From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Feb 2 18:13:58 2005 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j12NDw618797; Wed, 2 Feb 2005 18:13:58 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2005 18:13:58 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200502022313.j12NDw618797@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 V24 #51 TELECOM Digest Wed, 2 Feb 2005 18:12:00 EST Volume 24 : Issue 51 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Identity Theft, Net Scams Rose in '04-FTC (Lisa Minter) Survey: Consumers Show Little Interest in VoIP (Telecom dailyLead USTA) Re: Format For Image to be Faxed? (John Levine) Re: Format For Image to be Faxed? (Brad Houser) Re: Invalid Number Tones (DevilsPGD) Re: Invalid Number Tones (Tim@Backhome.org) Re: Invalid Number Tones (Brad Houser) Re: Do Allow Under-9s to Use a Mobile (John Smith) Re: Do Allow Under-9s to Use a Mobile (Daniel W. Johnson) Re: Do Allow Under-9s to Use a Mobile (Linc Madison) Re: America the Worst For Cell Rates and Plans (Joseph) Re: Who Does DA For Cox Communications? (Lou Jahn) Re: $47,000 per Line Installation Cost (Charles Cryderman) Re: TV "Decency" -- Broadcast vs. Cable (J Kelly) Re: Time Warner Cable to Offer Free AOL (CustmClr) Re: British TV License was: America the Worst For Cell (spuorgelgoog) Re: Last Laugh! Emergency Broadcast Blunder In Connecticut (Tim@Backhom) 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: 02 Feb 2005 07:58:57 -0800 From: Lisa Minter Subject: Identity Theft, Net Scams Rose in '04-FTC The U.S. Federal Trade Commission said it received 635,000 consumer complaints in 2004 as criminals sold nonexistent products through online auction sites like eBay Inc. or went shopping with stolen credit cards. Identity theft -- the practice of running up bills or committing crimes in someone else's name -- topped the list with 247,000 complaints, up 15 percent from the previous year. Fraud and identity theft cost consumers at least $437 million in 2003. Internet-related fraud accounted for more than half of the remaining complaints as scammers found victims through Web sites or unsolicited e-mail, the FTC said. Auction fraud was the most common Internet scam, the FTC said in its annual fraud report, followed by complaints about online shopping and Internet access service. The number of incidents was up across nearly every category from 2003, but it was unclear whether that represented an actual increase in fraud or simply a greater awareness of the FTC's Consumer Sentinel fraud program. Consumers likely lost significantly more than the amount reported, as fewer than half were able to pin a dollar figure on their losses. The median monetary loss reported was $259, though 41 consumers reported losses of $1 million or more. The FTC did not specify how many identity-theft incidents took place online. A recent report by the Better Business Bureau found that most cases of identity theft occurred through the theft of a checkbook or other offline methods. 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, Yahoo News. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2005 13:32:17 EST From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA Subject: Survey: Consumers Show Little Interest in VoIP Telecom dailyLead from USTA February 2, 2005 http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=19136&l=2017006 TODAY'S HEADLINES NEWS OF THE DAY * Survey: Consumers show little interest in VoIP BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH * NTT DoCoMo chief talks wireless * Report predicts growth for telecom industry * Adelphia bondholder is bidder for bankrupt company * SBC, AT&T detail job cuts USTA SPOTLIGHT * Announcing Optical Communications Essentials EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES * AT&T technology changed communications but couldn't save company REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE * Virginia lawmakers urge rethink of telecom taxes * WorldCom fraud extends back to 1997, witness says Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others. http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=19136&l=2017006 ------------------------------ Date: 2 Feb 2005 15:40:33 -0000 From: John Levine Subject: Re: Format For Image to be Faxed? Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > If I want to fax a B&W or, more likely, a gray-scale image from within > my computer (Apple iBook, using the internal modem), into what format > (JPEG? GIF? ???) should I convert the image and at what resolution (72 > dpi?) before I fax it, to get the best balance of image sharpness and > transmission time? Group 3 faxes have their own transmission format. It's about 200 dpi, one bit deep. TIFF files can store this format directly, but any fax program should be able to deal with other common formats. So long as it's 200 dpi and one-bit B/W, that's what a fax machine can deal with. If you want to send greyscale, email a PDF. Regards, John Levine johnl@iecc.com Primary Perpetrator of The Internet for Dummies Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://www.johnlevine.com, Mayor "A book is a sneeze." - E.B. White, on the writing of Charlotte's Web ------------------------------ From: Brad Houser Subject: Re: Format For Image to be Faxed? Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2005 11:51:05 -0800 Organization: Intel Reply-To: Brad Houser AES wrote in message news:telecom24.48.2@telecom-digest.org: > Pardon me if this is a bit off topic, but I suspect someone on one or > the other of these groups may have the answer immediately at hand: > If I want to fax a B&W or, more likely, a gray-scale image from within > my computer (Apple iBook, using the internal modem), into what format > (JPEG? GIF? ???) should I convert the image and at what resolution (72 > dpi?) before I fax it, to get the best balance of image sharpness and > transmission time? Faxes are essentially 1 bit black and white. Any grey scales need to be done through dithering. If your fax software does it, then no conversion is necessary. If not you will want to convert to 1 bit B/W and use some decent software that actually dithers and not convert everything that isn't white to black. Brad Houser ------------------------------ From: DevilsPGD Subject: Re: Invalid Number Tones Date: Wed, 02 Feb 2005 01:38:12 -0700 Organization: Octanews In message L. Hao wrote: > I need to design an algorithm to detect call progress. For example, it > needs to figure out whether the call hits a live person, an answering > machine, a fax machine, and etc. But among all these things, I am > having trouble finding the spec for this so-called invalid > number. When you dial an invalid number, you normally get a tone > followed by " the number you just dialed ...". Can anyone tell me where > I can find the spec for this tone? Or better yet, if anyone can share > his/her methods of detecting it, it'd be great. In general, get a digital line (ISDN or up) and you'll get accurate dialing information. Beyond that, I don't believe that the tones are reliable or consistent anymore. ------------------------------ From: Tim@Backhome.org Subject: Re: Invalid Number Tones Date: Wed, 02 Feb 2005 05:09:41 -0800 Organization: Cox Communications L. Hao wrote: > I need to design an algorithm to detect call progress. For example, it > needs to figure out whether the call hits a live person, an answering > machine, a fax machine, and etc. But among all these things, I am > having trouble finding the spec for this so-called invalid > number. When you dial an invalid number, you normally get a tone > followed by " the number you just dialed ...". Can anyone tell me where > I can find the spec for this tone? Or better yet, if anyone can share > his/her methods of detecting it, it'd be great. > Thanks for the help. > Li Sounds like a telemarketer in training. ;-) ------------------------------ From: Brad Houser Subject: Re: Invalid Number Tones Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2005 11:54:24 -0800 Organization: Intel Reply-To: Brad Houser L. Hao wrote in message news:telecom24.49.4@telecom-digest.org: > I need to design an algorithm to detect call progress. For example, it > needs to figure out whether the call hits a live person, an answering > machine, a fax machine, and etc. But among all these things, I am > having trouble finding the spec for this so-called invalid > number. When you dial an invalid number, you normally get a tone > followed by " the number you just dialed ...". Can anyone tell me where > I can find the spec for this tone? Or better yet, if anyone can share > his/her methods of detecting it, it'd be great. The Special Information Tone (SIT) is 950, 1400, 1800 (all tones +- 50 hz) for 330 +- 70 ms. http://www.ahk.com/Special%20Information%20Tones.pdf Brad Houser ------------------------------ From: John Smith Subject: Re: Do Allow Under-9s to Use a Mobile Date: Wed, 02 Feb 2005 05:02:26 GMT jmeissen@aracnet.com wrote: > OK, enough already! I'm not stupid enough to think that cell phones > are radioactive. And I know that RF is not the same as particle > radiation. Not all radioactivity is particle radiation. Gamma rays, for example are electromagnetic, just like RF, but incredibly more powerful. Conversely, not all particle radiation is always dangerous. Alpha particles can be effectively shielded by an average sheet of paper. Not only do experts think they know these things, but they're right. > Linc seemed to be implying that the only possible damage to cells > had to be from the heat induced by the radiation. The effects of radiation, if we limit ourselves to electromagnetic, are dependent on the energy in a photon of that energy. Microwaves produce heat, x-rays produce ionization. Microwaves will not ionize your cellular material, and x-rays will not heat you up. > I was simply pointing out that there are other ways to damage > cellular structure that don't involve heat, with the point being > that while yes, it is probably virtually impossible for the > electromagnetic radiation from a cell phone to induce enough > temperature change to have any possible effect, there may be other > mechanisms that haven't been discovered yet. Actually, a number of other mechanisms have been discovered, but microwave (cell phone) radiation can't accomplish them, because its photons are not energetic enough. Even if you turn up the intensity of the radiation a thousandfold, all you accomplish is having a thousand times as many photons failing to do anything unusual as were failing before. You can break a window by throwing a golf ball. You can't break a window by throwing a ping-pong ball--even if you throw it a thousand times. While we can't say for sure that other mechanisms may not occur, we can very reliably set an upper limit on how harmful any as-yet- undiscovered properties of microwaves can be, simply because enough people have been exposed to enough microwaves over enough years (cell phones are not a unique source) that any effect above a certain level would have been evident. That upper limit is somewhere between zero and incomprehensibly small. Gamma radiation, from radioactive decay, although not particle radiation, is still extremely dangerous. It is thousands of times more energetic, and therefore more dangerous than x-rays, which are pretty dangerous in their own right. Ultraviolet light, which we know can cause cancer, is a thousand times less energetic still. But once we get down to visible light the "radiation" is essentially harmless, as is infrared light. Microwave photons are between a hundred and a hundred thousand time LESS energetic than infrared. So, if you are concerned that it is possible for cell phones to cause untoward effects, you should be wrapping all the TV remotes in tinfoil so they can't spew out those dangerous infrared photons. The very possession of light bulbs, which spew out potentially deadly infrared and visible light by the tens of watts, should be banned outright. ------------------------------ From: Daniel W. Johnson Subject: Re: Do Allow Under-9s to Use a Mobile Date: 1 Feb 2005 22:02:53 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com fake@fake.com wrote: > Heating is not the only mechanism that can cause harm: > At one time, X-Rays were considered safe for all, including pregnant > women. And back then, they exposed you to a higher amount of > radiation. > Many people get a type of radiation burn that is so common we refer > to it as "sunburn". I don't think this is caused by heating (but > does require a lot more EM energy than cellphones produce.) To determine the effects of EM radiation, you need to know two parameters: intensity and frequency. Obviously, a higher intensity corresponds to a greater effect. As for frequency, it is proportional to the energy per photon, so a higher frequency (especially X-ray or gamma ray) means greater penetration. There is also a possibility of resonant effects at certain frequencies; I believe microwave ovens are tuned to a frequency that resonates with water (but cellphones are not). When the above is taken into account, the conclusion is that your average flashlight is more dangerous than a cellphone. ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Do Allow Under-9s to Use a Mobile Date: Wed, 02 Feb 2005 00:26:23 -0800 From: Linc Madison Reply-To: lincmad@suespammers.org Organization: California resident; nospam; no unsolicited e-mail allowed In article , wrote: > Heating is not the only mechanism that can cause harm: NO ONE ever said it was. What *I* said was that heating is the only mechanism of harm that is *relevant* to a discussion of cellphones. > At one time, X-Rays were considered safe for all, including pregnant > women. And back then, they exposed you to a higher amount of > radiation. Fine. Now explain exactly what relevance that has to the discussion of CELLULAR TELEPHONES. The answer is, NONE WHATSOEVER. > Many people get a type of radiation burn that is so common we refer > to it as "sunburn". I don't think this is caused by heating (but > does require a lot more EM energy than cellphones produce.) Again, absolutely ZERO relevance to cellular telephones. Let me reiterate what I said before, in a valiant effort to kill this stupid and pointless never-ending thread: The ONLY thing ANYONE has said about the possible dangers of cellular telephones is that we might someday discover a whole new realm of science heretofore unimagined that reveals a hidden danger of using a cellular telephone. However, the same statement can be made about ABSOLUTELY ANYTHING ON EARTH. If you can't refute that specific statement, then please, for the love of this newsgroup, SHUT UP already about the "dangers" of cellphones! You may as well worry that the white markings on the roadway are going to come to life and leap up and strangle you in your car; it's an equally productive use of your time. Linc Madison * San Francisco, California * lincmad@suespammers.org * primary e-mail: Telecom at LincMad dot com All U.S. and California anti-spam laws apply, incl. CA BPC 17538.45(c) This text constitutes actual notice as required in BPC 17538.45(f)(3). DO NOT SEND UNSOLICITED E-MAIL TO THIS ADDRESS. You have been warned. ------------------------------ From: Joseph Subject: Re: America the Worst For Cell Rates and Plans Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2005 20:58:33 -0800 Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com On 1 Feb 2005 06:01:13 -0800, Justin Time wrote: > Actually it was the cellular companies who charged for "air time." > Air time does not take into account if a call is incoming or outgoing, > it only accounts for the amount of cellular resources used to connect > to the handset. That we currently have to abide by "full minute" > pricing should be the complaint . The cell phone companies charge what they do the way they do only because they can and because customers haven't demanded it. Fido in Canada at one time used exact billing i.e. you didn't start to get charged til the line was actually supervised and they also charged to the second unlike send-to-end billing which will bill you for all time including ringing if the end party answers. They got rid of that for prepaid customers a couple years ago and rumour has it that if Rogers has their way they'll eliminate per second billing as well. It's the reason why T-Mobile charges 29 cents/minute to call Europe while you can commonly get the same call through many long distance carriers for 5 cents or less per minute. Basically they're free to charge anything that they like. Until customers stop bending over to be taken advantage of they'll charge as much as they can get away with. ------------------------------ From: Lou Jahn Subject: Re: Who Does DA For Cox Communications? Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2005 10:26:48 -0500 Organization: Info Partners Corp. I while ago I understood Cox was buying DA from a reseller named Comtrust, who farmed the actual DA effort off to Excell Agent Services (now owned by OSC). However, the easiest approach to fixing any DA problem is to call the Service Order Center (SOC) of the LEC or CLEC (where orders for service are handled). All flow of DA records start at the SOC. When they receive a notice of an error, the SOC has an system to alert the down stream DA center. Based on the severity of an error, a DA database provider will normally correct the listing overnight, but can immediately invoke a change on emergency situations. Good DA databases reflect SOC changes like new or deleted numbers within two business days of the order. Hope that helps. Lou Jahn Info Partners Corp. 609-823-6602 609-823-2202 Fax ------------------------------ Subject: Re: $47,000 per Line Installation Cost Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2005 13:55:41 -0500 From: Charles Cryderman In TELECOM Digest V24 #48 Fred Atkinson wrote: > Years ago, I was working for a company that had a radio transmitter on > the top of a mountain somewhere in Hawaii. I never visited the site (or > even the state), but we normally monitored and managed our sites by > dialup lines. > The unfortunate thing was that though there were a great number of > radio transmitters on that mountain site, the local Telco had never > run a cable up there. > Not immediately knowing this fact, I called to find out what it was > going to cost to have a line dropped on the site. I was quoted a > price of ten thousand dollars just for the installation of a cable up > to the site (they wanted us to incur the entire cost despite the fact > that there were a large number of other companies needing phone lines > to control their equipment). > Of course, there was no way any manager at our company was going to sign > off for that. So, we had to have our local people frequently stop by > and check the site to make sure it was running in optimum condition. I > had found a device that connected to a cell phone and provided an RJ-11 > to plug a telephone device into. But, we decided that there would be so > much intermodulation on that site that it wouldn't work effectively. > And this was when cellular was still in its infancy. Remaining deleted. Years ago my Sister and Brother-in-Law built their home in northern Michigan (Lake St Helen). When they contacted GTE (now Verizon) about getting telephone service they were told that it would cost $15,000 but that as other homes were built and added they would receive part of that money back with each new telephone installation. My Brother-in-Law told them to take a hike. He went and rented a backhoe and installed his own 25 pair underground cable the 2000 feet or so he had to go. Installed a Demark at the main road where GTE connected his service. He said it cost him a few hundred dollars. It has been over ten years and all of the new homes built in that area still don't have telephone service. Verizon is still requiring someone to pay the $15,000 (probably more now). A few have asked about hooking to his cable but for the most part my Sister and Brother-in-Law are the only year round residents. He is willing to let others on the cable but said he would require that all who sign on release him of any possible liability. Chip Cryderman ------------------------------ From: J Kelly Subject: Re: TV "Decency" -- Broadcast vs. Cable Date: Wed, 02 Feb 2005 14:09:39 -0600 Organization: http://newsguy.com Reply-To: jkelly@newsguy.com On 1 Feb 2005 10:28:12 -0800, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: > What bothers me is that there are two standards -- one for traditional > broadcast TV and one for cable TV. I think both should be treated as > the same. > The claimed justified is that TV uses the "public airwaves" and TV > reaches everyone freely while cable does not. But cable depends on > "public airwaves" just as much as broadcast, only they use satellite > signals to get their material. So HBO shouldn't be allowed to air movies with nudity, simply because they use a satellite? I disagree (strongly). If the "entertainment industry" (and I use the term 'entertainment' loosely) would just stop shoving crap down our throats none of this would have happened. They don't need to use words like "bastard" or "douche bag" on network TV during times when children might watch. I think they should be *able* to use those words, or any others they want, but they should voluntarily refrain from such shenanigans. I do not believe in government censorship, and I know that the FCC fining a station afterwards isn't technically censorship since they didn't prevent the situation before the fact, but it has the same result. But I think the idiots that run the "entertainment industry" need to stop and think about what they are doing before they do it. There is no reason for tits during the super bowl, and no reason for sit com characters to call each other douche bags during prime time. ------------------------------ From: custmclr@aol.com (CustmClr) Date: 02 Feb 2005 20:46:33 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Subject: Re: Time Warner Cable to Offer Free AOL The contents of the AOL notice has changed: "Please note: Beginning early 2005, AOL will no longer be providing direct access to newsgroups. We apologize for any inconvenience. "For members with a separate high-speed Internet connection, we recommend contacting your service provider to confirm if they offer access to newsgroups. Newsgroup services from your high-speed provider can be accessed through a third party reader, such as Mozilla Thunderbird (http://www.mozilla.org/projects/thunderbird/). Alternatively, you can access Newsgroups via Google at http://groups.google.com/. " To connect with others who share your interests, visit AOL Keyword: People Connection where you can find and learn more about AOL Journals (blogs), message boards and chat rooms." ------------------------------ From: spuorgelgoog@gowanhill.com Subject: Re: British TV License (was America the Worst For Cell Rates) Date: 2 Feb 2005 12:52:14 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I believe the BBC World Service is > a decent, rather good programming effort, which is one reason why I > offer it here on the 'Feed Sweep' > URL http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra/bbc.html The World Service is funded not through the television licence fee but by a separate Government grant. http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/us/001108_wsfunding.shtml Owain ------------------------------ From: Tim@Backhome.org Subject: Re: Last Laugh! Emergency Broadcast Blunder In Connecticut Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2005 19:12:13 -0800 Organization: Cox Communications > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The talking heads on the radio and > television chattered about it for several minutes as people everywhere > started rushing out of their homes, driving their cars furiously down > all the roads and highways, etc. Once the massive traffic jam of all > traffic jams was underway, *then* the poor people were told, 'Gee, > it seems to have been a false alarm ...' PAT] The *only* reason this country has not been destroyed by terrorists because, so far, the terrorists have not decided to tube us. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You know, that may very well be true. 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 V24 #51 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Feb 3 18:17:47 2005 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j13NHlI29825; Thu, 3 Feb 2005 18:17:47 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2005 18:17:47 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200502032317.j13NHlI29825@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 V24 #52 TELECOM Digest Thu, 3 Feb 2005 18:15:00 EST Volume 24 : Issue 52 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Cell Phones Make the Young Drive More Like the Old (Michael Quinn) FCC Lets SBC Dial Direct to Get Net Phone Numbers (Jack Decker) Qwest, MCI Talk Deal (Telecom dailyLead from USTA) Caller-ID -- Market Share? (Lisa Hancock) Comcast Exceeds One Million HDTV-Capable Set-Top Boxes (Monty Solomon) Re: Invalid Number Tones (L Hao) Re: Supermarket: Let Your Fingers do the Paying (Robert Bonomi) Re: Supermarket: Let Your Fingers do the Paying (ranck@vt.edu) Re: British TV License (was America the Worst For Cell Rates (Tony P.) Re: Time Warner Cable to Offer Free AOL (Joseph) Re: AT&T Hangs Up - and Few Are Sorry to Say Goodbye (John McHarry) Re: TV "Decency" -- Broadcast vs. Cable (Henry) Re: Identity Theft, Net Scams Rose in '04-FTC (shlichter1@aol.com) Re: Do Allow Under-9's To Use a Mobile (Matthew Lombardi) 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 Phones Make the Young Drive More Like the Old Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2005 08:52:50 -0500 From: Quinn Michael From today's Washington Post. Fair use caveat applies. Regards, Mike Springfield VA Washington Post Thursday, February 3, 2005; Page A07 Drivers who use cell phones end up driving like elderly people, with slower reaction times and a tendency to miss what is right in front of them, researchers said yesterday. Even when they used "hands-free" devices, young drivers who normally have the quickest reflexes drove like 70-year-olds, the team at the University of Utah found. "If you put a 20-year-old driver behind the wheel with a cell phone, their reaction times are the same as a 70-year-old driver who is not using a cell phone," said psychologist David Strayer, who led the study. Writing in the journal Human Factors, Strayer's team said it tested people 65 to 74 years old against drivers 18 to 25 years old using a driving simulator. Braking time slowed 18 percent when young or elderly drivers used a cell phone, the researchers found. 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: Jack Decker Date: Thu, 03 Feb 2005 12:12:12 -0500 Subject: FCC Lets SBC Dial Direct to Get Net Phone Numbers http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1035_22-5560894.html By Ben Charny CNET News.com February 2, 2005, 2:11 PM PT The nation's top utility regulator has made it easier and cheaper for SBC Communications and other Internet phone service providers to get 10-digit phone numbers -- another federal boost for the mushrooming broadband phone industry. In essence, the Federal Communications Commission gave SBC permission to get telephone numbers directly from their official source -- a privately run, quasi-government agency known as the North American Numbering Plan Administration. It's a much cheaper alternative. Before the FCC's action, only those Net phone providers certified by states could approach the agency directly. The SBC division selling Net phone services argued that it wasn't fair; the calls actually use the Internet and are therefore off-limits to any regulation. Also, requiring certification multiplies the already onerous amount of expensive state and federal telephone regulation. "The waiver is in the public interest," FCC commissioners wrote in a decision released this week. "It will help expedite the implementation of (Internet-enabled) services." Other Internet phone providers are sure to win such an exemption, the FCC notes in its 27-page order. The rules exemption for SBC is in effect for another few months, as commissioners finish drafting rules for Net phone providers. Full story at: http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1035_22-5560894.html How to Distribute VoIP Throughout a Home: http://michigantelephone.mi.org/distribute.html If you live in Michigan, subscribe to the MI-Telecom group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MI-Telecom/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2005 13:33:27 EST From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA Subject: Qwest, MCI talk deal Telecom dailyLead from USTA February 3, 2005 http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=19163&l=2017006 TODAY'S HEADLINES NEWS OF THE DAY * Qwest, MCI talk deal BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH * Time Warner Cable, Adelphia would merge under bid terms * Settlement against former WorldCom directors collapses * Verizon gets nod for cable franchise in Texas town * IP turns phone market on its head USTA SPOTLIGHT * Carrier Grade Voice Over IP -- Now at www.telecom-bookstore.com EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES * Businesses take to Wi-Fi * Report: Cable VoIP has impressive growth in 2004 Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others. http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=19163&l=2017006 ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com Subject: Caller-ID -- Market Share? Date: 3 Feb 2005 11:12:01 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com I get the impression that a great many people have Caller-ID at both home and work. Would anyone know roughly the percentage of subscribers, by residence and business types, who have Caller-ID? In some areas I suspect the percentage is quite high. I don't have it myself. At work, we have a basic 2500 sets and no callerID, although I believe other divisions of my employer have more modern phones that have C-ID as part of a display. At home, I will normally answer the phone, but I will ignore it if I'm not in the mood to talk, regardless of who the call is from. That is, if I'm plopped down in front of the TV or eating dinner, I don't want to be bothered getting up or interupted -- which I'd have to do to check the caller ID box. I admit having an answering machine is a big help. I'm not sure if C-ID curtails tele-solicitor calls. If you don't answer a solicitor, they just call back later or the next day, and keep calling until you actually talk to them. (Aren't computers wonderful!) While the laws have reduced the calls quite a bit, I still get some from market researchers, charities, politicians, and people who claim they've done business with me in the past. (I wish I reported the last SOB who did that since it was a blatant lie). [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Mike Sandman sells a little device which immediatly emits the three-tone signal (number not in service) upon you lifting the phone receiver. That tends to get rid of a number of telemarketers who use automated equipment. It goes in series with the phone pair and responds to the change in voltage when the phone goes off hook. Its not expensive, and you put one either in front of each phone, or if you wish, just one unit at the demarc so it catches all phones going off hook. Contact http://sandman.com for details. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2005 21:28:05 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Comcast Exceeds One Million HDTV-Capable Set-Top Boxes Comcast Exceeds One Million HDTV-Capable Set-Top Boxes; Demand for HDTV Service Propelled by Super Bowl - Feb 2, 2005 11:34 AM (PR Newswire) PHILADELPHIA, Feb. 2 /PRNewswire/ -- As Super Bowl frenzy reaches a fever pitch, Comcast Corporation (Nasdaq: CMCSA, CMCSK), announced it has now deployed more than one million high-definition television (HDTV)-capable Digital Cable set-top boxes in customers' homes, adding more than 800,000 of them in 2004 alone. In addition, Comcast has experienced a 143% increase in the number of customers connecting HDTV sets to Comcast's HD service during January 2005 versus January 2004. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=46612126 ------------------------------ Reply-To: L Hao From: L Hao Subject: Re: Invalid Number Tones Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2005 11:25:08 -0800 Thanks Brad and other responders. Really helpful. It does sound like a telemarketing system, doesn't it? : ). Well, it is not. I got people asking me the same question in the DSP thread. It is a system for our Pharmacy and Clinic customers to remind their patients more efficiently. L. Brad Houser wrote in message news:telecom24.51.7@telecom-digest.org: > L. Hao wrote in message > news:telecom24.49.4@telecom-digest.org: >> I need to design an algorithm to detect call progress. For example, it >> needs to figure out whether the call hits a live person, an answering >> machine, a fax machine, and etc. But among all these things, I am >> having trouble finding the spec for this so-called invalid >> number. When you dial an invalid number, you normally get a tone >> followed by " the number you just dialed ...". >> Can anyone tell me where I can find the spec for this tone? Or >> better yet, if anyone can share his/her methods of detecting it, >> it'd be great. > The Special Information Tone (SIT) is 950, 1400, 1800 (all tones +- > 50 for 330 +- 70 ms. > http://www.ahk.com/Special%20Information%20Tones.pdf > Brad Houser [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Also see the other message in this issue from Lisa Hancock talking about telemarketers who bother her household at inconvenient times, etc. If nothing else, you can measure these tones yourself using a device intended to scare away the telemarketers. Inquire of mike@sandman.com http://sandman.com ------------------------------ From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) Subject: Re: Supermarket: Let Your Fingers do the Paying Date: Thu, 03 Feb 2005 03:46:00 -0000 Organization: Widgets, Inc. In article , Monty Solomon wrote: > By Jo Best > Story last modified Tue Feb 01 12:18:00 PST 2005 > A supermarket has given its customers the choice of paying by > fingerprint at a store in the state of Washington -- and has found them > surprisingly willing to use the biometric system. > U.S. chain Thriftway introduced the system, which uses technology from > Pay By Touch , in its store in the Seattle area in 2002. It said it > now sees thousands of transactions a month using the payment method. > Once people have enrolled in the Pay By Touch system, they have their > fingerprint scanned as verification of identity at the checkout. They > then choose which credit card they want to pay the bill with, having > already registered the credit cards with the store. > Thriftway President Paul Kapioski said rather than shying away from > the technology because of concerns about protecting their privacy, > customer demand ensured that the biometric payment system made it past > the pilot stage. > http://news.com.com/2100-1029-5559074.html > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I do not understand one thing: If > people have already been verified as to their ability and > willingness to pay for their groceries through their credit card > and their personal identification has been verified in much the same > way by the credit card people, then *why* would people want to go one > step further by enrolling in 'Pay by Touch'? Is this intended as one > way to 'save them time' by not having to sign a credit card slip? In > other words, touch your thumb or finger somewhere rather than taking > a couple seconds to sign a slip of paper? Now, if the grocery people > had set up their own credit system *in place of Visa/MC* by using a > thumb/finger print, I can see where that might be useful, but > otherwise, why bother? PAT] Gee, I dunno. Like maybe you _don't_ have to have your card, *or* card number, with you. Like, no hassles if the mag stripe doesn't read. Like, no opportunity for a dishonest cashier to memorize the number off your card. Like, maybe, *nobody*else* can buy anything with that card number at that store. i.e., if it's a 'pay by touch' card, "no touchee, no tickee", and if the fingerprint _doesn't_ match, "no sale". You're right, I can't see why anybody would *consider* bothering to do something like that. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, let's see ... maybe I was caught shoplifting at a grocery store in Iraq or Iran and the Taliban chopped off all my fingers as part of the punishment. And one of the terms for accepting MC/Visa cards required by many/most/all of the card issuers is that the store is *not* permitted to demand any other form of identification. The card is to stand on its own regards ID, *if the holder is using it for payment*. So your 'no touch, no sale' idea is not possible in many stores. I can see where fingerprints might be used in lieu of an actual plastic but I do not think it can be a requirement *in addition to* plastic. And when a clerk is caught making an unauthorized sale using someone else's card the answer is simple also. Fire and presecute them. PAT] ------------------------------ From: ranck@vt.edu Subject: Re: Supermarket: Let Your Fingers do the Paying Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2005 17:40:13 UTC Organization: Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia, USA Monty Solomon wrote: > A supermarket has given its customers the choice of paying by > fingerprint at a store in the state of Washington -- and has found them > surprisingly willing to use the biometric system. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I do not understand one thing: If > people have already been verified as to their ability and > willingness to pay for their groceries through their credit card > and their personal identification has been verified in much the same > way by the credit card people, then *why* would people want to go one > step further by enrolling in 'Pay by Touch'? Is this intended as one > way to 'save them time' by not having to sign a credit card slip? In > other words, touch your thumb or finger somewhere rather than taking > a couple seconds to sign a slip of paper? Now, if the grocery people > had set up their own credit system *in place of Visa/MC* by using a > thumb/finger print, I can see where that might be useful, but > otherwise, why bother? PAT] I don't know, but presumably they would not have to have their card with them. The biometric fingerprint scan provides a positive ID and the store can just charge the purchase to the cutomer's account on file. You could then leave the card at home either on purpose or by mistake but still have no problem at the checkout. Sort of like the old days when the grocer actually knew who you were and if you forgot your wallet he'd say, "bring the money back later." There is the added security that no one else can use your account. A new clerk doesn't need to recognize you or check your ID for a written check. In theory you could cut the physical credit card up and then *only* your fingerprint will allow charges on that account. Bill Ranck Blacksburg, Va. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: As long as the fingerprints accessed some internal charge system (in lieu of or in addition to) a signature on file, I see no problem with it. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: British TV License (was America the Worst For Cell Rates Organization: ATCC Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2005 18:16:07 -0500 In article , MRC@CAC.Washington.EDU says: > On Tue, 1 Feb 2005, David Clayton wrote: >> I think the original point many have been to say that a lot of PAL TV >> sets these days seem to have in-built NTSC capability, and I would >> imagine that a lot sold in NTSC markets also have PAL. > Perhaps the term "a lot" means something different in Australia than > it does in North America. In North America, the implication of "a > lot" means "many", "a significant percentage or number." > That is not the case with PAL televisions in North America. Almost no > televisions sold in North America and Japan have PAL. TVs sold in > North America with PAL capable are grey market imports, not consumer > goods. > Nor is there any demand for it. DVDs and video tapes are much cheaper > in North America than elsewhere in the world. For similar reasons, > there is little interest in region 2 (or region-free) DVD players in > the US, even though there is quite a bit of interest in region 1 (or > region-free) DVD players in Europe and Japan. > The technical advantage that PAL once enjoyed over NTSC vanished in > the 1980s with the advent of modern electronics instead of the > one-tube wonders of the 1960s that led to the "never twice same color" > epithet. These days, the phase alteration in PAL is complete > unnecessary and comes at a steep cost in not being able to render > green accurately. Indeed. The reason we still have the black and white carriers is because the color system we use was a kludge. NTSC uses a sub carrier to convey luminance and chroma and in the past the crystal and tube method left much to be desired. Now there's very good synchronization between the carrier and luminance chroma system because of the transistor based circuitry, specifically phase lock loop. ------------------------------ From: Joseph Subject: Re: Time Warner Cable to Offer Free AOL Date: Wed, 02 Feb 2005 19:02:58 -0800 Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com On 02 Feb 2005 20:46:33 GMT, custmclr@aol.com (CustmClr) wrote: > The contents of the AOL notice has changed: > "Please note: Beginning early 2005, AOL will no longer be providing direct > access to newsgroups. We apologize for any inconvenience. Seems to me at every turn AOL is encouraging people to leave. I wonder why people even continue to use "the internet with training wheels" when lower cost easy-to-us alternatives are readily available most everywhere. I think too many people have been blinded by AOL's over-saturation of the market by including junk discs in every magazine and newspaper. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It may also be that Usenet newsgroups are not the big attraction they used to be. There are now days so many alternatives such as interactive web sites, the Yahoo groups, Google groups, etc. And so many of the Usenet newsgroups are populated by long, oldtime users who (frankly) act at times like the newsgroups are their personal property. You seem to be saying that internet = Usenet and when the new users get done with their training wheels they should graduate to begin direct Usenet useage. Some may choose to do so, but the vast majority do not. Maybe a lot of the 'new users with their training wheels' have gotten tired of the insults and 'I know it all, but you are too ignorant to be allowed to be here' attitude of many of the old-timers. I know from my experience I have gotten very turned off at one time or another by 'Usenet attitudes' and rarely use it any longer; many of the newer guys simply do not bother at all. There are just too many valid, good alternatives to Usenet these days. Or, consider the Usenet equivilent of TELECOM Digest: at one time in internet history, 'comp.dcom.telecom' as we are called was the *only* user discussion forum on telecom which was available. Then in the early/middle 1990's there were *three* of these groups on Usenet. When the web got started, more and more groups came along. Now there are at least two dozen telecom discussion groups -- mostly web based -- available. Maybe AOL is not 'encouraging people to leave' as you phrased it; maybe, to the contrary, regards Usenet they simply decided 'who needs it any longer'. And truely, Usenet has begun to wear out its welcome with a lot of netizens, some of whom were not yet born when Usenet first got started, just as many readers of this Digest were not yet born -- or quite young -- when this forum was known as 'arpa.telecom' (prior to being comp.dcom.telecom). Times change as do people and their attitudes. PAT] ------------------------------ From: John McHarry Subject: Re: AT&T Hangs Up - and Few Are Sorry to Say Goodbye Date: Thu, 03 Feb 2005 04:04:33 GMT Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net Well, it was swallowed by one of its own spawn, and they have pretty well managed to choke off local competition, so those who do morn shouldn't have long to wait for the Second Coming. Voip is a large cloud on the horizon for them, but expect them to try to freeze it out of the interconnect market. Even if they don't, the cable companies are likely to attack the independent voip providers. If that succeeds, a duopoly is little better than a monopoly. They may not legally conspire to set prices, but there will ensue a sort of truce, like obtained in long distance for many years, where competitors were allowed to undercut AT&T by a certain amount, but not more (AT&T had the lowest operating cost), and raised their rates when AT&T did. ------------------------------ From: henry999@eircom.net (Henry) Subject: Re: TV "Decency" -- Broadcast vs. Cable Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2005 08:26:51 +0200 Organization: Elisa Internet customer J Kelly wrote: > On 1 Feb 2005 10:28:12 -0800, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: >> What bothers me is that there are two standards -- one for traditional >> broadcast TV and one for cable TV. I think both should be treated as >> the same. >> The claimed justified is that TV uses the "public airwaves" and TV >> reaches everyone freely while cable does not. But cable depends on >> "public airwaves" just as much as broadcast, only they use satellite >> signals to get their material. > So HBO shouldn't be allowed to air movies with nudity, simply because > they use a satellite? I disagree (strongly). > If the "entertainment industry" (and I use the term 'entertainment' > loosely) would just stop shoving crap down our throats none of this > would have happened. They don't need to use words like "bastard" or > "douche bag" on network TV during times when children might watch. I > think they should be *able* to use those words, or any others they > want, but they should voluntarily refrain from such shenanigans. > I do not believe in government censorship, and I know that the FCC > fining a station afterwards isn't technically censorship since they > didn't prevent the situation before the fact, but it has the same > result. But I think the idiots that run the "entertainment industry" > need to stop and think about what they are doing before they do it. > There is no reason for tits during the super bowl, and no reason for > sit com characters to call each other douche bags during prime time. H.L. Mencken once poured his scorn on those busybodies in society who suffered from 'a terrible, pervasive fear that someone, somewhere, is having fun.' Don't televisions in the USA have an 'off' button any more? Can't parents tell their children 'go read a book'? This Janet Jackson 'scandal' and the repercussions from it look like so much nonsense from over here in Europe, I'll tell you. "The whole world is laughing." Cheers, Henry [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Tell me this, what do the Europeans think about Janet Jackson's brother, Michael, and the railroad ride he is getting here in the USA right now? He is certainly eccentric, but his big mistake was when he handed over five cents to that slimy woman who made the first extortion attempt about ten years ago. That opened the flood gates for the latest hysterical scene here. Janet and her wardrobe malfunction was nothing by comparison. PAT] ------------------------------ From: shlichter1@aol.com Subject: Re: Identity Theft, Net Scams Rose in '04-FTC Date: 3 Feb 2005 04:41:32 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com The folowing might have to do with your article. I got an e-mail from someone claiming to have received my entry to a contest, they gave me a toll free number; 866-677-4100. The reason given was they needed to discuss tax issues on my prize that I had one. To me that sounds like they either want a credit card number or my Social Security number. Either way ,they will not get that from me. I think all the readers to the Digest should call the above number and find out what the prize is, and make sure you also help your local payphone operator. I fowarded a copy to the FTC, don't hold much hope to them doing much. (c)The only good spammer is a dead one!! Have you hunted one down today? I Kill Spammers, Inc. A ROT in Hell Co. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2005 12:15:15 -0700 From: Matthew Lombardi Reply-To: Matthew Lombardi Subject: Re: Do Allow Under-9's to use a Mobile jmeissen@aracnet.com responded on the subject Re: Do Allow Under-9s to Use a Mobile on 30 Jan 2005 08:03:13 GMT: > Linc seemed to be implying that the only possible damage to cells > had to be from the heat induced by the radiation. I was simply > pointing out that there are other ways to damage cellular structure > that don't involve heat, with the point being that while yes, it > is probably virtually impossible for the electromagnetic radiation > from a cell phone to induce enough temperature change to have any > possible effect, there may be other mechanisms that haven't been > discovered yet. And maybe Scott Adams is right. Maybe not all the dinosaurs are extinct, and that they're hiding in our houses. And one day they're all going to come forward and ask why we're burning their friends' dead carcasses in our cars and turning them into carpet and plastic. Boy, they're really gonna be pissed. Impossible? Nope -- they may have been able to survive the mass extinction via mechanisms that haven't been discovered yet -- despite the massive amount of evidence that we have to the contrary. But should we make decisions that affect our lives because of this remote possibility? Is that really what you're suggesting? Remember that this began as a discussion of whether or not we should consider not letting children use cellphones - would the radiation be risky to them? I consider this to be about as likely as finding Dino in my credenza, but you and others would have me live my life in fear for my children's safety -- based on NO EVIDENCE of ANY KIND. If we did that, we would quickly find our society paralyzed, unable to do anything because of possible, billion-to-one-shot risks that we're just too damned averse to taking. "Life Is Short, But It's Wide" -- sure, go ahead and avoid reasonable risks, but stop worrying about risks so low that they cannot be measured. - Matt [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: A regular reader/financial contributor to TELECOM Digest sent me some snail mail today with an article from *IEEE Spectrum*, December, 2004 issue which is quite relevant to a discussion topic here in recent days. On page 22 of the December issue, "Cellphones Linked to Brain Tumors". And subtitled, 'The good news is they're benign, the bad news is they're here.' A study of cellphone subscribers with more than ten years of use (in other words users of cellphones at present since prior to 1993) had doubled their *risk* (not that they had it; just that they had doubled their risk for getting) _Accoustic Neuroma_, a benign condition affecting one in one hundred thousand people. Accoustic Neuroma is a 'tumor' which attaches itself to the nerve connecting the brain and the inner ear, causing some degree of hearing loss. This *risk* is four times as high on the side of the head where the phone is usually held. This latest study was done by Stefan Lonn of the (Swedish) Karolinska Institute; other comments are made by James C. Lin, who studies the biological effects of electromagnetic radiation at the University of Illinois at Chicago; Kenneth R. Foster who studies the health risks of nonionizing electromagnetic radiation at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia; and other scientists. They seem to conclude that users who want cut the above (rather miniscule, but existent) risk even more should use headsets. NO tumors were associated with less than ten years of cell phone use, an outcome which has been documented by past studies. So, as more and more people approach this ten year plus mark in cell phone use, should they be concerned about other malignant tumors? Experts are not sure, according to the IEEE Spectrum report. If you wish a copy of this article from IEEE Spectrum, December 2004, so you can show it to friends and others who get into this discussion, send me a *stamped* self-addressed envelope (long number 8 envelope) and ask for a copy. No donation is needed unless you wish to send along a gift. Patrick Townson, PO Box 50, Independence, KS 67301-0050. 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 V24 #52 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Feb 4 16:39:18 2005 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j14LdHo11225; Fri, 4 Feb 2005 16:39:18 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 4 Feb 2005 16:39:18 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200502042139.j14LdHo11225@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 V24 #53 TELECOM Digest Fri, 4 Feb 2005 16:37:00 EST Volume 24 : Issue 53 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Warning About Fake "Tickets" From Red Light Cameras (Marcus D. Falco) Is Canada Headed Toward a Canadian DMCA? (Marcus Didius Falco) Study: Cell Phone Use Ups Accident Risk (Marcus Didius Falco) Data Over Power Lines a Problem? (David Clayton) What Ports Are Used For NBX <--> NBX Connectivity (Michael March) Qwest, MCI Press Ahead With Merger Talks (Telecom dailyLead from USTA) Please Advise for VoIP Hardware (Fakhar) Re: Supermarket: Let Your Fingers do the Paying (George Mitchell) Re: Supermarket: Let Your Fingers do the Paying (Barry Margolin) Re: Supermarket: Let Your Fingers do the Paying (Robert Bonomi) Re: British TV License (was America the Worst For Cell Rates (BobT) Re: Comcast Exceeds One Million HDTV-Capable Set-Top Box (Isaiah Beard) Re: AT&T Hangs Up - and Few Are Sorry to Say Goodbye (Lisa Hancock) Beta Test Request: TD-Extra Site Map (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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 02 Feb 2005 23:25:50 -0500 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Warning About Fake "Tickets" From Red Light Cameras ------ Forwarded Message From: Declan McCullagh < > Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 23:58:37 -0500 To: Subject: [Politech] Warning about fake "tickets" from red light cameras -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Red light cameras - fake tickets Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 17:28:39 -0800 From: editor Reply-To: editor@ To: declan@ For Declan - I do a site about red light camera tickets. Back in 2002 you had a thread about the cameras, so I figured you might be interested in a little update for politechbot. There's been a number of prominent newspaper articles recently, but when the commercial media discuss the cameras, there's a couple issues they always leave out. Issue # 1. At least nine cities in California are sending out fake red light camera tickets, to get you to identify the driver, so that they can send the driver a real ticket. It's a great con game - most people, not having heard anything about it in the press, fall for it. And, while the fake tickets are fully bilingual, I think that those not as familiar with American courts (and such things as the 5th Amendment) are much more likely to be fooled. I have a section on my website about the fake tickets, in case you need additional info. The url is http://www.highwayrobbery.net/redlightcamsticket.htm#Fakes and the fake ticket info, including some sample fake tickets, is under "Police Going Too Far...." This is some of the info from the website - "If your "ticket" does not have the address and phone number of the court on it, or if it says, "Do not contact the court," it's not really a ticket at all. It's a fake, probably generated by the police (fake ticket examples: El Cajon , Vista ), but it could have been printed up by a clever confidence man who hopes you will give him your credit card number. (For more about con men, see the end of this section.) The official format for a real ticket is on the website of the Judicial Council of California. "This section is about police trickery and bluffing ! "In some towns the police are going to extraordinary lengths to get registered owners, or members of their household, to identify the driver. In those towns, if the technicians reviewing the photos see that the pictured driver is obviously not the registered owner (gender mismatch, or great difference in age) or that the photo is too blurry to be sure of who it is, one tactic they frequently use is to send the registered owner an official-looking notice telling him that he must identify the driver, within 10 days. (In the business, they call these notices a "nomination.") "Why do they do it? "So far, the common thread is that all these "Police Going Too Far..." cities use RedFlex as their camera vendor and have contracts (signed before 2004) requiring them to pay RedFlex approx. $90 for each real ticket issued. These cities send the registered owner a notice (fake ticket) -- which the City doesn't have to pay RedFlex for - when they see that the face photo is of such poor quality that it would probably not be accepted by a judge as proof of who the driver was. Sending you the fake ticket is the police's attempt to get you to identify the driver, thus providing them that proof. Once you have filled-out the blanks on the fake ticket form, the police can be pretty sure that a ticket will stick and that they will be able to recoup the $90 it will cost them to have a real one issued. So they go ahead and have RedFlex issue (print up and mail) one." Issue # 2. There's a big incentive for the cities, and the camera companies, to set the yellows very short. Here in California our legislature passed a law, 3 years ago, setting a minimum yellow for _straight-through_ traffic. While the mandated straight-through minimums are on the short side, nonetheless it has caused the lucrative enforcement to shift to left turns, for which the minimum yellow is just 3.0 seconds. And right turns. But there's no evidence that people turning left or right cause the horrible accidents that the authorities say they want to prevent (see the analyses I did of several heavily-enforced intersections - under Hawthorne Documents Set #3, Culver City Documents Set # 12, and Costa Mesa Documents Set #10). But, if we nonetheless accept that it's a reasonable goal to decrease left-turn runners, there's an alternative to heavy ticketing. If you will look at the Mesa, Arizona Ticket Counts table (see Mesa, Arizona on the Camera Towns page of my website), you'll see that left turn violations go way down, and stay down, when drivers are given a reasonable amount of yellow. And for straight through movements, the Ticket Counts table on the Costa Mesa (California) Documents page shows that just a few tenths of a second longer yellow makes a significant decrease in the number of tickets. I hope you find this of interest. Regards, Jim editor highwayrobbery . net . no . spam I slightly munged this address to foil spammers- Politech mailing list Archived at http://www.politechbot.com/ Moderated by Declan McCullagh (http://www.mccullagh.org/) ------ End of Forwarded Message Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 02 Feb 2005 23:33:36 -0500 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Is Canada Headed Toward a Canadian DMCA? _______________ Forward Header _______________ Subject: Is Canada Headed Toward a Canadian DMCA? Author: Michael Geist < > Date: 31st January 2005 7:15:58 am Dave, Of possible interest to IP -- my weekly Toronto Star Law Bytes column examines whether Canada may be headed toward a Digital Millennium Copyright Canada Act. The column explores the risks associated with technological protection measures alongside anti-circumvention legislation and the potential that Canada may adopt DMCA-like provisions into its copyright law. Column, posted in full below, at MG `TPMs': A perfect storm for consumers Michael Geist Toronto Star During last fall's U.S. presidential election, CBS News featured a controversial report on President George W. Bush's military service. The report, which relied on unverified documents, generated enormous media coverage, eventually leading to a public apology and the upcoming retirement of veteran news anchor Dan Rather. Several weeks ago, an independent panel released a 234-page report on the incident as CBS News continued its efforts to abate the scandal. Two days after the freely available report was released, Internet users noticed that attempts to electronically copy and paste sentences from the lengthy report were rendered impossible as CBS's lawyers had inserted a technological feature into the document that prevented any form of electronic copying. Although the use of the technological restriction was relatively unimportant -- a speed bump rather than a full blocking mechanism -- its use highlights the increasing reliance on technological protection measures (TPMs) to control access to, and use of, digital content. The proliferation of technological protection measures, alongside new legislative proposals designed to protect these digital locks, represent a perfect storm of danger to consumers, who may find themselves locked out of content they have already purchased, while sacrificing their privacy and free speech rights in the process. Owners of online databases and other digital content deploy technological protection measures (sometimes referred to as Digital Rights Management or DRM) to establish a layer of technical protection that is designed to provide greater control over their content. The content industry has touted technological protection measures' promise for more than decade, maintaining that technological locks could prove far more effective in curtailing unauthorized copying than traditional laws. While technological protection measures do not provide absolute protection - research suggests all technological protection measures can eventually be broken - companies continue to actively search for inventive new uses for these technological locks. In certain instances their use is obvious to consumers. For example, DVDs contain a content scrambling system that limits the ability to copy even a small portion of a lawfully purchased DVD. Similarly, purchasers of electronic books often find that their e-books contain limitations restricting copying, playback, or use of the e-book on multiple platforms. In fact, e-books are frequently saddled with far more restrictions than are found in the paper-based equivalent. Sometimes the use of a technological protection measure is far less obvious, manipulating markets to the detriment of consumers, rather than protecting content. DVDs also typically contain regional codes that limit the ability to play a DVD to a specific region. The consumer is often unaware of the regional code until they purchase a DVD while on vacation in one region only to find that they cannot play the disc on their DVD player when they return home. Of even greater concern is the increasing use of technological protection measures in completely unexpected environments. For example, Hewlett-Packard has begun to install technological protection measures into their printer cartridges. The technology is used to block consumers from purchasing cartridges in one region and using them in another, thereby enabling the company to maintain different pricing structures for the same product in different global markets. Despite the proliferation of technological protection measures, few consumers are aware of their existence and many manufacturers are loath to disclose their use. In fact, consumers may soon find that these technological limitations force them to incur significant new costs as they face little alternative but to re-purchase content so that it functions on their personal computer or other favourite device. The industry acknowledges as much, as according to Kevin Gage, a vice-president with the Warner Music Group, this year we will begin to see people with "large libraries of content that won't play with their devices." The impact of technological protection measures also extends far beyond consumer fairness. The same technologies can function much like spyware by invading the personal privacy of users. For example, technological protection measures can be used to track consumer activity and report the personal information back to the parent company. There is also concern that technological protection measures can be used to induce security breaches. Recent reports indicate that hackers are using these technologies in the Microsoft Windows Media Player to trick users into downloading massive amounts of spyware, adware, and viruses. While the potential for technological protection measure abuse may appear obvious, Canadian policy makers have actually been racing toward increasing the use and legal protections afforded to technological protection measures. Canadian Heritage has provided funding to technological protection measure initiatives to help facilitate their development, while parliamentarians, led by Canadian Heritage Minister Liza Frulla and Industry Minister David Emerson, have been jointly working on a copyright reform package that would reportedly grant technological protection measures additional legal protections. The experience with technological protection measure legal protection in the United States, which enacted anti-circumvention legislation as part of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) in 1998, demonstrates the detrimental impact of this policy approach - Americans have experienced numerous instances of abuse that implicate free speech, security, user rights under copyright, and fair competition. From a free speech perspective, the CBS News case represents only the latest in a series of incidents where speech was chilled under the threat of legal action due to technological protection measure and anti-circumvention legislation. For example, several years ago Edward Felten, a Princeton researcher, sought to release an important study on encryption that included circumvention information. When he publicly disclosed his plans, he was served with a warning that he faced potential legal liability if he publicly disclosed his findings. The impact on security, particularly in the wake of 9/11, has been similarly disconcerting. Many computer science researchers have foregone working on sensitive security and encryption matters due to legal fears, pointing to the arrest and imprisonment of Dmitry Sklyarov, a Russian software programmer who spent several months in a California jail in 2001 after he traveled to the U.S. to discuss a circumvention software program at a conference. That incident led leading former Cyber-security Czar Richard Clarke to acknowledge that "a lot of people didn't realize that [the DMCA] would have this potential chilling effect on vulnerability research." Companies have not shied away from using prohibitions on circumventing technological protection measures to limit competition. Lexmark, another leading printer company, sued a rival printer cartridge company for copyright infringement for circumventing technological protection measures designed to prevent consumers from using the rival company's printer cartridges in Lexmark printers. Similarly, Chamberlain, a garage door opener company, sued Skylink for creating a universal remote control that interoperated with its garage door opener by circumventing a technological protection measure. In both instances, appellate courts recently denied the suits, but fear of a potential lawsuit may be sufficient to stop competitive activity in its tracks. From a traditional copyright perspective, anti-circumvention legislation, acting in concert with technological protection measures, has steadily eviscerated fair use rights such as the right to copy portions of work for research or study purposes, since the blunt instrument of technology can be used to prevent all copying, even that which copyright law currently permits. They also have the potential to limit the size of the public domain, since in the future work may enter public domain as its copyright expires, yet that content may be practically inaccessible as it sits locked behind a technological protection measure. Notwithstanding the U.S. experience, there is every indication that adoption of these legal provisions is marching forward in Canada leading to a potential DMCCA - the Digital Millennium Copyright Canada Act. This despite the fact that the U.S. model need not be imitated in order to meet Canada's international obligations and the fact that important advocates, such as the Privacy Commissioner of Canada, who recently wrote to Industry Canada and Canadian Heritage to request future consultation on the privacy impact of copyright reform, have yet to be heard. In fact, the time has come for all Canadians to speak out and to tell the responsible ministers along with their local MPs what is increasingly self-evident. Canada does not need protection for technological protection measures. In order to maintain our personal privacy, a vibrant security research community, a competitive marketplace, and a fair copyright balance, we need protection from them. ********************************************************************** Professor Michael A. Geist Canada Research Chair in Internet and E-commerce Law University of Ottawa Law School, Common Law Section 57 Louis Pasteur St., Ottawa, Ontario, K1N 6N5 Tel: Fax: [for phone and fax numbers and email and web addresses, check the original of this posting in Dave Farber's "interesting people" archives] Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 03 Feb 2005 17:16:15 -0500 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Study: Cell Phone Use Ups Accident Risk Note the last paragraph. Do we draw the conclusion that the way to improve safety when talking on the cell phone and driving is to do it more often so we gain more experience? http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A56468-2005Feb2.html?sub=3DAR http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A56468-2005Feb2?language=3Dprinter washingtonpost.com Study: Cell Phone Use Ups Accident Risk By Leon D'Souza The Associated Press Wednesday, February 2, 2005; 7:19 AM SALT LAKE CITY -- Talking on a cell phone makes you drive like a retiree -- even if you're only a teen, a new study shows. A report from the University of Utah says when motorists between 18 and 25 talk on cell phones, they drive like elderly people - moving and reacting more slowly and increasing their risk of accidents. "If you put a 20-year-old driver behind the wheel with a cell phone, his reaction times are the same as a 70-year-old driver," said David Strayer, a University of Utah psychology professor and principal author of the study. "It's like instant aging." And it doesn't matter whether the phone is hand-held or handsfree, he said. Any activity requiring a driver to "actively be part of a conversation" likely will impair driving abilities, Strayer said. In fact, motorists who talk on cell phones are more impaired than drunken drivers with blood-alcohol levels exceeding 0.08, Strayer and colleague Frank Drews, an assistant professor of psychology, found during research conducted in 2003. Their new study appears in this winter's issue of Human Factors, the quarterly journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society. Strayer said they found that when 18- to-25-year-olds were placed in a driving simulator and talked on a cellular phone, they reacted to brake lights from a car in front of them as slowly as 65- to 74-year-olds who were not using a cell phone. In the simulator, each participant drove four 10-mile freeway trips lasting about 10 minutes each, talking on a cell phone with a research assistant during half the trip and driving without talking the other half. Only handsfree phones -- considered safer -- were used. The study found that drivers who talked on cell phones were 18 percent slower in braking and took 17 percent longer to regain the speed they lost when they braked. The numbers, which come down to milliseconds, might not seem like much, but it could be the difference to stopping in time to avoid hitting a child in the street, Strayer said. The new research questions the effectiveness of cell phone usage laws in states such as New York and New Jersey, which only ban the use of hand-held cell phones while driving. It's not so much the handling of a phone, Strayer said, but the fact that having a conversation is a mental process that can drain concentration. The only silver lining to the new research is that elderly drivers using a cell phone aren't any more of a hazard to themselves and others than young drivers. Previous research suggested older drivers may face what Strayer described as a "triple whammy." "We thought they would be really messed up because not only are they slower overall due to age, there's also a difficulty dividing attention," Strayer said. But the study found that more experience and a tendency to take fewer risks helped negate any additional danger. Copyright 2005 The Associated Press 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: David Clayton Subject: Data Over Power Lines a Problem? Date: Fri, 04 Feb 2005 15:12:01 +1100 http://www.pcworld.idg.com.au/index.php/id;650745972;fp;2;fpid;1 Sparks fly over power line Internet trials Howard Dahdah, PC World 03/02/2005 15:22:19 Knocking an aeroplane out of the sky by simply using an ultra-fast Internet connection is closer to fact than fantasy, say opponents of a new Broadband over Power Lines (BPL) technology. While the prospect of broadband Internet access at 100 times current speeds is exciting Web surfers, critics say the radio interference it causes poses a serious threat to radio networks, including those used by air traffic controllers. BPL, also known as Power Line Communications (PLC), can transmit data at 200Mbps by utilising normal electrical power lines. Users of the service would plug their broadband modem into a normal household power point. ------------------------------ From: Michael March Subject: What Ports Are Used for NBX <--> NBX Connectivity? Date: 3 Feb 2005 20:29:23 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com I just stepped into a situation where a company has two NBX 100s are linked up together. One side is on a T-1 going to the general Internet and the other is on a 640kpbs(up/down) DSL link, again, going to the general Internet. There are problems with the call quality between the sites so I want to get some QoS rules going to see if that helps out. Does anyone know what protocol / ports or whatever is used for NBX to NBX communication? Thanks! ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 4 Feb 2005 13:31:33 EST From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA Subject: Qwest, MCI Press Ahead With Merger Talks Telecom dailyLead from USTA February 4, 2005 http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=19201&l=2017006 TODAY'S HEADLINES NEWS OF THE DAY * Qwest, MCI press ahead with merger talks BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH * KMC turns focus to IP services * Nortel seeks repayment of bonuses from former CEO, others * Sprint, Comcast report earnings USTA SPOTLIGHT * SUPERCOMM, TELECOM '05, Webinars and the Telecom-Bookstore EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES * MCI, UNH team up on IPv6 project VOIP DOWNLOAD * AOL eyes VoIP market * IP-over-Wi-Fi emerges on the scene * U.S. government issues VoIP security warning Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others. http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=19201&l=2017006 ------------------------------ From: fakharmtc@hotmail.com (Fakhar) Subject: Please Advise for VoIP Hardware Date: 4 Feb 2005 00:45:20 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Hi, I was wondering about a VoIP hardware setup that we can setup in our organization. The Organization set up is as follows. 1: Different Branches within on city and also other cities. 2: Within a single city, We have DSL Link at each location from single ISP. 3: Across the city the ISP are changed. We have independent PABXs at each location. What we want is a solution that we can integrate with the existing PABXs. Using the VoIP Hardware we should be able to use the normal telephone sets and make call within the organization (in the same city or inter-city call). Please advice me any good and inexpensive solution. Take Care, Fakhar ------------------------------ From: George Mitchell Subject: Re: Supermarket: Let Your Fingers do the Paying Date: Thu, 03 Feb 2005 16:11:01 -0800 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com ranck@vt.edu wrote: > I don't know, but presumably they would not have to have > their card with them. The biometric fingerprint scan provides > a positive ID and the store can just charge the purchase to > the cutomer's account on file. You could then leave the card > at home either on purpose or by mistake but still have no > problem at the checkout. Sort of like the old days when > the grocer actually knew who you were and if you forgot your > wallet he'd say, "bring the money back later." There is > the added security that no one else can use your account. > A new clerk doesn't need to recognize you or check your > ID for a written check. In theory you could cut the physical > credit card up and then *only* your fingerprint will allow > charges on that account. > Bill Ranck > Blacksburg, Va. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: As long as the fingerprints accessed > some internal charge system (in lieu of or in addition to) a signature > on file, I see no problem with it. PAT] It's easy to forget that, once your fingerprint has been scanned into the store's system, now this impossible-to-forget, impossible-to-forge identification is stored on their system, ready to be replayed at will by anyone with access to their computer. -- George Mitchell (obfuscated email address) ------------------------------ From: Barry Margolin Subject: Re: Supermarket: Let Your Fingers do the Paying Organization: Symantec Date: Fri, 04 Feb 2005 01:06:20 -0500 In article , bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) wrote: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, let's see ... maybe I was caught > shoplifting at a grocery store in Iraq or Iran and the Taliban chopped > off all my fingers as part of the punishment. And one of the terms > for accepting MC/Visa cards required by many/most/all of the card > issuers is that the store is *not* permitted to demand any other form > of identification. The card is to stand on its own regards ID, *if the > holder is using it for payment*. So your 'no touch, no sale' idea is > not possible in many stores. I can see where fingerprints might be > used in lieu of an actual plastic but I do not think it can be a > requirement *in addition to* plastic. And when a clerk is caught > making an unauthorized sale using someone else's card the answer is > simple also. Fire and presecute them. PAT] They're not demanding it in addition to the card, they're offering it as an optional *alternative* to the card. If your fingers have been chopped off, I suggest you don't choose this option. Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu Arlington, MA *** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me *** ------------------------------ From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) Subject: Re: Supermarket: Let Your Fingers do the Paying Date: Fri, 04 Feb 2005 17:11:13 -0000 Organization: Widgets, Inc. In article , Robert Bonomi wrote: > In article , >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I do not understand one thing: If >> people have already been verified as to their ability and >> willingness to pay for their groceries through their credit card >> and their personal identification has been verified in much the same >> way by the credit card people, then *why* would people want to go one >> step further by enrolling in 'Pay by Touch'? Is this intended as one >> way to 'save them time' by not having to sign a credit card slip? In >> other words, touch your thumb or finger somewhere rather than taking >> a couple seconds to sign a slip of paper? Now, if the grocery people >> had set up their own credit system *in place of Visa/MC* by using a >> thumb/finger print, I can see where that might be useful, but >> otherwise, why bother? PAT] > Gee, I dunno. > Like maybe you _don't_ have to have your card, *or* card number, with > you. > Like, no hassles if the mag stripe doesn't read. > Like, no opportunity for a dishonest cashier to memorize the number > off your card. > Like, maybe, *nobody*else* can buy anything with that card number at > that store. i.e., if it's a 'pay by touch' card, "no touchee, no > tickee", and if the fingerprint _doesn't_ match, "no sale". > You're right, I can't see why anybody would *consider* bothering to do > something like that. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, let's see ... maybe I was caught > shoplifting at a grocery store in Iraq or Iran and the Taliban chopped > off all my fingers as part of the punishment. Strawman -- not a _bad_ strawman despite the stretch, but still a strawman. Then, obviously, you would not _elect_ to use their *optional* system, would you? And then there's no problem for you, is there? Or didn't you notice that it is a _voluntary_participation_ system? > And one of the terms for accepting MC/Visa cards required by > many/most/all of the card issuers is that the store is *not* > permitted to demand any other form of identification. The card is to > stand on its own regards ID, *if the holder is using it for > payment*. So your 'no touch, no sale' idea is not possible in many > stores. When the store has a prior *signed*, verified, validated, directive from the card-holder on file that says "do not allow any charges against this card number unless the fingerprint matches the one I have provided on file" the store most certainly *can* demand the fingerprint. Agreed, the store cannot do it on it's _own_ initiative. However, that is simply not the situation with regard to a _voluntary_participation_ program such as the one under discussion. > I can see where fingerprints might be > used in lieu of an actual plastic but I do not think it can be a > requirement *in addition to* plastic. Making clear that you did not bother to *read* the original article. A) this is not a 'required' system. B) the fingerprint _is_ used *INSTEAD* of the plastic. > And when a clerk is caught making an unauthorized sale using someone > else's card the answer is simple also. Fire and presecute them. PAT] "Simple"??? *snicker* No, make that <*GUFFAW*> First off, that _assumes_ that the clerk got caught. Second, 'unauthorized sales' can make for a _gawdaful_ mess of problems for the actual card-holder. Just imagine that you're going on vacation. And have made sure that your card has a _zero_ balance outstanding. You get to your destination, and offer the card to pay for your hotel room, and get told "card not accepted -- over credit limit". Where are you, the wife, and kids, going to sleep tonight? Getting an 'unauthorized sale' off your account can be *difficult*. Consider a telephone order (one where the merchant asked for, and _got_ the 'security code'), that was actually _delivered_ to YOUR address, and signed for in your name. I have relatives who have been the (almost) victim of *precisely* that. They got wind of things shortly before the order was to be delivered, and law enforcement was waiting when the delivery truck came by. A guy _outside_ the house pretended to be the 'addressee', and signed for the package. Whereupon the cops pounced. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Oh, I dunno about this last part, where one supposedly has a hard time catching the clerk 'in the act'. Walmart does okay on it. The stores here in southeast Kansas employ 'shoppers' for just that purpose, old bag ladies who are (told to be) so ignorant and distasteful they 'could not possibly know anything about store procedures'. When management gets word of a cashier or other employee who may be a miscreant, those old bag ladies all get in line at that register over a period of a few days, and pass through that line day after day until their beady little eyes catch the cashier; something the clerk would not dare do with management or 'another employee' watching them. Then the bag lady gives a report to the proper management team responsible, secretly of course. I know how that works because for several months the Chicago Transit Authority secretly employed me (and others of my nature) to be 'riders' when they wanted to catch subway cashiers who were ripping them off royally. Obviously the cashier was *not* going to act out when a supervisor or an 'intelligent' (read: well groomed, sophisticated person with an important job) was riding the train. CTA knew it was essential to use old bag ladies or 'bad, smelly, bums' as riders to get the goods on the crooks. CTA would call and say "ride through the (name of subway station) on the 3rd shift on weekends for a few days". What that meant was wear old, ragged, filthy clothes, act as ignorant as hell, as needed be argumentative with the cashier, go rushing through the turnstyle in a big hurry, try not to act like you are looking, but *listen* for the 'fare collected' bell to ring behind you (or in newer style turnstyles) note if the cashier punches the 'fare collected' button to light the turnstyle status or if she 'accidentally' punches the button to release the turnstyle on the basis of 'transfer received' or 'monthly pass'. *Never say a word to her about it.* Just note the time/date/badge number and as soon as you can, call (private, unlisted number) to tell the inspectors. Generally, I just did as they asked me; I can be a 'dumb, ignorant old customer' if I am asked. Most business places which work with a large number of customers, and handle a lot of cash, etc employ people like that to help them out. The 'regular employees' are not supposed to know about them nor suspect people are hired to deliberatly watch them and snitch on them. PAT] ------------------------------ From: BobT Subject: Re: British TV License (was America the Worst For Cell Rates) Date: Fri, 04 Feb 2005 16:59:50 GMT On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 23:50:45 -0800, Mark Crispin wrote: > That is not the case with PAL televisions in North America. Almost no > televisions sold in North America and Japan have PAL. TVs sold in > North America with PAL capable are grey market imports, not consumer > goods. Well, we recently got a Philips 30 inch LCD HDTV, at BestBuy in Chicago, which is NTSC/PAL. I suppose the greymarket label may apply to it, but it wasn't the only one they were selling with this capability. It was made in the EU, which is unusual in these days of everything coming from China. The NTSC tuner also works fine in it, although we rarely use it, since the OTA STB we use incorporates both ATSC and NTSC. ------------------------------ From: Isaiah Beard Subject: Re: Comcast Exceeds One Million HDTV-Capable Set-Top Boxes Date: Fri, 04 Feb 2005 13:24:22 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Unfortunately, Comcast is leaving out the fact that in many areas, people are getting HDTV-ready set top boxes even if they intend to plug it into an NTSC TV. The boxes are capable of translating the signal to something more suitable for a standard definition TV, IF you happen to order the HD package. Ad if you dont order the package, you simply don't get those channels, and the box works as a standard digital cable receiver. Bottom line: swapping out your old cable boxes with HDTV ready tuners doesn't mean everyone is watching in HD. Monty Solomon wrote: > Comcast Exceeds One Million HDTV-Capable Set-Top Boxes; Demand > for HDTV Service Propelled by Super Bowl > - Feb 2, 2005 11:34 AM (PR Newswire) PHILADELPHIA, Feb. 2 /PRNewswire/ > -- As Super Bowl frenzy reaches a fever pitch, Comcast Corporation > (Nasdaq: CMCSA, CMCSK), announced it has now deployed more than one > million high-definition television (HDTV)-capable Digital Cable > set-top boxes in customers' homes, adding more than 800,000 of them in > 2004 alone. In addition, Comcast has experienced a 143% increase in > the number of customers connecting HDTV sets to Comcast's HD service > during January 2005 versus January 2004. > - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=46612126 E-mail fudged to thwart spammers. Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply. ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com Subject: Re: AT&T Hangs Up - and Few Are Sorry to Say Goodbye Date: 4 Feb 2005 10:53:40 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com RamaChandra Raju Bhupathiraju wrote: > Tue Feb 1, 6:31 AM ET Op/Ed - USATODAY.com > ... It was an overbearing monopoly before its breakup ... No it was not. It's monopoly status did not result from anything AT&T did, but rather from edicts from the state and federal govts explicitly defining what AT&T could do. Note that AT&T was also forbidden to act in many other markets, including those it had once developed products (ie motion picture sound systems). AT&T was strictly limited in what it could do and what it could charge; people forget that there was much it could NOT do. > Not since its early days has it been much of an innovator. Most of our present day communication system owes itself to innovations AT&T continued to make until divesture, not only in technology, but also telecom administration. > For much of its history, AT&T was the quintessential monopoly. It > had no competition for local service, no competition for long- > distance service and offered people few reasons to like it. Its > customers could choose whatever color telephone they wanted, the > saying went, so long as it was black. Not exactly true. Customers DID have choices in using telegrams for messages (as most people did until the 1960s when long distance costs dropped), as well as using their own phone systems internally within their company (as many large organizations did). Customers most certainly had the choice of various telephone sets and services for both residence and business to suit their needs, and they came in colors, too. > AT&T was once, arguably, the USA's most powerful company. It was a powerful company, but not necessarily the country's "most" powerful. Various companies have had great power over time. Years ago US Steel was #1. IBM once held great power. The railroads, such as the Pennsylvania and New York Central, were quite powerful. In later years the energy companies like Exxon had power. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 4 Feb 2005 15:04:03 EST From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: TD-Extra Site Map For some time now, I have been working and molding 'td-extra' to make it an all-purpose news service; if you will, a sort of "poor man's Yahoo" news service. I do not kid myself, there is a long way to go to complete the job. But here is where I am at to date, and I invite your review if what is done thus far. A dream I have had since I first got into computers and news groups now over twenty years ago was to create a total news service, with an emphasis on telecom/technology news. but not neglecting other news as well. Please tell me what you think thus far: (All these URLs begin with http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra then continue as shown below:) Audio Feedsweep entries: /AP.html Five minute radio news summary, updated hourly on the hour. /bbc.html Ongoing 24/7 news and features from BBC World Service. /TDNews.html Ongoing 24/7 news from three main sources: BBC, Voice of America (VOA) and National Public Radio (NPR) This URL automatically alternates between these three services, playing each for one or two hours, then moving on to another one. To see what it is on, and where it is going next, look at /radioschedule.html /Fednews.html This is news of interest to federal employees, 24/7 with AP news hourly on the hour, other features throughout the hour. Overnight and weekends, it is entirely AP News Radio. When combined with 'feedsweep', as the audio is playing, more than one hundred news headlines (all time stamped USA Central time) from various sources (mostly AP and Reuters) are displayed. The entire feedsweep display refreshes about once every two or three minutes, as new items are received. Click on a headline, read the story, click elsewhere, read another story. New items are posted at the top, and older items are scrolled off the bottom. All four of these pages use the feedsweep scripts, the only difference is *which audio* to which you to listen. If you don't want to listen to radio at all, then just click the button on the screen to turn it off or on. (the default is 'audio on' to which ever source you choose.) In addition to 'feedsweep' with /AP.html, /bbc.html, /TDNewsradio.html and /Fednews.html , other things to check out in td-extra are these: (like above, all begin with URL http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra then continue) /dailynews.html A *very short* summary of news headlines from various categories. /gaynews.html A collection of GLBT news headlines and links from various GLBT sources. /index.html The default starting page if you do not choose any specific newsfeed, audio, or news source. In other words you only type in http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra /internet-news.html Here I have USA Today headlines, abstracts and links, and United Press International headlines, abstracts and links. /more-news.html An extension of TELECOM Digest, with telecom headlines, abstracts and links. Additionally, United Press International reports on telecom, internet, technology, and networking. /nasa.html Video/audio from National Aeronautics and Space Administration. /nytimes.html A hundred or so headlines, abstracts and links to articles in the current day's New York Times from the National, International, Politics, Home, and Technology section of the paper. In addition, on the right side of the page, headlines, abstracts and links from the current issue of Christian Science Monitor, National Public Radio News, Salon.com (internet magazine) and other sources. /miscellaneous.html Religious news service. The audio here is a 24/7 stream from Eternal Word Radio Network, however you can turn it off or switch to various other audio streams as desired. /radioschedule.html Is part of TDNews.html the program schedule. /operator-pat.html A bizzare collection of JPG files featuring your moderator's namesake. /othernews.html More headlines from USA Today, technology headlines from CNN.com and internet.com /technews.html Technology headlines and links from Forbes, EE Times, Infoworld.com, others. /supplement.html Features include full pages of the current issue of Christian Science Monitor, Atlantic Unbound (the internet version of Atlantic Monthly magazine), your local weather forecast (input your postal code), Today's Astronomy Picture, Today's Note from History, a few other things. /worldpress.html National and International News from an alternative viewpoint. =================================== And of course, you begin by reading the current issue of TELECOM Digest. I will agree I do not yet have it all organized as well as I should, and that is where I hope you all will help me in this beta-test with your comments and ideas. Remember: http://telecom-digest.org for starters, then go to http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra to read 'the rest of the news' each day, or listen to audio presentations of the news. For direct entry to the URL of your choice, just add /'feature name' to the URL, or make it your starting or 'home' page as desired. 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 V24 #53 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat Feb 5 23:58:39 2005 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j164wc925258; Sat, 5 Feb 2005 23:58:39 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2005 23:58:39 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200502060458.j164wc925258@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 V24 #54 TELECOM Digest Sat, 5 Feb 2005 23:59:00 EST Volume 24 : Issue 54 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Telecom Update (Canada) #467, February 4, 2005 (Angus TeleManagement) A Child Learns a Harsh Lesson in Politics (Monty Solomon) Motorola v550 - Picture Downloading?? (Pete L) Update Interval For E911 Records (William Warren) Phone Service Codes, AIM Messaging, etc. (dexter3) Re: British TV License (was America the Worst For Cell Rates) (Rob) Re: 1+Ten-Digits Mandatory in NYCity (Carl Moore) Re: Supermarket: Let Your Fingers do the Paying (jmeissen@aracnet.com) Re: Supermarket: Let Your Fingers do the Paying (Barry Margolin) Re: Supermarket: Let Your Fingers do the Paying (Robert Bonomi) Re: Supermarket: Let Your Fingers do the Paying (DevilsPGD) Re: AT&T Hangs Up - and Few Are Sorry to Say Goodbye (Tony P.) Re: AT&T Inventions Fueled Tech Boom, And Its Own Fall (Lou Jahn) Re: Please Advise for VoIP Hardware (CWB) 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: Fri, 04 Feb 2005 16:15:21 -0500 From: Angus TeleManagement Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #467, February 4, 2005 ************************************************************ TELECOM UPDATE ************************************************************ published weekly by Angus TeleManagement Group http://www.angustel.ca Number 467: February 4, 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: ** Nortel Sues Former Executives ** MTS Sells Stake in Wireless Venture ** CRTC Sets ILEC Rates for Competitor Services ** 519 Running Short of Numbers ** Best Year in Wireless History ** Competitor Rates Set for Telebec, Telus Quebec ** SBC to Buy AT&T, Cut 12,800 Jobs ** FCI Plans VoIP Launch ** Atlantic Telecom Unions Merge ** Labour Board Reverses Telus Ruling ** Aastra Buying Former Voice-Data PBX Giant ** Spotwave Products Said 3G-Ready ** Restructuring Costs Cut BCE Profit ** Allstream Boosts MTS Profits ** Small ILEC Interconnection Rates Set ** CRTC Restarts Deferral Account Proceeding ** U.S. Report Sees Security Risks with IP Phones ============================================================ NORTEL SUES FORMER EXECUTIVES: Nortel Networks is suing three of its former executives--CEO Frank Dunn, CFO Doug Beatty and Controller Michael Gollogly--alleging they manipulated the company's financial reports in 2003. The suits seeks repayment of bonuses and stock units totaling $12.85 million. ** On February 1 Nortel released results showing a profit of US$59 million in the first quarter of 2004, and $16 million in the second quarter. MTS SELLS STAKE IN WIRELESS VENTURE: MTS Allstream has sold its one-third share of the broadband wireless joint venture launched at the end of 2003, to its former partners. Microcell Solutions (formerly Inukshuk Internet) and NR Communications have purchased equal shares for a total of $8.1 million in cash, MTS's total investment in the joint venture. (see Telecom Update #409, 423, 434, 436) ** The Joint Venture launched service in Richmond B.C. and Cumberland Ont. in March 2004, but no further deployments have been announced. CRTC SETS ILEC RATES FOR COMPETITOR SERVICES: The CRTC has released its long-awaited decision on pricing for digital services leased to competitors by incumbent telcos. ** Competitor Digital Network services (available to competitive carriers and registered resellers) now include not just customer access lines, but also lines linking other parts of competitor networks within specified large metropolitan areas. Lower-speed links (DS-0 and DS-1) are to be priced at cost plus 15%; higher-speed links will have larger markups. ** The telcos' revenue losses will be compensated from their deferral accounts. ** Call-Net says the changes will save it $25 million per year. MTS Allstream, which wanted bigger discounts on higher-speed services, is disappointed; it says "the CRTC has missed an excellent opportunity to promote full competition in the next-generation services that Canadians will want tomorrow." www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Decisions/2005/dt2005-6.htm 519 RUNNING SHORT OF NUMBERS: The Canadian Numbering Administrator says the latest survey of demand for numbers indicates that all the prefixes in the 519 Area Code will be assigned by April 2006, seven months prior to the currently scheduled introduction of a new area code, 226. The 519 Relief Planning Committee has asked the CRTC to approve several measures to avoid a number shortage, including moving the introduction of 226 up to June 3, 2006. www.cnac.ca/npa_data.htm#NPA519 BEST YEAR IN WIRELESS HISTORY: Statistics Canada says the Canadian wireless industry is "on track for its best year in history." In Q3 2004, 14 million wireless subscribers generated $2.5 billion in revenues and $753 million in operating profits -- up 18% and 39%, respectively, from Q3 2003. ** Wireline revenues remained flat, but cost-cutting raised wireline profits. ILECs had 2.6 million subscribers for high speed services in Q3 2004, up 28% from a year earlier. ** Capital investment grew year-over-year in both segments, by 26% in wireless and 21% in wireline. www.statcan.ca/Daily/English/050203/d050203c.htm COMPETITOR RATES SET FOR TELEBEC, TELUS QUEBEC: CRTC Telecom Decision 2005-4 sets rates and terms for the introduction of competition in local telephone and payphone services in areas where Telebec or Telus Quebec is the incumbent telco. The decision creates a rate-banding structure similar to that used by larger telcos and sets the rates to be charged for services leased by competitors. www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Decisions/2005/dt2005-4.htm SBC TO BUY AT&T, CUT 12,800 JOBS: SBC Communications has agreed to buy AT&T for US$16 billion. SBC says it expects to cut 12,800 jobs as a result of the deal. ** Published reports say that the smallest of the regional U.S. telcos, Denver-based Qwest, is trying to buy the second-largest U.S. LD carrier, MCI, for about $6 billion. Verizon and BellSouth may also make bids. FCI PLANS VoIP LAUNCH: Toronto-area CLEC FCI Broadband says it will begin offering VoIP-based telephone service to business and residential customers in June, under the brand name "iTalk." ATLANTIC TELECOM UNIONS MERGE: The Atlantic Communications and Technical Workers Union (AC&TWU) has voted to merge with the Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union of Canada (CEP). The AC&TWU represents Aliant employees in Nova Scotia, the CEP those in Newfoundland, New Brunswick, and PEI. ** The two unions previously worked together as the Council of Atlantic Telecommunications Unions. LABOUR BOARD REVERSES TELUS RULING: The Canadian Industrial Relations Board has reversed its April 2004 order requiring Telus to enter binding arbitration with the Telecommunications Workers Union, and set aside strict rules limiting Telus from communicating with bargaining unit employees. (See Telecom Update #418, 421) Reasons for the decision will be published at a future date. AASTRA BUYING FORMER VOICE-DATA PBX GIANT: Dallas-based InteCom was one of the first companies to offer a high-end, integrated voice-data PBX. After being bought and sold by Wang, it merged with French PBX maker Matra Telecom, and is now owned by Belgian aerospace giant EADS. Now Toronto-based Aastra Technology is acquiring EADS' PBX business for $117 million. The deal is expected to close by the end of March. SPOTWAVE PRODUCTS SAID 3G-READY: Ottawa-based Spotwave Wireless says that its SpotCell products, which improve in-building coverage for wireless carriers, are now compatible with EVDO and UMTS next generation wireless technology. RESTRUCTURING COSTS CUT BCE PROFIT: BCE Inc's 2004 profits were down 13% from the previous year as a result of $772 million (after tax) in charges for restructuring, including reducing staff by 10%. Total revenue was up 2.4% to $19.19 billion from $18.74 billion. ALLSTREAM BOOSTS MTS PROFITS: Manitoba Telecom Services reports a 2004 profit of $305.1 million, up from $85.6 million in 2003. Total revenue jumped from $858 million to $1.52 billion. Most of the growth occurred in the fourth quarter, reflecting MTS's acquisition of Allstream. ** MTS TV now has 32,578 installed customers for its digital cable TV service. SMALL ILEC INTERCONNECTION RATES SET: The CRTC has revised the rates that the independent telcos charge long distance carriers to connect to their networks. The Commission says the new rates "move the small ILECs' rates closer to market- based interconnection rates." www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Decisions/2005/dt2005-3.htm CRTC RESTARTS DEFERRAL ACCOUNT PROCEEDING: The CRTC has set new timelines for submissions in its examination of how the incumbent telcos' deferral accounts are to be spent. The proceeding had been on hold, awaiting an Aliant filing that was submitted January 28. www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Letters/2005/lt050202.htm www.crtc.gc.ca/PartVII/eng/2004/8678/aliant/050128.doc U.S. REPORT SEES SECURITY RISKS WITH IP PHONES: A new report from the U.S. National Institute for Standards and Technology warns government agencies and others to proceed with caution and carefully consider security risks when considering changing to VoIP-based phone systems. VoIP systems have "significant security issues," the report says. "Designing, deploying, and securely operating a VoIP network is a complex effort that requires careful preparation." http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/nistpubs/800-58/SP800-58- final.pdf ============================================================ HOW TO SUBMIT ITEMS FOR TELECOM UPDATE E-MAIL: editors@angustel.ca FAX: 905-686-2655 MAIL: TELECOM UPDATE Angus TeleManagement Group 8 Old Kingston Road Ajax, Ontario Canada L1T 2Z7 =========================================================== HOW TO SUBSCRIBE (OR UNSUBSCRIBE) TELECOM UPDATE is provided in electronic form only. There are two formats available: 1. The fully-formatted edition is posted on the World Wide Web on the first business day of the week at www.angustel.ca 2. The e-mail edition is distributed free of charge. To subscribe, send an e-mail message to: join-telecom_update@nova.sparklist.com To stop receiving the e-mail edition, send an e-mail message to: leave-telecom_update@nova.sparklist.com Sending e-mail to these addresses will automatically add or remove the sender's e-mail address from the list. Leave subject line and message area blank. We do not give Telecom Update subscribers' e-mail addresses to any third party. For more information, see www.angustel.ca/update/privacy.html. =========================================================== COPYRIGHT AND CONDITIONS OF USE: All contents copyright 2004 Angus TeleManagement Group Inc. All rights reserved. For further information, including permission to reprint or reproduce, please e-mail rosita@angustel.ca or phone 905-686-5050 ext 500. The information and data included has been obtained from sources which we believe to be reliable, but Angus TeleManagement makes no warranties or representations whatsoever regarding accuracy, completeness, or adequacy. Opinions expressed are based on interpretation of available information, and are subject to change. If expert advice on the subject matter is required, the services of a competent professional should be obtained. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2005 12:16:53 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: A Child Learns a Harsh Lesson in Politics By JULIE SALAMON For adults, the fuss over a PBS children's television show featuring an animated bunny - and real lesbian mothers - was nothing new. But for Emma Riesner, 11, who was supposed to be a star of the now-controversial episode of "Postcards From Buster," what began as a participatory social studies lesson has become a harsh lesson in exclusionary politics. http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/05/arts/television/05bust.html?ex=1265259600&en=3c8daf2784bd2764&ei=5090 NOTE: For more than a hundred headlines, story absracts and the full story behind them, you can read New York Times on line here each day with *no* login requirements, *no* cookies, *no* pop ups/unders, etc. Just the news. For NY Times, Christian Science Monitor and NPR News, check out http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra/nytimes.html ------------------------------ From: peterlavington@hotmail.com (Pete L) Subject: Motorola v550 - Picture Downloading?? Date: 5 Feb 2005 01:43:34 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com I know quite a bit about computers but phones are a bit of a mystery to me! We have just obtained a Motorola v550 and after wading through the manual Ihave mastered the art of working the thing. What I cannot seem to do is download pictures from it to my PC. I've been through all the manual and it doesn't mention it. I have a UBS cable and some software tools - which again don't seem to mention downloading pics. Surely it can be done? Question is how? Anybody out there ideas, please? Pete L ------------------------------ From: william_warren_notme@comcast.net Subject: Update interval for E911 Records Date: Sat, 05 Feb 2005 12:00:45 -0500 Pat, I have a customer who's using Vonage as his primary business line. The problem is that he moves it with him from job to job, many of them in buildings with no phone service that he's in charge of remodeling, and he's got a medical condition that might cause his coworkers to dial 911. He tells me that there's no problem with 911 calls because Vonage has a screen he uses to update his address. The question: how long do E911 updates take to propagate once submitted by Vonage? IIRC, it's at least a day, but I'm hoping I'm wrong. William (Remove "notme" from address for direct replies.) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I was told it is more or less a few times daily, but my problem would be your first paragraph: 'many of them buildings with no phone service in them.' If that is the case, then *how* does he get the internet connection needed to use his VOIP line? Do you mean the buildings have no phone service but somehow *do* have cable installed for his VOIP line? Without cable modems or DSL lines, how is he going to use the VOIP? I am sure the person must have a cell phone; my suggestion would be to use in case of an emergency. Forward his VOIP line to his cell phone. PAT] ------------------------------ From: dexter3 Subject: Phone Service Codes, AIM Messaging, etc. Date: 4 Feb 2005 13:52:34 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com I couldn't find where else to post this question, so please accept my apologies if there's a more appropriate place. I am very curious about how certain services are offered via phone codes. For example, there's a radio station in my area that allows free calls from Cingular subscribers by entering #630. In addition, I can send instant messages to my AOL instant messenger account by using a 6-digit code. So if I wanted to start my own business/service and utilize something like what AOL does with instant messages (you can text message a cell phone from AIM by entering something like +15555551212, and replies from the recipient phone are sent via a text message that hits a 6-digit code that delivers back to your screen name), how would I set up such a code? Do I need to work out a partnering agreement with each service provider? Or is this a standard business service offered by the providers for which I'd pay a small subscription fee? Any ideas on this would be much appreciated, as my web searches have turned up nothing on the subject. Thanks. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This is done at the celco switch, like a speed dial. Ask the cellular company to set it up for you, but it won't come for free. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Rob Subject: Re: British TV License (was America the Worst For Cell Rates) Date: 4 Feb 2005 14:15:00 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com BobT wrote: > Well, we recently got a Philips 30 inch LCD HDTV, at BestBuy in > Chicago, which is NTSC/PAL. I suppose the greymarket label may apply > to it, but it wasn't the only one they were selling with this > capability. It was made in the EU, which is unusual in these days of > everything coming from China. The NTSC tuner also works fine in it, > although we rarely use it, since the OTA STB we use incorporates both > ATSC and NTSC. It's more than likely that because it was made in Europe it is both PAL and NTSC. Rob South Wales, UK ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 4 Feb 2005 17:15:57 EST From: Carl Moore Subject: Re: 1+Ten-Digits Mandatory in NYCity This topic was here two years ago. I'll rehash what I have in Maryland: each geographic area code (301 and 410) has an overlay area code (240 and 443 respectively) mixed in. The overlays put an end to 7D local calls (which now have to be dialed with 10D instead, although 1+10D will also work). And it was noted that 240 and 443 were in use in Washington DC area suburbs (area 301) as PREFIXES, so the nearby equipment could NOT jump to intercept when someone goofed and tried dialing a local call as 240-xxxx or 443-xxxx. Also recall that in the Chicago area, 847 is one of the area codes and is a prefix in what's now 773 area in city of Chicago, and since 7D was being allowed in the Chicago area, you had this scenario if you were in what's now 773 area: dial 1 847 abc defg for a local call to area code 847 or your call will complete to 847 abcd. ------------------------------ From: jmeissen@aracnet.com Subject: Re: Supermarket: Let Your Fingers do the Paying Date: 4 Feb 2005 22:29:38 GMT Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com In article , wrote: > I don't know, but presumably they would not have to have > their card with them. The biometric fingerprint scan provides > a positive ID and the store can just charge the purchase to > the cutomer's account on file. You could then leave the card > at home either on purpose or by mistake but still have no > problem at the checkout. One thing I haven't seen mentioned is reliability. It's one thing to accurately read a sequence of digits that can be validated by a checksum. It's something else to accurately match a scanned image to an original scan. I know it's not as simple as that, but they also have to account for orientation, dirt, scars, etc. I'm sure that with a small sample there's effectively a 100% match confidence. But as the population to match against grows, how reliable is the system? There are no checksums associated with fingerprints. It's easy to say that fingerprints are unique, so they make a perfect identifier. But interpreting fingerprints is not always so perfect. We had a classic and high-profile example up here in Oregon recently when a lawyer was detained for months as a terrorist on the basis of an incorrectly matched fingerprint. John Meissen jmeissen@aracnet.com ------------------------------ From: Barry Margolin Subject: Re: Supermarket: Let Your Fingers do the Paying Organization: Symantec Date: Fri, 04 Feb 2005 19:27:35 -0500 In article , George Mitchell wrote: > It's easy to forget that, once your fingerprint has been scanned into > the store's system, now this impossible-to-forget, impossible-to-forge > identification is stored on their system, ready to be replayed at will > by anyone with access to their computer. Anyone with that level of access can probably just insert charges directly into the database, there's no need to go to the fingerprint scanners. Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu Arlington, MA *** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me *** ------------------------------ From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) Subject: Re: Supermarket: Let Your Fingers do the Paying Date: Sat, 05 Feb 2005 02:20:55 -0000 Organization: Widgets, Inc. In article , Robert Bonomi wrote: >> In article : >>> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I do not understand one thing: If >>> people have already been verified as to their ability and >>> willingness to pay for their groceries through their credit card >>> and their personal identification has been verified in much the same >>> way by the credit card people, then *why* would people want to go one >>> step further by enrolling in 'Pay by Touch'? Is this intended as one >>> way to 'save them time' by not having to sign a credit card slip? In >>> other words, touch your thumb or finger somewhere rather than taking >>> a couple seconds to sign a slip of paper? Now, if the grocery people >>> had set up their own credit system *in place of Visa/MC* by using a >>> thumb/finger print, I can see where that might be useful, but >>> otherwise, why bother? PAT] >> Gee, I dunno. >> Like maybe you _don't_ have to have your card, *or* card number, with >> you. >> Like, no hassles if the mag stripe doesn't read. >> Like, no opportunity for a dishonest cashier to memorize the number >> off your card. >> Like, maybe, *nobody*else* can buy anything with that card number at >> that store. i.e., if it's a 'pay by touch' card, "no touchee, no >> tickee", and if the fingerprint _doesn't_ match, "no sale". >> You're right, I can't see why anybody would *consider* bothering to do >> something like that. >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, let's see ... maybe I was caught >> shoplifting at a grocery store in Iraq or Iran and the Taliban chopped >> off all my fingers as part of the punishment. > Strawman -- not a _bad_ strawman despite the stretch, but still a > strawman. > Then, obviously, you would not _elect_ to use their *optional* system, > would you? And then there's no problem for you, is there? > Or didn't you notice that it is a _voluntary_participation_ system? >> And one of the terms for accepting MC/Visa cards required by >> many/most/all of the card issuers is that the store is *not* >> permitted to demand any other form of identification. The card is to >> stand on its own regards ID, *if the holder is using it for >> payment*. So your 'no touch, no sale' idea is not possible in many >> stores. > When the store has a prior *signed*, verified, validated, directive > from the card-holder on file that says "do not allow any charges > against this card number unless the fingerprint matches the one I have > provided on file" the store most certainly *can* demand the > fingerprint. > Agreed, the store cannot do it on it's _own_ initiative. However, that > is simply not the situation with regard to a _voluntary_participation_ > program such as the one under discussion. >> I can see where fingerprints might be >> used in lieu of an actual plastic but I do not think it can be a >> requirement *in addition to* plastic. > Making clear that you did not bother to *read* the original article. > A) this is not a 'required' system. > B) the fingerprint _is_ used *INSTEAD* of the plastic. >> And when a clerk is caught making an unauthorized sale using someone >> else's card the answer is simple also. Fire and presecute them. PAT] > "Simple"??? *snicker* No, make that <*GUFFAW*> > First off, that _assumes_ that the clerk got caught. > Second, 'unauthorized sales' can make for a _gawdaful_ mess of > problems for the actual card-holder. Just imagine that you're going > on vacation. And have made sure that your card has a _zero_ balance > outstanding. You get to your destination, and offer the card to pay > for your hotel room, and get told "card not accepted -- over credit > limit". Where are you, the wife, and kids, going to sleep tonight? > Getting an 'unauthorized sale' off your account can be *difficult*. > Consider a telephone order (one where the merchant asked for, and > _got_ the 'security code'), that was actually _delivered_ to YOUR > address, and signed for in your name. > I have relatives who have been the (almost) victim of *precisely* > that. They got wind of things shortly before the order was to be > delivered, and law enforcement was waiting when the delivery truck > came by. A guy _outside_ the house pretended to be the 'addressee', > and signed for the package. Whereupon the cops pounced. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Oh, I dunno about this last part, where > one supposedly has a hard time catching the clerk 'in the > act'. Walmart does okay on it. The stores here in southeast Kansas > employ 'shoppers' for just that purpose, *GUFFAW* [[ sigh. I'm repeating myself. ]] The ones who get 'caught in the act' are the bozos, incompetents, and amateurs. Consider, for example: Scenario: A card fails the mag-stripe 'read' -- i.e. it doesn't "swipe". The cashier gets the card, to manually key in the number. (the cashier also *memorizes* the 16 digits of the card, and the 3 digit 'security' code. This does _not_ take much time -- how fast can you commit 2 phone numbers to memory? ) The cashier returns the card to the customer. The *completely*correct* transaction is completed. Just _what_ is the 'shopper' going to report to management? Besides the fact that the cashier did their job "right"? Even a security camera recording the cashier's every move isn't going to show anything wrong. Got any idea how many times a day that *that* scenario actually occurs for any given cashier? Sould you believe 'several times per *hour*'? "Capturing" _one_ card a day is a relatively trivial memorization task. Two or three would _not_ be a problem for most people. That's enough to make for a nice 'supplemental' income. Scenario, part II: After the cashier gets off-shift, and has _left_the_premises_, s/he writes down the previously memorized numbers. Then, that week-end, say, s/he meets up with "A. Mafiosi", who pays say, $20 for each card number with security code; $50 if the "name" that goes with the card is also available, and $150 if the _address_ is also provided. (Maybe it's a regular customer that often pays by check, but used a card _this_ time.) Scenario, part III: Our friend, "A. Mafiosi", sits on the purchased info for a couple of weeks -- hell, maybe a couple of -months-. Then he turns a crew loose to make a bunch of fraudulent purchases, using card numbers that came from several _different_ places, at *different* times. *HOW* IN THE H*LL does the victim (or _anybody_ else, for that matter) associate _those_ "unauthorized charges" with the specific transaction where the card number was 'memorized'? The *store* with the 'crooked' cashier has no inkling that anything is wrong. Not even any reason to so much as -suspect- that there's a problem. The credit-card company has no idea *where* or *when* the compromise occurred. Given _enough_ separate card numbers 'stolen', and *enough* computer processing power/time (it takes a *LOT* of "cpu cycles" to do this kind of 'pattern recognition' -- the specialty is called "cluster analysis" ), they _will_ find all sorts of 'patterns' in the valid charges. The odds of identifying the _actual_ pattern of transactions where the compromise occurred is *NOT* good. (It'd be one thing if this was the _only_ set of fraudulent transactions, but where they're mixed in with fraudulent transactions from "forty 'leven" *other* sources, the correlation problem becomes nearly impossible.) Admittedly, the more data you have to look at, the better the chances of finding 'correlations'. Unfortunately, the computing requirements for the required kind of analysis grow _faster_ than the data. It's somewhere between a 'square' and 'cube' relationship. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The 'ones who get caught are bozos and amateurs' ... okay, so all the 19-20 year old cashiers at Walmart are Harvard graduates with great memories who can glance ONCE at a sixteen digit number and recall it exactly a few hours later when they meet with Mr. Mafiosi. They won't be able to use a pen and paper to write it down, the 'shopper' will see them do that. The 'shopper' can tell management "the cashier claimed the card *you gave me as a control to be used* would not swipe, and she had to do it manually, and she wrote the number/name down on a scrap of paper in the process." Or, did this brilliant young cashier actually -- in her three second glance at the card as she punched the numbers in -- memorize the number for delivery a few hours later, especially when there is no context to -- or repetitive sequence in the number. I mean, the shopper did not give her card number 5555-1212-1212-1212 or an 'easy to glance at and memorize' number. And whether the shopper-spy is the customer standing in front of the cashier right now, or the next one in line dumping her crap all over the conveyor belt, trying to push and shove her way to the head of the line is anyone's guess. Most store cashiers in places like Walmart are in fact the bozos and amateurs you mention. And since they are the front line, handling the cash, the registers, etc, 'shoppers' blending in with the crowd of customers pushing and shoving up to the register manage to do quite well at catching them. PAT] ------------------------------ From: DevilsPGD Subject: Re: Supermarket: Let Your Fingers do the Paying Date: Fri, 04 Feb 2005 23:15:56 -0700 Organization: Octanews In message George Mitchell wrote: >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: As long as the fingerprints accessed >> some internal charge system (in lieu of or in addition to) a signature >> on file, I see no problem with it. PAT] > It's easy to forget that, once your fingerprint has been scanned into > the store's system, now this impossible-to-forget, impossible-to-forge > identification is stored on their system, ready to be replayed at will > by anyone with access to their computer. So? ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: AT&T Hangs Up - and Few Are Sorry to Say Goodbye Organization: ATCC Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2005 09:55:09 -0500 In article , hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com says: > RamaChandra Raju Bhupathiraju wrote: >> Tue Feb 1, 6:31 AM ET Op/Ed - USATODAY.com >> ... It was an overbearing monopoly before its breakup ... > No it was not. It's monopoly status did not result from anything > AT&T did, but rather from edicts from the state and federal > govts explicitly defining what AT&T could do. Note that AT&T > was also forbidden to act in many other markets, including those > it had once developed products (ie motion picture sound systems). > AT&T was strictly limited in what it could do and what it could > charge; people forget that there was much it could NOT do. Bell System management had decided early on that a stronger regulator environment and regular profit were preferable to having to battle CLEC operations of the time. Of course Vail was able to absorb most of the competition which led to Bell becoming a monopoly in a vast majority of the country. Otherwise you were served by GTE, yet a smaller monopoly. >> Not since its early days has it been much of an innovator. > Most of our present day communication system owes itself to > innovations AT&T continued to make until divesture, not only in > technology, but also telecom administration. The fact that it derived regular profit was why AT&T could embark on research of the scale that it did. >> For much of its history, AT&T was the quintessential monopoly. It >> had no competition for local service, no competition for long- >> distance service and offered people few reasons to like it. Its >> customers could choose whatever color telephone they wanted, the >> saying went, so long as it was black. > Not exactly true. Customers DID have choices in using telegrams for > messages (as most people did until the 1960s when long distance costs > dropped), as well as using their own phone systems internally within > their company (as many large organizations did). Customers most > certainly had the choice of various telephone sets and services for > both residence and business to suit their needs, and they came in > colors, too. How likely was it for larger business to be using anything other than Western Electric gear. In most cases, those companies didn't even own their communication system but instead leased them from Bell. Who cared that internal traffic wasn't carried on local loop, Bell was still extracting revenue from that leasing fees which were probably as excessive then as costs for maintenance on a G3i are now. >> AT&T was once, arguably, the USA's most powerful company. > It was a powerful company, but not necessarily the country's "most" > powerful. Various companies have had great power over time. Years > ago US Steel was #1. IBM once held great power. The railroads, such > as the Pennsylvania and New York Central, were quite powerful. In > later years the energy companies like Exxon had power. AT&T was powerful in that it could bring the country to its knees had it wanted. By the time just after World War II governments had started to realize it. I'd place AT&T on the same tier as US Steel, IBM, Standard Oil, etc. ------------------------------ From: Lou Jahn Subject: Re: AT&T Inventions Fueled Tech Boom, And Its Own Fall Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2005 17:53:25 -0500 Organization: Info Partners Corp. In Vol 2 Issue 50: From: sufaud Subject: AT&T Inventions Fueled Tech Boom, And Its Own Fall Date: Wed, 02 Feb 2005 06:15:55 +0000 The referenced article stated: "When I run into old Bell Labs people the first thing they say is, 'Can you believe what has happened?' " says Robert Lucky, a scientist and executive who worked at Bell Labs for 31 years until 1992. Even at the time of the breakup in 1984, he says, "the feeling was that we had a network that was the envy of the world. No one could duplicate it." I was basically a lobbyist for IBM covering Network Products (mostly ROLM issues) when IBM announced that is was selling off their ROLM PBX operation. The following factual history will position AT&T's problems and why they failed themselves and stockholders. A good friend who then jointly owned a market research firm named Northern Business Information (NBI) told me he received numerous calls from AT&T senior executives about his prior research reports upon IBM's sell-off announcement. Why you ask? Well when IBM announced the Siemens deal they stated the total ROLM operations included Sales, Support and HQs operations contained 12,000 employees. Well at that point in time AT&T had a "staff headcount" of slightly over 17,000 covering their then three major PBX brands. Of course, they had more many when counting Sales, Manufacturing and Field support. What ticked off the senior executives in regard to NBI reports was the fact that internal AT&T staff managers always told the senior folks that NBI had missed this function and that function when issuing a referenced report. The simple fact was AT&T spent more on planning than IBM/ROLM did on running their operation. It was a headquarter operation that allowed inflated staff headcount and the lack of truthful internal presentation of the marketplace dynamics that lead to AT&Ts actual demise. Those readers who lived in New Jersey may remember the "many" AT&T headcount reduction announcements for the 3-5 years after the 1984 deregulation. Most were coupled with rifts of 50,000 to 100,000 at a time. Just think of the disruption such consistent headquarters turnover has on any business operation. I was always amazed the NJ's economy did not fall to the ground, but no, in spite of such job shedding NJs economy continued to grow until the late 1990's. Another factoid: AT&T as a total corporation had about 990,000 employees in 1981-82. In 1987 the seven ROBCs and AT&T had only about 725,000 employees. While one might argue firms like MCI and SPRINT were doing some of the former AT&T effort. That total headcount of the RBOCs and AT&T continued to fall well into the 1990s. So while AT&T did indeed have a magnificent network, AT&T's inflated cost structure due to HQ overhead, simply brought it to its knees. It just took time for the real problems to register. Lou Jahn Info Partners Corp 609-823-6602 609-823-2202 Fax www.InfoPartnersCorp.com ------------------------------ From: CWB Subject: Re: Please Advise for VoIP Hardware Date: Sun, 06 Feb 2005 01:56:02 GMT Organization: Road Runner High Speed Online http://www.rr.com What are the phone systems? Make, model, etc?? Personally I would not try VoIP over DSL for more than two calls ... each call will take 80k or so on average...if your DSL is only 384k outbound, that doesnt take many calls to stop your outbound traffic on the data side! Fakhar wrote in message news:telecom24.53.7@telecom-digest.org: > Hi, > I was wondering about a VoIP hardware setup that we can setup in > our organization. The Organization set up is as follows. > 1: Different Branches within on city and also other cities. > 2: Within a single city, We have DSL Link at each location from > 3: Across the city the ISP are changed. > We have independent PABXs at each location. What we want is a solution > that we can integrate with the existing PABXs. Using the VoIP > Hardware we should be able to use the normal telephone sets and make > call within the organization (in the same city or inter-city call). > Please advice me any good and inexpensive solution. > Take Care, > Fakhar ------------------------------ 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 V24 #54 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Feb 7 00:45:55 2005 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j175jsu06668; Mon, 7 Feb 2005 00:45:55 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2005 00:45:55 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200502070545.j175jsu06668@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 V24 #55 TELECOM Digest Mon, 7 Feb 2005 00:45:00 EST Volume 24 : Issue 55 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson One in 20 People May Have a Mobile Phone Illness (Marcus Didius Falco) Drivers on Cell Phones Kill Thousands, Snarl Traffic (Marcus D. Falco) Old Party-Line Arrangements (Paul Coxwell) Historical Significant Internet Communications Technology (laconsults) Need Recommendations For Economy Pay as You Go Cell Phones (kimshapiro) Any Recommendations re: Economy Internet Phone Service (Anna) Satellite Radio Technology (AES) Re: British TV License (was America the Worst For Cell Rates) (BobT) Re: Supermarket: Let Your Fingers do the Paying (Wesrock@aol.com) Re: Supermarket: Let Your Fingers do the Paying (AES) Re: Supermarket: Let Your Fingers do the Paying (Robert Bonomi) Re: Update Interval For E911 Records (William Warren) 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: Sun, 06 Feb 2005 21:44:39 -0500 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: One in 20 People May Have a Mobile Phone Illness http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2091-1463100,00.html The Sunday Times - Ireland Richard Oakley UP TO 5% of the population may be suffering ill health as a result of radiation from mobile phones and masts, according to a group of Irish doctors fighting for official acceptance of the problem. The Irish Doctors Environmental Association (IDEA) is urging the government to adopt a cautious approach to the technology, and to ensure that people who claim to have related illnesses are monitored. In a study to be released this week, the doctors will say they have identified 16 people whom they believe have been adversely affected by radiation. The medical report concludes that seemingly sensitive individuals suffer devastating effects from exposure to electromagnetic radiation. According to the IDEA s co-founders Philip Michael and Elizabeth Cullen, more people are reporting severe health effects linked to radiation. The survey outlines symptoms that include fatigue, confusion, tingling, temperature changes, dizziness and difficulty sleeping . It estimates that between 1% and 5% of the population could be sensitive to radiation and experience illness as a result. The IDEA says further research is necessary. It wants special screens for the 16 people in the study, to see if their conditions improve when radiation is blocked. The association's claims will be strongly refuted by the industry and government. The Department of Communications said recently that there was no valid scientific research to suggest that the use of mobile phones could be bad for children. Their comments followed advice by a leading British expert that their use by pre-teens should be limited. The government has also said that tests on mobile-phone base stations in the country found that none exceeded internationally recognised guidelines on radiation levels. Mobile-phone operators also dismiss claims that radiation from masts or phones could be harmful. Vodafone said: There is no evidence of any impact on human health when exposure levels are below internationally recognised guidelines . Despite these reassurances there are growing numbers of people reporting symptoms, like Dubliners Helen McCrory of Clontarf and Enda Dalton of Raheny. McCrory blames nearby mobile phone masts for her illness and said she can t leave her house because masts are everywhere now . I can t sleep, my head pounds, my skin burns and I get a painful pumping sensation from head to toe. It has got so bad that I feel suicidal, she said. Dalton claims he has suffered from radiation since 1985 and has installed a screened room in his house to get relief. There are loads of people like me who are sensitive to radiation and our symptoms are real. We need the entire system shut down until a thorough investigation is carried out. We know the radiation is below recommended guidelines, but these guidelines are not correct because we still suffer, he said. John Ryan, a farmer in Tipperary, claims he has suffered illness since allowing a Vodafone mast to be installed on his land. He has offered to return the money he received to have the mast taken down but Vodafone wants him to pay extra. The mast has been shown to adhere to safe radiation levels but Ryan is adamant that it gives him headaches and dizzy spells. Vodafone does not accept that the mast is responsible for Ryan s symptoms. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/section/0,,549,00.html Copyright 2005 Times Newspapers Ltd. *** 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, Times Newspapers. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 06 Feb 2005 21:40:53 -0500 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Drivers on Cell Phones Kill Thousands, Snarl Traffic http://www.livescience.com/technology/050201_cell_danger.html Drivers on Cell Phones Kill Thousands, Snarl Traffic By Robert Roy Britt LiveScience Senior Writer Finally, empirical proof you can blame chatty 20-somethings for stop-and-go traffic on the way to work. A new study confirms that the reaction time of cell phone users slows dramatically, increasing the risk of accidents and tying up traffic in general, and when young adults use cell phones while driving, they're as bad as sleepy septuagenarians. "If you put a 20-year-old driver behind the wheel with a cell phone, their reaction times are the same as a 70-year-old driver who is not using a cell phone," said University of Utah psychology professor David Strayer. "It's like instantly aging a large number of drivers." The study was announced today and is detailed in winter issue of the quarterly journal Human Factors. Traffic jams and death Cell phone distraction causes 2,600 deaths and 330,000 injuries in the United States every year, according to the journal's publisher, the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society. The reason is now obvious: Behind the Statistics Are Cell Phones Really So Dangerous? Drivers talking on cell phones were 18 percent slower to react to brake lights, the new study found. In a minor bright note, they also kept a 12 percent greater following distance. But they also took 17 percent longer to regain the speed they lost when they braked. That frustrates everyone. "Once drivers on cell phones hit the brakes, it takes them longer to get back into the normal flow of traffic," Strayer said. "The net result is they are impeding the overall flow of traffic." Strayer and his colleagues have been down this road before. In 2001, they found that even hands-free cell phone use distracted drivers. In 2003 they revealed a reason: Drivers look but don't see, because they're distracted by the conversation. The scientists also found previously that chatty motorists are less adept than drunken drivers with blood alcohol levels exceeding 0.08. Separate research last year at University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign supported the conclusion that hands-free cell phone use causes driver distraction. "With younger adults, everything got worse," said Arthur Kramer, who led the Illinois study. "Both young adults and older adults tended to show deficits in performance. They made more errors in detecting important changes and they took longer to react to the changes." The impaired reactions involved seconds, not just fractions of a second, so stopping distances increased by car-lengths. Older drivers more cautious The latest study used high-tech simulators. It included people aged 18 to 25 and another group aged 65 to 74. Elderly drivers were slower to react when talking on the phone, too. The simulations uncovered a twofold increase in the number of rear-end collisions by drivers using cell phones. Older drivers seem to be more cautious overall, however. "Older drivers were slightly less likely to get into accidents than younger drivers," Strayer said. "They tend to have a greater following distance. Their reactions are impaired, but they are driving so cautiously they were less likely to smash into somebody." But in real life, he added, older drivers are significantly more likely to be rear-ended because of their slow speed. Other studies in the journal found: * Telephone numbers presented by automated voice systems compete for drivers' attention to a far greater extent than when the driver sees the same information presented on a display. * Interruptions to driving, such as answering a call, are likely to be more dangerous if they occur during maneuvers like merging to exit a freeway. * Things could get worse. Wireless Internet, speech recognition systems and e-mail could all be even more distracting. Are Cell Phones Really So Dangerous? Posted Feb. 2, 2005 Several readers wrote to LiveScience questioning whether cell phones were really so bad for drivers. Here is some additional information that helps illuminate the death statistic. The estimates of annual deaths reported in this week's article (2,600) may well be low. The number, for U.S. deaths related to drivers using cell phones, comes from a 2002 study by the Harvard Center for Risk Analysis (HCRA). Researchers then estimated that the use of cell phones by drivers caused approximately 2,600 deaths. Because data on cell phone use by motorists are limited, the range of uncertainty is wide, those researchers said. The estimate of fatalities in that HCRA report ranged between 800 and 8,000. Importantly, the researchers noted (in 2002) that increasing cell phone use could be expected to cause the annual death estimate to rise. The 2002 estimate, for example, was up from an estimate of 1,000 deaths in the year 2000. Logic suggests the number -- though just an estimate -- could be much higher in 2005. The estimates are based largely on mathematical models, but they are not without basis. In 2001 in California, for example, "at least 4,699 reported accidents were blamed on drivers using cell phones, and those crashes killed 31 people and injured 2,786," according to an analysis by The Los Angeles Times. That number can expected to be low, because of the lack of formal procedures for noting cell phone use as a cause of a traffic accident. The Times also noted a 1997 study of Canadian drivers "who agreed to have their cell phone records scrutinized found that the risk of an accident was four times greater while a driver was using the phone." Each year, about 42,000 people die in U.S. auto accidents. Here is how the new University of Utah simulations were conducted: Participants in the simulator used dashboard instruments, steering wheel and brake and gas pedals from a Ford Crown Victoria sedan, surrounded by three screens showing freeway scenes and traffic, including a "pace car" that intermittently hit its brakes 32 times as it appeared to drive in front of study participants. If a participant failed to hit their own brakes, they eventually would rear-end the pace car. Each participant drove four simulated 10-mile freeway trips lasting about 10 minutes each, talking on a cell phone with a research assistant during half the trips and driving without talking the other half. Only hands-free phones were used to eliminate any possible distraction from manipulating a hand-held cell phone. Thirty times each second, the simulator measured the participants' driving speed, following distance and -- if applicable -- how long it took them to hit the brakes and how long it took them to regain speed. -- RRB ------------------------------ From: Paul Coxwell Subject: Old Party-Line Arrangements Date: Sun, 6 Feb 2005 11:14:23 -0000 I'm interested in getting some more detailed historical information on the way party-lines were arranged years ago. Here in Britain with our relatively small area and comparatively high density of population, a two-way line was the norm with ringing applied to tip or ring and bells connected from one side of the line to a local ground. Outgoing calls used a ground-start method, with subscribers having to press a button to obtain dialtone. (As even local calls were charged, this method enabled the C.O. to determine the originating party at the outset.) I've gleaned from various sources, including some old Digest posts, that in the U.S. there were various methods employed, including up to 10-way party lines with the last digit of the number selecting tip or ring and the appropriate ringing cadence. I've also seen references to tuned ringers with ringing applied at a different frequency for each party, and to party-line numbers having an additional digit (coded as a letter) added the end of the regular number. When it comes to outgoing calls once DDD and CAMA had arrived, I've seen references to different ringer wiring combinations to enable the equipment to test for originating party, and also in the earlier days of DDD that in some places (maybe small independents?) callers had to dial an ID digit (e.g. 1x + NPA + number). Can anybody elaborate and explain in more detail the arrangements which were commonly used, both in the Bell System and in the larger independents? Thanks, Paul ------------------------------ From: laconsults@aol.com Subject: Historical Significant Internet Communications Technology:PSTN Date: 6 Feb 2005 05:06:56 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Historical Significant Internet Communications Technology:PSTN quality NextGen TCP/IP Seattle News, Washington (WA), WA - Feb 3, 2005 http://www.getseattle.com/articles/...5783&;cp=308754 Historical Significant Internet Communications Technology BreakThrough: Immediate PSTN tranmsmission quality Next Generations TCP, not needing cumbersome QoS/ MPLS etc: Visit http://iwxchange.com to freely download for research purposes. Microsoft, Cisco, IETF included will be very surprised 'good old ' Internet's underlying TCP/IP protocol itself can now more successfully do for PSTN quality VoIP / Multimedia instead of current QoS/MPLS cumbersome attempts. Dr Bob Kahn had somehow perhaps foreseen something like this in his recent interview: ' ... something far bigger than existing Internet may just as easily again emerge ... just like Internet itself originally ... from totally unexpected quarters ... Here is our NextGenTCP for all Windows platforms, 9x/ME/NT/Win2000/WinXP/Win2003, ready for immediate production network uses even for this 1st version. Visit http://iwxchange.com to download free. You can easily set this up for production use on your home/ office LAN PCs. Its guaranteed SAFE not affecting systems in anyway whastsoever. Install this in your LAN/ WAN/ Proprietary Internet & immediately working corporate wide/ worldwide within minutes with immediate end2end PSTN transmissions quality among all nodes locations, not needing multimillion pounds & 6 months timeframe QOS/ MPLS etc for PSTN quality VoIP/ VideoConference, This software can be freely distributed widely with 3 months free license automatic grant , expires 1 May 2005. NextGenTCP is like most softwares AOL ... etc, after someone install 1st time, even an arts educated office girl watching can repeat the steps install & use it on her own. Right attached the concise instructions for this 1st version Here is the only instructions most people ever needs, to convert their LAN/ WAN corporate networks into PSTN quality within minutes: Download attached files in C directory, then click on winpkflt_lite to install. To run NextGenTCP bring up DOS Command Prompt & type : C:\ NextGenTCP.exe timeout pause-interval ( Timeout values in ms eg 25 , 50 etc , set this value to the WAN/ LAN most distant locations' uncongested one way latency ie slightly more than half the uncongested ping's round trip's RTT ). Typical values of NextGenTCP.exe 15 50 works well on most systems. Run NextGenTCP from command prompt DOS box in each & every PCs within your LAN &/or WAN for immediate PSTN quality UDP traffics VoIP/ VideoConference/ Movie Streams within your corporate network within minutes, not needing multi-million pounds & 6 months timeline QOS/ MPLS planning. Movie streaning/ audio file streaming tested working first time on LAN PCs (you may want to attach 2 plug & play IP phones to test). Note: make sure your PCs' Ethernet settings are 10mbs half duplex, NOT full duplex (which turns off CSMA/ CD & introduces excessive collision latencies like 150ms. Anyway full duplex setting is usually allowed only where there are only a single PC connected to a single device) http://www.getseattle.com/articles/...783&;cp=308754 ------------------------------ From: kimshapiro100@yahoo.com Subject: Need recommendations for economy "pay as you go" cell phones ... Date: 6 Feb 2005 08:59:16 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Need recommendations for economy "pay as you go" cell phones. This is for a 10 year old child in California -- to be used ONLY in EMERGENCY situations. My child is probably going to use between 5 and 30 minutes a month. I think there is no point subscribing to a plan. Any recommendations for a "pay as you go" economy cell phone ? (like prepaid cards ?) Does anyone have any stories, suggestions, recommendations ? Any companies to avoid ? Any good or bad experiences ? Which company ? How much does the phone and the calls cost ? Where is the best place to buy it from ? Thanks in advance for your input. Kim [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I do not know if you have Alltel where you are at, but their 'Smart Pay' service is very common around here in Independence, and many parents use it to stay in touch with their children. The advance deposit you pay Alltel never runs out, but their rates for use are not all that cheap; I think Smart Pay charges fifty cents per minute of use on local calls; a dollar per minute on long distance calls; but the credit runs until it is all used. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Anna Subject: Any Recommendations re: Economy Internet Phone Service? Date: 6 Feb 2005 09:14:49 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com I have heard of Vonage, Skype etc ? Which is most economical ? We make between 6 and 12 hours of long distance calls per month.(mostly US) What service/plan is best for us ? Any companies to avoid ? Are all calls equally clear in all these companies? in terms of static? Which company's quality / customer service is best ? Also what headset / Internet phone should we get ?. Would like to get a headset/phone that gives clear reception. Prefer to avoid the static on the line? Any help would be highly appreciated. Thanks, Anna [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I personally use Vonage, which works with any telephone you wish to plug in and use. I am hearing rumors that their customer service is slipping a little; that may be due to the *huge* increase in their customer base in recent months. PAT] ------------------------------ From: AES Subject: Satellite Radio Technology Date: Sun, 06 Feb 2005 13:43:07 -0800 Organization: Stanford University Haven't gotten clear answers yet from the alt.radio.satellite NG on a couple of very fundamental questions re satellite radio technology (Sirius or XM) so I'll venture to ask them here: 1) If I purchase a subscription to one of these, does that mean _one_ activated receiver per subscription? (Or can I be using one receiver say on the freeway and my family be using a couple of others at different locations in the house, on one basic monthly subscription.) 2) Same question, but if I have one subscription and one activated receiver, can I pull multiple stations (or channels?) out of that receiver (using multiple "tuners" or "decoders" or whatever they're called) and feed these different audio signals into different rooms or headphones or audio channels? Thanks for any info, or pointers to neutral and reliable sources of info (which doesn't necessarily seem to include the Sirius or XM web pages). ------------------------------ From: BobT Subject: Re: British TV License (was America the Worst For Cell Rates) Organization: EasyNews, UseNet made Easy! Date: Sun, 06 Feb 2005 13:51:29 GMT On 4 Feb 2005 14:15:00 -0800, Rob wrote: > It's more than likely that because it was made in Europe it is both PAL > and NTSC. > Rob > South Wales, UK Yes, I thought of that too. It certainly seems reasonable, anyway. ------------------------------ From: Wesrock@aol.com Date: Sun, 6 Feb 2005 10:03:07 EST Subject: Re: Supermarket: Let Your Fingers Do the Paying In a message dated 2/5/05 11:04:34 PM Central Standard Time, editor@telecom-digest.org writes: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The 'ones who get caught are bozos and > amateurs' ... okay, so all the 19-20 year old cashiers at Walmart are > Harvard graduates with great memories who can glance ONCE at a sixteen > digit number and recall it exactly a few hours later when they meet > with Mr. Mafiosi. Is there some relationship between memorization skills and being a Harvard graduate (or attaining any other educational level)? When I was in high school, one of the students had memorized the entire telephone directory of the small town where I lived -- about half the size of Independence -- and could memorize almost anything else with ease. But he was a very poor student and barely capable, if at all, at making his way in life. I'm not sure he even graduated from high school, and if he did it would have been the result of a social promotion. Wes Leatherock wesrock@aol.com wleathus@yahoo.com ------------------------------ From: AES Subject: Re: Supermarket: Let Your Fingers do the Paying Date: Sun, 06 Feb 2005 08:40:41 -0800 Organization: Stanford University In article , jmeissen@aracnet.com wrote: > It's easy to say that fingerprints are unique, so they make a perfect > identifier. But interpreting fingerprints is not always so perfect. We > had a classic and high-profile example up here in Oregon recently when > a lawyer was detained for months as a terrorist on the basis of an > incorrectly matched fingerprint. And high-tech tools that are used by law-enforcement and security agencies but not generally employed and thus tested and validated by researchers in real scientific fields should always be treated as highly suspect. As examples, fingerprint analysis has considerable validity, but not nearly as much as law enforcement agencies would have you believe; and polygraphy ("lie detectors") is total voodoo junk science. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What you say is very true. What do you think about the newest gimmick, DNA-printing? Police seem to be making a big thing out of building up their DNA files at this time. They *claim* it is much more reliable than fingerprinting, and they *claim* one's DNA is absolutely unique, but they said that about fingerprints at one time also. PAT] ------------------------------ From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) Subject: Re: Supermarket: Let Your Fingers do the Paying Date: Sun, 06 Feb 2005 17:23:19 -0000 Organization: Widgets, Inc. In article , Robert Bonomi wrote: > In article , Robert Bonomi > wrote: >>> In article : >>>> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I do not understand one thing: If >>>> people have already been verified as to their ability and >>>> willingness to pay for their groceries through their credit card >>>> and their personal identification has been verified in much the same >>>> way by the credit card people, then *why* would people want to go one >>>> step further by enrolling in 'Pay by Touch'? Is this intended as one >>>> way to 'save them time' by not having to sign a credit card slip? In >>>> other words, touch your thumb or finger somewhere rather than taking >>>> a couple seconds to sign a slip of paper? Now, if the grocery people >>>> had set up their own credit system *in place of Visa/MC* by using a >>>> thumb/finger print, I can see where that might be useful, but >>>> otherwise, why bother? PAT] >>> Gee, I dunno. >>> Like maybe you _don't_ have to have your card, *or* card number, with >>> you. >>> Like, no hassles if the mag stripe doesn't read. >>> Like, no opportunity for a dishonest cashier to memorize the number >>> off your card. >>> Like, maybe, *nobody*else* can buy anything with that card number at >>> that store. i.e., if it's a 'pay by touch' card, "no touchee, no >>> tickee", and if the fingerprint _doesn't_ match, "no sale". >>> You're right, I can't see why anybody would *consider* bothering to do >>> something like that. >>> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, let's see ... maybe I was caught >>> shoplifting at a grocery store in Iraq or Iran and the Taliban chopped >>> off all my fingers as part of the punishment. >> Strawman -- not a _bad_ strawman despite the stretch, but still a >> strawman. >> Then, obviously, you would not _elect_ to use their *optional* system, >> would you? And then there's no problem for you, is there? >> Or didn't you notice that it is a _voluntary_participation_ system? >>> And one of the terms for accepting MC/Visa cards required by >>> many/most/all of the card issuers is that the store is *not* >>> permitted to demand any other form of identification. The card is to >>> stand on its own regards ID, *if the holder is using it for >>> payment*. So your 'no touch, no sale' idea is not possible in many >>> stores. >> When the store has a prior *signed*, verified, validated, directive >> from the card-holder on file that says "do not allow any charges >> against this card number unless the fingerprint matches the one I have >> provided on file" the store most certainly *can* demand the >> fingerprint. >> Agreed, the store cannot do it on it's _own_ initiative. However, that >> is simply not the situation with regard to a _voluntary_participation_ >> program such as the one under discussion. >>> I can see where fingerprints might be >>> used in lieu of an actual plastic but I do not think it can be a >>> requirement *in addition to* plastic. >> Making clear that you did not bother to *read* the original article. >> A) this is not a 'required' system. >> B) the fingerprint _is_ used *INSTEAD* of the plastic. >>> And when a clerk is caught making an unauthorized sale using someone >>> else's card the answer is simple also. Fire and presecute them. PAT] >> "Simple"??? *snicker* No, make that <*GUFFAW*> >> First off, that _assumes_ that the clerk got caught. >> Second, 'unauthorized sales' can make for a _gawdaful_ mess of >> problems for the actual card-holder. Just imagine that you're going >> on vacation. And have made sure that your card has a _zero_ balance >> outstanding. You get to your destination, and offer the card to pay >> for your hotel room, and get told "card not accepted -- over credit >> limit". Where are you, the wife, and kids, going to sleep tonight? >> Getting an 'unauthorized sale' off your account can be *difficult*. >> Consider a telephone order (one where the merchant asked for, and >> _got_ the 'security code'), that was actually _delivered_ to YOUR >> address, and signed for in your name. >> I have relatives who have been the (almost) victim of *precisely* >> that. They got wind of things shortly before the order was to be >> delivered, and law enforcement was waiting when the delivery truck >> came by. A guy _outside_ the house pretended to be the 'addressee', >> and signed for the package. Whereupon the cops pounced. >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Oh, I dunno about this last part, where >> one supposedly has a hard time catching the clerk 'in the >> act'. Walmart does okay on it. The stores here in southeast Kansas >> employ 'shoppers' for just that purpose, > *GUFFAW* [[ sigh. I'm repeating myself. ]] > The ones who get 'caught in the act' are the bozos, incompetents, and > amateurs. > Consider, for example: > Scenario: > A card fails the mag-stripe 'read' -- i.e. it doesn't "swipe". > The cashier gets the card, to manually key in the number. > (the cashier also *memorizes* the 16 digits of the card, and the 3 digit > 'security' code. This does _not_ take much time -- how fast can you > commit 2 phone numbers to memory? ) > The cashier returns the card to the customer. > The *completely*correct* transaction is completed. > Just _what_ is the 'shopper' going to report to management? Besides the > fact that the cashier did their job "right"? Even a security camera > recording the cashier's every move isn't going to show anything wrong. > Got any idea how many times a day that *that* scenario actually occurs > for any given cashier? Sould you believe 'several times per *hour*'? > "Capturing" _one_ card a day is a relatively trivial memorization > task. Two or three would _not_ be a problem for most people. That's >enough to make for a nice 'supplemental' income. > Scenario, part II: > After the cashier gets off-shift, and has _left_the_premises_, s/he > writes down the previously memorized numbers. Then, that week-end, say, > s/he meets up with "A. Mafiosi", who pays say, $20 for each card number > with security code; $50 if the "name" that goes with the card is also > available, and $150 if the _address_ is also provided. (Maybe it's a > regular customer that often pays by check, but used a card _this_ time.) > Scenario, part III: > Our friend, "A. Mafiosi", sits on the purchased info for a couple of > weeks -- hell, maybe a couple of -months-. Then he turns a crew loose > to make a bunch of fraudulent purchases, using card numbers that came > from several _different_ places, at *different* times. > *HOW* IN THE H*LL does the victim (or _anybody_ else, for that matter) > associate _those_ "unauthorized charges" with the specific transaction > where the card number was 'memorized'? > The *store* with the 'crooked' cashier has no inkling that anything is > wrong. Not even any reason to so much as -suspect- that there's a > problem. > The credit-card company has no idea *where* or *when* the compromise > occurred. Given _enough_ separate card numbers 'stolen', and *enough* > computer processing power/time (it takes a *LOT* of "cpu cycles" to do > this kind of 'pattern recognition' -- the specialty is called "cluster > analysis" ), they _will_ find all sorts of 'patterns' in the valid > charges. The odds of identifying the _actual_ pattern of transactions > where the compromise occurred is *NOT* good. (It'd be one thing if > this was the _only_ set of fraudulent transactions, but where they're > mixed in with fraudulent transactions from "forty 'leven" *other* > sources, the correlation problem becomes nearly impossible.) > Admittedly, the more data you have to look at, the better the chances > of finding 'correlations'. Unfortunately, the computing requirements > for the required kind of analysis grow _faster_ than the data. It's > somewhere between a 'square' and 'cube' relationship. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The 'ones who get caught are bozos and > amateurs' ... okay, so all the 19-20 year old cashiers at Walmart are > Harvard graduates with great memories who can glance ONCE at a sixteen > digit number and recall it exactly a few hours later when they meet > with Mr. Mafiosi. "Harvard graduate" has *NOTHING* to do with the ability to memorize and recall two telephone numbers. The quality of your strawmen is slipping. In point of *proven* fact -- as in many, *many* college/university psych department studies -- that most people *can* do such memorizations with only a relatively SMALL amount of training; as in, only a few *hours*. *literally* the only thing it takes is some practice. Working with _numbers_. > They won't be able to use a pen and paper to write > it down, the 'shopper' will see them do that. The 'shopper' can tell > management "the cashier claimed the card *you gave me as a control >to be used* would not swipe, and she had to do it manually, and she You chose Walmart as the example. You obviously *don't* know how things work there. The *customer* swipes the card. The *customer* (as well as the cashier) gets a visible indicator _if_ the swipe succeeds/fails. If the swipe did not fail, the customer gets prompted if they want any cash back, or to approve the charge amount as shown. There's *NOT* a d*mn thing the cashier can do to affect _that_ part of the process. > wrote the number/name down on a scrap of paper in the process." Note well that I specified that the cashier did _memorize_ the number. There's *NO* 'wrote it down on a scrap of paper' to report. There's also *NO* reason for the cashier to attempt to 'fake' a "didn't swipe" for a card that does swipe. he/she just waits for one to come along that legitimately _fails_ the swipe. There are *so* many valid 'targets of opportunity' every day -- far more than they are likely to be able to retain memorization of -- that there is nothing to be gained by 'fabricating' opportunities. > did this brilliant young cashier actually -- in her three second > glance at the card as she punched the numbers in -- memorize the > number for delivery a few hours later, Despite the sarcastic tone, you've got it *exactly* right -- It doesn't take 'brilliance' -- virtually anybody who could work successfully (postulating they were given the normal training for the position) as, for example, an 'accounting clerk', a 'bank teller', or a 'motel night manager'. is "smart enough", *AND* has the memorization capacity, to do this. It is *NOT* all that difficult. Again, *all* it takes is some time/effort/ practice to develop that particular skill. > especially when there is no > context to -- or repetitive sequence in the number. I mean, the shopper > did not give her card number 5555-1212-1212-1212 or an 'easy to glance > at and memorize' number. > And whether the shopper-spy is the customer > standing in front of the cashier right now, or the next one in line > dumping her crap all over the conveyor belt, trying to push and shove > her way to the head of the line is anyone's guess. Which makes exactly _what_ difference, anyway? After all, there is *nothing* "out of the ordinary" to see/report. They had the customer try to swipe the card several times. Then they took the card, held it up beside their screen, while they looked at the number, keyed it in, and double-checked what was on their display against what was on the card. Everything is _exactly_ as a 'good' cashier would do it. This one is just "thinking" a bit more than the average cashier. > Most store cashiers > in places like Walmart are in fact the bozos and amateurs you mention. Yup. "Most" *is* the operative word. One 'smart' crooked one, however, can easily do more damage than a -thousand- of the 'dumb' ones. And the odds of catching that 'smart' one are at least a thousand times worse than catching the dumb one. > And since they are the front line, handling the cash, the registers, > etc, 'shoppers' blending in with the crowd of customers pushing and > shoving up to the register manage to do quite well at catching them. Oh, yeah, the *stupid* ones get caught. I won't dispute *that*. The 'smart' ones, nobody even so much as suspects they're there. A few years ago, there was a ring that got caught (from the *other* end -- fencing the goods purchased with the stolen card numbers) that had used a scheme very similar to what I laid out. *ONE* of the cashiers involved had made, as I recall, $160,000+ from the card-numbers that she had carried out of the store 'in her head' -- she'd been doing it for more than FIVE YEARS, without being suspected of anything. The store involved was "shocked"; management was quoted as saying "She was one of our _best_ cashiers." It _can_ happen. It *does* happen. The voluntary-participation "Pay by Touch" system deprives the 'smart' crooked cashier -- as well as the 'dumb' one -- of the opportunity to 'steal' a card number. But, you're right, I can't imagine why anyone would *consider* participating in that program. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 06 Feb 2005 16:09:44 -0500 From: William Warren Subject: Re: Update Interval For E911 Records william_warren_notme@comcast.net wrote: > Pat, > I have a customer who's using Vonage as his primary business line. > The problem is that he moves it with him from job to job, many of them > in buildings with no phone service that he's in charge of remodeling, > and he's got a medical condition that might cause his coworkers to > dial 911. > He tells me that there's no problem with 911 calls because Vonage has > a screen he uses to update his address. > The question: how long do E911 updates take to propagate once submitted > by Vonage? IIRC, it's at least a day, but I'm hoping I'm wrong. > William > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I was told it is more or less a few > times daily, but my problem would be your first paragraph: 'many of > them buildings with no phone service in them.' If that is the case, > then *how* does he get the internet connection needed to use his VOIP > line? Do you mean the buildings have no phone service but somehow *do* > have cable installed for his VOIP line? Without cable modems or DSL > lines, how is he going to use the VOIP? I am sure the person must > have a cell phone; my suggestion would be to use in case of an > emergency. Forward his VOIP line to his cell phone. PAT] Pat, He's in the business of replacing existing phones and wire with new equipment, and old key systems with PBX's and dial tone provided by a CLEC. Suffice to say that experience has shown there are usually interruptions to the dial tone during that kind of work, and in any event he wants to have "his" number available for calls when in the buildings out-of-hours. He's almost always able to find a data connection, either by hooking up to an existing customer in the building or by finding a wifi hot spot, using a Pringles antenna. The benefit of having the VoIP line is that he can test a new PBX with "live" dialtone when the company's numbers get fouled up during LNP switching, and that happens a lot. He also likes to able to "transfer" his calls to his house without having to go back to an office at the end of the day (I don't know how Vonage does that, but he has two Linksys boxes, one with him and one at home). Anyway, the point is he makes it work somehow, and I'd like to be sure that a 911 call via the Vonage box would show the correct address. William (Remove "nonoise" for direct replies.) ------------------------------ 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 V24 #55 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Feb 7 19:07:48 2005 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j1807l515058; Mon, 7 Feb 2005 19:07:48 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2005 19:07:48 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200502080007.j1807l515058@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 V24 #56 TELECOM Digest Mon, 7 Feb 2005 19:08:00 EST Volume 24 : Issue 56 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson CBS, CSTV Hope Idea Clicks/Webcast Deal Seen as a Springboard (Solomon) TiVo Report Shows Super Bowl Ads Got Huge Audience; Sexy,Funny (Solomon) Former AOL Employee Pleads Guilty in Spam Case (Lisa Minter) Hackers, Virus Writers Target Mobile Phones (Lisa Minter) EBay to Cut Fees, Expand Customer Support (Lisa Minter) MCI Mum on Qwest Bid (Telecom dailyLead from USTA) I'm Searching For a Budget Pipe Prefere oc3. (Globeadue) Healthwatch: Deep Throat's Secret (and Health ...) (Danny Burstein) Digital Cellular Sound Quality (Jeffrey Mattox) 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, 7 Feb 2005 01:44:02 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: CBS, CSTV Hope Idea Clicks/Webcast Deal Seen as a Springboard By Bill Griffith | January 30, 2005 These days, it seems everything related to TV and broadband (1) comes back to the Super Bowl in one way or another and (2) represents someone trying to sell us something. Take Thursday's announcement that College Sports TV has cut a deal with CBS's Sportsline.com to provide streaming video (webcasts) of out-of-market games from the upcoming NCAA men's basketball tournament. Cost for the service will be $19.95. Early-bird fans (also known as "office pool participants") who sign up by Feb. 8 can get the service for half-price. The webcasts will include all games not shown in your area by CBS through the regional semifinals. http://www.boston.com/sports/football/articles/2005/01/30/cbs_cstv_hope_idea_clicks/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2005 09:39:29 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: TiVo Report Shows Super Bowl Ads Got Huge Audience; Sexy, Funny TiVo Report Shows Super Bowl Ads Got Huge Audience; Sexy, Funny Ads Still Drew Most Enthusiastic Viewership - Feb 7, 2005 08:32 AM (PR Newswire) McCartney's Tamer Halftime Show Keeps More Viewers Tuned In Compared to Last Year's Hip Hop Halftime and 'Wardrobe Malfunction' ALVISO, Calif., Feb. 7 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- TiVo (Nasdaq: TIVO) said this year's Super Bowl and the commercials within it got the typical huge global audience as in years past. But despite efforts to scale back tastelessness and sex in the game and advertising, the commercials that pushed the envelope the furthest still drew the most enthusiastic viewership, according to TiVo's annual audience measurement of the big game. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=46716865 http://www.tivo.com/5.3.6_sb.asp TiVo Super Bowl viewership http://www.tivo.com/biggame ------------------------------ Date: 07 Feb 2005 09:23:25 -0800 From: Lisa Minter Subject: Former AOL Employee Pleads Guilty in Spam Case Jason Smathers, 24, admitted to conspiracy and interstate trafficking of stolen property, charges that could carry a maximum prison sentence of 24 months under federal guidelines. The federal case charged that Smathers, of Harpers Ferry, West Virginia, stole the screen names from AOL, a Time Warner Inc. unit, and sold it to an Internet marketer. The marketer paid $28,000 for the names, then allegedly used them to promote his online gambling operation while also selling them to other spammers, according to prosecutors. U.S. District Judge Alvin Hellerstein, who last year refused to accept the guilty plea because he had a "technical" question, set a sentencing date of May 20. 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: 07 Feb 2005 09:25:31 -0800 From: Lisa Minter Subject: Hackers, Virus Writers Target Mobile Phones Hackers can scoop up calendars, contact lists and other sensitive information, or turn a mobile phone into a bugging device to secretly listen in on conversations. Mobile viruses that spread through the air can disable phones completely. Few mobile phone users have been seriously harmed yet by security breaches. But experts say serious threats are likely to emerge as mobile phones evolve into tiny computers capable of communicating in a variety of ways. "There is a very large pool of vulnerable devices already in use, and inevitably this will lead to issues with the owners of those devices," said Adam Laurie, a U.K. security expert who has uncovered several security holes. "Problems like this are only just beginning to surface," Laurie said in an e-mail interview. Because mobile providers like Cingular maintain tight control over their networks, users have so far largely avoided the spam, spyware and other hassles that plague computer users. But that doesn't mean they're immune from other threats. Laurie demonstrated last spring that he could copy the calendars and contact lists of 46 British lawmakers and turn their phones into bugging devices that could pick up nearby conversation, simply by hanging around Parliament and waiting for victims to walk by. Laurie was able to tap into their phones using Bluetooth, a short-range wireless technology included on many new phones that allows users to zap each other their contact information, talk through their car stereos and sync up with computers without a cable. LIKE THE COMMON COLD. Bluetooth also allows viruses to spread through the air like a common cold. The Cabir virus that surfaced last June is relatively nontoxic, antivirus firms say. It requires the user to click "OK" before it installs itself, it doesn't harm the phones it infects, and it can only spread to one other phone until the host phone is rebooted. Cabir has managed to spread to nine countries so far, paving the way for other, more harmful viruses. Early computer viruses did little more than flood networks with unwanted traffic, but more recent viruses like Bagle enable criminals to secretly take control of infected computers and use them to commit identity theft or extort protection money from online businesses. That pattern is emerging with mobile viruses as well. A virus called Skulls disables phone applications and replaces their icons with a skull-and-crossbones symbol, while another disguised as a video game called Mosquito automatically places calls to toll numbers, according to descriptions by several antivirus firms. Antivirus analysts at Kaspersky Labs in Russia are currently investigating a report that Lexus car stereos have been infected with a Bluetooth virus. "In the future we can come across viruses for nearly any complicated device. Imagine your fridge throwing food in the microwave oven," Kaspersky spokeswoman Olga Kobzareva said in an e-mail interview. Some experts say mobile viruses aren't likely to become as widespread as computer viruses because no single operating system predominates, unlike the 90 percent of personal computers that run some version of Microsoft Windows. Only 1.8 percent of the 164 million mobile phones sold in the last three months use Symbian, the operating system targeted by virus writers, said Greg Mastoras, a senior security analyst at the anti-virus company Sophos. "We don't think it's a big issue to think about right now," he said. Nokia and Sony Ericsson offer patches for phones that have proven susceptible to viruses and Bluetooth hacks, and industry engineers now check for security holes before releasing new products. Users can install antivirus software on their phones, or simply place Bluetooth in "hidden" mode so it is not visible to other devices. "We're trying to design the future in a way that will prevent as many hacks as possible," said Joe Farren, a spokesman for the Cellular Telecommunications and Internet Association, a Washington-based trade group. But new headaches are likely to emerge as the industry consolidates around one or two operating systems and adds Wi-Fi Internet capability, said Tristan Henderson, a research assistant professor at Dartmouth College's Center for Mobile computing. "Once we have cell phones that are connected to the Internet, someone sitting in China or Russia or anywhere can attack a cell phone in New York, and that will be fun," he 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 ------------------------------ Date: 07 Feb 2005 09:30:10 -0800 From: Lisa Minter Subject: E-Bay to Cut Fees, Expand Customer Support NEW YORK (Reuters) - Online auctioneer eBay Inc. will lower the fees it charges to list items for sale, the company said on Sunday, as it also announced other changes in pricing and customer service policies in response to user feedback. In a message posted to eBay's Web site, North America President Bill Cobb said that, effective at midnight, eBay.com and eBay.ca will lower the minimum insertion fees for auction-style listings and fixed price categories, among others, from 30 cents to 25 cents. The company says it's standing by its move to hike final value fees on store inventory format listings, but it will credit $15.95 in May to all sellers who operated an eBay Store in April. In addition, eBay plans to shut down most of its automated email responses within the next 90 days, so users will get a response from a company representative. Automated emails will only be used to acknowledge receipt of spam or policy violation reports, according to Cobb's statement. The company is also expanding telephone support to provide access to all eBay Stores owners beginning April 1, the statement 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 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2005 12:48:08 EST From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA Subject: MCI Mum on Qwest Bid Telecom dailyLead from USTA February 7, 2005 http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=19228&l=2017006 TODAY'S HEADLINES NEWS OF THE DAY * MCI mum on Qwest bid BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH * Telecom landscape may be poised for shift * Satellite subscriptions rise 14% as cable growth stagnates * South Korean telcos chart ambitious course * Time Warner would dominate L.A. if it wins joint bid for Adelphia USTA SPOTLIGHT * 3G Wireless with WiMAX and Wi-Fi -- Now in the Telecom Bookstore EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES * New VoIP security group formed REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE * Spreading the message about file sharing * Former WorldCom CFO poised to testify in trial of former boss Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others. http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=19228&l=2017006 ------------------------------ From: Globeadue Subject: I'm Searching For a Budget Pipe Pefere oc3. Date: 7 Feb 2005 13:05:01 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com I'm looking for some sorta fat pipe for my systems. I'm just a hobbyist(gaming, family network and servers). What I have are some very very nice OC3 voip sequencers sq-1000's from cetacean that I'd like to get running. I'm in Georgia and if anyone knows a way for non business user to get a line under $200/m I'd love to hear about it. ------------------------------ From: Danny Burstein Subject: Healthwatch: Deep Throat's Secret (and Health...) Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2005 03:49:56 -0500 Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC ob telecom: The Watergate burglers were caught planting bugs and wiretaps... ------------- From an article by John "cancer on the presidency" Dean in Sunday's LA Times: http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/sunday/commentary/la-op-sources6feb06,1,828254.story "I have little doubt that one of my former Nixon White House colleagues is history's best-known anonymous source - Deep Throat. But I'll be damned if I can figure out exactly which one. "We'll all know one day very soon, however. Bob Woodward, a reporter on the team that covered the Watergate story, has advised his executive editor at the Washington Post that Throat is ill. And Ben Bradlee, former executive editor of the Post and one of the few people to whom Woodward confided his source's identity, has publicly acknowledged that he has written Throat's obituary. "I suspect that Throat's identity may prove a cautionary tale for all news gatherers. Stay tuned. _____________________________________________________ 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: Times change, but the more they change, the more things stay the same. In Nixon's presidency, FOIA had not yet become law -- I don't think -- and the importance of people like 'Throat' could not be underestimated, and surely, he brought down Nixon, even though others fell as well, and wound up going to jail in Tricky Dick's place. A full year and a half after ACLU and others filed suit under FOIA (in 2003) asking for information on Bush's role in the torture and sexual humiliation of Iraqi guys, the court ruled they could have the paperwork they were seeking, although with so many redactions I think there must have been a big sale on black tip marker pens. Finally, on December 20, 2004 ACLU got the paperwork they had been demanding; they released it a day or two later to the net and elsewhere. Page after page, of the hundreds of pages received had redactions; there are literally *thousands* of instances of violations of the Geneva Conven- tion regarding treatment and mistreatment of prisoners; it was all much more widespread than anyone suspected; it all came down from very high sources in the Pentagon, and ultimatly from Bush. Check out the http://aclu.org pages under 'Prisoner Torture' for more details, or also look at http://onward-christian-soldiers.n3.net . Already, a lot of the little guys (military, etc) have already wound up in jail or court-martialled, etc for 'just following orders'. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2005 03:48:31 -0600 From: Jeffrey Mattox Subject: Digital Cellular Sound Quality [Please withhold my email address.] My old analog cell phone, a Nokia 918, has a cheap, grandfathered rate plan, so I'm not likely to upgrade unless Cingular rips out their analog equipment. Get this: the phone's logo is "Ameritech"! Whenever I have a conversation with a modern cell phone user, it's digital-ness is highly obvious because the sound quality is so bad. I assumed digital meant higher quality. Even today, digital is called "advanced technology." To wit: Digital phones use advanced technology that converts voices into numeric code, which is then transmitted to the phone and decoded. ... Reception, sound quality, battery life, and security features are superior to analog. http://www.staples.com/content/Article/C-D/CellularWireless.asp Well, it not very advanced from my perspective -- it's a step backward. And to say that digital "sound quality .. [is] superior" is a lie. Because of the low sample rate (is it 8 KHz?), it's not possible to reconstruct perfect speech. Is this situation ever likely to be improved? Why isn't it possible to sample at a higher rate, compress the result in the phone for transmission, and then decompress at the base (and do the same thing for the reverse channel)? Are all digital cellular phones the same? Aren't many people bothered by the horrible sound quality? Jeff ------------------------------ 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 V24 #56 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Feb 7 20:22:46 2005 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j181MkK16032; Mon, 7 Feb 2005 20:22:46 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2005 20:22:46 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200502080122.j181MkK16032@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 V24 #57 TELECOM Digest Mon, 7 Feb 2005 20:23:00 EST Volume 24 : Issue 57 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Old Party-Line Arrangements (jsw@ivgate.omahug.org) Re: Old Party-Line Arrangements (John Levine) Re: Old Party-Line Arrangements (William Warren) Re: Old Party-Line Arrangements (George Kinder) Re: Old Party-Line Arrangements (Lisa Hancock) Re: Old Party-Line Arrangements (Joseph) Re: AT&T Inventions Fueled Tech Boom, And Its Own Fall (Lisa Hancock) Re: Update Interval for E911 Records (Isaiah Beard) Re: Satellite Radio Technology (Isaiah Beard) Re: A Child Learns a Harsh Lesson in Politics (Lisa Hancock) Re: America the Worst For Cell Rates and Plans (cjmebox-telecomdigest) Re: Supermarket: Let Your Fingers do the Paying (David Clayton) Re: Supermarket: Let Your Fingers do the Paying (Graeme Thomas) Re: Satellite Radio Technology (Carl Navarro) Re: Any Recommendations re: Economy Internet Phone Service (Ron Chapman) Re: Motorola v550 - Picture Downloading?? (jmeissen@aracnet.com) Re: Need Recommendations for Economy "Pay as You Go" Cell Phone (Joseph) Re: Any Recommendations re: Economy Internet Phone Service (John Levine) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Old Party-Line Arrangements Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2005 14:51:04 CST From: jsw@ivgate.omahug.org Reply-To: jsw@ivgate.omahug.org > When it comes to outgoing calls once DDD and CAMA had arrived, I've > seen references to different ringer wiring combinations to enable the > equipment to test for originating party, and also in the earlier days > of DDD that in some places (maybe small independents?) callers had to > dial an ID digit (e.g. 1x + NPA + number). The only method I'm aware of for transparently identifying the calling party was used by Ma Bell on two-party fully-selective lines. This used the ringer coils in a balanced bridge configuration to ground to indicate when the "tip" party was off hook. For four-party and eight-party lines, the usual practice was to intercept and send the call first to a live operator to identify the party. > Can anybody elaborate and explain in more detail the arrangements which > were commonly used, both in the Bell System and in the larger > independents? When speaking in context of Ma Bell, in metropolitan areas, two-party and four-party fully-selective (no party heard another party's ring) lines were at times offered. Ringdown voltage was applied between one side of the pair and ground on two-party lines. On four-party lines a small cold-cathode tube was used as a rectifier to discriminate the positive or negative ringdown pulses sent on the appropriate side of the pair. Eight party semi-selective lines were offered in rural areas, and in some cases until quite recently. This was similar to the four-party fully-selective method but employed a "one long" or "two short" ring cadence to identify the called party. The indies would more commonly use frequency-selective ringers to ring only the bell of the called party's phones. ------------------------------ Date: 7 Feb 2005 06:08:45 -0000 From: John Levine Subject: Re: Old Party-Line Arrangements Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > I've gleaned from various sources, including some old Digest posts, > that in the U.S. there were various methods employed, including up to > 10-way party lines with the last digit of the number selecting tip or > ring and the appropriate ringing cadence. I've also seen references > to tuned ringers with ringing applied at a different frequency for > each party, Yup, they did all that. Tuned ringers, various combinations of ringing tip/ring vs. tip/ground, and ring patterns. > and to party-line numbers having an additional digit > (coded as a letter) added the end of the regular number. Only on manual exchanges where you saw a lot of numbers like 1234J, or it was just spelled out, e.g. my mother's phone number in Bell territory in Vermont in the 1930s and 40s was six two ring three. (Not that she ever needed to use it since the operator knew her and would reroute calls, e.g., "your mother's playing bridge at the Cliffords' tonight, shall I ring her there?") On older dial exchanges the last digit typically picked the ring pattern, on later ones it was all programmable by wiring. > When it comes to outgoing calls once DDD and CAMA had arrived, I've > seen references to different ringer wiring combinations to enable the > equipment to test for originating party, and also in the earlier days > of DDD that in some places (maybe small independents?) callers had to > dial an ID digit (e.g. 1x + NPA + number). In the 1970s, I knew people at non-Bell independents who used circle digits, the extra digit to identify the calling phone. There was also a surprising amount of ONI, operators cutting in to ask for your number, even on private lines in Bell territory before ANI was universal. Relatives who run a small independent told me that party line billing was a huge hassle since kids would lie to the ONI operator and they spent a lot of time getting the calls reassigned to the right parties. 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: My grandmother told me once that when she was a middle age lady (she lived in Coffeyville on Southwestern Bell; they of course had manual [and party line] service in those days), the system allowed the phone of the person for whom the call was intended to ring normally; others who were on the party line would only get a feeble 'tick' from the bell clapper. She said the old biddies on the party line would set the phone in a galvanized laundry tub, so even if they were sitting out on the front porch on a hot summer night, they would all hear that (amplified by the galvanized tub) 'tick sound', and the front-porch ladies would quietly slip inside and try to listen/spy on the neighbor who had received the phone call, to find out who had called and what they were talking about. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 07 Feb 2005 08:06:46 -0500 From: William Warren Subject: Re: Old Party-Line Arrangements Paul Coxwell wrote: > I'm interested in getting some more detailed historical information on > the way party-lines were arranged years ago. > Here in Britain with our relatively small area and comparatively high > density of population, a two-way line was the norm with ringing > applied to tip or ring and bells connected from one side of the line > to a local ground. Outgoing calls used a ground-start method, with > subscribers having to press a button to obtain dialtone. (As even > local calls were charged, this method enabled the C.O. to determine > the originating party at the outset.) In the Bell System, ground start was never used for residential service. On two-party lines, the "tip" party would be wired with the ringer (and, on occasion, a portion of the hybrid coil) connected between the tip lead and ground, without an isolating capacitor, to allow the CO to determine the billing party. If there was current flow to ground, then the "tip" party was making the call. I worked in a 5XB office once: IIRC, tips vs. ring id was made by the originating marker, but all other billing decisions were handled in the mainframes after the paper tape rolls had been sent out for offline processing. I never worked on multi-line phones; they weren't available in my area when I was in the CO. However, I remember that we had a few "legacy" four-party lines, and I think (Again, IIRC) that billing was handled by CAMA operators asking for the originating number during billable calls. [snip] William (Remove "nonoise" for direct replies) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 07 Feb 2005 08:51:16 -0500 From: George Kinder Subject: Re: Old Party-Line Arrangements Paul Coxwell wrote: > I'm interested in getting some more detailed historical information on > the way party-lines were arranged years ago. > Can anybody elaborate and explain in more detail the arrangements > which were commonly used, both in the Bell System and in the larger > independents? > Thanks, > Paul Paul, I once lived in an area (1955) in West Virginia where pairs were scarce. We were on a ten party line. Five ringers were tip-to-ground and five were ring-to-ground. They used coded ringing to alert the subscriber. (long-long, long-short, short-long, short short, etc.) To get rid of the annoying rings I built a decoder out of old pinball machine parts to screen the rings and connect my ringer only when my code rang. I do not recall any correlation between telephone number and ring cadence. Eventually we got a 4 party line. On this one they used two phones on each side of the line but used a small gas tube and a superimposed dc voltage to select the appropriate ringer. I don't remember the details. George ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com Subject: Re: Old Party-Line Arrangements Date: 7 Feb 2005 09:48:56 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Paul Coxwell wrote: > Can anybody elaborate and explain in more detail the arrangements > which were commonly used, both in the Bell System and in the larger > independents? It is important to note that arrangements varied greatly from place to place depending on the date, local conditions and the telephone company that first installed the network. Party lines were common even in high density cities for many years of telephone service; they saved about 35% of the phone cost which enabled people of modest means to afford a telephone. In the 1950s, party lines were mandatory in some places until the phone company could catch up with heavy demand for new service. Party lines didn't only share the cost of running a line to the subscriber, but also central office costs as well since it reduced traffic peaks. Central offices had to be expanded before mandatory party service could end. Indeed, a major motion picture comedy was made about two people fighting over use of a party line they were forced to get. In some US states party line service is no longer offered at all. In other states it is too existing customers only. I don't know if any state allows new customers to get such service. The savings today are only about 5%. As mentioned, technical arrangements varies. In cities, it was 2-party service, Bell using arrangements of tip and ring and ground (someone else can explain better) so only the desired party was rung. In later years, each subscriber had their own number and it was transparent to the caller. The independents often used frequency ringing. For very rural service, more than 4 parties would share a line and ringing cadences were required. ------------------------------ From: Joseph Subject: Re: Old Party-Line Arrangements Date: Mon, 07 Feb 2005 10:11:07 -0800 Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com On Sun, 6 Feb 2005 11:14:23 -0000, Paul Coxwell wrote: > I've gleaned from various sources, including some old Digest posts, > that in the U.S. there were various methods employed, including up to > 10-way party lines with the last digit of the number selecting tip or > ring and the appropriate ringing cadence. This is generally the case only where the equipment used was "terminal per line" as opposed to "terminal per station." In terminal per line set ups the last digit always indicated the cadence of the ringing with 10 possible combinations for both tip and ring side of the line so that it might be possible to have 5 different ringing cadences depending on what your number is e.g. the last digit of 1 on the ring side of the line you'd have a single ring, 2 two rings, 3 one long and a short, 4 one long a short and a long, and 5 being five short rings. Repeated for the remaining digits on the tip side. In terminal per station you could have any ringing combination but it was determined at the central office (switch.) > I've also seen references > to tuned ringers with ringing applied at a different frequency for > each party, and to party-line numbers having an additional digit > (coded as a letter) added the end of the regular number. Mostly used by independents rather than by the Bell System. > When it comes to outgoing calls once DDD and CAMA had arrived, I've > seen references to different ringer wiring combinations to enable the > equipment to test for originating party, and also in the earlier days > of DDD that in some places (maybe small independents?) callers had to > dial an ID digit (e.g. 1x + NPA + number). On two-party lines whether it was tip or ring determined whether either party would be charged and you could use AMA. With four party you used CAMA and an operator would come on the line to ask what your number was. Independents used "ID" digit. ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com Subject: Re: AT&T Inventions Fueled Tech Boom, And Its Own Fall Date: 7 Feb 2005 10:06:10 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Lou Jahn wrote: > The simple fact was AT&T spent more on planning than IBM/ROLM > did on running their operation. It was a headquarter operation that > allowed inflated staff headcount and the lack of truthful internal > presentation of the marketplace dynamics that lead to AT&Ts actual > demise. I wouldn't call this a "lack of truthful internals" or "inflated cost". I would call it the problems of transition as technology changed. As a monopoly in electro-mechanical technology for the U.S., it made sense for AT&T have a strong staff for planning. This is what made the U.S. telephone network so reliable and robust compared to the rest of the world. Both internal and customer equipment were tested, re-test, field tested extensive before going out the door. AT&T had very few "Edsels" over its history. But with the coming of widespread electronics coupled with divesture coupled with customer owned equipment, this staff was simply no longer necessary. IBM went through the same thing. In its heydey, IBM computers were not a commodity, they needed difficult set up and programming so that a computer with 128K of memory could serve an entire moderate enterprise, 1 Meg for a big enterprise. Youngsters today with unlimited cheap gigabytes of RAM memory simply can't imagine what it was like to run complex business problems on such limited hardware. Anyway, that took a lot of people. As technology and the marketplace changed, customers could do their work right out of the box and those people were no longer necessary. IBM went through painful layoffs as well. In a sense, both at IBM and AT&T the technologists automated themselves out of a job. Cheap fibre-optic cable eliminated the need for detailed math analysis of calling and traffic patterns to optimize cable construction; cheap computers eliminated the need to precisely control the content of every bit at all times. Some critics blame the mgmt of AT&T and IBM for allowing the companies to be top-heavy. I don't agree. At the time the people were hired, there was a need for their skills. At the time they were hired, they still had a to support a network antiquated by today's standards. It's really like this in any industry. The use of new technology in electronics and materials allows my automobile to run further between maintenance work -- this has cut jobs for car mechanics. Also, cars last longer, cutting jobs for auto makers. (The flip side is that we drive much much more nowadays which offsets those savings.) > Those readers who lived in New Jersey may remember the "many" AT&T > headcount reduction announcements for the 3-5 years after the 1984 > deregulation. Most were coupled with rifts of 50,000 to 100,000 at a > time. Just think of the disruption such consistent headquarters > turnover has on any business operation. I was always amazed the NJ's > economy did not fall to the ground, but no, in spite of such job > shedding NJs economy continued to grow until the late 1990's. > Another factoid: AT&T as a total corporation had about 990,000 > employees in 1981-82. In 1987 the seven ROBCs and AT&T had only about > 725,000 employees. While one might argue firms like MCI and SPRINT > were doing some of the former AT&T effort. That total headcount of the > RBOCs and AT&T continued to fall well into the 1990s. > So while AT&T did indeed have a magnificent network, AT&T's inflated > cost structure due to HQ overhead, simply brought it to its knees. It > just took time for the real problems to register. > Lou Jahn > Info Partners Corp > 609-823-6602 > 609-823-2202 Fax > www.InfoPartnersCorp.com ------------------------------ From: Isaiah Beard Subject: Re: Update interval for E911 Records Date: Mon, 07 Feb 2005 15:59:01 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com william_warren_notme@comcast.net wrote: > I am sure the person must have a cell phone; my suggestion would be > to use in case of an emergency. Forward his VOIP line to his cell > phone. PAT] I agree with Pat on this one. Wireless E-911 with location identification is now starting to come online in quite a few areas, increasing the chance that he would be better off using the cell phone for 911 service. But in either case (VoIP OR cellular), it's still a good idea to do your best to articulate your location to the dispatch center to the best of your ability. E-mail fudged to thwart spammers. Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply. ------------------------------ From: Isaiah Beard Subject: Re: Satellite Radio Technology Date: Mon, 07 Feb 2005 16:04:52 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com AES wrote: > Haven't gotten clear answers yet from the alt.radio.satellite NG on a > couple of very fundamental questions re satellite radio technology > (Sirius or XM) so I'll venture to ask them here: Will be glad to answer, as I am an XM subscriber. > 1) If I purchase a subscription to one of these, does that mean _one_ > activated receiver per subscription? (Or can I be using one receiver > say on the freeway and my family be using a couple of others at > different locations in the house, on one basic monthly subscription.) No, for both services, it's one subscription per radio. XM does offer you a break on this though, as their "family plan" allows you to add additional radios to your account for a reduced price ($6.99 per month, as opposed to $9.99 per month). And if you have broadband at home, there is the $3.99 option where XM's service is streamed over the internet (Sirius offers something similar I believe, and it might even be a free add-on). > 2) Same question, but if I have one subscription and one activated > receiver, can I pull multiple stations (or channels?) out of that > receiver (using multiple "tuners" or "decoders" or whatever they're > called) and feed these different audio signals into different rooms or > headphones or audio channels? Currently, none of the radios offered work in the way you would want. they all are capable of tuning into just one channel at a time. E-mail fudged to thwart spammers. Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply. ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com Subject: Re: A Child Learns a Harsh Lesson in Politics Date: 7 Feb 2005 13:22:19 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Monty Solomon wrote: > By JULIE SALAMON > For adults, the fuss over a PBS children's television show featuring > an animated bunny - and real lesbian mothers - was nothing new. But > for Emma Riesner, 11, who was supposed to be a star of the > now-controversial episode of "Postcards From Buster," what began as a > participatory social studies lesson has become a harsh lesson in > exclusionary politics. That "a harsh lesson ..." description isn't accurate. What the kid learned was that show business is tough. TV shows are cancelled all the time; few shows terminate on their own. Some may air for years before cancellation. But others get cancelled before even a single episode airs. This is not unusual. It is often claimed broadcast TV has no taste and anything goes. That is not true. While boundaries are changing, there are limits; and TV stations and network know pushing beyond those limits will offend and lose viewers. In the case of this particular show, keep in mind that the family structure it used is very rare in real life. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2005 14:38:16 PST From: Reply-To: cjmebox-telecomdigest@yahoo.com Subject: Re: America the Worst For Cell Rates and Plans (I hope my delayed reaction is forgiven) Thanks for the very useful link. I certainly stand corrected on my claim about the cost of calls by cell phone customers being lower in Europe than here. It is obvious from the chart that this is not the case. Interestingly, the correlation between high per minute cost and low total usage is portrayed as the cause of low usage. I wonder if this ought to be a greater concern for the operators than for the users. That is, could they "get more" out of every user if they lowered the per minute cost of calls? From the user's side though, the monthly cost seems to be lower for the European, even at the cost of lower usage (on outgoing calls). An average American is getting a 10c/min charge because he/she has purchased minutes in bulk. If he actually used all those minutes, it would cost about $55 monthly. If not, the minutes actually cost more (that's why I mentioned my "guess" that high volume users are better off in the US than in Europe). If you go over, as has happened to me on occasion, God help you. Working off the same chart, an average Italian user would have a monthly cost of about $30, a bit more than half what the American paid (of course he/she also made a lot fewer outgoing calls). It seems to me an arguable point, that if there was added value in talking more, European users would pay more to do so. Since they are not, can we infer that they have reached the limit of what they are willing to spend on their mobile service, so lower per minute costs would not necessarily increase total use? (In light of the research sited, I think that's not the case. It is likely that the average user would end up spending more per month if the per minute cost came down). Having said all that, I must say I still hate being charged for incoming calls :-) Thanks again for the papers. -Dean PS none of the above argues against the main point of Mr Marcus' report, on the adverse effects of call termination fees (I suffer from these personally. Whenever I want to call my brother in Europe, I try to call him on a fixed line so as to avoid the significant extra charges of calling him on his cell. He never has such a problem when calling me.) John Levine wrote: > The reality is that most Europeans have a much cheaper service. I just came across a most interesting article in the current European Economic Journal on this very topic. See pages 5-7: http://www.european-enterprise.org/public/docs/EEJ.pdf It argues that due to the "termination monopoly" in which anyone who wants to call you has to pay the price your carrier sets, the average per minute price for calls in Europe is much higher than in the US, and a simple chart shows that the lower the per minute price, the more calls people make. A big advantage of charging all the calls to the subscriber is that the overall price becomes a competitive issue, which drives the per minute price down and provides for cheap bundled plans. In a monopoly environment, prices tend to stay high unless regulated down, and that's what's happening in Europe, increasing regulation of termination prices. He also points out that roaming prices are an even worse problem for the same reason, they're set by whatever carrier your carrier happens to have a roaming agreement with, but now there's international politics added to the mix. ------------------------------ From: David Clayton Subject: Re: Supermarket: Let Your Fingers do the Paying Date: Mon, 07 Feb 2005 17:18:33 +1100 On Sun, 2005-02-06 at 17:23 +0000, Robert Bonomi wrote: > It _can_ happen. It *does* happen. The voluntary-participation "Pay > by Touch" system deprives the 'smart' crooked cashier -- as well as > the 'dumb' one -- of the opportunity to 'steal' a card number. > But, you're right, I can't imagine why anyone would *consider* > participating in that program. One thing that I haven't seen brought up here re the issue of having your fingerprint "on file" is that I believe the Biometric systems actually record (and store) a "hash" value of the particular ID, not the ID itself (like an actual image of your fingerprint). This is supposed to ensure that the stored ID cannot be used to re-create the actual ID, but can only be used for comparison with new hashed data. This is from my Biometric system knowledge of a few years ago, someone with more up to date information may be able to expand all of our knowledge ... 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. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2005 14:03:31 +0000 From: Graeme Thomas Subject: Re: Supermarket: Let Your Fingers do the Paying In article , AES writes: [ But if you decide to print it, PAT, please remove my email address. ] > As examples, fingerprint analysis has considerable validity, but not > nearly as much as law enforcement agencies would have you believe; Right. In the right circumstances fingerprint evidence is reliable. The law enforcement agencies don't mention much about what those circumstances are, though. Basically, if a good, clean fingerprint can be found then the chances of a false match are minuscule. But those chances rise fairly sharply if there's only a partial fingerprint available. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What you say is very true. What do you > think about the newest gimmick, DNA-printing? Police seem to be > making a big thing out of building up their DNA files at this time. > They *claim* it is much more reliable than fingerprinting, and they > *claim* one's DNA is absolutely unique, but they said that about > fingerprints at one time also. PAT] From what I can gather a complete DNA match is impossible, with the possible exception of identical twins. However, many of the existing DNA tests only perform partial matching, and the possibility of a match again rises sharply. In the UK the police have been using DNA matching for quite a while, and there are regular stories of people being charged with old crimes, after they've given a DNA sample for some unrelated offence. Most such people end up convicted of the old crime. (I have some worries over that. How could anyone be expected to come up with an alibi after several years have elapsed? Can *you* remember what you were doing on one particular evening 15 years ago?) One such person *was* able to prove he was innocent of the crime, though. Records showed that he was in prison at the time of the offence. The DNA evidence had already shown a match. There was some hasty reorganization after that in the DNA labs, and they started trying to identify the DNA with greater precision. It's now foolproof, apparently. I imagine that they'll stick with that view until another fool comes along with a cast-iron alibi. Graeme Thomas ------------------------------ From: Carl Navarro Subject: Re: Satellite Radio Technology Date: Mon, 07 Feb 2005 08:04:49 GMT Organization: Road Runner High Speed Online http://www.rr.com On Sun, 06 Feb 2005 13:43:07 -0800, AES wrote: > Haven't gotten clear answers yet from the alt.radio.satellite NG on a > couple of very fundamental questions re satellite radio technology > (Sirius or XM) so I'll venture to ask them here: > 1) If I purchase a subscription to one of these, does that mean _one_ > activated receiver per subscription? (Or can I be using one receiver > say on the freeway and my family be using a couple of others at > different locations in the house, on one basic monthly subscription.) I have the XM system and that's what it means. One receiver per activation. You get a discount on the multiple activations, but each s/n has a service. > 2) Same question, but if I have one subscription and one activated > receiver, can I pull multiple stations (or channels?) out of that > receiver (using multiple "tuners" or "decoders" or whatever they're > called) and feed these different audio signals into different rooms or > headphones or audio channels? Not yet, but I either dreamed or they are close to a unit for commercial use that has multiple tuners in one frame. Carl Navarro ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2005 05:57:53 -0500 From: Ron Chapman Subject: Re: Any Recommendations re: Economy Internet Phone Service? In article , Anna wrote: > I have heard of Vonage, Skype etc ? Which is most economical ? > We make between 6 and 12 hours of long distance calls per > month.(mostly US) I pay 3.85 cents/minute for regular, dial 1+ long distance from my home phone (either line -- nice and convenient). 12 hours of that comes to $27.72. Less calling comes to less money, obviously; 6 hours would come to half of that, or $13.86. You may not want to pay $25/month for a fixed rate plan of any kind. Then again, with the freedom to call as much as you want, you may. There are plenty of $20/month competitors to Vonage. Packet8 comes to mind; $20 for unlimited US service. ------------------------------ From: jmeissen@aracnet.com Subject: Re: Motorola v550 - Picture Downloading?? Date: 7 Feb 2005 16:43:31 GMT Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com In article , Pete L wrote: > I know quite a bit about computers but phones are a bit of a mystery > to me! We have just obtained a Motorola v550 and after wading through > the manual Ihave mastered the art of working the thing. What I cannot > seem to do is download pictures from it to my PC. I've been through > all the manual and it doesn't mention it. I have a UBS cable and some > software tools - which again don't seem to mention downloading pics. > Surely it can be done? Question is how? Anybody out there ideas, > please? I just recently went though this with my daughter, who get that phone from her mother. I assume you're using XP? We made the mistake of inserting the Bluetooth adapter and just expecting XP to "do the right thing", as it usually does. After several days of loading/unloading/re-installing/searching I found that there is a significant difference between Microsoft's Bluetooth software and what came with the Bluetooth adapter we bought. Also, once you allow Microsoft to associate their driver with the adapter it will remember that association and continue to use it no matter how many times you un-install the adapter and try to install other software. Once we physically deleted the appropriate file(s) from the system we were able to re-install the driver software that came with the adapter, and then everything worked great. I don't recall exactly how it appeared, but it was fairly intuitive once it worked. Sorry I can't recall the files to delete (it was several weeks ago). You can probably find them with an appropriate Google search. John Meissen jmeissen@aracnet.com ------------------------------ From: Joseph Subject: Re: Need Recommendations for Economy "Pay as You Go" Cell Phones Date: Mon, 07 Feb 2005 10:18:34 -0800 Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com On 6 Feb 2005 08:59:16 -0800, kimshapiro100@yahoo.com wrote: > Need recommendations for economy "pay as you go" cell phones. > This is for a 10 year old child in California -- to be used ONLY in > EMERGENCY situations. > My child is probably going to use between 5 and 30 minutes a month. > I think there is no point subscribing to a plan. > Any recommendations for a "pay as you go" economy cell phone ? (like > prepaid cards ?) A lot of it will depend on where you are. If you're in or near a major city most any of the companies around Cingular, Verizon, T-Mobile, Alltel, Virgin Mobile, etc. will likely work similarly in that you'll have to have a compatible phone and subscribe to a company's network. You'll buy refill vouchers usually in amounts of anywhere from $5 to $100. The refills will have "expiration" times by which you either need to make a call or add more money to the account to keep the account from being discontinued. If you keep track of the account and add more money generally the money you alreay have in the account stays there and is just added to by the new refill you add to your account. You cannot however just "forget" about it. You'll need to do something such as add money periodically to keep the account. ------------------------------ Date: 7 Feb 2005 05:54:25 -0000 From: John Levine Subject: Re: Any Recommendations re: Economy Internet Phone Service? Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I personally use Vonage, which works > with any telephone you wish to plug in and use. I am hearing rumors > that their customer service is slipping a little; that may be due to > the *huge* increase in their customer base in recent months. PAT] It's no rumor -- I'm about to cancel my Vonage account as soon as the number is ported away which is supposed to happen on Wednesday. It used to be fine but in recent months the voice quality became terrible and I was completely unable to contact any live people at Vonage at all. Multiple e-mails went unanswered other than the auto-ack, and every time I tried to call them, once I went through the menu to the point where I would queue for a person, I always got a busy signal. Too bad, they used to be good. I'm now using Lingo, the voice quality is OK and the local calling area is much larger. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Interesting you mention how you work your way through the menu up to the point the next voice will be a human being, then it goes to busy sigal. Same thing has happened to me a lot recently; high noon, midnight, even five in the morning. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V24 #57 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Feb 8 14:09:28 2005 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j18J9Sj23104; Tue, 8 Feb 2005 14:09:28 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2005 14:09:28 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200502081909.j18J9Sj23104@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 V24 #58 TELECOM Digest Tue, 8 Feb 2005 14:10:00 EST Volume 24 : Issue 58 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Bush Wants to Revive Digital TV Fees (Monty Solomon) A U.S. First: Dish Network Interactive Shopping Channel (Monty Solomon) Nepal Telephone Service - International Restored (Carl Moore) Qsig (Gareth) Fomer WorldCom CFO Sullivan Testifies in Ebbers Trial (Telecom Daily) Re: Old Party-Line Arrangements (Dave Garland) Re: Old Party-Line Arrangements (Wesrock@aol.com) Re: Old Party-Line Arrangements (Tom Lager) Re: AT&T Inventions Fueled Tech Boom, And Its Own Fall (Fred Goldstein) Re: A Child Learns a Harsh Lesson in Politics (Linc Madison) Re: A Child Learns a Harsh Lesson in Politics (Joseph) Re: I'm Searching For a Budget Pipe Pefere oc3. (T. Sean Weintz) Re: Motorola v550 - Picture Downloading?? (jmeissen@aracnet.com) Re: One in 20 People May Have a Mobile Phone Illness (Robert Bonomi) Re: Digital Cellular Sound Quality (Tim@Backhome.org) Re: Need Recommendations For Economy Pay as You Go Cell Phones (D Esan) Re: Digital Cellular Sound Quality (Joseph) Re: Hackers, Virus Writers Target Mobile Phones (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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2005 08:58:59 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Bush Wants to Revive Digital TV Fees By Brooks Boliek WASHINGTON (Hollywood Reporter) - President Bush is attempting to revive a plan that would require broadcasters to pay a $500 million fee for use of their current analog TV channels in 2007. The plan is part of the $2.57 trillion budget proposal Bush presented to Congress on Monday. While Bush has pushed the plan in previous budget proposals to no avail, it could see some action in the 109th Congress as pressure is mounting to get broadcasters to make the switch to digital TV. In the past, broadcasters could depend on their allies in Congress to kill the plan. But one of their key supporters, Rep. Billy Tauzin, R-La., the former chairman of the House Commerce Committee, has retired. Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas, runs the committee now, and he is decidedly less friendly to the industry. Currently, broadcasters are required to stop analog transmissions at the end of 2006, or when 85% of the American TV viewing audience receives a digital signal, whichever comes later. The 85% number has long been considered an unreachable goal. Last week, Barton warned broadcasters that he is out of patience, telling reporters that he wants Congress to enact a "hard date" that would force broadcasters to shut off their analog transmissions by year's end. Proposals to stop analog broadcasts so the frequencies can be auctioned off have become more appealing because of budgetary pressure, Barton said. http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=televisionNews&storyID=7562718 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2005 09:13:52 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: A U.S. First: Dish Network Offers Interactive Shopping Channel Satellite News While interactive television is fairly common in the European television markets, it hasn't yet caught on in a significant way in the United States, but EchoStar Communications Corp. is hoping to change all of that. The company which already offers a variety of interactive services, EchoStar will be the first television company in either the cable or satellite side of the market to offer the ability to shop through the interactive functions on its Dish Network direct-to-home satellite television service. The service, to be launched later this month, was developed in partnership with high-tech gadget retailer Sharper Image and offers Dish subscribers the ability to purchase selected items from their catalog from the comfort of the living room. According to Scott Higgins, director of interactive programming for EchoStar, the service works like this: viewers enter the interactive portal and select the Sharper Image channel. After browsing the catalog and making a selection, the view, through the remote control, is prompted to enter credit card information. That information is shipped directly to Sharper Image for order processing. http://www.hoovers.com/free/news/detail.xhtml?ArticleID=NR200502071675.5.10_1c76001f55bd9957 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2005 11:46:12 EST From: Carl Moore Subject: Nepal Telephone Service -- International Restored I have seen a news story that Nepal has restored international telephone service. I guess that anything starting with the international access code during the outage got blocked (I don't know how many digits had to be present before the blockage occurred). What would have happened for calls from elsewhere to Nepal? (In 1990 during Persian Gulf crisis, at least AT&T blocked calls to Kuwait when such calls got to some international call-processing center and the Kuwait country code was recognized.) ------------------------------ Subject: Qsig From: Gareth Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2005 11:48:11 +0000 We are planning to purchase a NEC Neax switch and connect this using QSig to an existing Samsung DCS Gateway. We already use QSig to connect together 3 Samsung DCS Gateway systems. As each vendor is unable or unwilling to guarantee the compatibility of their swiches, I am looking for advice. I know that the whole point of QSig is to connect equipment from different vendors and I would not expect this to be a problem, but I want to verify this before I continue. On an immediate basis, so that the planning can continue, I want to confirm that, in principle, that the Samsung and NEC switches can be connected using QSig to provide the basic level QSig service. QSig is supported on both these switches. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2005 13:01:00 EST From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA Subject: Fomer WorldCom CFO Sullivan Testifies in Ebbers Trial Telecom dailyLead from USTA February 8, 2005 http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=19260&l=2017006 TODAY'S HEADLINES NEWS OF THE DAY * Fomer WorldCom CFO Sullivan testifies in Ebbers trial BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH * Sprint may unload cell-phone towers * BellSouth picks Alcatel, Redback for network upgrade * Spamhaus says spam program resides on MCI computers * EarthLink reports earnings USTA SPOTLIGHT * Announcing Phone Facts Plus 2005 EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES * Tech companies announce superchip * Tandberg unveils video-communications technology REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE * Nextel agrees to spectrum exchange Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others. http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=19260&l=2017006 ------------------------------ From: Dave Garland Subject: Re: Old Party-Line Arrangements Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2005 00:34:06 -0600 Organization: Wizard Information On 7 Feb 2005 06:08:45 -0000, in comp.dcom.telecom Pat wrote: > She said the old biddies on the party line would set the phone in a > galvanized laundry tub, so even if they were sitting out on the > front porch on a hot summer night, they would all hear that > (amplified by the galvanized tub) 'tick sound', and the front-porch > ladies would quietly slip inside and try to listen/spy on the > neighbor who had received the phone call, to find out who had called > and what they were talking about. When I was a kid in the '50s in rural New York, I think we probably had an 8 or 10 party line. There were several ring codes, and a cardboard cheat sheet that told how to call other parties on the line (IIRC, each party had a different 2-digit code that you dialed, then hung up and, I think, waited for your own phone to stop ringing, indicating that the other party had picked up). By the early '60s, the number of parties had dropped to about 4. Somebody had finally turned the local corner store in to the phone company for using the residential party line as their business line. The personal phone equipment in my room, in addition to my contraband extension (constructed of an ear and mic element taped to an improvised handle ... there was no insulation so it was unwise to have it touching both your ear and your mouth when a ring signal applied ringing voltage between the two points.. and a box with a toggle on-off hookswitch and a SPST NC button switch used for dialing, to dial 9 press 9 times), included a small 3-transistor amp from a defunct tape recorder attached to the line, so I could listen to party-line conversations without going offhook. As most other eavesdroppers have probably found, 95% of the conversations were extremely boring. ------------------------------ From: Wesrock@aol.com Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2005 20:51:38 EST Subject: Re: Old Party-Line Arrangements In a message dated 7 Feb 2005 06:08:45 -0000, John Levine writes: > Only on manual exchanges where you saw a lot of numbers like 1234J, or > it was just spelled out, e.g. my mother's phone number in Bell > territory in Vermont in the 1930s and 40s was six two ring three. > (Not that she ever needed to use it since the operator knew her and > would reroute calls, e.g., "your mother's playing bridge at the > Cliffords' tonight, shall I ring her there?") The letter usually used in manual exchanges were J and W on two party, with R and M added on four-party. (Lines with more than four parties had other conventions.) However, I lived in Konawa, Oklahoma, in the early 1950s and it was a small step-by-step office with terminal per line. In offices with terminal per line, an additional digit did identify the party and ringing current to be applied. (It also meant there was no effective means of intercept when party lines were regrouped.) Single party lines occupied the 2XX number series (my office number was 234) -- all three digits. Party lines were assigned numbers in the 4XXX series (first three digits identified the line, fourth digit designated the party and ringing to be applied). The four digits were written in a single block. Terminal-per-station became almost universal, of course, because of the problems with terminal-per-line and a party digit. Wes Leatherock wesrock@aol.com wleathus@yahoo.com ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Old Party-Line Arrangements From: Youremail@isp.mil.easynews.com (Tom Lager) Organization: Disorganized Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2005 16:52:40 GMT JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com (Joseph) wrote in : > On Sun, 6 Feb 2005 11:14:23 -0000, Paul Coxwell > wrote: >> I've gleaned from various sources, including some old Digest posts, >> that in the U.S. there were various methods employed, including up to >> 10-way party lines with the last digit of the number selecting tip or >> ring and the appropriate ringing cadence. > This is generally the case only where the equipment used was "terminal > per line" as opposed to "terminal per station." In terminal per line > set ups the last digit always indicated the cadence of the ringing > with 10 possible combinations for both tip and ring side of the line > so that it might be possible to have 5 different ringing cadences > depending on what your number is e.g. the last digit of 1 on the ring > side of the line you'd have a single ring, 2 two rings, 3 one long and > a short, 4 one long a short and a long, and 5 being five short rings. > Repeated for the remaining digits on the tip side. > In terminal per station you could have any ringing combination but it > was determined at the central office (switch.) >> I've also seen references >> to tuned ringers with ringing applied at a different frequency for >> each party, and to party-line numbers having an additional digit >> (coded as a letter) added the end of the regular number. > Mostly used by independents rather than by the Bell System. >> When it comes to outgoing calls once DDD and CAMA had arrived, I've >> seen references to different ringer wiring combinations to enable the >> equipment to test for originating party, and also in the earlier days >> of DDD that in some places (maybe small independents?) callers had to >> dial an ID digit (e.g. 1x + NPA + number). > On two-party lines whether it was tip or ring determined whether > either party would be charged and you could use AMA. With four party > you used CAMA and an operator would come on the line to ask what your > number was. > Independents used "ID" digit. When I started here (1970) we had a Federal stepper. The terminal-per-line shelves used the second digit of the station for the ring digit. For example 5195 was party 1, 5295 was party 2, etc. up to 5095 was party 0. We had five frequency grounded ringing (Synchromonic) so each party only got their own ring. Circle digit toll ID was done with North Electric "Autollizer" The sleeve lead from the line was connected through a diode to ground via a jumper that went through a "ring field" When the customer dialed the circle digit a current spike flowed through the jumper and induced a voltage in the coils of each ring through which the jumper was run. This identified the line in a register/sender that was incorporated into the toll trunk. Billing info was sent to a tape punch at the end of the call. Tapes were "read" once per week in small offices, daily in the big offices, and 90 column cards were created for shipment to the data center where bills were produced. The C.O. was a noisy place then. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 07 Feb 2005 22:37:21 -0500 From: Fred Goldstein Subject: Re: AT&T Inventions Fueled Tech Boom, And Its Own Fall On 7 Feb 2005 10:06:10 -0800 hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com said, > As a monopoly in electro-mechanical technology for the U.S., it made > sense for AT&T have a strong staff for planning. This is what made > the U.S. telephone network so reliable and robust compared to the rest > of the world. Both internal and customer equipment were tested, > re-test, field tested extensive before going out the door. AT&T had > very few "Edsels" over its history. > But with the coming of widespread electronics coupled with divesture > coupled with customer owned equipment, this staff was simply no longer > necessary. The old AT&T had its share of Edsels. The 101ESS was notorious, for one, and the 1964 Picturephone wasted what, a billion clams or so? But as a monopoly, there were no Buicks and Chryslers to compete with the Edsels. > Some critics blame the mgmt of AT&T and IBM for allowing the companies > to be top-heavy. I don't agree. At the time the people were hired, > there was a need for their skills. At the time they were hired, they > still had a to support a network antiquated by today's standards. No, AT&T remained fat well after divestiture, and it was fat with young blood as well as old. I was working in corporate telecom functions in the 1980s and 1990s. When AT&T showed up for a meeting -- for instance, to tell us about a new product or feature -- they would not just send the person with the information, or two people the way their competitors might. They'd send a small army! Usually one person to give the talk, that person's boss to watch them carefully and be sure they toed the line, and eight or nine others to line the room and make sure there were no empty chairs. Most said nothing and added no value. It was the same at standards meetings in the late 1980s -- AT&T would send scores of people, far more than anyone else. Most said nothing. Their only purpose seemed to be that when the Working Groups needed "consensus" to advance something (voting was only at Plenary), AT&T's own bodies looked like a near-consensus just by their own nodding together. Lou hit the nail on the head. It was a desperately mismanaged company. (earlier) >> ... It was an overbearing monopoly before its breakup ... > No it was not. It's monopoly status did not result from anything > AT&T did, but rather from edicts from the state and federal govts > explicitly defining what AT&T could do. Note that AT&T was also > forbidden to act in many other markets, including those it had once > developed products (ie motion picture sound systems). AT&T was > strictly limited in what it could do and what it could charge; > people forget that there was much it could NOT do. Let's get the history straight. I researched this for my new book, "The Great Telecom Meltdown" (Artech House), which just came out. (Pat, a review copy should be en route somewhere soon.) The monopoly didn't just happen. AT&T had a total monopoly from 1876 to 1893 because of the (questionable) Bell patent (17 years). Then there was a lot of competition, but AT&T bought Pupin's (questionable) patent on the loading coil, giving them a monopoly on long distance. There were however a lot of CLECs ("Independents", many then competing in Bell areas) a hundred years ago. In 1912, the Kingsbury Commitment allowed Independents to interconnect via Bell, but stopped Bell from buying up most Independents. Competition waned, and by the time of the Communications Act of 1934 it was dead, replaced by a regulated-utility model that AT&T preferred. AT&T largely controlled its regulators (as the Bells do now). Its telephone monopoly safe, its Western Electric competed in many areas, such as motion picture sound and broadcast transmitters. The Department of Justice brought an antitrust suit (US vs. Western Electric) in 1949, and the 1956 Final Judgment limited WECo to supporting Bell. That was reopened later and became the basis of Divestiture. >> Not since its early days has it been much of an innovator. > Most of our present day communication system owes itself to > innovations AT&T continued to make until divesture, not only in > technology, but also telecom administration. AT&T's version of telecom administration is, perhaps a model for Chinese industries that need to make inefficient use of surplus labor, while maintaining a strong authoritarian hierarchy. Its main job however was indeed to hold back innovation, partly because slow deprecation led to lower rates, which were politically popular. Fred R. Goldstein fgoldstein "at" ionary "dot" com ------------------------------ Subject: Re: A Child Learns a Harsh Lesson in Politics Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2005 00:30:49 -0800 From: Linc Madison Reply-To: lincmad@suespammers.org Organization: California resident; nospam; no unsolicited e-mail allowed In article , wrote: > Monty Solomon wrote: >> By JULIE SALAMON >> For adults, the fuss over a PBS children's television show >> featuring an animated bunny - and real lesbian mothers - was >> nothing new. But for Emma Riesner, 11, who was supposed to be a >> star of the now-controversial episode of "Postcards From Buster," >> what began as a participatory social studies lesson has become a >> harsh lesson in exclusionary politics. > That "a harsh lesson ..." description isn't accurate. > What the kid learned was that show business is tough. No, actually, what the kid learned was "a harsh lesson in (exclusionary) politics," exactly as described. The show wasn't pulled for reasons having anything at all to do with "show business," but entirely for reasons of politics. > In the case of this particular show, keep in mind that the family > structure it used is very rare in real life. Actually, again, no it isn't "very rare in real life." There are thousands upon thousands of such families in America, and more of them every single day. The show was not pulled because of any fear of alienating viewers. The show was pulled because of pressure from government officials. Linc Madison * San Francisco, California * lincmad@suespammers.org * primary e-mail: Telecom at LincMad dot com All U.S. and California anti-spam laws apply, incl. CA BPC 17538.45(c) This text constitutes actual notice as required in BPC 17538.45(f)(3). DO NOT SEND UNSOLICITED E-MAIL TO THIS ADDRESS. You have been warned. ------------------------------ From: Joseph Subject: Re: A Child Learns a Harsh Lesson in Politics Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2005 08:26:05 -0800 Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com On 7 Feb 2005 13:22:19 -0800, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: > In the case of this particular show, keep in mind that the family > structure it used is very rare in real life. But how realistic is it to completely rub it out as if to show that such things do not exist? "Protecting" children from the reality of life is a disservice to them. ------------------------------ From: T. Sean Weintz Subject: Re: I'm Searching For a Budget Pipe Pefere oc3. Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2005 12:15:09 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Globeadue wrote: > I'm looking for some sorta fat pipe for my systems. I'm just a > hobbyist(gaming, family network and servers). What I have are some very > very nice OC3 voip sequencers sq-1000's from cetacean that I'd like to > get running. I'm in Georgia and if anyone knows a way for non business > user to get a line under $200/m I'd love to hear about it. LOL ... Under $200 a month for an OC3? While your at it why not ask for a brand new high performace sports car for under $200 as well. $200 is WAY outta the ball park for OC3 service. Add a zero on the end. ------------------------------ From: jmeissen@aracnet.com Subject: Re: Motorola v550 - Picture Downloading?? Date: 8 Feb 2005 17:53:43 GMT Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com In article , wrote: > In article , Pete L > wrote: >> What I cannot seem to do is download pictures from it to my PC. > We made the mistake of inserting the Bluetooth adapter and just > expecting XP to "do the right thing", as it usually does. A quick follow-up ... The installation instructions that came with the dongle explicitly stated that you MUST install the software BEFORE plugging in the dongle. That's because once you plug it in, XP associates its own driver, which it considers to be more "correct" than anything you try to install later and hence will never be replaced. The same problem can occur if you apply SP2, since it will replace any existing manufacturer's driver with its own. This KB article describes the procedure to fix the problem. Remove the dongle, follow the procedure to remove the XP driver (I used the Device Manager to remove the device, deleted the file, then rebooted), then install the software that came with the dongle, THEN plug the dongle in and establish the association with the phone. http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;840635 Hopefully that will correct the problem. It worked for us. Once we got the dongle's software installed the rest was a breeze and my daughter is happily moving pictures back and forth between her PC and the phone. John Meissen jmeissen@aracnet.com ------------------------------ From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) Subject: Re: One in 20 People May Have a Mobile Phone Illness Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2005 10:14:48 -0000 Organization: Widgets, Inc. In article , Marcus Didius Falco wrote: > http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2091-1463100,00.html > The Sunday Times - Ireland > Richard Oakley > UP TO 5% of the population may be suffering ill health as a result of > radiation from mobile phones and masts, according to a group of Irish > doctors fighting for official acceptance of the problem. > ....... In a study to be released this week, the doctors will say > they have identified 16 people whom they believe have been adversely > affected by radiation. ..... > ..... It wants special screens for the 16 people in > the study, to see if their conditions improve when radiation is > blocked. > ...... McCrory blames nearby mobile phone masts for her > illness and said she can t leave her house because masts are > everywhere now . I can't sleep, my head pounds, my skin burns and I > get a painful pumping sensation from head to toe. It has got so bad > that I feel suicidal, she said. Oh Lordie, Lordie! That's some of the *FUNNIEST* stuff I've read in _years_. Cell-phone base stations, like cell-phones themselves, scale down their transmit power to the minimum level needed for reliable communication. In a *worst*case* scenario -- where the phone has to run at full power out, the cell tower might be transmitting an entire TEN WATTS. And, of course, the more cells there are in the area, the *LOWER* the power output from any transmitter -- because the 'range' to the cell 'edge' (i.e., where some other tower is closer to the phone) is a smaller distance. Less transmit power is required to make for an 'acceptable' signal level at the 'worst case' point of reception. In metropolitan areas, the 'radius' of a cell is a few miles, at *most*. A "legal power" TV station transmitter will produce similar signal levels at receivers more than FIFTY MILES away from the transmitter. (Stations on the "Central Iowa Telefarm", at Alleman, Iowa -- between Des Moines and Ames, claim an _85_ mile radius for their "service area". With high-gain receiving antennas, double that distance is possible.) If you're within a mile of such a TV transmitter, the signal levels are some 2500(!!) times higher than the _maximum_ from a cell tower. If the 85 mile number is to be believed, you can roughly _triple_ that number (some what over 7200). It's positively *amazing* that these people are susceptible to cell-phone tower transmissions, but don't seem to be bothered by TV, "business two-way", "Police/Fire/Ambulance", taxi-cab, etc., etc., that all generate much *HIGHER* signal levels in the atmosphere. *AT*SIMILAR*FREQUENCIES*. I've got fifty thousand -- no, make that fifty *million* -- quatloos that says that you could shut any of those 'victims' of this "illness" in a large "Faraday Cage", along with a cell-phone transmitter/antenna (behind a wall where they couldn't see it), and they would be utterly *unable* to tell if or when that transmitter was operating. For those who don't know what a Faraday Cage is, it is a totally shielded enclosure. *NO* RF energy from the 'outside world' will reach the inside of the enclosure. Nothing from inside it, will get out, either. ------------------------------ From: Tim@Backhome.org Subject: Re: Digital Cellular Sound Quality Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2005 06:32:03 -0800 Organization: Cox Communications Jeffrey Mattox wrote: > [Please withhold my email address.] > My old analog cell phone, a Nokia 918, has a cheap, grandfathered rate > plan, so I'm not likely to upgrade unless Cingular rips out their > analog equipment. Get this: the phone's logo is "Ameritech"! > Whenever I have a conversation with a modern cell phone user, it's > digital-ness is highly obvious because the sound quality is so bad. > I assumed digital meant higher quality. Even today, digital is called > "advanced technology." To wit: > Digital phones use advanced technology that converts voices > into numeric code, which is then transmitted to the phone and > decoded. ... Reception, sound quality, battery life, and > security features are superior to analog. > http://www.staples.com/content/Article/C-D/CellularWireless.asp > Well, it not very advanced from my perspective -- it's a step > backward. And to say that digital "sound quality .. [is] superior" is > a lie. Because of the low sample rate (is it 8 KHz?), it's not > possible to reconstruct perfect speech. Your complaint reminds me of the mother watching her son marching with his company in a military graduation ceremony. He his out of step with the others, but mom says sonny is fine, all the others are out of step. ;-) My Cingular digital phone sounds great on all connections. ------------------------------ From: david_esan@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Need Recommendations for Economy "Pay as You Go" Cell Phones Date: 8 Feb 2005 07:04:46 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com kimshapiro100@yahoo.com wrote: > Need recommendations for economy "pay as you go" cell phones. > This is for a 10 year old child in California -- to be used ONLY in > EMERGENCY situations. I think we went over this about 3 months ago. I suggest that you check the archives. Someone had a really good web site that compared various pay-as-you-go plans. If I remember correctly the winner was 7-11 who had a cheap phone, and a low per minute cost. Refills were required every 120 days, rather than the 90 that Virgin Mobile required. It is important to check the coverage maps that are available on line. There were AT&T Wireless plans that were fantastic, but the area in which my wife travels to work was not on network, and a very expensive roaming charge applied. ------------------------------ From: Joseph Subject: Re: Digital Cellular Sound Quality Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2005 08:19:10 -0800 Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com On Mon, 7 Feb 2005 03:48:31 -0600, Jeffrey Mattox wrote: > Is this situation ever likely to be improved? Why isn't it possible > to sample at a higher rate, compress the result in the phone for > transmission, and then decompress at the base (and do the same thing > for the reverse channel)? Are all digital cellular phones the same? > Aren't many people bothered by the horrible sound quality? The sound quality is due to the codec that's used. What follows is opinion only and should not be taken for the last word. CDMA as offered by Sprint PCS, Verizon, etc. uses a codec that is inferior and is prone to "metalic" sounding conversations. GSM on the other hand uses a different codec and to most people the quality of audio is almost on par with that used in traditional wireline telephony. I use GSM through a Cellsocket adapter and no one can tell that I am using a mobile phone. ------------------------------ From: Joseph Subject: Re: Hackers, Virus Writers Target Mobile Phones Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2005 08:21:28 -0800 Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com On 07 Feb 2005 09:25:31 -0800, Lisa Minter wrote: > Hackers can scoop up calendars, contact lists and other sensitive > information, or turn a mobile phone into a bugging device to secretly > listen in on conversations. Mobile viruses that spread through the air > can disable phones completely. Are these articles written by Lisa? If not there's no indication where this information comes from. It would be nice if there was at least some attribution for where articles such as this one come from. Or does copyright not count on usenet and the the Telecom Digest? ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. ************************ 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 V24 #58 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Feb 9 03:45:40 2005 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j198jdr28577; Wed, 9 Feb 2005 03:45:40 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2005 03:45:40 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200502090845.j198jdr28577@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 V24 #59 TELECOM Digest Wed, 9 Feb 2005 03:45:00 EST Volume 24 : Issue 59 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Microsoft Issues 8 'Critical' Software Patches (Lisa Minter) Paper Submission Deadline Reminder: IEEE Conference on Service(SCC 2005) Triple-Play Broadband Resources (aminamor@gmail.com) Re: Old Party-Line Arrangements (Paul Coxwell) Re: Old Party-Line Arrangements (Wesrock@aol.com) Re: Old Party-Line Arrangements (Lisa Hancock) Re: Need Recommendations for Economy Pay as You Go Cell Phones (E.Ranck) Re: Any Recommendations re: Economy Internet Phone Service? (timeOday) Re: Need Recommendations for Economy Pay as You Go Cell Phones (surplus) Re: Supermarket: Let Your Fingers do the Paying (ranck@vt.edu) Re: Supermarket: Let Your Fingers do the Paying (Lisa Hancock) Re: AT&T Inventions Fueled Tech Boom, And Its Own Fall (Lisa Hancock) Old vs. New Doctors - Communication and Technology (Lisa Hancock) Re: Digital Cellular Sound Quality (EventHelix.com) Re: E-Bay to Cut Fees, Expand Customer Support (Dave Close) Last Laugh! Stop Junk Faxes! (wal) 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: 08 Feb 2005 22:11:14 -0800 From: Lisa Minter Subject: Microsoft Issues 8 'Critical' Software Patches NOTE: It must have been a busy day at Bill Gates' shop Tuesday. By Brian Krebs, washingtonpost.com Staff Writer Microsoft Corp. today released a dozen software patches to cover 16 security flaws -- half of which it deemed "critical" -- in all versions of the Windows operating system and a broad range of popular Microsoft applications such as its Internet chat and media player products. The Redmond, Wash.-based software giant issued patches to mend a total of 16 security flaws, with more than half addressing security glitches found in Service Pack 2, the massive software security upgrade Microsoft made available to Windows XP users last August. Security experts said a weakness in Windows disclosed today could become a vehicle for the next big Internet virus outbreak. The flaw involves the "server message block" service enabled by default in every version of Microsoft Windows that allows users to share files on a network. Attackers could potentially exploit the weakness over the Internet without any action by the user, but only if a computer was not already protected by firewall software. Hackers could also exploit it by tricking a user into clicking on a specially crafted Web link in an e-mail. "Out of all of the vulnerabilities, this one is the most likely to become the next widespread Internet worm," said Oliver Friedrichs, senior director of security response for Symantec Corp., a Cupertino, Calif.-based Internet security company. Microsoft also issued a bundle of six fixes for vulnerabilities in its widely used Internet Explorer Web browser. One of the flaws was recently exploited by "phishers," criminals who engage in identity theft by creating authentic-looking e-mail messages and Web sites designed to lure people to disclosing personal financial data. Two of the vulnerabilities were used recently by hackers to sneak spyware onto users' computers. Experts said today's batch of patches shows that hackers are increasingly looking for ways to bypass automatic computer network defenses erected by growing numbers of business and home computer users. Half of the vulnerabilities detailed today require action by a user -- such as clicking a link in an e-mail or attached word-processing document -- before attackers could gain control of a computer. "We recommend that in any situation where you receive a link or file from someone that you use extreme caution," said Stephen Toulouse, Microsoft's security program manager. He suggested users check with the sender before opening a link or file that appears suspicious. Today's patch release included critical fixes for a number of Windows software products, including the MSN Messenger Internet chat program, Windows Media Player, and Microsoft Office, the suite of programs that includes Microsoft Word, Excel and PowerPoint. One critical software patch specific to corporate Windows users fixes a vulnerability in Microsoft's "license logging service," which helps companies keep track of of their licensed installations of Windows. The service is enabled automatically all Windows 2000 Windows NT, and Server 2003 computers, and could allow hackers to infiltrate a corporate network, said Abe Mounce, director of research for Atlanta-based Internet Security Systems Inc. The security hole in Microsoft's chat software affects MSN Messenger versions 6.1 and 6.2. Users of those versions will be prompted when they next open the program to download and install a new version of the program. Users can download most of the patches at windowsupdate.microsoft.com Microsoft has repeatedly urged Windows XP users to turn on the program's "automatic update" service, which can fetch and install patches from Microsoft automatically after they are made available. But that service does not retrieve patches for Microsoft Office, so users who have Office installed must visit the Office Update Web site, and then click on the "check for updates" link in the upper right-hand corner of the page. This month's batch of patches brings the total number of critical vulnerabilities Microsoft has identified in 2005 to 10. Last year, Microsoft released a total of 25 "critical" security fixes. The patches were released on the same day that Microsoft announced that it is buying Sybari Software Inc., an East Northport, N.Y.-based company specializing in e-mail security for corporate clients. Terms of the deal were not disclosed. The Associated Press reported that the acquisition -- and word that Microsoft is gearing up to release its first set of commercial antivirus products -- could help the software giant take business away from leading Internet security companies like Symantec and Santa Clara, Calif.-based McAfee Inc. Over the past two years, Microsoft has made several acquisitions aimed at bolstering its security offerings. The company bought a Romanian Internet security firm in 2003. In December, it bought Giant Company Software Inc., which makes tools to remove spyware. 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 ------------------------------ From: LiangJie Zhang Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2005 20:56:49 -0500 Subject: Paper Deadline Reminder: IEEE Conference on Services Computing I wanted to use this note to remind you that the paper submission deadline of IEEE International Conference onn Services Computing (SCC 2005) is approaching. Thank you very much for your great support. 2005 IEEE International Conference on Services Computing (SCC 2005) =================================================================== July 12-15, 2005, Orlando, Florida, USA Sponsored by IEEE Computer Society http://conferences.computer.org/scc/2005 Theme: Bridge the Gap between Business Services and IT Services Services now account for more than half of the U.S. economy. Services Computing, as a new cross discipline, addresses how to enable IT technology to help people perform business services more efficiently and effectively. As we can see, Services Computing currently shapes the processes of business modeling, business consulting, solution creation, service delivery, and software architecture design, development and deployment, monitoring and management. The 2005 IEEE International Conference on Services Computing (SCC 2005) aims to the topics of bridging the gap between Business Services and IT Services with a new ground breaking technology suite that includes Web services and service-oriented architecture (SOA), business strategy and design, business process integration and performance management, and utility/grid computing. It is sponsored by the IEEE Computer Society Technical Committee on Services Computing and will be co-located with the 2005 IEEE International Conference on Web Services (ICWS 2005). The theme of this joint IEEE conference on SERVICES is 'Bridge the Gap between Business Services and IT Services'. Since Web Services is an IT technology, ICWS 2005 will put its focus on all aspects of IT infrastructure services. SCC 2005 concentrates on business services, business solutions, and the bridging technologies such as Business Strategy and Design, Business Process Integration and Management, SOA, and Grid and Utility Computing. SCC 2004 was held in Shanghai, China, September 15-18, 2004. A total of 330 papers were submitted to SCC 2004. Submissions were from over 30 countries and regions. 37 were accepted as full research papers, 9 were accepted as short papers, and 50 were accepted as special session papers. SCC 2005 has the following major research tracks: Foundations of Services Computing, Service-Oriented Architecture (SOA), Grid/Utility Computing, and Business Process Management and Business Integration. SCOPE: Topics of interest include, but are not limited to, the following: Foundations of Services Computing - Business Strategy and Design - Services science - Services Modeling - Service-oriented business consulting methodology and utilities - Services delivery - Servicesvalue chain and innovation lifecycle Service-Oriented Architecture (SOA) - Service-Oriented Architecture (SOA) - SOA Solution Stack - SOA Industry Standards - SOA Industry Solutions Business Process Management and Business Integration - Enterprise Modeling - Business process modeling, transformation and integration - Business performance management - Software architecture design, development and deployment (software as a service) - Application integration services (e.g. Enterprise Service Bus) - Service Level Automation and Orchestration - Industry solution patterns - e-Business Solutions Grid/Utility Computing - Grid Computing - Utility Computing - Utility Business Services SCC 2005 Special Tracks: Special Track 1: IEEE SCC 2005 Special Track on Service Provisioning Strategies Special Track 2: IEEE SCC 2005 Special Track on Business in the Grid SUBMISSION OF PAPERS: Authors are invited to submit original, unpublished research papers that are not being considered in another forum. Manuscripts will be limited to 8-10 (IEEE Proceeding style) pages and be printed on 10 or 12 size font. Please follow the IEEE Computer Society Press Proceedings Author Guidelines to prepare your papers. Electronic submission of manuscripts (in PDF or Word format) is required. Detailed Instructions for electronic paper submission, panel proposals, tutorial proposals, and review process can be found at http://conferences.computer.org/scc/2005/ . The length of the camera-ready of an accepted paper will be limited to 8 (IEEE style) pages. At least one author of each accepted paper is required to attend the conference and present the paper. The IEEE SCC 2005 Proceedings will be collected in EI Compendex. The detailed submission instructions can be found at SCC 2005 web site. The enhanced version of the selected best papers published in the SCC 2005 will be invited ! to publication in the International Journal of Web Services Research (JWSR) (by Idea Group) and possibly other related journals. Some speakers of the keynotes, panels, and tutorials will be invited to submit articles to extend their presentations for IEEE IT Professional Magazine. EVALUATION PROCESS: All submissions will be evaluated for originality, significance, clarity, and soundness. Each paper will be refereed by at least two to three researchers in the topical area. BEST STUDENT PAPER AWARDS: One Best Paper award and 1-3 Best Student Paper Awards will be presented by SCC 2005. The first author of the best student papers should be full-time students. IMPORTANT DATES: Abstract Submission Deadline: Feb. 14, 2005 (Monday) - NEW! Paper Submission due date: Feb. 14, 2005 (Monday) - NEW! Decision Notification (electronic): April 11, 2005 (Monday) - NEW! Camera-Ready copy due date & Pre-registration due: April 29, 2005 (Friday) - NEW! General Chairs: Carl K. Chang (Iowa State University, USA) Liang-Jie (LJ) Zhang (IBM T. J. Watson Research Center, USA) Program Committee Chairs: Frank Leymann (University of Stuttgart, Germany) Sandeep Purao (Pennsylvania State University, USA) Hai Jin (Huazhong University of Science and Technology, China) Industrial Track Chairs: Ali Arsanjani (IBM Global Services, USA) Wu Chou (Avaya Labs Research, USA) Joseph Williams (Microsoft, USA) Panel Chairs: Frank Ferrante (Editor in Chief, IEEE IT Professional Magazine, USA) Dejan S. Milojicic (Hewlett-Packard Laboratories, USA) J. Leon Zhao (University of Arizona, USA) Publicity Chairs: Patrick C. K. Hung (University of Ontario Institute of Technology, Canada) Anup Kumar (University of Louisville, USA) Elena Ferrari (University of Insubria at Como, Italy) Tutorial Chair: Ling Liu (Georgia Institute of Technology, USA) Job Fair Chair: Hemant Jain (University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee, USA) Finance Chair: Johnny Wong (Iowa State University, USA) Publication Chair: Gurpur Prabhu (Iowa State University, USA) Awards Chair: Rong N Chang (IBM T.J. Watson Research Center, USA) Poster Chairs: Graciela Gonzalez (Sam Houston State University, USA) Jia Zhang (Northern Illinois University, USA) Web Chair: Jinchun Xia (Iowa State University, USA) Registration Chair: Dingding Lu (Iowa State University, USA) Technical Program Committee Bajaj, Akhilesh (The University of Tulsa) Bertino, Elisa (CERIAS Purdue University) Bhagavatula, Krishna (Tata Consultancy Services) Bu-Hulaiga, Ihsan Ali (Joatha Informatics Consulting Center (JICC)) Buyya, Rajkumar (The University of Melbourne) Cai, Guoray (Pennsylvania State University) Cai, Wentong (Nanyang Technological University) Cao, Jiannong (Hong Kong Polytechnic University) Chang, Rong N. (IBM T.J. Watson Research Center) Chen, Jian (Tsinghua University) CHEN, Ying (IBM China Research Lab) Cheung, David (The University of Hong Kong) Chiu, Dickson K.W. (Dickson Computer Systems) Chua, Cecil Eng Huang (Nanyang Technological University) Cooper, Brian F. (Georgia Institute of Technology) Dustdar, Schahram (Vienna University of Technology, Austria) Etzion, Opher (Active Technologies) Guo, Minyi (University of Aizu) Huhns, Michael N. (University of South Carolina) Iwano, Kazuo (IBM Corporation) Jacob, Varghese S. (University of Texas at Dallas) Katz, Daniel S. (JPL/Caltech, USA) King, Roger (Buzz) (University of Colorado at Boulder) King, Chung-Ta (National Tsing Hua University, Taiwan) Kishimoto, Hiro (Fujitsu Laboratories) Kitagawa, Hiroyuki (University of Tsukuba) Kreulen, Jeffrey T. (IBM Almaden Research Center) Lau, Francis C.M. (University of Hong Kong) Lee, Dongwon (Penn State University) Li, Wen-Syan (IBM Almaden Research Center) Li, Minglu (Shanghai Jiao Tong University) Lim, Ee-Peng (Nanyang Technological University) Lin, Geng (Cisco Systems, Inc.) Ludwig, Heiko (IBM TJ Watson Research Center) Luo, Min (IBM Global Services) Madria, Sanjay K. (University of Missouri-Rolla, USA) Mark, Leo (College of Computing, Georgia Tech, USA) Maximilien, E. Michael (IBM Almaden Research Center) Mehta, Kumar (University of Connecticut) Mitra, Prasenjit (Pennsylvania State University) Morar, John F (IBM T.J. Watson Research Center) Ouksel, Aris M. (The University of Illinois at Chicago) Potok, Thomas E. (Oak Ridge National Laboratory) Ramesh, Balasubramaniam (Georgia State University) Reinwald, Berthold (IBM Almaden Research Center) Ritter, Norbert (University of Hamburg) Rossi, Matti (Helsinki School of Economics) Shan, Ming-Chien (HP Laboratories) Sheth, Amit (LSDIS Lab, UGA and Semagix, Inc) Therani, Madhusudan (University of Arizona) Tsai, Jeffrey J.P. (University of Illinois at Chicago) Voruganti, Kaladhar (IBM Almaden Research) Wang, Cho-Li (University of Hong Kong) Xu, Zhiwei (Institute of Computing Technology (ICT)) Zhang, Yanqing (Georgia State University) Zhang, Yanchun (Victoria University, Australia) Zhao, J. Leon (University of Arizona) Zhao, Huimin (School of Business Administration, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee) Technical Steering Committee Carl K Chang (Iowa State University, USA) Ephraim Feig (Kintera Inc, USA) Hemant Jain (University of Wisconsin- Milwaukee , USA) Frank Leymann (University of Stuttgart, Germany) Minglu Li (Shanghai Jiaotong University, China) Jeffrey Tsai (University of Illinois at Chicago, USA) Calton Pu (Georgia Tech, USA) Zhiwei Xu (Institute of Computing Technology (ICT), China) Liang-Jie Zhang (IBM T.J. Watson Research Center, USA) ------------------------------ From: aminamor@gmail.com Subject: Triple-Play Broadband Resources Date: 8 Feb 2005 19:08:04 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Dear all, I'm in the process of collecting technical related documents and links for triple-play deployment. My objective is to list this links and document in the following site: . (Still under construction) that will be open to everybody. Could you please help by sending your current experience? * Internet access * Voice * TV and radio broadcast * Interactive TV * Backbone design * IAD * Any other possible services How to combine those services? Who is offering this type of service so far? You can contact me directly at the following address: aminamor@gmail.com or you can post your feedback in this forum. Thanks in advance A.Amor http://www.triplepaly.be Telecom and TV convergence becomes a triple-play reality. ------------------------------ From: Paul Coxwell Subject: Re: Old Party-Line Arrangements Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2005 00:10:32 -0000 Many thanks to all who have replied. The variety that existed in the old U.S. network makes for some interesting history compared to the British situation where the nationalized GPO (General Post Office) ran all but a couple of tiny independent companies and practices were pretty much standard right across the country. > Only on manual exchanges where you saw a lot of numbers like 1234J, or > it was just spelled out, e.g. my mother's phone number in Bell > territory in Vermont in the 1930s and 40s was six two ring three. Now I think about it, I've seen something like that on an old postcard from the 1950s (I think it was from a rural motel). The number shown was 421R2, or something similar to that, so presumably that's "ring 2" on the end. > In the 1970s, I knew people at non-Bell independents who used circle > digits, the extra digit to identify the calling phone. There was also > a surprising amount of ONI, operators cutting in to ask for your > number, even on private lines in Bell territory before ANI was > universal. Why the name "circle" digit? > included a small 3-transistor amp from a defunct tape recorder attached > to the line, so I could listen to party-line conversations without going > offhook. As most other eavesdroppers have probably found, 95% of the > conversations were extremely boring. I guess eavesdropping was a pretty widespread pasttime. In fact back about 25 years ago my parents were on a party line and I lashed up a similar arrangement to monitor calls. My amp was a home-brew kit using, if I recall correctly, EF80 and ECL80 tubes. > The letter usually used in manual exchanges were J and W on two party, > with R and M added on four-party. (Lines with more than four parties > had other conventions.) Is there any particular significance to the letters? Can anyone remember which letters were which combination of tip/ring and polarity/cadence, or is that going back a little too far? > In the Bell System, ground start was never used for residential > service. On two-party lines, the "tip" party would be wired with the > ringer (and, on occasion, a portion of the hybrid coil) connected > between the tip lead and ground, without an isolating capacitor, to > allow the CO to determine the billing party. If there was current flow > to ground, then the "tip" party was making the call. The wiring arrangements adopted by the GPO here meant that every phone intended for party-line use could be sent out into the field wired the same way. The switch had changeover contacts and was inserted into the "A" wire (GPO terminology for what would normally be the tip side of the line) so that when pressed it opened the loop and grounded the "B" wire (normally the ring side of the line) via the hybrid and remaining circuitry. The bell would then be wired from the "B" wire to ground. The two stations were designated X and Y. The X subscriber's set was wired the normal way, A to tip, B to ring, then all that was necessary when installing at the Y subscriber's premises was to swap A and B at the junction box. Thus X had ringing on ring and grounded ring for dialtone, while Y had ringing on tip and grounded the tip to originate a call. In SxS offices (which formed the majority of exchanges here for many years) there was a small relay set which then simply switched the line to the appropriate uniselector or linefinder on detecting the ground-start. Incoming calls were what you all describe as terminal-per-station and could come from completely separate final selectors (connectors) for each party, thus giving complete freedom on which two numbers would share the line. Party lines certainly survived in some areas quite a way into the 1980s. There are still shortages of pairs in some places these days, except now BT makes extensive use of DACS units to multiplex lines. Regards, Paul ------------------------------ From: Wesrock@aol.com Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2005 19:48:31 EST Subject: Re: Old Party-Line Arrangements In a message dated Tue, 08 Feb 2005 16:52:40 GMT, Youremail@isp.mil.easynews.com (Tom Lager) writes: > Billing info was sent to a tape punch at the end of the call. > Tapes were "read" once per week in small offices, daily in the big > offices, and 90 column cards were created for shipment to the data > center where bills were produced. The C.O. was a noisy place then. This reminds me many years ago when a Bell 5XB with AMA about 60 miles from the accounting office sent the wide yellow tapes (no conversion to punch cards) to the nearest accounting office by a package express company. Once the box never arrived and apparently fell off the truck. As in most such shipments, the carrier's liability was limited to $50 unless a high value was declared and paid for. There was an immediate hue and cry that every such shipment have the full value declared and the excess value fee paid. Cooler heads prevailed, and the matter was studied. The value of the calls on the lost AMA tapes was estimated at between $5,000 and $6,000. There had never been any other tapes lost since AMA offices were first installed in Oklahoma, and paying for the full value on all such shipments would amount to, as I recall, $500,000 a year. The idea of paying for the full value on all of them was hastily dropped. Wes Leatherock wesrock@aol.com ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) Subject: Re: Old Party-Line Arrangements Date: 8 Feb 2005 13:28:49 -0800 John Levine wrote: > In the 1970s, I knew people at non-Bell independents who used circle > digits, the extra digit to identify the calling phone. There was also > a surprising amount of ONI, operators cutting in to ask for your > number, even on private lines in Bell territory before ANI was > universal. My employer in 1973 had Centrex but suburban (message unit) and toll calls were ONI -- you dialed the number and a Bell operator came on and asked you for your number. (I believe the Centrex was run by step-by-step switch since it had secret digit absorbtion of the first digit of the extension. All our extensions began with "3" and you didn't need to dial that 3 except when calling 33xx. My co-workers were impressed when I discovered that.) My employer also used a cord switchboard; I thought all Centrex users had more modern consoles. AFAIK, ANI trailed direct-distance dialing in the Bell System. I would think being an ONI operator would be a pretty boring job -- all you did was enter 4 digits into a key pad all day long. TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response: > She said the old biddies on the party line would set the phone in a > galvanized laundry tub, so even if they were sitting out on the > front porch on a hot summer night, they would all hear that > (amplified by the galvanized tub) 'tick sound', and the front-porch > ladies would quietly slip inside and try to listen/spy on the > neighbor who had received the phone call, to find out who had called > and what they were talking about. PAT] From time to time people say "back in the good old days people were nicer, more respectful, etc." The above example -- which was very common -- shows this wasn't always the case. In my present complex, I joke that we should have our own private PBX connecting the apartments. We know a few "old biddies" who would jump at the chance to be operators so they could listen in to every call. Joseph wrote: > On two-party lines whether it was tip or ring determined whether > either party would be charged and you could use AMA. With four party > you used CAMA and an operator would come on the line to ask what your > number was. [repeating an old story] Back in the 1970s I was making a lot of toll calls from home (thank goodness for cheap after 11pm rates). We had a private line served by a #5 XBAR in a city. Suddenly, my phone bill didn't show any long distance calls. Month after month went by. I finally called the phone company and reported it and they denied anything was wrong. About a month later someone from the _business_ subscriber service (not residential) called me to report they found a problem with my line. The man said somehow my "tip and ring were confused with a business customer and my toll calls were charged to him; they reviewed the calls against my past usage and put them back on my bill; I would be allowed to pay it out over a few months." I don't know how the internals confused my line and this business's for billing purposes, his number wasn't anything like mine. But the toll calls were mine and my own calls showed up again. As I understood it, the businessman noticed my toll calls (being made late at night) and repeatedly complained to the company it couldn't have come from his place. The phone company simply said someone must have access and using his phones. After I guess he made a big enough stink they researched it and found the 'tip/ring' problem and fixed it. Oh yes -- he called one of the numbers I called and got more info. The only subsequent problem was that while the man said I could pay it out, the regular _residential_ service people demanded the full payment at once. ------------------------------ From: ranck@vt.edu Subject: Re: Need Recommendations For Economy "Pay as You Go" Cell Phones Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2005 20:46:04 UTC Organization: Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia, USA kimshapiro100@yahoo.com wrote: > Need recommendations for economy "pay as you go" cell phones. > My child is probably going to use between 5 and 30 minutes a month. I have a TracFone which would seem to fill that need pretty nicely. You can go to their web page, buy a refurbished phone for $30 and they give you 2 months activation and 110 or 120 minutes with it. At least that was the deal last July when I got mine for a motorcycle trip. The 2 month activation was actually good until November. You can buy cards to add months and minutes at just about any convenience store or WalMart or other store. I later bought a 1 year activation that included 300 or 450 minutes (I forget exactly) which I have not used up yet, and seems like it would fill the needs you state. The cost at this rate is less than $10 per month. It may not be the best deal going, but there is no contract and minutes don't expire as long as the phone stays activated. web site: www.tracfone.com Bill Ranck Blacksburg, Va. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2005 16:37:15 -0700 From: timeOday Subject: Re: Any Recommendations re: Economy Internet Phone Service? TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to John Levine: >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I personally use Vonage, which works >> with any telephone you wish to plug in and use. I am hearing rumors >> that their customer service is slipping a little; that may be due to >> the *huge* increase in their customer base in recent months. PAT] > It's no rumor -- I'm about to cancel my Vonage account as soon as the > number is ported away which is supposed to happen on Wednesday. It > used to be fine but in recent months the voice quality became terrible > and I was completely unable to contact any live people at Vonage at > all. Multiple e-mails went unanswered other than the auto-ack, and > every time I tried to call them, once I went through the menu to the > point where I would queue for a person, I always got a busy signal. > Too bad, they used to be good. I'm now using Lingo, the voice quality > is OK and the local calling area is much larger. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Interesting you mention how you work > your way through the menu up to the point the next voice will be a > human being, then it goes to busy sigal. Same thing has happened to me > a lot recently; high noon, midnight, even five in the morning. PAT] Same here. Nobody's home. At least, I've never gotten through to anybody at Vonage. I'm also getting a lot of calls dropped right as the other person answers. ------------------------------ From: NOTvalid@surplus4actors.INFO Subject: Re: Need Recommendations for Economy "Pay as You Go" Cell Phones Date: 8 Feb 2005 20:28:35 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com After reviewing all our options, including complaints re SOME carriers we chose Virgin Mobile. But then we knew the SPCS netwrok would be used by VM and had been happy with SPCS. Ask friends who are on SPCS, what service is like in your city. Incredibly low long distance phone rates, as low as USA-Canada 1.9CPM! Works as prepaid phone card. PIN not needed for calls from home or cell phone. Compare the rates at https://www.onesuite.com/ No monthly fee or minimum. Use promotion code "034720367" for some FREE time. We added OS to our VM phones for international calls. ------------------------------ From: ranck@vt.edu Subject: Re: Supermarket: Let Your Fingers do the Paying Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2005 20:09:52 UTC Organization: Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia, USA George Mitchell wrote: > It's easy to forget that, once your fingerprint has been scanned into > the store's system, now this impossible-to-forget, impossible-to-forge > identification is stored on their system, ready to be replayed at will > by anyone with access to their computer. I don't know how the store systems are set up. I do know that we have two door lock fingerprint scanners where I work. These scanners apparently store the fingerprint info locally to themselves because I had to have my fingerprint read into each separately. They could not share the scan/image from one to the other. Seemed like a poor setup to me, but it made me less worried about that scanned image getting loose in the world if they could not even transmit the info from one scanner to another of the exact same make and model. I'm not sure what anyone could do with my scanned fingerprint anyway. If someone could get it out of the scanner on the door lock system they could also get into my office and borrow my coffee cup to get a more complete set. In the case of a store system as we have been talking about, anyone with enough access to get my fingerprint image out of the system could simply charge stuff to my account directly anyway. I suppose someone could frame me for a major crime with my fingerprint, but I can't imagine who would go to all that bother or why. Bill Ranck Blacksburg, Va. ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) Subject: Re: Supermarket: Let Your Fingers do the Paying Date: 8 Feb 2005 13:53:41 -0800 Monty Solomon wrote: > By Jo Best > Story last modified Tue Feb 01 12:18:00 PST 2005 > Thriftway President Paul Kapioski said rather than shying away from > the technology because of concerns about protecting their privacy, > customer demand ensured that the biometric payment system made it past > the pilot stage. I must admit I split the fence on this issue. When my supermarket began to accept ATM (now debit) cards as payment and even gives cash back, I jumped at it. It makes things a lot easier, plus I get my cash needs at the same time. (That's a plus for the supermarket in that it has a bank credit instead of hard currency to handle). The flip side is they now know me and what I like to buy and it's all accumulated someplace. That part I don't like. Say for example I decide to run for public office. The opposition candidate slips a few bucks to a supermarket employee who pulls up my buying habits. Do I buy 'adult' magazines or any other odd products? (This has been frequently done in video stores.) Say for example I have a medical problem and buy a lot of over-the-counter remedies for it. A prospective employer or insurance company would want to know that. Some supermarkets have pharmacies attached and prescription records would of course offer juicy data. The good news, I suppose, is that criminals have been caught using this data. Some vandals put glue in a building's locks. The authorities (according to the newspaper) checked local big box stores for sales of that particular clue which they had from their cash register tapes. They got the time whenever that particular glue was sold. Then they checked their CCTV camera tapes and matched it and found the vandals. So even paying cash doesn't protect you. ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Minter) Subject: Re: AT&T Inventions Fueled Tech Boom, And Its Own Fall Date: 8 Feb 2005 11:05:15 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: > Some critics blame the mgmt of AT&T and IBM for allowing the companies > to be top-heavy. I don't agree. At the time the people were hired, > there was a need for their skills. At the time they were hired, they > still had a to support a network antiquated by today's standards. I forgot one other important point. Throughout the postwar history of both AT&T and IBM new technology was more efficient and reduced the number of workers needed. Yet the companies _added_ workers. Why was that? A reason was the new technology lowered the cost of service and thus increased business level. As AT&T automated long distance and reduced its cost, customers made more calls and the net need for telephone operators actually went up. There were fewer operators per call, but so many more calls. Likewise for IBM*. New technology reduced the number of employees needed to service computers, but the lower cost enabled more people to get computers, thus producing a net gain in employees. For both companies, technology (and business world) changes exploded the business yet employees were no longer needed to support even tremendous high volume of business. When was the last time we needed a human telephone operator? When was the last time an IBM service technician came out to fix a broken card, printer, or install new software? Those things are automated or eliminated. *How many employees did IBM need just to test and replace vacuum tubes in its mainframe computers of the 1950s -- which continued in service well into the 1960s? ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Minter) Subject: Old vs. New Doctors -- Communication and Technology Date: 8 Feb 2005 14:07:43 -0800 The NYT had a piece comparing old vs. new doctors, and when or if should a doctor retire. See: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/08/health/08essa.html?8hpib My mother used the same doctor for at least 40 years. Her family was concerned that he was too old (he was in his upper 70s), but my mother was very comfortable with him and confident. She never quite warmed up to his "junior" associate and always wanted the "senior" doctor. We finally convinced her it was time to see "junior" and that he had proved himself. I went with her and "junior" was now 60 himself, to my surprise. He came on to the practice many years ago, but my mother never got over thinking of him as the junior member of the team, still learning. If I lived close by, I'd be using 'junior' myself. I am not too comfortable by medical offices that are real ultra-modern high tech. Sure sometimes high tech is great but sometimes it seems an impediment. My lab results are faxed back and the fuzzy sheet is hard to read -- could critical numbers by misinterpreted? (Why doesn't anyone bother with the 'fine' or 'high-res' settings when faxing?) Keying the information in and reading it from a computer screen makes me uneasy -- I think it'd be easier to make an error there than from pen and paper. Confidence is a critical part of the doctor-patient relationship. My mother had great confidence in the senior man and that meant a lot. My mother always discouraged me from seeing an optometrist, feeling an opthamalogist was better. I had an eye problem and went to an optham. I had a long wait, saw him only a few minutes while an associate optometrist did the test, and paid a big bill. The next time I went to an optometrist and I was treated much better and felt much more comfortable. As far as I was concerned, I was getting better care even though the optometrist didn't have quite the training an opthamologist had. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Speaking of 'old' and 'new' doctors, my mother has gone to the same physician here in Independence for about 25 years. Then about six years ago, Dr. Empson quit taking *any* new patients at all, and he is just gradually working off his existing load of patients until he eventually retires. When I arrived here following my aneurysm, my mother tried to sign me up with Dr. Empson's practice, but he would not take me. His clinic put me on the case load of a 'junior' assistant, Dr. Wilkins, which was fine with me, but I got in the clinic last time around and Wilkins was not there either. It seems he had been promoted to a management position there in the medical center. (The clinic is a division of the medical center here, Mercy Hospital.) So now there is a third or fourth new 'junior' physician in the practice there. PAT] ------------------------------ From: EventHelix.com Subject: Re: Digital Cellular Sound Quality Date: 8 Feb 2005 18:35:14 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com The analog calls require several times the bandwidth of a digital call. The voice quality was slightly better but at a great expense. With digital calls, sampling is not the issue. The compression of the speech sometimes causes artifacts to appear. Also, loss of packets on the radio link also hurts the voice quality. The voice coders are getting better with time but you will never get toll quality voice on cell phones. Deepa EventStudio 2.5 - http://www.EventHelix.com/EventStudio Enter model in plain text;generate call flow in PDF and Word ------------------------------ From: dave@compata.com (Dave Close) Subject: Re: E-Bay to Cut Fees, Expand Customer Support Date: 8 Feb 2005 21:25:01 -0800 Organization: Compata, Costa Mesa, California Lisa Minter quotes Reuters: > In addition, eBay plans to shut down most of its automated email > responses within the next 90 days, so users will get a response from > a company representative. I don't know how eBay can stop automated responses to email when they don't accept email. There are no email addresses anywhere on their site. Like many web site operators, they seem to confuse a web form with real email. But by insisting on contact only through their forms, they destroy a user's audit trail and make it considerably more difficult for a user to track an issue. -- Dave Close, Compata, Costa Mesa CA +1 714 434 7359 dave@compata.com dhclose@alumni.caltech.edu "Though the people support the government, the government should not support the people." -- Grover Cleveland ------------------------------ From: wal Subject: Last Laugh! Stop Junk Faxes! Date: 8 Feb 2005 17:08:30 -0800 Are you fed up with companies sending you junk faxes? Here are simple ways to fight back: 1- Never ever call that toll free number that they put for you to be removed from their fax. If you call that number you are confirming that your fax number is good, and you will get more fax. They might remove you from one list, and put you on 10 other lists!. 2- Call the company that the fax is listing for you to call them (usually their toll free number) to inquire about whatever they want to sell you or make you sign up for services, and tell them the following: you: Hi ... them: Hi ... you: Got your fax ... them: Are you interested in Blah Blah Blah ... you: No ... them: Why you calling us? you: Because I got your fax and I don't want amy ore faxes. them: Give me your fax number and I'll remove you from the list. you:No thanks, if I gave u my fax number, I will recieve more faxes. them: so why you calling us. you: Because I got your fax, and don't want more faxes. They will hang up. Repeat the above to the same number at least 10 times for each fax you recieve! Trust me this method will send them a signal that what they are doing is wrong, and that it is time for them to stop faxing people that do not care to recieve their faxes. Let me know how it works for you. ------------------------------ 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 V24 #59 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Feb 9 19:16:10 2005 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j1A0GA104714; Wed, 9 Feb 2005 19:16:10 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2005 19:16:10 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200502100016.j1A0GA104714@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 V24 #60 TELECOM Digest Wed, 9 Feb 2005 19:15:00 EST Volume 24 : Issue 60 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Profiles in Driver Distraction: Effects of Cell Phone (Monty Solomon) Why Do Cell Phone Conversations Interfere With Driving? (Monty Solomon) U.S. Companies Move Call Center Work to the Home (Lisa Minter) Sullivan Says Ebbers Told Him to Manipulate Numbers (Telecom dailyLead) Book Review: "Managing Security with Snort and IDS Tools" (Rob Slade) Brother Question (LB@notmine.com) Re: Old Party-Line Arrangements (Lisa Hancock) Re: Old Party-Line Arrangements (Tony P.) Re: Old Party-Line Arrangements (John Levine) Re: Old vs. New Doctors -- Communication and Technology (ranck@vt.edu) Re: Any Recommendations re: Economy Internet Phone Service? (Tony P.) Re: Supermarket: Let Your Fingers do the Paying (Ted Klugman) Re: Last Laugh! Stop Junk Faxes! (Tim@Backhome.org) Re: Last Laugh! Stop Junk Faxes! (LB@notmine.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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2005 10:49:22 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Profiles in Driver Distraction: Effects of Cell Phone Conversations on Younger and Older Drivers David L. Strayer and Frank A. Drews University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah Our research examined the effects of hands-free cell phone conversations on simulated driving. We found that driving performance of both younger and older adults was influenced by cell phone conversations. Compared with single-task (i.e., driving only) conditions, when drivers used cell phones their reactions were 18% slower, their following distance was 12% greater, and they took 17% longer to recover the speed that was lost following braking. There was also a twofold increase in the number of rear-end collisions when drivers were conversing on a cell phone. These cellphone-induced effects were equivalent for younger and older adults, suggesting that older adults do not suffer a significantly greater penalty for talking on a cell phone while driving than compared with their younger counterparts. Interestingly, the net effect of having younger drivers converse on a cell phone was to make their average reactions equivalent to those of older drivers who were not using a cell phone. Actual or potential applications of this research include providing guidance for recommendations and regulations concerning the use of mobile technology while driving. http://www.psych.utah.edu/AppliedCognitionLab/StrayerHFES04.pdf ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2005 10:49:33 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Why Do Cell Phone Conversations Interfere With Driving? David L. Strayer, Frank A. Drews, Dennis J. Crouch, and William A. Johnston Department of Psychology University of Utah To Appear In W. R. Walker and D. Herrmann (Eds.) Cognitive Technology: Transforming Thought and Society. McFarland & Company Inc., Jefferson, NC. Why Do Cell Phone Conversations Interfere With Driving? While often being reminded to pay full attention to driving, people regularly engage in a wide variety of multi-tasking activities when they are behind the wheel. Indeed, as the average time spent commuting increases, there is a growing interest in trying to make the time spent on the roadway more productive. Unfortunately, due to the inherent limited capacity of human attention, engaging in these multi-tasking activities often comes at a cost of diverting attention away from the primary task of driving. There are a number of more traditional sources of driver distraction. These "old standards" include talking to passengers, eating, drinking, lighting a cigarette, applying makeup, or listening to the radio (Stutts et al., 2003). However, over the last 5-10 years many new electronic devices have been developed and are making their way into the vehicle. In most cases, these new technologies are engaging, interactive information delivery systems. For example, drivers can now surf the Internet, send and receive e-mail or fax, communicate via cellular device, and even watch television. There is good reason to believe that some of these new multi-tasking activities may be substantially more distracting than the old standards because they are more cognitively engaging and because they are performed over longer periods of time. This chapter focuses on how driving is impacted by cellular communication because this is one of the most prevalent exemplars of this new class of multi-tasking activity. Here we summarize research from our lab (e.g., Strayer & Johnston, 2001; Strayer, Drews, & Johnston, 2003; Strayer, Drews, & Crouch, in press), that addressed four interrelated questions related to cell phone use while driving. http://www.psych.utah.edu/AppliedCognitionLab/CogTechChapter.pdf ------------------------------ Date: 09 Feb 2005 09:48:17 -0800 From: Lisa Minter Subject: U.S. Companies Move Call Center Work to the Home NEW YORK (Reuters) - People who reach Esther DeJesus when they call Office Depot Inc.'s customer service center have no idea that she's sitting at home in a room decorated with pictures of Garfield and Betty Boop. The Orlando, Florida, resident, who works on the retailer's account for call center contractor Willow CSN, is one of a new breed of customer service representative. Rather than commuting to a crowded office, she puts in 37 to 40 hours a week at home and sets her own schedule. "It is really convenient," said DeJesus, who likes the setup because it allows her to take care of her grandmother. And she shares her home office with her twin daughters, who work part-time for Willow while going to college. After some unsuccessful attempts to move call centers abroad, U.S. companies are shifting some of that work back to this country -- and into people's homes. Besides Office Depot, JetBlue Airways Corp., General Electric Co. and Staples Inc. are among the companies that have been using stay-at-home customer service representatives as an alternative to traditional call centers in the United States, India and the Philippines. Home-based workers are usually happier, which means better service, these companies say. The arrangement also allows employers to schedule people in small part-time slots when call volume is higher, rather than hiring regular call-center workers who get paid whether they are busy or not. To work at home, employees need a computer that meets certain specifications, such as high-speed Internet access. After taking a training course, they're ready to start answering calls that are routed to their home phone. Companies are passing on some of the savings they're realizing in rent and office equipment. Stay-at-home customer service representatives generally command $13 to $14 an hour, while the industry rate for call center workers is $8 to $9. HOMEWARD BOUND Office Depot plans to close nine of its 11 call centers by the end of September and replace them with home-based workers. The Delray Beach, Florida-based company now has 1,400 remote agents and plan to double that number in a year. "We chose to go with virtual agents as a means to keep work done domestically and also get the best quality and cost," said Julian Carter, director of operations. Office Depot said it halved its attrition rate to 30 percent almost immediately after it started using home-based workers 3 1/2 years ago. Now attrition has fallen even more, to a low-teen percentage rate, allowing the company to save training and recruiting expenses. Industrywide, the annual turnover rate of 25 percent to 30 percent for work-at-home agents is significantly lower than 35 percent to 70 percent for call center workers, according to Gartner Inc. The research firm expects that 10 percent of all contact centers will use home agents as part of their overall customer services by 2006. There are already more than 100,000 home-based agents in the United States, according to technology research firm IDC. Home-based agents are one response to the growing political backlash against offshoring. Top personal-computer maker Dell Inc., for example, is retreating from India because customers have complained about the difficulty of understanding the workers' accents. "Expectations about the benefits of offshore will mature," Alexa Bona, a research director at Gartner, said in a report. "More creative responses to outsourcing, such as work-at-home agents, will start to gain ground." West Corp., as well as closely held companies like Willow, Alpine Access and Working Solutions, has carved out a profitable niche as an intermediary between home-based workers and the corporations that use them. JetBlue already has about 900 agents based at home and is looking to add more. The discount airline said its customers like to talk to its workers, who are comfortable as they answer calls in their slippers and pajamas. "When employees are happy, revenues are going to go up," said G.R. Badger, a customer service supervisor at JetBlue. For people who chose to stay at home and answer calls, the convenience is the biggest draw. Daniel Boord, a father with two children, has a full-time job as a laboratory worker. Each weekend, he also works 15 hours helping American Automobile Association customers from his home in Phoenix. "The flexibility is superb," Boord said. "For my second job, I don't have to leave the house. I just need to walk 50 feet to my 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, in this instance Reuters News Service. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2005 13:32:47 EST From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA Subject: Sullivan Says Ebbers Told Him to Manipulate Numbers Telecom dailyLead from USTA February 9, 2005 http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=19297&l=2017006 TODAY'S HEADLINES NEWS OF THE DAY * Sullivan says Ebbers told him to manipulate numbers BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH * HP chief Fiorina steps down * How much is MCI worth? * Nortel, RIM forge alliance * RealNetworks changes strategy for mobile phone market * Cisco reports earnings USTA SPOTLIGHT * Win the Battle for Consumers with Help from USTA EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES * San Diego electric utility to offer Internet access over power lines Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others. http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=19297&l=2017006 ------------------------------ From: Rob Slade Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2005 08:20:13 -0800 Subject: Book Review "Managing Security with Snort and IDS Tools" Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca BKMSWSIT.RVW 20041106 "Managing Security with Snort and IDS Tools", Kerry Cox/Christopher Gerg, 2004, 0-596-00661-6, U$39.95/C$57.95 %A Kerry Cox %A Christopher Gerg %C 103 Morris Street, Suite A, Sebastopol, CA 95472 %D 2004 %G 0-596-00661-6 %I O'Reilly & Associates, Inc. %O U$39.95/C$57.95 800-998-9938 fax: 707-829-0104 nuts@ora.com %O http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0596006616/robsladesinterne http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0596006616/robsladesinte-21 %O http://www.amazon.ca/exec/obidos/ASIN/0596006616/robsladesin03-20 %O tl a rl 2 tc 3 ta 3 tv 2 wq 2 %P 269 p. %T "Managing Security with Snort and IDS Tools" Chapter one explains what Snort, and network intrusion detection, is. The basics of network traffic sniffing and analysis, and the operation of tcpdump and ethereal, are described in chapter two. Installation, options, and the basic operation of Snort are outlined in chapter three. Chapter four details the different types of blackhat and intruder activity in terms of network intrusion. Chapter five details the confguration file and choices. How, and where, to use and set up Snort is the topic of chapter six. Snort rules are explained in chapter seven, which also outlines the system for creating them. Snort can also be used for intrusion prevention, as chapter eight points out. Tuning sensitivity, and establishing thresholds and clipping levels, is discussed in chapter nine. Chapter ten reviews the use of ACID (Analysis Console for Intrusion Detection) as a management console. An alternative program is SnortCenter, described in chapter eleven, and more options are listed in twelve. Chapter thirteen notes possibilities for the use of Snort in high bandwidth situations. For those interested in the standard intrusion detection program, here is a set of useful explanations for its use and operation. copyright Robert M. Slade, 2004 BKMSWSIT.RVW 20041106 ====================== (quote inserted randomly by Pegasus Mailer) rslade@vcn.bc.ca slade@victoria.tc.ca rslade@sun.soci.niu.edu Science is what we understand well enough to explain to a computer; Art is everything else. - Donald Ervin Kunth http://victoria.tc.ca/techrev or http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade ------------------------------ From: LB@notmine.com Subject: Brother Question Date: Wed, 09 Feb 2005 07:32:06 -0500 Organization: Optimum Online I recently bought a Brother All in One -- mainly for the copying ability. My question is: Does anyone know if Brother will sell my phone number if I activate the fax part of the machine? TIA LB ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) Subject: Re: Old Party-Line Arrangements Date: 9 Feb 2005 07:22:28 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Wesrock@aol.com wrote: > This reminds me many years ago when a Bell 5XB with AMA about 60 miles > from the accounting office sent the wide yellow tapes (no conversion > to punch cards) to the nearest accounting office by a package express > company. Once the box never arrived and apparently fell off the > truck. As in most such shipments, the carrier's liability was limited > to $50 unless a high value was declared and paid for. If this was back in the 60s, $50 was equal to about $500 today. I always wondered how much the AMA added to the cost of toll calls. The Bell System had to develop very complex tape punch machines to create the tapes and then machines to sort and read the tape--one machine resulted in a very large patent application. The Bell System was very slow to adopt mag tapes for this out of fear of unreliability. What amazes me that outside of cities which used message unit meters for suburban calls, other places itemized literally nickel+dime toll charges. All that effort to charge 15c for a call. Now that the system is all electronic and computerized, it's got to the point where we can get unlimited toll service. When I got that service, I thought of all that effort into developing, making, and running the toll charge equipment. ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: Old Party-Line Arrangements Organization: ATCC Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2005 16:47:01 -0500 In article , hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com says: > Back in the 1970s I was making a lot of toll calls from home (thank > goodness for cheap after 11pm rates). We had a private line served by > a #5 XBAR in a city. > Suddenly, my phone bill didn't show any long distance calls. Month > after month went by. I finally called the phone company and reported > it and they denied anything was wrong. About a month later someone > from the _business_ subscriber service (not residential) called me to > report they found a problem with my line. The man said somehow my > "tip and ring were confused with a business customer and my toll calls > were charged to him; they reviewed the calls against my past usage and > put them back on my bill; I would be allowed to pay it out over a few > months." > I don't know how the internals confused my line and this business's > for billing purposes, his number wasn't anything like mine. But the > toll calls were mine and my own calls showed up again. > As I understood it, the businessman noticed my toll calls (being made > late at night) and repeatedly complained to the company it couldn't > have come from his place. The phone company simply said someone must > have access and using his phones. After I guess he made a big enough > stink they researched it and found the 'tip/ring' problem and fixed > it. Oh yes -- he called one of the numbers I called and got more info. > The only subsequent problem was that while the man said I could pay it > out, the regular _residential_ service people demanded the full > payment at once. In the early 90's I'd moved and gotten a new phone number. But months went by and I never received a bill. I'd dutifully call Nynex every month and try to explain that I was using the line, I should be getting the bill. Try as I might, this went on for eighteen months. When I finally got someone to research it they found out that the order had been processed but the paperwork was never sent to billing. Not only that, but the audit cycles never caught the fact that they had an in service line that wasn't being billed. I agreed to pay the local service charges. I think the grand total came to $150 or so for the eighteen months. Because this was post-breakup though, my AT&T LD calls were a mystery until I got a call from a friend in New Jersey asking if I'd been messing with the phone system again. Turns out he's gotten a call from the local VA hospital asking who he knew at the hospital that made calls to him on certain dates and times. Of course while he was talking to them he didn't make the connection so to speak but then it popped in his head and he called me. Turns out their main switchboard was 273-7100, part of which was 273- 7106. My number was 273-0716 -- yep, a typo. When they PIC'd my line they miss-keyed the number as 273-7106, in essence the zero moved three places to the right. Never could wade deep enough through the government beauracracy to find out how much I owed them. Oh well. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Almost the very same thing with me, in 1975. I got a new phone, outside plant came out and installed it, but they somehow failed to pass along the paperwork to the billing/accounting people, so I never did get a bill for about a year. Soon enough, in a month or so I knew there had been some error. As long as no 'coin rated' calls were made on that line, I probably never would have received a bill. But then, about a year later, some $#%@# phreak made a third-party call and billed it to my number. Eventually *that* paperwork (the charge ticket) made its way through to accounting; the computer said there is no such working number and the charge fell out of the system, and wound up in the ever increasing, seldom-resolved work of an investigator, who as part of his work decided to *call the number in question* and see if it was really disconnected. Of course, it was a working number; mine. He called plant and asked them; they claimed the paperwork had gone through long before. When my first bill finally came, it was marked for service to present time for *13 months*,plus of course the next month in advance. Oooh, that stung! I pleaded my case to the service rep: if you can't see your way clear to just write it off, at least give me a few months to pay the bill. She would not agree to write it off, but did say I could have three months to pay the entire bill; at that point it would be 13+3 = 16 months or 5 payments each month for 3 months plus a final installment. The rep had sort of a smirk in her voice as she said to me, "But Mr. Townson, you KNEW what you were doing! We share some of the blame also, which is why I am not going to demand all the payment by the due date in a month." PAT] ------------------------------ Date: 9 Feb 2005 14:32:03 -0000 From: John Levine Subject: Re: Old Party-Line Arrangements Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA >> In the 1970s, I knew people at non-Bell independents who used circle >> digits, the extra digit to identify the calling phone. There was also >> a surprising amount of ONI, operators cutting in to ask for your >> number, even on private lines in Bell territory before ANI was >> universal. > Why the name "circle" digit? It was displayed in a circle on the card in the middle of the dial above or below your phone number. In the 1970s and 1980s my sister in law in Ghent NY had a circle digit even though she had a private line, so toll calls were 11-number where the second 1 was the circle digit. 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. ------------------------------ From: ranck@vt.edu Subject: Re: Old vs. New Doctors -- Communication and Technology Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2005 20:46:08 UTC Organization: Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia, USA Lisa Hancock wrote: > hard to read -- could critical numbers by misinterpreted? (Why > doesn't anyone bother with the 'fine' or 'high-res' settings when > faxing?) Keying the information in and reading it from a computer > screen makes me uneasy -- I think it'd be easier to make an error > there than from pen and paper. It is an old and widely accepted cliche' that doctors have terrible handwriting. My daughter is in her 4th year as a medical student and she tells me that pharmacists and nurses really like the hospitals with a computer based system for the doctors to make notes and write up prescriptions. There are fewer mistakes and no hard to read instructions. While it may make you uneasy, real life experience says using the computer is less prone to error. Bill Ranck Blacksburg, Va. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: And since we all know the computer does not make mistakes and always is accurate, then whatever the prescription calls for has to be the correct medicine. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: Any Recommendations re: Economy Internet Phone Service? Organization: ATCC Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2005 16:31:25 -0500 In article , timeOday- UNSPAM@theknack.net says: > TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to John Levine: >>> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I personally use Vonage, which works >>> with any telephone you wish to plug in and use. I am hearing rumors >>> that their customer service is slipping a little; that may be due to >>> the *huge* increase in their customer base in recent months. PAT] >> It's no rumor -- I'm about to cancel my Vonage account as soon as the >> number is ported away which is supposed to happen on Wednesday. It >> used to be fine but in recent months the voice quality became terrible >> and I was completely unable to contact any live people at Vonage at >> all. Multiple e-mails went unanswered other than the auto-ack, and >> every time I tried to call them, once I went through the menu to the >> point where I would queue for a person, I always got a busy signal. >> Too bad, they used to be good. I'm now using Lingo, the voice quality >> is OK and the local calling area is much larger. >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Interesting you mention how you work >> your way through the menu up to the point the next voice will be a >> human being, then it goes to busy sigal. Same thing has happened to me >> a lot recently; high noon, midnight, even five in the morning. PAT] > Same here. Nobody's home. At least, I've never gotten through to > anybody at Vonage. I'm also getting a lot of calls dropped right as the > other person answers. They do troll the Vonage forums though and answer those questions that they easily can. Demands for things like ACR fall on deaf ears though. ------------------------------ From: Ted Klugman Subject: Re: Supermarket: Let Your Fingers do the Paying Date: Wed, 09 Feb 2005 11:05:34 -0500 Organization: Optimum Online On Thu, 03 Feb 2005 16:11:01 -0800, George Mitchell wrote: > It's easy to forget that, once your fingerprint has been scanned into > the store's system, now this impossible-to-forget, impossible-to-forge > identification is stored on their system, ready to be replayed at will > by anyone with access to their computer. There's an important thing to consider here -- what is actually being stored. Finger scan technologies do NOT store your fingerprint -- they store metadata. Sort of like a one-way hash, this information is gleaned FROM the fingerprint and the algorithm is not reversable. The data stored includes details about ridges and valleys, usually from a handful of points around the fingerprint. You cannot regenerate a fingerprint from the stored data. Additionally, finger scans take much less storage -- only a few kilobytes. Complete fingerprint storage requires much more space. The downside to using finger scans is that the FAR (false acceptance rate -- where Alice's finger is determined to actually be Bob's) and FRR (false rejection rate -- where Alice's finger is determined to not be hers) are higher. ------------------------------ From: Tim@Backhome.org Subject: Re: Last Laugh! Stop Junk Faxes! Date: Wed, 09 Feb 2005 02:30:42 -0800 Organization: Cox Communications They still win. That takes entirely too much time for marginal results. wal wrote: > Are you fed up with companies sending you junk faxes? Here are simple > ways to fight back: > 1- Never ever call that toll free number that they put for you to be > removed from their fax. If you call that number you are confirming > that your fax number is good, and you will get more fax. They might > remove you from one list, and put you on 10 other lists!. > 2- Call the company that the fax is listing for you to call them > (usually their toll free number) to inquire about whatever they want > to sell you or make you sign up for services, and tell them the > following: > you: Hi ... > them: Hi ... > you: Got your fax ... > them: Are you interested in Blah Blah Blah ... > you: No ... > them: Why you calling us? > you: Because I got your fax and I don't want amy ore faxes. > them: Give me your fax number and I'll remove you from the list. > you:No thanks, if I gave u my fax number, I will recieve more faxes. > them: so why you calling us. > you: Because I got your fax, and don't want more faxes. > They will hang up. > Repeat the above to the same number at least 10 times for each fax you > recieve! > Trust me this method will send them a signal that what they are doing > is wrong, and that it is time for them to stop faxing people that do > not care to recieve their faxes. > Let me know how it works for you. ------------------------------ From: LB@notmine.com Subject: Re: Last Laugh! Stop Junk Faxes! Date: Wed, 09 Feb 2005 07:33:04 -0500 Organization: Optimum Online wal wrote: > Are you fed up with companies sending you junk faxes? Here are simple > ways to fight back: > 1- Never ever call that toll free number that they put for you to be > removed from their fax. If you call that number you are confirming > that your fax number is good, and you will get more fax. They might > remove you from one list, and put you on 10 other lists!. > 2- Call the company that the fax is listing for you to call them > (usually their toll free number) to inquire about whatever they want > to sell you or make you sign up for services, and tell them the > following: > you: Hi ... > them: Hi ... > you: Got your fax ... > them: Are you interested in Blah Blah Blah ... > you: No ... > them: Why you calling us? > you: Because I got your fax and I don't want amy ore faxes. > them: Give me your fax number and I'll remove you from the list. > you:No thanks, if I gave u my fax number, I will recieve more faxes. > them: so why you calling us. > you: Because I got your fax, and don't want more faxes. > They will hang up. > Repeat the above to the same number at least 10 times for each fax you > recieve! > Trust me this method will send them a signal that what they are doing > is wrong, and that it is time for them to stop faxing people that do > not care to recieve their faxes. > Let me know how it works for you. and/or "You already have my number. Could please fax the info in BRAILLE?" LB ------------------------------ 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 V24 #60 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Feb 10 00:32:45 2005 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j1A5WiO06693; Thu, 10 Feb 2005 00:32:45 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2005 00:32:45 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200502100532.j1A5WiO06693@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 V24 #61 TELECOM Digest Thu, 10 Feb 2005 00:30:00 EST Volume 24 : Issue 61 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Audioblog.com Lets Bloggers Include Sound, Video Files (Lisa Minter) Browser Feature Could Make Scams Easier (Lisa Minter) Re: Old Party-Line Arrangements (Scott Dorsey) Re: Old Party-Line Arrangements (Wesrock@aol.com) Re: Old vs. New Doctors -- Communication and Technology (Fred Atkinson) Re: Why Do Cell Phone Conversations Interfere With Driving? (D. Clayton) Re: Why Do Cell Phone Conversations Interfere With Driving? (M D Falco) Spammer With a Toll Free Number (shlichter1@aol.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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 09 Feb 2005 09:39:33 -0800 From: Lisa Minter Subject: Audioblog.com lets bloggers include sound, video files By Michael Bazeley, Mercury News The push-button ease of blogging opened online publishing to the masses. Virtually anyone today can create a blog in minutes. But as bloggers look for new ways to express themselves through audio and video, the technology gets more complicated. Editing a short video and getting it to play successfully on the Web is not for the technologically faint of heart. Enter Audioblog.com, a Web-based service run by Eric Rice, an East Bay digital media producer. Audioblog.com simplifies the task of posting audio and video files to Web sites. "We said blogging is now a platform, people are constantly publishing, so let's now do the audio thing," said Rice, who already was doing an online radio talk show when he founded the company. The Audioblog service costs $4.95 a month. To get audio onto their Web sites, bloggers can upload an MP3 or WAV format file to the Audioblog servers, or call into the service from any phone. Audioblog records the phone call and automatically creates a new entry on the blog. Additionally, bloggers can record their message over the Web with a recorder the company created using Macromedia Flash. (Google's Blogger service offers a similar tool, but its features are limited.) "I love the fact that you can record from any browser or any computer," Rice said. "Audio can be complicated. And now it's just 'get an Internet connection and record.' " The advent of podcasting -- the ability to easily subscribe to and download audio programs to iPods and other portable digital players -- is pushing audio blogging to new heights. Rice said podcasters are finding new uses for the phone-blogging feature. "People use this to record conference calls or they report live, on location, if you will," he said. "It's an amazing mobile recording tool." Audioblog has been used far and wide, Rice said. Bloggers covering the Democratic and Republican national conventions filed audio reports from the convention floors with their cell phones. And a group of police officers filed audio dispatches -- with the help of a satellite phone -- from an expedition to the top of Mount Kilimanjaro. Rice recently added video to the service. Members with a camera attached to their computers can create video blog dispatches with much the same ease as they can audio posts. That feature could become especially popular this year as video blogging appears poised to take off as a phenomenon. Video bloggers held their first national conference last month. And services such as Our media.org are emerging to offer free hosting for bulky video files. "We're kind of at the crossroads with video now," Rice said. "We added a video blog capability to our service because we said, 'Let's get ready.' " Contact Michael Bazeley at (408) 920-5642, and read his blog at http://www.siliconbeat.com . Have a suggestion for an Ideas and Innovations profile? E-mail us at innovations@mercurynews.com . 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, San Jose Mercury News. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I do not know why the Mercury is making a big deal of this. I have encoded audio/video into my web pages for several years. Its not that hard to do. For example, I am going to include in this note a bit of code which you can cut and paste and use on your own web page to play video or audio files; this snippet responds to the Real Player format: ;>--
;>-- -- HEIGHT=20 WIDTH=150> ;>-- ;>-- ;>-- ;>-- ;>-- -- HEIGHT=20 WIDTH=150 AUTOSTART=true> ;>-- Pull out the ';>--' at the start of each line; I hope this does not start playing out while you are trying to read this page, if you read it in a browser! The first line, the image, is the little radio I use on my web pages such as http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra/AP.html and other 'talking pages'. The source Value is where I get the audio stream for Associated Press News in this instance. If you prefer to have a Real Player type logo instead drop the image of the little radio. That 'Object ID=video1' gets you a little window if you have a movie to play. 'CONTROLS' can be several variables ranging from 'All' (for a complete set of controls as often seen, or 'PlayButton' if you just want the simple little off/on button you see on my web pages.) The param value AUTOSTART 'true' or 'false' if you do/do not want the audio to start playing as the page loads. And *always* quote the variables. The main thing to remember is the browser command EMBED=whatever you wish to play. There are entire web sites devoted to instructions on how to do audio and video on the web; my instructions above are just intended to get you started. I am sort of ambivilent on the use of audio/video web pages. Some people hate them, others enjoy them. I sort of like them, but have seen some web pages with idiotic music I just hated. It really is *not* hard to get audio/video on a web page. Now actually *producing* your own multimedia is a different matter. Look at the 'biography' page on our web site to see a little movie I produced several years ago about this Digest. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: 09 Feb 2005 10:05:06 -0800 From: Lisa Minter Subject: Browser Feature Could Make Scams Easier By ANICK JESDANUN, AP Internet Writer NEW YORK - An Internet browser feature meant to permit Web addresses in Chinese, Arabic and other languages could encourage online fraudsters by making scam Web sites look legitimate to visitors. For once, the affected browser is not the industry-leading Internet Explorer from Microsoft Corp. but rather several of its more robust competitors. That's because the aging IE lacks support for internationalized domain names; at least without a plug-in, which would then make IE vulnerable. "It's kind of ironic that it affects some of the supposedly safer browsers," said Neel Mehta, a research engineer at the Internet Security Systems Inc. A fix won't be easy because the vulnerability, publicized at a weekend hacker conference, that enables so-called "phishing" scams involves a feature, not a coding error. Engineers at the Mozilla Foundation, developer of the No. 2. Firefox browser, said they were reviewing options and should have more to say within a few days. The maker of the Opera browser said in a statement that although a fix is possible, "it's extremely hard to find a balance between making the fix too comprehensive or too limited. Even though you limit yourself you can create problems for valid domains." Officially, the Internet's Domain Name System supports only 37 characters; the 26 letters, 10 numerals and a hyphen. But in recent years, in response to a growing Internet population worldwide, engineers have been working on ways to trick the system into understanding other languages. Engineers have rallied around a character system called Unicode. The newly discovered exploit takes advantage of the fact that characters that look alike can have two separate codes in Unicode and thus appear to the computer as different. For example, Unicode for "a" is 97 under the Latin alphabet, but 1072 in Cyrillic. Subbing one for the other can allow a scammer to register a domain name that looks to the human as "paypal.com," tricking users into giving passwords and other sensitive information at what looks like a legitimate site. Some browsers, including Firefox, let users deactivate the other character sets but doing so is complicated and would cut off access to the relatively few sites that use non-English characters in their addresses. A better solution is to always manually type Web address directly into a browser rather than clicking on a link sent via e-mail or even copying and pasting that link. The potential for the vulnerability has been known for awhile, but it has only recently gained the attention of security experts as non-English domain names become a reality. Eric Johanson, an independent security consultant in Seattle, publicized it on Sunday, saying he wanted to pressure vendors to act. Dan Hubbard, director of security at Websense Inc., which monitors phishing scams, said he knew of no e-mails circulating on the Internet that take advantage of the vulnerability, but he expects scammers to start using it soon to target non-IE browsers. Hubbard said plenty of flaws already exist with IE because users don't keep up with security updates. "Attackers will check to see what browser you're using and then use vulnerability A if it's Internet Explorer and B if it's Mozilla Firefox," Hubbard said. But Johannes Ullrich, chief technology office with the SANS Institute's Internet Storm Center, said scammers may focus on exploiting other flaws because IE remains dominant. "Right now the one thing that will likely prevent them from using it is that Internet Explorer users will not be able to see the page at all," he 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, Associated Press. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) Subject: Re: Old Party-Line Arrangements Date: 9 Feb 2005 18:43:29 -0500 Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000) Lisa Hancock wrote: > TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response: >> She said the old biddies on the party line would set the phone in a >> galvanized laundry tub, so even if they were sitting out on the >> front porch on a hot summer night, they would all hear that >> (amplified by the galvanized tub) 'tick sound', and the front-porch >> ladies would quietly slip inside and try to listen/spy on the >> neighbor who had received the phone call, to find out who had called >> and what they were talking about. PAT] > From time to time people say "back in the good old days people were > nicer, more respectful, etc." The above example -- which was very > common -- shows this wasn't always the case. Well, I for one, know that I'd be a lot nicer and more respectful if half the town was listening in on MY phone. scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." ------------------------------ From: Wesrock@aol.com Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2005 20:08:30 EST Subject: Re: Old Party-Line Arrangements In a message dated 8 Feb 2005 13:28:49 -0800, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) writes: > AFAIK, ANI trailed direct-distance dialing in the Bell System. I believe the first office with DDD was Englewood, New Jersey, a 5XB with ANI/AMA. The second was Enid, Oklahoma, or Harlingen, Texas, similarly 5XB with ANI/AMA. Wes Leatherock wesrock@aol.com wleathus@yahoo.com ------------------------------ From: Fred Atkinson Subject: Re: Old vs. New Doctors -- Communication and Technology Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2005 20:57:42 -0500 > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: And since we all know the computer does > not make mistakes and always is accurate, then whatever the prescription > calls for has to be the correct medicine. PAT] I believe they said *less* prone to error, not error free, Pat. I'm inclined to believe it. There is less error when it is neatly typed rather than relying on everyone's ability to read everyone else's handwriting. The computer can also be programmed to ask [and require answers to] questions that a rushed doctor or nurse might forget to answer if they were relying on their memory for the right questions. Back in the sixties, I remember hearing doctors and engineers giving a reason most of their handwritings were so poor. They claimed it was because their professors in college went so fast during lectures that they had to write notes at a very fast rate of speed (which tended to develop poor penmanship skills). Might be valid in some cases. In others, it might be just a polite excuse. The quality of my own handwriting is pretty bad. It was so poor during my elementary school years that [after receiving numerous complaints from my teachers] my parents had me examined by a neurologist. He told them that his testing demonstrated there there was nothing neurologically wrong with me. He said that some people just never seem to develop good penmanship skills. So, when I learned to type (in high school), that was a big step up for me. When the computer became prevalent, that really took care of the issue altogether for me. I don't believe for a minute that the computer makes their work error free. But I do believe that it probably does *reduce* the likelihood of mistakes. Remember that most computers don't make mistakes. More often than not, it is the fault of the person incorrectly inputting the information the computer acted upon, the programmer who wrote the software who coded it in a way that caused a mistake when it processed the information, or someone else that was involved in the planning process in the software's development. The latter two can't predict every eventuality that could possibly result from something that they weren't able to predict. The former could be in error for a number of different reasons. This could include bad information, getting information about one patient confused with another before inputting it. And it could be a number of other factors. More often, it is the former. And it leaves a digital (not paper) trail for the lawyers to follow when something goes wrong and someone is harmed. Hopefully, that thought makes the medical folks all a bit more careful in the record keeping process. Not errror free. Fewer errors. Regards, Fred ------------------------------ From: David Clayton Subject: Re: Why Do Cell Phone Conversations Interfere With Driving? Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2005 11:50:05 +1100 On Wed, 2005-02-09 at 10:49 -0500, Monty Solomon wrote: > David L. Strayer, Frank A. Drews, Dennis J. Crouch, > and William A. Johnston > Department of Psychology University of Utah > To Appear In W. R. Walker and D. Herrmann (Eds.) > Cognitive Technology: Transforming Thought and Society. > McFarland & Company Inc., Jefferson, NC. > Why Do Cell Phone Conversations Interfere With Driving? ...... > There is good reason to believe that some of these > new multi-tasking activities may be substantially more distracting > than the old standards because they are more cognitively engaging and > because they are performed over longer periods of time. ...... Ahh, is this the old mental "cpu cycle" availability issue? It looks like with all the new "applications" we are introducing, we may need upgrades to our "wetware" to keep up? :-) 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. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 09 Feb 2005 20:10:27 -0500 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Re: Why Do Cell Phone Conversations Interfere With Driving? ---- Forwarded Message From: Monty Solomon < > Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2005 10:49:33 -0500 Subject: Why Do Cell Phone Conversations Interfere With Driving? Why Do Cell Phone Conversations Interfere With Driving? David L. Strayer, Frank A. Drews, Dennis J. Crouch, and William A. Johnston Department of Psychology University of Utah To Appear In W. R. Walker and D. Herrmann (Eds.) Cognitive Technology: Transforming Thought and Society. McFarland & Company Inc., Jefferson, NC. Why Do Cell Phone Conversations Interfere With Driving? While often being reminded to pay full attention to driving, people regularly engage in a wide variety of multi-tasking activities when they are behind the wheel. Indeed, as the average time spent commuting increases, there is a growing interest in trying to make the time spent on the roadway more productive. Unfortunately, due to the inherent limited capacity of human attention, engaging in these multi-tasking activities often comes at a cost of diverting attention away from the primary task of driving. There are a number of more traditional sources of driver distraction. These "old standards" include talking to passengers, eating, drinking, lighting a cigarette, applying makeup, or listening to the radio (Stutts et al., 2003). However, over the last 5-10 years many new electronic devices have been developed and are making their way into the vehicle. In most cases, these new technologies are engaging, interactive information delivery systems. For example, drivers can now surf the Internet, send and receive e-mail or fax, communicate via cellular device, and even watch television. There is good reason to believe that some of these new multi-tasking activities may be substantially more distracting than the old standards because they are more cognitively engaging and because they are performed over longer periods of time. This chapter focuses on how driving is impacted by cellular communication because this is one of the most prevalent exemplars of this new class of multi-tasking activity. Here we summarize research from our lab (e.g., Strayer & Johnston, 2001; Strayer, Drews, & Johnston, 2003; Strayer, Drews, & Crouch, in press), that addressed four interrelated questions related to cell phone use while driving. http://www.psych.utah.edu/AppliedCognitionLab/CogTechChapter.pdf ------------------------------ From: shlichter1@aol.com Subject: Spammer With a Toll Free Number Date: 9 Feb 2005 16:24:46 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com The following number is for a company that sells it bulk mailing services, you can never ger off the list even though they give you a link and this number. By the way, it also allows you to send faxes, so if you know anyone that is in the spam fax business give thme the number; 800-915-0204. Also the following number is for a company know as KaBloom, they sell flowers and use the above companies service, here is their number, let them know how you feel about them using spammers services. The only way to stop these companies is to cut off their source of income. 800-522-5666. ------------------------------ 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 V24 #61 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Feb 10 17:52:21 2005 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j1AMqKU13108; Thu, 10 Feb 2005 17:52:21 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2005 17:52:21 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200502102252.j1AMqKU13108@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 V24 #62 TELECOM Digest Thu, 10 Feb 2005 17:52:00 EST Volume 24 : Issue 62 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Google Seeks to Broaden Ad Reach to More Companies (Lisa Minter) Pfizer, Microsoft Sue Web Sites Over Illegal Viagra (Lisa Minter) Online Banking Growing Rapidly, Survey Finds (Lisa Minter) 3.2 mln US Homes Have a PC, But no Landline (Jack Decker) Verizon Makes Informal Offer for MCI (Telecom dailyLead from USTA) Print to Fax Solutions? (Reto Krucker) Re: Brother Question (Ken Abrams) Re: Brother Question (jmeissen@aracnet.com) Re: Old Party-Line Arrangements (DevilsPGD) Re: Why Do Cell Phone Conversations Interfere With Driving (Tim@Backhom) Re: Last Laugh! Stop Junk Faxes! (SELLCOM Tech support) 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: 10 Feb 2005 14:04:49 -0800 From: Lisa Minter Subject: Google Seeks to Broaden Ad Reach to More Companies By Lisa Baertlein SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Web search leader Google Inc. is focusing investment on expanding advertising services and improving Internet search, the Web search leader said on Wednesday at its first analyst day as a public company. Google Chief Executive Eric Schmidt said Google's current advertising services are most popular with medium-sized companies and that it is working on products to serve the largest and smallest advertisers. Google's mid-market advertising business is highly automated and low cost. Very small advertisers are more likely to not have Web sites or be unfamiliar with Internet search advertising that drives virtually all of Google's revenue. The company recently increased the number of people devoted to direct sales and to helping large advertising customers track the performance of their Web search ad dollars. Omid Kordestani, Google's senior vice president of worldwide sales and field operations, said the company is focusing on signing up more local advertisers and beefing up tools that help advertisers better target ads and measure their effectiveness. He also said the company could do better in the Asia-Pacific region, where it has just three advertising sales offices versus nine in Europe and 12 in the United States. Google competes with Yahoo Inc. for Web search advertising dollars both in the U.S. and internationally. New Web search entrant Microsoft Corp. has not said whether it will build its own Web search advertising services. It currently partners with Overture Services, Yahoo's Web search advertising provider. In all, Google said it would put about 70 percent of its investment toward its core Web search and advertising businesses. Schmidt said the business side of the company is run in a traditional way while the product development side is more creative. "We're actually not as unconventional as we say we are," Schmidt said. "We're in this to make money," said co-founder Larry Page, although he added that Google will not try to drive revenue with each of its products -- which range from local, news and image search to free online e-mail and photo management services. Google shares closed down 3.6 percent at $191.58 on the Nasdaq, ahead of IPO-related lock-ups expirations that are slated to expire on nearly 177 million shares early next week. 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 Subject: Pfizer, Microsoft Sue Web Sites Over Illegal Viagra Date: 10 Feb 2005 14:03:10 -0800 By Bill Berkrot NEW YORK (Reuters) - Pfizer Inc. and Microsoft Corp. said on Thursday they filed parallel lawsuits against Web site operators and spam advertisers that sell illegal versions of Pfizer's Viagra. The companies said the lawsuits follow a seven-month investigation to discover the identity of two Web site operators together with those advertising them via spam e-mails. Pfizer has filed suit against CanadianPharmacy and E-Pharmacy Direct, while Microsoft has filed civil actions against the spam advertisers for the Web sites. Microsoft has also filed three suits against spam advertisers who advertise unauthorized or counterfeit versions of Viagra on other online pharmacies under such names as Discount RX, Virtual RX, and EzyDrugStore.com. With Microsoft going after illegal spammers and Pfizer taking on online sellers of illegal medicines, they said they are "targeting the entire supply chain." Pfizer general counsel Beth Levine said there was no accurate way of calculating how much the company is losing in Viagra sales as a result of illegal Internet sales of the best-selling erectile dysfunction treatment. "One individual who pleaded guilty in an earlier suit said he had taken in several million dollars in sales," she said. The pharmacy spam rings have allegedly sent hundreds of millions of e-mail messages to Microsoft's MSN Hotmail customers within the past year alone, Microsoft said. The identities of the individuals controlling the sites are unknown, the companies said. But Aaron Kornblum, Microsoft's Internet safety enforcement attorney, said now that the lawsuits are active they have subpoena power to go to Web hosting services, payment processors and shipping distributors to try to track down the culprits. "All of these are perhaps legitimate businesses being used by spammers to set up illegal businesses," Kornblum said. He said one illegal Web site was registered under an actual New York resident's name that had been obtained via identity theft. The companies said orders taken by cndpharmacy.com were being filled and shipped from India with no real Canadian connection. Pfizer has gone after illegal sales of unauthorized or counterfeit versions of their products before, especially Viagra and chloresrtol-lowering Lipitor, the world's best selling prescription drug. In August, Pfizer took legal action against 30 Web sites claiming to sell Viagra or generic versions of the drug, even though there is no legal generic Viagra. The company said 29 of those site are no longer operating. "We are going to continue to come after them," Levine promised. "We are seeing successes," Kornblum added. "We are taking spammers off line, helping to put them in jail." Microsoft said it was continuing to come up with ways to try to prevent people from being inundated with illegal spam and, in particular, offers selling illegal prescription drugs. Kornblum said Microsoft filters block 3.2 billion spam messages every day. It has also set up more than 100,000 so-called trap accounts that receive hundreds of millions of spam e-mails, he said. (Additional reporting by Toni Clarke) 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: 10 Feb 2005 13:30:00 -0800 From: Lisa Minter Subject: Online Banking Growing Rapidly, Survey Finds WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Nearly half of all U.S. adult Internet users now manage their bank accounts online, making banking the fastest-growing online activity, according to a survey released on Wednesday. Forty-four percent of U.S. Internet users bank online, up from 30 percent two years ago, the Pew Internet and American Life Project said. The nonprofit group said banking has grown faster than any other online activity since it began measuring Internet use in March 2000. People with high-speed connections at home, those between the ages of 28 and 39, and more affluent households were most likely to bank online, the group said. The survey of 537 Internet users was conducted in November 2004 and has a margin of error of plus or minus 5 percentage points. ------------------------------ From: Jack Decker Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2005 11:54:28 -0500 Subject: 3.2 Mln US Homes Have a PC, But no Landline http://www.itfacts.biz/index.php?id=P2561 According to MetaFacts, the number of PC-using homes without a standard landline increased 60% since 2002 (3.2 mln in 2003 versus 2.0 mln in 2002). In terms of all PC-using homes, the numbers are just as dramatic. The percentage of users without any telephone line grew from 2.4% in 2002 to 3.5% in 2003, a 46% year over year increase. Within homes with one person, growth was even faster, rising from 2.3% in 2002 to 5% in 2003. Full story at: http://www.itfacts.biz/index.php?id=P2561 Additional commentary at: http://techdirt.com/articles/20050208/149254_F.shtml http://www.broadbandreports.com/shownews/60073 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, 10 Feb 2005 12:48:15 EST From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA Subject: Verizon Makes Informal Offer For MCI Telecom dailyLead from USTA February 10, 2005 http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=19327&l=2017006 TODAY'S HEADLINES NEWS OF THE DAY * Verizon makes informal offer for MCI BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH * Equipment makers urge light regulatory approach to Internet-based services * Huawei to give core routers a try * EarthLink eyes 3G market USTA SPOTLIGHT * USTA applauds broad support for updating telecom laws at hearing EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES * Honeywell develops system to use cell phones during flights * Hotels, resorts lead in Wi-Fi access REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE * AT&T, Vonage settle spat Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others. http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=19327&l=2017006 ------------------------------ From: reto.krucker@rocketmail.com (Reto Krucker) Subject: Print to Fax Solutions? Date: 10 Feb 2005 05:12:31 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com I have a Server with a Modem on it. Now, I like to share five different Fax-Printers with different TSID's. With the Standard W2k-Faxdriver, I had to set the TSID on the Modem. Is there a Print2Fax driver, where I can set the TSID on the Printer and not on the Modem? I don't like to install something on the Clients, thats why I'm searching a Solution with Print2Fax Drivers. ------------------------------ From: Ken Abrams Subject: Re: Brother Question Organization: SBC http://yahoo.sbc.com Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2005 14:35:22 GMT wrote: > I recently bought a Brother All in One -- mainly for the copying ability. > My question is: Does anyone know if Brother will sell my phone number > if I activate the fax part of the machine? This is an interesting thought but I don't think your concern is justified. I doubt the machine is programmed to "call home" on it's own. I have one and like it, except for 2 things. No power switch (at least on my older model). Toner and drums are VERY expensive from Brother. 3rd party replacements are available at about 1/2 the price but require some effort to find. I've been using 3rd party parts now for about a year with no ill effects. ------------------------------ From: jmeissen@aracnet.com Subject: Re: Brother Question Date: 10 Feb 2005 17:09:14 GMT Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com In article , wrote: > I recently bought a Brother All in One -- mainly for the copying ability. > My question is: Does anyone know if Brother will sell my phone number > if I activate the fax part of the machine? This has me curious. What sort of "activation" is required by Brother in order to use the fax capability? John Meissen jmeissen@aracnet.com ------------------------------ From: DevilsPGD Subject: Re: Old Party-Line Arrangements Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2005 00:51:53 -0700 Organization: Octanews > The only subsequent problem was that while the man said I could pay it > out, the regular _residential_ service people demanded the full > payment at once. In fairness, if you're aware you are not being billed correctly that doesn't absolve you from needing to pay that bill. You should be putting away some cash to pay that bill when/if the telco ever bothers to bill you properly. ------------------------------ From: Tim@Backhome.org Subject: Re: Why Do Cell Phone Conversations Interfere With Driving? Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2005 07:02:16 -0800 Organization: Cox Communications David Clayton wrote: > On Wed, 2005-02-09 at 10:49 -0500, Monty Solomon wrote: > Ahh, is this the old mental "cpu cycle" availability issue? > It looks like with all the new "applications" we are introducing, we > may need upgrades to our "wetware" to keep up? :-) Those of us who have spent a career in professional aviation found out a long time ago that the diversion caused by talking on the radio with air traffic control has to be managed carefully, and placed at the lowest of three levels of tasking: 1. Flying (controlling) the aircraft. 2. Navigating the aircraft. 3. Communicating by radio with ATC. A subset of Number 3, even with a two or three-person crew on an airliner, is to never respond to, an initiate a radio communication with ATC while taking off or landing on a runway at high speed. And, normally aircraft are not operating in as tight of an enviornment as automobiles. Plus, professional pilots are professional pilots, whereas most (but not all) automobile drivers are poorly trained, poorly kept up-to-date, rank amateur drivers. Plus, there is the progressive decline in amateur driver's attitudes for common courtesy and observation of proven safey rules. The common running of red lights, failure to yield to pedestrians lawfully crossing the street, and failure to use turn indicators are prime examples. Grossly excessive speed and excessive lane changes (as in, "get out of my way you idiot, I am more important than you are) is another scary trend. Cell phones should be outlawed for drivers everywhere. Then again, it takes consistent enforcement to make any rule like that work Consistent enforcement is the exception, rather than the rule, these days. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I assume you are referring to *using* a cell phone, not merely *being in possession* of a cell phone while driving. They are very important tools for people driving alone at night, or on the highway in the event of an accident or automobile malfunction, etc. PAT] ------------------------------ From: SELLCOM Tech support Subject: Re: Last Laugh! Stop Junk Faxes! Organization: www.sellcom.com Reply-To: support@sellcom.com Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2005 16:57:55 GMT wal posted on that vast internet thingie: > Are you fed up with companies sending you junk faxes? Here are simple > ways to fight back: We save them up and about once a month mail them to the FCC enforcement division. Steve at SELLCOM http://www.sellcom.com Discount multihandset cordless phones by Panasonic AT&T, 5.8Ghz 2line; TMC ET4000 4line Epic phone, OnHoldPlus, Watchguard! Brick wall "non MOV" surge protection. Firewood splitters www.splitlogs.com If you sit at a desk www.ergochair.biz you owe it to yourself. ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 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 V24 #62 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Feb 11 20:47:39 2005 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j1C1ldU22957; Fri, 11 Feb 2005 20:47:39 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2005 20:47:39 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200502120147.j1C1ldU22957@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 V24 #63 TELECOM Digest Fri, 11 Feb 2005 20:46:00 EST Volume 24 : Issue 63 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson National ID Card or Your Papers Please (Patrick Townson) Telecom Update (Canada) #468, February 11, 2005 (Angus TeleManagement) Verizon, MCI Forge Ahead With Merger Talks (Telecom dailyLead from USTA) Verizon Plans to Offer "Naked DSL" on 4/5 of its Wirelines (R Collinge) Dumb Question in Today's Wireless (Avalon1178) How to Make Skype Wireless? (tinaspeilberg1@yahoo.com) Satellite Radio Authorization: How Does it Work? (AES) Man Dies in Car Waiting for 911 to Find Him (Patrick Townson) Re: 3.2 Mln US Homes Have a PC, But no Landline (Tim@Backhome.org) Re: Old Party-Line Arrangements (Paul Coxwell) Re: Old Party-Line Arrangements (William Warren) Re: Digital Cellular Sound Quality (Isaiah Beard) 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: Patrick Townson Subject: National ID Card is Almost Ready For Us Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2005 17:18:03 -0600 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Ken Bryant is a cousin of mine, living in Nashville, TN. PAT] ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ken Bryant" To: "kpbryant" Sent: Friday, February 11, 2005 2:39 PM Subject: National ID Card or Your Papers Please. > Meclan McCullagh of CNET News.com reported late wyesterday, "The > U.S. House of Representatives approved on Thursday a sweeping set of > rules aimed at forcing states to issue all adults federally approved > electronic ID cards, including driver's licenses. Under the rules, > federal employees would reject licenses or identity cards that don't > comply, which could curb Americans' access to airplanes, trains, > national parks, federal courthouses and other areas controlled by > the federal government. The bill was approved by a 261-161 vote. > McCullagh went on to write, "Thursday's vote mostly fell along party > lines. About 95 percent of the House Republicans voted for the bill, > which had been prepared by the judiciary committee chairman, F. > James Sensenbrenner, a Wisconsin Republican. More than three-fourths > of the House Democrats opposed it." In the meantime, you can note > how your Representative voted. Did they vote your interests? Check > it out for yourself. http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2005/roll031.xml -- [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: So, are you ready for your National ID card? PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2005 15:34:57 -0500 From: Angus TeleManagement Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #468, February 11, 2005 ************************************************************ TELECOM UPDATE ************************************************************ published weekly by Angus TeleManagement Group www.angustel.ca Number 468: February 11, 2005 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: ** European Cellular Penetration Hits 80% ** CRTC VoIP Report Expected in Q2 2005 ** Sprint U.S. to Phase Out iDEN ** Bell Wants Higher Business Rates ** Nortel and RIM Plan VoIP on BlackBerry Platform ** CUPE Signs Contract with Telus Quebec ** AT&T Settles Brand-Name Fight with Vonage ** FCC Outlaws Cellular Spam ** MTS to Provide DSL to CLEC-Served Loops ** CRTC Amends Data Collection Process ** Aliant Launches 10-Megabit Internet ** Cisco Sales Growth Slows ** Cellphone Users Drive Like Old Folks ** Mark Your Calendars Now ============================================================ EUROPEAN CELLULAR PENETRATION HITS 80%: Eurostat, an agency of the European Union, reports that Europe now has 80 mobile telephone subscriptions for every 100 inhabitants. Cellular penetration by country ranges from 45.5% (Poland) to 120.2% (Luxembourg). http://epp.eurostat.cec.eu.int ** A new study by Merrill Lynch finds that the top six handset makers sold 159 million handsets worldwide in the fourth quarter of 2004, a remarkable 19.6% increase over the third quarter. CRTC VoIP REPORT EXPECTED IN Q2 2005: CRTC Chair Charles Dalfen says that the Commission now expects to release its VoIP decision in the second quarter of this year. SPRINT U.S. TO PHASE OUT iDEN: Last year U.S. wireless carrier Sprint bought Nextel, a competitor whose service uses Motorola's iDEN technology. Yesterday, Sprint executives told financial analysts they will migrate all of the iDEN customers to CDMA by 2008. Motorola says it remains committed to iDEN, but the loss of its largest customer raises concerns about the technology's long-term viability. ** In Canada, iDEN is used by Telus Mobility for its Mike service. BELL WANTS HIGHER BUSINESS RATES: Bell Canada has asked the CRTC to approve an increase of 80 cents/month for individual business lines, including those on one- and three-year contracts, in most of Ontario and Quebec. www.crtc.gc.ca/8740/eng/2005/B2.htm#200501207 NORTEL AND RIM PLAN VoIP ON BLACKBERRY PLATFORM: Nortel Networks and Research In Motion are collaborating to allow users of RIM's BlackBerry 7270 to make and receive IP telephony calls and access multimedia features over a wireless LAN connected to Nortel's MCS 5100. They previewed the technology at the VoiceCon conference in Florida this week. ** RIM is also working to link the BlackBerry handhelds to 3Com IP-PBXs. CUPE SIGNS CONTRACT WITH TELUS QUEBEC: 81% of the 540 first- line managers at Telus Quebec represented by CUPE have voted to accept a new three-year contract. The deal provides for wage increases ranging from 4.55% to 20.54%, coupled with a work-week increase to 37.5 from 35 hours, beginning in September. AT&T SETTLES BRAND-NAME FIGHT WITH VONAGE: AT&T has settled a dispute with Vonage, which claimed that the name of AT&T's VoIP phone service (CallVantage) would confuse consumers and weaken Vonage's trademark. (See Telecom Update #427) AT&T has agreed always to call its service "AT&T CallVantage." FCC OUTLAWS CELLULAR SPAM: The U.S. Federal Communications Commission has posted a list of 189 wireless e-mail domains to which it will be illegal to send unsolicited commercial messages after March 9. No comparable prohibition exists in Canada. ** A study released February 9 by the University of St. Gallen, Switzerland, found that eight out of ten mobile users worldwide have received spam messages. The study surveyed users in eight countries, including Canada. MTS TO PROVIDE DSL TO CLEC-SERVED LOOPS: MTS Allstream says it can now, through a manual process, provide retail DSL Internet service to Manitoba residential and business customers whose local telephone service is provided by a CLEC using local loops leased from MTS Allstream. www.crtc.gc.ca/8740/eng/2005/M59.htm#200501058 CRTC AMENDS DATA COLLECTION PROCESS: The CRTC has announced revised procedures for its 2005 data collection and registration process for telecom carriers and service providers. Providers who fail to register could find themselves unable to obtain numbers, interconnection agreements, or advantageous competitor rates on network services. www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Circulars/2005/ct2005-4.htm ALIANT LAUNCHES 10-MEGABIT INTERNET: Aliant has begun Internet service at 10 Mbps and will have 30 Halifax apartment buildings connected by July. The telco is also conducting a trial in Bedford, Nova Scotia of Fibre to the Home at 30 Mbps. CISCO SALES GROWTH SLOWS: Cisco System's sales for the three months ended January 29 were US$6.1 billion, an increase of 12.3% from a year earlier, but up only 1.5% from the previous quarter. Profits of $1.4 billion were double last year's level and the same as the previous quarter. During the quarter, Cisco sold its four millionth IP phone. CELLPHONE USERS DRIVE LIKE OLD FOLKS: A study published in the winter edition of the journal Human Factors concludes that young drivers talking on cellphones "drive like elderly people" -- they move and react more slowly, increasing their risk of accidents. "If you put a 20-year-old driver behind the wheel with a cellphone, their reaction times are the same as a 70-year-old driver who is not using a cellphone," says University of Utah Psychology professor David Strayer, principal author of the study. MARK YOUR CALENDARS NOW: Two conferences not to be missed: ** ICCM Canada 2005 (formerly Call Centre Canada). Metro Toronto Convention Center. March 21-23, 2005. www.iccmcanada.com ** Telemanagement Live! Conference and Exposition on business telecom and networking. North Hall, Metro Toronto Convention Centre. October 17-19, 2005. www.telemanagementlive.com ============================================================ 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 late Friday afternoon each 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 2005 Angus TeleManagement Group Inc. All rights reserved. For further information, including permission to reprint or reproduce, please e-mail rosita@angustel.ca or phone 905-686-5050 ext 500. The information and data included has been obtained from sources which we believe to be reliable, but Angus TeleManagement makes no warranties or representations whatsoever regarding accuracy, completeness, or adequacy. Opinions expressed are based on interpretation of available information, and are subject to change. If expert advice on the subject matter is required, the services of a competent professional should be obtained. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2005 13:10:18 EST From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA Subject: Verizon, MCI Forge Ahead With Merger Talks Telecom dailyLead from USTA February 11, 2005 http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=19342&l=2017006 TODAY'S HEADLINES NEWS OF THE DAY * Verizon, MCI forge ahead with merger talks BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH * Analysis: MCI's bottom line hinges on enterprise customers * Cablevision's Charles Dolan to buy remains of Voom USTA SPOTLIGHT * Order USTA's Best-Selling VoIP Implementation and Planning Guide Today EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES * Ercisson chief: 3G is booming VOIP DOWNLOAD * Level 3 exits hosted VoIP market * Study: Wi-Fi phone sales slow * Pulver drops Bellster name * What does the future hold for VoIP? REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE * FCC votes to further study intercarrier compensation rules Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others. http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=19342&l=2017006 ------------------------------ From: R Collinge Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2005 20:21:56 -0600 Subject: Verizon plans to offer "naked dsl" on 4/5 of its wirelines. Jack (Decker), Thanks for continuing with the newsgroup. I want to add a tidbit that Verizon announced last Friday, but that seems to have been lost in the shuffle of merger speculation. Verizon reportedly plans to unbundled DSL for over 80% of their customers, potentially this year. That would allow Verizon customers to replace their POTS lines with DSL and VoIP if they want. "Verizon expects "that in the not-too-distant future that you will be able to get Verizon DSL without getting Verizon phone service," said Tom Tauke, Verizon executive vice president for public affairs and communications. "It's a technological issue, it's not a marketing issue." "From a very practical perspective, we would like to be able to offer the DSL service on a stand-alone basis and the effort is being made to bring that about as rapidly as possible," he said. "Verizon spokesman Eric Rabe said so-called "naked DSL" could be offered potentially later this year but noted that subscribers to its service via fiber-optic lines, FiOS, could get stand-alone broadband now. Almost 1 million homes are now served by Verizon's fiber network but the company has targeted reaching 3 million homes by the end of the year. Roughly 80 percent of Verizon's 53 million traditional lines are capable of offering DSL." http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?storyID=7545839&type=technologyNews Bob [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It would be very interesting if SBC decided to go the same way: DSL with no phone service requirements, but it is very unlikely; they just can't get their act together to accomplish that. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Avalon1178 Subject: Dumb Question in Today's Wireless Date: 10 Feb 2005 22:16:28 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com I apologize for the dumb question but ... Where are we (North America, Europe, and Asian countries) in wireless technology? Are we in 3G yet or are we still in 2.5G phase? When can we expect full maturity of 3G technology? If we are in 2.5G, what is the most prevalent technology? On the GSM side (EDGE? HSCSD?...)? Thanks! ------------------------------ From: tinaspeilberg1@yahoo.com Subject: How to Make Skype Wireless ? Date: 11 Feb 2005 05:20:29 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com I signed up for Skype but did not realize that the calls are via PC. So whenever I make a call I am stuck to the PC. I am used to a wireless phone and doing other things while I talk. Is there any way to make my Skype connection wireless ? I am NOT technical. Thanks, Tina ------------------------------ From: AES Subject: Satellite Radio Authorization: How Does it Work? Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2005 15:27:24 -0800 Organization: Stanford University Pointers to info on how XM and Sirius systems work, specifically as regards authorization? When a satellite authorizes a given radio, does it do it by sending that radio (and, as a side effect, all other radios) some kind of digital key that combines with some unique built-in matching key in that particular radio to enable it to decode the broadcast content? If so, presumably if you stop paying your bill it can also deauthorize your radio by sending something to wipe out the code? But suppose you put your radio in a shielded box, stop paying, wait a few months until they give up trying to deauthorize you, then bring it back out -- are you still authorized? Or does every authorized radio have to get reauthorized at some periodic interval? Bottom line: Do individual radios actually talk back to the satellites at any point? Or do authorization and other command signals flow only from the satellites to the radio? (Not looking to play any games here -- just interested to understand how it works.) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: An interesting problem, and one that the gas company deals with a lot in older inner city areas, which is gradually getting cured. Many years ago, gas was delivered in underground pipes (it still is), but as a matter of economics the gas company used a lot of 'branch lines' off the main feed. For example, there are two dwellings on a piece of land, one sort of behind the other one. Gas company runs a pipe which attaches to one meter, then the pipe 'branches' off and runs to the second meter. First meter owner gets delinquent in paying his gas bill, and refuses to allow access to his basement for the purpose of cutting off his service. Gas company keeps telling the man "let us in your basement so we can lock off your meter." Man refuses to do so, assuming there is no way for gas company to cut his service if they can't get in his basement. What the gas company will do is get a permit from the city to excavate in the street and cut him off at that point. The only trouble is, the person on the other end of the property, with his own meter, which is in good standing, winds up getting cut also. Needless to say, that man (second meter) raises plenty of hell, and demands his gas service back. Gas company claims it was an accident, and they will turn him back on ASAP, but there is one big problem with natural gas which does not apply with other utilities; before they can turn him back on (with the consequential lighting of his pilot lights to prevent explosions, etc, now they *absolutely must* get the other guy's pilot light relighted as well (or in actual practice cut his meter) to avoid possible explosions at that end. So they turn one neighbor against the other one, telling second meter, "Gee, we would love to restore *your* service but we can't get into first meter and under the law, even if we should not have 'accidentally' cut off your service, we have to light his pilot as well (and all the other pilot lights on the same branch line)." You better believe second meter finds first meter (if he has to break the basement door down himself) and imposes on him to allow the meter to be cut off so that then gas company can turn the line back on, and go around lighting all the pilot lights for all the other residents on the 'branch line'. Western Union also had similar woes with their clock service fifty or more years ago: a large office building, maybe there were a few dozen clocks on the circuit. Some joker would not pay his clock bill and assume WUTCO can't do anything about it if I don't let them in the office to remove the clock. Their policy was where an individual clock was on an individual circuit, WUTCO would put a 'load' on the line and just leave it there. Eventually the load would overcome the tension from the escapement spring and stop the pendulum from swinging, which had the effect of denying any more clock service. When the guy paid up, the clock man came back out and restarted the clock. But if (as was common) there were fifty clocks and only one setting-circuit handling them all; one joker does not pay and refuses to give up the clock; WUTCO had to shut them all down, then once they were all dead (due to the load on the line), go back and restart the 49 good customers and let the one bad guy sit there and stew in his juices. Of course there are no clocks with WUTCO works in them any longer, and although gas company still now and then has to resort to cutting off many customers temporarily (and use *them* as tools to get after the bad guy) and delinquencies in paying for gas is more common these days for various economic reasons, gas company is gradually redoing their outside plant infrastructure, so that everyone gets their own direct feed to the gas main, so customers either voluntarily admit the gas man to inspect/lock out their meter for non-payment, or gas company excavates in the street as needed, but now there are no innocent victims in the process, or not as many as in the past. My understanding is satellite receiving units do not 'talk back' to the satellite; everything is done from the satellite end, and as long as there is any 'unfinished business' with any one receiver, the satellite company just keeps on sending over and over the required codes. DISH has those little plastic 'smart cards' which have to be replaced once a year or so, so I assume if you were not paying, at best, you'd get the remainder of the time available before the Smart Card ran out. I do not know what some of the others are doing. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, Feb 10 2005 18:00:00 PST From: Patrick Townson Subject: Man Dies Waiting for 911 to Arrive -- Suit alleges dispatcher let man die in car -- This story from our TD-Extra pages tells of a man with a cellular phone registered in Dyer, Indiana (where he lived) who died in his car (and was found in the car dead a few weeks later) in a parking garage in Saulk Village, Illinois. Saulk Village (a far south suburb of Chicago) sits on the Illinois/Indiana state line right 'across the street' from Dyer, Indiana. It appears the 911 dispatcher for Saulk Village (area code 708)did not know why she was getting a call from an area code 219 number. The man called from his automobile saying he thought he was having a heart attack; the 911 dispatcher did not deal with it correctly. The man died while waiting for an ambulance to show up (it never did show up) and several weeks later they found his body in his car where it had been parked. The family is suing the Village of Saulk Village for damages. See the full story at: http://interestalert.com/brand/siteia.shtml?Story=st/sn/02100002aaa0485f.upi&Sys=ptownson&Type=News&Filter=Front%20Page&Fid=FRONTPAG ------------------------------ From: Tim@Backhome.org Subject: Re: 3.2 Mln US Homes Have a PC, But no Landline Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2005 10:33:05 -0800 Organization: Cox Communications Jack Decker wrote: > http://www.itfacts.biz/index.php?id=P2561 > According to MetaFacts, the number of PC-using homes without a > standard landline increased 60% since 2002 (3.2 mln in 2003 versus 2.0 > mln in 2002). In terms of all PC-using homes, the numbers are just as > dramatic. The percentage of users without any telephone line grew from > 2.4% in 2002 to 3.5% in 2003, a 46% year over year increase. Within > homes with one person, growth was even faster, rising from 2.3% in > 2002 to 5% in 2003. I have had Vonage for two years now. Today, I was using it for an important business telcon. 1 hour 15 minutes into the conference the Vonage dropped off and would not dial out. This condition lasted for perhaps 30 minutes. I was able to recover by dialing back in on my POTS wireline. ------------------------------ From: Paul Coxwell Subject: Re: Old Party-Line Arrangements Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2005 19:03:17 -0000 > I believe the first office with DDD was Englewood, New Jersey, a 5XB > with ANI/AMA. The second was Enid, Oklahoma, or Harlingen, Texas, > similarly 5XB with ANI/AMA. The first British office to have STD (Subscriber Trunk Dialing) go into operation was Bristol, somewhere around 1957/58. Over here though the GPO opted for a charging system somewhat different to AMA. Billing was by way of meters, stepped at a frequency dependent upon the time of day and the type of call, with each "unit" then being charged at a certain amount. For many years there were only three basic zones for calls within the United Kingdom: Local rate, "a" rate which was outside local and generally up to a radius of about 35 miles from the group center, and "b" rate for everything beyond that. This system kept the billing relatively simple, but of course we are an entire country which covers only about the same land area as Oregon. Manual dockets were kept and sent for processing for all operator-connected calls. -- Paul ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2005 16:08:05 -0500 From: William Warren Subject: Re: Old Party-Line Arrangements Tony P. wrote: > In article , hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com > says: >> Back in the 1970s I was making a lot of toll calls from home (thank >> goodness for cheap after 11pm rates). We had a private line served by >> a #5 XBAR in a city. >> Suddenly, my phone bill didn't show any long distance calls. Month >> after month went by. I finally called the phone company and reported >> it and they denied anything was wrong. About a month later someone >> from the _business_ subscriber service (not residential) called me to >> report they found a problem with my line. The man said somehow my >> "tip and ring were confused with a business customer and my toll calls >> were charged to him; they reviewed the calls against my past usage and >> put them back on my bill; I would be allowed to pay it out over a few >> months." >> I don't know how the internals confused my line and this business's >> for billing purposes, his number wasn't anything like mine. But the >> toll calls were mine and my own calls showed up again. [snip] On the #5XB, a phone was wired in two separate steps: one for incoming calls, and a separate connection for outgoing. This was done because a lot of businesses choose to have all their toll usage lumped on one bill, or wanted to have a single billing number for a specific workgroup, etc., so that the "incoming" wiring was done at the Number Group, and the "outgoing" at the Translator. Someone miswired the Translator. HTH. William ------------------------------ From: Isaiah Beard Subject: Re: Digital Cellular Sound Quality Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2005 23:27:03 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Jeffrey Mattox wrote: > Whenever I have a conversation with a modern cell phone user, it's > digital-ness is highly obvious because the sound quality is so bad. For what it's worth, it didn't used to be this way. Back when CDMA was just getting started in the US, Qualcomm had these QCP-2700 digital cell phones that really did sound a LOT better than even a landline phone. of course, that was back when vocoders were set that 13kbps, which with compression, was ample bandwidth for human speech. > Well, it not very advanced from my perspective -- it's a step > backward. And to say that digital "sound quality .. [is] superior" is > a lie. Because of the low sample rate (is it 8 KHz?), it's not > possible to reconstruct perfect speech. The problem here is that when digital started penetrating the market, cellular rates started coming down and demand for cellular phones increased. This taxed even the most well-off digital networks, and so to accomodate everyone, cell carriers began demanding vocoders that used less bandwidth. 13kbps vocoders gave way to 8kbps, and then even further to the variable rate vocoders that are in use today (which can step down as far as 4kbps depending on what sounds are being transmitted). > Is this situation ever likely to be improved? Probably not. In fact, the trend is for MORE compression, using less bandwidth. Granted the new vocoders being developed are using more ingenious methods to make this happen, and they promise to improve sound quality while still reducing their network overhead. We'll see if that promise is fulfilled. > Why isn't it possible to sample at a higher rate, compress the > result in the phone for transmission, and then decompress at the > base (and do the same thing for the reverse channel)? Compression IS happening right now. The problem is that there is a huge difference between lossy compression (the type which is in use now, which discards certain elements of the audio that the codec thinks the human ear won't notice is missing much) and type of compression that you're probably expecting, lossless compression (the type which does not discard any audio information during compression). Your modern cell phone has to be able to compress audio instantaneously. It wouldn't do anyone much good if the phone captured several seconds of audio, spent a few more seconds compression that audio using a lossless algorithm, and then sending it down the line where a further delay is added while the receiving end decompresses and replays the signal. At present, cell phones just don't have powerful enough processors to do lossless compression in real time. The compromise then is to use a very lossy codec, one that discards portions of the sound that is presented to it, in the hopes that the human ear ont he receiving end will not notice that those components are missing. Although the quality suffers, it does allow a modern cell phone to quickly compress the audip it needs to transmit in almost-real time. You'll note, there is still a delay of about a quarter to a half a second between the time the person actually says something into a digital cell phone, and the time in which the sound arrives at the other end, and you'll also note that this delay just isnt't present when one uses an analog cellular or wireline phone. > Are all digital cellular phones the same? No. Different digital cell phones use different codecs. ALL of them use compression, and NONE of them truly give toll quality speech, but the differing codecs DO sound different, and it tends to be a matter of personal preference as to which sounds better. I know some people who prefer GSM phones, as they feel the sound coming from GSM is more natural to them. I, on the other hand, find GSM to be very harsh sounding to my ears ... very raspy, very shrill, and actually rather painful to listen to after an extended period. I prefer my CDMA phone, as the sound from CDMA (in my opinion, yours may differ) is much easier on my ears. > Aren't many people bothered by the horrible sound quality? > Jeff E-mail fudged to thwart spammers. Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply. ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 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 V24 #63 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat Feb 12 19:18:19 2005 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j1D0IJG01411; Sat, 12 Feb 2005 19:18:19 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 12 Feb 2005 19:18:19 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200502130018.j1D0IJG01411@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 V24 #64 TELECOM Digest Sat, 12 Feb 2005 19:18:00 EST Volume 24 : Issue 64 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Man Accused of Arranging Mass Suicide For Internet Users (Lisa Minter) Online Bullying Rears Its Head in the Netherlands (Lisa Minter) Click Fraud Looms As Search-Engine Threat (Lisa Minter) Cablevision Chair to Buy Remainder of Voom (Monty Solomon) XM Antenna Construction (johndee) BT Payphone? (Clark W. Griswold, Jr.) Re: Satellite Radio Authorization: How Does it Work? (Mark Crispin) Re: Satellite Radio Authorization: How Does it Work? (DevilsPGD) Re: Satellite Radio Authorization: How Does it Work? (Robert Bonomi) Re: Satellite Radio Authorization: How Does it Work? (Isaiah Beard) Re: Satellite Radio Authorization: How Does it Work? (Ron Chapman) Re: Satellite Radio Authorization: How Does it Work? (Tim@Backhome.org) Re: Cell Phone Lockdown (LonnyPaul) Re: Verizon Plans to Offer "Naked DSL" on 4/5 of its Wirelines (S Sobol) Re: National ID Card is Almost Ready For Us (Henry) Re: National ID Card is Almost Ready For Us (Tim@Backhome.org) 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: 12 Feb 2005 11:08:11 -0800 From: Lisa Minter Subject: Man Accused of Arranging Mass Suicide For Internet Users PORTLAND, Ore. (Reuters) - An unemployed Oregon man who police said used an Internet chat room to arrange a mass suicide pact with dozens of people on Valentine's Day was charged on Friday with trying to solicit aggravated murder. Authorities seized the man's computer and are scouring it to identify and contact potential participants in the mass suicide to make sure they are safe, Klamath County Sheriff Capt. Chris Montenaro said. "They are doing welfare checks on all of them," Montenaro said. "There is a very extensive investigation involving a lot of jurisdictions." Gerald Krien, 26, was charged with solicitation to commit attempted aggravated murder. He could face 10 to 30 years in prison if convicted. Participants in the planned group suicide appeared to be people "not happy with that date (Valentine's Day, Feb. 14) and not happy with their own personal lives," Montenaro said. The police were tipped off by a Canadian woman who learned that one mother was allegedly planning to kill her two children and take her own life. The chat room was designed for people interested in suicide, Montenaro said. Krien lives with his parents in the southern Oregon town of Klamath Falls. He has had no prior contact with local law enforcement and is being held on $100,000 bail. "There is no evidence of a religious or cult following with this group," Montenaro 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 ------------------------------ Date: 12 Feb 2005 11:11:31 -0800 From: Lisa Minter Subject: Online Bullying Rears Its Head in the Netherlands AMSTERDAM (Reuters) - Twelve percent of Dutch youngsters aged between 11 and 15 said they had been bullied online, according to a study by a local Internet provider, which added the real number could be much higher. The Netherlands-based Planet Internet said 30 percent of youngsters in the study reported they had threatened others, mainly schoolmates, via instant messaging or e-mail. "I send mails to children who I don't like," one 11-year-old respondent told the company. "I send them filthy messages, worse than rotten, saying things like 'I'm gonna kill you tonight'." The study, which interviewed 500 children, found that adults remained oblivious to the new phenomenon, in contrast to bullying at school, which was a well-publicized problem. "Online bullying occurs out of sight; children live in their own digital world," the report said, adding that only 37 percent of victims tell their parents. "Adults should take more interest in what youngsters are doing on the Internet, so that it's more likely they will be told what's going on." 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: 12 Feb 2005 11:32:10 -0800 From: Lisa Minter Subject: Click Fraud Looms As Search-Engine Threat By MICHAEL LIEDTKE, AP Business Writer SAN FRANCISCO - Like thousands of other merchants, Tammy Harrison thought she had struck gold when hordes visited her Web site by clicking on the small Internet ads she purchased from the world's most popular online search engines. It cost Harrison as much as $20 for each click, but the potential new business seemed to justify the expense. Harrison's delight dimmed, though, when she realized the people clicking on her ads weren't really interested in her products. She was being victimized by "click fraud," a scam that threatens to squelch the online advertising boom that has been enriching Google Inc., Yahoo Inc. and their many business partners. The ruse has different twists, but the end result is usually the same: Merchants are billed for fruitless traffic generated by someone who repeatedly clicks on an advertiser's Web link with no intention of ever buying anything. Harrison figures she has spent about 200 hours documenting the mischief that drained her budget and diverted customers to a competitor, costing her an estimated $100,000 in sales. "Click fraud has gotten out of control," said Harrison, who sells computer software to doctors. "It's stealing money from my pocket. It's just as bad as someone walking into a store and taking a television." Estimates vary widely on how much click fraud is going on in the $3.8 billion search engine advertising market. "Click fraud exists, but it's mostly a big paranoia," said Chris Churchill, chief executive of Fathom Online, a San Francisco firm that studies the spending patterns on search engine ads. Others believe anywhere from 10 percent to 20 percent of the clicks are made under false pretenses. "Click fraud is like a big elephant standing in the middle of the living room," said Lisa Wehr, president of Oneupweb, a search engine advertising consultant. "Everyone sees it and knows it's there, but no one is quite sure what to do about it." Both Google and Yahoo acknowledge the perils of click fraud, but believe improved internal controls and the increased vigilance of advertisers will prevent the problem from escalating. "We are always worried about it, but it hasn't been a material issue so far," said Google chief executive Eric Schmidt. After recently expanding its staff to patrol click fraud, Google broke up a scheme that had generated several thousand bogus transactions, chief financial officer George Reyes told analysts earlier this week. Yahoo also has been shoring up click fraud protections, said Patrick Giordiani, a senior manager for the company's advertising subsidiary, Overture Services. Such reassurances from search engine executives aren't surprising, given how much they stand to lose if advertisers curtail spending, said Jessie Stricchiola, president of Alchemist Media, which helps businesses detect problems and negotiate refunds. "There's some serious positioning and politicking going on," she said. "Click fraud isn't going to destroy the industry, but it's not going away either." Harrison said she didn't know a thing about the problem until a former employee formed a rival firm and started to repeatedly click on her ads as a competitive tactic. The fraudulent clicks frequently exceeded spending limits Harrison had set, knocking her ads out of the display rotation. The search engines have issued refunds to cover the bogus clicks, but Harrison says those payments don't compensate for missed sales opportunities. In November, Google filed a lawsuit that revealed the search engine can't even trust some of its own advertising partners. Houston-based Auction Experts International never responded to claims it collected at least $50,000 in illegitimate commissions by clicking on the ad links that Google delivered to its Web pages. But the site shut down and Google won a default judgment against one of its principals. The suit won't be Google's last to combat click fraud, said Palo Alto attorney David Kramer, who represents the company. Stricchiola believes it's only a matter of time before advertisers become so exasperated with click fraud that they file a class-action lawsuit against a major search engine. The incentives for click fraud have increased along with the money devoted to search engine advertising a concept that didn't exist until Overture Services introduced it in the late 1990s. Such advertising, Google calls it AdWords, works like this: The search engine auctions off the right to have advertising links displayed when designated words, such as "vacation Hawaii," are included in a search request. The top bids get the most prominent display on Web pages. Once widely ridiculed, the idea has turned into a fast-spreading craze as more merchants realized substantially higher returns on search engine ads than on more traditional marketing campaigns conducted through the Yellow Pages, direct mail and newspapers. By 2008, industry research firm eMarketer expects $7.4 billion to be spent on search engine advertising, up from just $108.5 million in 2000. The success of search engine advertising has substantially raised prices, too. In mid-1999, advertisers paid Overture an average commission of 11 cents per click. By the end of last year, advertisers were paying an industrywide average of $1.70 for the hundreds of keywords tracked by Fathom Online. The cost of prized search terms runs much higher. For instance, the top price for mesothelioma, a cancer that spurred scores of lawsuits linking the illness to asbestos exposure, recently stood at $51 per click, Fathom said. Higher prices have turned click fraud into a cottage industry. Some swindlers have hired cheap overseas contractors to sit in front of computers and click on targeted links all day. Others are developing sophisticated software to help automate and conceal click fraud. On the other side of the fence, entrepreneurs like Dmitri Eroshenko are trying to develop technology solutions to counteract click fraud. "This has become a real cat-and-mouse game," said Eroshenko, who runs Clicklab in Miami. "Advertisers are going to have to accept a certain level of click fraud as a cost of doing business." Mike Liedtke can be reached at mliedtke(at)ap.org On the Net: www.clicklab.com www.alchemistmedia.com 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: Is it 'click fraud' when a netizen is casually surfing around the net and clicks on an ad *thinking* they might possibly be interested in it then they discover they are not interested? Isn't clicking on an ad more or less the same thing as 'window shopping' which as often as not does not produce revenue for the owner of the window? If I return to a store window a second or third time, to examine the goods more closely and have thoughts of my own about the merchandise, is that the essence of 'click fraud'? Merchants need to realize that when they nicely decorate a window on a well traveled thoroughfare, that people are going to stop and look at it sometimes, most of whom will not go inside nor buy anything. And maybe services like Google and Yahoo need to quit the practice of auctioning off the clicks to the highest bidder and instead just start selling 'x' number of displays (or page hits) for 'x' dollars, and when 'x" number of hits has been reached, then quit displaying the ad at all, and quit playing games with particular 'word popularity' and such. There is a lot I could say about the kinds of ads they serve up to me on the telecom pages (and frequently the lack of any ads at all) but I shall not bother; I'll just go along playing the games I see other webmaster/publishers playing, making what little I can from it. But the system does need to be improved, that's for sure. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2005 23:10:45 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Cablevision Chair to Buy Remainder of Voom NEW YORK (AP) -- Charles Dolan, founder and chairman of Cablevision Systems Corp., is not one to give up on his satellite TV plans. After being forced by Cablevision's board of directors to sell fledgling TV service Voom's only satellite to EchoStar Communications Corp. for $200 million, Dolan said late Thursday that he is planning to buy out the remainder of Voom's assets. The deal includes Voom's 26,000 customers, 21 exclusive high definition channels, various spectrum licenses and leased capacity. Under the plan, Dolan, along with his son Tom Dolan and some other Cablevision shareholders, will form a private company that will assume Voom's liabilities and protect Cablevision from any losses. Cablevision has signed a letter of intent agreeing to the transaction, but the board must still approve final terms. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=46853664 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Feb 2005 11:53:41 -0600 From: johndee Subject: XM Antenna Construction Does anyone know where I can find info on how to build a XM antenna? ------------------------------ From: Clark W. Griswold, Jr. Subject: BT Payphone? Date: Sat, 12 Feb 2005 11:29:28 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Anyone know of a source for old coin capable BT payphones? Not the semi-public kind you found in pubs or hotels, but the silver kind that were wall mounted in phone boxes. Were those "smart" phones that counted pulses, or did they require control by the central office? A source for the old A/B button phones would be great as well. Thanks! ------------------------------ From: Mark Crispin Subject: Re: Satellite Radio Authorization: How Does it Work? Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2005 18:06:18 -0800 Organization: Networks & Distributed Computing On Fri, 11 Feb 2005, AES wrote: > When a satellite authorizes a given radio, does it do it by sending > that radio (and, as a side effect, all other radios) some kind of > digital key that combines with some unique built-in matching key in > that particular radio to enable it to decode the broadcast content? Correct. > If so, presumably if you stop paying your bill it can also deauthorize > your radio by sending something to wipe out the code? I believe this to be the case. It's certainly the way that satellite TV works. > But suppose you put your radio in a shielded box, stop paying, wait a > few months until they give up trying to deauthorize you, then bring it > back out -- are you still authorized? Or does every authorized radio > have to get reauthorized at some periodic interval? Maybe, and yes. A satellite radio or TV that was not receiving when the update comes down continues with its old status. But, it doesn't last for more than a few minutes, when the satellite company's periodic re-update hits the receiver. If the receiver has had no power (as in unplugged, not "turned off", since it's still receiving updates even when "turned off") for an extended period of time, it drops its authorization entirely and goes into unauthorized mode. It stays in that mode until the next periodic re-update when it goes alive again. RVers with satellite receivers who are quite familiar with this behavior. In my experience, it only stays unauthorized for a couple of minutes before it comes back. Empirical evidence suggests that every receiver is updated every few minutes. You can also call and ask for a manual update if you're having problems. There is quite a tribe of individuals who hack the security of satellite TV, usually in modifying the access cards to be promiscuous; and an equal tribe at the satellite TV companies who figure out how the hack worked and (1) develop a new generation of cards that breaks the hacks, (2) develop a counter-hack that attacks hacked cards and disables them. These access cards are actually programmable CPUs -- they're not just passive memory -- and the actual work is done there. I don't think that the receivers are anything other than receivers; I don't think that they have a crypto engine. North American satellite TV pirates seem to be primarily in Canada, and focus their attacks at US satellite providers. Apparently, there are some Canadians who want to get the TV that their socialist government denies them. I haven't heard of anyone hacking satellite radio. I suspect that it isn't economical; also the receiver itself would have to be hacked instead of a card. > Bottom line: Do individual radios actually talk back to the satellites > at any point? No. > Or do authorization and other command signals flow only from the > satellites to the radio? Yes. -- Mark -- http://staff.washington.edu/mrc Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate. Si vis pacem, para bellum. ------------------------------ From: DevilsPGD Subject: Re: Satellite Radio Authorization: How Does it Work? Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2005 21:10:58 -0700 Organization: Octanews In message AES wrote: > But suppose you put your radio in a shielded box, stop paying, wait a > few months until they give up trying to deauthorize you, then bring it > back out -- are you still authorized? Or does every authorized radio > have to get reauthorized at some periodic interval? I'm not sure about XM or Sirus, but typically the transmitters will occasionally resend deauthorization lists out randomly to catch people that try to do what you described. It takes very little bandwidth to send out unsubscribe commands, so there is no reason that they couldn't dedicate one entire music channel's worth of bandwidth to running the list over and over until the end of time. > Bottom line: Do individual radios actually talk back to the satellites > at any point? Or do authorization and other command signals flow only > from the satellites to the radio? In the case of radios all transmission is from the satellite to the radio there is no feedback or return signal possible. TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response: > My understanding is satellite receiving units do not 'talk back' to > the satellite; everything is done from the satellite end, and as long > as there is any 'unfinished business' with any one receiver, the > satellite company just keeps on sending over and over the required > codes. DISH has those little plastic 'smart cards' which have to > be replaced once a year or so, so I assume if you were not paying, at > best, you'd get the remainder of the time available before the Smart > Card ran out. I do not know what some of the others are doing. PAT] DISH (and similar) do not need card swaps once a year or anything of the sort, a new card is only needed when the encryption technology changes. They're currently in the middle of changing from NAGRA1 to NAGRA2. NAGRA1 did not deactivate cards by time, only by explicit command from the broadcaster. NAGRA2 has a timeout built into the algorithm so that you can't just pull the card after you deactivate and still expect to get channels. ------------------------------ From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) Subject: Re: Satellite Radio Authorization: How Does it Work? Date: Sat, 12 Feb 2005 04:49:45 -0000 Organization: Widgets, Inc. In article , AES wrote: > Pointers to info on how XM and Sirius systems work, specifically as > regards authorization? [[.. munch ..]] > Bottom line: Do individual radios actually talk back to the satellites > at any point? Or do authorization and other command signals flow only > from the satellites to the radio? It is a *one*way* transmission, from the head end to the radio. The transmitted code contains an "expiration date". if you don't get a new code by the expiration date, the receiver stops playing. "Automatically." The system designers _aren't_ "stupid", you know. This basic authentication technology is _at_least_ 20-25 years old. There was 'broadcast' radio (FM 'SCA' sub-carrier) transmission of stock-market quotes back in the early 80's, if not earlier, that worked in this precise manner. I'm not sure, but I think some Muzak(tm) (and/or competitors) background sound systems worked the same way. Re: PAT's stories about gas customer woes -- the "2nd meter" party can simply file a complaint with the state regulators. As a 'public utility', the gas company is *required* to provide service to anybody 'willing and able' to pay for it. The problem in the company infrastructure is *not* a valid reason for cutting off the '2nd meter' customer service. They can use their 'right-of-way' easement to dig up the piping, and cut off the non-paying customer, and restore service to the customer in good standing. *OR* run a new feed-pipe for him. This is the _UTILITY_ _COMPANY's_ problem, and *they* have to "do whatever is necessary" to fix it. This is a situation where the customer can play hardball with the utility, *and*win*. "No, I'm not going to do _your_job_ for you. NO, I'm not going to 'be patient'. Get it fixed. *NOW*. " etc. "Breach of franchise contract" is a _wonderfully_ potent phrase. The risk of lawsuit damage awards is even more potent. As well as a 'negotiating point' for demanding non-trivial credits for the the 'mistaken' cut-off. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The state regulatory commissions are pretty much, however, on the side of the utilties on things like this. If you appeal to the regulators (informally at first, by speaking on the telephone to the regulator's secretary or clerk) time and again that person will **assume** at first there is more to the story than what you have told him. He will take all the details, he will relay all those details to the gas/electric/telephone company involved; the utility will respond politely they will be glad to cure the problem; the regulator's secretary or clerk will close the file and get back to you saying "I have spoken to (the secretary or clerk) of the utility's chairman and they assured me it will be promptly taken care of." Then he will happily hang up his phone and go back to sleep or his lunch or whatever, feeling assured he has helped another customer recieve satisfaction. One big expenses at any utility are the costs of 'doing business' with the state commission; the country club memberships, the liquor and food tabs, etc. In many small towns, the commissioners belong to the same clubs, churches, civic organizations, etc as the utility brass. The utility says to the commission "that request is unrealistic; we are not set up to do that" and that, as 'they' say, is that. Sometimes the state commission will even assist the utility in bullying and humiliating the customer, to get the customer to lay down and be quiet. Now if *you* are in a position to file a *formal* complaint, engage the services of an attorney who is licensed and competent to practice before the commission, then be our guest. Most of us are not thus equipped. Commmissions, per se, very rarely talk back to big business per se. Big business runs things, unless/until it just gets to be too outrageous for even the rotten commissioners to stomach. Speaking of big business, you may have heard that Walmart got sued as a class action about a month ago by several state attornies general on violations of the (fairly uniform) Child Labor Laws. You are not supposed to have children without majority age (18-21 most places) operate 'dangerous machinery', i.e. chainsaws, etc even if all they are doing is attempting to sell the 'dangerous machinery'. Walmart had been saying 'nuts to that regulation' and telling their youthful clerks to demonstrate all sorts of hardware and gasoline powered equipment. Walmart pleaded guilty in late January, and agreed to pay a fine totaling several hundred thousand dollars, on *one condition*: There was not to be any news releases on it until after the fine had been paid (from Bentonville corporate) and the fine got paid sometime this past week. You can see the full story on line here in the Telecom Digest Extra pages: http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra either in the FeedSweep pages or the nytimes.html section. Just look for the Walmart story. So, get your lawyer and sue the gas company if it makes you feel better. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Isaiah Beard Subject: Re: Satellite Radio Authorization: How Does it Work? Date: Sat, 12 Feb 2005 00:29:44 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com AES wrote: > Pointers to info on how XM and Sirius systems work, specifically as > regards authorization? > When a satellite authorizes a given radio, does it do it by sending > that radio (and, as a side effect, all other radios) some kind of > digital key that combines with some unique built-in matching key in > that particular radio to enable it to decode the broadcast content? To an extent, yes, this is how it works. A "hit" code is sent from the satellites and is broadcast over the "preview" channel, which the radio must be tuned to and must receive the full key before the radio can decode the whole signal and the remaining channels are "unlocked." Activation keys generally take about 10-15 minutes to compeltely download, and the key is transmitted six or seven times in succession so that your radio has a chance to get a clean copy (meaning the activation code persists for about an hour). If you don't have your radio on during this period, a "refresh" signal can be sent later, when the radio is ready. > If so, presumably if you stop paying your bill it can also deauthorize > your radio by sending something to wipe out the code? That's one way to do it, and if one had their radio turned on while the deactivation code was being sent (the duration tends to be around 48 hours if activation traffic is very high; if not, then the code persists for longer), the radio would shut off more quickly than it would the "other" way (which I will describe shortly). > But suppose you put your radio in a shielded box, stop paying, wait a > few months until they give up trying to deauthorize you, then bring it > back out -- are you still authorized? Or does every authorized radio > have to get reauthorized at some periodic interval? If you do this, and you turn your radio on, then your radio will stay in an 'activated" mode for about an hour or so. However, the key that's stored in the radio has already expired, so it is actively looking for a renewal code. If it doesn't get one, the radio "shuts off," going only to the preview channel. > Bottom line: Do individual radios actually talk back to the satellites > at any point? Or do authorization and other command signals flow only > from the satellites to the radio? It's only one way, from satellite to receiver. No information is uplinked. E-mail fudged to thwart spammers. Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Feb 2005 04:26:26 -0500 From: Ron Chapman Subject: Re: Satellite Radio Authorization: How Does it Work? In article , AES wrote: > Pointers to info on how XM and Sirius systems work, specifically as > regards authorization? > When a satellite authorizes a given radio, does it do it by sending > that radio (and, as a side effect, all other radios) some kind of > digital key that combines with some unique built-in matching key in > that particular radio to enable it to decode the broadcast content? Yep. They're continuously sending out an authorization stream. > If so, presumably if you stop paying your bill it can also deauthorize > your radio by sending something to wipe out the code? No. They don't send out a deauthorization stream. Read on. > But suppose you put your radio in a shielded box, stop paying, wait a > few months until they give up trying to deauthorize you, then bring it > back out -- are you still authorized? Or does every authorized radio > have to get reauthorized at some periodic interval? Bingo. You have to get reauthorized at some periodic interval. I did exactly what you describe: I de-installed my SkyFi for a period of months, and deactivated my account. When I plugged it back in some months later, it worked fine for several days. Then suddenly it stopped. It needs to be reauthorized periodically. When it sees an entire authorization stream come and go but it's not on the list, it's deauthorized. > Bottom line: Do individual radios actually talk back to the satellites > at any point? Or do authorization and other command signals flow only > from the satellites to the radio? It's one way. The radios don't talk back to anyone. It's really quite simple. ------------------------------ From: Tim@Backhome.org Subject: Re: Satellite Radio Authorization: How Does it Work? Date: Sat, 12 Feb 2005 07:16:02 -0800 Organization: Cox Communications I suspect most of the folks who use this forum are not interested in trying to cheat XM or Sirius. AES wrote: > Pointers to info on how XM and Sirius systems work, specifically as > regards authorization? > When a satellite authorizes a given radio, does it do it by sending > that radio (and, as a side effect, all other radios) some kind of > digital key that combines with some unique built-in matching key in > that particular radio to enable it to decode the broadcast content? > If so, presumably if you stop paying your bill it can also deauthorize > your radio by sending something to wipe out the code? > But suppose you put your radio in a shielded box, stop paying, wait a > few months until they give up trying to deauthorize you, then bring it > back out -- are you still authorized? Or does every authorized radio > have to get reauthorized at some periodic interval? > Bottom line: Do individual radios actually talk back to the satellites > at any point? Or do authorization and other command signals flow only > from the satellites to the radio? > (Not looking to play any games here -- just interested to understand > how it works.) > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: An interesting problem, and one that > the gas company deals with a lot in older inner city areas, which is > gradually getting cured. Many years ago, gas was delivered in underground > pipes (it still is), but as a matter of economics the gas company used > a lot of 'branch lines' off the main feed. For example, there are two > dwellings on a piece of land, one sort of behind the other one. Gas > company runs a pipe which attaches to one meter, then the pipe > 'branches' off and runs to the second meter. First meter owner gets > delinquent in paying his gas bill, and refuses to allow access to his > basement for the purpose of cutting off his service. Gas company keeps > telling the man "let us in your basement so we can lock off your > meter." Man refuses to do so, assuming there is no way for gas company > to cut his service if they can't get in his basement. What the gas > company will do is get a permit from the city to excavate in the street > and cut him off at that point. The only trouble is, the person on the > other end of the property, with his own meter, which is in good standing, > winds up getting cut also. > Needless to say, that man (second meter) raises plenty of hell, and > demands his gas service back. Gas company claims it was an accident, > and they will turn him back on ASAP, but there is one big problem with > natural gas which does not apply with other utilities; before they can > turn him back on (with the consequential lighting of his pilot lights > to prevent explosions, etc, now they *absolutely must* get the other > guy's pilot light relighted as well (or in actual practice cut his > meter) to avoid possible explosions at that end. So they turn one > neighbor against the other one, telling second meter, "Gee, we would > love to restore *your* service but we can't get into first meter and > under the law, even if we should not have 'accidentally' cut off your > service, we have to light his pilot as well (and all the other > pilot lights on the same branch line)." You better believe second meter > finds first meter (if he has to break the basement door down himself) > and imposes on him to allow the meter to be cut off so that then gas > company can turn the line back on, and go around lighting all the > pilot lights for all the other residents on the 'branch line'. > Western Union also had similar woes with their clock service fifty or > more years ago: a large office building, maybe there were a few > dozen clocks on the circuit. Some joker would not pay his clock bill > and assume WUTCO can't do anything about it if I don't let them in the > office to remove the clock. Their policy was where an individual clock > was on an individual circuit, WUTCO would put a 'load' on the line > and just leave it there. Eventually the load would overcome the > tension from the escapement spring and stop the pendulum from swinging, > which had the effect of denying any more clock service. When the guy > paid up, the clock man came back out and restarted the clock. But if > (as was common) there were fifty clocks and only one setting-circuit > handling them all; one joker does not pay and refuses to give up the > clock; WUTCO had to shut them all down, then once they were all dead > (due to the load on the line), go back and restart the 49 good customers > and let the one bad guy sit there and stew in his juices. > Of course there are no clocks with WUTCO works in them any longer, and > although gas company still now and then has to resort to cutting off > many customers temporarily (and use *them* as tools to get after the > bad guy) and delinquencies in paying for gas is more common these days > for various economic reasons, gas company is gradually redoing their > outside plant infrastructure, so that everyone gets their own direct > feed to the gas main, so customers either voluntarily admit the gas > man to inspect/lock out their meter for non-payment, or gas company > excavates in the street as needed, but now there are no innocent > victims in the process, or not as many as in the past. > My understanding is satellite receiving units do not 'talk back' to > the satellite; everything is done from the satellite end, and as long > as there is any 'unfinished business' with any one receiver, the > satellite company just keeps on sending over and over the required > codes. DISH has those little plastic 'smart cards' which have to > be replaced once a year or so, so I assume if you were not paying, at > best, you'd get the remainder of the time available before the Smart > Card ran out. I do not know what some of the others are doing. PAT] ------------------------------ From: LonnyPaul Subject: Re: Cell Phone Lockdown Date: 11 Feb 2005 19:36:49 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com The good thing is that now you can get lots of unlocked phones at traditional retailers -- even like http://www.tigerdirect.com. They seem to have an ever growing array of unlocked gsm cell phones. I purchased several already, and aside from the fact that the original language setting was to Japanese, I was quite happy to get some of the best deals on any unlocked gsm phone at TigerDirect right now. Has anyone else bought an unlocked phone from TigerDirect? Michael D. Sullivan wrote: > On Thu, 11 Dec 2003 00:19:28 -0500, Marcus Didius Falco posted the > following to comp.dcom.telecom: >> If memory serves (and it may not in this instance), there was, at one >> time, an FCC rule or policy saying that cellular equipment could not >> be subsidized from cellular service, the main reason that the cellular >> carriers don't unlock. > There has never been any such FCC rule or policy. I used to write the > FCC's cellular rules and policies, and I've been dealing with 'em on the > outside since then, so I'm quite sure. California used to have such a > policy, but it was found unlawful long ago. > Michael D. Sullivan > Bethesda, MD, USA > Delete nospam from my address and it won't work. ------------------------------ From: Steve Sobol Subject: Re: Verizon Plans to Offer "Naked DSL" on 4/5 of its Wirelines Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2005 22:40:34 -0800 Organization: Glorb Internet Services, http://www.glorb.com R Collinge wrote: > "Verizon expects "that in the not-too-distant future that you will be > able to get Verizon DSL without getting Verizon phone service," said > Tom Tauke, Verizon executive vice president for public affairs and > communications. "It's a technological issue, it's not a marketing > issue." Bull. It's a marketing issue. It's a monopolistic big-telco-doing-whatever-they-want-to issue. There is no technological requirement for there to be a dialtone on the same line as DSL, and no, I'm not talking about SDSL, I'm talking about ADSL which usually must be bundled with POTS service. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It would be very interesting if SBC > decided to go the same way: DSL with no phone service requirements, > but it is very unlikely; they just can't get their act together to > accomplish that. PAT] Heh. They'd love to do it. You could get DSL alone from SBC and they could do whatever they want to with no fear of regulatory repercussions -- because you can't complain to your state PUC about unregulated data services. (Well, you can, but they won't do anything.) JustThe.net - Apple Valley, CA - http://JustThe.net/ - 888.480.4NET (4638) Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / sjsobol@JustThe.net / PGP: 0xE3AE35ED "In case anyone was wondering, that big glowing globe above the Victor Valley is the sun." -Victorville _Daily Press_ on the unusually large amount of rain the Southland has gotten this winter (January 12th, 2005) ------------------------------ From: henry999@eircom.net (Henry) Subject: Re: National ID Card is Almost Ready For Us Date: Sat, 12 Feb 2005 14:29:20 +0200 Organization: Elisa Internet customer Patrick Townson wrote: >> Declan McCullagh of CNET News.com reported late yesterday, "The >> U.S. House of Representatives approved on Thursday a sweeping set of >> rules aimed at forcing states to issue all adults federally approved >> electronic ID cards... It will be interesting to see how this affects expatriate Americans who have residence in no US state. Cheers, Henry ------------------------------ From: Tim@Backhome.org Subject: Re: National ID Card is Almost Ready For Us Date: Sat, 12 Feb 2005 11:30:11 -0800 Organization: Cox Communications Patrick Townson wrote: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: So, are you ready for your National ID > card? PAT] I'd gladly go for it, provided they would round up all the wetbacks and deport them. Fat chance. ------------------------------ 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 V24 #64 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun Feb 13 04:30:31 2005 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j1D9UVV05335; Sun, 13 Feb 2005 04:30:31 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 13 Feb 2005 04:30:31 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200502130930.j1D9UVV05335@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 V24 #65 TELECOM Digest Sun, 13 Feb 2005 04:30:00 EST Volume 24 : Issue 65 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: XM Antenna Construction (Owen Epstein) Re: XM Antenna Construction (Isaiah Beard) Re: XM Antenna Construction (John Stahl) Re: Verizon Plans to Offer Naked DSL on 4/5 of its Wirelines (meissen) Re: Verizon Plans to Offer Naked DSL on 4/5 of its Wirelines (Joseph) Re: Verizon Plans to Offer Naked DSL on 4/5 of its Wirelines (Griswold) Re: Verizon Plans to Offer Naked DSL on 4/5 of its Wirelines (D Clayton) Re: Verizon Plans to Offer Naked DSL on 4/5 of its Wirelines (Sullivan) Re: Click Fraud Looms As Search-Engine Threat (Michael D. Sullivan) Re: Telecom Update (Canada) #468, February 11, 2005 (Joseph) Re: Ready for National ID Card? (C.W.) Re: Old Party-Line Arrangements (Wesrock) 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: Owen Epstein Subject: Re: XM Antenna Construction Date: 12 Feb 2005 22:00:41 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com johndee wrote: > Does anyone know where I can find info on how to build a XM antenna? The XM antenna is proprietary of-course but the specifications for a similiar antenna the delivers the same type of sat/repeater content is available. You have to dig but IEEE (subscription) site has a resonably good synopsis. ------------------------------ From: Isaiah Beard Subject: Re: XM Antenna Construction Date: Sun, 13 Feb 2005 01:15:20 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com johndee wrote: > Does anyone know where I can find info on how to build a XM antenna? Why would you want to build one, when for $30 you can walk into an electronics store and buy one that's not only professionally constructued and works quite well, but is also barely the size of a postage stamp? That said, I imagine any patch antenna optimized for the 2.3GHz band with the appropriate connector will do. E-mail fudged to thwart spammers. Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Feb 2005 21:21:47 -0500 From: John Stahl Subject: Re: XM Antenna Construction > Does anyone know where I can find info on how to build a XM antenna? There are some Internet sites which have various construction articles regarding antenna fabrication and build. The XM satellite radio service is in the 2.3GHz frequency band or about 13cm wavelength. The Internet site: http://6mt.com/2304tech.htm, has several interesting construction zipped files for omni-directional and wide angle microwave antennas in the 9 - 13cm wavelength. You must also take into consideration the fact the (both) XM (and its competitor Sirus) both utilize additional terrestrial (ground based) repeaters where "viewing" of the full sky isn't always practical - like in big cities. Therefore, both radio types have dual antenna inputs, each for different receiving antenna - two sets of frequencies, hence different antenna designs. I really don't have much info about the "terrestrial" frequencies. Being that this application is either vehicular mobile or with the newest XM radio designs, portable, I would really recommend that commercial antennas be best for reliable reception. Figure it this way: if you spend the big bucks for the receiver (and the monthly expenditure for the service) to insure good reliable reception, use a commercial antenna (available from multiple sources). The rule is really: the output of your device is as good as its "cheapest" (weakest) part ... Hope this helps a bit. John Stahl Aljon Enterprises CEA Certified MECP ------------------------------ From: jmeissen@aracnet.com Subject: Re: Verizon Plans to Offer "Naked DSL" on 4/5 of its Wirelines Date: 12 Feb 2005 22:32:46 GMT Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com In article , R Collinge wrote: > Jack (Decker), > "Verizon expects "that in the not-too-distant future that you will be > able to get Verizon DSL without getting Verizon phone service," said > Tom Tauke, Verizon executive vice president for public affairs and > communications. "It's a technological issue, it's not a marketing > issue." "From a very practical perspective, we would like to be able > to offer the DSL service on a stand-alone basis and the effort is > being made to bring that about as rapidly as possible," he said. So that begs the question, will that option only be available to Verizon Online subscribers, or will those of us who prefer an independant ISP but are forced to pay through the nose for Verizon Data's DSL service be able to take advantage of it? john- ------------------------------ From: Joseph Subject: Re: Verizon Plans to Offer "Naked DSL" on 4/5 of its Wirelines Date: Sat, 12 Feb 2005 15:21:55 -0800 Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com On Thu, 10 Feb 2005 20:21:56 -0600, Telecom Digest Editor wrote: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It would be very interesting if SBC > decided to go the same way: DSL with no phone service requirements, > but it is very unlikely; they just can't get their act together to > accomplish that. PAT] Qwest has been offering "naked" pairs for quite a few months already. This is not really "new" service as it was always available for alarm service i.e. it goes into the CO but does not get connected to a switch. ------------------------------ From: Clark W. Griswold, Jr. Subject: Re: Verizon Plans to Offer "Naked DSL" on 4/5 of its Wirelines Date: Sat, 12 Feb 2005 18:19:00 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Steve Sobol wrote: > Bull. > It's a marketing issue. It's a monopolistic > big-telco-doing-whatever-they-want-to issue. There is no technological > requirement for there to be a dialtone on the same line as DSL, and > no, I'm not talking about SDSL, I'm talking about ADSL which usually > must be bundled with POTS service. Sigh. While I'm no fan of SBC or any of the others, not everything is the fault of the big old telco you know ... In the case of DSL, someone has to cover the costs of maintaining the wire and doing the billing. When DSL was first rolled out, it was promoted as an add-on to voice phone service. The independent DSL providers (and eventually the telcos themselves) successfully argued to the various state PUCs that they should only have to pay the marginal or addon cost to put DSL on the line, since the subscriber was already covering billing and maintenance through the voice bill. Tariffs, regulations and accounting systems were written by the sates and the telcos to make this happen. Now, the DSL providers want to sell a naked product. Well, all those laws/systems/regulations have to change. In fact, in many cases the telco doesn't even know what it costs on an individual basis for a naked line - they've never had to compute it that way before or track costs that way before. Far easier to add it all up and divide by the number of subscriber lines, eh? While there is no technological reason to prevent naked DSL from being sold, you clearly don't grasp all the other factors that take time and money to change. While the telcos may not like sharing their old copper pairs, they've pretty much resigned themselves to it, since they were installed under regulated rate of return rules. What's a bit more unfortunate is that the telcos have successfully managed to exempt themselves from sharing any new fiber that gets buried. Since the capacity of fiber exceeds that of a copper pair in a bundle with a bunch of other copper pairs by a factor of a million to 1 or more, the long term viability of naked DSL is questionable at best. ------------------------------ From: David Clayton Subject: Re: Verizon Plans to Offer "Naked DSL" on 4/5 of its Wirelines Date: Sun, 13 Feb 2005 14:11:20 +1100 On Fri, 2005-02-11 at 22:40 -0800, Steve Sobol wrote: > R Collinge wrote: >> "Verizon expects "that in the not-too-distant future that you will be >> able to get Verizon DSL without getting Verizon phone service," said >> Tom Tauke, Verizon executive vice president for public affairs and >> communications. "It's a technological issue, it's not a marketing >> issue." > Bull. > It's a marketing issue. It's a monopolistic > big-telco-doing-whatever-they-want-to issue. There is no technological > requirement for there to be a dialtone on the same line as DSL, and > no, I'm not talking about SDSL, I'm talking about ADSL which usually > must be bundled with POTS service. In Australia there is (in theory) a way of getting ADSL from one provider with "dial tone" from the incumbent telco (Telstra), it's called the "Spectrum Sharing Service" (SSS). There is also the "Unconditioned Local Loop" (ULL) where the incumbent telco will just charge for the pair to your home from the exchange, and you can then get xDSL from whoever has equipment in the exchange. I don't think there has been too much take up as yet of these services, but a fair few ISP's are installing their own DSLAM's in Telstra exchanges at this moment. There are some links to FAQ's and technical info here for anyone that's interested: http://www.telstrawholesale.com/products/access.htm 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. ------------------------------ From: Michael D. Sullivan Subject: Re: Verizon Plans to Offer "Naked DSL" on 4/5 of its Wirelines Date: Sun, 13 Feb 2005 04:38:02 GMT In article , sjsobol@JustThe.net says: > R Collinge wrote: >> "Verizon expects "that in the not-too-distant future that you will be >> able to get Verizon DSL without getting Verizon phone service," said >> Tom Tauke, Verizon executive vice president for public affairs and >> communications. "It's a technological issue, it's not a marketing >> issue." > Bull. > It's a marketing issue. It's a monopolistic > big-telco-doing-whatever-they-want-to issue. There is no technological > requirement for there to be a dialtone on the same line as DSL, and > no, I'm not talking about SDSL, I'm talking about ADSL which usually > must be bundled with POTS service. There is at least one technology issue, and maybe more. Verizon's many millions of ADSL/POTS lines are identified by telephone number. The POTS telephone number is, in effect, the key, the unique identifier, used in the databases of both Verizon's LEC and Verizon Online, which markets DSL to the public. Both companies' databases will have to be significantly reconfigured to use an identification other than simply the telephone number in order to run their businesses before Naked DSL is offered. If you have ever called Verizon Online's customer (dis) service number, you will know that the first question asked is, "What is your DSL line's phone number?" Reconfiguration of two companies' massive databases to use a different key is not a simple task. It needs to be planned meticulously, tested and debugged, and then rolled out, probably as a flash cut, affecting all of Verizon's wire centers, customer service centers, etc. This is not unlike the reconfiguration of wireless providers' networks that was needed to effectuate number portability; previously, each phone's service provider was identified by the area code and NXX code of the phone number associated with it, which was stored in both the phone and network databases as the mobile ID number (MIN). In order to break the hard link between the MIN and phone number, or mobile directory number (MDN), several years of planning and implementation of complex database changes were required. Michael D. Sullivan Bethesda, MD, USA Replace "example.invalid" with ".com". ------------------------------ From: Michael D. Sullivan Subject: Re: Click Fraud Looms As Search-Engine Threat Date: Sun, 13 Feb 2005 05:26:06 GMT In article , lisa_minter2001 @yahoo.com says... TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to Lisa Minter: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Is it 'click fraud' when a netizen > is casually surfing around the net and clicks on an ad *thinking* they > might possibly be interested in it then they discover they are not > interested? No, it's not. It's window shopping, as you suggest below. You, the casual user, haven't signed or clicked on any contract regarding your right to click. > Isn't clicking on an ad more or less the same thing as 'window shopping' > which as often as not does not produce revenue for the owner of the > window? If I return to a store window a second or third time, to > examine the goods more closely and have thoughts of my own about the > merchandise, is that the essence of 'click fraud'? The analogy is apt. You, the consumer, even have the right to engage a salesperson's attention for an extended period. You can go into Tiffany's and ask to try on dozens of rings, necklaces, watches, or whatever, and then say "thank you very much," and walk out. You can do this every day for weeks on end, if you want, as long as you are doing it in good faith and not with the intention of tying up their salespeople so others can't be served. Tiffany's has every right to decline to deal with you, though. I'm sure Tiffany's has had the opportunity to determine the extent to which encouraging such window- shopping ultimately results in sales. If it isn't productive over time, they won't let it go on, and will shoo away the repeat time-wasters. If it is productive over time, and the repeat non-customers eventually fall in love with the diamond necklace or silver ring, then Tiffany's will accept this as the cost of doing business. The same is true of supermarkets and discount stores, which advertise loss-leader items to get people into the store. Consumers are entitled to buy only the under-cost paper towels, cosmetics, towels, coffeepots, paper shredders, or wifi cards and nothing else, if they choose. If, over time, it turns out that's all they buy, the stores will have to change their strategies. Similarly, you the consumer have the right to call an 800 number to find out information about a company's services or products, even if that company is a spammer. The fact is that any promotional gimmick has costs, and the company using any gimmick must monitor its costs and benefits. The law firms promoting melisthomelia suits have to decide whether it's worth paying $51 a click for 1000 curious onlookers, based on how many clients they get out of it and the likelihood of recovery. They can stop paying for the clicks at any time if it isn't working out. It's different, however, when someone sets out deliberately to impose unnecessary costs on a business, as opposed to shopping in good faith as a consumer. If Cartier's, for example, sent people into Tiffany's to tie up their salespeople, and Tiffany's suffered lost sales, then Tiffany's might have grounds for a lawsuit against Cartier's. Likewise, if someone with no commercial motive, just a bad attitude, repeatedly sent people into Tiffany's and tied up salespeople trying on rings with no intention of buying in order to damage Tiffany's business, grounds for a lawsuit might exist. It also wouldn't be legitimate for someone to repeatedly and maliciously call the 800 number of a spammer (or send faxes to a fax spammer) in order to run up their costs and damage their business. In a similar vein, if a competing law firm hired a bunch of people to repeatedly click on a melisthomelia link in order to run up the advertised firm's costs, there might be grounds for a lawsuit. Situations such as these are similar to a "Denial of Service" attack on a website and should not be considered as though they were legitimate consumer actions. > Merchants need to realize that when they nicely decorate a window on a > well traveled thoroughfare, that people are going to stop and look at > it sometimes, most of whom will not go inside nor buy anything. And > maybe services like Google and Yahoo need to quit the practice of > auctioning off the clicks to the highest bidder and instead just start > selling 'x' number of displays (or page hits) for 'x' dollars, and > when 'x" number of hits has been reached, then quit displaying the ad > at all, and quit playing games with particular 'word popularity' and > such. There is a lot I could say about the kinds of ads they serve up > to me on the telecom pages (and frequently the lack of any ads at all) > but I shall not bother; I'll just go along playing the games I see > other webmaster/publishers playing, making what little I can from it. > But the system does need to be improved, that's for sure. PAT] Yahoo and Google should remain essentially unregulated in this respect. If the auctioned-off click model works, good for them. If it doesn't work, they will change to something else that has better prospects. Likewise, companies are free to buy ad slots at auctioned prices, or not; whether this makes sense for them depends on their business model. They should not, however, be subjected to intentional damage to their business by competitors or cranks just because they posted an ad. The companies selling ads (e.g., Yahoo and Google) and the advertisers should try to find a method for resolving the issue that works for both sides. For example, a plaintiff's asbestos law firm might negotiate with Yahoo and Google to disqualify another firm from advertising for a period if it is somehow linked to fraudulent clicks. Michael D. Sullivan Bethesda, MD, USA Replace "example.invalid" with ".com". ------------------------------ From: Joseph Subject: Re: Telecom Update (Canada) #468, February 11, 2005 Date: Sat, 12 Feb 2005 15:27:05 -0800 Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com On Fri, 11 Feb 2005 15:34:57 -0500, Angus TeleManagement wrote: > EUROPEAN CELLULAR PENETRATION HITS 80%: Eurostat, an agency of the > European Union, reports that Europe now has 80 mobile telephone > subscriptions for every 100 inhabitants. Cellular penetration by > country ranges from 45.5% (Poland) to 120.2% (Luxembourg). Pardon my lack of understanding but how can *anything* be 120.2%? You can't have more than 100% which means totally covered can you or can you? [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I am one person, but I have two cell phones (one that I only rarely if ever use.) Would having those two cell phones mean that I was 200 percent covered on cell phones? I think what the article meant to say was there are now 120.2 cell phones for every hundred inhabitants, which would get the 120.2 % they have. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Feb 2005 22:34:12 -0600 From: C.W. Reply-To: temp18@thewolfden.org Subject: Re: National ID Card is Almost Ready For Us What the hell's wrong with you? This is the telecom digest! Why are you wasting my time including this sort of crap that has no useful content and is nothing but racist? > *From*: / Tim@Backhome.org/ > *Subject*: / Re: National ID Card is Almost Ready For Us/ > *Date*: / Sat, 12 Feb 2005 11:30:11 -0800/* > * > Patrick Townson wrote: >> [*TELECOM Digest Editor's Note*: So, are you ready for your National ID >> card? PAT] > I'd gladly go for it, provided they would round up all the wetbacks > and deport them. > Fat chance. ------------------------------ From: Wesrock@aol.com Date: Sat, 12 Feb 2005 19:59:19 EST Subject: Re: Old Party-Line Arrangements In a message dated Fri, 11 Feb 2005 16:08:05 -0500, William Warren < william_warren_nonoise@comcast.net> writes: > On the #5XB, a phone was wired in two separate steps: one for incoming > calls, and a separate connection for outgoing. This was done because a > lot of businesses choose to have all their toll usage lumped on one > bill, or wanted to have a single billing number for a specific > workgroup, etc., so that the "incoming" wiring was done at the Number > Group, and the "outgoing" at the Translator. > Someone miswired the Translator. With all due respect, the identification came from an identification wire which was threaded through a "Number Network" frame with oval openings corresponding to the digits of the number and surrounded by coils which could detect a spurt of tone on the idenficiation lead. This spurt was sent when a caller accessed the DDD equipment. An object lesson given to planners for later 5XB/DDD cutover committee involved a jumper that was misrouted in the Enid, Oklahoma, office its cutover to 5XB/DDD/AMA (previously it had been manual common battery). A jewelry store which sold small appliances and a lumber yard which sold large appliances were frequently in dispute over their toll billing. The problem was compounded by the fact that both called the same General Electric appliance distribution warehouse in a suburb of Kansas City to place orders or for other dealings. Neither one of them could deny they made calls to this number, since they both did, but not necessarily at the times the were billed for. This went on for months. A craftsman investigating the problem for the umpteenth time ran the identification jumpers and found the jumper for one of the business's second line was miswired to one of the other business's numbers. (The numbers at one point differed by only one digit. Since it was only on the second line, the occasions of misbilling appeared to be random. A caution to switchmen to verify every jumped before cutover to make sure that they or the W.E. installers had each one wired correctly. Incidentally, group billing takes place in the accounting office, not in the C.O., so each line is wired to its correct line number, not kludged in the C.O. Wes Leatherock wesrock@aol.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 V24 #65 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Feb 14 00:20:32 2005 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j1E5KWH12794; Mon, 14 Feb 2005 00:20:32 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2005 00:20:32 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200502140520.j1E5KWH12794@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 V24 #66 TELECOM Digest Mon, 14 Feb 2005 00:20:00 EST Volume 24 : Issue 66 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson How to Stop Junk E-Mail: Charge for the Stamp (Monty Solomon) Break-In at SAIC Risks ID Theft (Monty Solomon) Interactive TV Poised for a Rollout (Monty Solomon) Re: Verizon Plans to Offer "Naked DSL" on 4/5 of its Wirelines (S Sobol) Re: Verizon Plans to Offer "Naked DSL" on 4/5 of its Wirelines (AES) Re: Verizon Plans to Offer Naked DSL on 4/5 of its Wirelines (Goldstein) Re: National ID Card is Almost Ready For Us (DevilsPGD) Re: XM Antenna Construction (Fred Atkinson) Re: Click Fraud Looms As Search-Engine Threat (AES) 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: Sun, 13 Feb 2005 23:57:42 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: How to Stop Junk E-Mail: Charge for the Stamp DIGITAL DOMAIN By RANDALL STROSS Published: February 13, 2005 COMPARE our e-mail system today with the British General Post Office in 1839, and ours wins. Compare it with the British postal system in 1840, however, and ours loses. In that year, the British introduced the Penny Black, the first postage stamp. It simplified postage -- yes, to a penny -- and shifted the cost from the recipient to the sender, who had to prepay. We look back with wonder that it could have ever been otherwise. Recipient pays? Why should the person who had not initiated the transaction be forced to pay for a message with unseen contents? What a perverse system. Today, however, we meekly assume that the recipient of e-mail must bear the costs. It is nominally free, of course, but it arrives in polluted form. Cleaning out the stuff once it reaches our in-box, or our Internet service provider's, is irritating beyond words, costly even without per-message postage. This muck -- Hotmail alone catches about 3.2 billion unsolicited messages a day -- is a bane of modern life. Even the best filters address the problem too late, after this sludge has been discharged without cost to the polluter. In my case, desperation has driven me to send all my messages sequentially through three separate filter systems. Then I must remember to check the three junk folders to see what failed to get through that should have. Recipient pays. http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/13/business/yourmoney/13digi.html?ex=1265950800&en=27f653cbed7b77f4&ei=5090 NOTE: To read the New York Times on line daily here, with no login or registration requirements, go to: http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra/nytimes.html About a hundred new headlines daily, constantly refreshing 24/7. Just find the desired headline, click on it and read the article. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 13 Feb 2005 23:48:14 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Break-In At SAIC Risks ID Theft Computers Held Personal Data on Employee-Owners By Griff Witte Washington Post Staff Writer Some of the nation's most influential former military and intelligence officials have been informed in recent days that they are at risk of identity theft after a break-in at a major government contractor netted computers containing the Social Security numbers and other personal information about tens of thousands of past and present company employees. The contractor, employee-owned Science Applications International Corp. of San Diego, handles sensitive government contracts, including many in information security. It has a reputation for hiring Washington's most powerful figures when they leave the government, and its payroll has been studded with former secretaries of defense, CIA directors and White House counterterrorism advisers. Those former officials -- along with the rest of a 45,000-person workforce in which a significant percentage of employees hold government security clearances -- were informed last week that their private information may have been breached and they need to take steps to protect themselves from fraud. David Kay, who was chief weapons inspector in Iraq after nearly a decade as an executive at SAIC, said he has devoted more than a dozen hours to shutting down accounts and safeguarding his finances. He said the successful theft of personal data, by thieves who smashed windows to gain access, does not speak well of a company that is devoted to keeping the government's secrets secure. http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A17506-2005Feb11 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 13 Feb 2005 23:25:45 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Interactive TV Poised for a Rollout NASDAQ:MSFT) Microsoft Corporation By BRUCE MEYERSON AP Business Writer NEW YORK (AP) -- I want my IPTV? Internet Protocol, the language of most online communications, was supposed to have revolutionized the way we watch television by now, enabling a wide range of multimedia bells and whistles: from multiple camera angles to on-screen Web searches while viewing Gilligan's Island to see which actors are still living. But just as the tech bubble's promise of "IP" telephone service over an Internet connection is only now becoming a widespread reality, IPTV finally appears to be on the verge of cracking the U.S. mainstream. Not the cable TV establishment _ which questions the technology and the demand for so much interactivity _ but rather three Bell telephone companies are taking IPTV off the drawing board in the United States, much as telecom players in Asia and Europe have led the way abroad. The extent of the Bells' plans vary considerably, but perhaps a dozen markets will see some form of IPTV starting later this year, and millions of homes may have the option by the end of 2006. SBC Communications Inc., the dominant local phone company from the Midwest to California, is deploying a full-blown IPTV system that it plans to launch by year-end in at least a few undisclosed markets. Verizon Communications Inc. plans to offer some interactive IP-based features on top of a conventional digital cable service. The company also won't name its debut markets, due mid-year, though it has secured cable franchise licenses in certain suburbs of Dallas and Los Angeles. While BellSouth Corp. has expressed doubt about whether a cable rollout makes financial sense, the company sees enough potential to trial IPTV technology in undisclosed markets. The nation's dominant cable providers, busy introducing telephone service across the country, say there's no rush to introduce TV services much more interactive than video-on-demand and digital video recorders to pause, fast-forward and rewind. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=46898837 ------------------------------ From: Steve Sobol Subject: Re: Verizon Plans to Offer "Naked DSL" on 4/5 of its Wirelines Date: Sun, 13 Feb 2005 09:27:48 -0800 Organization: Glorb Internet Services, http://www.glorb.com Clark W. Griswold wrote: > Now, the DSL providers want to sell a naked product. Well, all those > laws/systems/regulations have to change. In fact, in many cases the > telco doesn't even know what it costs on an individual basis for a > naked line - they've never had to compute it that way before or track > costs that way before. Far easier to add it all up and divide by the > number of subscriber lines, eh? How is that *not* the fault of the telco? > While there is no technological reason to prevent naked DSL from being > sold, you clearly don't grasp all the other factors that take time and > money to change. What other factors? OK, I was not aware that the telcos had lobbied to set up the tarriff you described. But they asked for it. Michael D. Sullivan wrote: > There is at least one technology issue, and maybe more. Verizon's > many millions of ADSL/POTS lines are identified by telephone number. When I purchased a Yellow Pages ad from SBC a few years ago, my account number looked a lot like a telephone number. But it wasn't. It was something like 216-R##-###-#### (216 was the area code I was in at the time, and the #'s represent random numbers that I don't remember). It seemed pretty obvious that they bill for directory services using the same billing system that bills for POTS services. Verizon could use a similar account numbering system. Sure, there are costs involved in implementing it, but I have no sympathy for any of the telcos where services over copper are involved, since they milked lots of money out of that copper for so many years before DSL came along, and didn't do many upgrades. > and network databases as the mobile ID number (MIN). In order to > break the hard link between the MIN and phone number, or mobile > directory number (MDN), several years of planning and implementation > of complex database changes were required. Technically, what you're describing isn't a technical issue, it's a billing issue. JustThe.net - Apple Valley, CA - http://JustThe.net/ - 888.480.4NET (4638) Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / sjsobol@JustThe.net / PGP: 0xE3AE35ED "In case anyone was wondering, that big glowing globe above the Victor Valley is the sun." -Victorville _Daily Press_ on the unusually large amount of rain the Southland has gotten this winter (January 12th, 2005) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have had AT&T billing numbers in the past which were my area code, followed by a seven digit number which *appeared at first* to be a telephone number except that it was not a dialable number, such as 137-xxxx or 109-xxxx. I am sure the telcos could deal with this issue with a minimum of hassle. PAT] ------------------------------ From: AES Subject: Re: Verizon Plans to Offer "Naked DSL" on 4/5 of its Wirelines Date: Sun, 13 Feb 2005 13:43:54 -0800 Organization: Stanford University In article , Clark W. Griswold, Jr. wrote: > What's a bit more unfortunate is that the telcos have successfully > managed to exempt themselves from sharing any new fiber that gets > buried. Since the capacity of fiber exceeds that of a copper pair in a > bundle with a bunch of other copper pairs by a factor of a million to > 1 or more, the long term viability of naked DSL is questionable at > best. That's not just "a bit more unfortunate" -- it's a massively socially undesirable policy. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 13 Feb 2005 12:31:33 -0500 From: Fred Goldstein Subject: Re: Verizon Plans to Offer Naked DSL on 4/5 of its Wirelines5 On 12 Feb 2005 22:32:46, jmeissen@aracnet.com asked, >> "Verizon expects "that in the not-too-distant future that you will be >> able to get Verizon DSL without getting Verizon phone service," said >> Tom Tauke, Verizon executive vice president for public affairs and >> communications. "It's a technological issue, it's not a marketing >> issue." "From a very practical perspective, we would like to be able >> to offer the DSL service on a stand-alone basis and the effort is >> being made to bring that about as rapidly as possible," he said. > So that begs the question, will that option only be available to > Verizon Online subscribers, or will those of us who prefer an > independant ISP but are forced to pay through the nose for Verizon > Data's DSL service be able to take advantage of it? That depends on how the FCC rules in pending CC Docket 04-440 -- go to the FCC website, e-filing, ECFS, and read the comments on 04-440 to see the record. It is a Petition from Verizon (similar to, but more extensive than, one previously filed by BellSouth in 04-405) for the FCC to "forbear" from enforcing the rules with regard to any of its "broadband" services, primarily DSL, but also (because of an earlier petition) ATM, Frame Relay, and possibly T1 and higher-speed leased lines. The rules in question are: Title II of the Communications Act, in general -- the portion that concerns Common Carriage. Forbearing from Common Carriage (specifically Sections 201 and 202) means that they would not have to provide "Just and Reasonable" rates, or offer "nondiscriminatory" service. This would allow them to turn away all ISPs other than Verizon Online. However, Verizon suggests that they will enter into commercial agreements with another ISP or so, if that ISP offers them a good enough deal, like revenue sharing. But having a free choice of ISP? If the Petition goes ahead and is not overturned in court, fuggedaboutit. The other rule in the Forbearance Petition is Computer II, which requires a telco's unregulated affiliates (Verizon Online, in this case) to purchase services from the regulated parent company (The Verizon Telephone Companies) at the same terms and conditions (tariffs) that are offered to unaffiliated entities. Again, this is what made the ISP industry possible; if this goes away, "Internet" becomes the property of the ILEC, so long as it uses their copper wire, full stop. Verizon claims that since cable modems have a bigger share (they don't offer wholesale service to other ISPs, again except for very limited special deals), they should be treated the same way. And the independent ISPs can go pound sand, or dig up the streets and install their own wires. Fred Goldstein k1io fgoldstein "at" ionary.com ionary Consulting http://www.ionary.com/ ------------------------------ From: DevilsPGD Subject: Re: National ID Card is Almost Ready For Us Date: Sun, 13 Feb 2005 02:56:43 -0700 Organization: Octanews In message C.W. wrote: > What the hell's wrong with you? This is the telecom digest! Why are > you wasting my time including this sort of crap that has no useful > content and is nothing but racist? A better question is what this whole thread has to do with telecom. A: Maybe because some people are too annoyed by top-posting. Q: Why do I not get an answer to my question(s)? A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? ------------------------------ From: Fred Atkinson Subject: Re: XM Antenna Construction Reply-To: fatkinson@mishmash.com Date: Sun, 13 Feb 2005 17:17:32 GMT Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net >> Does anyone know where I can find info on how to build a XM antenna? > Why would you want to build one, when for $30 you can walk into an > electronics store and buy one that's not only professionally > constructued and works quite well, but is also barely the size of a > postage stamp? Let's not discourage him from experimenting. There are students, ham radio operators, and a number of others who like to build electronic devices. I used to do it myself. Sometimes they were kits. Other times, from articles in magazines. Yet other times, things I undertook myself. Some of them were very crude, but what the heck? Fred ------------------------------ From: AES Subject: Re: Click Fraud Looms As Search-Engine Threat Date: Sun, 13 Feb 2005 13:41:50 -0800 Organization: Stanford University In article , Michael D. Sullivan wrote: > It's different, however, when someone sets out deliberately to impose > unnecessary costs on a business, as opposed to shopping in good faith > as a consumer. If Cartier's, for example, sent people into Tiffany's > to tie up their salespeople, and Tiffany's suffered lost sales, then > Tiffany's might have grounds for a lawsuit against Cartier's. Question for Michael Sullivan: Is it different when the _business_ sets out deliberately to impose unnecessary or unwanted costs (however minor) on the _individual_? Suppose while passing by Cartier's front door on my way back to work I drop into their store to make a quick good-faith query about one of their products. I discover after doing this, however, that they won't let me back out their front door again. I can only leave via a rear door, which forces me to walk through an arcade filled with display windows for their mechandise or other related merchandise and then dumps me out on the next street, a block in the opposite direction from my initial destination. Turns out they get paid small amounts by the other merchants for doing this. Is the analogy to certain kinds of hidden pop-up window ads clear enough? Would retaliatory actions on my part be justified? (e.g, if there were pushbuttons in the arcade to serve me with catalogs, could I justifiably push several of them and dump the catalogs on the floor?) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Your point is a *very good one*. I have even had some bozos (but in fairness, they are usually the sex purveyors) not let me leave at all, dumping one new window after another at me without any absolute way out short of recyling power on the computer. 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 V24 #66 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Feb 14 15:18:10 2005 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j1EKIAM18745; Mon, 14 Feb 2005 15:18:10 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2005 15:18:10 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200502142018.j1EKIAM18745@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 V24 #67 TELECOM Digest Mon, 14 Feb 2005 15:18:00 EST Volume 24 : Issue 67 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson The Move to High-Tech Tracking of Inmates (Lisa Minter) Wireless VOIP Gives Voice to Indian Nation (Jack Decker) Powell Rips FCC Delay on Connect Fee Reform (Jack Decker) Vonage Complains of VOIP Blocking by ISPs (Jack Decker) Verizon to Buy MCI (Telecom dailyLead from USTA ) FCC Actions, February 10, 2005 Meeting (Jonathan Marashlian) Re: Click Fraud Looms As Search-Engine Threat (AES) 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, 14 Feb 2005 02:58:11 -0500 From: Lisa Minter Subject: The Move to High-Tech Tracking of Inmates Click here to read this story online: http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0507/p02s02-usju.html By Kris Axtman Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor HOUSTON) Cash-strapped states are increasingly using what was once a military-only technology to free up prison beds and keep inmates from committing crimes while on early release. An electronic bracelet, strapped to a parolee's ankle, uses Global Positioning Satellite (GPS) technology to track his or her every move. It alerts a parole officer if a convicted sex offender is near a school, for instance, or if a drunk driver steps into a bar. Oklahoma may well be the next state to use this technology to keep prison populations -- and prison costs -- down. Just this week, a bill passed both houses and is awaiting the governor's signature. The number of states using this technology has multiplied in the past few years -- a direct result of the limping economy, says Lee Kicker, western regional sales manager for Pro-Tech, the company which contracts the technology. "Our biggest success has been in getting heads off beds," says Mr. Kicker, referring to municipalities that are looking to release inmates early. "Compared to a jail bed, it's dramatically cheaper." The Florida Department of Corrections first began using the technology in 1997, and currently 32 states and 125 different jurisdictions utilize this system. The savings -- GPS costs an average of $5 a day compared to $50 a day in prison -- is significant. But some wonder about the wisdom of letting inmates out early -- even if it's only nonviolent offenders, as will be the case with the Oklahoma Department of Corrections. The state wants to send 800 offenders now on work release home with a GPS tracking device and move 800 inmates in prison to work release. All of them could be monitored with the technology. "We're not in favor of taking people out of prisons and putting them on GPS," says Kicker, a former Dallas police officer. "But many people, like those on work release, can do just as well out on the street as they can in prison." Some jurisdictions use GPS to monitor parolees or those on probation. Some, such as Tulsa County, use it to monitor people awaiting trial. There, the county assesses the danger and flight risk and then decides whether to let someone out with an ankle bracelet. Officials there have monitored over 1,000 people so far, with charges ranging from domestic abuse to drugs to murder. In that time, only seven have failed to appear in court and six were captured within 48 hours. "They usually test us for the first couple days, but when they realize that we truly do know their whereabouts at all times, they behave themselves," says Kevin Francis, director of court services for Tulsa County. He calculates that the GPS tracking system has already saved taxpayers $3.2 million annually -- enough to fund his entire office for a year. GPS sends back signals and data in real time, which is a far cry from old tracking systems. Parole officers input curfew times and exclusion zones, such as a playground, a victim's house, or a bar, into a computer and are beeped if an offender enters that area. In Colorado, for instance, a convicted sex offender was found frequently returning to the scene of his crime. One of the first signs of reoffending, experts say, is fantasizing about a prior offense, so the man was sent back to prison for violating the terms of his parole. Studies have shown that satellite-tracking systems can reduce the number of parolees who commit crimes. In Florida, where the system has been in operation longer, recidivism rates among sex offenders have gone from around 50 percent to between 3 and 7 percent. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), though it's concerned about the monitoring of people who might not be included if the GPS tracking wasn't an option, says the technology is a good alternative to incarceration. The US has over 2 million people in custody and the rate of incarceration is several times that of most industrialized nations, says Elizabeth Alexander, director of the ACLU's National Prison Project in Washington. "We need to reform our criminal-justice system and be certain that we are using our scarce resources on prisons only when it is absolutely necessary," she says. "So we support alternatives that do that -- and protect the public's safety." But the system is not foolproof. Like any technology, it's subject to human error. Here in Houston, for example, convicted rapist Lawrence Napper was placed on the GPS system after being paroled in 2000. He was supposed to go only from home to work to his parole office, but in nine months, he logged 444 violations that were never caught. He was then transferred to a less restrictive monitoring program and, a month later, was arrested for sexually assaulting a 6-year-old boy. He was sentenced to life in prison. "There is a chance for human error. I'm not going to argue that point," says Kicker. "But you can't strap an ankle bracelet on a guy and then forget about him. It takes a certain amount of diligence on the parole officer's part." (c) Copyright 2005 The Christian Science Monitor. All rights reserved. The Christian Science Monitor -- an independent daily newspaper providing context and clarity on national and international news, peoples and cultures, and social trends. Online at http://www.csmonitor.com 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 The Christian Science Publishing Society. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ From: Jack Decker Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2005 13:01:49 -0500 Subject: Wireless VOIP Gives Voice to Indian Nation http://industryclick.com/magazinearticle.asp?magazineid=7&releaseid=12926&magazinearticleid=214795&siteid=3 By Carol Wilson Telephony, Feb 14, 2005 What began as one Indian reservation's desire for better telephone service now stands to become a national movement to bring broadband technology to other reservations around the U.S. Mescalero Apache Telecom (MATI) took life in March 2001 and in four short years has upgraded telephone service to the Mescalero Apache Indian Reservation, introduced high-speed Internet access and begun trialing broadband wireless technology for voice and data as a competitive carrier. As important, however, is that MATI is sharing its knowledge with others in the same situation. "We made Mescalero a showcase to show other tribes," said Godfrey Enjady, general manager of Mescalero Apache Telecom. "We have a telecom 101 training course for tribes and show them the back-office, the billing and the front-office systems, as well as a lot of training that we cram into a week. We have NECA [National Exchange Carriers' Association] and vendors come out and make presentations. It's all part of our outreach to tribes to show them how telephone companies work. Full story at: http://industryclick.com/magazinearticle.asp?magazineid=7&releaseid=12926&magazinearticleid=214795&siteid=3 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 Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2005 13:56:33 -0500 Subject: Powell Rips FCC Delay on Connection Fee Reform http://www.internetnews.com/bus-news/article.php/3482361 February 10, 2005 Powell Rips FCC Delay on Connection Fee Reform By Roy Mark WASHINGTON -- Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman Michael Powell warned his fellow commissioners today that they would eventually regret Thursday's FCC decision to further study intercarrier compensation reform. After reviewing the issue for the last four years, the FCC is now seeking comment on seven reform proposals submitted to the agency by various telecom industry groups and alliances. Given the FCC's rulemaking procedures, any final decision made on the proposals is probably months away at best. Powell and Commissioner Kathleen Abernathy bluntly said the time had come for action, not more study. "Today, we act as timidly as ever in the name of dialogue and process," said Powell, who announced his resignation last month. "If you're looking for bold action, you're certainly not going to find it here." The emergence of IP-based communications over the last three years, most notably Voice over IP (define), has put the FCC in a quandary over how to fit 21st-century technologies into a 70-year-old structure originally designed to regulate the then publicly owned telephone system. Full story at: http://www.internetnews.com/bus-news/article.php/3482361 ------------------------------ From: Jack Decker Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2005 13:42:22 -0500 Subject: Vonage Complaining Of VoIP 'Blocking' I hope the FCC will act swiftly to nip this in the bud -- ISP's have no more business blocking customers' access to certain VoIP providers than they do blocking access to competitors' web sites. I mean, just as a hypothetical, suppose that Comcast or Charter took it upon themselves to block customer access to SBC or Verizon web sites because they didn't want you to read about the DSL offerings from those companies? Soon we'd be back to the bad old days of walls between providers (think Compuserve and the original AOL). At the heart of it, VoIP is just data, and once you allow companies to start blocking certain types of data based on content or destination you are going down a very slippery slope. And before anyone mentions it, e-mail is a special case because of the spam problem, and even with e-mail there are ways to tunnel around an ISP's port 25 block if you have legitimate access to another mail server. Not concerned yet? Well consider this -- suppose your web page was hosted on a particular ISP, and suddenly one of the large ISPs took a notion to start blocking access to web sites hosted on selected competitive ISPs. Of course, their solution would be to open an account with them and move your web site to their servers. Now what happens when two or more ISPs do this? Pretty soon the entire Internet as we know it falls apart, and I don't think I'm being overly dramatic in saying that -- I have seen just too many examples of corporate greed destroying the good things of life to think that it could not happen that way. http://www.advancedippipeline.com/news/60400413 February 14, 2005 Vonage Complaining Of VoIP 'Blocking' Company has complained to the FCC that competing service providers are "blocking" its Voice over IP service. By Paul Kapustka Advanced IP Pipeline BOULDER, Colo. -- Leading Voice over IP service provider Vonage Holdings has complained to the Federal Communications Commission that competitors are blocking the use of its service, according to FCC staffers and others close to the company. In a speech during Sunday's Silicon Flatirons conference here, Stanford law professor Larry Lessing said that Vonage has been telling the FCC that other service providers are hampering Vonage's VoIP service by "blocking" it from reaching certain SIP addresses for end-user devices. Reports of other providers using networking techniques to block competitors' VoIP services have surfaced before, but none have involved Vonage or major U.S. service providers. Robert Pepper, the FCC's chief of policy development, was at the Silicon Flatirons conference and confirmed that Vonage had complained to the FCC about blocking issues, but did not comment further. Brooke Schulz, Vonage's senior vice president for corporate communications, said Monday that the company would not comment on the report. Full story at: http://www.advancedippipeline.com/news/60400413 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2005 12:50:06 EST From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA Subject: Verizon to Buy MCI http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=19386&l=2017006 TODAY'S HEADLINES NEWS OF THE DAY * Verizon to buy MCI BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH * Analysis: Lucent may face pressure to seek merger * Sprint to lease wireless towers * Microsoft beefs up presence in mobile phone market * Tut buys Copper Mountain * Motorola to sell inexpensive mobile phones USTA SPOTLIGHT * Fill Your Most Urgent Job Requirements!! EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES * Analysis: Mobile TV is great idea, but product is a ways off * Report: Mobile phone gambling represents huge opportunity for wireless companies REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE * Ebbers' lawyers expected to put heat on Sullivan Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others. http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=19386&l=2017006 ------------------------------ From: Jonathan Marashlian Subject: FCC Actions, February 10, 2005 Meeting Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2005 13:28:41 -0500 Organization: The Helein Law Group http://www.thefrontlines-hlg.com/ The FRONT LINES http://www.thlglaw.com/ Advancing The Cause of Competition in the Telecommunications Industry VISIT THE HELEIN LAW GROUP AT INTELLE-CARD EXPO IN MIAMI The Helein Law Group will be exhibiting at the Spring Intelle-Card Expo Prepaid Show, being held this year at the Miami Convention Center from March 22-25. Please visit us at Booth #607. For more information on the show go to: http://www.intelecardexpo.com/home/default.asp If you are interested in attending and would like a free Exhibit Hall Pass, please contact Jonathan Marashlian at: jsm@thlglaw.com. Free passes will be provided on a first-come, first-serve basis. FCC TAKES FIRST STEP TOWARD INTERCARRIER COMPENSATION REFORM On February 10, 2005, the Federal Communications Commission ("FCC") initiated a rulemaking proceeding whose goal is to replace the outdated intercarrier compensation system with a uniform regime suited for competitive markets and new technologies. The current system relies on per-minute intercarrier payments that distinguish between different types of carriers and services, such as local and long-distance, or wireless and wireline, even though these distinctions often have no bearing on the cost of providing service. Furthermore, new technologies, such as Internet telephony, and new service offerings, such as bundled flat-rate packages, have eroded these distinctions. The FCC began its long trek towards reforming intercarrier compensation over four years ago with its 2001 Intercarrier Compensation NPRM. Although no rules ever resulted from this proceeding, the record developed therein gave rise to four suggested common themes for reform. First, any approach should encourage the development of efficient competition and the efficient use of and investment in telecommunications networks. Second, any approach must preserve universal service support, which ensures affordable rates for consumers living in rural and high-cost areas. Any proposal that would result in significant reductions in intercarrier payments should include a proposal to address the universal service implications of such reductions. Third, any approach must be technologically and competitively neutral. Finally, an approach that requires minimal regulatory intervention and enforcement is consistent with the competitive deregulatory environment of the 1996 Telecommunications Act. Proposals that rely on negotiated agreements between carriers might be preferable to regimes requiring detailed rules and regulations. The FCC is seeking comment on seven comprehensive reform proposals submitted by the industry and others in the rulemaking. Among the questions the Commission will examine is the effect any change will have on consumers and the universal service fund, which helps provide affordable service for rural and low income Americans. The Commission said it would be "particularly receptive" to any plan that offers expanded choices and lower rates to rural consumers. Following is a list of the groups submitting reform proposals and a brief description of their plans: * Intercarrier Compensation Forum (ICF). The group represents a diverse group of nine carriers. The plan would reduce most per-minute termination rates from existing levels to zero over a six-year period. * Expanded Portland Group (EPG). The group is comprised of small and mid-sized rural LECs. Its two-phase plan would eventually convert per-minute intercarrier charges to capacity-based charges. * Alliance for Rational Intercarrier Compensation (ARIC). ARIC represents small rural providers serving high-cost areas. Its Fair Affordable Comprehensive Telecom Solution (FACTs) plan would unify per-minute rates at a level based on a carrier's embedded costs. * Cost-Based Intercarrier Compensation Coalition (CBICC). The coalition represents competitive local exchange carriers, or CLECs. The plan would create a cost-based termination rate in each geographic area for all types of traffic. * Home Telephone Company and PBT Telecom (Home/PBT). Home and PBT are rural local exchange carriers. The plan would replace the current regimes with connection-based intercarrier charges. * Western Wireless. Western Wireless is a wireless carrier that receives universal service support in 14 states. Its plan would reduce intercarrier charges in equal steps over four years to bill-and-keep. * NASUCA. NASUCA is the National Association of State Utility Consumer Advocates. NASUCA's plan would reduce certain intercarrier rate levels over a five-year period. To read these plans in their entirety, visit the FCC's web site at http://www.fcc.gov/wcb/ppd/. Links to the plans can be found under the heading "Intercarrier Compensation Reform." FCC PROPOSES REDUCTION IN CARRIER CHANGE (PIC) CHARGES On February 10, 2005, the FCC announced the adoption of rules aimed at reducing the cost to consumers of switching long-distance providers. The current rate of $5 could be reduced to $1.25 under the Commission's new rules. These rates would apply when long-distance carriers order the changes electronically rather than manually. For manual changes, the rates could increase slightly, to $5.50. Local exchange carriers, which receive the fees for switching a customer's pre-subscribed long-distance carrier, can charge more if they can document higher costs. However, local carriers that adopt the new "safe harbor" rates are free from the expense of submitting detailed cost information. Local companies can also charge less than the safe harbor rate if they choose. When consumers switch both interstate and intrastate long-distance providers at the same time, the charge for changing the interstate provider is cut in half, from $1.25 to 63 cents for electronically processed changes. The FCC has no authority to reduce the intrastate charge, which is set by each state. The Commission found that electronic processing and other changes in the industry have reduced the cost of switching carriers since the $5 fee was adopted in 1984. The order creates an incentive for long-distance carriers to invest in electronic processing so that fees charged by local providers won't deter customers from signing up. Long-distance companies sometimes voluntarily pay these fees to attract new customers, but they are not required to do so. Local carriers that haven't installed systems capable of processing electronic orders would not be required to do so if the investment isn't economically rational. These carriers may charge the safe harbor rate for manual changes. FCC ADOPTS RULES TO IMPROVE EXCHANGE OF CUSTOMER INFORMATION BETWEEN ILECs AND IXCs WHEN CUSTOMERS SWITCH PREFERRED PROVIDERS The Commission has adopted new rules that will help ensure that consumers' phone service bills are accurate and that their carrier selection requests are honored and executed without undue delay. The rules specify a number of situations in which carriers must share customer information with each other. The proceeding began with a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking released on March 25, 2004. It asked parties to address the magnitude of the billing problems ascribed to carriers' failure to exchange customer account information among themselves in a complete and/or timely manner and whether the adoption of mandatory, minimum standards could significantly reduce the percentage of consumer complaints concerning billing errors. Upon a review of the record, the FCC concluded that mandatory, minimum standards are needed to facilitate the exchange of customer account information between local exchange carriers (LECs) and interexchange carriers (IXCs). The FCC pointed to evidence demonstrating that information needed by carriers to execute customer requests in a timely and efficient manner and to properly bill customers was not being consistently provided by all LECs and by all IXCs. Comments by a group of telephone companies reported, for example, that nearly 60 percent of approximately 3,065 wireline local service providers do not participate in any exchange of customer account information. As a result, on average, approximately 163.7 million calls per month (nearly two billion calls per year) are placed on their long distance networks by subscribers for whom the long distance provider has received no customer billing name and address information. The Commission noted that complaints to its own Consumer Centers also indicated continuing problems caused by lack of information sharing among companies. Under the new rules, a LEC will be required to supply customer account information to an IXC when: (1) the LEC has placed an end user on the IXC's network; (2) the LEC has removed an end user from the IXC's network; (3) an end user that is presubscribed to the IXC makes certain changes to her account information via her LEC; (4) the IXC has requested billing, name and address (BNA) information for an end user who has usage on the IXC's network but for whom the IXC does not have an existing account; and (5) the LEC rejects an IXC-initiated order to change a customer's presubscribed interexchange carrier (PIC). In addition, an IXC will be required to supply customer account information to a LEC when an end user contacts the IXC directly either to select or to remove the IXC as his PIC. The Commission also required carriers to provide the required notifications promptly and without unreasonable delay. While the Commission specified what type of information must be shared, it did not specify the method carriers should use, allowing them to share customer account information pursuant to state-mandated data exchange requirements, privately negotiated agreements with other carriers, or voluntarily-established business rules, including the voluntary, industry-developed standards known as the Customer Account Record Exchange (CARE) process. This approach should minimize the potential costs or burdens associated with implementing the information sharing requirements, particularly for small and rural carriers. The new rules recognize a carrier's right to be compensated for the services it provides by ensuring that providers of long distance phone services receive proper notification when customers are placed on their networks. The information sharing standards adopted today apply in situations involving an IXC and a LEC (or LECs). The Commission also issued a Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (FNPRM) seeking comment on whether they should be extended to situations in which consumers change LECs. The FNPRM specifically asked whether the Commission should require all local service providers to participate in the exchange of customer account information and if so, what information local service providers should be required to supply. =============== The Front Lines is a free publication of The Helein Law Group, LLP, providing clients and interested parties with valuable information, news, and updates regarding regulatory and legal developments primarily impacting companies engaged in the competitive telecommunications industry. The Front Lines does not purport to offer legal advice nor does it establish a lawyer-client relationship with the reader. If you have questions about a particular article, general concerns, or wish to seek legal counsel regarding a specific regulatory or legal matter affecting your company, please contact our firm at 703-714-1313 or visit our website: www.THLGlaw.com The Helein Law Group, LLP 8180 Greensboro Drive, Suite 700 McLean, Virginia 22102 ------------------------------ From: AES Subject: Re: Click Fraud Looms As Search-Engine Threat Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2005 09:04:40 -0800 Organization: Stanford University In article , AES wrote: > In article , Michael D. Sullivan > wrote: >> It's different, however, when someone sets out deliberately to impose >> unnecessary costs on a business, as opposed to shopping in good faith >> as a consumer. If Cartier's, for example, sent people into Tiffany's >> to tie up their salespeople, and Tiffany's suffered lost sales, then >> Tiffany's might have grounds for a lawsuit against Cartier's. > Question for Michael Sullivan: > Is it different when the _business_ sets out deliberately to impose > unnecessary or unwanted costs (however minor) on the _individual_? > Suppose while passing by Cartier's front door on my way back to work I > drop into their store to make a quick good-faith query about one of > their products. > I discover after doing this, however, that they won't let me back out > their front door again. I can only leave via a rear door, which > forces me to walk through an arcade filled with display windows for > their mechandise or other related merchandise and then dumps me out on > the next street, a block in the opposite direction from my initial > destination. Turns out they get paid small amounts by the other > merchants for doing this. > Is the analogy to certain kinds of hidden pop-up window ads clear > enough? Would retaliatory actions on my part be justified? (e.g, if > there were pushbuttons in the arcade to serve me with catalogs, could > I justifiably push several of them and dump the catalogs on the > floor?) > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Your point is a *very good one*. I > have even had some bozos (but in fairness, they are usually the > sex purveyors) not let me leave at all, dumping one new window after > another at me without any absolute way out short of recyling power > on the computer. PAT] Thank you for the kind assessment; and I've encountered the same situation also, which is absolutely infuriating. ------------------------------ 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 V24 #67 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Feb 15 00:23:05 2005 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j1F5N5K21944; Tue, 15 Feb 2005 00:23:05 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 00:23:05 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200502150523.j1F5N5K21944@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 V24 #68 TELECOM Digest Tue, 15 Feb 2005 00:22:00 EST Volume 24 : Issue 68 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Mobile Phone Industry Eyes Music Downloads (Monty Solomon) Motorola Drives Next Generation Push-to-View (Monty Solomon) Motorola and Oakley Introduce Bluetooth Sunglasses (Monty Solomon) Two New Twentieth Television Mobile Shows Premiere on V CAST (Solomon) SS7 F-Links and A-Link Emulation to Decommission Switch (brettnem) ADSL and SDSL? (Robert Anderson) Cingular Seeking Employees in Oklahoma City (Wesrock@aol.com) Reputed Mobsters Plead Out in Phone, Credit Card Scams (Danny Burstein) Re: Vonage Complaining Of VoIP 'Blocking' (Paul Timmins) Re: The Move to High-Tech Tracking of Inmates (David B. Horvath, CCP) Re: Powell Rips FCC Delay on Connection Fee Reform (John McHarry) Re: Click Fraud Looms As Search-Engine Threat (John McHarry) Re: Click Fraud Looms As Search-Engine Threat (Rich Greenberg) Re: Old vs. New Doctors - Communication and Technology (G. Finder) 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, 14 Feb 2005 23:44:40 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Mobile Phone Industry Eyes Music Downloads By LAURENCE FROST AP Business Writer CANNES, France (AP) -- With a covetous eye on the success of portable music players, mobile phone makers are going after would-be iPod buyers by building high-quality players into their handsets. Sony Ericsson announced Monday it would soon market music-player mobiles under its parent's Walkman brand, drawing on the music catalogue of a sister company, Sony BMG, the world's No. 2 record company. And Nokia Corp., the world's leading phone maker, announced an alliance with Microsoft Corp. to allow mobile subscribers to load music from a PC onto their phones _ much the way that a digital music player works. Unlike owners of dedicated MP3 players, Nokia users will also be able to download tracks directly onto their handsets through the wireless phone network and transfer them to computer for storage or burning onto a CD. At a news conference on the first day of the 3GSM World Congress, a major mobile industry gathering on the French Riviera, Nokia also unveiled a new "3G" phone with an integrated music player and high-quality stereo output. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=46953246 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2005 23:46:13 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Motorola Drives Next Generation Services with Push-to-View Continues to Lead Industry with First Push-to-Experience Application for GSM PoC Handsets at 3GSM World Congress CANNES, France, Feb. 14 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- 3GSM World Congress -- Motorola, Inc. (NYSE:MOT), a global leader in wireless communications, today announced plans to take "push-to" technology to the next level as the first company to deliver a complete "Push-to-View" solution on GSM PoC (Push-to-Talk over Cellular) handsets. The company will demonstrate this offering at 3GSM World Congress in Cannes. With Push-to-View, the first in the family of "Push-to-Share" applications, consumers can now see the presence state of their contacts and spontaneously share pictures, captured on their phone, quickly and easily. Whether at work or at play, GSM PoC subscribers will have the ability to send voice or image messages -- all at the push of a button*. For operators deploying PoC networks worldwide, Push-to-View capabilities provide a new real-time multimedia services data application that can lead to increased revenue and differentiation opportunities. Push-to-View will be the first offering in a broader category of peer-to-peer file sharing applications slated from Motorola over the next year -- including video, audio and other rich media -- all designed to further extend the concept of one-touch communications. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=46951168 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2005 23:48:18 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Motorola and Oakley Introduce First Bluetooth Sunglasses Cutting-Edge RAZRWire Line Offers Consumers On-The-Go Connections CANNES, France, February 14 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Motorola, Inc. (NYSE:MOT) and Oakley, Inc. (NYSE:OO) today unveiled a new line of premium Bluetooth(R) wireless technology eyewear designed to keep consumers comfortable and connected. Named RAZRWire, the invention frees the wearer from cumbersome wires and allows active users to quickly answer or place calls with the touch of a button. RAZRWire represents the fusion of world-class Oakley optics with Motorola's industry-leading Bluetooth technology. Available in three frame colors RAZRWire delivers communication in a fashionable, convenient package. The product was developed to meet the needs of active consumers seeking seamless mobility, offering them an integrated easy-to-use design. For cyclists, skateboarders, rock climbers, golfers - practically anyone who is active outdoors - the innovative eyewear encourages hands-free connection while on the go. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=46925781 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2005 15:27:10 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Two New Twentieth Television Mobile Shows Premiere on V CAST 'The Sunset Hotel' and 'Love and Hate' Mobisodes Developed for Viewing on Wireless Phones HOLLYWOOD, and BEDMINISTER, N.J., Feb. 8 /PRNewswire/ -- Twentieth Television and Verizon Wireless, the nation's leading wireless service provider, are bringing the drama and excitement of two mobisodes this week to Verizon Wireless V CAST customers -- "Love and Hate" and "The Sunset Hotel." V CAST from Verizon Wireless is the first true 3G wireless broadband consumer multimedia service in the country, allowing customers to view crystal clear video clips on demand because it runs on Verizon Wireless' Evolution-Data Optimized (EV-DO) network -- the only widely available wide-area wireless broadband network in the United States. Premiering exclusively on V CAST in the V CAST Showcase Channel on Wednesday, February 9, "The Sunset Hotel" is a gorgeous upscale hotel for the Los Angeles elite. Jack, its bartender, is impossibly out of his league when he falls in love with a hotel call girl, Bianca Novak. Both are entangled in a complex web when one of the hotel guests is murdered, and the jealous and vicious hotel manager, Peter, makes it his mission to exploit the situation with manipulation and blackmail. Peter had best watch his back, however, or he could be the next death at "The Sunset Hotel." Premiering exclusively in the V CAST Showcase Channel on Thursday, February 10, "Love and Hate" follows the daily lives of a fictitious family over the course of six months, during which cameras document the emotional strains placed upon them by the many trials and tribulations the family members are experiencing. The improvised soap opera takes an up close and personal point-of-view of the destruction of son Allen's marriage between his wife Elizabeth and carefree daughter Lauryn's unexpected engagement to her newfound boyfriend, Paul. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=46754640 ------------------------------ From: brettnem@gmail.com Subject: SS7 F-Links and A-Link Emulation to Decommission Switch Date: 14 Feb 2005 12:43:28 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Hi All, Here's what I'm trying to do. I have two existing switches with A-Links and their own unique point codes. I'm in the process of trying to decommission one of the switches and would like to get rid of it's A-Links ASAP. This switch has only a few customers, but has 4 CO-Codes on it (it's been in the progress of being decommissioned for some time). I'd really like to move the CO-Code over to the interconnection on the other switch, but I don't think this will happen quick enough for my needs since a LERG update will take a minumum of 45 days. I've thought about using number portability to move the codes (the customers..) but the Code has been entered into the LERG as non-portable! Ek! So ... what I'm thinking is that maybe I could setup an F-Link between the two switches and emulate the point code that was on the old switch's A-Link on the New switch's A-Link and then create a Trunk Group between the two switches. Any thoughts? Does this work? I'm not real familiar with F-Links so I don't know if this is even possible. Thoughts, ideas, etc??? Thanks, Brett ------------------------------ From: Robert Anderson Subject: ADSL and SDSL? Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2005 13:03:18 -0800 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Do you more reliably get the higher bandwidth with SDSL than with ADSL? For example, is the CIR higher with SDSL? We are a very small business using VoIP and our connection is ADSL. People have problems hearing us but not the other way around. We were thinking of switching from ADSL over to SDSL, to see if that helps. Robert Anderson ------------------------------ From: Wesrock@aol.com Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2005 19:04:01 EST Subject: Cingular Seeking Employees in Oklahoma City A banner at a major intersection near my house in Oklahoma City announces that Cingular is hiring and gives a toll-free number to call. Wes Leatherock wesrock@aol.com ------------------------------ From: Danny Burstein Subject: "Reputed Mobsters" Plead Out in Phone and Credit Card Scams Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2005 19:15:40 -0500 Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC "Six reputed mobsters pleaded guilty before jury selection was to begin Monday in a case alleging that the Gambino crime family placed hundreds of millions of dollars in unauthorized charges on unsuspecting consumers' credit cards and telephone bills. "Alleged Gambino captain Salvatore Locascio, made member Richard Martino and four mob associates pleaded guilty to charges including money laundering and conspiracy to commit mail fraud. ... "Prosecutors said the defendants helped set up shell corporations that advertised free services such as psychic readings, phone sex and horoscopes. But calling the numbers triggered unauthorized monthly charges on customers' phone bills, eventually grossing more than $420 million for the Gambino members and their associates, prosecutors said. ... (and also direct credit card fraud) : "Prosecutors said $230 million in fraudulent charges was levied on consumers who believed the sites needed their card numbers for age verification ..." http://www.newsday.com/news/local/wire/ny-bc-ny--phonecompany-mob0214feb14,0,7044766.story?coll=ny-ap-regional-wire Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key dannyb@panix.com [to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded] [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have seen cases like this, where web sites have demanded credit card numbers as 'proof' that the holder was over the age of 21 and they (web sites) have said they did not intend to charge the credit card, only to use it for validation purposes. Yet they insisted on complete details from the card, then proceeded to put through a small charge. I never have trusted any site which said 'all they wanted to do was age verification using a credit card'. PAT] ------------------------------ Organization: Timmins Technologies, LLC From: Paul Timmins Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2005 18:51:41 -0500 Subject: Re: Vonage Complaining Of VoIP 'Blocking' Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com On Mon, 2005-02-14 at 17:07 -0500, Mike O'Connor wrote: >> Not concerned yet? Well consider this - suppose your web page was >> hosted on a particular ISP, and suddenly one of the large ISPs took a >> notion to start blocking access to web sites hosted on selected >> competitive ISPs. Of course, their solution would be to open an >> account with them and move your web site to their servers. Now what >> happens when two or more ISPs do this? Pretty soon the entire >> Internet as we know it falls apart, and I don't think I'm being overly >> dramatic in saying that - I have seen just too many examples of >> corporate greed destroying the good things of life to think that it >> could not happen that way. > Most ISPs of reasonable size have figured out that it's not worth it > to block or deny peering with other providers of reasonable size (of > course there may be quibbling at the margins). The result of blocking > is too much grief with customers, who don't care that much about the > underlying transporter of bits. Blocking = less bits = less money, in > the general sense. In the 21st century, it's been legal issues that > have resulted in "stupid acts of site blocking" moreso than anything: That's what gets me. Last I remember, to qualify as a common carrier, an ISP isn't allowed to exact any sort of traffic control beyond what is necessary to maintain the stability of the network. Anything more and it could be seen as having the ability to control its content, and would be vicariously liable for crimes committed over its infrastructure and services. Isn't that still the case? Paul Timmins Timmins Technologies, LLC ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2005 21:21:36 -0500 From: David B. Horvath, CCP Subject: Re: The Move to High-Tech Tracking of Inmates Please remove my email address PAT. While I like to reduce the costs of government functions, I think there are way too many holes in this idea for it to be implemented with dangerous criminals. GPS tracking does not work within buildings. If the sensor cannot see the sky, it cannot give true tracking information. Here's a simple scenario: A criminal enters a building, wraps tin foil (or other material that blocks the signals) around the sensor, exits the building, goes about their illegal business, returns to the same building, removes the block, and exits. To the GPS (and anyone receiving the tracking data), it has never left the building. - David At 03:18 PM 2/14/2005, editor@telecom-digest.org wrote: > On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 02:58:11 -0500, Lisa Minter > posted: > Click here to read this story online: > http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0507/p02s02-usju.html > By Kris Axtman Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor Stuff deleted > But the system is not foolproof. Like any technology, it's subject to > human error. Here in Houston, for example, convicted rapist Lawrence > Napper was placed on the GPS system after being paroled in 2000. > He was supposed to go only from home to work to his parole office, but > in nine months, he logged 444 violations that were never caught. He > was then transferred to a less restrictive monitoring program and, a > month later, was arrested for sexually assaulting a 6-year-old boy. He > was sentenced to life in prison. > "There is a chance for human error. I'm not going to argue that > point," says Kicker. "But you can't strap an ankle bracelet on a guy > and then forget about him. It takes a certain amount of diligence on > the parole officer's part." Rest deleted ------------------------------ From: John McHarry Subject: Re: Powell Rips FCC Delay on Connection Fee Reform Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 03:19:16 GMT Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 13:56:33 -0500, Jack Decker wrote: > http://www.internetnews.com/bus-news/article.php/3482361 > February 10, 2005 > Powell Rips FCC Delay on Connection Fee Reform > By Roy Mark > WASHINGTON -- Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman Michael > Powell warned his fellow commissioners today that they would > eventually regret Thursday's FCC decision to further study > intercarrier compensation reform. "Reform" is what those advocating any particular change always call it, progressive or regressive. As I recall, the last "reform" slaughtered competitive DSL. The CLEC settlement rules, which the Bells wrote, but miscalculated, are probably the next target. That should allow them to kill competitive VoIP. OTOH, maybe I am too old and cynical. Or worked in telecom too long. ------------------------------ From: John McHarry Subject: Re: Click Fraud Looms As Search-Engine Threat Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 03:36:34 GMT Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net On Sun, 13 Feb 2005 13:41:50 -0800, AES wrote: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Your point is a *very good one*. I > have even had some bozos (but in fairness, they are usually the > sex purveyors) not let me leave at all, dumping one new window after > another at me without any absolute way out short of recyling power > on the computer. PAT] Change your browser to Firefox. Or stop going to such sites, but that would be too extreme. More seriously, anyone using IE should download and use Google's popup blocker, or an equivalent. Given the plethora of IE exploits in the wild, even CERT has advocated a move away. Firefox is the most popular alternative, although there are others, notably Opera. As they gain market share there will be attacks aimed at them, but they are more recent re-implementations of the Mosaic browser that was the grandpappy of them all. There is some reason to hope that their security is due to more than obscurity, to couch a phrase. ------------------------------ From: richgr@panix.com (Rich Greenberg) Subject: Re: Click Fraud Looms As Search-Engine Threat Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2005 23:22:43 +0000 (UTC) Organization: Organized? Me? In article , AES wrote: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Your point is a *very good one*. I > have even had some bozos (but in fairness, they are usually the > sex purveyors) not let me leave at all, dumping one new window after > another at me without any absolute way out short of recyling power > on the computer. PAT] Pat et al, the way to stop the popups short of a power cycle is to go into "Network and dial up connections", right click on your lan connection, select properties, and check the box ot the bottom of the "general" tab labeled "Show Icon in Task Bar when Connected". Then OK out. This will add an icon that looks like two terminals to your task bar. When you get hit with this popup flood, right click the icon and select "Disable". Cuts off the source of the popups. Shut down all browser instances. Now you can re-enable which can be done from the "Network and dial up connections". To make this even easier, right click on your lan connection, select "create shortcut" and click yes to put it on the desktop. Move it to whereever you want and double click to enable. Rich Greenberg Marietta, GA, USA richgr atsign panix.com + 1 770 321 6507 Eastern time. N6LRT 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, 09 Feb 2005 20:36:28 -0500 From: Gordianus Finder Subject: Re: Old vs. New Doctors - Communication and Technology hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) wrote about Old vs. New Doctors -- Communication and Technology on 8 Feb 2005 14:07:43: > The NYT had a piece comparing old vs. new doctors, and when or if > should a doctor retire. > See: > http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/08/health/08essa.html?8hpib > My mother used the same doctor for at least 40 years. Her family was > concerned that he was too old (he was in his upper 70s), but my mother > was very comfortable with him and confident. She never quite warmed > up to his "junior" associate and always wanted the "senior" doctor. > We finally convinced her it was time to see "junior" and that he had > proved himself. I went with her and "junior" was now 60 himself, to > my surprise. He came on to the practice many years ago, but my mother > never got over thinking of him as the junior member of the team, still > learning. When she got into her late 70s, my mother started looking for the youngest physician in the practice. She got tired of having her physician die or retire. My father always argued that the younger doctors would be more up-to-date. On the other hand, experience counts, too. There may be a medium, and it may even be a happy one. ------------------------------ 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 V24 #68 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Feb 15 16:46:01 2005 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j1FLk1t28540; Tue, 15 Feb 2005 16:46:01 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 16:46:01 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200502152146.j1FLk1t28540@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 V24 #69 TELECOM Digest Tue, 15 Feb 2005 16:46:00 EST Volume 24 : Issue 69 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Oregon Woman Thought Suicide Party Was Joke (Lisa Minter) Vonage Complains to FCC of Calls Being Blocked (Lisa Minter) E-Mail Bug Made Computers Phone Emergency Line (Lisa Minter) The Internet alternative/If none of today's movie-delivery (M Solomon) Scammers Access Data on 35,000 (Monty Solomon) UPDATE: FCC Chairman Powell Says Agency is Active (Jack Decker) GSM Operator Roaming Specification (teachtiro@yahoo.com) Phone Merger Creates Two Telephone Giants (Telecom Dailylead from USTA) Re: Vonage Complaining Of VoIP 'Blocking' (Scott Dorsey) Re: Vonage Complaining Of VoIP 'Blocking' (DevilsPGD) Detroit: America's Rejection Capital (Carl Moore) Re: Motorola and Oakley Introduce Bluetooth Sunglasses (Robert Weller) Re: Supermarket: Let Your Fingers do the Paying (Hank Karl) Re: Motorola v550 - Picture Downloading?? (Hank Karl) Re: The Move to High-Tech Tracking of Inmates (Lisa Hancock) Re: Complaining Of VoIP 'Blocking' (John R Levine) Re: Motorola v550 - Picture Downloading?? (Gary Breuckman) Re: Man Dies Waiting for 911 to Arrive (Marcus Didius Falco) Re: Level3 VOIP Product Implodes (lookemintheye) 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: 15 Feb 2005 07:00:25 -0800 From: Lisa Minter Subject: Oregon Woman Thought Suicide Party Was Joke By RUKMINI CALLIMACHI, Associated Press Writer PORTLAND, Ore. - College senior Jaime Shockman was at home working on her computer when an instant message popped up at the bottom of her screen. It was an invitation to die. "Do you think of suicide?" the stranger asked. "Do you want to die with others," he went on, according to the instant message transcript. Bored and convinced the message was a joke, the young woman replied. For two hours in December, she answered questions posed by 26-year-old Gerald Krein, who is now accused of attempting to lure emotionally fragile women to his Oregon home for what police are calling a Valentine's Day sex and suicide party. It's not clear whether any of the women he allegedly contacted were sincere about killing themselves. For her part, Shockman says she engaged Krein in the conversation as a prank. "I was convinced it was a joke," Shockman said, who believes the man picked her out because her screen name 'KillToriSpelling' refers to killing. The Portland State University student decided it was something more sinister when he told her that a mother from Portland was coming to his home in southern Oregon to commit suicide along with her five kids. Now, Shockman is one of five women from Canada, Georgia, Oregon, Missouri and Virginia out of more than two dozen allegedly contacted by Krein who have identified themselves to police. According to authorities, the women were invited to the "suicide get-together" at his house, where they were to hang themselves naked from a beam. Krein, who was arrested Wednesday, told investigators he had been in touch with 31 women. He was indicted Monday while deputies kept watch over his house to make sure no one arrived to kill themselves. "It was suggested that they come here, that they hang with him, that they have a sex party, and if they couldn't come he would certainly entertain them, doing it over the Internet," Sheriff Tim Evinger said. Shockman printed a copy of the instant message communication in which he identified himself first as "Jerry," then as "Gerald Krein" and showed it to The Associated Press. She also has shown it to police. After he divulged his plan to commit suicide along with 15 others, Shockman asked him: "How do you want to die?" "We was thinking haning," he wrote back, according to the transcript. "All at the same time in the same place?" she asked. When he answered yes, she kidded him that the weight of the bodies would break the structure they were hung from. "No," he replied. "Got a thing bult to hold bodys." He said it was strong enough to "hold 50" and added he had quit his job at Blockbuster to plan the party and build the beam in his house in Klamath Falls, Ore. In the final hour, Shockman said Krein peppered her with questions on how she wanted to die. Did she want to hold hands with the other women? Did she want to be blindfolded, or see the expression on the other women's faces as she died? How high should her body be above the ground? What did she want to wear? Krein instructed her not to wear shoes because the shoes would "weigh you down." She felt on edge when he asked her whether she wanted to die in the nude. But it was when he mentioned that children were to be involved that she dialed 911. "One woman is bring her kids," he messaged. "How many kids?" asked Shockman, from her room plastered with horror movie posters. "5," he messaged back. When asked why he wanted to die, he answered: "hate everything." He asked to see a picture of her. Shockman sent him to an Oregon newspaper Web site and sent him to the image of another woman. He rated her a "10." According to the transcript, he said that women hate him. Then he asked: "Am I a dog to you?" Copyright 2005 The Associated Press. 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 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Regards suicide, there have been many famous, multiple suicides I can recall. A few years ago, there was the insane man who led several followers to commit suicide with the promise they were going to go to heaven on a space ship that was coming from the moon for them; I think the cult was called "Heaven's Gate" ? But the all time winner, if it could be called that, was the case of Jim Jones, formerly the housing commissioner of San Francisco, and pastor of "People's Temple" also in San Francisco who migrated to Guyana in South America along with 800 of his followers where they all committed mass suicide at Jones' urging after the murder of a U.S. congressman who had gone to Guyana to investigate the whole thing. I do not know, has there ever been a mass suicide involving that many (or more) individuals before or since? I wonder if this latest guy, in Oregon, is going to start a new trend of mass sex/suicide parties? PAT] ------------------------------ Date: 15 Feb 2005 07:17:04 -0800 From: Lisa Minter Subject: Vonage Complains to FCC of Calls Being Blocked WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Vonage Holdings Corp., an Internet-based telephone service provider, has complained to U.S. communications regulators that some of its calls are being blocked, the company said on Monday. According to a source familiar with the dispute, Vonage has told Federal Communications Commission officials that it has evidence an Internet service provider owned by a telephone company has been blocking its service, affecting a couple of hundred customers. Vonage spokeswoman Brooke Schulz confirmed that some of the company's traffic had been blocked, but declined to provide details about who blocked its service or how many customers were affected. Internet service providers are able to block Vonage calls by refusing data from certain ports, similar to the methods used to control unwanted e-mail. "We have seen an instance of port blocking that was of grave concern to us," Schulz said. "We have sought the FCC's counsel to remedy the situation." Schulz said Vonage had to go through and restore each customer's service individually, but that the fix was temporary. An FCC official said the agency has not received a formal complaint from Vonage. FCC Chairman Michael Powell told a trade publication on Monday in Colorado that the agency was "actively on this case and we are taking it pretty seriously." The FCC could take enforcement action against carriers if they are found to have engaged activities that violate anti-competition laws, said Powell, according to trade publication Advanced IP Pipeline. Vonage's service uses high-speed Internet connections to carry telephone calls. 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: 15 Feb 2005 07:19:44 -0800 From: Lisa Minter Subject: E-Mail Bug Made Computers Phone Emergency Line SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - A Louisiana man has pleaded guilty to sending rigged e-mails that caused some computers to dial the 911 emergency services number, prosecutors said on Monday. David Jeansonne, 44, admitted to sending e-mails to about 20 subscribers of Microsoft's WebTV, a television Internet service since renamed MSN TV. An attachment to the e-mail rewrote the user's access WebTV number to 911 so that the next time the service was used, calls to WebTV in Santa Clara, California were diverted. "This prompted unnecessary emergency police dispatches at numerous locations around the country in July 2002," the U.S. Attorney's office for the Northern District of California said in a statement. "At least 10 WebTV users reported that the local police either called or visited their residences in response to the unnecessary 9-1-1 calls." Jeansonne faces a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison after pleading guilty to two counts of intentionally damaging computers and causing a public safety threat. 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, 15 Feb 2005 12:36:24 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: The Internet Alternative / If None of Today's Movie-Delivery The Internet alternative If none of today's movie-delivery options suit you, now there's the internet alternative By Hiawatha Bray, Globe Staff | February 14, 2005 Now that millions of Americans download music from the Internet, Joshua Goldman thinks consumers are ready for the next step: downloading high-quality videos of everything from nature documentaries to classic Hollywood movies. "I think we're seeing the largest change in the way people watch video content ... since the launch of the VCR," said Goldman, chief executive of Akimbo Systems Inc., a San Mateo, Calif., firm that began selling its Internet home video system last year. "This is access to anything you want, when you want it, from the history of recorded media." There's already plenty of video on the Internet -- short video clips at news websites, movie trailers, and crude, illegal copies of popular films available through file-swapping services like Kazaa or Grokster. But there are also companies like Movielink and CinemaNow that offer legal downloads of recent films like "Troy" and "The Bourne Supremacy." Still, even though it's possible to connect a PC to a television set, these downloads are usually viewed on a computer monitor. Companies like Akimbo and competitor Dave Networks Inc. are aiming for a place in the living room, right next to the television set-top controller box, or even inside it. And they're offering video that looks as good as any pay-per-view movie on cable TV. These companies are betting that consumers will pay around $15 a month for a service that will constantly download video entertainment through a broadband Internet connection, storing it up until the customer is ready to watch. http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2005/02/14/the_internet_alternative/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 11:20:34 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Scammers Access Data on 35,000 By Matt Hines Story last modified Tue Feb 15 07:55:00 PST 2005 ChoicePoint confirmed Tuesday that criminals recently accessed its database of consumer records, potentially viewing the personal data of about 35,000 Californians and resulting in at least one case of identity fraud. The Atlanta company, which provides consumer data services to insurance companies, other businesses and government agencies, said the unidentified individuals posed as legitimate businesspeople in order to breech its defenses . Chuck Jones, a company spokesman, said that roughly 50 fraudulent accounts were set up by the schemers, through which they could view the data of California residents. News of the crime first surfaced when ChoicePoint sent an e-mail to individuals potentially affected by the attack last week. Among the data available through the company's services, and possibly accessed by the criminals, are consumers' names, addresses, Social Security numbers and credit reports, Jones confirmed. However, he said it is nearly impossible to tell what information was viewed by the criminals. ... http://news.com.com/2100-1029-5577122.html ------------------------------ From: Jack Decker Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 11:19:09 -0500 Subject: FCC Chairman Powell Says Agency is "actively on this case" Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com http://advancedippipeline.com/60400413 February 14, 2005 Vonage Complaining Of VoIP 'Blocking' UPDATED: FCC Chairman Powell says agency is "actively on this case." By Paul Kapustka Advanced IP Pipeline BOULDER, Colo. -- Leading Voice over IP service provider Vonage Holdings has complained to the Federal Communications Commission that competitors are blocking the use of its service, according to FCC chairman Michael Powell and others close to the company. "We're very actively on this case and we are taking it pretty seriously," said Powell, during an interview Monday here at the Silicon Flatirons conference. In a speech at the conference Sunday, Stanford law professor Larry Lessing said that Vonage has been telling the FCC that other service providers are hampering Vonage's VoIP service by "blocking" it from reaching certain SIP addresses for end-user devices. According to Powell, his understanding is that the blocking is not coming from major service providers, but from rural Local Exchange Carriers (LECs). Brooke Schulz, Vonage's senior vice president for corporate communications, said Monday that the company would not comment on the report. Full story at: http://advancedippipeline.com/60400413 ------------------------------ From: teachtiro@yahoo.com Subject: GSM Operator Roaming Specification Date: 15 Feb 2005 04:07:06 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Hi, Could some one provide me the document or link to it, which is the standard specification for implementing GSM operator roaming, is the standard published by gsmworld association (gsmworld.com), i have searched for the document in their web but invain. The documents section on their web is http://www.gsmworld.com/documents/index.shtml Thanks in advance. tiro ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 14:39:42 EST From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA Subject: Phone Mergers Create Two Telecom Giants Telecom dailyLead from USTA February 15, 2005 http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=19423&l=2017006 TODAY'S HEADLINES NEWS OF THE DAY * Phone mergers create two telecom giants BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH * Mergers analysis: * Cisco unveils suite of security products * AOL in talks with Comcast, others for broadband partnerships * Music downloads create a buzz USTA SPOTLIGHT * Order USTA's best-selling VoIP Implementation and Planning Guide today EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES * Verizon mobile TV launches with broadcast-quality pictures * Study: Teens getting ad messages via cell phone REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE * Analysis: FCC's conditions on phone mergers to set tone for regulatory debate * Vonage alleges ISP blocks calls Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others. http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=19423&l=2017006 ------------------------------ From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) Subject: Re: Vonage Complaining Of VoIP 'Blocking' Date: 15 Feb 2005 10:14:10 -0500 Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000) Paul Timmins wrote: > That's what gets me. Last I remember, to qualify as a common carrier, an > ISP isn't allowed to exact any sort of traffic control beyond what is > necessary to maintain the stability of the network. Anything more and it > could be seen as having the ability to control its content, and would be > vicariously liable for crimes committed over its infrastructure and > services. > Isn't that still the case? I don't know of any ISPs that have classified as common carriers (although I know some common carriers who also run ISPs. Part of the regulation that you have to accept as a common carrier is that you cannot perform any traffic control beyond what is required for stability, yes. But you also have to deal with a vast additional body of regulation having to do with connection between networks, international connections, etc. Getting the government to assign common carrier status to you is not a trivial business. Why would an ISP go through that? scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." ------------------------------ From: DevilsPGD Subject: Re: Vonage Complaining Of VoIP 'Blocking' Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 01:09:42 -0700 Organization: Octanews In message Paul Timmins wrote: > That's what gets me. Last I remember, to qualify as a common carrier, an > ISP isn't allowed to exact any sort of traffic control beyond what is > necessary to maintain the stability of the network. Anything more and it > could be seen as having the ability to control its content, and would be > vicariously liable for crimes committed over its infrastructure and > services. > Isn't that still the case? ISPs are not common carriers. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 10:07:55 EST From: Carl Moore Subject: Detroit: America's Rejection Capital News story gives a number in area code 248, to be given out if you are asked for your telephone number by someone whom you are not interested in. The full telephone number is given in the story (let me know if I should send it along to you). Notice that at least some of you reading this, if you were given such number, would be able to figure out where it was (at least where the prefix is). Story also says "Rejection Hotline" now serves 29 U.S. cities. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: By all means, Carl, please send along the number, or at least a link to the article you saw. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Robert Weller Subject: Re: Motorola and Oakley Introduce First Bluetooth Sunglasses Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 09:56:10 -0800 Hardly innovative. These glasses look like a standard BT headset bolted to a pair of sunglasses. Check out the images here: http://www.pocket-lint.co.uk/newsimage.php?newsId=941&image=1 Bob Weller > Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2005 23:48:18 -0500 > From: Monty Solomon > Subject: Motorola and Oakley Introduce First Bluetooth Sunglasses > Cutting-Edge RAZRWire Line Offers Consumers On-The-Go Connections > CANNES, France, February 14 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Motorola, Inc. > (NYSE:MOT) and Oakley, Inc. (NYSE:OO) today unveiled a new line of > premium Bluetooth(R) wireless technology eyewear designed to keep > consumers comfortable and connected. Named RAZRWire, the invention > frees the wearer from cumbersome wires and allows active users to > quickly answer or place calls with the touch of a button. RAZRWire > represents the fusion of world-class Oakley optics with Motorola's > industry-leading Bluetooth technology. > Available in three frame colors RAZRWire delivers communication in a > fashionable, convenient package. The product was developed to meet the > needs of active consumers seeking seamless mobility, offering them an > integrated easy-to-use design. For cyclists, skateboarders, rock > climbers, golfers - practically anyone who is active outdoors - the > innovative eyewear encourages hands-free connection while on the go. > - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=46925781 ------------------------------ From: Hank Karl Subject: Re: Supermarket: Let Your Fingers do the Paying Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 09:41:44 -0500 Organization: NETPLEX Internet Services - http://www.ntplx.net/ On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 02:04:53 -0500, Monty Solomon wrote: > By Jo Best > Story last modified Tue Feb 01 12:18:00 PST 2005 > A supermarket has given its customers the choice of paying by > fingerprint at a store in the state of Washington -- and has found them > surprisingly willing to use the biometric system. > http://news.com.com/2100-1029-5559074.html > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I do not understand one thing: If > people have already been verified as to their ability and > willingness to pay for their groceries through their credit card > and their personal identification has been verified in much the same > way by the credit card people, then *why* would people want to go one > step further by enrolling in 'Pay by Touch'? Is this intended as one > way to 'save them time' by not having to sign a credit card slip? In > other words, touch your thumb or finger somewhere rather than taking > a couple seconds to sign a slip of paper? Now, if the grocery people > had set up their own credit system *in place of Visa/MC* by using a > thumb/finger print, I can see where that might be useful, but > otherwise, why bother? PAT] You could give your kids access to your account so they can buy groceries for you, but you'd have to hope they don't load up on candy and soda :-) On the other hand, its possible to fake fingerprints. Fortunately, the only files of fingerprints I know of are kept by law enforcement agencies, and we can certainly trust them not to commit this type of fraud. (I'll leave a lot of room for Pat's response.) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have nothing more to say on this topic. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Hank Karl Subject: Re: Motorola v550 - Picture Downloading?? Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 09:47:48 -0500 Organization: NETPLEX Internet Services - http://www.ntplx.net/ On 5 Feb 2005 01:43:34 -0800, peterlavington@hotmail.com (Pete L) wrote: > I know quite a bit about computers but phones are a bit of a mystery > to me! We have just obtained a Motorola v550 and after wading through > the manual Ihave mastered the art of working the thing. What I cannot > seem to do is download pictures from it to my PC. I've been through > all the manual and it doesn't mention it. I have a UBS cable and some > software tools - which again don't seem to mention downloading pics. > Surely it can be done? Question is how? Anybody out there ideas, > please? > Pete L Check with your carrier (or whoever you bought the phone from) to see if it can be done. I've heard that Verizon (for one) disables the download to PC feature so that you have to pay for each picture that you save. ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com Subject: Re: The Move to High-Tech Tracking of Inmates Date: 15 Feb 2005 11:38:18 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Lisa Minter wrote: > By Kris Axtman Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor > "Compared to a jail bed, it's dramatically cheaper." Jails and prisons are extremely expensive. They do protect society by serving as a warehouse keeping criminals off the streets. However, they have a poor record of rehabilitation. > "We're not in favor of taking people out of prisons and putting them > on GPS," says Kicker, a former Dallas police officer. "But many > people, like those on work release, can do just as well out on the > street as they can in prison." Prison is not real life. Supervised work release offers more of an opportunity for rehabilitation. Unfortunately, a conviction record makes it extremely difficult if not impossible for a felon to find another job and the temptation to go back to crime becomes awfully hard to fight. > "There is a chance for human error. I'm not going to argue that > point," says Kicker. "But you can't strap an ankle bracelet on a guy > and then forget about him. It takes a certain amount of diligence on > the parole officer's part." That's the other big problem of prisons. Society is willing to spend big big bucks building high security prisons to serve as warehouses. But society doesn't like any educational or social-life training programs for the offenders, even though many offenders desperately need such help to stay clean. MSNBC reported graduates of a Los Angeles program are far less likely to return. Parole is a joke. An offender on parole needs a great deal of support, both in terms of 'tough love' and practical skill assistance. But parole is basically nothing but paperwork and filling up the cup. There is a great shortage of parole officers and other support personnel. This isn't a "bleeding heart liberal" issue, it is plain practicality. If society ignores these offenders, these offenders won't ignore us -- they'll be robbing our houses soon enough. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Chicago Police have run into a 'little administrative problem' on this. They are not permitted under the law to house certain types of offenders (1) within 500 feet of schools or day care centers, nor (2) within some small distance of each other, nor (3) around a place of ill-repute. Trouble is, the number of offenders has risen so expotentially in recent years, they are running physically out of anywhere to put them while meeting the above criteria. So now they are thinking about eliminating (2) from their criteria, and in fact have ignored it for quite a while. As a result, there is one area in the city, Englewood (a very poor economically, black, inner city area) which is *so* overloaded with offenders, that the neighbors there have started complaining a lot also. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: 15 Feb 2005 00:26:04 -0500 From: John R Levine Subject: Re: Complaining Of VoIP 'Blocking' > That's what gets me. Last I remember, to qualify as a common carrier, an > ISP isn't allowed to exact any sort of traffic control beyond what is > necessary to maintain the stability of the network. Anything more and it > could be seen as having the ability to control its content, and would be > vicariously liable for crimes committed over its infrastructure and > services. > Isn't that still the case? That is not the case and never has been. In the US, at least, ISPs are not common carriers, have never been common carriers, and never will be common carriers unless there's a significant change in the law. ISPs owned by telephone companies are not common carriers, even though their sister telcos are. The legal responsibility of ISPs for the material they carry has nothing to do with the amount of traffic control they exert and everything to do with specific laws on the topic, notably the CDA (47 USC 230) and the DMCA (17 USC 512). I don't know why the myth about ISPs being common carriers keeps reappearing. It's not like it's hard to find out. With respect to alleged VoIP blocking, my ISP happens to be a subsidiary of my local rural telco, and I just cancelled my Vonage service due to a combination of voice quality that went into the toilet and Vonage's complete failure to provide any support when I tried to e-mail or call them. But having done a fair amount of packet traces, I'm quite sure that this has nothing to do with my ISP and a whole lot to do with congestion at routers within NSPs and particularly the gateways between the NSP that my ISP uses and the one that Vonage uses. I switched to Lingo and their voice quality is OK. Regards, John Levine johnl@iecc.com Primary Perpetrator of The Internet for Dummies, Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://www.johnlevine.com, Mayor "I dropped the toothpaste", said Tom, crestfallenly. ------------------------------ From: Gary Breuckman Subject: Re: Motorola v550 - Picture Downloading?? Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2005 23:08:39 -0600 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Reply-To: puma@catbox.com > In article , Pete L > wrote: >> I know quite a bit about computers but phones are a bit of a mystery >> to me! We have just obtained a Motorola v550 and after wading through >> the manual Ihave mastered the art of working the thing. What I cannot >> seem to do is download pictures from it to my PC. I've been through >> all the manual and it doesn't mention it. I have a UBS cable and some >> software tools - which again don't seem to mention downloading pics. >> Surely it can be done? Question is how? Anybody out there ideas, >> please? I have a V551. If you have the mobile phone tools package, first, be sure to update it (live update). What you want is under tools multimedia studio pick "mobile explorer" The phone is on the right, you can select pictures and move them to the pc, and vice-versa. There's also editing, in "melody studio" that will let you take sound clips or tracks from CD's, select portions of them, and create ring tones. -- Gary Breuckman ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2005 23:38:58 -0500 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Re: Man Dies Waiting for 911 to Arrive On Thu, Feb 10 2005 18:00:00 PST Patrick Townson > wrote about: Man Dies Waiting for 911 to Arrive > -- Suit alleges dispatcher let man die in car -- > This story from our TD-Extra pages tells of a man with a cellular > phone registered in Dyer, Indiana (where he lived) who died in > his car (and was found in the car dead a few weeks later) in a > parking garage in Saulk Village, Illinois. Saulk Village (a far > south suburb of Chicago) sits on the Illinois/Indiana state line > right 'across the street' from Dyer, Indiana. It appears the 911 > dispatcher for Saulk Village (area code 708)did not know why she > was getting a call from an area code 219 number. The man called > from his automobile saying he thought he was having a heart attack; > the 911 dispatcher did not deal with it correctly. The man died > while waiting for an ambulance to show up (it never did show up) > and several weeks later they found his body in his car where it > had been parked. The family is suing the Village of Saulk Village > for damages. > See the full story at: > http://interestalert.com/brand/siteia.shtml?Story=st/sn/02100002aaa0485f.upi&Sys=ptownson&Type=News&Filter=Front%20Page&Fid=FRONTPAG This certainly can happen, but, IMnotsoHO, it's the fault of the 911 operator. I often get 911 connections from the wrong operator -- the wrong county or even the wrong state. (And a 911 operator certainly can't assume the location of a cell phone from its area code!) In my opinion, once the operator figures out where I am -- or at least that I am not in his/her jurisdiction, I am relatively quickly transferred to the 911 operator in the correct jurisdiction, even if it's in a neighboring state. After all, when we're near a boundary we have no control over which tower will pick up our signal. ------------------------------ From: lookemintheye Subject: Re: Level3 VOIP Product Implodes Date: 14 Feb 2005 21:44:18 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com You are right on. I have been working for CallTower for 3 years and the Cisco stuff we use is as bulletproof as phones have ever been. The hard part for customers is change and getting used to and finding ways to use the features. If you are a Level3 customer, check in with CallTower. harris 415-869-8979 lookemintheye wrote: > It seems that Level 3 is pulling out of the small and medium > business hosted VOIP market. Some customers may be in pain soon and > some Level 3 resellers are product less. The product was called > (3)Tone. > Other companies in this space include Pingtone, > CallTower, GoBeam and more daily MCI and Level 3 seem to have > dropped out. The systems based on Cisco hardware and software seem > to be the most reliable. lookemintheye 1/27/05 ------------------------------ 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 V24 #69 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Feb 15 23:16:30 2005 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j1G4GU501522; Tue, 15 Feb 2005 23:16:30 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 23:16:30 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200502160416.j1G4GU501522@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 V24 #70 TELECOM Digest Tue, 15 Feb 2005 23:17:00 EST Volume 24 : Issue 70 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson IE 7 (LB@notmine.com) Packet8 Problems Dialing Austria (Dave Rasmussen) A Silly Question - 2-Line Phone With One Phone Number? (Boat) Leading Zeros? (AES) Re: Vonage Complaining Of VoIP 'Blocking' (Tony P.) Re: Detroit: America's Rejection Capital (Carl Moore) Re: ADSL and SDSL? (Robert Bonomi) Re: ADSL and SDSL? (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: LB@notmine.com Subject: IE 7 Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 18:33:13 -0500 Organization: Optimum Online FYI http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2005/02/15/373104.aspx LB ------------------------------ From: dave@alpha1.csd.uwm.edu (Dave Rasmussen) Subject: Packet8 Problems Dialing Austria Date: 15 Feb 2005 22:53:41 GMT Organization: Information & Media Technologies, U of Wisconsin - Milwaukee I purchased Packet8 from Compusa a couple weeks ago and have been trying to call an aunt in Klagenfurt Austria but I never get through, which I can on my pots line. Packet8 seems overwhelmed to get back to me so I figured I would ask anyone out there in netland using their service how it has been working for them. dave@uwm.edu www.uwm.edu/~dave 414-229-5133 IM: damtalldave Unix/Account Administration, UW-Milwaukee, Info & Media Technologies 3210 N Maryland, Bolton 229A, Milwaukee, WI 53211 ham: N9REJ ------------------------------ From: Boat Subject: A Silly Question - 2-Line Phone With One Phone Number? Organization: SBC http://yahoo.sbc.com Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 21:55:24 GMT I have a silly question. I'd like to get a 5.8 GHz, 2-line phone with multiple handsets but I only have one incoming phone number into my home. In order to fully utilize Line 1 and Line 2 I assume I will have to get the phone company out here to install a second line. Is that true? Are there any other options? Thank You! [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: If you have a VOIP line, consider extending it to to terminate on your proposed two line phone. If you have a cellular phone, consider getting a 'cell socket' type device for your cell phone, and extend it to your proposed two line phone. PAT] ------------------------------ From: AES Subject: Leading Zeros? Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 14:10:15 -0800 Organization: Stanford University I've just encountered an annoying hassle where proper handling of archival bibliographic data requires keeping track of leading zeros in ID numbers; and these seem like informed groups to ask if anyone has comments or observations on other electronic or online systems that require or even allow leading zeros? Specifically the Am Phys Soc now identifies articles not by volume and page numbers but by volume and a six-digit "article number" which sometimes does and sometimes does not have an initial zero -- but if it does you _must_ keep it for various bibliographic and online citations to work properly. A few quick tests show that the default behavior is to automatically and irretrievably discard leading zeros on integer numbers keyed into an Excel worksheet cell or a Mathematic list. One of my bank accounts prints my account number with three leading zeros, but won't accept them in the Account Number field for online login. On the other hand for another ID card I have, you _must_ type the leading zeros. Are there any kind of published refs or computer standards or human interface guidelines on the use of leading zeros? ZIP codes use 'em, phone numbers don't? ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: Vonage Complaining Of VoIP 'Blocking' Organization: ATCC Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 17:27:15 -0500 In article , paul@timmins.net says: > On Mon, 2005-02-14 at 17:07 -0500, Mike O'Connor wrote: >>> Not concerned yet? Well consider this - suppose your web page was >>> hosted on a particular ISP, and suddenly one of the large ISPs took a >>> notion to start blocking access to web sites hosted on selected >>> competitive ISPs. Of course, their solution would be to open an >>> account with them and move your web site to their servers. Now what >>> happens when two or more ISPs do this? Pretty soon the entire >>> Internet as we know it falls apart, and I don't think I'm being overly >>> dramatic in saying that - I have seen just too many examples of >>> corporate greed destroying the good things of life to think that it >>> could not happen that way. >> Most ISPs of reasonable size have figured out that it's not worth it >> to block or deny peering with other providers of reasonable size (of >> course there may be quibbling at the margins). The result of blocking >> is too much grief with customers, who don't care that much about the >> underlying transporter of bits. Blocking = less bits = less money, in >> the general sense. In the 21st century, it's been legal issues that >> have resulted in "stupid acts of site blocking" moreso than anything: > That's what gets me. Last I remember, to qualify as a common carrier, an > ISP isn't allowed to exact any sort of traffic control beyond what is > necessary to maintain the stability of the network. Anything more and it > could be seen as having the ability to control its content, and would be > vicariously liable for crimes committed over its infrastructure and > services. > Isn't that still the case? Yep, and by those rules Cox shouldn't be considered a common carrier any longer. They actually teach parents how to implement filters on web sites, etc. via Cox provided servers. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I can tell you that Southwestern Bell has always claimed 'common carrier status' on their DSL service as a way to avoid any/all spam filtering on user's mailboxes. They won't even sort perceived spam into a separate spam box as CableOne does. It just all goes into your mailbox -- all several hundred pieces of it daily. How you want to sort it is your business. Just call this one of my several minor complaints with SBC, which is why I dumped them out of my house totally. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 17:42:11 EST From: Carl Moore Subject: Re: Detroit: America's Rejection Capital The article was from Associated Press (so it might turn up in syndication in several places); I found it on WPVI-TV "Action News" (channel 6) site out of Philadelphia. The complete number is 248-262-6861 (yes, it was in the article). [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: So exactly what is the number? All I received (on several dialing attempts) was a recording "All circuits are busy now, please try again later." If that the intent of that number, to return that recorded message all the time? PAT] ------------------------------ From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) Subject: Re: ADSL and SDSL? Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 23:50:42 -0000 Organization: Widgets, Inc. In article , Robert Anderson wrote: > Do you more reliably get the higher bandwidth with SDSL than with > ADSL? There is no inherent superiority in either of the technologies. > For example, is the CIR higher with SDSL? *WHAT* CIR? > We are a very small business using VoIP and our connection is > ADSL. People have problems hearing us but not the other way around. > We were thinking of switching from ADSL over to SDSL, to see if that > helps. There are a whole sh*tload of issues, some 'technical', but *most* are 'administrative, that affect the situation. ADSL vs. SDSL affects only the connection between the customer premises and the DSLAM (at the telco C.O.) -- and obviously, the specific equipment used at each of those two places. If the CPE and the DSLAM 'sync up' at a specified data-rate, whatever that rate is, you _will_ have that speed of transmission *between*those*two*points*. What you will get, going any further than that, is *anybody's* GUESS. Emphasis on the word "guess". It's simply not possible to predict in advance, nor is an end-to-end throughput at one point in time any sort of a guarantee that you will be able to get anything approaching that same throughput (between those *same* endpoints) at any other time. This is the "nature" of the Internet -- performance is 'statistical', at best. Separately, there is the matter of the speed of the 'upstream' link from the DSLAM, and the number of users (and at what speeds) sharing that uplink. The 'uplink' is *almost*always* "over-subscribed" -- i.e. the aggregate bandwidth for the 'sold' DSL lines is _much_ higher than the bandwidth of the upstream link. This "works" because it is *very*rare* for all the end- users to be *trying* to use all their bandwidth at the same time. Similarly, there is 'yet another layer' of 'over-subscribing', with regard to the DSLAM uplinks vs. the size of the pipe that the provider has "to the outside world". Note: The over-all situation is *exactly* similar with a 'cable modem' connection. The 'details' are slightly different -- in that the 'over-subscribing' (and 'contention' for access) occurs one stage earlier in the process. The 'uplink' from the cable-modem is a 'shared' resource, with all the users on the same run of cable competing for the limited bandwidth available on the cable. The cable can support _maybe_ a dozen or two users at the full advertised 'up to' download speed. With several _hundred_ to possibly a few *thousand* customers sharing a single cable, the reason one =rarely= gets anything approaching the advertised maximum rate is *not* hard to understand. DSL is commonly sold in a couple of different "grades". Commonly referred to as "consumer class", and "business class". The underlying technology (ADSL, SDSL) is relatively inconsequential to the class of service, or to the pricing. The differences include: The degree of 'over-subscribing' the uplink -- "business class" service generally gets a much _lower_ degree of over-subscription; thus you have a *much* better chance of actually getting the claimed bandwidth (or close to it). A lower 'over subscription' ratio also translates into lower latency (from queuing), and fewer dropped packets. The level of 'monitoring', and/or proactive preventative maintenance involved. i.e., "catching things *before* they fail". Also, watching the traffic levels, and (potentially) moving customers between racks so as to reduce the amount of congestion. The _timeliness_ of repairs, if the circuit fails. "consumer grade" service usually has *NO* 'guaranteed' repair time, whatsoever. An outage can go for *weeks*, literally. "Business" DSL may have a repair time "promise" of 'a couple of days'. Which just means that one *cannot* get the problem 'escalated' before that interval has elapsed; and only if you, the customer *complain* about it still being down. OTOH, true "T-1" service has a _4-hour_ window, after which *automatic* escalation occurs. (The proverbial "you get what you pay for", applies to repairs on data circuits -- with a *vengeance* :) Note: "People have problems hearing us" is simply NOT a good enough statement of the problems you are experiencing, for _anyone_ to *guess* at what's going on. Do you mean: 1) insufficient audio level? 2) sufficient level, but momentary 'gaps' in the audio? 3) sufficient level, but 'unintelligible'? 4) "something else"? And, of course, there is the "incidental" question of how much _upstream_ bandwidth you have on your ADSL connection, and how many simultaneous calls you're trying to make, Overloading the uplink is a *great* way to end up suffering from dropout gaps and other intelligibility issues. ------------------------------ From: T. Sean Weintz Subject: Re: ADSL and SDSL? Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 16:57:12 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Robert Anderson wrote: > Do you more reliably get the higher bandwidth with SDSL than with > ADSL? > For example, is the CIR higher with SDSL? > We are a very small business using VoIP and our connection is > ADSL. People have problems hearing us but not the other way around. > We were thinking of switching from ADSL over to SDSL, to see if that > helps. > Robert Anderson ADSL is asymmetrical -- the downstream speed is usually much faster than the upstream. And adsl is usually cheap (often under $50 per month) 1.5mbps downstream and 128kbps upstream is a pretty standard speed. SDSL is symetrical -- the upstream and downstream speeds are the same. That is what we have here - 2 sdsl lines, both 1.5mbps upstream and downstream. You pay a premium for that fast upstream speed, tho. It's about $400 a month per line for us. Reliability is pretty much the same between the two. It's the upstream speed that is the big difference. And the support -sdsl is generally aimed at businesses, so the support people for sdsl providers are more than just script readers. SDSL is symmetrical -- upload ------------------------------ 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 V24 #70 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Feb 16 16:28:39 2005 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j1GLSdM08780; Wed, 16 Feb 2005 16:28:39 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 16:28:39 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200502162128.j1GLSdM08780@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 V24 #71 TELECOM Digest Wed, 16 Feb 2005 16:29:00 EST Volume 24 : Issue 71 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Uplink Requirements, was: ADSL and SDSL? (Danny Burstein) Can You Identify - FUJITSU (Michael Muderick) Wireless/RFID Conference & Exhibition (Monty Solomon) SBC Has High Hopes For TV Service (Telecom dailyLead from USTA) Patton to Unveil New VoIP SoHo Solutions at CeBIT 2005 (Chris) Blogger Recounts Problems Trying to Get SBC Phone Service (Jack Decker) Re: SS-7 F-Links and A-Link Emulation (Bob Colby) Re: Vonage Complaining of VoIP 'Blocking' (Marcus Didius Falco) Re: Vonage Complaining Of VoIP 'Blocking' (Michael D. Sullivan) Re: Vonage Complaining Of VoIP 'Blocking' (Robert Bonomi) Re: Vonage Complaining Of VoIP 'Blocking' (John Levine) Re: Detroit: America's Rejection Capital (except it isn't) (Neal McLain) Another Rejection Number (was Re: Detroit: America's Rejection) (Moore) 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 Subject: Uplink Requirements, was: ADSL and SDSL? Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 05:10:01 UTC Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC In bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) writes: [ lots snipped ] > Separately, there is the matter of the speed of the 'upstream' link > from the DSLAM, and the number of users (and at what speeds) sharing > that uplink. The 'uplink' is *almost*always* "over-subscribed" -- > ie. the aggregate bandwidth for the 'sold' DSL lines is _much_ higher > than the bandwidth of the upstream link. This "works" because it is > *very*rare* for all the end- users to be *trying* to use all their > bandwidth at the same time. Keep in mind that when downloading at that higher speed, you're also using the upstream channel for various handshakes. The exact amount of bandwidth required for those acknowledgements will vary _very_ dramatically depending on what you're pulling over and the protocols in use, but a realistic number would be five percent. What this means it that if you and a bunch of your neighbors are pulling stuff down at 1 meg, you're each using up 50k on the upside. (Again, with _mucho_ variation). With, say, that typical advertised 1.5meg/128k (which, on a good day, may be 80% of that), you and the folk down your block don't have much spare room for that VOIP phone which requires bi-directional throughput. Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key dannyb@panix.com [to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded] ------------------------------ From: Michael Muderick Subject: Can You Identify - FUJITSU Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 05:41:31 -0500 I have approximately 40 modules that look like they attach to the bottom of a business telephone with a 68 pin connector. They are white plastic. They are made by Fujitsu-identified as ROM CART. Some of them have two IC's, programmable with UV light hole, others have one. Some of the numbers are F760-ROMDW, F10L-0760-K304-WM, 1050, 5Ess, A4FA, SRS-1050, 1F0112. I 'd be happy to email a small jpeg file; I'd really appreciate if you could tell me exactly what they are, and what phones they were for. I'd like to sell them if they have any value. But I dont know what to call them on ebay. TIA. Michael Muderick ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 10:01:40 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Wireless/RFID Conference & Exhibition The 2nd Annual Wireless/RFID Conference & Exhibition Conference: February 28 - March 2 Exhibition: March 2 Ronald Reagan Building, Washington, DC Presented by the E-Gov Institute, FCW Events, and Federal Computer Week The Exhibition is open to all Government Professionals at No Cost For more information on the conference, visit: http://www.e-gov.com/events/2005/wireless/index.asp ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 14:25:52 EST From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA Subject: SBC Has High Hopes for TV Service Telecom dailyLead from USTA February 16, 2005 http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=19451&l=2017006 TODAY'S HEADLINES NEWS OF THE DAY * SBC has high hopes for TV service BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH * What is Qwest's next move? * Tier 2 carriers look to capitalize on Ethernet * Analysts: Dolan may sell Cablevision * Motorola turns up heat on competitors with new products USTA SPOTLIGHT * Ethernet-Based Metro Area Networks now available in the Bookstore EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES * Companies offer IPTV to go REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE * Phone mergers may help Bells' cause on Capitol Hill * Government rakes in $2.25 billion from wireless auction; Powell proud of spectrum policy * FCC poised to request unpaid fees from AT&T Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others. http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=19451&l=2017006 ------------------------------ From: Chris Subject: Patton to Unveil New VoIP SoHo Solutions at CeBIT 2005 Date: 16 Feb 2005 11:52:21 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Patton to Unveil New VoIP SoHo Solutions at CeBIT 2005 These two new mid-range VoIP routers deliver converged voice-and-data communications to small-office and home-office (SoHo) users in remote locations. For Immediate Release GAITHERSBURG, Maryland: Patton -- a leader in network access and connectivity -- announced today they will unveil two new members of their innovative SmartNode(TM) family of VoIP solutions at CeBIT 2005 Patton has specially designed the two new mid-range VoIP routers to deliver converged voice-and-data communications to small-office and home-office (SoHo) users in remote locations. The model SN4020 SoHo solution serves users in standard analog-telephony environments while the model SN4552 SoHo VoIP solution targets ISDN users. Patton will demonstrate their new SmartNode solutions at their CeBIT booth located in Hall 13, Stand A58 at the Hanover, Germany show during 10-16 March 2005. SmartLink(TM) 4020 Series Analog SoHo VoIP Router -- Available in early Q2 2005, Patton's new SmartLink 4020 Series offers SoHo users an affordable connection to the cost-saving world of Internet voice. Like the business-class members of the SmartNode family, Patton's new SN4020 VoIP solution for the SoHo market integrates a VoIP gateway with full-featured IP-routing capabilities to deliver simplified, converged voice-and-data network communications. Available in single (SN4021) or dual (SN4022) FXS port configurations, the SmartNode router connects to any standard analog phone, fax machine, or PBX. SmartNode 4552 ISDN SoHo VoIP Router -- Available immediately, Patton's new SmartNode 4552 ISDN VoIP Router offers a low-cost CPE solution that delivers converged BRI/So and LAN-to-WAN data-access service to SoHo users over DSL, fiber, cable, the Internet, or any broadband network. Providers -- Deployed at the customer premise, the SN4552 will enable Competitive Local Exchange Carriers (CLECs) and Internet Telephony Service Providers (ITSPs) to grab their share of the ISDN service-delivery market. With the SN4552, providers can roll out BRI/So services bundled with data access for LAN users over any broadband delivery system (including cable, fiber, and DSL). The SN4552 is strategically priced, so VoIP providers can deliver bundled voice-and-data services at rates that undercut traditional ISDN service by about 30% ($20 versus $30/month for example). SoHo and SMEs -- For small-to-mid-sized enterprises (SMEs), as well as remote and home-office users, the SN4552 delivers high-quality, low-cost BRI voice-over-broadband service that is tightly integrated with LAN-to-WAN data-access. The SN4552 uses Patton's SmartWare(TM) VoIP technology to connect two BRI/So users to a remote PBX over broadband. The affordable SN4552 integrated access device includes a built-in 4-port auto-sensing fast-Ethernet switch for convenient data connections. The SN4552 also provides a fallback connection to the local PSTN for alternate call-routing during IP-network outages, as well as a lifeline relay to the PSTN for guaranteed ISDN service in the event of a local power failure. "ISDN providers have proved their commitment to Patton by deploying thousands of SmartNode ports in bundled service offerings during the past year," said Ramon Felder, SmartNode Product Manager located in Bern, Switzerland. "Patton is pleased to reward that vote of confidence by offering a new solution that does even more-at a lower price." "SmartNode VoIP solutions are 'more than just talk' because they actually work in the real world," said Burton A. Patton, Patton's Executive Vice President. "Because Patton's SmartNode technology is progressive, proven and mature, service providers around the world are choosing SmartNode CPE solutions as they roll out converged voice and data services to their subscribers." SmartNode stands out from other VoIP solutions because Patton's DownStreamQoS(TM) delivers best-possible voice quality while their SessionRouter(TM) call-routing software is the industry's most flexible, enabling SmartNode to integrate smoothly into virtually any telephony system's existing numbering plan. Visit Patton at CeBIT 2005 in Hall 13, Stand A58, during 10-16 March in Hannover, Germany. About Patton Patton Electronics Company is a US manufacturer and marketer of data communications products, including VoIP/ToIP gateways & routers, Remote Access (V.92, V.90, K56Flex, V.34+, and ISDN dial-in), Last Mile/Local Loop Access (T1, E1, and xDSL modems, NTUs and CSU/DSUs), Multi-Service Access (voice, intranet, extranet, and Frame Relay access), and Connectivity (interface converters, short range modems, multiplexers, and surge protectors). For more information or to request a free datacom catalog, please contact sales@patton.com. Patton Electronics Company 7622 Rickenbacker Drive Gaithersburg, MD 20879 USA Tel: +1 301.975.1000 Fax: +1 301.869.9293 Email: marketing@patton.com Web: http://www.patton.com/ ------------------------------ From: Jack Decker Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 12:12:14 -0500 Subject: Blogger Recounts Problems Trying to Get SBC Phone Service If you wonder why people are going to cellular substitution and VoIP, it may not just be price considerations; it might also be that they've run into a situation like this. I found this on a blog called "IP Inferno" at http://ipinferno.blogspot.com/2005/02/dyspeptic-consumer.html Tuesday, February 15, 2005 The Dyspeptic Consumer (Sponsor: Lok Technology) In my next life, which could begin minutes from now, or never, I ought to write a column called "The Dysfunctional, Dyspeptic Consumer." (Dyspepsia -- isn't there a pill for that now?) The column would mostly be an acknowledgment of a theme I see in my writings when it comes to what we might call the interface between companies and the people they're trying to sell to. Although I'm assured by many acquaintances and much reading that life as I know it would not be nearly as full, fruitful or satisfying without the efforts of the for-profit enterprises I do business with, I continue to suspect the companies, or the people who run them, have an agenda that puts my welfare as one of their customers pretty far down their list of objectives. The latest small, real-life exhibit to feed my suspicion comes by way of one of my brothers. He and his wife took the plunge last year and had a new house built in a town south of Chicago for themselves and their three kids. They moved in in mid-January. Their new home had light, heat, water, and cable TV service (with broadband Net access) when they moved in. The only utility that wasn't hooked up at the time -- their phone. The local provider there is Ameritech (the successor to the Illinois Bell of my childhood). Ameritech is one of the RBOCs acquired over the last few years by wanna-be monopoly SBC; the same SBC that's in the process of buying what's left of AT&T -- a deal that will be just super for telecom customers everywhere as well as for the 7,000 or so employees of the merged concern who will be laid off as part of maximizing efficiency (or at least cutting operating costs). When my brother was ready to move into his new home, he called Ameritech and set up an installation appointment (if I had been a better big brother and more plugged in to what was going on, I might have suggested he skip Ameritech altogether and sign up with CallVantage or Vonage over his cable broadband connection). He was told he'd have a two-week wait until a technician could show up to do the necessary work (and what the necessary work is I don't quite know; the place is wired inside and out). Two weeks! That seems excessive to me, but what the heck -- as part of maximizing efficiency and cutting operating costs, SBC-owned Ameritech probably doesn't have as many service crews as they used to. So my brother made an appointment. The day came. No one from Ameritech showed up. No one called to explain whether there was a problem or to reschedule. When my brother finally called to ask what happened, he was told that the company technician couldn't locate a service box outside the home and therefore couldn't do the installation. The box is in plain sight, and my brother described precisely where it is to aid the apparently visually impaired phone techs. Ameritech was so moved by my brother's plight -- he and his wife are getting by using their cellphones -- that they rescheduled his appointment. In another two or three weeks. So today, more than a month after moving in, still no landline service. If we were talking Moscow before Gorbachev, OK, sure, I understand. Or Kabul after the Taliban. But we're talking about the heartland of the wealthiest, most can-do nation on Earth. Aren't we? If you look at Ameritech's service problems since SBC acquired it -- just Google "Ameritech service complaints" -- it appears that the company 1) has a long history of poor customer service and 2) things really got bad after SBC entered the picture. But this discussion shouldn't be about beating up on one company. It should be about how to fix things. As to that, I admit, I don't have the answers beyond suggesting that there's something seriously broken in an industry that treats customers this way. The situation also suggests the value of real competition and, perhaps, the window of opportunity that exists for VoIPs to win business through a better customer-service ethic. Hmmm. We'll see how it pans out. In the meantime, I'm going to suggest my brother cancel his Ameritech appointment and sign up with someone else. posted by dan at 9:07 AM 2 comments Article plus reader comments at: http://ipinferno.blogspot.com/2005/02/dyspeptic-consumer.html How to Distribute VoIP Throughout a Home: http://michigantelephone.mi.org/distribute.html If you live in Michigan, subscribe to the MI-Telecom group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MI-Telecom/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 11:37:17 -0600 From: Bob Colby Organization: Lucent Technologies Subject: Re: SS7 F-Links and A-Link Emulation to Decommission Switch [ Pat, please suppress email address, thanks ] Brett, you left out some important details, but let's try to work through the problem regardless ... First, F-links (Fully Associated links) are nothing special. They work the same as other links, they just don't go through STPs, they connect directly between two COs. It should be a relatively simple experiment to define a trunk group between your two COs, and include some channels for F-links in the same span. You will need to update your MTP routing tables on both sides to point to the new F-links as the path to get to the other CO's point code. Once this is complete, calls between the two COs should use the new trunk group, AND should be routing messages over the new F-links, not up the A-links. You would need to do this in any case if the old CO is going to be around for a while. What you left out is who owns (or cares for) the STP(s) that your two COs talk to over their A-links. This is what governs whether you will be able to remove the old CO's A-links or not. In order for the rest of the world to connect to your old CO via the new CO's A-links and the new F-link, the STP that connects you to the network needs to change its MTP routing tables so that it routes ALL messages (new CO and old CO) over the new CO's A-links. The new CO then would forward messages for the old CO across the newly defined F-link. So, the controlling factor is not at your end, but at the STP end. Depending on how long it would take to get the routing changes done, some of your other alternatives may be faster. Bob Colby ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 23:49:55 -0500 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Re: Vonage Complaining of VOIP Blocking Tony P. responded to Paul Timmins about Re: Vonage Complaining Of VoIP 'Blocking' > In article , paul@timmins.net says: >> On Mon, 2005-02-14 at 17:07 -0500, Mike O'Connor wrote: >> That's what gets me. Last I remember, to qualify as a common carrier, an >> ISP isn't allowed to exact any sort of traffic control beyond what is >> necessary to maintain the stability of the network. Anything more and it >> could be seen as having the ability to control its content, and would be >> vicariously liable for crimes committed over its infrastructure and >> services. >> Isn't that still the case? > Yep, and by those rules Cox shouldn't be considered a common carrier > any longer. They actually teach parents how to implement filters on > web sites, etc. via Cox provided servers. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I can tell you that Southwestern Bell > has always claimed 'common carrier status' on their DSL service as > a way to avoid any/all spam filtering on user's mailboxes. They won't > even sort perceived spam into a separate spam box as CableOne does. > It just all goes into your mailbox -- all several hundred pieces of > it daily. How you want to sort it is your business. Just call this > one of my several minor complaints with SBC, which is why I dumped > them out of my house totally. PAT] Recall that all or almost all telephone companies permit you to block certain calls based on caller ID or the lack thereof. The carrier cannot initiate any control over the content, but they can certainly aid the customer in controlling the content of messages or classes of message. In other words, if Fox provides customer with filters, and provides them with instruction, that's fine, provided the customer must opt-in to using the filter. It would have no effect on Fox's status as a common carrier. ------------------------------ From: Michael D. Sullivan Subject: Re: Vonage Complaining Of VoIP 'Blocking' Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 07:34:58 GMT In article , paul@timmins.net says... > That's what gets me. Last I remember, to qualify as a common carrier, an > ISP isn't allowed to exact any sort of traffic control beyond what is > necessary to maintain the stability of the network. Anything more and it > could be seen as having the ability to control its content, and would be > vicariously liable for crimes committed over its infrastructure and > services. > Isn't that still the case? ISPs are not and never have been common carriers. They are providers of information service. So is Vonage. Information service providers are not subject to any of the restrictions on discrimination that are imposed on common carriers. ISPs and other information service providers are given some of the protections that have traditionally been given to common carriers, such as not being responsible for the content of postings. That doesn't make them common carriers. They are entitled to refuse service or to curtail service without any significant regulatory constraints. (Obviously, they have to comply with laws that apply to all businesses, such as those concerning racial and sexual discrimination.) Many internet posters seem to think ISPs or forums are common carriers because they aren't responsible for the third-party content they pass along. That is completely incorrect. They have been given some of the protections afforded common carriers but have not been classified as common carriers and are not subject to the restrictions on common carriers. TELECOM Digest Editor Noted in response: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I can tell you that Southwestern Bell > has always claimed 'common carrier status' on their DSL service as > a way to avoid any/all spam filtering on user's mailboxes. They won't > even sort perceived spam into a separate spam box as CableOne does. > It just all goes into your mailbox -- all several hundred pieces of > it daily. How you want to sort it is your business. Just call this > one of my several minor complaints with SBC, which is why I dumped > them out of my house totally. PAT] Pat, I seriously doubt that SBC claimed that their DSL ISP subsidiary was a common carrier, because the FCC specifically required it to separate its retail ISP offering from its common carrier telco subsidiary that provides the DSL line, because the broadband ISP offering is an information service, which is by definition *not* a common carrier service. SBC may have avoided spam filtering because it was concerned about lawsuits from those filtered, but not in order to remain a common carrier. Believe me, no telco wants to be subject to common carrier regulation, and they all try like heck to structure new services as non-common-carrier services. For example, Vonage is not a common carrier, but an information service provider, says the FCC. AT&T is battling the FCC about its enhanced calling card service, claiming that because it contains ads, it isn't a common carrier service but an information service. Being a common carrier -- i.e., telecommunications carrier -- means that your costs are higher than they would be otherwise (e.g., USF support based on end-user revenues, telecommunications excise tax on certain services, CALEA, etc.), you have to avoid charging unreasonable rates (whatever that means) and unreasonably discriminating among customers, and you have to apply to the FCC for permission to stop providing service, bizarrely. It has nothing whatever to do with your ability to filter email or refuse connections to certain IP addresses or ports. For what it's worth, Verizon's ISP subsidiary, Verizon Online, has filtered email and been moderately selective about newsgroups for years and has lately been very aggressively blocking email from domains it believes are harboring spammers, even to the extent of blocking email from much of Europe. Customers are not pleased. But in its ISP business, Verizon isn't a common carrier. Michael D. Sullivan Bethesda, MD, USA Replace "example.invalid" with ".com". ------------------------------ From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) Subject: Re: Vonage Complaining Of VoIP 'Blocking' Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 11:16:47 -0000 Organization: Widgets, Inc. In article , Tony P. wrote: > In article , paul@timmins.net says: >> On Mon, 2005-02-14 at 17:07 -0500, Mike O'Connor wrote: >>>> Not concerned yet? Well consider this -- suppose your web page was >>>> hosted on a particular ISP, and suddenly one of the large ISPs took a >>>> notion to start blocking access to web sites hosted on selected >>>> competitive ISPs. Of course, their solution would be to open an >>>> account with them and move your web site to their servers. Now what >>>> happens when two or more ISPs do this? Pretty soon the entire >>>> Internet as we know it falls apart, and I don't think I'm being overly >>>> dramatic in saying that - I have seen just too many examples of >>>> corporate greed destroying the good things of life to think that it >>>> could not happen that way. >>> Most ISPs of reasonable size have figured out that it's not worth it >>> to block or deny peering with other providers of reasonable size (of >>> course there may be quibbling at the margins). The result of blocking >>> is too much grief with customers, who don't care that much about the >>> underlying transporter of bits. Blocking = less bits = less money, in >>> the general sense. In the 21st century, it's been legal issues that >>> have resulted in "stupid acts of site blocking" moreso than anything: >> That's what gets me. Last I remember, to qualify as a common carrier, an >> ISP isn't allowed to exact any sort of traffic control beyond what is >> necessary to maintain the stability of the network. Anything more and it >> could be seen as having the ability to control its content, and would be >> vicariously liable for crimes committed over its infrastructure and >> services. >> Isn't that still the case? Nope, that is *NOT* the case. Never was. "Common carrier" is a *whole*lot* more complex than that. As a common carrier, there _are_ some things you are prohibited from doing; "restricting content" is one of them. There are other things that you must _actively_ perform. Simply 'refraining from prohibited activities' does _not_ a common carrier make. > Yep, and by those rules Cox shouldn't be considered a common carrier > any longer. They actually teach parents how to implement filters on > web sites, etc. via Cox provided servers. *NO* ISP is, or ever was, a common carrier. NO ISP has ever even _applied_ for common carrier status, let alone been _granted_ it. Common carriers' have certain immunities that ISP's _want_ you to believe that they are protected by. However, along with those immunities, comes a whole sh*tload of regulatory nonsense, that no ISP would put up with. Like having your *entire* rate structure overseen by the government. Like having to apply to the regulatory authorities *every*time* you want to change your rates -- and suffer for an average of *two*years* while they 'make up their mind' how much, *if*any*, of that requested increase to allow. For any ISP that claims "common carrier" status, or immunity protections, just ask to see a copy of their "tariff", and ask what government agency it is on file with. No tariff on file, *no* common-carrier status. Common carriers are *required* by law to have their tariff on file, *and* 'available for inspection' at the corporate offices (at least). They are usually *big* documents. ------------------------------ Date: 16 Feb 2005 04:31:30 -0000 From: John Levine Subject: Re: Vonage Complaining Of VoIP 'Blocking' Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA >> Isn't that still the case? > Yep, and by those rules Cox shouldn't be considered a common carrier > any longer. Cox, being a cable company, isn't a common carrier and never has been. Why do you think they are? R's, John ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 22:56:12 -0600 From: Neal McLain Subject: Re: Detroit: America's Rejection Capital (except it isn't) Carl Moore wrote: Subject: Re: Detroit: America's Rejection Capital > The complete number is 248-262-6861 (yes, it was in the > article). > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: So exactly what is the > number? It's called "Rejection Hotline" -- it rejects all calls with a rather stupid message. There are similar numbers in many other cities. See list at: http://www.rejectionhotline.com/numbers_and_cities.php? > All I received (on several dialing attempts) was > a recording "All circuits are busy now, please try again > later." If that the intent of that number, to return that > recorded message all the time? PAT] Apparently the 248 number really is busy, perhaps because of the Associated Press publicity. I tried several other numbers, and they all went through. Neal McLain ------------------------------ Subject: Another Rejection Number (was Re: Detroit: America's Rejection) Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 11:59:30 -0500 From: carl Moore (Civ,ARL/SLAD) The same idea has been mentioned in another Philadelphia source (KYW news-radio), and here is a web reference for as long as it is good: http://www2.kyw1060.com/news_story_detail.cfm?newsitemid=44085 There is a Philadelphia number included there as well (215-618-1505). As for "all circuits busy", PERHAPS people are trying it out of curiosity. According to the story, there is indeed a rejection message if you get through. If you haven't read any of the news stories yet, try looking them up. ------------------------------ 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 V24 #71 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Feb 16 18:17:40 2005 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j1GNHdl09947; Wed, 16 Feb 2005 18:17:40 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 18:17:40 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200502162317.j1GNHdl09947@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 V24 #72 TELECOM Digest Wed, 16 Feb 2005 18:18:00 EST Volume 24 : Issue 72 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Leading Zeros? (Robert Bonomi) Re: Leading Zeros? (Justin Time) Re: Leading Zeros? (Brad Houser) Re: Leading Zeros? (William Warren) Re: Leading Zeros? (Barry Margolin) Re: Leading Zeros? (Michael D. Sullivan) Re: Verizon Plans to Offer Naked DSL on 4/5 of Wirelines (Mike Sullivan) Re: Verizon Plans to Offer Naked DSL on 4/5 of Wirelines (ranck@vt.edu) Re: Click Fraud Looms As Search-Engine Threat (Michael D. Sullivan) Re: Powell Rips FCC Delay on Connection Fee Reform (Michael D. Sullivan) Re: A Silly Question - 2-Line Phone With One Phone Number? (LB@notmine) Re: ADSL and SDSL? (Robert Bonomi) Re: Man Dies Waiting for 911 to Arrive (Tim@Backhome.org) Re: Vonage Complaining of VoIP 'Blocking' (Tony P.) Re: The Move to High-Tech Tracking of Inmates (Lisa Hancock) 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: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) Subject: Re: Leading Zeros? Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 11:59:36 -0000 Organization: Widgets, Inc. In article , AES wrote: > I've just encountered an annoying hassle where proper handling of > archival bibliographic data requires keeping track of leading zeros in > ID numbers; and these seem like informed groups to ask if anyone has > comments or observations on other electronic or online systems that > require or even allow leading zeros? > Specifically the Am Phys Soc now identifies articles not by volume and > page numbers but by volume and a six-digit "article number" which > sometimes does and sometimes does not have an initial zero -- but if > it does you _must_ keep it for various bibliographic and online > citations to work properly. A few quick tests show that the default > behavior is to automatically and irretrievably discard leading zeros > on integer numbers keyed into an Excel worksheet cell or a Mathematic > list. Note: *BAD* test. You can select the 'formatting' on a cell, column, or entire worksheet, to display numbers with leading zeroes. If you treat the cell data as a 'number', it will be 'left filled' with zeroes to the number of positions you specify. If you treat the cell as *TEXT* then _exactly_ what you enter =will= be preserved. > One of my bank accounts prints my account number with three > leading zeros, but won't accept them in the Account Number field for > online login. On the other hand for another ID card I have, you > _must_ type the leading zeros. > Are there any kind of published refs or computer standards or human > interface guidelines on the use of leading zeros? ZIP codes use 'em, > phone numbers don't? Finding "formal documentation" on this matter is going to be _very_ difficult. Just for starters, "a number is a number is a number" is simply *NOT* true. Sometimes a "number" is just a "label", not a 'count of a quantity'. If you can find it, get a copy of the big user-manual for "SPSS" (the social-science statistics package) They devote a fair amount of the first _chapter_ to the different "kinds" of numbers -- they identify at least *five* separate, _incompatible_ types, BTW. For "counting numbers" -- those on which you can do arithmetic, leading zeroes are 'immaterial'; can be 'ignored' on input, and are _commonly_ (although *not* always) "suppressed" on output. The output suppression _is_ strictly for improved "readability" for/by "humans". Where the "number" is merely some form of 'label', all bets are off. The number of symbols in the string _may_ be significant -- in which case, obviously stripping/inserting 'leading zeroes' *does* change the label. Or, the 'number' is a "structured" label. composed of various (possibly variable-sized) sub-fields. leading zeroes in _any_ sub-field must be preserved, so that the sub-field is the *size* expected/indicated. The "safest" thing to do with anything other than 'counting numbers' is to treat them as 'text strings", which you store, and reproduce, *exactly* as entered. Well, trimming leading/trailing "white-space" is allowed, *if* you know that said white-space is *not* significant. And, of course, any 'validation' that you can do _before_ accepting the input -- such as no white-space _within_ the 'label' is still OK. Treating a 'label' as a 'counting number' *IS* a _very_ common database design error, and one that ends up biting a _lot_ of inexperienced designers at a 'much later date'. And, when that _does_ happen, it is *really* messy to 'repair' the previously entered data. ------------------------------ From: Justin Time Subject: Re: Leading Zeros? Date: 16 Feb 2005 05:22:56 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Suppression of leading zeroes in a number stored electronically was a design decision made at the initial concept meetings for the package. As far as convention, again it's a choice. If you specify a string, which is how numbers are stored and referenced in most programs as variable length, then you will use less storage to hold a number. As an example, if you have a right justified field that holds 15 digits and the string contains only 7 digits after the first non-zero digit, you don't have to store the 8 leading zeroes. If it is a fixed length field, then you would be required to key in all 15 digits, including leading zeroes. There are several different ways to handle a variable length number in a fixed length situation and it would be a good programming exercise for a basic class. Rodgers Platt ------------------------------ From: Brad Houser Subject: Re: Leading Zeros? Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 12:40:50 -0800 Organization: Intel Reply-To: Brad Houser AES wrote in message news:telecom24.70.4@telecom-digest.org: > A few quick tests show that the default behavior is to automatically > and irretrievably discard leading zeros on integer numbers keyed > into an Exce l worksheet cell or a Mathematic list. If you enter the number in Excel with an apostrophe in front it will be stored it as a number but display it as entered: '00001 displays as 00001 Brad Houser ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 15:32:15 -0500 From: William Warren Subject: Re: Leading Zeros? AES wrote: > I've just encountered an annoying hassle where proper handling of > archival bibliographic data requires keeping track of leading zeros in > ID numbers; and these seem like informed groups to ask if anyone has > comments or observations on other electronic or online systems that > require or even allow leading zeros? > Specifically the Am Phys Soc now identifies articles not by volume and > page numbers but by volume and a six-digit "article number" which > sometimes does and sometimes does not have an initial zero -- but if > it does you _must_ keep it for various bibliographic and online > citations to work properly. A few quick tests show that the default > behavior is to automatically and irretrievably discard leading zeros > on integer numbers keyed into an Excel worksheet cell or a Mathematic > list. One of my bank accounts prints my account number with three > leading zeros, but won't accept them in the Account Number field for > online login. On the other hand for another ID card I have, you > _must_ type the leading zeros. > Are there any kind of published refs or computer standards or human > interface guidelines on the use of leading zeros? ZIP codes use 'em, > phone numbers don't? In a spreadsheet, simply format the column as "Text", and the leading zeroes will be entered unchanged. If you are using a computer program to retrieve data, consult the programming menu for the field definition which is equivalent to text. HTH. William (Filter noise for direct replies.) ------------------------------ From: Barry Margolin Subject: Re: Leading Zeros? Organization: Symantec Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 00:02:46 -0500 In article , AES wrote: > Are there any kind of published refs or computer standards or human > interface guidelines on the use of leading zeros? ZIP codes use 'em, > phone numbers don't? If leading zeroes are intended to be significant, don't use a numeric data type for the field. Program it as a character string, since that's what it actually is (if you want to restrict it to digits, you may need to write a separate validation routine for that). Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu Arlington, MA *** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me *** ------------------------------ From: Michael D. Sullivan Subject: Re: Leading Zeros? Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 08:17:16 GMT In article , siegman@stanford.edu says: > I've just encountered an annoying hassle where proper handling of > archival bibliographic data requires keeping track of leading zeros in > ID numbers; and these seem like informed groups to ask if anyone has > comments or observations on other electronic or online systems that > require or even allow leading zeros? > Specifically the Am Phys Soc now identifies articles not by volume and > page numbers but by volume and a six-digit "article number" which > sometimes does and sometimes does not have an initial zero -- but if > it does you _must_ keep it for various bibliographic and online > citations to work properly. A few quick tests show that the default > behavior is to automatically and irretrievably discard leading zeros > on integer numbers keyed into an Excel worksheet cell or a Mathematic > list. One of my bank accounts prints my account number with three > leading zeros, but won't accept them in the Account Number field for > online login. On the other hand for another ID card I have, you > _must_ type the leading zeros. > Are there any kind of published refs or computer standards or human > interface guidelines on the use of leading zeros? ZIP codes use 'em, > phone numbers don't? The application typically must be set up to handle the ID numbers as character strings. In the case of excel spreadsheets, when entering the ID numbers directly, put a single quote before the entry (e.g., '00123) to treat it as a string. It should be possible to devise data entry dialogs that handle this correctly without having to put in the quote symbol. Early in the days of the WWW, some online forms made the mistake of treating entries beginning with 0 as octal, resulting in the rejection of entries with digits greater than 7 and the translation of others to completely unintended values (e.g., 050 would be 50 base 8, or 40 base 10). Any database program should have a simple way to deal with this. For example, input the data as a character string, validate the characters as permissible, such as 0-9, require reentry if not valid, and then translate to whatever format is used internally. -- Michael D. Sullivan Bethesda, MD, USA Replace "example.invalid" with ".com". ------------------------------ From: Michael D. Sullivan Subject: Re: Verizon Plans to Offer "Naked DSL" on 4/5 of its Wirelines Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 06:53:43 GMT In article , siegman@stanford.edu says: > In article , Clark W. Griswold, > Jr. wrote: >> What's a bit more unfortunate is that the telcos have successfully >> managed to exempt themselves from sharing any new fiber that gets >> buried. Since the capacity of fiber exceeds that of a copper pair in a >> bundle with a bunch of other copper pairs by a factor of a million to >> 1 or more, the long term viability of naked DSL is questionable at >> best. > That's not just "a bit more unfortunate" -- it's a massively socially > undesirable policy. Except that rolling out fiber costs exactly the same for a telco as for a non-telco. If the telcos had to allow others to use their fiber as unbundled network elements (UNEs), priced in accordance with TELRIC, they wouldn't bother, and there would be no fiber to the home, and no competition for the cable operators. For installing fiber to the home, telcos have no "natural monopoly" advantages, so nobody else is "impaired" without access to that fiber at UNE prices, because they could install the same fiber at the same cost. Why should a telco have to lease out that fiber to others at what amounts to a below-cost rate? If they had to do that, their competitors would automatically be able to profitably provide broadband service cheaper than the telco, because they wouldn't have to bear the cost of deployment. It seems to me that the FCC's decision not to require sharing of FTTH was the only way to give the telcos an incentive to deploy fiber. That's a socially desirable policy, while requiring them to offer fiber to others at UNE prices would be massively socially undesirable. Michael D. Sullivan Bethesda, MD, USA Replace "example.invalid" with ".com". ------------------------------ From: ranck@vt.edu Subject: Re: Verizon Plans to Offer "Naked DSL" on 4/5 of its Wirelines Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 20:13:01 +0000 (UTC) Organization: Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia, USA Michael D. Sullivan wrote: > There is at least one technology issue, and maybe more. Verizon's > many millions of ADSL/POTS lines are identified by telephone number. > The POTS telephone number is, in effect, the key, the unique > identifier, used in the databases of both Verizon's LEC and Verizon > Online, which markets DSL to the public. Both companies' databases Nope, Veirzon's predecessor Bell Atlantic had no trouble billing for dry pair leased lines in the 1970's. They had a circuit number which we used when calling in trouble tickets, but no phone number was associated with them. I am quite willing to bet there are still dry pair leased lines here and there. In fact I'll bet just about every ATM machine has a wire pair with no dial-tone or phone number. Those things use leased lines with modems set up in leased line mode. At least that is how they used to work. No bank wants to have its ATMs on the switched phone network, but they do lease wire pairs from the local telco. The only difference for DSL is the type of modem. > will have to be significantly reconfigured to use an identification > other than simply the telephone number in order to run their > businesses before Naked DSL is offered. If you have ever called > Verizon Online's customer (dis) service number, you will know that the > first question asked is, "What is your DSL line's phone number?" That is just the easiest identifier. If their database programmers were even halfway competent there will be other wire pair circuit IDs that are unique identifiers. In fact a phone number isn't a unique key anyway. It can change while the wire pair does not, and the wire pair could change while the phone number does not. Bill Ranck Blacksburg, Va. ------------------------------ From: Michael D. Sullivan Subject: Re: Click Fraud Looms As Search-Engine Threat Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 07:22:01 GMT In article , siegman@stanford.edu says: > In article , Michael D. Sullivan > wrote: >> It's different, however, when someone sets out deliberately to impose >> unnecessary costs on a business, as opposed to shopping in good faith >> as a consumer. If Cartier's, for example, sent people into Tiffany's >> to tie up their salespeople, and Tiffany's suffered lost sales, then >> Tiffany's might have grounds for a lawsuit against Cartier's. > Question for Michael Sullivan: > Is it different when the _business_ sets out deliberately to impose > unnecessary or unwanted costs (however minor) on the _individual_? There is a tort (civil wrong, something you can sue for if there are damages) called "tortious interference with business," and a similar one known as "tortious interference with contract," but I don't think there is a tort called "tortious interference with individual choice." However, there are both torts and criminal laws concerning unlawful imprisonment and harrassment. In appropriate circumstances, these might be applicable to some hypothetical situations, as discussed below. > Suppose while passing by Cartier's front door on my way back to work I > drop into their store to make a quick good-faith query about one of > their products. > I discover after doing this, however, that they won't let me back out > their front door again. I can only leave via a rear door, which > forces me to walk through an arcade filled with display windows for > their mechandise or other related merchandise and then dumps me out on > the next street, a block in the opposite direction from my initial > destination. Turns out they get paid small amounts by the other > merchants for doing this. This is exactly what every theme park and museum tries to do: the exit is through the gift shop. If there were grounds for claiming this is illegal, the class action bar would have sued and gotten settlements that resulted in sending you coupons for a discount in the foregoing gift shops, as well as million dollar fees for themselves. > Is the analogy to certain kinds of hidden pop-up window ads clear > enough? Would retaliatory actions on my part be justified? (e.g, if > there were pushbuttons in the arcade to serve me with catalogs, could > I justifiably push several of them and dump the catalogs on the > floor?) When you come out of Pirates of the Caribbean and have to guide your kids through the gift shop and past the photo stand, are you entitled to knock stuff off the shelves and spatter paint on the pictures? No. Could you take a copy of stuff they are handing out and trash it? Yes. In your hypothetical, I don't see any problem in taking copies of what is offered and trashing it, as a one-shot deal; it's probably protected under the First Amendment as a form of speech protesting the imposition. What if you organized a couple hundred people to repeatedly, go through the store and grab catalogs to trash? It's possible that you might be considered as intentionally and tortiously interfering with the businesses of the catalog-offerors, especially if you depleted their stock of catalogs and had no reason for going through the store except to trash the catalogs. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Your point is a *very good one*. I > have even had some bozos (but in fairness, they are usually the > sex purveyors) not let me leave at all, dumping one new window after > another at me without any absolute way out short of recyling power > on the computer. PAT] The recursive open-ad-on-close routines are truly vile. Their only reason for existence is that some advertising companies pay per view, and the abuse of this through these cascading ads is likely to make the advertising companies rethink their business model. Moreover, it is conceivable that there might be grounds for a lawsuit against such operations (if you can figure out who to sue) on grounds of harrassment or the electronic equivalent of false imprisonment. The odds are, however, that the entities who engage in this BS are judgment proof (i.e., no assets). And clicking on the popups only rewards them, because they wouldn't be popped up like that if they had to pay for clicks. And as others have noted, one can avoid these cascading popups by using the Google Toolbar (or other ad-blockers) with IE or just using Firefox (I do both, and the cascading popups are a thing of the past), assuming one is using Windows. I don't know if the Mac Safari browser or the Mac version of IE are victimized, or how to fix it if they are. Needless to say (but still necessary due to DC Bar rules), none of the foregoing is a legal opinion or intended to create an attorney-client relationship, but is rather a general discussion of legal principles. Michael D. Sullivan Bethesda, MD, USA Replace "example.invalid" with ".com". ------------------------------ From: Michael D. Sullivan Subject: Re: Powell Rips FCC Delay on Connection Fee Reform Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 08:01:26 GMT In article , jmcharry@comcast.net says: > "Reform" is what those advocating any particular change always call > it, progressive or regressive. As I recall, the last "reform" > slaughtered competitive DSL. The CLEC settlement rules, which the > Bells wrote, but miscalculated, are probably the next target. That > should allow them to kill competitive VoIP. OTOH, maybe I am too old > and cynical. Or worked in telecom too long. Actually, the real battle involves the rapacious rural ILECs, who want everything to subsidize them and they want it now. Since the VoIP providers aren't carriers, they are the party that is conspicuous by its absence from the scheme. The VoIP providers typically use CLECs to front for them in terms of obtaining interconnection and origination/termination of calls on the PSTN, so the CLECs would be their proxy in this proceeding. As to the CLEC settlement rules, the Bells didn't write them; the FCC initially gave the CLECs what they asked for, but when it turned out the CLECs had played the FCC for a fool and were engaging in gamesmanship (e.g., signing up ISPs with no outgoing minutes and massive incoming minutes), it reversed course as to their internet terminations. For everything else, the CLECs have made out just fine. Michael D. Sullivan Bethesda, MD, USA Replace "example.invalid" with ".com". ------------------------------ From: LB@notmine.com Subject: Re: A Silly Question - 2-Line Phone With One Phone Number? Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 03:47:38 -0500 Organization: Optimum Online Boat wrote: > I have a silly question. I'd like to get a 5.8 GHz, 2-line phone with > multiple handsets but I only have one incoming phone number into my > home. In order to fully utilize Line 1 and Line 2 I assume I will have > to get the phone company out here to install a second line. Is that > true? Are there any other options? > Thank You! > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: If you have a VOIP line, consider > extending it to to terminate on your proposed two line phone. If you > have a cellular phone, consider getting a 'cell socket' type device > for your cell phone, and extend it to your proposed two line phone. > PAT] n Pat's suggestions are right on. If you do get a second line the telco will probably make the change where the phone line enters the house such that the four wires in all the wires in the house now are used for the two numbers. Usually red-green and yellow-black. If you need to get at individual lines you can buy a splitter that plugs into your current jacks. Take a look at Radio Shack or similar. LB ------------------------------ From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) Subject: Re: ADSL and SDSL? Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 11:30:42 -0000 Organization: Widgets, Inc. In article , T. Sean Weintz wrote: > Robert Anderson wrote: >> Do you more reliably get the higher bandwidth with SDSL than with >> ADSL? >> For example, is the CIR higher with SDSL? >> We are a very small business using VoIP and our connection is >> ADSL. People have problems hearing us but not the other way around. >> We were thinking of switching from ADSL over to SDSL, to see if that >> helps. >> Robert Anderson > ADSL is asymmetrical *not*necessarily* > SDSL is symetrical *not*necessarily* As "commonly deployed", SDSL has same speed up and down, and ADSL has mis-matched (almost invariably higher in the 'down' direction) speeds. However, I have had "symmetric rate" ADSL, and "Asymmetric rate" SDSL, service, at various times, from various providers. Not terribly common, but such services do/did exist. :) ------------------------------ From: Tim@Backhome.org Subject: Re: Man Dies Waiting for 911 to Arrive Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 07:06:41 -0800 Organization: Cox Communications Some dumb jury will probably find Saulk Villiage liable. Most people have no ideas that cell phones are actually little two-way radios that connect to the phone system somewhere. If they guy had had any sense about this he would have said, "I am in Saulk Villiage and think I am having a heart attack." Or, if he had not been alone, it would have been different ... and so on and so forth. Folks think wireless phones are wireline phones. Of course, some of us semi-techies thing VoIP phones are also wireline phones, which they most decidedly are not. Marcus Didius Falco wrote: > On Thu, Feb 10 2005 18:00:00 PST Patrick Townson > > wrote about: > Man Dies Waiting for 911 to Arrive >> -- Suit alleges dispatcher let man die in car -- >> This story from our TD-Extra pages tells of a man with a cellular >> phone registered in Dyer, Indiana (where he lived) who died in >> his car (and was found in the car dead a few weeks later) in a >> parking garage in Saulk Village, Illinois. Saulk Village (a far >> south suburb of Chicago) sits on the Illinois/Indiana state line >> right 'across the street' from Dyer, Indiana. It appears the 911 >> dispatcher for Saulk Village (area code 708)did not know why she >> was getting a call from an area code 219 number. The man called >> from his automobile saying he thought he was having a heart attack; >> the 911 dispatcher did not deal with it correctly. The man died >> while waiting for an ambulance to show up (it never did show up) >> and several weeks later they found his body in his car where it >> had been parked. The family is suing the Village of Saulk Village >> for damages. >> See the full story at: >> http://interestalert.com/brand/siteia.shtml?Story=st/sn/02100002aaa0485f.upi&Sys=ptownson&Type=News&Filter=Front%20Page&Fid=FRONTPAG > This certainly can happen, but, IMnotsoHO, it's the fault of the 911 > operator. I often get 911 connections from the wrong operator -- the > wrong county or even the wrong state. (And a 911 operator certainly > can't assume the location of a cell phone from its area code!) In my > opinion, once the operator figures out where I am -- or at least that I > am not in his/her jurisdiction, I am relatively quickly transferred to > the 911 operator in the correct jurisdiction, even if it's in a > neighboring state. After all, when we're near a boundary we have no > control over which tower will pick up our signal. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yeah, the 'dumb jury' *should* find for the plaintiff, IMO. The 911 dispatcher should never leave a call abandoned merely because she does not know what to do or where the call was coming from. They have ways to hold the line open and get the answers they need, or at the very least, locate the tower where the call came through. Whatever happened to the plan that E-911 was going to be able to locate mobile callers within a distance of several feet? PAT] ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: Vonage Complaining Of VoIP 'Blocking' Organization: ATCC Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 18:01:09 -0500 In article , johnl@iecc.com says: >>> Isn't that still the case? >> Yep, and by those rules Cox shouldn't be considered a common carrier >> any longer. > Cox, being a cable company, isn't a common carrier and never has been. > Why do you think they are? Cox hasn't been just a cable company for at least the past five years. They provide cable television in both standard and digital forms, telephone service, and net service. The phone service is FCC regulated btw. ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com Subject: Re: The Move to High-Tech Tracking of Inmates Date: 16 Feb 2005 08:15:18 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Telecom Editor wrote: > criteria, and in fact have ignored it for quite a while. As a result, > there is one area in the city, Englewood (a very poor economically, > black, inner city area) which is *so* overloaded with offenders, that > the neighbors there have started complaining a lot also. PAT] I wonder how many offenders came from Englewood in the first place. But it is sad to hear your description. At one time Englewood housed a key railroad Union Station that served a number of lines coming into Chicago. In the prior days, passengers of the famed Broadway Limited and Twentieth Century Limited got to be on a race between the two trains in that area. AFAIK nothing is left of that station. Also, Chicago is home to a very early planned community (condo like), the Pullman community built for workers of the Pullman manufacturing plant. Pullman built all sorts of services into the community to protect the workers from bad influences (though they could be found in the next town over). Sadly, a bitter strike ruined it. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Answering your questions/comments sort of in reverse order: Pullman, Illinois was a suburb of Chicago, and a 'company town' a lot like Gary, Indiana over a hundred years ago. George F. Pullman was considered a very 'enlightened' individual in his ideas of providing housing, food, entertainment and a total social environment for his employees. Eventually, the Supreme Court disgreed with his assessment and forced the Pullman Town Corporation to divest its assets to the employees of Pullman Sleeping Car Company who lived there. At some point, Pullman, Illinois was annexed into the City of Chicago and became the Chicago southside neighborhood known today as Pullman. The telephones there are 773-785 which metamorphed to that from 312-785 and before that from Pullman-5 and before that it was 'PULlman'. Other than a stop on the Illinois Central Railroad Electric Train called (what else?) 'Pullman', there is not a lot left there that is not a typical inner city neighborhood. There is the clock tower and the Pullman United Methodist Church, a very grandiose establishment (bought and paid for by George F.Pullman and largely surviving on his largesse even to this day, a century later), and not much else. 'Englewood' is best remembered for its train station as you mentioned, and also for its late shopping district, at 63rd Street and Englewood Avenue, where there was among other things a very large Sears, Roebuck store on that corner, and several other prominent business establishments making it second only to downtown Chicago (the 'loop' area) in terms of elegance and importance to the business community. The telephones there are 773-364 which eventually traced back to ENGlewood long ago. Sears closed up shop there, drugs and crime took over the neighborhood, and the one establishment everyone assumed would be around until hell froze over, Englewood Hospital, went bankrupt and closed its doors a couple years ago. It appears people could not pay the doctor either. Now the business places there are mostly currency exchanges (I am not sure if any banks are in the area any longer or not), gasoline stations, combination fast food/discount liquor stores and the ever- present Illinois State Lottery Agents. I guess that's because, in their wisdom, the authorities know it is important to provide ex- offenders a wholesome, positive environment for living arrangements. I do know that in their wisdom, the brave, courageous officers of the Chicago Police (who serve as the intake agents for the Corrections Industry) realize the importance of maintaining a steady flow of repeat business to the Corrections Industry which is why they keep moving offenders (both ex- and current) into the area. No, Lisa, the old train station no longer is around, and the year isn't 1950 either. Neither are the white people, except for the occassional white ex- offender who gets placed there. Even the one McDonalds Restaurant which *ever* went bankrupt and closed down is no longer there. The tour busses which take people around town stay over close to the McCormick Place area. 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 V24 #72 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Feb 17 22:07:16 2005 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j1I37GK20898; Thu, 17 Feb 2005 22:07:16 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 22:07:16 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200502180307.j1I37GK20898@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 V24 #73 TELECOM Digest Thu, 17 Feb 2005 22:07:00 EST Volume 24 : Issue 73 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson A Regulatory Maze Ahead for a Recast F.C.C. (Monty Solomon) Thanks to Cellphones, TV Screens Get Smaller (Monty Solomon) Simplifying Web Checkouts (Monty Solomon) You There, at the Computer: Pay Attention (Monty Solomon) Lots of Personal Reports Leaked Out From Choicepoint (Danny Burstein) Telecom Mergers as a Window on Job Market (Lisa Minter) Qwest Makes MCI Bid Public (Telecom dailyLead from USTA) Cell Phone Use Coming For Airbus Fliers (Marcus Didius Falco) Question on PAM modulation? (yijun_lily@yahoo.com) Re: Verizon Plans to Offer Naked DSL on 4/5 of Wireline (Fred Goldstein) Re: Verizon Plans to Offer Naked DSL on 4/5 of Wireline (Tony P.) Re: Verizon Plans to Offer Naked DSL on 4/5 of Wireline (Chas Cryderman) Re: Packet8 Problems Dialing Austria (John McHarry) Re: Vonage Complaining of VOIP Blocking (Tim@Backhome.org) Re: Vonage Complaining Of VoIP Blocking (Scott Dorsey) Re: Motorola and Oakley Introduce First Bluetooth Sunglasses (seanmc42) Re: Motorola and Oakley Introduce First Bluetooth Sunglasses (timeOday) Re: Leading Zeros? (AES) Re: Powell Rips FCC Delay on Connection Fee Reform (John Levine) Re: A Silly Question - 2-Line Phone With One Phone Number? (C Griswold) Re: ADSL and SDSL? (Dean) Re: Another Rejection Number (was Re: Detroit: Rejection) (Ankur Shah) 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, 16 Feb 2005 23:15:54 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: A Regulatory Maze Ahead for a Recast F.C.C. February 15, 2005 By STEPHEN LABATON WASHINGTON, Feb. 14 - The deals have been forged on Wall Street, but their final shape may depend on Washington. Most people expect the huge telecommunications mergers recently announced to be approved in the current political climate, but the deals could prompt a considerable fine-tuning of existing rules. The consolidations, a natural outgrowth of the deregulatory agenda of the Federal Communications Commission under Michael K. Powell, will present the next chairman with a crucial opportunity to rewrite the rules governing the industry. The conditions set -- or brushed aside -- by regulators in deciding whether to approve each of the three big deals announced in the last few weeks will be among the most significant policy decisions for the industry since Congress rewrote telecommunications rules nine years ago. Verizon Communications' announcement that it will buy MCI follows the proposed acquisition of AT&T by SBC Communications and Sprint's purchase of Nextel. If the regulators respond by attaching important conditions to approval of the mergers, they may relieve significant pressure on Congress to conduct a quick overhaul of the Telecommunications Act of 1996. One thing is certain: the proposed deals will remove AT&T and MCI, the two major adversaries of the regional Bell companies, from political lobbying. http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/15/business/15regs.html?ex=1266123600&en=ca4def20fbbbd997&ei=5090 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 23:19:42 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Thanks to Cellphones, TV Screens Get Smaller By NOAH ROBISCHON New from the creators of "24": a spinoff series about a rogue Washington antiterrorism agent who is trying to infiltrate the Department of Defense. It's called "24 Conspiracy," but unlike "CSI: Miami" or "Law & Order: SVU," it is not broadcast on a different night, or on television at all. It is seen exclusively on Verizon's newest mobile phone. Each of the one-minute mobile episodes (referred to as mobisodes) is specially shot and edited for the small, small screen. "Conspiracy," produced by Twentieth Century Fox Television, a division of the News Corporation, is one of three original series making their debut on Verizon's V Cast, a high-speed cellular phone network that delivers broadband Internet-quality video. Mobile video is already popular in Korea, Japan and Europe. "24 Conspiracy" made its debut last month in England, where it costs 50 pence for a single episode and $39.99, or about $19, for the series. V Cast, which began its service on Feb. 7, is the most ambitious wireless video offering in the United States to date. The network gives subscribers access to some 300 video clips, most from two to three minutes long. There are CNN news updates, ESPN sports briefs, music videos and jokes from the previous night's edition of "The Daily Show With Jon Stewart." http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/15/arts/television/15cell.html?ex=126612360=0&en=5bf6ef9b75a1cb9d&ei=5090 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 23:22:05 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Simplifying Web Checkouts Simplifying Web Checkouts By BOB TEDESCHI FOR many e-commerce sites, the shopping cart is where transactions go to die. About half of prospective customers bail out of their purchases sometime after selecting products and before hitting the buy button, according to Forrester Research, a technology consultant. That phenomenon has prompted sites like TJMaxx.com and HomeGoods.com to find new ways to shepherd customers smoothly through the checkout process. As traditional retailers sharpen their online operations, those kinds of improvements could be critical in winning business. Take the TJX Companies, which owns T. J. Maxx, Marshalls and HomeGoods, among others. Last fall the company opened online stores for T. J. Maxx and HomeGoods, using a traditional checkout method that makes users click through multiple screens while typing in shipping information, credit card numbers and the like. During the holiday season, both TJMaxx.com and HomeGoods.com tested a new checkout system that lets customers use a single page for all shipping and billing information. Fifty percent more customers completed the one-page checkout process than finished the multipage process. http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/14/technology/14ecom.html?ex=1266037200&en=2e977cb22a040daa&ei=5090 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Read these, and other stories from the New York Times each day on our free, no registration required website, which is http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra/nytimes.html The news headlines are updated constantly, 24/7. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 22:51:24 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: You There, at the Computer: Pay Attention By KATIE HAFNER FIRST, a confession. Since starting to write this article two hours ago, I have left my chair only once. But I have not been entirely present, either. Each time I have encountered a thorny sentence construction or a tough transition, I have heard the siren call of distraction. Shouldn't I fiddle with my Netflix queue, perhaps, or click on the weekend weather forecast? And there must be a friend having a birthday who would love to receive an e-card right now. I have checked two e-mail accounts at least a dozen times each, and read eight messages. Only two were relevant to my task, but I responded right away to all of them. My sole act of self-discipline: both instant messaging accounts are turned off. For now. This sorry litany is made only slightly less depressing when I remind myself that I have plenty of company. Humans specialize in distraction, especially when the task at hand requires intellectual heavy lifting. All the usual "Is it lunchtime yet?" inner voices, and external interruptions like incoming phone calls, are alive and well. But in the era of e-mail, instant messaging, Googling, e-commerce and iTunes, potential distractions while seated at a computer are not only ever-present but very enticing. Distracting oneself used to consist of sharpening a half-dozen pencils or lighting a cigarette. Today, there is a universe of diversions to buy, hear, watch and forward, which makes focusing on a task all the more challenging. http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/10/technology/circuits/10info.html ------------------------------ From: Danny Burstein Subject: Lots of Personal Reports Leaked Out From Choicepoint Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 03:18:19 -0500 Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC "Choicepoint" is one of the major accumulators of persnal info about just about everybody in the US. It's used by credit agencies, businesses, landlords, law enforcement, oh, and also, identity thieves. It looks like they've been a bit careless. Here are excerpts from their own statement, followed by a comment from EPIC: "ChoicePoint has notified approximately 35,000 California residents that their information may have been accessed by a very small number of criminals posing as legitimate companies to gain access to information about consumers. Additional disclosures will be forthcoming to approximately 110,000 consumers outside of California whose information also may have been accessed. Law enforcement officials informed us today that their current investigation has identified approximately 750 people who have been the victims of identity theft in this incident. "It appears that consumers names, addresses, Social Security numbers and credit reports may have been viewed by these individuals, who posed as legitimate business customers with a lawful purpose for accessing information about individuals which, in fact, was not the case... http://www.choicepoint.com/news/statement_0205_1.html and EPIC: " ... issued notices to over 30,000 California residents that their personal information may have been accessed by criminals with access to the Choicepoint's information products. Individuals outside California may have been affected too, but the company is not obligated to disclose security breaches to residents of other states. As recently as two weeks ago, EPIC again warned the Federal Trade Commission about unjustified access to commercial databases and questioned the adequacy of Choicepoint's auditing procedures ... http://www.epic.org http://www.epic.org/privacy/choicepoint/ _____________________________________________________ Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key =09=09 dannyb@panix.com [to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 12:51:52 -0500 From: Lisa Minter Subject: Telecom Mergers as a Window on Job Market Click here to read this story online: http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0217/p02s01-usec.html Byline: Ron Scherer Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor (NEW YORK) Four years ago, the telecom industry had the dubious distinction of leading the nation in layoffs. Now, it looks as if the industry, in the midst of a major consolidation, could be one of the top job cutters again. But this time, employment specialists don't think the job prospects for all those supervisors, engineers, accountants, and personnel specialists will be as bleak. Unlike 2001, those out of work won't be fighting for jobs with unemployed dotcomers. The layoffs also come at a time when the economy is growing, not in recession. And online bulletin boards report they have job postings for people in the business. In fact, the experience of laid-off telecomers could be a sign of the resurgence of the job market -- something predicted for 2005. "It is a much more sanguine time," says John Challenger of Challenger, Gray & Christmas, a Chicago outplacement firm. "Hopefully, people coming out of telecom with basic business skills will find them transferable from industry to industry." Initially, a considerable number of resumes will be circulating from telecom employees. SBC Communications, which is acquiring AT&T, says it expects to cut about 13,000 jobs on top of another 12,000 that will be eliminated before the merger is finalized. The Verizon-MCI marriage could put 7,000 people on the unemployment line. And the Sprint-Nextel merger could put yet thousands more out of work, although no announcements have been made yet. Ripple effects As the newly acquired companies settle in, there could be a ripple effect for their suppliers, law firms, and accountants. The mergers could also force smaller companies to combine, says Raul Martynek, CEO of Eureka Networks, a New York-based communications company. "It's the only way to survive in this new reality," he says. Eureka, in fact, is an example of the shifting dynamics in the industry. Five years ago, the company emphasized growth. Today, says Mr. Martynek, the business model is predicated on efficiency. For example, in 2000, his company had 700 employees. After 9/11 and the telecom implosion, the company downsized to 75 employees - its size today. "We're doing four times the revenue we did in those days," says Martynek, who has been acquiring companies himself. "There will be more synergies but also more cuts." Few layoffs will come from the blue-collar side of the companies because these trades are highly unionized. "It's tough to lay them off," says Martynek. Instead, most of the cuts are expected to be on the white-collar side. SBC has already said it would have 5,100 excess managers. An additional 5,100 will be cut from sales and other parts of customer support. Yet more layoffs are likely in human resources, regulatory, and lobbying operations. Verizon said recently its staff reductions would focus on networking, legal, sales, and IT departments. Executives who are running job bulletin boards are somewhat optimistic that those looking for work will find them. VetJobs.com, a bulletin board for former military personnel, has posted 227 telecom jobs. "A lot of telecom skills are transferable in administration, human resources, marketing, and sales," says Ted Daywalt, CEO of the Atlanta-based organization. However, he adds, "it may take a 30 to 40 percent pay cut to remain employed." Opportunities within There may also be new opportunities within the merged companies themselves. Paul Kowal, a customer-service consultant in Cambridge, Mass., says the combined behemoths will need more people helping other people. "The customers will have as many questions and issues as they used to, so if you double your subscriber base, you need to double your customer service to reduce churn," or people moving to other companies for better service. In addition, SBC and other telecoms are developing plans to offer cable service to their huge subscriber base. For the most part, they haven't hired staff yet. "If you start to add cable service and other broadband packages, there is an opportunity to sell and a need to maintain the service," says Mr. Kowal, who is president of Kowal & Associates. The phone companies are also expanding their services to include streaming video on cellphones. News organizations, such as ABC News, are trying to sell subscriptions to 24-hour news programming in this format. And during the Super Bowl, for example, some cellphone subscribers could receive video updates of the game. Moreover, new cars are becoming equipped with telecommunications devices that allow passengers to watch movies and play games. "Companies will have to gear up, and it results in more opportunities," says Kowal. Some of the companies, such as Verizon, are still installing fiber-optic cable to individual homes. There are reports the company will be hiring up to 5,000 people to help it market and maintain this system. "There are pockets in telecom that will be hiring," says Martynek. One of those areas is likely to be new ways to use electronic devices in homes. More appliances, such as ovens, will be controlled remotely, perhaps through a cellphone. "They are already testing the appliances where it will keep the food cold until a certain time and then start to warm it," says Kowal. "But you will also be able to move the cooking time up or down remotely." This future market is called "device control." With the fiber-optic cable going to a home, Kowal speculates, it could mean the phone company could get into the home-protection business, again competing with cable companies. (c) Copyright 2005 The Christian Science Monitor. All rights reserved. http://www.csmonitor.com/cgi-bin/send-story?2005/0217/p02s01-usec.txt The Christian Science Monitor -- an independent daily newspaper providing context and clarity on national and international news, peoples and cultures, and social trends. Online at http://www.csmonitor.com 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, the Christian Science Publishing Society. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 12:50:35 EST From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA Subject: Qwest Makes MCI Bid Public Telecom dailyLead from USTA February 17, 2005 http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=19492&l=2017006 TODAY'S HEADLINES NEWS OF THE DAY * Qwest makes MCI bid public BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH * Mergers may be in the cards for equipment makers * Cabir appears in U.S. * Ebbers' defense team attacks Sullivan's credibility * Philly's Wi-Fi plan stirs debate * Nextel reports earnings USTA SPOTLIGHT * Calling ALL Carriers Ready to Explore! EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES * MPLS demand on the rise REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE * FCC investigates Vonage call-blocking claims Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others. http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=19492&l=2017006 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 18:52:01 -0500 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Cell Phone Use Coming for Airbus Fliers GSM phones in the US are provided by T-Mobile and also on the all-digital services from Cingular/AT&T. Elsewhere in the world they are available in almost all countries except a few in South America, and Japan. I think some Philippines carriers use GSM. Check gsmworld.com for full information. And so much for all the so-called "safety" arguments about using cell phones on aircraft. http://www.usatoday.com/travel/flights/2005-02-15-airbus-cell-phones_x.htm http://usatoday.printthis.clickability.com/pt/cpt?action=cpt&title=USATODAY.com+-+Cell+phone+use+coming+for+Airbus+fliers&expire=&urlID=13240551=&fb=Y&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.usatoday.com%2Ftravel%2Fflights%2F2005-02-15-airbus-cell-phones_x.htm&partnerID=1664&showBibliography Cell phone use coming for Airbus fliers GENEVA (AP) Passengers will soon be able to use their own cell phones on commercial airliners, under a deal signed Tuesday by European aeronautics giant Airbus and a Geneva-based technology firm. OnAir's voice and data systems will be a standard option on all new Airbus superjumbo A380 planes from 2006, giving passengers on short- and long-haul flights the chance make calls using their own phones, Chief Executive George Cooper said. The technology could also be fitted to Boeing jets, and will be used to give passengers Internet access using their own laptops, he said. "It is going to rapidly become something that people are going to be very upset if they don't have," Cooper told The Associated Press in an interview. "It's not many years ago when most of us had phones that didn't work everywhere, now we expect them to work anywhere." Users of mobile phones with roaming capability will be able to make and receive calls using a base station within the airplane, which will use GSM technology, the main European system. Most users will not be able to connect to U.S. or Asian networks, but Cooper said OnAir had "focused on the mobile phone side on GSM, because that is the dominant standard and will be for years." The company is banking on a large increase in GSM-compatible phones being sold in North America and Asia, he said. But "the main market for voice is short-haul," as business travelers within a connected Europe will increasingly see such a service as a necessity. "Short-haul journeys tend to be part of a business day, they tend to be in daylight and the person you are calling is quite likely to be in the same time zone as you," Cooper said. "We think it's likely that the day will come when, if you don't have this, you may actually not get some of those passengers." OnAir estimates the global market for airliner Internet access at about $400 million annually. For mobile telephone service, revenues could be four times as high. That would make the combined market worth some $2 billion, catering to more than 700 million people. The company a joint venture of Airbus and Netherlands-based IT company SITA Information Networking Computing is aiming to sell its services to airlines, which could then use the technology in other plane models. European and Asian companies, as well as some American airlines, have already shown strong interest in fitting their planes with OnAir's technology, Cooper said, declining to name firms that have placed orders. OnAir hopes that the surcharge for mobile phone use will be competitive, with international call rates at about $2 to $2.50 per minute. A text message should cost about 50 cents to send or receive. Prices for Internet access will be higher, at about $15 per flight for basic services such as e-mail and $30 for a more comprehensive service, Cooper said. Planes can be fitted with either wired or wireless connections, but so far airlines have been more keen to use wireless because it weighs less and is cheaper, Cooper said. To log on to the Internet, a user would then need a wireless-capable laptop. "It is as if we are creating a new country in the sky," Cooper said, stressing that airlines will find ways to regulate the use of cell phones and laptops "so that it doesn't annoy everybody." Crews will be able to switch the system off when the aircraft enters its local night and the blinds go down. Mobile service could be disconnected, while still allowing text services, he said. Airlines may introduce new seating plans, to allow nonusers to avoid the noise and potential annoyance from mobile phone conversations, Cooper suggested. Seattle-based Connexion, a rival provider backed by Boeing, offers a similar Internet service on all Lufthansa flights, allowing passengers to log on using their own laptops at comparable rates of $9.95 for 30 minutes to $29.95 flights longer than six hours. Copyright 2005 The Associated Press. Find this article at: http://www.usatoday.com/travel/flights/2005-02-15-airbus-cell-phones_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: yijun_lily@yahoo.com Subject: Question on PAM Modulation? Date: 17 Feb 2005 09:38:40 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Dear all, Just read a book on telecom. Have a question on PAM. Why is carrier added when envelope detector is used for PAM? What is the carrier adding for? I think envelope detector can be used for PAM with depressed carrier too, right? Thanks. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 23:43:18 -0500 From: Fred Goldstein Subject: Re: Verizon Plans to Offer Naked DSL on 4/5 of Wirelines On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 06:53:43 GMT, Verizon attorney Michael D. Sullivan wrote, > In article , siegman@stanford.edu > says: >> In article , Clark W. Griswold, >> Jr. wrote: >>> What's a bit more unfortunate is that the telcos have successfully >>> managed to exempt themselves from sharing any new fiber that gets >>> buried. Since the capacity of fiber exceeds that of a copper pair in a >>> bundle with a bunch of other copper pairs by a factor of a million to >>> 1 or more, the long term viability of naked DSL is questionable at >>> best. >> That's not just "a bit more unfortunate" -- it's a massively socially >> undesirable policy. > Except that rolling out fiber costs exactly the same for a telco as > for a non-telco. If the telcos had to allow others to use their fiber > as unbundled network elements (UNEs), priced in accordance with > TELRIC, they wouldn't bother, and there would be no fiber to the home, > and no competition for the cable operators. For installing fiber to > the home, telcos have no "natural monopoly" advantages, so nobody else > is "impaired" without access to that fiber at UNE prices, because they > could install the same fiber at the same cost. Theoretically correct -- there are small towns where others are beating Verizon to the punch on FTTH. However, there is still a SUBSTANTIAL advantage to their incumbency. If a newcomer pulls FTTH, it has to take over the dial tone business of existing ILEC subscribers. VZ, on the other hand, can simply drop in FiOS and shove its 90+% of phone lines onto it. Talk about advantaged! The only reason anybody competes is that there are enough subscribers who hate Verizon (and SBC, etc.) that a risk-loving competitor (if it can find the money -- equity markets have no truck for overbuilding) has a chance of grabbing that business pretty easily. > Why should a telco have to lease out that fiber to others at what > amounts to a below-cost rate? If they had to do that, their > competitors would automatically be able to profitably provide > broadband service cheaper than the telco, because they wouldn't have > to bear the cost of deployment. It seems to me that the FCC's > decision not to require sharing of FTTH was the only way to give the > telcos an incentive to deploy fiber. That's a socially desirable > policy, while requiring them to offer fiber to others at UNE prices > would be massively socially undesirable. That, however, is typical Verizon double-talk. No, a telco should not have to lease anything to competitors below cost. BUT the FCC's normal TELRIC formula for UNEs is not below cost! TELRIC cost is based on the efficient incremental cost of a new deployment, assuming existing wire center locations but no embedded plant, and (this is important!) INCLUDING a share of common corporate expenses PLUS a fair return on the investment. Now when you're talking about, say, unbundled local switching (UNE-P), one can argue that the incremental cost of capacity today is sometimes unrealistically low, given that the post-meltdown (fire sale) recent price of switches is so much lower than the ILECs paid for them, and is a temporary fluke. But FTTH is precisely where TELRIC shines. It really is a new deployment, usually on a wire-center basis, and it really is incremental capacity. So properly computed, TELRIC should be very, very close to the ILEC's actual costs, with a fair profit thrown in. The ILECs however are gaming the system. They know they have a compliant FCC, so they simply refused to deploy plant upgrades until the rules were changed. It's like Bill Gates' alleged recent threat to pull his development center out of Denmark if they voted against software patents. It's an example of throwing one's weight around to unduly influence regulators. What Verizon wants in FiOS is nothing less than an absolute monopoly on control of information. They have asked that it NOT be common carriage, so there is NO right of other ISPs to ride it, and NO common carrier expectation of either privacy or non-interference with content. They can demand their advertising be included, for example, on all outgoing email, and they can decide what their subscribers can and cannot read, watch, or listen to via their network. (Repeating another current thread here in the Digest, ISPs are NOT common carriers.) And once FiOS is installed, independent ISPs lose their copper-loop access to the subscribers. (Please don't tell me again about cable being the alternative, or idiotic notions like BPL, satellite, or cWAP.) *I would much rather have 512 kbps access to the information of my choice than terabit/sec access to Verizon Online!* While I'm at it, Mr. Sullivan also wrote, > Re: Powell Rips FCC Delay on Connection Fee Reform > Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 08:01:26 GMT > In article , jmcharry@comcast.net > says: >> "Reform" is what those advocating any particular change always call >> it, progressive or regressive. As I recall, the last "reform" >> slaughtered competitive DSL. The CLEC settlement rules, which the >> Bells wrote, but miscalculated, are probably the next target. That >> should allow them to kill competitive VoIP. OTOH, maybe I am too old >> and cynical. Or worked in telecom too long. > Actually, the real battle involves the rapacious rural ILECs, who want > everything to subsidize them and they want it now. Since the VoIP > providers aren't carriers, they are the party that is conspicuous by > its absence from the scheme. The VoIP providers typically use CLECs > to front for them in terms of obtaining interconnection and > origination/termination of calls on the PSTN, so the CLECs would be > their proxy in this proceeding. True. The rurals live on subsidies, with no incentive to be efficient. > As to the CLEC settlement rules, the Bells didn't write them; the FCC > initially gave the CLECs what they asked for, but when it turned out > the CLECs had played the FCC for a fool and were engaging in > gamesmanship (e.g., signing up ISPs with no outgoing minutes and > massive incoming minutes), it reversed course as to their internet > terminations. That's an outright lie. In 1996, the early CLECs (mostly the big IXCs) asked for Bill and Keep. It was Mr. Sullivan's Bell Atlantic Corporation that filed a now-famous statement with the FCC calling it "bilk and keep". Here's the direct quote, as I used it in Chapter 9 of Meltdown: The most blatant example of a plea for a government handout comes from those parties who urge the Commission to adopt a reciprocal compensation price of zero, which they euphemistically refer to as 'bill and keep.' A more appropriate name, however, would be 'bilk and keep,' since it will bilk the LECs' customer out of their money in order to subsidize entry by the likes of AT&T, MCI, and TCG. And here's the cite: Bell Atlantic Reply Comments in FCC docket 96-98, at 20. Also see hearing transcript on HR4445 before the House Subcommittee on Telecommunications, Trade and Consumer Protection, June 22, 2000: http://www.nrri.ohio-state.edu/recipcomp/hearings%20on%20hr%204445.pdf > For everything else, the CLECs have made out just fine. Give me a break. There is no harder business in the country, nowadays, than being a CLEC. I work directly with a couple of dozen of them, and none are nearly as fat, dumb and lazy as any of the Bells. The 1996-1999 Rules were modestly pro-competitive. Since then, the FCC majority has been working overtime to shut down the Telecom Act and rebuild the old Bell System monopolies, only without the regulation that kept the old one in check. Fred Goldstein k1io fgoldstein "at" ionary.com ionary Consulting http://www.ionary.com/ ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: Verizon Plans to Offer "Naked DSL" on 4/5 of its Wirelines Organization: ATCC Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 21:18:38 -0500 In article , ranck@vt.edu says: > Michael D. Sullivan wrote: >> There is at least one technology issue, and maybe more. Verizon's >> many millions of ADSL/POTS lines are identified by telephone number. >> The POTS telephone number is, in effect, the key, the unique >> identifier, used in the databases of both Verizon's LEC and Verizon >> Online, which markets DSL to the public. Both companies' databases > Nope, Verizon's predecessor Bell Atlantic had no trouble billing > for dry pair leased lines in the 1970's. They had a circuit number > which we used when calling in trouble tickets, but no phone number > was associated with them. I am quite willing to bet there are still > dry pair leased lines here and there. In fact I'll bet just about > every ATM machine has a wire pair with no dial-tone or phone number. > Those things use leased lines with modems set up in leased line mode. > At least that is how they used to work. No bank wants to have its > ATMs on the switched phone network, but they do lease wire pairs from > the local telco. The only difference for DSL is the type of modem. Many ATM's now use dial-up access. Of course the encryption must be fairly robust but from what I know about banks, I tend to be pessimistic about it. >> will have to be significantly reconfigured to use an identification >> other than simply the telephone number in order to run their >> businesses before Naked DSL is offered. If you have ever called >> Verizon Online's customer (dis) service number, you will know that the >> first question asked is, "What is your DSL line's phone number?" > That is just the easiest identifier. If their database programmers > were even halfway competent there will be other wire pair circuit IDs > that are unique identifiers. In fact a phone number isn't a unique > key anyway. It can change while the wire pair does not, and the wire > pair could change while the phone number does not. My Verizon account number was NPA-NXX-XXXX XXX XXX X where those last seven digits were 616 005 1 - and it was the same before I changed my BTN. That's probably the switch port that I was assigned to. ------------------------------ Subject: Verizon Plans to Offer "Naked DSL" on 4/5 of its Wirelines Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 13:45:48 -0500 From: Charles Cryderman In Telecom Digest V24 #72 Michael D. Sullivan wrote: "Except that rolling out fiber costs exactly the same for a telco as for a non-telco. If the telcos had to allow others to use their fiber as unbundled network elements (UNEs), priced in accordance with TELRIC, they wouldn't bother, and there would be no fiber to the home, and no competition for the cable operators. For installing fiber to the home, telcos have no "natural monopoly" advantages, so nobody else is "impaired" without access to that fiber at UNE prices, because they could install the same fiber at the same cost. Why should a telco have to lease out that fiber to others at what amounts to a below-cost rate? If they had to do that, their competitors would automatically be able to profitably provide broadband service cheaper than the telco, because they wouldn't have to bear the cost of deployment. It seems to me that the FCC's decision not to require sharing of FTTH was the only way to give the telcos an incentive to deploy fiber. That's a socially desirable policy, while requiring them to offer fiber to others at UNE prices would be massively socially undesirable." I must disagree with this. It does cost the same, for the most part, to lay fiber The cost to run it is higher for non-ILEC companies. Back in the "hey-day" of telecom, a company (now going to be part of SBC due to their takeover of AT&T) called Teleport came into the Detroit area to install fiber rings. Working for their first Detroit area customer I had great insight to the process. Every community they ran fiber though wanted their cut, even when they were doing nothing more then going though and not dropping any service. Teleport was hit with outrageous cost to use the right-of-ways as well as having a 5% "Franchise Fee" tacked on (paid annually). None of the ILECs though out the country pay "Franchise Fees" and you will see their lawyers out in force when they have FTTH and start providing TV. They will argue (and most likely win) that they, being a common carrier and telephone company, do not have to pay these fees. "Franchise Fees" alone mean that it is cheaper for them then any other to provide FTTH. What I advocate is taking the ILEC's existing, rate payer paid, legacy cable plant and forcing them to divest it into a separate company that only provides transport on a equal basis. This way the ILECs keep the new fiber that they are paying for to do with as they please. Any other company wanting to incur the cost can also do FTTH (with out the bulls#it fees from each community). Or any company, including the ILECs can go to this new entity that now owns and operates the legacy cable plant for service. This way companies like (I'm in Michigan remember) LDMI (Long Distance Michigan) can continue to offer a completive product without having SBC take all the profits like they are doing now. The big joke on us rate payers is the "so called" completive market. Chip Cryderman ------------------------------ From: John McHarry Subject: Re: Packet8 Problems Dialing Austria Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 23:07:24 GMT Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 22:53:41 +0000, Dave Rasmussen wrote: > I purchased Packet8 from Compusa a couple weeks ago and have been > trying to call an aunt in Klagenfurt Austria but I never get through, > which I can on my pots line. Packet8 seems overwhelmed to get back to > me so I figured I would ask anyone out there in netland using their > service how it has been working for them. You didn't try to dial the international access code first, did you? Packet8 takes the first digits as being the country code, including 1, so US calls seem fairly normal. I have had no problems dialing Dresden, Germany, but have not tried Austria. To call Austria you would dial 43. ------------------------------ From: Tim@Backhome.org Subject: Re: Vonage Complaining of VOIP Blocking Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 05:55:16 -0800 Organization: Cox Communications Marcus Didius Falco wrote: > Recall that all or almost all telephone companies permit you to block > certain calls based on caller ID or the lack thereof. The carrier > cannot initiate any control over the content, but they can certainly > aid the customer in controlling the content of messages or classes of > message. > In other words, if Fox provides customer with filters, and provides > them with instruction, that's fine, provided the customer must opt-in > to using the filter. It would have no effect on Fox's status as a > common carrier. You're right *provided* the end user has control over, and a reasonable understand of, the use of the filter. I think the Vonage complaint is about some ISPs simply blocking the service from reaching all of the blocking ISP's customers, without each customers express and perhaps occasional permission. ------------------------------ From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) Subject: Re: Vonage Complaining Of VoIP 'Blocking' Date: 17 Feb 2005 17:14:21 -0500 Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000) Tony P. wrote: > Yep, and by those rules Cox shouldn't be considered a common carrier > any longer. They actually teach parents how to implement filters on > web sites, etc. via Cox provided servers. When was Cox EVER a common carrier? > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I can tell you that Southwestern Bell > has always claimed 'common carrier status' on their DSL service as > a way to avoid any/all spam filtering on user's mailboxes. They won't > ven sort perceived spam into a separate spam box as CableOne does. > It just all goes into your mailbox -- all several hundred pieces of > it daily. How you want to sort it is your business. Just call this > one of my several minor complaints with SBC, which is why I dumped > them out of my house totally. PAT] This might be worth reporting to the FCC. --scott "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have said this before: Regulators (any and all of them) only listen/respond to big telco. I talked to the FCC (informal complaint) and the Chairman (of SBC) regards this. SBC got tired of hearing from me, and the lady who responded on behalf of the Chairman essentially told me to quit bothering them with my complaints about (a) their phone service generally and (b) their DSL service in particular. When I suggested I would move my phone line to Prairie Stream she said "you can't do that; you have to stay with us." I said I would see about that, and put in my order that very day with Prairie Stream. SBC told Duane (president of Prairie Stream) that I was 'not eligible for transfer' because of my DSL. I guess she assumed I would be so hot for keeping DSL I would endure whatever crap they dished out on the phone side. I moved my internet over to CableOne and a day or two later, SBC reluctantly released my phone account. They sure have short memories. At least once per week for the past year now, I have gotten all sorts of offers trying to intice me to go back with them. And about once a month or so I also get from them collection notices saying I owe them $49.95 since I did not give them a month's notice before leaving. One day I got a collection notice and a 'such a good customer, we want you back' offer in the same day's mail. I do not know what good it will do, but I sincerely hope the FCC will *not* give necessary approval to the SBC/ATT merger unless the company agrees to continue UNE-P and give all the breaks they can to the other ISP's etc. In any event, I will **never again** have a Bell telco in my home. PAT] ------------------------------ From: seanmc42@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Motorola and Oakley Introduce First Bluetooth Sunglasses Date: 16 Feb 2005 16:27:50 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Man, no kidding! I was hoping for something more "Thump"-like. At LEAST stereo! Who would want these - you'd have to listen to your tunes in mono! ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 21:05:17 -0700 From: timeOday Subject: Re: Motorola and Oakley Introduce First Bluetooth Sunglasses Robert Weller wrote: > Hardly innovative. These glasses look like a standard BT headset > bolted to a pair of sunglasses. Check out the images here: > http://www.pocket-lint.co.uk/newsimage.php?newsId=941&image=1 > > Bob Weller And ... only one ear? The could have made a bundle selling a "iPod compatible" (i.e. standard phono jack) bluetooth transmitter for it. ------------------------------ From: AES Subject: Re: Leading Zeros? Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 17:21:44 -0800 Organization: Stanford University In article , bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) wrote: >> citations to work properly. A few quick tests show that the default >> behavior is to automatically and irretrievably discard leading zeros >> on integer numbers keyed into an Excel worksheet cell or a Mathematic >> list. > Note: *BAD* test. > You can select the 'formatting' on a cell, column, or entire > worksheet, to display numbers with leading zeroes. If you treat the > cell data as a 'number', it will be 'left filled' with zeroes to the > number of positions you specify. > If you treat the cell as *TEXT* then _exactly_ what you enter =will= > be preserved. I just once again opened Excel: Mac 2004, selected a cell at random, typed in "0038", and hit the Enter key. The selection dropped down to the cell below and left "38" displayed in the cell in which I'd made the entry. I re-selected that cell and looked at the entry field up above where the contents are displayed; it also held "38". I then played some with the "Number" formats for that cell, and was unable to find any kind of Custom number format that gave me back the leading zeros -- but maybe I missed something??? (The "ZIP Code" format did give me leading zeros: "00038" to be specific, but I don't think that would be helpful.) In any case, I think my statement above as to the __default__ behavior of Excel is correct ... ? ------------------------------ From: AES Subject: Re: Leading Zeros? Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 17:59:23 -0800 Organization: Stanford University Thanks for replies on this issue. No one said what I was hoping someone would tell me, however, namely that avoiding the use of leading zeros was a well-known design principle. Advice like "As a matter of good application design (or at least, if you'd just as soon avoid all kinds of unnecessary complications) don't design a system that employs labels, or ID numbers, or "article numbers" in which leading zeros are significant or even necessary" still seems to me a sensible choice, however. What started this thread was that the American Physical Society some years ago chose to revamp their centuries-old system of identifying journal articles by volume number and page number (or numbers) -- still the near-universal practice for nearly all journals of any kind -- with a new system of volume number and a six-digit "article" number for each article. I'll readily concede that in both cases these are at least as much "labels" as "numbers" -- though they're spoken of and in many cases act very much like numbers. The newly arrived article number, though, allows for and to some extent mandates the leading zeros. Whether all the different varieties of widely used bibliographic software that people employ for research and writing (EndNote as just one example) will properly store and handle these leading zeros is open to question; I doubt that many of them anticipated that this could be a requirement Actually, APS isn't even consistent about this themselves. If you go to their bibliographic search site you'll find that you can select Phys Rev A and key in "64" and "33811" and you'll get article 033811 in volume 64 with no problem ("064" and "33811" will be flagged as invalid, however). The leading zero is mandatory in certain URLs that lead you to full text of the article itself, however. ------------------------------ Date: 17 Feb 2005 01:39:17 -0000 From: John Levine Subject: Re: Powell Rips FCC Delay on Connection Fee Reform Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > Actually, the real battle involves the rapacious rural ILECs, who want > everything to subsidize them and they want it now. Yes, and we their customers thank you for it. I agree that the current universal service setup is a mess, but the solution is to simplify it so it's collected as a percentage of revenue, and change the way it's distributed to avoid incentives to gold plate everything. > As to the CLEC settlement rules, the Bells didn't write them; the FCC > initially gave the CLECs what they asked for, but when it turned out > the CLECs had played the FCC for a fool and were engaging in > gamesmanship (e.g., signing up ISPs with no outgoing minutes and > massive incoming minutes), it reversed course as to their internet > terminations. For everything else, the CLECs have made out just fine. Uh, negatory on that. The Bells wanted high recip comp per minute rates because they expected that the traffic would mostly be toward them, like it was from cell phones. The CLECs, not being totally stupid, moved into the ISP market both because the recip was favorable and also because the Bells had dragged their feet giving the ISPs the bulk lines they needed to grow their business, and offered things the Bells wouldn't like broad local number coverage. In this particular case the Bells shot themselves directly in the foot. 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 ------------------------------ From: Clark W. Griswold, Jr. Subject: Re: A Silly Question - 2-Line Phone With One Phone Number? Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 19:35:18 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com LB@notmine.com wrote: > Usually red-green and yellow-black. Careful, you're showing your age there! :) Most residential wire bundles have been blue, orange, brown, and green pairs (with the second wire having a whilte stripe over the primary color) for quite some time now. ------------------------------ From: Dean Subject: Re: ADSL and SDSL? Date: 17 Feb 2005 11:10:38 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Robert Bonomi wrote: > In article , > T. Sean Weintz wrote: >> Robert Anderson wrote: >>> Do you more reliably get the higher bandwidth with SDSL than with >>> ADSL? >>> For example, is the CIR higher with SDSL? >>> We are a very small business using VoIP and our connection is >>> ADSL. People have problems hearing us but not the other way around. >>> We were thinking of switching from ADSL over to SDSL, to see if that >>> helps. >>> Robert Anderson >> ADSL is asymmetrical > *not*necessarily* >> SDSL is symetrical > *not*necessarily* > As "commonly deployed", SDSL has same speed up and down, and ADSL has > mis-matched (almost invariably higher in the 'down' direction) speeds. > However, I have had "symmetric rate" ADSL, and "Asymmetric rate" SDSL, > service, at various times, from various providers. Not terribly > common, but such services do/did exist. :) Can you elaborate? I thought the 'A' in ADSL and the 'S' in SDSL stood for asymmetrical and symmetrical respectively. What you're describing seems to negate that doesn't it? What am I missing? ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 19:34:18 -0500 From: Ankur Shah Subject: Re: Another Rejection Number (was Re: Detroit: America's Rejection) [Pat, please hide my email address from the post] carl Moore (Civ,ARL/SLAD) wrote: > The same idea has been mentioned in another Philadelphia source (KYW > news-radio), and here is a web reference for as long as it is good: > http://www2.kyw1060.com/news_story_detail.cfm?newsitemid=44085 > There is a Philadelphia number included there as well (215-618-1505). > As for "all circuits busy", PERHAPS people are trying it out of > curiosity. According to the story, there is indeed a rejection > message if you get through. If you haven't read any of the news > stories yet, try looking them up. Here is the complete list of rejection hotline numbers available, courtesy of rejectionhotline.com http://tinyurl.com/6hozs ------------------------------ 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 V24 #73 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Feb 18 15:06:47 2005 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j1IK6lM28408; Fri, 18 Feb 2005 15:06:47 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2005 15:06:47 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200502182006.j1IK6lM28408@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 V24 #74 TELECOM Digest Fri, 18 Feb 2005 15:07:00 EST Volume 24 : Issue 74 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson New York Times to Buy About.com for $410 Million (Lisa Minter) Internet Fraud Threatens Economy - Secret Service (Lisa Minter) Hacking Attacks Rarely Made Public, Experts Say (Lisa Minter) Healey Proposes GPS to Protect Abuse Victims, Gang Witnesses (M Solomon) Qwest to Bid Again on MCI (Telecom dailyLead from USTA) CFP: Extended Deadline: The 2005 Intl Conf on Communications (CIC 2005) Re: Leading Zeros? (Barry Margolin) Re: Leading Zeros? (Dave Close) Re: Leading Zeros? (Robert Bonomi) Re: Leading Zeros? (Matt B) Re: E-Mail Bug Made Computers Phone Emergency Line (Dave Close) Re: Cell Phone Use Coming for Airbus Fliers (John Levine) Re: A Silly Question - 2-Line Phone With One Phone Number? (LB@notmine) Re: ADSL and SDSL? (Robert Bonomi) Re: Simplifying Web Checkouts (ranck@vt.edu) 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: 17 Feb 2005 22:10:37 -0800 From: Lisa Minter (lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com> Subject: New York Times to Buy About.com for $410 Million By Julie MacIntosh PHILADELPHIA (Reuters) - The New York Times Co. on Thursday said it will buy online information portal About.com for $410 million from publisher Primedia Inc. as it looks for new ways to build advertising revenue over the Internet. The Times Co., whose newspapers include The New York Times and The Boston Globe, said it will expand About.com's content and visibility and use the site to market its products and those of advertisers. Primedia bought About.com for $690 million in stock in late 2000, as it worked to meld its traditional publishing business with online media. But the publisher struggled to steer About.com through the Internet downturn and noted on Thursday that the portal is "completely distinct" from its other Web sites. About.com provides consumers who search its database with information from expert "guides" on topics including health, finances, food, and travel. Some investment banking sources suggested in recent weeks that About.com could sell for considerably less than $410 million. The sources named Time Warner Inc. and Ask Jeeves Inc. as other parties that might have been interested in the company. But Reed Phillips, a managing partner at media banking firm DeSilva & Phillips, said that while the price was a bit higher than he had expected, "it's not out of the ballpark." Phillips pointed out that Internet companies have started trading again at significantly higher multiples, and said The Times Co. would be able to use ad revenue from About.com to make up for the flagging classified ad sales that have plagued the industry. However, one investment banker who follows the industry closely said The Times Co. could find it challenging, as Primedia did, to mine the more niche-oriented consumers who use About.com. "The Times certainly has greater reach, though, and maybe that's the theory behind it," the source said. Primedia, majority-owned by private investment firm Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Co., has sold several high-profile magazines and its Sprinks online advertising service in recent years in an effort to whittle itself into a special interest and business-to-business publisher. Primedia revamped About.com last year after appointing a new chief executive, Peter Horan, to the unit in late 2003. The company noted that the sale of About.com would strengthen its balance sheet. The New York Times Co. said About.com would not start adding to its earnings until 2007. The company said that for tax purposes, it plans to treat the acquisition similar to an asset purchase, leading to tax deductions worth over $80 million. Online advertising executives said the purchase would open the New York Times and its advertisers to a much broader consumer audience. About.com has more than 22 million visitors each month, nearly double the 13 million visitors to the NYTimes.com and related sites combined. "This is one of the best-kept secrets in our business ... but (About.com) hasn't had the resources to really promote themselves," said Jeff Lanctot, vice president of media at online agency Avenue A/Razorfish. "It's a good reach and a diversified audience," he said. "We've spent an increasing amount of money with them in the last two years." Lanctot likened the site to a smaller version of dominant Internet portals like Yahoo or Microsoft's MSN, where Internet users can be directed to specialty interests off a well-trafficked home page. The site's main page can be used for mass marketing while niche areas can help advertisers target their commercials to the appropriate audiences. The New York Times has more than 40 web sites, including the NYTimes.com. NOTE: For stories from New York Times, Christian Science Monitor, National Public Radio and other media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra/nytimes.html. 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: 17 Feb 2005 22:10:06 -0800 From: Lisa Minter Subject: Internet Fraud Threatens Economy - Secret Service By Spencer Swartz SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Internet fraudsters, motivated by money and armed with sophisticated technology, pose an increased economic threat as they steal private data from companies and individuals, the director of the U.S. Secret Service said on Thursday. "There is no longer any doubt about that threat ... With just a few key strokes, (online fraudsters) can disrupt our nation's economy," said Ralph Basham at the RSA Security Conference in San Francisco. In addition to protecting the U.S. president, the Secret Service also helps to protect U.S. financial institutions. Security analysts have warned that Internet hackers, once motivated by the thrill of shutting down computer systems, are joining forces with organized crime groups as they seek to profit from hacking into databases and stealing personal data through a variety of tactics, like phishing. Phishing scams fool users into entering sensitive information on Web pages that look legitimate. Basham said several law enforcement agencies in the United States and overseas recently disrupted an online organized crime ring that spanned eight U.S. states and six countries. Thirty people have been arrested so far in that case. Basham said 7 million credit card numbers had been stolen by the crime ring, costing consumers and credit card companies around $4.3 million, though the loses could have been up to $1 billion, he added. INCREASED COOPERATION, CHOICEPOINT Analysts have warned that the scale and speed of online threats has increased and quickened as hackers exploit technologies like spyware. Spyware has been one of the fastest-growing of the so-called malicious code threats. It gathers private data by recording keystrokes and monitoring e-mail without a person's knowledge. But increased cooperation and information sharing between U.S. agencies, foreign governments, technology companies and the financial community has helped mitigate online fraud, Basham said. Howard Schmidt, a special advisor for cyberspace security during the first term of President Bush said companies and individuals are better protected now than ever before and are also more aware of online fraud risks. But he cautioned that Internet fraudsters were increasingly targeting less-protected small businesses rather than large companies that can spend millions of dollars on security software to protect their computer systems. "We're seeing the bad guys moving down the food-chain," hitting small businesses and credit unions, said Schmidt, whose other posts have included security chief at Microsoft Corp. Security analysts and technology executives said in panel discussions and interviews at the conference this week that Internet crime will continue, despite efforts by companies and individuals to protect themselves. As evidence, they pointed to news this week that personal data of thousands of U.S. consumers was stolen from a U.S.-based company. ChoicePoint Inc. said on Tuesday that tens of thousands of U.S. consumers faced a greater risk of identity theft after thieves posing as legitimate businesses got access to a database of Social Security numbers and credit histories. ChoicePoint, based in Georgia, gathers and sells information on millions of U.S. consumers to employers, landlords, marketing companies and several 35 U.S. government agencies. ------------------------------ Date: 17 Feb 2005 22:11:31 -0800 From: Lisa Minter Subject: Hacking Attacks Rarely Made Public, Experts Say WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A security breach that placed consumers at risk for identity theft grabbed headlines this week but most hacking incidents go unreported to police or the public, experts said on Thursday. Afraid of negative publicity, most companies that suffer intrusions take a tight-lipped approach that leaves consumers unaware when their identities may be compromised, they said. At the same time, businesses are becoming more willing to discuss security issues with their competitors behind the scenes in an effort to head off online threats, an approach experts say has managed to reduce the impact of computer worms and viruses. Still, a 2004 FBI cybercrime survey found that only 20 percent of companies report computer intrusions to the police, and half don't report them to anybody. "A business organization or a government organization for that matter has an obligation to inform the employees or customers that have been potentially harmed as a result of the data breach," said Larry Ponemon, a privacy and security consultant who has advised a wide variety of companies. Only one state -- California -- requires companies to notify consumers when an outsider is able to access their Social Security numbers or other information that puts them at greater risk for identity theft. Data-mining company ChoicePoint Inc. mailed out some 35,000 of those notices to California residents last week after it discovered that criminals had posed as legitimate businesses to access consumer dossiers it had compiled. ChoicePoint will notify some 110,000 consumers outside California who may have been affected as well, company spokesman Chuck Jones said. Privacy experts said the California law paradoxically may discourage companies from examining intrusions too closely for fear that they might have to make them public. "There's a process in place that may be filtering out a lot of bad news," Ponemon said. "I really think that we have a problem here." Jim Dempsey, executive director at the nonprofit Center for Democracy and Technology, said the issue might be better addressed by broad privacy legislation that outlines consumer rights rather than specific security requirements. "How you structure responsibility is not an easily answered question, but it's one that Congress and the public and the industry needs to confront," he said. Outside the public sphere, businesses have been more willing to discuss security issues, said Peter Allor, who oversees a cybersecurity information center for the technology industry. Though the center has been up and running since 2001, membership has spiked to around 60 since last summer, allowing members to block computer viruses before they can cause major damage, he said. "You can actually go and work with competitors and with partners and discuss information in a protected manner," he 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 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2005 02:45:44 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Healey Proposes GPS to Protect Abuse Victims, Gang Witnesses By Karen Testa, Associated Press Writer | February 16, 2005 BOSTON -- Victims of domestic abuse and witnesses to gang crimes could get special protections from satellite technology under new legislation filed Wednesday by Lt. Gov. Kerry Healey. The bill would make Massachusetts the first state to use Global Positioning System monitoring to combat domestic violence, Healey's office said. Under the proposal, courts would be allowed to force abusers who violate their restraining orders to wear a monitoring device as a condition of their probation. The system would alert the victim and police if the offender enters certain restricted areas, such as a home, workplace or child's school. The technology already is being used in Massachusetts to track the state's most dangerous sexual predators. Abusers who are caught in excluded zones, which would be determined by a court, would be punished by up to a $5,000 fine or 2 1/2 years in jail. Victim advocates say this legislation is historic because it would shift the burden off the victim to protect herself or himself. Most often, the victims are the ones who alter their routines -- or worse, give up their homes, jobs and communities -- to try to stay safe. http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2005/02/16/healey_proposes_using_gps_to_protect_abuse_victims_gang_crime_witnesses/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2005 12:59:13 EST From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA Subject: February 18, 2005 - Qwest to bid again on MCI Telecom dailyLead from USTA February 18, 2005 http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=19531&l=2017006 TODAY'S HEADLINES NEWS OF THE DAY * Qwest to bid again on MCI BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH * Major publisher eyes educational services via handsets * Juniper gains on Cisco * Satellite ISPs find niche USTA SPOTLIGHT * At SUPERCOMM: Register today for the IP Video Conference EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES * Report: Ultrawideband almost ready for consumer market VOIP DOWNLOAD * Report: VoIP could be WiMAX's best friend * Skype, Linux provider strike deal REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE * Doubts linger whether Sullivan's testimony links Ebbers to fraud EDITOR'S NOTE * The dailyLead will not be published Monday Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others. http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=19531&l=2017006 ------------------------------ From: bdauriol@cs.utep.edu Subject: CFP: Extended Deadline: The 2005 Conference on Communications Date: 17 Feb 2005 17:43:21 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Extended Deadline: March 10, 2005 See http://www.cs.utep.edu/~cic for details The 2005 International Conference on Communications in Computing (CIC 2005) June 27 - 30, 2005 Monte Carlo Resort, Las Vegas, Nevada, USA Extended Call for Papers Important Dates March 10, 2005: Draft papers due March 31, 2005: Accept Notification April 20, 2005: Camera-Ready papers due The International Conference on Communications in Computing (CIC) focuses on the communication requirements directly induced or required by computations. An essential element of high performance computing is the trade-off in the amount of computation versus the amount of communication performed. Certain applications are inherently communication-intensive. In others, communication steps may be replaceable with local computations and vice versa. This conference provides a venue for scholarly publication that explores issues relating to the combined effects of communications and computations in the context of modern computing systems. CIC is part of the International Multiconference in Computer Science and Computer Engineering. Following the recent broadening of the field of parallel and distributed computing, CIC covers all current research endeavors in this field. Submissions are also encouraged from researchers in other areas of computing and from related areas in physics, computer engineering or other areas of study whose work supports the focus of this conference. Suggested Topics * Communication Aspects of Parallel & Distributed Algorithms * Communications in High Performance Computing * Distributed Systems and Advanced Applications (e.g. multimedia, cooperative systems) * Grid, Peer-to-Peer Computing and Cluster-based Computing * Interconnection Networks (e.g. bus-based, optical) * Networks (e.g. management, traffic analysis) * Communication Protocols (e.g. ATM, wireless) * Scalable and Interoperable Systems and Associated Standards * Performance Issues (e.g. benchmarks, measurement, evaluation) * Architecture (e.g. VLSI, SIMD, ,vector, reconfigurable) * Software Systems (e.g. operating system support, middleware, tools) * Visualization (e.g. debugging and load balancing tools) * Communications in Neural Computing, Genetic Algorithms * Communications in New Computing Paradigms (e.g. optical-, nano-, bio-computing) * Modeling and Simulation of High Performance Systems * Advanced Compilation Techniques (e.g. parallelizing compilers) * Programming Languages for Parallel and other High Performance Computing Environments * Reliability and Fault Tolerance * Embedded and Real Time Systems * Digital Signal Processing * Internet & Web-based Processing, E-commerce, Telecommunication Submission Prospective authors are invited to submit a draft paper of no more than 7 pages (IEEE style, preferably two-columns, 11 or 12pt font size, Times-roman or similar) to cic@cs.utep.edu by the due date. Email submissions in PDF format are preferable (MS Word documents can also be accepted). Papers must not have been previously published or currently submitted for publication elsewhere. The first page of the paper should include: paper title; name, affiliation, postal address, email address, telephone and fax number of each author and a maximum of five keywords. Also include in the submission the name of the author who will be presenting the paper (if accepted). Evaluation Papers will be evaluated for originality, significance, clarity of presentation, technical soundness and relevance to the conference. Each paper will be refereed by two researchers in the topical area. The Camera-Ready papers will/may be reviewed by one person. General Chair * Brian J. d'Auriol, The University of Texas at El Paso, USA Steering Committee * Hamid R. Arabnia, The University of Georgia, USA * Ping-Tsai Chung, Long Island University, USA * Kathy Liszka, The University of Akron, USA * Jan Smid, Morgan State University, USA * Yi Pan, Georgia State University, USA * Behrooz Parhami, University of California, Santa Barbara, USA * Antonio Pescap=E8, University of Napoli Federico II, Italy Program Committee * Abdullah Abonamah, Zayed University, United Arab Emirates * Padma Apparao, Intel, USA * Virendra Bhavsar, University of New Brunswick, Canada * Rajendra V Boppana, The University of Texas at San Antonio, USA * Anu Bourgeois, Georgia State University, USA * Herwig Bruneel, Ghent University, Belgium * Seyed Mohamed Buhari, King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals, Saudi Arabia * Henry Chan, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong * Zhao Chen, new York City College of Technology, USA * Xuan-Hien Dang, The University of Akron, USA * Yuanshun Dai, Indiana University Purdue University Indianapolis, USA * Frank Dehne, Griffith University, Australia * M. Rasit Eskicioglu, The University of Manitoba, Canada * Edward E. E. Frietman,Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands and California State University, Chico, USA * Marina L. Gavrilova, University of Calgary, Canada * Peter C.J. Graham, University of Manitoba, Canada * George A. Gravvanis, Hellenic Open University, Greece * Youssef Iraqi, University of Waterloo, Canada * Khan M. Iftekharuddin, The University Memphis, USA * Jack Jean, Wright State University, USA * Weijia Jia, City University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong * Yong-Kee Jun, Gyeongsang National University, South Korea * Kuan-Ching Li, Providence University, Taiwan ROC * Mohamed Ould-Khaoua, University of Glasgow, United Kingdom * Keqin Li, State University of New York at New Paltz, USA * Xuejun Liang, Jackson State University, USA * Annalisa Massini, Universita' "La Sapienza" - Roma, Italy * Klaus D. McDonald-Maier, University of Kent at Canterbury, United Kingdom * Rami Melhem, University of Pittsburgh, USA * Jean Frederic Myoupo, The University of Picardie-Jules Verne, France * Priyadarsi Nanda, University of Technology, Sydney, Austalia * Marcin Paprzycki, Oklahoma State University, USA * Dana Petcu, Western University of Timisoara, Romania * Alexander Reinefeld, Konrad-Zuse-Zentrum fur Informationstechnik Berlin, Germany * Tore Risch, Uppsala University, Sweden * Rodrigo Romero, University of Texas at El Paso, USA * Carlo Sansone, Universita' di Napoli "Federico II", Italy * David Sem=E9, Universite de Picardie Jules Verne - LaRIA, France * Ruth Shaw, University of New Brunswick, Saint John, N.B., Canada * Hong Shen, Japan Advanced Institute of Science and Technology * Tor Skeie, Simula Research Laboratory, Norway * Yahya Slimani, Faculty of Sciences of Tunis, Tunisia * Pradip K. Srimani, Clemson University, USA * Al Stutz, Ohio Supercomputer Center, USA * Keum-Young Sung, Handong Global University, South Korea * Johnson Thomas,Oklahoma State University * R. Vaidyanathan, Louisiana State University, USA * Alan Wagner, University of British Columbia, Canada * Biing-Feng Wang, National Tsing Hua University, Taiwan * Peter Welch, University of Kent at Canterbury, United Kingdom * Sabine Wittevrongel, Ghent University, Belgium * Lan Yang, Cal Poly Pomona, USA * G. Young, Cal Poly Pomona, USA * Heather Yu, Panasonic Digital Networking Lab, USA * S. Q. Zheng, University of Texas at Dallas, USA ------------------------------ From: Barry Margolin Subject: Re: Leading Zeros? Organization: Symantec Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 22:43:23 -0500 In article , AES wrote: > Thanks for replies on this issue. No one said what I was hoping someone > would tell me, however, namely that avoiding the use of leading zeros > was a well-known design principle. Advice like > "As a matter of good application design (or at least, if you'd just > as soon avoid all kinds of unnecessary complications) don't design > a system that employs labels, or ID numbers, or "article numbers" > in which leading zeros are significant or even necessary" > still seems to me a sensible choice, however. That's fine advice to the people designing the labeling system in the first place. But if you're implementing a database that manages data from a preexisting schema, you don't usually have the luxury of changing the way ID numbers are assigned. If the system already makes use of significant leading zeroes, you have to accomodate that. Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu Arlington, MA *** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me *** ------------------------------ From: dave@compata.com (Dave Close) Subject: Re: Leading Zeros? Date: 17 Feb 2005 19:23:49 -0800 Organization: Compata, Costa Mesa, California AES writes: > ... A few quick tests show that the default > behavior is to automatically and irretrievably discard leading zeros > on integer numbers keyed into an Excel worksheet cell or a Mathematic > list. If you define a spreadsheet cell as "text", you can enter all the leading zeros you like and keep them. Unfortunately, the default setting is "general", which is neither text nor numeric: it means treat the value as numeric if it only contains digits, text otherwise. If you have data where leading zeros have been lost, it isn't difficult to restore them on retrieval using a print format statement of whatever style is appropriate for the system you are using. 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: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) Subject: Re: Leading Zeros? Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2005 09:10:27 -0000 Organization: Widgets, Inc. In article , AES wrote: > In article , > bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) wrote: >>> citations to work properly. A few quick tests show that the default >>> behavior is to automatically and irretrievably discard leading zeros >>> on integer numbers keyed into an Excel worksheet cell or a Mathematic >>> list. >> Note: *BAD* test. >> You can select the 'formatting' on a cell, column, or entire >> worksheet, to display numbers with leading zeroes. If you treat the >> cell data as a 'number', it will be 'left filled' with zeroes to the >> number of positions you specify. > I just once again opened Excel: Mac 2004, selected a cell at random, > typed in "0038", and hit the Enter key. The selection dropped down to > the cell below and left "38" displayed in the cell in which I'd made > the entry. I re-selected that cell and looked at the entry field up > above where the contents are displayed; it also held "38". > I then played some with the "Number" formats for that cell, and was > unable to find any kind of Custom number format that gave me back the > leading zeros -- but maybe I missed something??? (The "ZIP Code" format > did give me leading zeros: "00038" to be specific, but I don't think > that would be helpful.) What is 'right' depends on "what you want out". If you always want 4 digit numbers, with leading zeros as needed to reach that specific size, then you select 'custom' for the format, *AND* type "0000" (without the quotes in the field specification on the upper right side of that pane. If you want "exactly as entered", you select the "text" type from the list on the left side of pane. You have to do this *BEFORE* you enter the data in the field, because *this* setting affects the manner in which the data is _stored_, not 'just' the manner of display. > In any case, I think my statement above as to the __default__ behavior > of Excel is correct ... ? True. The point being that the 'default' behavior is *NOT* appropriate if you want 'stored "exactly as entered"'. Excel provides the 'text' field attribute for those situations. You simply have to 'think ahead', and specify the desired attribute *before* entering the data. Either by setting the 'format' attribute _first_, *or* by 'prefixing' the data value with the special 'flag' character (an apostrophe, or 'single-quote', i.e, "'") that tells Excel to 'store this *exactly*as*I*entered*it*. In high school, the wood-shop teacher had a saying: "you have to out-think the materials you work with." This is true, whether the materials are a block of wood, or a computer. If you want data preserved "exactly as entered', all you have to do is *SAY*SO*. If you don't say, Excel 'guesses', based on what is "correct _most_ of the time". If it 'guesses wrongly', that is not a failing of the program -- after all, "ROM" in a computer does *NOT* mean "read operator's mind". ------------------------------ From: Matt B Subject: Re: Leading Zeros? Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2005 07:04:49 -0500 Format the cell as TEXT **first**, then enter 00038 or whatever. Exactly what you entered will retain. AES wrote in message news:telecom24.73.18@telecom-digest.org: > In article , > bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) wrote: >>> citations to work properly. A few quick tests show that the default >>> behavior is to automatically and irretrievably discard leading zeros >>> on integer numbers keyed into an Excel worksheet cell or a Mathematic >>> list. >> Note: *BAD* test. >> You can select the 'formatting' on a cell, column, or entire >> worksheet, to display numbers with leading zeroes. If you treat the >> cell data as a 'number', it will be 'left filled' with zeroes to the >> number of positions you specify. >> If you treat the cell as *TEXT* then _exactly_ what you enter =will= >> be preserved. > I just once again opened Excel: Mac 2004, selected a cell at random, > typed in "0038", and hit the Enter key. The selection dropped down to > the cell below and left "38" displayed in the cell in which I'd made > the entry. I re-selected that cell and looked at the entry field up > above where the contents are displayed; it also held "38". > I then played some with the "Number" formats for that cell, and was > unable to find any kind of Custom number format that gave me back the > leading zeros -- but maybe I missed something??? (The "ZIP Code" format > did give me leading zeros: "00038" to be specific, but I don't think > that would be helpful.) > In any case, I think my statement above as to the __default__ behavior > of Excel is correct ... ? ------------------------------ From: dave@compata.com (Dave Close) Subject: Re: E-Mail Bug Made Computers Phone Emergency Line Date: 17 Feb 2005 19:18:10 -0800 Organization: Compata, Costa Mesa, California Lisa Minter writes: > SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - A Louisiana man has pleaded guilty to > sending rigged e-mails that caused some computers to dial the 911 > emergency services number, prosecutors said on Monday. Back in the early 1980s, I worked for a small company called Axxa. They were created to build a workstation product desired primarily by Citibank. I wasn't there when the product was designed, but I met many of the folks who were. The product was called the Axxa 911. This was before 911 service was common in the US. It consisted of two workstations, one for a manager and the other for his secretary, linked by a dial-up modem line. The line was usually routed through a PBX so the two stations were local extensions. Of course, each station needed to know the extension or phone number to dial to get to the other, and the default value as delivered to customers was "911". The story goes that the default was changed after an incident late one night at company HQ. Some engineers working late and testing the device accidentally connected it to an outside line. Some time later, they were surprised to find some officers creeping down the dark hallway with guns drawn. Of course, the 911 operator heard no voice on the line and had no way to return the call as after-hours calls rang somewhere else. Dave Close, Compata, Costa Mesa CA +1 714 434 7359 dave@compata.com dhclose@alumni.caltech.edu "Though the people support the government, the government should not support the people." -- Grover Cleveland ------------------------------ Date: 18 Feb 2005 03:20:02 -0000 From: John Levine Subject: Re: Cell Phone Use Coming for Airbus Fliers Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > Users of mobile phones with roaming capability will be able to make > and receive calls using a base station within the airplane, which will > use GSM technology, the main European system. > Most users will not be able to connect to U.S. or Asian networks, but > Cooper said OnAir had "focused on the mobile phone side on GSM, > because that is the dominant standard and will be for years." I wonder if they plan to support the 800 and 1900 MHz that North American GSM uses, or just the 900 and 1800 MHZ used in Europe. Some North American GSM phones can do 800 or 1800, but most can't. > And so much for all the so-called "safety" arguments about using > cell phones on aircraft. The issue has always been much more the problem that phones in the sky would be visible to many cell sites on the ground and mess them up. A cell site in the plane would tell the phones on the plane to cut their power back to the minimum, which should avoid that problem. ------------------------------ From: LB@notmine.com Subject: Re: A Silly Question - 2-Line Phone With One Phone Number? Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2005 03:32:56 -0500 Organization: Optimum Online Clark, W., Griswold, "Jr." wrote: > LB@notmine.com wrote: >> Usually red-green and yellow-black. > Careful, you're showing your age there! :) > Most residential wire bundles have been blue, orange, brown, and green > pairs (with the second wire having a whilte stripe over the primary > color) for quite some time now. Please Define "quite some time now". LB ------------------------------ From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) Subject: Re: ADSL and SDSL? Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2005 09:50:43 -0000 Organization: Widgets, Inc. In article , Dean wrote: > Robert Bonomi wrote: >> In article , >> T. Sean Weintz wrote: >>> Robert Anderson wrote: >>>> Do you more reliably get the higher bandwidth with SDSL than with >>>> ADSL? >>>> For example, is the CIR higher with SDSL? >>>> We are a very small business using VoIP and our connection is >>>> ADSL. People have problems hearing us but not the other way around. >>>> We were thinking of switching from ADSL over to SDSL, to see if that >>>> helps. >>>> Robert Anderson >>> ADSL is asymmetrical >> *not*necessarily* >>> SDSL is symetrical >> *not*necessarily* >> As "commonly deployed", SDSL has same speed up and down, and ADSL has >> mis-matched (almost invariably higher in the 'down' direction) speeds. >> However, I have had "symmetric rate" ADSL, and "Asymmetric rate" SDSL, >> service, at various times, from various providers. Not terribly >> common, but such services do/did exist. :) > Can you elaborate? I thought the 'A' in ADSL and the 'S' in SDSL stood > for asymmetrical and symmetrical respectively. What you're describing > seems to negate that doesn't it? What am I missing? Your understanding of the _names_ underlying the acronyms is correct. The names reference two different, incompatible, implementations of technology that fall under the broad categorization of 'DSL'. The names do -not- dictate the actual link speeds in either direction. Nor the 'relationship' between them. I don't know enough about the 'deep innards' of the specific technologies to discuss differences in detail. I'm _guessing_ that the names refer to the allocation of the available spectrum-space to the signals in each direction, Now, obviously, the 'allocation' puts an _upper_limit_ on the data-transmission rate, *BUT* nothing says that you have to be using the maximum rate within that allocation. I know SDSL _does_ use the 'voice spectrum' bandwidth, and thus _cannot_ be shared on the same wire-pair with POTS voice service. ADSL runs totally at 'supersonic' frequencies, and thus can use 'shared' wiring. DSL ("low-pass") 'filters' are needed for shared lines to prevent 'non-linearities' (amplifiers, other bi-metallic junctions, etc.) from generating 'noise' in the voice spectrum, due to the supersonics. I *do* know what service I have actually had. 1) 512kbit up / 512kbit down. on a non-shared line. CPE was a "Cisco 678" ADSL modem. (I'm using that _same_ modem on a 1.5mbit down/ 768k up 'shared' circuit presently.) 2) 768k down / 384k up, on a non-shared line. CPE was an Efficient Networks 'SpeedStream 5150" *SDSL* modem. (*not* a "5160", which is an identical-looking ADSL unit. :) You can "google" up the specs of those specific modems to confirm the which type of DSL are used for. I had numerous occasions where I saturated those links for extended periods, both upstream and downstream (at different times), to _nearby_ end-points with "big" pipes -- the speed figures above stand 'confirmed by actual usage measurements'. ------------------------------ From: ranck@vt.edu Subject: Re: Simplifying Web Checkouts Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2005 17:15:16 UTC Organization: Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia, USA Monty Solomon wrote: > By BOB TEDESCHI > FOR many e-commerce sites, the shopping cart is where transactions go > to die. > About half of prospective customers bail out of their purchases > sometime after selecting products and before hitting the buy button, > http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/14/technology/14ecom.html?ex=1266037200&en=2e977cb22a040daa&ei=5090 Well, I went and read the rest of the article and never did it mention the main reason I usually drop shopping cart transactions part way through. In a lot of these on-line shops the only way to find out their shipping charge is to get the item into the shopping cart. I comparison shop and that includes shipping costs. Some sites have clearly wised up on this and do state shipping costs up front, or at least give you a way to find them without loading an item into their cart. Web business is an ongoing learning process for the merchants and the customers. Bill Ranck Blacksburg, Va. ------------------------------ 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 V24 #74 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat Feb 19 20:12:36 2005 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j1K1CaT10486; Sat, 19 Feb 2005 20:12:36 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2005 20:12:36 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200502200112.j1K1CaT10486@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 V24 #75 TELECOM Digest Sat, 19 Feb 2005 20:12:00 EST Volume 24 : Issue 75 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson At Least 700 Have Identities Stolen (Lisa Minter) Newspaper Chains Pay Up for Web Companies (Lisa Minter) Mobile Phone Virus Found in United States (Lisa Minter) Telemarketing? (Choreboy) Dave Barry Books on Audiobook Format (johnazrael) Re: Powell Rips FCC Delay on Connection Fee Reform (Michael D. Sullivan) Re: Verizon Plans to Offer Naked DSL on 4/5 of Wirelines (M.D. Sullivan) Re: A Silly Question - 2-Line Phone With One Phone Number (SELLCOM Tech) Re: Leading Zeros? (Jeffrey Mattox) Re: Cell Phone Use Coming for Airbus Fliers (Joseph) Re: Vonage Complaining Of VoIP 'Blocking' (Tim Keating) 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: 19 Feb 2005 09:45:31 -0800 From: Lisa Minter Subject: At Least 700 Have Identities Stolen When word first emerged this week that still unknown scammers had illegally obtained detailed dossiers on 35,000 people by posing as legitimate customers of ChoicePoint, the company portrayed it as a relatively minor criminal case, limited to California. But by week's end, it was shaping up to be a full-blown scandal with as many as a half million people nationwide potentially vulnerable to identity theft. Outraged, attorneys general from 38 states demanded that ChoicePoint warn any victims in their states as well, and politicians, consumer advocates and security experts called for more federal oversight of a lightly regulated industry that gathers and sells personal data about nearly every adult American. The task force leader, sheriff's lieutenant Robert Costa, said the number of people vulnerable to identity theft in the case could reach 500,000. That's a much higher number than the latest estimate acknowledged by ChoicePoint, which belatedly sent warning letters to a total of 145,000 people in various states after a chorus of complaints. The volume of data compromised was so huge that deputies are almost certain that a 41-year-old Nigerian man sentenced Thursday to 16 months in jail in the scam did not act alone. The man, Olatunji Oluwatosin, was arrested on Oct. 27 when ChoicePoint faxed him some paperwork at a Kinko's store in a sting operation. He pleaded no contest and did not agree to help authorities in the probe. "We were victimized by some extremely well organized criminals," ChoicePoint spokesman Chuck Jones said. An Alpharetta, Ga.-based spinoff from the credit-reporting giant Equifax, ChoicePoint maintains databases that hold 19 billion Social Security numbers, credit and medical histories, motor vehicle registrations, job applications, lawsuits, criminal files, professional licenses and other pieces of sensitive information. ChoicePoint also owns a DNA analysis lab and facilitates drug testing for employers. But ChoicePoint and other privately owned aggregators of personal information operate with virtually no federal oversight, and critics say the companies haven't done enough to safeguard their information-rich databases. Word of the identity theft case got out after ChoicePoint sent warning letters last week to people in California; the only state with a law requiring disclosure of such security breaches to people whose identities are threatened. But ChoicePoint said it discovered the breach in October, when the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department began investigating one case of identity theft. Jones initially told The Associated Press on Tuesday that ChoicePoint had not alerted the FBI or other federal law enforcement agencies, and that "we don't have any evidence to indicate at this point that the situation has spread beyond California." But security experts scoffed at that idea, and other states' politicians quickly demanded the same consideration for their residents that Californians were getting. On Wednesday, Sen. Dianne Feinstein D-Calif., called for hearings on her proposed national version of the California law, while Sen. Bill Nelson D-Fla., asked federal regulators Friday to oversee data-brokering companies the same way they do other companies that handle financial and medical records. New York state legislator James Brennan asked his state to suspend an $800,000 ChoicePoint contract until the company agreed to warn any New York residents whose data might have been exposed. ChoicePoint eventually decided to send letters to 110,000 more people around the country; an unprecedented move for the company, but "the right thing to do" in this case, Jones said. Victims should receive letters within a few weeks, Jones said, and immediately check credit histories for suspicious activity. The company also plans to release a list of states affected in the next several days. Costa, who runs Southern California's High Tech Task Force Identity Theft Detail, said the estimate that as many as 500,000 people may be threatened is based on records his department subpoenaed from ChoicePoint. Costa also said that the FBI, the Secret Service and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement; the largest investigative arm of the Department of Homeland Security; have now contacted his department to join the probe. Citing the ongoing investigation, ChoicePoint won't speak publicly about details about the scam or discuss any security measures added since the breach. Costa says he can't reveal many details either. But some details have been released. Using stolen identities and faxing applications to ChoicePoint from Kinko's stores, the thieves opened up 50 accounts and for months received volumes of data on consumers, including names, addresses, credit reports and Social Security numbers; all the data needed to get credit in someone else's name. The ring also set up commercial mail-receiving locations in places such as Mail Boxes Etc., where deputies found redirected mail for more than 700 people; everything from personal letters to junk mail to the credit card applications that are like gold for con artists, Costa said. ChoicePoint had required the con artists to fax copies of business licenses, and verified through a background check that licenses were valid for nonbank financial institutions. But they didn't perform physical checks or visit the addresses, as they sometimes do, to make sure they were legitimate. Computer experts worry that ChoicePoint and other companies that specialize in gathering and selling private information still aren't sufficiently protecting it from unauthorized uses. "Most financial organizations have very sophisticated fraud detection algorithms to minimize the impact to the end user; why couldn't this company have the same type of controls?" asked Joseph Ansanelli, a member of the Financial Services Information Security Analysis Center who has testified before Congress on identity theft and consumer data privacy. "Even if the criminals misrepresented themselves to do fraud, there are fraud detection programs that could kick in at that point." 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 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: My very strong recommendation is do NOT assume Choice Point/Equifax will do anything more than absolutely required under the law on this matter. I suggest **everyone** send a letter to Choice Point/Equifax demanding a current copy of their credit report, and so so frequently over the next year or two to see how this thing plays out. Look over the reports you recieve very closely, and dispute any degrogatory item on your report. The law does require credit bureaus to investigate every consumer dispute and remove every degrogatory item which the creditor is unable to prove (or neglects to respond to) in a timely way. As people find out they have been victimized, I also suggest a class action lawsuit against Choice Point/Equifax, if those are still allowed, however President Bush is working hard to eliminate your right to file suit against corporations which have wronged you. But I do recommend you look into this ASAP, not relying on the credit bureau to tell you about it. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: 19 Feb 2005 09:47:42 -0800 From: Lisa Minter Subject: Newspaper Chains Pay Up for Web Companies By Martha Graybow NEW YORK (Reuters) - Newspaper publishers, often seen as stodgy and slow-growing, will pay whatever it takes to grab a bigger piece of the fast-growing online advertising market -- if two recent deals are any indication. The New York Times Co.'s purchase of About.com, announced on Thursday, and Dow Jones & Co. Inc.'s Inc. have raised eyebrows because the deals are much more richly valued than traditional newspaper acquisitions. But analysts say the prices may be what newspaper companies must pay if they want to bulk up their Internet operations. Because few Internet content companies are for sale, they say, publishers are jumping on what they can find. "Internet valuations are back in a big way," said Morgan Stanley analyst Douglas Arthur. "There are not that many properties out there that have survived through the bubble still intact, with a reasonable business model and good share of traffic on the Web, and apparently, they are going to go for a big price." Analysts say The New York Times, which is buying About.com from magazine publisher Primedia Inc., is paying a hefty price for the consumer-focused Web site by virtually any measure. Primedia is getting 30 times About.com's 2004 earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization, a key industry measure known as EBITDA. The New York Times said that multiple falls to 23 based on 2005 projections of financial results. In contrast, newspaper chain Lee Enterprises Inc. recently agreed to pay about 13.5 times EBITDA in its $1.4 billion buyout of Pulitzer Inc., one of the biggest newspaper deals in recent years. But the Internet also is growing much more quickly than newspapers, which have been mired in an ad slump over the last several years and are struggling with declines in readership. The Internet is the fastest-growing advertising outlet, even though the dollars are minuscule compared with other big media like television and newspapers. In other recent deals, The Washington Post Co. recently bought Web magazine Slate from Microsoft Corp. to get more online readers and ads. The company did not disclose the purchase price, which some have estimated at less than $20 million. More deals are expected. Possible targets include financial news site TheStreet.com which recently hired bankers to consider options that include a sale. Ryan Jacob, portfolio manager of the $70 million Jacob Internet Fund, said other attractive companies that could be eyed as acquisitions include CNET Networks Inc. which operates a technology news site, and women-oriented iVillage Inc. CNET and iVillage appeal to advertisers because they target very specific audiences, said Jacob, whose fund owns small stakes in both. Analysts say that while premium Internet companies may be commanding high prices, newspaper chains also must prove to investors that these deals pay off. The About.com agreement is "a major 'show me story'" for The New York Times, Credit Suisse First Boston analyst William Drewry said in a research report to clients. Debt rating service Standard & Poor's on Friday changed its outlook on The New York Times to negative from stable, citing the About.com deal. A negative outlook indicates there is a greater chance of a rating downgrade over the next two years, which could raise borrowing costs. New York Times stock closed down $1.05 at $37.20, while Primedia shares gained 15 cents to $4.20, both on the New York Stock Exchange. Copyright 2005 Reuters Limited. 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: 19 Feb 2005 09:49:40 -0800 From: Lisa Minter Subject: Mobile Phone Virus Found in United States By Spencer Swartz SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - The world's first mobile phone virus "in the wild" has spread to the United States from its birthplace in the Philippines eight months ago, a security research firm said on Friday. The virus, called Cabir, has spread slowly into 12 countries and marks the beginning of the mobile phone virus era, which could one day disrupt the lives of many of the world's 1.5 billion mobile phone users. The biggest impact of the relatively innocuous virus, found in about 15 variations so far, is draining mobile phone batteries, said Mikko Hypponen, director of Finnish anti-virus research company F-Secure (FSC1V.HE). Hypponen said Cabir was found on Monday in a technology gadgets store in Santa Monica, California, when a passing techie spotted a telltale sign on the screen of a phone in the store. "It's interesting (the Cabir variant) has now been found in the United States, but it's not the end of the world," said Hypponen. The mobile-virus threat will grow in the future as virus-writers become more sophisticated and phones standardize on technologies that make it easier for viruses to spread across not just specific devices but the whole industry. The danger is small at the moment, in part because of the range of handheld technologies. This is unlike the personal computer world dominated by the Windows operating system made by Microsoft Corp. Also, many handheld device makers have recently released new mobile phones equipped with anti-virus software. STORE-SIGHTING, SLOW-MOVING The store owner's phone had also been infected, Hypponen said. Both devices were Nokia Subject: Telemarketing? Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2005 00:42:21 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Yesterday an unknown woman phoned my aunt's house and asked to have her call a toll-free number about her order. When my aunt called, the greeting was "Marlboro Company." The woman asked my aunt her name, phone number, and date of birth. Then she asked if she smoked or had ever smoked. Then, without ever mentioning an address or what had been ordered, she said my aunt must have been the wrong person. If they'd thought my aunt had ordered something, wouldn't they have refreshed her memory? What was the point of the call? Choreboy [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Are you certain your aunt did not misdial when calling back? What you described sounds like a technique used by bill collectors/skip tracers trying to verify a phone number with a given name/address. Telemarketers on the other hand usually just make their pitch without taking a risk that the potential customer will neglect to return the call. And, bill collectors/skip tracers depend heavily on the ANI which an 800 number invariably produces for them. I do not think the Marlboro people told your aunt she 'must have been the wrong person'; but rather, that she had reached the wrong person, i.e. misdialed on her call back. She probably misdialed and got on a telemarketer's (for Marlboro) incoming line. PAT] ------------------------------ From: johnazrael Subject: Dave Barry Books on Audiobook Format Date: 18 Feb 2005 13:36:47 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Hey guys, just something I thought you'd want to know about -- you can listen to Dave Barry's books -- all of them -- on audio book through a rental site called Jiggerbug.com! I've been using Jiggerbug.com for quite a while now, and am LOVING their service. Just in case, the address is www.jiggerbug.com. Check it out! [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: A lot of people like Dave Barry, so I printed this even though IM(not so)HO the message borders on spam. So, consider this your free ride in the Digest, and if I stand corrected please accept my apology. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Michael D. Sullivan Subject: Re: Powell Rips FCC Delay on Connection Fee Reform Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2005 02:44:33 GMT In article , johnl@iecc.com says... >> As to the CLEC settlement rules, the Bells didn't write them; the FCC >> initially gave the CLECs what they asked for, but when it turned out >> the CLECs had played the FCC for a fool and were engaging in >> gamesmanship (e.g., signing up ISPs with no outgoing minutes and >> massive incoming minutes), it reversed course as to their internet >> terminations. For everything else, the CLECs have made out just fine. > Uh, negatory on that. The Bells wanted high recip comp per minute > rates because they expected that the traffic would mostly be toward > them, like it was from cell phones. The CLECs, not being totally > stupid, moved into the ISP market both because the recip was favorable > and also because the Bells had dragged their feet giving the ISPs the > bulk lines they needed to grow their business, and offered things the > Bells wouldn't like broad local number coverage. In this particular > case the Bells shot themselves directly in the foot. I must have had a brain fart. You are right, of course. The FCC adopted the scheme advocated by the ILECs, who thought that they would be terminating all the calls and would collect more than they paid. The CLECs, naturally looked for a business plan to receive terminating comp and came up with ISPs. The ILECs called foul, and the FCC eventually got them out of the hole they had dug by holding that internet traffic was "interstate, interexchange" traffic even if dialed to a local number. Michael D. Sullivan Bethesda, MD, USA Replace "example.invalid" with ".com". ------------------------------ From: Michael D. Sullivan Subject: Re: Verizon Plans to Offer Naked DSL on 4/5 of Wirelines Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2005 02:51:55 GMT In article , SeeSigForEmail@wn6.wn.net says: >> As to the CLEC settlement rules, the Bells didn't write them; the FCC >> initially gave the CLECs what they asked for, but when it turned out >> the CLECs had played the FCC for a fool and were engaging in >> gamesmanship (e.g., signing up ISPs with no outgoing minutes and >> massive incoming minutes), it reversed course as to their internet >> terminations. > That's an outright lie. In 1996, the early CLECs (mostly the big > IXCs) asked for Bill and Keep. It was Mr. Sullivan's Bell Atlantic > Corporation that filed a now-famous statement with the FCC calling it > "bilk and keep". Here's the direct quote, as I used it in Chapter 9 > of Meltdown: I was in error, as I admitted to Fred Goldstein in another posting. And I am not an employee of or attorney for Bell Atlantic or Verizon. I do some work for Verizon Wireless on wireless issues. I had no involvement whatsoever (for Bell Atlantic, Verizon, Verizon Wireless, or anyone else) in the establishment of reciprocal compensation rates. Michael D. Sullivan Bethesda, MD, USA Replace "example.invalid" with ".com". [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: If I were rude, crude, lewd and obnoxious, this mesage would have been titled "Lawyer/Mouthpiece For Bell Atlantic/Verizon Gets 'Outed' and Exposed" but I am not rude, crude, lewd or obnoxious so I did not change the subject line. Anyway, Mr. Sullivan has been helpful to the Digest in a couple instances so my inclination is to say thanks to him for help rendered in the past; most recently the Norvergence scandal. PAT] ------------------------------ From: SELLCOM Tech support Subject: Re: A Silly Question - 2-Line Phone With One Phone Number? Organization: www.sellcom.com Reply-To: support@sellcom.com Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2005 04:21:29 GMT Boat posted on that vast internet thingie: > I have a silly question. I'd like to get a 5.8 GHz, 2-line phone with > multiple handsets but I only have one incoming phone number into my > home. In order to fully utilize Line 1 and Line 2 I assume I will have > to get the phone company out here to install a second line. Is that > true? Are there any other options? A lot of people have multiple lines but only one advertised number by using call rollover from the phone co. The other lines will have phone numbers but they are often not used. Steve at SELLCOM http://www.sellcom.com Discount multihandset cordless phones by Panasonic 5.8Ghz 2line; TMC ET4300 4line Epic phone, OnHoldPlus, Brickmail voicemail Brick wall "non MOV" surge protection. Firewood splitters www.splitlogs.com If you sit at a desk www.ergochair.biz you owe it to yourself. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: In any event, he would have had to deal with the Mother Company, which is what he had hoped to avoid; listed or unlisted; virtual or real, etc. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2005 22:54:51 -0600 From: Jeffrey Mattox Subject: Re: Leading Zeros? [Please withhold my email address for spam avoidance reasons.] To Robert Bonomi: I have tried emailing you privately, but my messages always bounce. I have seen many of your posts in the TELECOM Digest. Your comments would be more effective if you didn't overuse punctuation marks. You are obviously trying to add emphasis to your writing, as if you are speaking, but excessive and misused punctuation marks just slow down and distract the reader. Writing and speech are two different things. For example, this paragraph is wild with unnecessary punctuation and capitals: If you want data preserved "exactly as entered', all you have to do is *SAY*SO*. If you don't say, Excel 'guesses', based on what is "correct _most_ of the time". If it 'guesses wrongly', that is not a failing of the program -- after all, "ROM" in a computer does *NOT* mean "read operator's mind". This would be better: If you want data preserved exactly as entered, all you have to do is say so. If you don't say, Excel guesses, based on what is correct most of the time. If it guesses wrongly, that is not a failing of the program -- after all, ROM in a computer does not mean "read operator's mind". Most dictionaries have a section about proper use of punctuation and capitalization. Please take a look. I repeat: Writing and speech are two different things. I'm not a writing expert; just an engineer interested in reading your posts in TELECOM. When I see one of your posts now, I tend now to skip over it because of the difficulty I anticipate in reading it. (All you language experts out there are now free to critique this message.) Respectfully, Jeff [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Dear Respectful Jeff, I have often wondered if I could require writers here to be familiar with and make use of the _Chicago Manual on Style_ as it would make my job a lot easier also. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Joseph Subject: Re: Cell Phone Use Coming for Airbus Fliers Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2005 02:13:30 -0800 Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com On 18 Feb 2005 03:20:02 -0000, John Levine wrote: > Some North American GSM phones can do 800 or 1800, but most can't. North American GSM phones cannot do GSM 1800 only GSM "850" or GSM 1900. GSM 1800 is a Euro-Asian frequency. And before anyone gets upset GSM 800 is the same thing as GSM 850. For some reason unknown to me when GSM was introduced to use on cellular networks it was decided to call it GSM 850 even though it uses the same transmit and receive frequencies as other cellular technologies such as CDMA or TDMA (IS-136.) ------------------------------ From: Tim Keating Subject: Re: Vonage Complaining Of VoIP 'Blocking' Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2005 13:34:19 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 13:42:22 -0500, Jack Decker wrote: > I hope the FCC will act swiftly to nip this in the bud -- ISP's have > no more business blocking customers' access to certain VoIP providers > than they do blocking access to competitors' web sites. I mean, just I suggest checking out a recent slashdot discussion on the subject. http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/02/14/2352254&tid=215 Vonage is a victim of their own default configuration. Vonage by defaulting too using NO compression, has eliminated the efficiencies one should have gained by using VoIP techniques. The result is a " A Tragedy of the Commons" type scenario. I.E. You've traded what could have been a locally switched call, for 3 or 4x more data traffic going over long distance IP backbones. http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Tragedy%20of%20commons "The key to the tragedy of the commons is when individuals use a public good, they do not bear the entire cost of their several actions." ------------------------------ 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 V24 #75 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Feb 21 04:59:54 2005 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j1L9xrh22870; Mon, 21 Feb 2005 04:59:54 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2005 04:59:54 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200502210959.j1L9xrh22870@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 V24 #76 TELECOM Digest Mon, 21 Feb 2005 05:00:00 EST Volume 24 : Issue 76 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson New-Look Passports: High-tech Passports Not Working (Marcus D Falco) Six Apart (Monty Solomon) Report DNC Violation? (chsvideo@hotmail.com) A New Radio Station For Our Town (TELECOM Digest Editor) Re: Cell Phone Use Coming for Airbus Fliers (John Levine) Re: Cell Phone Use Coming for Airbus Fliers (Marcus Didius Falco) Re: Telemarketing? (Choreboy) Re: ADSL and SDSL? (Koos van den Hout) Re: A Silly Question - 2-Line Phone With One Phone Number? (Boat) 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, 21 Feb 2005 01:30:33 -0500 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: New-Look Passports: High-Tech Passports Not Working http://economist.com/science/displayStory.cfm?story_id=3D3666171 http://economist.com/science/PrinterFriendly.cfm?Story_ID=3D3666171 Border controls New-look passports Feb 17th 2005 From The Economist print edition KOBAL COLLECTION High-tech passports are not working. IN OLDEN days (before the first world war, that is) the traveller simply pulled his boots on and went. The idea that he might need a piece of paper to prove to foreigners who he was would not have crossed his mind. Alas, things have changed. In the name of security (spies then, terrorists now), travellers have to put up with all sorts of inconvenience when they cross borders. The purpose of that inconvenience is to prove that the passport's bearer is who he says he is. The original technology for doing this was photography. It proved adequate for many years. But apparently it is no longer enough. At America's insistence, passports are about to get their biggest overhaul since they were introduced. They are to be fitted with computer chips that have been loaded with digital photographs of the bearer (so that the process of comparing the face on the passport with the face on the person can be automated), digitised fingerprints and even scans of the bearer's irises, which are as unique to people as their fingerprints. A sensible precaution in a dangerous world, perhaps. But there is cause for concern. For one thing, the data on these chips will be readable remotely, without the bearer knowing. And again at America's insistence those data will not be encrypted, so anybody with a suitable reader, be they official, commercial, criminal or terrorist, will be able to check a passport holder's details. To make matters worse, biometric technology as systems capable of recognising fingerprints, irises and faces are known is still less than reliable, and so when it is supposed to work, at airports for example, it may not. Finally, its introduction has been terribly rushed,=20 risking further mishaps. The United Sates want the thing to start running by October, at least in those countries for whose nationals it does not demand visas. Your non-papers, please In theory, the technology is straightforward. In 2003, the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO), a UN agency, issued technical specifications for passports to contain a paper-thin integrated circuit basically, a tiny computer. This computer has no internal power supply, but when a specially designed reader sends out a radio signal, a tiny antenna draws power from the wave and uses it to wake the computer up. The computer then broadcasts back the data that are stored in it. The idea, therefore, is similar to that of the radio-frequency identification (RFID) tags that are coming into use by retailers, to identify their stock, and mass-transit systems, to charge their passengers. Dig deeper, though, and problems start to surface. One is interoperability. In mass-transit RFID cards, the chips and readers are designed and sold as a package, and even in the case of retailing they are carefully designed to be interoperable. In the case of passports, they will merely be designed to a vague common standard. Each country will pick its own manufacturers, in the hope that its chips will be readable by other people's machines, and vice versa. That may not happen in practice. In a trial conducted in December at Baltimore International Airport, three of the passport readers could manage to read the chips accurately only 58%, 43% and 31% of the time, according to confidential figures reported in Card Technology magazine, which covers the chip-embedded card industry. (An official at America's Department of Homeland Security confirmed that there were problems .) A second difficulty is the reliability of biometric technology. Facial-recognition systems work only if the photograph is taken with proper lighting and an especially bland expression on the face. Even then, the error rate for facial-recognition software has proved to be as high as 10% in tests. If that were translated into reality, one person in ten would need to be pulled aside for extra screening. Fingerprint and iris-recognition technology have significant error rates, too. So, despite the belief that biometrics will make crossing a border more efficient and secure, it could well have the opposite effect, as false alarms become the norm. The third, and scariest problem, however, is one that is deliberately built into the technology, rather than being an accident of its present inefficiency. This is the remote-readability of the chip, combined with the lack of encryption of the data held on it. Passport chips are deliberately designed for clandestine remote reading. The ICAO specification refers quite openly to the idea of a walk-through inspection with the person concerned possibly being unaware of the operation . The lack of encryption is also deliberate both to promote international interoperability and to encourage airlines, hotels and banks to join in. Big Brother, then, really will be watching you. And others, too, may be tempted to set up clandestine walk-through inspections where the person is possibly unaware of the operation . Criminals will have a useful tool for identity theft. Terrorists will be able to know the nationality of those they attack. Belatedly, the authorities have recognised this problem, and are trying to do something about it. The irony is that this involves eliminating the remote readability that was envisaged to be such a crucial feature of the system in the first place. One approach is to imprison the chip in a Faraday cage. This is a contraption for blocking radio waves which is named after one of the 19th-century pioneers of electrical technology. It consists of a box made of closely spaced metal bars. In practice, an aluminium sheath would be woven into the cover of the passport. This would stop energy from the reader reaching the chip while the passport is closed. Another approach, which has just been endorsed by the European Union, is an electronic lock on the chip. The passport would then have to be swiped through a special reader in order to unlock the chip so that it could be read. How the European approach will interoperate with other countries' passport controls still needs to be worked out. Those countries may need special equipment or software to read an EU passport, which undermines the ideal of a global, interoperable standard. Sceptics might suggest that these last-minute countermeasures call into doubt the reason for a radio-chip device in the first place. Frank Moss, of America's State Department, disagrees. As he puts it, I don't think it questions the standard. I think what it does is it requires us to come up with measures that mitigate the risks. However, a number of executives at the firms who are trying to build the devices appear to disagree. They acknowledge the difficulties caused by choosing radio-frequency chips instead of a system where direct contact must be made with the reader. But as one of them, who preferred not to be named, put it: We simply supply all the technology the choice is not up to us. If it's good enough for the US, it's good enough for us. Whether it actually is good enough for the United States, or for any other country, remains to be seen. So far, only Belgium has met America's deadline. It introduced passports based on the new technology in November. However, hints from the American government suggest that the October deadline may be allowed to slip again (it has already been put back once) since the Americans themselves will not be ready by then. It is awkward to hold foreigners to higher standards than you impose on yourself. Perhaps it is time to go back to the drawing board. Copyright 2005 The Economist Newspaper and The Economist Group. 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 the Economist Newspaper.. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2005 01:43:48 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Six Apart Couple Build Startup Into Blog Powerhouse By MICHAEL LIEDTKE AP Business Writer SAN FRANCISCO (AP) -- Like so many other 20-somethings hoping to mine the Internet gold rush of the late 1990s, Mena Trott was thrown for a humbling loop by the dot-com bust, yet still craved stardom. Her unassuming husband, Ben, just wanted another computer programming gig in Silicon Valley's depressed job market. The couple's odd chemistry cooked up Six Apart Ltd., a startup that has helped popularize the "blogging" craze, with millions of people worldwide maintaining online personal journals that dissect everything from politics to poultry. The Trotts, both 27, have amplified the buzz about Web logs, or blogs, by making them easier to set up and write. San Francisco-based Six Apart provides two widely used blogging tools _ a software publishing program, Movable Type, and a hosted service, TypePad, for people who don't want to do the technological grunt work themselves. Boosted by the recent takeover of another blogging service called LiveJournal, Six Apart now has 7 million users, including a substantial number who pay fees that range from $4.95 per month for TypePad's bare-bones package to thousands of dollars for licensing Movable Type to install on their own servers. The revenue stream, which the Trotts declined to disclose, has enabled the privately held Six Apart to expand from just six employees in early 2004 to more than 70 with the LiveJournal acquisition, making the Trotts darlings of the blogosphere. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=47113330 ------------------------------ From: chsvideo@hotmail.com Subject: Report DNC Violation? Date: 20 Feb 2005 17:51:58 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com How does one report a violation of the do not call list? Got a call at 5:50 this evening from "Health Insurance Services" that was not only a telemarketer, but it was a recording to boot. "Hi, this is Karen from Health Insurance Services, sorry to use this annoying phone call but did you know that...press 1 for more information" Lincoln ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2005 04:13:06 EST From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: A New Radio Station For Our Town I am very pleased to report we have a new _all classical music_ radio station here in southeast Kansas. Actually, KOSU is licensed out of Ketchum, Oklahoma (more or less across the state line) from Coffeyville, KS but it has a _very good_ signal here in Independence. It is at 107.5 FM, came on the air about a month ago, and largely plays classical music, 24/7, but also has some NPR programming. That leaves us now with _three_ good classical music stations here. In addition to the NPR stations in Tulsa (89.5 FM) and the station out of Pittsburg, KS (KRPS, 89.9 FM) we now have this third choice. The problem with 89.5 and 89.9 FM has been they are so far away from the Independence/Coffeyville area the only way to get a *good* signal listening to them is by attaching the cable line since they both get a free ride on the CableOne local system. But the new one, 107.5 booms in with no antenna at all, it seems. And where Pittsburg plays classical all day, along with BBC World Service overnight, and the Tulsa staton (89.5) tends to do mostly NPR with a smattering of classical music, the new people at 107.5 do classical all the time _day and night_ except for a few NPR things. I do not know for sure if we are the only radio market in the USA which now has _three_ stations doing classical music for many hours of the day, but I suspect we are. That does not count the two classical stations on cable only, which give us a rather good diet of intelligent, interesting music. Do you know of any other areas with three classical music stations all on the dial? New York, Chicago, San Francisco, Los Angeles, etc? PAT ------------------------------ Date: 20 Feb 2005 07:51:18 -0000 From: John Levine Subject: Re: Cell Phone Use Coming for Airbus Fliers Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA >> Some North American GSM phones can do 800 or 1800, but most can't. > North American GSM phones cannot do GSM 1800 only GSM "850" or GSM > 1900. Some North American GSM phones also do 900 or 1800 for people who travel to Europe. My wife's Moto V220 does 1800. My old Moto Timeport did 1900/900/1800 until I ran it through the washing machine. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2005 02:48:44 -0500 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Re: Cell Phone Use Coming for Airbus Fliers Joseph wrote about Re: Cell Phone Use Coming for Airbus Fliers on Sat, 19 Feb 2005 02:13:30 -0800 > On 18 Feb 2005 03:20:02 -0000, John Levine wrote: >> Some North American GSM phones can do 800 or 1800, but most can't. > North American GSM phones cannot do GSM 1800 only GSM "850" or GSM > 1900. GSM 1800 is a Euro-Asian frequency. Some phones are "Tri-band" and include the 1800 band. The ancient Motorola Timeport is an example. Most of the more advanced phones sold for use by international travelers are triband, and every seller will have one or two. I believe most older US phones cannot do 850, but rather do 1900 or 900/1800/1900, which is the official definition of "tri-band". Those that include 850 are quad-band > And before anyone gets upset GSM 800 is the same thing as GSM 850. > For some reason unknown to me when GSM was introduced to use on > cellular networks it was decided to call it GSM 850 even though it > uses the same transmit and receive frequencies as other cellular > technologies such as CDMA or TDMA (IS-136.) The official definition, found at http://www.gsmworld.com/technology/glossary.shtml says that 850 and 900 are different: GSM Global System for Mobile communications, the second generation digital technology originally developed for Europe but which now has in excess of 71 per cent of the world market. Initially developed for operation in the 900MHz band and subsequently modified for the 850, 1800 and 1900MHz bands. GSM originally stood for Groupe Speciale Mobile, the CEPT committee which began the GSM standardisation process and Tri-band Refers to a mobile phone able to operate on the three internationally designated GSM frequencies- 900, 1800 and 1900MHz I believe they are using different parts of the 800-900 band. See: http://www.gsmworld.com/technology/spectrum/frequencies.shtml In principle the GSM system can be implemented in any frequency band. However there are several bands where GSM terminals are, or will shortly be available. Furthermore, GSM terminals may incorporate one or more of the GSM frequency bands listed below to facilitate roaming on a global basis. Frequency Range GSM400 450.4 - 457.6 MHz paired with 460.4 - 467.6 MHz or 478.8 - 486 MHz paired with 488.8 - 496 MHz GSM 850 824 - 849 MHz paired with 869 - 894 MHz GSM900 880 - 915 MHz paired with 925 - 960 MHz GSM1800 1710 - 1785 MHz paired with 1805 - 1880 MHz GSM1900 1850 - 1910 MHz paired with 1930 - 1990 MHz In the above bands mobile stations transmit in the lower frequency sub-band and base stations transmit in the higher frequency sub-band. In any event, some of the latest phones (such as the new Motorola Razr V3) claim to be "quad-band." To see which companies use which bands, see the following. GSM Worldwide Live Networks illustrates the spread of live GSM networks worldwide. Included is the operating frequency (e.g. GSM 900, GSM 1800 or GSM 1900) and the date the service went live. At present, Tanzania is the only country with GSM 400, and it also has GSM 900/1800. TANZANIA Celtel Tanzania Limited celtel TANZANIA GSM 900/1800/400 Nov 2001 The file is available to view as a Acrobat PDF file or in HTML. Download GSM Global Networks on Air (829k PDF). http://www.gsmworld.com/news/statistics/netsonair.pdf OR View GSM Global Networks on Air as an HTML page. (This page is large (675k) and may take a while to completely load.) http://www.gsmworld.com/news/statistics/networks_complete.shtml United States Networks are identifed as GSM 850/1900, 1900 or as 850. The 850s or 850/1900s are mostly small companies (often with Farmer or Coop or Rural in their name) and the 1900s include the larger companies. Those in the UK are identified as GSM 900/1800 or as GSM 1800. Most of the tri-band phones Many European phones are dual band: Dual band Mobile phones which support transmission and reception of calls on the 900MHz and 1800MHz bands with seamless handover between the two frequency bands. ------------------------------ From: Choreboy Subject: Re: Telemarketing? Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2005 01:10:07 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Choreboy wrote: > Yesterday an unknown woman phoned my aunt's house and asked to have her > call a toll-free number about her order. > When my aunt called, the greeting was "Marlboro Company." The woman > asked my aunt her name, phone number, and date of birth. Then she > asked if she smoked or had ever smoked. Then, without ever mentioning > an address or what had been ordered, she said my aunt must have been > the wrong person. > If they'd thought my aunt had ordered something, wouldn't they have > refreshed her memory? What was the point of the call? > Choreboy > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Are you certain your aunt did not > misdial when calling back? What you described sounds like a technique > used by bill collectors/skip tracers trying to verify a phone number > with a given name/address. Telemarketers on the other hand usually > just make their pitch without taking a risk that the potential customer > will neglect to return the call. And, bill collectors/skip tracers > depend heavily on the ANI which an 800 number invariably produces for > them. I do not think the Marlboro people told your aunt she 'must have > been the wrong person'; but rather, that she had reached the wrong > person, i.e. misdialed on her call back. She probably misdialed and > got on a telemarketer's (for Marlboro) incoming line. PAT] "Marlboro" ended up saying they were looking for somebody else with my aunt's name. So "Marlboro" knew what it was about. If the first call were on the level I would have expected the caller to name the company. Wouldn't a customer be more likely to return a call if she recognized the name? When you order something, you give your address, at least your billing address. Nobody else with my aunt's name lives in her city. I don't think there was any mixup. You don't normally give your date of birth when you order something. If it were about an order, "Marlboro" would have asked my aunt's address, not her date of birth. A person's smoking history wouldn't show whether she had ordered something even if the item were cigarettes. These questions sound like a smoke screen to make my aunt think she had called the cigarette company. Did scammers get my aunt's date of birth? Would that be useful? Choreboy ------------------------------ From: Koos van den Hout Subject: Re: ADSL and SDSL? Date: 20 Feb 2005 19:10:09 GMT Organization: http://idefix.net/~koos/ Robert Bonomi wrote: > As "commonly deployed", SDSL has same speed up and down, and ADSL has > mis-matched (almost invariably higher in the 'down' direction) speeds. > However, I have had "symmetric rate" ADSL, and "Asymmetric rate" SDSL, > service, at various times, from various providers. Not terribly > common, but such services do/did exist. :) ADSL has, and I guess SDSL has it too, a difference between 'the possible speed of the phone line' and 'the speed the *dsl provider programs on it'. For example, my phone line has the following: Downstream Attainable line rate : 8112 kbit/sec Attainable Atm rate : 7680 kbit/sec Used line rate : 3600 kbit/sec Fast used Atm rate : 3200 kbit/sec Upstream Attainable line rate : 968 kbit/sec Attainable Atm rate : 864 kbit/sec Used line rate : 856 kbit/sec Fast used Atm rate : 768 kbit/sec (see http://idefix.net/~koos/speedtouchgraph/ for how I make my adsl modem tell me this and other details about the phoneline) The provider could for example program a profile with 768 kbit up/down. Koos van den Hout, PGP keyid RSA/1024 0xCA845CB5 via keyservers Koos@kzdoos.xs4all.nl or DSS/1024 0xF0D7C263 -?) Fax +31-30-2817051 Camp Wireless, wireless Internet access /\\ http://idefix.net/~koos/ at campsites http://www.camp-wireless.org/ _\_V ------------------------------ From: Boat Subject: Re: A Silly Question - 2-Line Phone With One Phone Number? Organization: SBC http://yahoo.sbc.com Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2005 20:40:46 GMT I do have call waiting. Are you saying that if I have call waiting then I have two lines, therefore if I got a 2-line phone I would be able to use both lines at the same time? Still confused ... SELLCOM Tech support wrote in message news:telecom24.75.8@telecom-digest.org: > Boat posted on that vast internet thingie: >> I have a silly question. I'd like to get a 5.8 GHz, 2-line phone with >> multiple handsets but I only have one incoming phone number into my >> home. In order to fully utilize Line 1 and Line 2 I assume I will have >> to get the phone company out here to install a second line. Is that >> true? Are there any other options? > A lot of people have multiple lines but only one advertised number by > using call rollover from the phone co. > The other lines will have phone numbers but they are often not used. > Steve at SELLCOM > http://www.sellcom.com > Discount multihandset cordless phones by Panasonic > 5.8Ghz 2line; TMC ET4300 4line Epic phone, OnHoldPlus, Brickmail voicemail > Brick wall "non MOV" surge protection. > Firewood splitters www.splitlogs.com > If you sit at a desk www.ergochair.biz you owe it to yourself. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: In any event, he would have had to deal > with the Mother Company, which is what he had hoped to avoid; listed > or unlisted; virtual or real, etc. PAT] [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: _NO_ you do not have two 'phones' or two 'lines'. You have _ONE_ phone line given special treatment at the phone central office. Now, if you are the only person in your house, then you can only talk to one person at a time, so for all practical purposes, yes, you have the equivilent of two 'lines', since if you had two _real lines_ and two concurrent callers, you would press a couple of buttons to go back and forth between them. With call-waiting you do the same thing; press a button (the hook switch, actually) to go between callers. But if you think that is 'two lines' then have a wife, or children or a roomate who wants to use the phone at the same time; it cannot be done. And if you get that call-waiting signal and the new caller wants to speak to another person in your household, then *someone* is going to have to wait, to cool their heels about recieving/placing their phone call. If there are two or more persons in your household, and the phone is fairly active as a result, then you _do not_ want call-waiting. You want two actual lines, or two actual 'services' of some kind or another, such as phone and VOIP, or phone and cell phone or (gasp!) even two actual Bell Telco lines. Your present phone, regardless of the features you have on it, i.e. call waiting or three way calling, or distinctive ringing, etc still reaches you only on one pair of wires, and a '2 line phone' would do you no good at all. 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 V24 #76 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Feb 21 18:46:35 2005 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j1LNkZZ28608; Mon, 21 Feb 2005 18:46:35 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2005 18:46:35 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200502212346.j1LNkZZ28608@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 V24 #77 TELECOM Digest Mon, 21 Feb 2005 18:47:00 EST Volume 24 : Issue 77 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson US Investor Seeks to Block MCI Sale to Verizon: Report (Lisa Minter) Our Waste Howling 'Cyberness' (Lisa Minter) Estimated E1/T1 Costs From US to the Philippines (Dallas01) Re: Cell Phone Use Coming for Airbus Fliers (Joseph) Re: Cell Phone Use Coming for Airbus Fliers (Geoffrey Welsh) Re: Telemarketing? (Dave Garland) Re: A New Radio Station For Our Town (Robert Bonomi) Re: Report DNC Violation? (Hoss) Re: Report DNC Violation? (GlowingBlueMist) 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: 21 Feb 2005 13:24:14 -0800 From: Lisa Minter Subject: US Investor Seeks to Block MCI Sale to Verizon: Report NEW YORK (AFP) - A disgruntled US shareholder has reportedly filed a lawsuit against MCI seeking to block the telecom group's potential take-over by Verizon Communications. The news comes as Qwest Communications mulls what it says will be a better offer for MCI than that made by Verizon's 6.75 billion dollar play which has already been accepted by MCI's board. The Financial Times said MCI shareholder Joseph Pojanowski has filed suit in Delaware claiming MCI and its board breached their fiduciary duties "by depriving MCI's public stock-holders of maximum value to which they are entitled." The suit also seeks class action status. Pojanowski's suit also demands that MCI's board hold an auction of the long-distance telecom group and open negotiations with any genuine bidder. Some of MCI's biggest shareholders have also recently spoken of their concerns about the value of Verizon's bid. Wall Street is closed Monday for the Presidents' Day holiday. On Friday, MCI closed up 1.65 dollars at 22.31 dollars while Verizon closed down 37 cents at 35.31 dollars. 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 AFP News Service. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ Date: 21 Feb 2005 10:44:57 -0800 From: Lisa Minter Subject: Our Waste Howling 'Cyberness' Mourning the true camaraderie of neighborhood as my blog echoes into the silence. By Jerry Lanson LEXINGTON, MASS. - Blogging, I've discovered, is about as stimulating as singing to my refrigerator. The echo of my words dissolves quickly into silence. It may be that these words simply bore anyone dropping by. But I suspect the lack of traffic to my new blog has more to do with the fact that there are now millions of bloggers out there, pouring their hearts out ... for the most part to themselves. And as they -- no, we -- spend more hours in front of computers, we take one more step in estranging ourselves from what's left of local community. Often I long for an earlier America, one I've seen more of in historical photos than experienced in real life. It's an America of concrete stoops and front porches, of town and city life where people not only know neighbors by name, but take the time to talk with them. My own family moved to the suburbs when I was 5. In the mid-'50s on Long Island, we kids were allowed to roam and more often than not, a game of tag or stickball went on in the middle of the street. Fights occasionally broke out, and sometimes nasty ethnic slurs got thrown around. Life was far from perfect. But it had a pulse. Today, in my tony suburb of Lexington, Mass., few kids play in the street. Many more are programmed for organized sports, organized music lessons, organized study. If life is one long climb toward success, it's also more isolated and fragmented. And that's true for their parents too. Today's houses are a lot bigger. But I suspect plenty of people get lost in all that extra elbow room, rushing to their computer in the hope of connecting with anyone. I, for one, am not convinced that the computer will ever be a terribly useful tool for real, personal connections. When an MIT professor created something called e-neighbors in my community a couple of years ago, it was an experiment to see how a neighborhood, joined by computer, would interact. I excitedly wrote to those signed on that I love to play poker, bridge, and just about any other card game. No one responded. Perhaps others in the neighborhood have become fast friends. But from what I can tell, the whole network has provided just one contribution -- a place to get tips on how to find a plumber, a carpenter, a lawn mower, a tree surgeon. Fill in the blank. Meanwhile, I still long for a regular card game, a lively cafe, a place where individual expression is heard and seen in the flesh, not tapped onto a screen and sent into cyberspace where it awaits someone else wandering around in the wilderness. I don't believe the Internet -- though it can introduce people -- ever offers true camaraderie. But I doubt that contemporary neighborhoods do, either. People don't give each other a chance. After a recent snow, I walked my golden retriever, Casey, and passed between two neighbors shoveling snow. On my right was an elderly man, approaching 80. He clearly labored as he shoveled his walk. Across the street, a young father, in his 30s, was putting the finishing touches on his perfect snow-blower cleared walkway, which arced around the front and side of his property. If he noticed the old fellow 25 feet away, he never acknowledged him. He clearly hadn't offered to lend a hand. As I came back around the block, I exchanged greetings with the older man. "Take your time," I advised him. "Don't overdo it." "You're right about that," he responded. The other man had left his snowblower standing by his front path and gone inside. Jerry Lanson is a professor of journalism at Boston's Emerson College. His blog can be found at http://musingonamerica.blogspot.com. 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 the Christian Science Publishing Society. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have noticed over the years, that computers are _not quite_ the bill of goods that were sold to us when 'home computers' first came into vogue in the 1980's, or even when they became still more popular in the middle/late 1990's. Maybe I am just getting bored and depressed by it all. There are literally thousands of blogs, and millions of URLs, most of which seem to be ignored by almost everyone. Some, which claim to have thousands of readers/users daily, I have never heard of. Some of the most heart- breaking situations I have seen on the net involve young people who sincerely believe that (a) they can get rich fast on the net, and (b)probably more significant -- they can make new friends *in person* through the chat rooms and the dating services. These kids send in money to the dating/friendship services, along with their pictures and personal details, find themselves really excited by their 'new friend' (over the computer) and then when the actual meeting time arrives, at best it is a total disappointment; at worst it is a total fraud perpetrated on them. If you have ever seen the cartoon, 'Honesty on the Internet' then you know how things go. And regards 'making money fast on the internet', after twenty-plus years doing this, I have barely started to get a grasp on making money in internet publishing, to say nothing of making it fast. As the essay 'Informing Ourselves to Death' (in our archives from 1991) states it very succinctly, I have not been encouraged by the new-found ease in balancing my checkbook, organizing my recipe and other files, keeping my appointments in order, or for that matter, making new friends and influencing people. Do you think (as things are today on the net) *this* is what the early pioneers had in mind for us a quarter century later, or were they just talking to humor us? PAT] ------------------------------ From: Dallas01 Subject: Estimated E1/T1 Costs From US to the Philippines Date: 21 Feb 2005 09:16:35 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com I am trying to put together some cost estimates for E1/T1 circuits between the U.S. and Manila but I don't have specific addresses at this time. The carriers won't help me unless I have addresses. Can anyone give me typical monthly E1 or T1 costs between the U.S. and Manila? Thanks. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What a typical response from the carriers! Actual street addresses would have no bearing in the matter at all. Manilla and USA are so sufficiently distant the rate would be the same. Reminds me of the time I asked a Bell System operator for the rate between Chicago and India. She refused to give it to me, insisting that she had to know the *exact number* I would be using the place the call and the *exact number* I would be calling in New Delhi, as if it could possibly matter. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Joseph Subject: Re: Cell Phone Use Coming for Airbus Fliers Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2005 08:48:51 -0800 Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 02:48:44 -0500, Marcus Didius Falco wrote: >> And before anyone gets upset GSM 800 is the same thing as GSM 850. >> For some reason unknown to me when GSM was introduced to use on >> cellular networks it was decided to call it GSM 850 even though it >> uses the same transmit and receive frequencies as other cellular >> technologies such as CDMA or TDMA (IS-136.) > The official definition, found at > http://www.gsmworld.com/technology/glossary.shtml > says that 850 and 900 are different: Well, yeah! But GSM 850 and 800 are the same thing as I said in my first post. ------------------------------ From: Geoffrey Welsh Subject: Re: Cell Phone Use Coming for Airbus Fliers Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2005 15:47:16 -0500 John Levine wrote: > Some North American GSM phones also do 900 or 1800 for people who > travel to Europe. My wife's Moto V220 does 1800. My old Moto > Timeport did 1900/900/1800 until I ran it through the washing machine. I've seen some phones referred to as "world phones" -- I assume that is what you're describing. -- Geoffrey Welsh Ambidextrous? No, I said I'm ambinonscattous - I don't give a crap either way! ------------------------------ From: Dave Garland Subject: Re: Telemarketing? Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2005 10:39:43 -0600 Organization: Wizard Information It was a dark and stormy night when Choreboy wrote: > Did scammers get my aunt's date of birth? Would that be useful? It would be useful if you were committing identity theft. Not to say that is what is happening, but it is a bit odd. It would be interesting to learn who that toll-free number lists to. If you shared the number, perhaps someone more knowledgable than I would look it up and learn more about its owner. ------------------------------ From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) Subject: Re: A New Radio Station For Our Town Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2005 14:09:18 -0000 Organization: Widgets, Inc. In article , TELECOM Digest Editor wrote: > I am very pleased to report we have a new _all classical music_ radio > station here in southeast Kansas. Actually, KOSU is licensed out of > Ketchum, Oklahoma (more or less across the state line) from > Coffeyville, KS but it has a _very good_ signal here in Independence. > It is at 107.5 FM, came on the air about a month ago, and largely > plays classical music, 24/7, but also has some NPR programming. That > leaves us now with _three_ good classical music stations here. In > addition to the NPR stations in Tulsa (89.5 FM) and the station out > of Pittsburg, KS (KRPS, 89.9 FM) we now have this third choice. The > problem with 89.5 and 89.9 FM has been they are so far away from the > Independence/Coffeyville area the only way to get a *good* signal > listening to them is by attaching the cable line since they both get > a free ride on the CableOne local system. But the new one, 107.5 booms > in with no antenna at all, it seems. > And where Pittsburg plays classical all day, along with BBC World > Service overnight, and the Tulsa staton (89.5) tends to do mostly NPR > with a smattering of classical music, the new people at 107.5 do > classical all the time _day and night_ except for a few NPR things. I > do not know for sure if we are the only radio market in the USA which > now has _three_ stations doing classical music for many hours of the > day, but I suspect we are. That does not count the two classical > stations on cable only, which give us a rather good diet of > intelligent, interesting music. Do you know of any other areas with > three classical music stations all on the dial? New York, Chicago, > San Francisco, Los Angeles, etc? Chicago, for several years now, is down to _one_ full-time classical station -- WFMT. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I remember when there were three such stations in Chicago also. The pioneer WEFM started in 1941 (well, actually WBBM was doing classical music on AM radio from its earlier years, but stopped around 1960.) Then WFMT came along in 1950 as the first *commercial* classical station in Chicago. Then WNIB started in 1955. WEFM changed formats (then later, the call sign) in 1976; and WNIB which started as a six hundred dollar investment by Bill and Sonia Florian in 1955 changed formats in 2001 -- after insisting for 40 years that they would always be around -- when they sold out to Clear Channel (which did not want the music, or the technical equip- ment, but merely the 96.9 and 97.1 FM spots for a paltry fifty million dollars; now there is but 'FMT left, and their announcers who were idiots with their foreign language affectations for most of that time, but they have improved a little, I guess. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Hoss Subject: Re: Report DNC Violation? Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2005 12:52:03 -0500 Organization: UseNetServer.com wrote in message news:telecom24.76.3@telecom-digest.org: > How does one report a violation of the do not call list? > Got a call at 5:50 this evening from "Health Insurance Services" that > was not only a telemarketer, but it was a recording to boot. > "Hi, this is Karen from Health Insurance Services, sorry to use this > annoying phone call but did you know that...press 1 for more > information" > Lincoln Hi Lincoln, http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/donotcall/ How to File a Complaint You can file a complaint by e-mail (donotcall@fcc.gov), telephone 1-888-CALL-FCC (1-888-225-5322) voice or 1-888-TELL-FCC (1-888-835-5322) TTY, or mail. Your complaint should include: a.. name, address, and telephone number where you can be reached during the business day; b.. the telephone number involved with the complaint; and c.. as much specific information as possible, including the identity of the telemarketer or company contacting you, the date on which you put your number on the national Do-Not-Call registry or made a company-specific do-not-call request, and the date(s) of any subsequent telemarketing call(s) from that telemarketer or company. If mailing a complaint, send it to: Federal Communications Commission Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau Consumer Inquiries and Complaints Division 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554 ------------------------------ From: GlowingBlueMist Subject: Re: Report DNC Violation? Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2005 14:12:40 -0600 Organization: Octanews wrote in message news:telecom24.76.3@telecom-digest.org: > How does one report a violation of the do not call list? > Got a call at 5:50 this evening from "Health Insurance Services" that > was not only a telemarketer, but it was a recording to boot. > "Hi, this is Karen from Health Insurance Services, sorry to use this > annoying phone call but did you know that...press 1 for more > information" > Lincoln If you are refering to the National Do Not Call Registry the answer is simple. Go to the www.donotcall.gov web page and click on the icon that says File a Complaint or use the link: https://www.donotcall.gov/Complain/ComplainCheck.aspx to go to the same place. ------------------------------ 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 V24 #77 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Feb 22 15:20:51 2005 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j1MKKol08168; Tue, 22 Feb 2005 15:20:51 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2005 15:20:51 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200502222020.j1MKKol08168@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 V24 #78 TELECOM Digest Tue, 22 Feb 2005 15:19:00 EST Volume 24 : Issue 78 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson A Telecom Capital No Longer (Marcus Didius Falco) Calling For Real Competition (Marcus Didius Falco) File Sharing to Get its Day in High Court (Telecom dailyLead from USTA) Withholding the Telephone Tax (TELECOM Digest Editor) Bill Hanhardt, Former Cop (Carl Moore) Re: Cell Phone Use Coming for Airbus Fliers (Marcus Didius Falco) Re: Telemarketing? (Choreboy) Re: A New Radio Station For Our Town (Henry) Re: A Silly Question - 2-Line Phone With One Phone Number? (John Smith) 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, 22 Feb 2005 00:50:58 -0500 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: A Telecom Capital No Longer http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A40700-2005Feb20.html By Jerry Knight Washington's days as the center of the telecommunications revolution are over. MCI Inc., the inventor of phone competition, is being courted by two of the former Baby Bell phone companies. Whether MCI hooks up with Verizon or Qwest doesn't matter. In either case, it'll be the corporate equivalent of marrying the enemy. Nextel Communications Inc., whose walkie-talkies wiggled into the mobile-phone business through regulatory loopholes, is merging with Sprint Corp., the biggest communications company outside the former Bell family. American Online Inc., which literally put America online, has become little more than a sideline for the multimedia moguls of Time Warner Inc. The Washington region still boasts a dozen-and-a-half publicly traded telecommunications companies, but only a few of them have made money for their shareholders over the past year. What once was the region's most promising growth industry has been largely reduced to a few struggling providers of phone and Internet services -- more mom-and-pop than Ma Bell -- and some small suppliers of hardware and services to the big boys. Why did Washington lose its leadership role? Because Washington has lost its relevance. Government regulation made Washington the birthplace of competition in communications, but the era when regulation determines who can provide what services to whom is past. "Telecom World War I is over," said Scott C. Cleland, chief executive of the Precursor Group, Washington's best-known telecom think tank. "This is the formal end to the era of managed competition" under government communications regulation. That war pitted the independent long-distance services led by MCI against AT&T and the seven regional phone companies that were spun off from it to transform the phone business from a monopoly to a competitive market. AT&T and the spinoffs won that one. MCI may have carried the battle that opened up competition in the long-distance market, but its disastrous marriage to WorldCom pushed the company into bankruptcy and then the arms of the enemy. Telecom's World War II is underway, Cleland said. This time it's a multi-front war between the phone companies and the cable companies, between the phone companies and the technology companies working on ways to make conventional calling obsolete, and between the phone companies and the Internet. MCI and Nextel will be influential in this war, but as parts of bigger companies. AOL will be on the side of the cable industry this time because Time Warner is the nation's No. 2 cable company. The most extreme threat facing the phone companies, Cleland said, "is that technology companies can figure out how to do voice over the Internet for free, or nearly free." Millions of early adopters are already making calls over the Web using voice over Internet protocol. There are technology and voice quality problems, but if they can be conquered, the old-line phone companies will likely lose Telecom World War II. Washington lawyers and lobbyists will be mobilized in the fight for the future of electronic communications. But they are not going to be the decisive combatants they were in the fight that began 30 years ago when William G. McGowan filed the lawsuit that won MCI the right to compete in the long-distance business. Since then, competition has driven down the price of long-distance calls -- and the value of the long-distance companies. MCI was sold to WorldCom for $30 billion. After Chapter 11 reorganization, what remains of the MCI-WorldCom operation has attracted bids from Qwest Communications International Inc. and Verizon Communications Inc. that range from $6.75 billion to $8 billion. Cheaper phone calls and cheaper phone stocks are the free market at work, dollars-and-cents examples of the "creative destruction" that capitalism can unleash. Washington investors know the list of casualties all too well. PSINet Inc., once the biggest Internet network, and Teligent Inc., the company that was going to make wires obsolete by linking offices through wireless networks, both are gone. Other local telecoms are in the limbo of Chapter 11 bankruptcy reorganization. Many of those companies were taken down by the very government regulations that created their business. Cleland said misguided government policies triggered the telecom crash. Encouraged by Washington policymakers, too many firms built fiber-optic networks and too many decided they could compete against the local phone companies. As the strongest survivors of that debacle, Nextel and MCI are leading the consolidation of the industry, which is likely to lead to the sale of some of the smaller players in the region. The only really revolutionary communications company left in the Washington area is XM Satellite Radio Holdings Inc., which has yet to turn a profit, but has made an enormous amount of money for investors in the past two years. XM stock is up 44 percent over the past 12 months after gaining 877 percent in 2003. In the fall of 2002, when it looked like XM might not make it, the stock fell as low as $1.75 a share. XM stock closed Friday at $32.62 after hitting $40 a share before technology stocks pulled back this year. XM has signed up 3.2 million customers for its pay-to-listen satellite broadcasting service and expects to pass the 5 million mark by year-end. The question for investors now is not whether XM will survive, but whether its stock is overpriced. Despite such reservations, XM is rated as "buy" by 14 of the 25 analysts whose ratings are reported to Bloomberg. Just four other local telecom stocks have produced positive returns for investors over the past 12 months: First Avenue Networks Inc. of Charlottesville, up 279 percent. First Avenue acquired the fixed-wireless operations of Teligent after that company went into bankruptcy. Essex Corp. of Columbia, up 133 percent. Essex's niche as a provider of high-security communications for the Defense Department and other government agencies makes it more of a defense contractor than a communications company. NII Holdings Inc. of Reston, up 65 percent. Formerly known as Nextel International, NII offers Nextel-brand wireless service overseas, primarily in Latin America. Visual Networks Inc. of Rockville, up 2.6 percent, Visual Networks makes equipment for monitoring and managing fiber-optic networks. Copyright 2005 The Washington Post Company 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 the Washington Post Company. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2005 00:57:18 -0500 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Calling For Real Competition http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A27725-2005Feb15.html By Steven Pearlstein Normally, I take a skeptical view of corporate mergers and acquisitions, from the viewpoint of both consumers and shareholders. But in the telecom industry, deregulation and technological change have created so much overcapacity, driven prices so low and so thoroughly transformed the services being sold that consolidation is now both inevitable and desirable. As far as we can tell, the future belongs to companies that build efficient networks delivering a bundle of services -- voice, data, video, Internet access -- to households and businesses. In that digital world, the traditional distinctions between local and long-distance, voice and data, Internet and television are increasingly irrelevant. Right now, there are four types of companies competing to build such networks and deliver these services: phone, cable, ground-based wireless services (cell phone networks) and wireless service that comes from satellites. For regulators, the key question going forward is whether the public is best served by allowing the companies that have built such networks to monopolize the services that run over them. Or should they be required to allow competitors access to certain parts of their networks, at a reasonable price, to ensure a more competitive market? Over the next several years, an expensive and high-stakes lobbying and legal war will be fought over just those questions. And the first battle is likely to be the antitrust review of the SBC's proposed purchase of AT&T and Verizon's of MCI. First, some history. One of the premises of the 1996 Telecom Act was that a Baby Bell like Verizon would have to lease out, at a reasonable price, its local wires and switches to competitors -- in particular, Baby Bells from other regions and long-distance companies offering combined local and long-distance service. This competition among phone giants never really materialized. The Baby Bells effectively entered into a nonaggression pact, refusing to enter one another's territory. Meanwhile, in Washington, the Bells launched an endless series of legal attacks on the rules for pricing the network access that eventually forced even giants like AT&T and MCI out of the business, and into the arms of SBC and Verizon. Now, however, regulators have one last chance to create genuine competition among phone companies. As a condition for approving their purchases of companies they were supposed to compete against, SBC and Verizon should be required to negotiate a contract allowing each to hook into the other's local network on reasonable terms. In addition, whatever deal they come up with would have to be offered to the other two Baby Bells, Qwest and BellSouth. This process wouldn't immediately require the Baby Bells to compete on one another's turf, as they promised to do in the past and promptly forgot about. But once the Baby Bells finish locking up the traditional phone markets in their home territory, which they are well on the way to doing, they will probably have no choice but to go elsewhere to meet growth targets. These agreements would open the door to such competition. There is recent precedent for such a requirement involving another government-sanctioned monopoly, a cable company. As a condition for approving their merger, the Federal Trade Commission required Time Warner to allow its cable customers to choose an Internet service other than America Online. And one would hope that the FTC would extend a similar open-access requirement to Comcast if it wins its bid to acquire parts of bankrupt Adelphia. For the past decade, the Baby Bells have talked incessantly of the glory of competitive markets while using their power and guaranteed profit to try to make sure they had no serious competitors. Now that wireless and cable competitors have come along and broken their local phone monopolies, they are scrambling to get into everyone else's businesses. Before they are allowed to buy their way in, we ought to force them to share the local networks they built at their customers' risk with their customers' money, just as Congress intended. Steven Pearlstein can be reached at pearlsteins@washpost.com. Copyright 2005 The Washington Post Company 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: Tue, 22 Feb 2005 13:30:25 EST From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA Subject: File Sharing to Get its Day in High Court Telecom dailyLead from USTA February 22, 2005 http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=19560&l=2017006 TODAY'S HEADLINES NEWS OF THE DAY * File sharing to get its day in High Court BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH * Qwest poised for second run at MCI * Washington, D.C., area loses status as telecom hotbed * BT shifts focus to VoIP * Editorial: Mergers reflect shift in telecom market USTA SPOTLIGHT * RFID: Radio Frequency Identification -- Get Your Copy Today! EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES * Sendo first out of gates with music-playing phone REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE * Technology, competition put spotlight on USF Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others. http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=19560&l=2017006 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I hope, that in its deliberations, the Court will recall the original and still intended purpose of the Internet; the sharing of files between netizens, and not eliminate this important function. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2005 03:51:54 EST From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Withholding the Telephone Tax Some folks are not aware of it, but you _can_ withhold (refuse to pay) that federal tax which is added to your phone bill each month, and the telephone company _cannot_ disconnect your service. Let's say for example, you have personal grievances or problems with President Bush's Religious War against Islam in Iraq, or his pending (soon to start almost any day) attack against Iran for similar bogus reasons. Check with your own attorney for further advice and counsel on this, but during Vietnam for example, almost _no one_ bothered to pay the telephone tax, mainly out of protest to the war. You do need to notify the communications carrier of your intent, in the form of a registered, certified letter so that you do not get put down for a 'short payment' on their books each month with a balance still owing. Telco will respond with a letter or phone call saying they are 'obligated' under the law to collect the tax. They cannot cut off your service as long as you pay the tariffed amount for the service howeverm while withholding the tax. What they can do, if they wish, is notify the government that 'person X has declined to pay the tax'. The government can then do whatever it wishes, but during Vietnam, the government did not think it worth their time to go after the millions of Americans who were protesting the small amounts of tax withheld. Often times, in fact, telco did not find it worth their time to even bother notifying the government; neither did they pay to the government what they did not collect each month, but the total remittance each month to the government from telco was noticably less for the several years of the Vietnam War. But make sure you only withhold the item on your phone bill shown as 'federal tax', and the witrhheld amount should be set aside, such as in an escrow account, so your intentions are also honorable, and easy to see. DO NOT just withold the tax money then spend it on personal activities. Be certain you can account for it. As I noted, you may wish to consult your attorney or tax advisor on this; it worked perfectly well during Vietnam, and my feeling is we are in for several more years of this illegitimate war with President Bush in charge of things. PAT ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2005 13:28:23 EST From: Carl Moore Subject: Bill Hanhardt, Former Cop I don't remember hearing of him before. It's come to my attention that he was a Chicago cop who was charged as a jewel-theft mastermind. His case is on Court TV "Mastermind" series at 10 PM eastern time Tuesday (2/22/05) night. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yes, he was a former cop, very dirty, with his hands into everything. Chicago has a lot of those guys; cops who are more crooked than the guys they arrest. F'r instance, twice in my recent memory, Chicago cops have ripped off _drug dealers_ and hauled them away to jail/prison then took the very same drugs and sold the drugs themselves. Eventually they got caught also (because it is true no matter how smart you are and lucky, there is always someone who is smarter and luckier.) But that's not a big deal (getting caught) either, since police always have dirty judges as tools in reserve. At least a couple times, rumors have been that certain judges were known by police to be cocaine addicts, but to avoid exposure, they agreed to work with police as needed. So despite the rule which says the computer assigns each defendant to a judge based on that particular judge's case load and it is a random selection, there are some exceptions to that: if a defendant has a prior record, then as long as the judge who saw him before is still in office, that same judge will see him again, _or if the prosecutor_ [not defense counsel] asks for a manual assignment to a specific judge it gets done that way. That's why certain judges always get the high profile drug and murder cases; because police have caught them doing the same thing and hold it over their head. Chicago Tribune has explained all of that a few times, most recently in their five-part series a couple years ago called 'Prosecutorial Misconduct'. Of course, the Tribune should know about all that: their own archives of unpublished photos and stories has bailed them out a few times when some politician or judge or police officer has gotten snippy with the Tribune and threatened to file suit, etc. Tribune marches into court and says to the judge, "hey, your honor, remember that story and those pictures we never did get around to using? Do you think we should run the stories now?" Well, you know how the judge winds up ruling when the case gets heard. Such a laugh, Chicago politicians and police are. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2005 21:15:03 -0500 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Re: Cell Phone Use Coming for Airbus Fliers Joseph commented on Re: Cell Phone Use Coming for Airbus Fliers on Mon, 21 Feb 2005 08:48:51 -0800: > On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 02:48:44 -0500, Marcus Didius Falco > wrote: >>> And before anyone gets upset GSM 800 is the same thing as GSM 850. >>> For some reason unknown to me when GSM was introduced to use on >>> cellular networks it was decided to call it GSM 850 even though it >>> uses the same transmit and receive frequencies as other cellular >>> technologies such as CDMA or TDMA (IS-136.) >> The official definition, found at >> http://www.gsmworld.com/technology/glossary.shtml >> says that 850 and 900 are different: > Well, yeah! But GSM 850 and 800 are the same thing as I said in my > first post. Since there are no references to GSM 800 in the official documents (hence, it doesn't exist), I figured it was a typo for GSM 900. In any event, there is no carrier in the world claiming to provide GSM 800 service. > John Levine wrote: >> Some North American GSM phones also do 900 or 1800 for people who >> travel to Europe. My wife's Moto V220 does 1800. My old Moto >> Timeport did 1900/900/1800 until I ran it through the washing machine. > I've seen some phones referred to as "world phones" -- I assume that > is what you're describing. Yes. ------------------------------ From: Choreboy Subject: Re: Telemarketing? Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2005 23:35:24 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Dave Garland wrote: > It was a dark and stormy night when Choreboy > wrote: >> Did scammers get my aunt's date of birth? Would that be useful? > It would be useful if you were committing identity theft. Not to say > that is what is happening, but it is a bit odd. > It would be interesting to learn who that toll-free number lists to. > If you shared the number, perhaps someone more knowledgable than I > would look it up and learn more about its owner. The number was 800 852 5321. I often encounter websites that ask my date of birth without good reason. I alter it because I've heard it can be useful to criminals (even if the organization is reputable, such as a newspaper). That's why it concerns me that unidentified people asked my aunt's date of birth in peculiar circumstances. Choreboy ------------------------------ From: henry999@eircom.net (Henry) Subject: Re: A New Radio Station For Our Town Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2005 07:03:53 +0200 Organization: Elisa Internet customer TELECOM Digest Editor wrote: > I am very pleased to report we have a new _all classical music_ radio > station here in southeast Kansas. Actually, KOSU is licensed out of > Ketchum, Oklahoma (more or less across the state line) from > Coffeyville, KS but it has a _very good_ signal here in Independence. The call sign is a clear tip-off, Pat: this is the Oklahoma State University station. College and university radio and television stations, funded by a combination of tax money, grants from private-sector foundations and contributions from individuals, are often a great source of classical music and other 'artsy' programming that is not viable in the hard-scrabble (not to mention philistine) commercial media environment. Cheers, Henry [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Actually, I found out after I posted that item of one small correction. The actual call sign is KOSN not KOSU, but it is part of the KOSU (and OK State University) 'family'. It is at 107.5 FM. I found this out when I started listening more closely. Two or three times each day, they take a full minute out of their programming to rattle off _all_ the call signs and frequencies they own, something like this: "KOSN, Bartlesville and Ketchum, 107.5 FM; KOSU, Stillwater and Tulsa, 90-something, some other call sign, other towns, frequencies, etc, all services of Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK." So I guess what I hear here now is the /N/ version, not the /U/ version. In any event, it is very loud and very clear, 'stereo' light nicely illuminated, which I could only get before on 89.9 KRPS provided I had the cable line plugged in. And since Oklahoma State University and their telecommunications education program is one of my patrons here at the Digest, I guess I should say thanks a little more often to them. PAT] ------------------------------ From: John Smith Subject: Re: A Silly Question - 2-Line Phone With One Phone Number? Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2005 08:28:52 GMT Boat wrote: > I do have call waiting. Are you saying that if I have call waiting then I > have two lines, therefore if I got a 2-line phone I would be able to use > both lines at the same time? Still confused ... No, if you have call waiting and one line, you still only have one line. You can't use the second line of a two-line phone unless you have a second line to hook it to. But you can still use the two-line phone. It's just that line two will be dead. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Which gets us back around to where we were before on what to do with that second pair, whatever color it turns out to be. Your non-telco choices are a _properly wired_ VOIP arrangement, a cell phone using a cell-socket arrangement (again, if properly wired), and god forbid, even a pair brought up from your local teleco central office if that's the way you wish to go. 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 V24 #78 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Feb 22 21:12:31 2005 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j1N2CV810943; Tue, 22 Feb 2005 21:12:31 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2005 21:12:31 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200502230212.j1N2CV810943@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 V24 #79 TELECOM Digest Tue, 22 Feb 2005 21:13:00 EST Volume 24 : Issue 79 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson New Jersey on Child Porn Crusade (Lisa Minter) Flaw in Mail-List Software Leaks Passwords (Monty Solomon) ID Security Breach Affects People in Every State (Monty Solomon) ID Theft Scam Hits D.C. Area Residents (Monty Solomon) Feds Square Off With Organized Cyber Crime (Monty Solomon) Paris Hilton's Sidekick Hacked (Monty Solomon) WebTV 911 Prankster Guilty (Monty Solomon) MasterCard PayPass (Monty Solomon) Buyouts of AT&T, MCI Sign of Long Distance's Demise (Jack Decker) Re: A Telecom Capital No Longer (Jim Haynes) Re: Telemarketing? (Bob Goudreau) Re: Telemarketing? (DevilsPGD) Re: Telemarketing? (Wesrock) Re: Withholding the Telephone Tax (Dave Garland) Re: Withholding the Telephone Tax (J. Kelly) Research Labs (arvind) Re: Verizon Plans to Offer Naked DSL on 4/5 of Wirelines (Geoff Welsh) 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: New Jersey on Child Porn Crusade (Lisa Minter) Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2005 15:56:42 PST From: Lisa Minter New Jersey Arrests 39 for Internet Child Porn NEW YORK (Reuters) - Thirty-nine people have been arrested in New Jersey charged with possession of video clips obtained over the Internet of the molestation and rape of a five-year-old girl in the state of Georgia, state police said late in January. The arrests, made from Jan. 17 to Jan. 27, were made using new technology to detect child pornography on the Internet and then use an innovative file-sifting software to trace those images to the personal computers they were stored on. "We will prosecute anyone who knowingly downloads from the Internet and circulates images of children who are being sexually exploited," Attorney General Peter Harvey said in a statement. "Through technology and training we are constantly enhancing our ability to do just that." Those arrested range in age from 14 to 61 and include a high-school student, a high-school hockey coach, a lawyer and a pediatric neurosurgeon. James Bidwell, the man in the act of molesting and raping the five-year-old girl, was convicted in 2002 for sending videotapes of his crimes via the Internet to Canada and England and is now serving a 45-year prison term. Copyright 2005 Reuters Limited. 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 Limited. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2005 16:27:31 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Flaw in Mail-List Software Leaks Passwords By Robert Lemos Staff Writer, CNET News.com A previously unknown vulnerability in Mailman, a popular open-source program for managing mailing lists, has led to the theft of the password file for a well-known security discussion group. The theft, discovered this week and reported in an announcement to the Full Disclosure security mailing list on Wednesday, casts uncertainty on the security of other discussion groups that use the open-source Mailman package. By specially crafting a Web address, an attacker can obtain the password for every member of a discussion group. http://news.com.com/2100-1002-5571576.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2005 16:27:49 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: ID Security Breach May Affect People in Every State, Firm Says By HARRY R. WEBER The Associated Press ATLANTA - ChoicePoint, under fire for being duped into allowing criminals to access its massive database of personal information, said yesterday that consumers in all 50 states, the District of Columbia and three U.S. territories may have been affected by the breach of the company's credentialing process. The data warehouser also announced plans to rescreen 17,000 business customers to make sure they are legitimate. The Alpharetta, Ga.-based company said it has hired a retired Secret Service agent to help revamp its verification process. It also has paid for a one-year subscription to a credit-monitoring service for each of the 144,778 people the breach may have affected. The company said the smallest number of possible victims -- two -- was in the U.S. Virgin Islands, while the largest number -- 34,114 -- was in California. In Washington, 3,189 residents are getting warning notices, the company said. It released a state-by-state breakdown yesterday. People in Puerto Rico and Guam also may have been affected. http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/2002186357_choicepoint22.html List of states and territories affected by ChoicePoint information breach http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/2002186187_webchoicepointlist22.html [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It would be good if you do not wait for, nor rely upon ChoicePoint in this matter but that you write to the company and make your own inquiries. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2005 16:27:42 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: ID Theft Scam Hits D.C. Area Residents 4,500 Caught Up In Loss of Data Conned From Firm By Robert O'Harrow Jr. Washington Post Staff Writer One of the nation's largest commercial information services said yesterday that thousands of Washington area residents were among those whose personal and financial details were sold to fraud artists apparently behind a nationwide identity theft scheme. As many as 4,500 residents in the District, Maryland and Virginia were among up to 145,000 people whose names, addresses, Social Security numbers and, in some cases, credit files were electronically shipped by ChoicePoint Inc. of Alpharetta, Ga., to people posing as business officials in the Los Angeles area. Investigators said they think the number of victims will continue to rise as officials learn more about the scheme. At least one lawmaker on Capitol Hill has called for stiffer regulation of commercial data services. This week, others are expected to push for hearings about the information industry. To control the damage to consumers and the company, ChoicePoint executives over the weekend decided to announce changes in how they assess their clients and maintain security. Starting today ChoicePoint will offer victims free credit reports and credit-monitoring services for the next year. ChoicePoint officials said they expect to finish sending out notices by the end of the week. Company officials also said they will curb access to some sensitive information for as many as 17,000 small-business clients, including some lawyers, private investigators and insurance companies, while verifying their legitimacy. Conducting the background checks could take as long as two months, the officials said. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A40379-2005Feb20.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2005 16:27:51 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Feds Square Off With Organized Cyber Crime By Kevin Poulsen, SecurityFocus Feb 17 2005 8:07PM SAN FRANCISCO--Computer intruders are learning to play well with others, and that's bad news for the Internet, according to a panel of law enforcement officials and legal experts speaking at the RSA Conference here Thursday. Christopher Painter, deputy director of the Justice Department's computer crime section, spoke almost nostalgically of the days when hackers acted "primarily out of intellectual curiosity." Today, he says, cyber outlaws and serious fraud artists are increasingly working in concert, or are one and the same. "What we've seen recently is a coming together of these two groups," said Painter. Ronald Plesco, counsel to the National Cyber-Forensics and Training Alliance, a computer forensics organization established by the FBI and private industry, agreed, and pointed to the trend in recent years of spammers building networks of compromised computers to launder their fraudulent e-mail offerings. Tim Rosenberg, a research professor at the George Washington University, warned of "multinational groups of hackers backed by organized crime" and showing the sophistication of prohibition-era mobsters. http://www.securityfocus.com/news/10525 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2005 16:27:58 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Paris Hilton's Sidekick Hacked By Lucy Sherriff Paris Hilton's address book, famously kept on a T-Mobile Sidekick, has been popping up all over the internet after someone managed to figure out her password. The Drudge Report says that it has confirmed the authenticity of many of the numbers, presumably a polite way of saying they've been crank calling Anna Kournikova and Lindsay Lohan all weekend. The FBI has reportedly opened an investigation. Files exposed to the world also include Paris' travel habits, airline and hotel preferences, along with her private notes. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/02/21/paris_hacked/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2005 16:28:09 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: WebTV 911 Prankster Guilty By Kevin Poulsen, SecurityFocus Feb 17 2005 3:22PM A Louisiana man pleaded guilty this week to two federal felonies for tricking a handful of MSN TV users into running a malicious e-mail attachment that reprogrammed their set-top boxes to dial 9-1-1 emergency response. In a plea agreement with prosecutors, David Jeansonne, 44, admitted to committing a computer attack that created a threat to public health or safety, and to damaging a protected computer and causing a least $5,000 in harm. According to court records, Jeansonne was targeting 18 specific MSN TV users in an online squabble when he crafted the script in July 2002, and sent it out disguised as a tool to change the colors on MSN TV's user interface. Though the code didn't mass-mail itself to others, some of the recipients were sufficiently fooled that they forwarded it to friends, for a total of 21 victims. http://www.securityfocus.com/news/10523 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2005 15:09:37 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: MasterCard PayPass MasterCard, MBNA, Seattle Seahawks and Baltimore Ravens Deploy MasterCard PayPass PURCHASE, N.Y.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Feb. 22, 2005-- MBNA Seahawks and MBNA Ravens Extra Points Cards to be PayPass-enabled, Offering Fans Speed, Convenience and Rewards MasterCard International today announced it is working with MBNA, the Seattle Seahawks and Baltimore Ravens Football Clubs to incorporate MasterCard(R) PayPass(TM) contactless payment technology into the MBNA Seahawks and MBNA Ravens Extra Points credit card programs. Both Qwest Field and M&T Bank Stadium will accept MasterCard PayPass cards at the point-of-sale, beginning with the 2005 football season. With MasterCard PayPass, Seahawks and Ravens fans won't miss any of the action standing in lines or fumbling for cash. Seahawks and Ravens fans will be able to simply tap their new MBNA Seahawks or MBNA Ravens Extra Points credit card on specially equipped merchant terminals throughout the stadiums when purchasing refreshments or souvenirs. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=47139944 ------------------------------ From: Jack Decker Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2005 14:10:00 -0500 Subject: Buyouts of AT&T, MCI Sign of Long Distance's Demise Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com http://www.usatoday.com/tech/techinvestor/industry/2005-02-19-ld-demise_x.htm By Bruce Meyerson, Associated Press NEW YORK The acquisitions of AT&T and MCI by larger rivals are the most dramatic evidence of long distance calling's steady decline as a business distinct from "local" phone service. But other signs are aplenty. This past week, in addition to the $6.7 billion takeover of MCI by Verizon Communications, came news of a large budget hotel chain, Microtel Inn & Suites, whose list of amenities has been expanded to include free unlimited long distance and wireless Internet access. There's little to lose with the new marketing pitch: The calls don't cost the company very much. And with so many travelers toting around cell phones with national calling plans, long-distance calls don't generate that much extra revenue any more, even at the inflated rates hotels often charge. The past week also brought an announcement from a small company named Northland Cable Television, which introduced unlimited local and long distance for a flat $38 a month in rural areas of the Carolinas served mostly by BellSouth as well as Verizon. Because such plans have become so prevalent on both wired and wireless phones, the concept of local and long distance as different types of calls may be fading fast among consumers and businesses. Full story at: http://www.usatoday.com/tech/techinvestor/industry/2005-02-19-ld-demise_x.htm How to Distribute VoIP Throughout a Home: http://michigantelephone.mi.org/distribute.html If you live in Michigan, subscribe to the MI-Telecom group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MI-Telecom/ ------------------------------ Subject: Re: A Telecom Capital No Longer Reply-To: jhaynes@alumni.uark.edu Organization: University of Arkansas Alumni From: haynes@alumni.uark.edu (Jim Haynes) Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2005 20:50:35 GMT In article , Marcus Didius Falco wrote: > http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A40700-2005Feb20.html > By Jerry Knight > ... > since then, competition has driven down the price of long-distance > calls -- > and the value of the long-distance companies. MCI was > sold to WorldCom for ... > Cheaper phone calls and cheaper phone stocks are the free market at work, > dollars-and-cents examples of the "creative destruction" that capitalism > can unleash. The above is typical of the mantras chanted by the business types. They ignore the role of technology in the picture. If fiber optics and microelectronics had not appeared on the scene we would still have expensive long-distance phone service, regardless of competition or the lack of it. Deregulation is still spoken of as if it were a panacea. People tend to forget that the reason we got regulation was to curb the abuses that were taking place in its absence. jhhaynes at earthlink dot net ------------------------------ From: BobGoudreau@Withheld on request Subject: Re: Telemarketing? Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2005 17:14:00 -0500 [As always, please obscure my email address in the message header and in the Digest ToC] Choreboy wrote: > I often encounter websites that ask my date of birth without good > reason=2E I alter it because I've heard it can be useful to criminals > (even if the organization is reputable, such as a newspaper). That's > why it concerns me that unidentified people asked my aunt's date of > birth in peculiar circumstances. If it truly was Marlboro calling (and not someone lying about their company affiliation), then they really would have a good reason for asking for a potential customer's birthdate. Cigarette companies are legally prohibi ted from marketing to minors, even when it comes to giveaways of non-tobacco items Verifying that a respondent to a promotion is of legal age befor e proceeding further is not unreasonable. Bob Goudreau Cary, NC ------------------------------ From: DevilsPGD Subject: Re: Telemarketing? Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2005 15:36:06 -0700 Organization: Disorganized In message Choreboy wrote: > Dave Garland wrote: >> It was a dark and stormy night when Choreboy >> wrote: >>> Did scammers get my aunt's date of birth? Would that be useful? >> It would be useful if you were committing identity theft. Not to say >> that is what is happening, but it is a bit odd. >> It would be interesting to learn who that toll-free number lists to. >> If you shared the number, perhaps someone more knowledgable than I >> would look it up and learn more about its owner. > The number was 800 852 5321. > I often encounter websites that ask my date of birth without good > reason. I alter it because I've heard it can be useful to criminals > (even if the organization is reputable, such as a newspaper). That's > why it concerns me that unidentified people asked my aunt's date of > birth in peculiar circumstances. 1) In the US, Federal law requires them to determine age to determine whether collection information is legal, as well as "adult" content. Admittedly a birthday isn't "required" but it's easier. 2) It's often seen as a harmless piece of information which can be used to partially verify a user down the road. Like all things it has been way over-used so it's less useful now. 3) Marketing: Knowing someone's age is very useful when determining marketing demographics. ------------------------------ From: Wesrock@aol.com Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2005 19:33:52 EST Subject: Re: Telemarketing? In a message dated Mon, 21 Feb 2005 23:35:24 -0500 Choreboy < choreboyREMOVE@localnet.com> writes: > The number was 800 852 5321. > I often encounter websites that ask my date of birth without good > reason. I alter it because I've heard it can be useful to criminals > (even if the organization is reputable, such as a newspaper). That's > why it concerns me that unidentified people asked my aunt's date of > birth in peculiar circumstances. > Choreboy I believe it was mentioned earlier that they answered "Marlboro." Presuming it is honestly associated with the makers of Marlboro cigarettes, depending on their purpose they may ask for the date of birth to identify whether the person is old enough to legally buy cigarettes. Wes Leatherock wesrock@aol.com wleathus@yahoo.com ------------------------------ From: Dave Garland Subject: Re: Withholding the Telephone Tax Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2005 15:00:59 -0600 Organization: Wizard Information It was a dark and stormy night when TELECOM Digest Editor wrote: > The government can then do whatever it > wishes, but during Vietnam, the government did not think it worth > their time to go after the millions of Americans who were protesting > the small amounts of tax withheld. I seem to remember receiving a call from them asking where my bank accounts were, and refusing to tell them, and eventually they deducted it from a tax refund I had coming. Of course, in today's freedom, they know where every cent of yours is already, thanks to ChoicePoint and the "Patriot" Act. It was within their power to do more dramatic things, like seize property and auction it off for the $14.93 you owed. But I don't recall them doing that for phone tax (they did it to some people who refused to pay income tax). But with today's regime, they might do that just because they thought it was fun, or because they thought God told them to do it. Maybe it's just my age, or maybe times have changed for the worse, but I find myself feeling nostalgic about a thug like Nixon, and that's scary. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: And maybe my age also; and I am convinced things _have_ changed considerably for the worst, 'Patriot Act' and credit bureau file break-ins not withstanding. It may be also that in my old age, and diseased brain, I have become much more radicalized than I ever use to be, back in the days when I had the full use of my whole body and brain. They can't hurt me any longer, so I just speak the truth as I know it. I mean, what would happen to me now; would they execute me? PAT] ------------------------------ From: J Kelly Subject: Re: Withholding the Telephone Tax Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2005 19:21:06 -0600 Organization: http://newsguy.com On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 03:51:54 EST, TELECOM Digest Editor wrote: > Some folks are not aware of it, but you _can_ withhold (refuse to pay) > that federal tax which is added to your phone bill each month, and the > telephone company _cannot_ disconnect your service. Let's say for > example, you have personal grievances or problems with President > Bush's Religious War against Islam in Iraq, or his pending (soon to > start almost any day) attack against Iran for similar bogus reasons. I think you have a 'hidden' agenda with this post, but it isn't all that well hidden. Your only point was that you have a problem with President Bush, am I right? I thought you were done preaching your political views in this group and we were getting back to the TELECOM Digest. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Oh, gosh ... you caught me in the act! I don't hide very well, do I? Actually I was discussing the very odious telephone tax and used my own feelings about the very odious and (you fill in this blank) person who occupies the White House at the present time as a good reason for not paying the tax. I suppose I could have divorced the two issues, but that would have been quite illogical wouldn't it? PAT] ------------------------------ From: Arvind Subject: Research Labs Date: 22 Feb 2005 13:30:35 -0800 Hi, I am looking for contacts in the following research labs Texas Instruments wireless research Cisco wireless research Nortel networks research center Nokia research center I would really appreciate it if you could provide me with contacts if you know anyone in these R&D labs. Thanks, Arvind ------------------------------ From: Geoffrey Welsh Subject: Re: Verizon Plans to Offer "Naked DSL" on 4/5 of its Wirelines Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2005 17:36:51 -0500 Michael D. Sullivan wrote: > There is at least one technology issue, and maybe more. Verizon's > many millions of ADSL/POTS lines are identified by telephone number. > The POTS telephone number is, in effect, the key, the unique > identifier, used in the databases of both Verizon's LEC and Verizon > Online, which markets DSL to the public. Others have noted that circuit numbers other than conventional telephone numbers have been used on dry pairs but, even if the DSL department's systems were built assuming that every DSL line had a conventional telephone number, would it kill the numbering plan to assign a number even if it no service is provided? I keep hearing that ILECs are losing landline business to competitors and alternative services, so in theory they have some unassigned numbers in their pools; perhaps they could take a just-returned number and assign it to a naked DSL line rather than adding it to the pool of numbers to be reused after a time? Obviously, local number portability means that fleeing* customers don't always return their phone number, but my point is that it may not be necessary to modify any existing systems. Taking your idea a bit further, it's very convenient to verify DSL availability against an existing database using your current phone number, and that would not be possible if you don't have a dialtone line whose phone number you know. But this already happens when somone moves and wants to order dialtone and DSL but doesn't know the previous occupant's phone number, so some mechanism must exist for looking up the loop without a current number. * Ohmigod, it's an ILEC! Run for your life!!! Geoffrey Welsh Ambidextrous? No, I said I'm ambinonscattous - I don't give a crap either way! Jr. wrote: > In the case of DSL, someone has to cover the costs of maintaining the > wire and doing the billing. OK, so how much of a typical residential line's monthly cost goes to maintenance, billing, etc.? Here in Ontario, Rogers Cablesystems will gladly offer cable internet to people who don't subscribe to their cable TV service for an additional $CDN 10 (they'll sell me basic cable -- all that overhead plus a few TV channels -- for $CDN 24.40/month.) Unfortunately, I can't currently get cable internet from any ISP other than Rogers, the cable company (and I'd rather not go with them for internet right now); I can get DSL from a number of ISPs but only if I have telephone service from the ILEC, Bell Canada; I can get telephone service from a CLEC, but then I couldn't get DSL from my choice of ISP with it (there's a rumor that you can get third party dialtone and DSL from the ILEC, which means you can get third-party DSL or third party dialtone but not both on the same line -- I'm sure that Bell Canada has an explanation of why that is, too.) I'd *love* to switch to a CLEC for dialtone, whether in general protest of our Canadian Ma Bell or in principle because the same company that can give me a phone line and unlimited free calling to to a significant fraction of Canada's population for $20 (plus fees such as 911 access and taxes) but can't let me see the number of the person who's calling me for less than $8, a 40% premium! Failing that, I might consider paying Bell Canada $10 so I can get DSL from a third-party ISP and maybe add a VOIP service or just use my cellphone as my main number (which I pretty much do already.) > Now, the DSL providers want to sell a naked product. Well, all those > laws/systems/regulations have to change. In fact, in many cases the > telco doesn't even know what it costs on an individual basis for a > naked line -- they've never had to compute it that way before or track > costs that way before. Far easier to add it all up and divide by the > number of subscriber lines, eh? I'm not saying that there wouldn't be work involved, but surely it could be done -- and they don't hesitate to find cost justifications every time they want to raise our rates. Or we could encourage them (by not arguing too much) to pick a nominal amount (say, $10, half the rate for dialtone service) and be done with it. > While there is no technological reason to prevent naked DSL from being > sold, I've heard -- but not seen for myself -- that an ILEC has claimed that the loop will corrode more quickly if it doesn't have battery power (or was that current flow, as in when the line is in use)! > While the telcos may not like sharing their old > copper pairs, they've pretty much resigned themselves to it, since > they were installed under regulated rate of return rules. That is the point entirely: I don't think (most of them) have accepted it at all, and I see competitors' access to the 'last mile' infrastructure installed during the monopoly days as being absolutely critical to competition ... if that's what we really want. I suspect, however, that the FCC isn't committed to widespread local competition and the CRTC either isn't committed or it's efforts have been essentially ineffectual. > What's a bit more unfortunate is that the telcos have successfully > managed to exempt themselves from sharing any new fiber that gets > buried. Since the capacity of fiber exceeds that of a copper pair in a > bundle with a bunch of other copper pairs by a factor of a million to > 1 or more, the long term viability of naked DSL is questionable at > best. Unfortunate, yes absolutely. However, I can see the point of view that facilities installed after competition should not be subject to sharing; the only question is whether the fiber being buried now is being installed in a truly competetive environment. Geoffrey Welsh Ambidextrous? No, I said I'm ambinonscattous - I don't give a crap either way! [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I've heard that story about 'keep battery on the line to prevent corrosion' before but do not know how true it is. I do know that the pair which served my mother's line (when she lived here with me) **still has battery on it** but no dial tone now almost two years after she moved to the old people's home over on Penn Street, taking her phone number with her. I was outside at the demarc the other day, checking out the wiring on my PBXtra and noted the pair that had been her phone years ago still had battery, so I tied it off and taped it up to keep an eager phone man away from 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 V24 #79 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Feb 23 14:51:58 2005 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j1NJpvX18715; Wed, 23 Feb 2005 14:51:58 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2005 14:51:58 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200502231951.j1NJpvX18715@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 V24 #80 TELECOM Digest Wed, 23 Feb 2005 14:52:00 EST Volume 24 : Issue 80 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson UN Panel Aims to End Internet Tug of War by July (Lisa Minter) Singapore Unveils Plan to Battle 'Cyber Terror' (Lisa Minter) Newspaper Chains Pay Up for Web Companies (Lisa Minter) Virus Arrives in E-mail Allegedly Sent by FBI (Lisa Minter) It's Here, the User Owned Phone System (Jack Decker) Re: Cell Phone Use Coming for Airbus Fliers (Joseph) U.S. Appeals Court Debates Anti-Piracy TV (Marcus Didius Falco) Re: Calling For Real Competition (Thomas A. Horsley) Re: Telemarketing? (Choreboy) Last Laugh! Re: Withholding the Telephone Tax (Michael Chance) 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: 23 Feb 2005 07:11:09 -0800 From: Lisa Minter Subject: UN Panel Aims to End Internet Tug of War by July GENEVA (Reuters) - A U.N.-sponsored panel aims to settle a long-running tug of war for control of the Internet by July and propose solutions to problems such as cyber crime and email spam, panel leaders announced. The panel, set up in December 2003, will lay groundwork for a final decision to be taken in Tunis in November at a U.N.-sponsored World Summit on the Information Society, where global control of the world wide web may be decided. Right now, the most recognizable Internet governance body is a California-based non-profit company, the International Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN). But developing countries want an international body, such as the U.N.'s International Telecommunication Union (ITU), to have control over governance -- from distributing Web site domains to fighting spam. "There is an issue that is out there and that needs to be resolved," said Nitin Desai, chairman of working group and special adviser to U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan. Incorporated in 1998, ICANN oversees management of the Internet's crucial addressing system which matches numerical addresses to familiar Web site addresses. While its oversight has been confined to technical matters, critics say that it is subject to U.S. political influence. The ITU, a 138-year-old trade body that among other things established country code rules for international telephone calls, is seen by developing countries as being better able to address their needs. All countries want to counter spam -- unsolicited commercial messages that can flood email accounts by the hundreds and burden the web with unwanted traffic. 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 Limited. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ Date: 23 Feb 2005 07:13:54 -0800 From: Lisa Minter Subject: Singapore Unveils Plan to Battle 'Cyber Terror' Describing the infrastructure behind the Internet as a "nerve system" in Singapore, Deputy Prime Minister Tony Tan said a new National Cyber-Threat Monitoring Center would maintain round-the-clock detection and analysis of computer virus threats. "We cannot afford to treat the threats from cyber terrorists, cyber criminals and irresponsible hackers lightly," Tan said in a speech while unveiling an information-technology security "master plan" in the tech-savvy city-state. "Infocomm security is as important in protecting Singapore as is physical security at our borders," added Tan, who is also Coordinating Minister for Security and Defense. Singapore has one of the world's highest Internet penetration rates, with 50-60 percent of its 4.2 million people living in homes wired to the Internet. The affluent, predominantly ethnic Chinese island has also steadily tightened security since the September 2001 attacks on the United States, from patrols of heavily armed police in busy shopping districts to tighter security at border points. In 2003, Singapore passed strict legislation to allow monitoring of all computer activity and for police to take pre-emptive action to protect state computers from cyber attack. Tan said the money would also be used to help businesses tighten security for online financial transactions while guiding them to work with the government in maintaining cyber security. The Cyber-Threat Monitoring Center will link up with companies that provide anti-virus systems and governments running similar centers, including the United States and Australia. It is expected to be fully operational by the second half of 2006. 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 Limited. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ Date: 23 Feb 2005 07:17:55 -0800 From: Lisa Minter Subject: Newspaper Chains Pay Up for Web Companies By Martha Graybow NEW YORK (Reuters) - Newspaper publishers, often seen as stodgy and slow-growing, will pay whatever it takes to grab a bigger piece of the fast-growing online advertising market -- if two recent deals are any indication. The New York Times Co.'s $463 million purchase of financial Web site MarketWatch Inc. have raised eyebrows because the deals are much more richly valued than traditional newspaper acquisitions. But analysts say the prices may be what newspaper companies must pay if they want to bulk up their Internet operations. Because few Internet content companies are for sale, they say, publishers are jumping on what they can find. "Internet valuations are back in a big way," said Morgan Stanley analyst Douglas Arthur. "There are not that many properties out there that have survived through the bubble still intact, with a reasonable business model and good share of traffic on the Web, and apparently, they are going to go for a big price." Analysts say The New York Times, which is buying About.com from magazine publisher Primedia Inc., is paying a hefty price for the consumer-focused Web site by virtually any measure. Primedia is getting 30 times About.com's 2004 earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization, a key industry measure known as EBITDA. The New York Times said that multiple falls to 23 based on 2005 projections of financial results. In contrast, newspaper chain Lee Enterprises Inc. recently agreed to pay about 13.5 times EBITDA in its $1.4 billion buyout of Pulitzer Inc. one of the biggest newspaper deals in recent years. But the Internet also is growing much more quickly than newspapers, which have been mired in an ad slump over the last several years and are struggling with declines in readership. The Internet is the fastest-growing advertising outlet, even though the dollars are minuscule compared with other big media like television and newspapers. In other recent deals, The Washington Post Co. recently bought Web magazine Slate from Microsoft Corp. to get more online readers and ads. The company did not disclose the purchase price, which some have estimated at less than $20 million. More deals are expected. Possible targets include financial news site TheStreet.com which recently hired bankers to consider options that include a sale. Ryan Jacob, portfolio manager of the $70 million Jacob Internet Fund, said other attractive companies that could be eyed as acquisitions include CNET Networks Inc. which operates a technology news site, and women-oriented iVillage Inc. CNET and iVillage appeal to advertisers because they target very specific audiences, said Jacob, whose fund owns small stakes in both. Analysts say that while premium Internet companies may be commanding high prices, newspaper chains also must prove to investors that these deals pay off. The About.com agreement is "a major 'show me story"' for The New York Times, Credit Suisse First Boston analyst William Drewry said in a research report to clients. Debt rating service Standard & Poor's on Friday changed its outlook on The New York Times to negative from stable, citing the About.com deal. A negative outlook indicates there is a greater chance of a rating downgrade over the next two years, which could raise borrowing costs. New York Times stock closed down $1.05 at $37.20, while Primedia shares gained 15 cents to $4.20, both on the New York Stock Exchange. NOTE: Read NY Times, National Public Radio News, Christian Science Monitor and other publications on line here each day, with no login or registration requirements. Check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra/nytimes.html . 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 Limited. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2005 08:59:28 PST From: Lisa Minter Subject: Virus Arrives in E-mail Allegedly Sent by FBI Virus arrives in e-mail allegedly sent by FBI By Matt Hines E-mail warns recipients that the government has monitored their Internet use and that they have "accessed illegal Web sites." http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1009_22-5587012.html?tag=sas.email Read all technology news from this week: http://www.news.com/thisweeksheadlines/ Copyright 2004 CNET Networks, Inc. All rights reserved. CNET Networks, Inc. 235 Second Street San Francisco, CA 94105 U.S.A. ------------------------------ From: Jack Decker Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2005 12:12:56 -0500 Subject: It's Here, the User Owned Phone System This is a blog entry that will probably only be of interest to a few of you, but for what it's worth, here it is: http://www.toyz.org/mrblog/archives/00000186.html It's here, the user owned phone system The rebels are at it again. This time they've built a free, open-source VoIP platform for embedded devices. It's a VoIP PBX in box, a cheap affordable box. The box, in fact, is a common Linksys router. It's called SIPatH (hey nobody said geeks know how to name products). [Link: http://sipath.sourceforge.net/ ] So take a standard Linksys router and toss this free code on it, and you have yourself your own SIP proxy server. No more NAT problem (the router has a real IP address and and can properly map to all SIP phones on the NAT LAN). It's open (not locked to a provider). This allows one to simultaneously use whatever services and PSTN termination provider one likes, in any mix and match fashion you like. Use a Brazilian telephony carier from your home in France. There is no such thing as local anymore. In a related note, some other bright folks have squeezed (a limited version of) Asterisk onto the the Linksys WRT-G router: Asterisk on OpenWRT. [Link: http://lestblood.imagodirt.net/archives/83-Asterisk-on-OpenWRT.html#extended ] These hacks may be still too geeky for a lot of people, but watch this space. It fortells a future. Look out telco copycats. Someone will make this a plug and play consumer product, and it's probably not far away. Do you see yet where this is going? 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: Joseph Subject: Re: Cell Phone Use Coming for Airbus Fliers Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2005 06:42:40 -0800 Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 21:15:03 -0500, Marcus Didius Falco wrote: > Since there are no references to GSM 800 in the official documents > (hence, it doesn't exist), I figured it was a typo for GSM 900. > In any event, there is no carrier in the world claiming to provide GSM > 800 service. If you read my original article you'd see that I addressed this that when they introduced GSM on cellular frequencies they decided for whatever reason to call it GSM 850. The truth is that it uses the same cellular frequencies used by analog AMPS, TDMA (IS-136) and CDMA. Those claim to be on 800 Mhz when the truth is that no cellular or PCS standard is exactly 800 or 1900 Mhz. They use one frequency to transmit and one to receive. Those frequencies are *around* 800 or 1900 Mhz. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2005 00:33:53 -0500 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: U.S. Appeals Court Debates Anti-Piracy TV This has the potential to be a very important case. If the FCC loses on this one, it will probably mean that hardware copy protection on computers, DVD players, and other devices is probably dead -- unless the entertainment industry can get its patsies in congress to act. http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/techpolicy/2005-02-22-tv-piracy_x.htm?POE= =TECISVA U.S. appeals court debates anti-piracy TV technology WASHINGTON (AP) A U.S. appeals panel on Tuesday challenged new federal rules requiring certain video devices to have technology to prevent copying digital television programs and distributing them over the Internet. U.S. Circuit Judge Harry Edwards told the Federal Communications Commission it "crossed the line" requiring the new anti-piracy technology in next-generation television devices. But another appeals judge on the panel questioned whether consumers can challenge the FCC's rules in the courtroom. The technology, know as the broadcast flag, will be required after July 1 for televisions equipped to receive new digital signals, many personal computers and VCR-type recording devices. It would permit entertainment companies to designate, or flag, programs to prevent viewers from copying shows or distributing them over the Internet. Edwards, the former chief judge of the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, questioned the FCC's authority to impose regulations affecting television broadcasts after such programs are beamed into households. The FCC's lawyer, Jacob Lewis, acknowledged the agency never had exercised such ancillary power but maintained it was permitted by Congress since lawmakers didn't explicitly outlaw it. "Ancillary does not mean you get to rule the world," Edwards said. He said the FCC "crossed the line" beyond its authority approved by Congress. "You've gone too far," he said. "Are washing machines next?" Another circuit judge, David Sentelle, agreed. Sentelle acknowledged entertainment companies could be reluctant to broadcast high-quality movies or TV shows that can't be protected against copyright violators but said that wasn't the FCC's problem. "It's going to have less content if it's not protected, but Congress didn't direct that you have to maximize content," Sentelle said. "You can't regulate washing machines. You can't rule the world." Consumers groups, including library associations, have contested the FCC requirements, asserting that the rules will drive up prices of digital television devices and prevent consumers from recording programs in ways permitted under copyright laws. The lawyer for the consumers groups, Pantelis Michalopoulos, argued that the broadcast flag could preclude libraries from copying television programs for educational or teaching purposes. But Sentelle questioned whether the consumer and library groups can lawfully challenge the FCC decision, since the rules in question affect television viewers broadly. Appeals court procedures require groups to be able to show a particular injury before judges will consider a case; the FCC did not argue this point. If the appeals panel decides that the consumers groups can't contest the FCC requirements, it would dismiss the case regardless of any concerns about the anti-piracy technology. A decision by the court could happen within months. Copyright 2005 The Associated Press. Find this article at: http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/techpolicy/2005-02-22-tv-piracy_x.htm?POE= =TECISVA 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 ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Calling For Real Competition From: tom.horsley@att.net (Thomas A. Horsley) Organization: AT&T Worldnet Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2005 03:07:37 GMT > As a condition for approving their purchases of companies they were > supposed to compete against, SBC and Verizon should be required to > negotiate a contract allowing each to hook into the other's local > network on reasonable terms. Nope. Way to whimpy a requirement. There should be companies that provide bandwidth and companies that provide services. The bandwidth providers should sell to anyone and never under any circumstances offer any content, and vice-versa. That would produce competition (and would have in the previous round of telecom reform as well :-). Any content creep into bandwidth provider territory is just asking for legal shenanagans that conform to the letter of the law but piss all over the spirit. >>==>> The *Best* political site >>==+ email: Tom.Horsley@worldnet.att.net icbm: Delray Beach, FL | Free Software and Politics <<==+ ------------------------------ From: Choreboy Subject: Re: Telemarketing? Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2005 23:12:12 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Wesrock@aol.com wrote: > In a message dated Mon, 21 Feb 2005 23:35:24 -0500 Choreboy < > choreboyREMOVE@localnet.com> writes: >> The number was 800 852 5321. >> I often encounter websites that ask my date of birth without good >> reason. I alter it because I've heard it can be useful to criminals >> (even if the organization is reputable, such as a newspaper). That's >> why it concerns me that unidentified people asked my aunt's date of >> birth in peculiar circumstances. >> Choreboy > I believe it was mentioned earlier that they answered "Marlboro." > Presuming it is honestly associated with the makers of Marlboro > cigarettes, depending on their purpose they may ask for the date of > birth to identify whether the person is old enough to legally buy > cigarettes. > Wes Leatherock > wesrock@aol.com > wleathus@yahoo.com Is it possible for a consumer to order cigarettes from the manufacturer by telephone? Did they call my aunt to make sure the order hadn't been placed by a minor using her credit card? If a customer placed an order and they phoned to check, they could lose the sale and the customer if she didn't return the call. I find it remarkable that the caller didn't name her company so the customer would be more likely to call back. Hundreds of companies call themselves "Marlboro", but I don't think the cigarette manufacturer is one. Wouldn't they answer the phone "Philip Morris"? Legitimate orders are oftem placed with somebody else's credit card. So it was immaterial whether my aunt smoked. The only way to check the order was the tell her had been ordered. She might have said her adult daughter smoked that brand and had permission to use the card. Instead of telling her what it was about, they claimed to be looking for somebody else with her name (and presumably her phone number). If the toll-free number she called were a consumer line for Philip Morris, I would have expected it to be mentioned somewhere on the web. I haven't found it. DevilsPGD wrote: > In message Choreboy > wrote: >> Dave Garland wrote: >>> It was a dark and stormy night when Choreboy >>> wrote: >>>> Did scammers get my aunt's date of birth? Would that be useful? >>> It would be useful if you were committing identity theft. Not to say >>> that is what is happening, but it is a bit odd. >>> It would be interesting to learn who that toll-free number lists to. >>> If you shared the number, perhaps someone more knowledgable than I >>> would look it up and learn more about its owner. >> The number was 800 852 5321. >> I often encounter websites that ask my date of birth without good >> reason. I alter it because I've heard it can be useful to criminals >> (even if the organization is reputable, such as a newspaper). That's >> why it concerns me that unidentified people asked my aunt's date of >> birth in peculiar circumstances. > 1) In the US, Federal law requires them to determine age to determine > whether collection information is legal, as well as "adult" content. > Admittedly a birthday isn't "required" but it's easier. I don't remember seeing a warning for kids not to fill in forms on a web page. It seems a strange approach to demand personal information in order to determine if demanding it was legal. If the kid exaggerates his age or makes a typo on his DOB, the illegal information stays on file. > 2) It's often seen as a harmless piece of information which can be used > to partially verify a user down the road. Like all things it has been > way over-used so it's less useful now. I've often forgotten passwords and never been asked my DOB for verification. Apparently they require it for some other reason. These are sites apparently without age restrictions. > 3) Marketing: Knowing someone's age is very useful when determining > marketing demographics. You don't need to know what day people were born to classify them by age. Some newspapers will let you download an archived item for $3. For others, the price is to provide personal information, starting with name and date of birth. Together they form a unique identifier for most Americans. If they want this information in leiu of dollars, it must be of value. How does it profit a newspaper to know the DOB of somebody a thousand miles away who once read an old article? A big web company had files of customer information collected under an assurance of privacy. Another corporation bought them. A judge ruled that this corporation had the right to sell the personal information on file. There's a market for the personal information websites collect, and the result might not be harmless. Choreboy ------------------------------ From: Michael Chance Subject: Last Laugh! was Re: Withholding the Telephone Tax Organization: SBC http://yahoo.sbc.com Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2005 10:24:57 GMT In article , ptownson@telecom- digest.org says: > Some folks are not aware of it, but you _can_ withhold (refuse to pay) > that federal tax which is added to your phone bill each month, and the > telephone company _cannot_ disconnect your service. Let's say for > example, you have personal grievances or problems with President > Bush's Religious War against Islam in Iraq, or his pending (soon to > start almost any day) attack against Iran for similar bogus reasons. But, Pat, I thought that the federal excise tax on telephone service was being used for it's original purpose -- to pay for expenses related to the Spanish-American War. After all, Puerto Rico is kind of high maintenance. Michael Chance [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, but the Spanish-American War also included Cuba, did it not? And Guantanomo is a very high maintainence cost for the government these days. I mean, consider all the costs to the government as it fights with that 'run away, vast liberal conspiracy known as the Supreme Court which is always telling us that the prisoners being tortured there have certain legal rights also, human rights and all that rot. And when our brave and courageous president fights the court for the right to continue practicing -- err, oops, I mean 'authorizing' -- he would not get his own hands dirty -- the degrading practices employed on the prisoners there daily, including but by no means limited to throwing the Koran in the buckets used as toilets by prisoners; practicing humiliation and sexual sadism on the inmates, making large numbers of them stay totally naked for days at a time, etc, well that costs a lot of money. It always costs a lot of money when 'good Christians' like our president tries to protect us from 'terrorism'. Ooops, did I label this one 'Last Laugh' by accident? Thank God on his European trip now in progress, *most* but not all of the people over there have not fallen for his latest pleas for cooperation. Have you read the 115-page 300 plus-paragraph report of the British guys who were held incommunicado in Guantanamo for two years? See if you can get through it without losing your breakfast or dinner: http://www.ccr-ny.org/v2/reports/docs/Gitmo-compositestatementFINAL23july04.pdf . This is one, or maybe the first, *non USA government produced* reports on the truth about what prisoners of war there are going through. Three independent witnesses, prisoners there with a report so detailed and so comprehensive, they simply could not have just made it up to 'make trouble for Bush' as some fundamentalist Christians I know have claimed. No siree, running an operation like Guantanamo costs our country a lot of money, so be sure to pay your Spanish American War luxury tax on your phones. 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 V24 #80 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Feb 24 00:40:23 2005 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j1O5eNf22975; Thu, 24 Feb 2005 00:40:23 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2005 00:40:23 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200502240540.j1O5eNf22975@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 V24 #81 TELECOM Digest Thu, 24 Feb 2005 00:39:00 EST Volume 24 : Issue 81 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Buyouts of AT&T, MCI Sign of Long Distance Demise (Marcus Didius Falco) Lawsuit Alleges Foul Play in H-P Printer (Marcus Didius Falco) Microsoft, Alcatel Forge IPTV Alliance (Telecom dailyLead from USTA) DrayTek Will Release All VoIP/DSL/VPN Router in CeBIT-2005 (Chris Tsai) FCC: AT&T's LD Cards Quack Like LD, Owe USF, etc. (Danny Burstein) Re: UN Panel Aims to End Internet Tug of War by July (LB@notmine.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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2005 00:21:02 -0500 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Buyouts of AT&T, MCI Sign of Long Distance's Demise http://www.usatoday.com/tech/techinvestor/industry/2005-02-19-ld-demise_x.htm By Bruce Meyerson, Associated Press NEW YORK The acquisitions of AT&T and MCI by larger rivals are the most dramatic evidence of long distance calling's steady decline as a business distinct from "local" phone service. But other signs are aplenty. This past week, in addition to the $6.7 billion takeover of MCI by Verizon Communications, came news of a large budget hotel chain, Microtel Inn Suites, whose list of amenities has been expanded to include free unlimited long distance and wireless Internet access. There's little to lose with the new marketing pitch: The calls don't cost the company very much. And with so many travelers toting around cell phones with national calling plans, long-distance calls don't generate that much extra revenue any more, even at the inflated rates hotels often charge. The past week also brought an announcement from a small company named Northland Cable Television, which introduced unlimited local and long distance for a flat $38 a month in rural areas of the Carolinas served mostly by BellSouth as well as Verizon. Because such plans have become so prevalent on both wired and wireless phones, the concept of local and long distance as different types of calls may be fading fast among consumers and businesses. "All-distance" calling plans were first popularized by AT&T Wireless, whose "Digital One Rate" helped blaze the trail for similar offerings from wireless rivals and local Bells like Verizon and SBC Communications Inc., which two weeks ago agreed to buy AT&T for $16 billion. But increasingly, new rivals are also trotting out their own unlimited, all-distance calling plans at a discount to traditional phone service, especially in the cable TV industry. The Northland Cable service is being delivered by Internet bubble survivor Net2Phone using VoIP, for Voice over Internet Protocol, an increasingly common technology which eliminates a great deal of the cost involved in connecting a call around the block or across the country. By contrast, unlimited local and long distance packages from the Bells using non-VoIP technology typically cost from $50 to $60 a month. That doesn't include $20 or so in additional fees and taxes on those bundles, compared with no extras on the Northland plan and perhaps $5 a month extra on many other VoIP services. That's one reason why Verizon is competing with itself by offering its own VoIP service for $30 to $35 a month, hopeful it can keep at least some of the revenue that it might lose to rivals with a customer who switches to VoIP. SBC plans to do offer its own VoIP service soon. By late 2004, more than 400 different companies were offering VoIP service in the United States, according to VoIPAction, an online marketplace featuring assorted VoIP resources. Many of those companies offer unlimited domestic calling as an option. How can so many companies afford to compete in a business long dominated by fewer than a dozen companies? During the Internet bubble of the late 1990s, predictions of explosive growth in Web traffic fueled a construction boom for fiber-optic networks. The long-distance industry has since been plagued by price wars and a huge glut of unused capacity. According to TeleGeography Research, only about 3% of the fiber capacity built during the boom is in use today, while Internet bandwidth for a typical route such as New York to Washington now costs less than a tenth of what it cost just five years ago. That helps explain why it's so cheap for companies to offer VoIP service, which transmits phone calls over the Internet as data packets mixed with all the other online traffic. A traditional phone call requires a continuous circuit to be "opened" across the network. "When you have to dedicate a line to connecting two people on opposite ends of the country, that uses a lot of resources," said Jerry Ellig, senior research fellow at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University. With VoIP, "You can cram a lot more phone calls into the same amount of network at the same time." As brand names, AT&T and MCI will likely prove useful enough to their new owners to persist for years to come. Both companies have extensive Internet trunk lines for carrying data, which Verizon and SBC aim to use to deliver all kinds of rich data, from business services to television. But the products those brand names are know for seem destined to become another quaint memory of the telephone industry like party lines, switchboard operators and rotary dials. Contributing: Associated Press Writer Elliott Minor in Georgia Copyright 2005 The Associated Press. Find this article at: http://www.usatoday.com/tech/techinvestor/industry/2005-02-19-ld-demise_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 USA Today. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2005 00:33:25 -0500 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Lawsuit Alleges Foul Play in H-P Printer Note that at present this is just an allegation. HP has apparently not yet answered the complaint, and there has been, as yet, no adjudication. http://www.usatoday.com/tech/products/gear/computing/2005-02-22-cartridge-suit_x LOS ANGELES A Georgia woman has sued Hewlett-Packard, claiming the ink cartridges for their printers are secretly programmed to expire on a certain date, in some cases rendering them useless before they are even installed in a printer. The suit filed in Santa Clara Superior Court in northern California last Thursday seeks to represent anyone in the United States who purchased an H-P inkjet printer since Feb. 2001. H-P is the world's No. 1 computer printer maker. H-P spokesmen were not immediately available to comment. H-P ink cartridges use a chip technology to sense when they are low on ink and advise the user to make a change. But, the suit claims, those chips also shut down the cartridges at a predetermined date regardless of whether they are empty. "The smart chip is dually engineered to prematurely register ink depletion and to render a cartridge unusable through the use of a built-in expiration date that is not revealed to the consumer," the suit said. The suit, which seeks class-action status, asks for restitution, damages and other compensation. Copyright 2005 Reuters Limited. Click for Restrictions. Find this article at: http://www.usatoday.com/tech/products/gear/computing/2005-02-22-cartridge-suit_x.htm?POE=TECISVA 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 Limited and USA Today. . For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2005 13:15:15 EST From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA Subject: Microsoft, Alcatel Forge IPTV Alliance; MSN to Launch Video Series Telecom dailyLead from USTA February 23, 2005 http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=19584&l=2017006 TODAY'S HEADLINES NEWS OF THE DAY * Microsoft, Alcatel forge IPTV alliance; MSN to launch video series BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH * Hedge funds urge MCI to consider all offers; GSA ruling favors Qwest * Verizon picks TVN for VOD * Time Warner VoIP service reflects cable's growing influence in telephony * Mobile phone virus causes concern * Cablevision reports earnings USTA SPOTLIGHT * Order Telecommunications Billing Systems Today! EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES * Intel shows off three chips for embedded market REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE * Former WorldCom executive testifies as government's case against Ebbers case nears end * ISPs take broadband complaint to Supreme Court Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others. http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=19584&l=2017006 ------------------------------ From: cisco8899@yahoo.com.sg (Chris Tsai) Subject: DrayTek Will Release All VoIP/DSL/VPN Router Model in CeBIT-2005 Date: 23 Feb 2005 18:45:40 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Draytek Corp is about to present New Integrated VoIP SoHo and CO Broadband Access Solutions at CeBIT 2005 Sinchu, February 24, 2005 Draytek Corp, a worldwide famous leading DSL CPE device provider specializing in broadband access solutions, today unveils new members of its well-known remarkable Vigor family: Vigor 2800V Series, Vigor Pro20 Series, and Vigor Access Series. Vigor 2800V Series include four models: Vigor 2800V, Vigor 2800Vi, Vigor 2800VG, and Vigor 2800VGi. As a VOIP IAD(Integrated Access Device) of the new generation, combination of several latest and popular technologies, ADSL2/2+, WLAN(802.11g), ISDN, VoIP(2 FXS ports, supporting SIP/MGCP protocols), QoS, VLAN, Firewall, USB Printer server and VPN(PPTP, L2TP, and IPSec, LAN-to-LAN and Remote access), allows up to 128 wireless stations to share hi-speed and secure Internet connections over new ADSL2/ADSL2+ and enables multiple novel applications such as Voice-over-WLAN and VPN-over-WLAN. In terms of Selectable Qos(Quality of Service), Vigor 2800V Series support four levels of priority, which ensure guaranteed bandwidth for specific data and services, such as VoIP or Videoconferencing. Speaking of its versatile firewall, in addition to Multi-NAT, port redirection, Dos/DDos(Denial of Service/Distributed Denial of Service) and IP spoofing attacks protection, the built-in SPI(Stateful Packet Inspection) firewall employs user-defined policies to filter all incoming/outgoing packets and blocks download of Java/ActiveX applet and certain file types by means of content filtering to secure the traffic and enhance network efficiency. With these strengths, Vigor 2800V Series constitute a powerful and economical CPE solution for SoHo and Small business users. To keep up with the trends of current networking security device market, Draytek introduces its innovative UTM(Unified Threat Management) appliance, Vigor Pro20 Series, which consist of four models, Vigor Pro20V, Vigor Pro20Vi, Vigor Pro20VG, and Vigor Pro20VGi. Equipped with all merits of Vigor family, such as excellent compatibility with DSL/Cable connection types, VoIP(2 FXS ports, supporting SIP/MGCP protocols), ISDN, WLAN(802.11g), Selectable QoS(Four priority levels), VLAN, USB Printer server and VPN(PPTP, L2TP and IPSec, LAN-to-LAN and Remote Access), Vigor Pro20 further provides a robust hardware-based real-time network protection mechanism of SPI Firewall(Multi-NAT, Content Filtering, Deep Packet and Content Inspection), Anti-virus, IDP(Intrusion Detection Prevention) and WPA2(802.11i) to defend viruses, worms, malicious programs, spams and hacker attacks over wireless or wired network. All in all, this all-in-one gadget offers secure network communication while maintaining high throughput and low latency for various applications. Easy-to-use and multifunctionality makes it a superb integrated security solution for SoHo and Small business users when it comes to the high ratio of C/P(Cost/Performance). As technologies advance rapidly, there are growing demands for more network bandwidth in the next generation network(NGN) structure. Taking advantage of the convenience and flexibility of IP network, plus state-of-the-art ADSL2/2+ technology, Draytek launches its first IP DSLAM product, Vigor Access Series, to meet the requirements of the current market. Vigor Access Series are composed of 2 models, Vigor AccessA24M and Vigor AccessA24S. They provide rich and various applications such as VoIP and mutimedia services in the current existing wired network, which comprises ADSL2/2+, PSTN and ATM, Frame Relay, while eliminating protocol transformation and thus ensuring high speed connectivity. In general, Vigor Access Series enjoy many unique features such as Excellent Scalability(Stackable), Single IP Management(EMS Management-VigorView), RA(Rate Adaptation), QoS and VLAN, which makes it a perfect CO(Central Office) broadband access alternative for Telco operators. The above-mentioned products are going to be displayed in the seminar held at 1400 hours, March 12. Please visit Draytek at CeBIT 2005 in Hall 14, Stand G12, during March 10-16 in Hannover, Germany. About Draytek Draytek Technology Co. is a worldwide famous provider of Internet broadband access integrated solutions, ranging from USB ADSL modems , Wireless ADSL routers, VoIP ADSL routers, ADSL router with ISDN backup, USB-based VoIP Broadband Security Routers, ISDN routers, IP DSLAM, USB ISDN TAs, and so on. For more information, please visit the company's website at http://www.draytek.com. ------------------------------ From: Danny Burstein Subject: FCC: AT&T's LD Cards Quack Like Regular LD, Owe USF, etc. Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2005 23:11:39 -0500 Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC "Washington, D.C. - The Federal Communications Commission Wednesday found that AT&T Corp. unlawfully avoided paying millions of dollars of universal service contributions and other fees related to a long-distance calling card service marketed by the company. "The Commission rejected an assertion by AT&T that its practice of inserting advertisements in the calling card service transformed it into an unregulated 'information service' not subject to universal service assessments. The advertisements are incidental to the underlying telecommunications service offered to the cardholder, the Commission found, and do not change the regulatory status of the service ... rest at: http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-256921A1.txt [a] http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-256921A1.doc [b] http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-256921A1.pdf [c] [a] ugly text/ascii [b] Word Doc form [c] Adobe Portable Document File (Most FCC publications are available in all three forms. The URLs are identical except for the extension) _____________________________________________________ Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key dannyb@panix.com [to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded] ------------------------------ From: LB@notmine.com Subject: Re: UN Panel Aims to End Internet Tug of War by July Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2005 17:10:43 -0500 Organization: Optimum Online Lisa Minter wrote: > GENEVA (Reuters) - A U.N.-sponsored panel aims to settle a > long-running tug of war for control of the Internet by July and > propose solutions to problems such as cyber crime and email > spam, panel leaders announced. > The panel, set up in December 2003, will lay groundwork for a final > decision to be taken in Tunis in November at a U.N.-sponsored World > Summit on the Information Society, where global control of the world > wide web may be decided. > Right now, the most recognizable Internet governance body is a > California-based non-profit company, the International Corporation for > Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN). > But developing countries want an international body, such as the > U.N.'s International Telecommunication Union (ITU), to have control > over governance -- from distributing Web site domains to fighting > spam. > "There is an issue that is out there and that needs to be resolved," > said Nitin Desai, chairman of working group and special adviser to > U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan. > Incorporated in 1998, ICANN oversees management of the Internet's > crucial addressing system which matches numerical addresses to > familiar Web site addresses. > While its oversight has been confined to technical matters, critics > say that it is subject to U.S. political influence. > The ITU, a 138-year-old trade body that among other things established > country code rules for international telephone calls, is seen by > developing countries as being better able to address their needs. > All countries want to counter spam -- unsolicited commercial messages > that can flood email accounts by the hundreds and burden the web with > unwanted traffic. > 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 Limited. > For more information go to: > http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml Whatever. Does anyone think the UN will be effective at this? LB [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Does anyone think ICANN will hand over the reigns to ICU in any event? I don't think they will. 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 V24 #81 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Feb 24 18:02:01 2005 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j1ON21F01329; Thu, 24 Feb 2005 18:02:01 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2005 18:02:01 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200502242302.j1ON21F01329@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 V24 #82 TELECOM Digest Thu, 24 Feb 2005 18:02:00 EST Volume 24 : Issue 82 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Britain Launches Internet Virus Alert Service (Lisa Minter) U.S. Identity Thefts Spur Senate Hearings (Lisa Minter) See You Later, Anti-Gators? (Lisa Minter) Are ISPs Blocking VoIP Calls? (Jack Decker) AT&T Must Pay Fees on Prepaid Calling Cards, FCC Says (Telecom USTA) Mob Bell: How Telecom-Saavy Gangsters Took Over Small Telco (ptownson) Re: Buyouts of AT&T, MCI Sign of Long Distance's Demise (Lisa Hancock) Re: Are ISPs Blocking VoIP Calls? (Mike Xero) 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: 24 Feb 2005 13:44:02 -0800 From: Lisa Minter Subject: Britain Launches Internet Virus Alert Service LONDON (Reuters) - Britain launched a Web site on Thursday aimed at helping computer users avoid damage from Internet viruses and other online threats. The government-funded IT Security Awareness for Everyone site (www.itsafe.gov.uk) will give free advice on data protection and issue virus alerts to those who sign up. "There is a clear need for easy-to-understand and simple, independent advice for non-technically minded people who use computers," Home Office Minister Hazel Blears said in a statement. E-mail or text alerts will direct users toward step-by-step guides on how to deal with any problem. The site will use information provided by the National Infrastructure Security Co-ordination Center (NISCC). More than half of UK households had a home computer in 2002, according to the Office for National Statistics. In the third quarter of 2004, 52 percent of UK households could access the Internet from home, compared with just nine percent in the same quarter of 1998. 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 instancem Associated Press. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ Date: 24 Feb 2005 13:45:23 -0800 From: Lisa Minter Subject: U.S. Identity Thefts Spur Senate Hearings By JESSE J. HOLLAND, Associated Press Writer WASHINGTON - A Senate committee will hold hearings on identity theft and information brokers following the revelation that a databank with information on millions of people was accessed by criminals, the committee chairman said Thursday. Democrats, including Sens. Patrick Leahy of Vermont, Dianne Feinstein of California and Charles Schumer of New York, have been calling for a Judiciary Committee inquiry into whether more regulation of companies such as ChoicePoint Inc. that buy and sell personal data is needed. "I got a letter from Senator Leahy yesterday on identity theft issue and I immediately said we can hold a hearing," said Senate Judiciary Chairman Arlen Specter, R-Pa. Specter did not give a schedule for the hearings. Formed in 1997 as a spinoff of credit reporting agency Equifax Inc., ChoicePoint has 19 billion public records in its database at its suburban Atlanta headquarters, including motor vehicle registrations, license and deed transfers, military records, names, addresses and Social Security numbers. It revealed last week that thieves apparently used previously stolen identities to open ChoicePoint accounts and received volumes of data on consumers, including names, addresses, Social Security numbers and credit reports. Choicepoint says 144,778 people may have been affected by the breach, while California authorities estimate up to 500,000. The ring operated for more than a year before it was detected and used the information to defraud at least 750 people, investigators said. Feinstein says the ChoicePoint thefts prove that there needs to be federal regulation of information brokers, and that Americans need to have more control over their personal data. "The ChoicePoint situation is perhaps the biggest indication of the vulnerability and lack of protection of individuals' personal data," she said. She has introduced a bill that would expand nationwide a California consumer protection law that requires companies to tell people if there is a breach in their data systems. She also wants information brokers to be forced to ask permission from people to sell their most sensitive personal information. Schumer, too, plans legislation that would create federal rules setting conditions under which companies can provide or sell access to private information. 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 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2005 22:47:31 PST From: Lisa Minter Subject: See You Later, Anti-Gators? By Paul Festa Slapped with a libel suit by the notorious adware company, a Web site pulls pages that called Gator's program "spyware." Will the suit cause critics of Gator-like software to zip their lips? http://news.com.com/See+you+later%2C+anti-Gators/2100-1032_3-5095051.html?tag=sas.email Read all technology news from this week: http://www.news.com/thisweeksheadlines/ Copyright 2004 CNET Networks, Inc. All rights reserved. CNET Networks, Inc. 235 Second Street San Francisco, CA 94105 U.S.A. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The essence of this is that some web site or another, or more than one, referred to products from the GAIN Company as 'spyware'; the response of GAIN/Gator to web sites which accuse them of being 'spyware' is to file suit. At one point, a few years ago, I experimented with some of the GAIN offerings; one was a clock setting program which synched to the Naval Observatory clock now and then. I've long since found a freeware open-source thing which does the same thing with several master clocks, and have since installed it on my entire network. But when I had the GAIN/Gator thing installed, I *read in its agreement* that I would get some advertising which I did. I do not recall reading anywhere that the cookies it generated were going to report what I was doing back to GAIN however, and apparently that is what the web sites were alleging, and what caused them to get sued on account of their allegations. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Jack Decker Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2005 00:29:07 -0500 Subject: Are ISPs Blocking VoIP Calls? http://www.internetnews.com/infra/article.php/3485271 By Roy Mark Internet telephony companies Vonage and Nuvio have turned to federal authorities with their complaints that some broadband providers are blocking or degrading their Voice over IP (define) services. Last week, the Edison, N.J.-based Vonage confirmed it had met with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) about the problem, but stressed today it had filed no formal complaint. "There was one malicious, intentional incidence of port blocking," Brooke Schulz, Vonage's senior vice president of corporate communications, said Wednesday. "We've had initial meetings [with the FCC] to discuss our options." The Vonage meeting with FCC officials came almost six months after Kansas City-based Nuvio sent a letter to the FCC accusing unnamed broadband providers of engaging in discriminatory practices by blocking Nuvio VoIP calls. "In each case, they [the broadband providers] had their own VoIP service," said Jason Talley, president and CEO of Nuvio. Full story at: http://www.internetnews.com/infra/article.php/3485271 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, 24 Feb 2005 13:38:43 EST From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA Subject: AT&T Must Pay Fees on Prepaid Calling Cards, FCC Says Telecom dailyLead from USTA February 24, 2005 http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=19630&l=2017006 TODAY'S HEADLINES NEWS OF THE DAY * AT&T must pay fees on prepaid calling cards, FCC says BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH * European telcos seek seamless fixed-line/wireless convergence * Nortel helps Adelphia, Rogers with VoIP * Report: Global VoIP market ready to boom * Motorola forecasts high demand for inexpensive handsets * Analysis: Billing, OSS key to IPTV's success USTA SPOTLIGHT * USTA Applauds FCC Decision on AT&T Phone Cards EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES * Open-source router software emerges on the horizon REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE * Government rests case against Ebbers; defense calls whistle-blower Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others. http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=19630&l=2017006 ------------------------------ Subject: Mob Bell Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2005 12:31:19 -0500 From: ptownson A curious account of how a small, independent telephone company in a small town in Missouri was purchased and taken over by some folks who the federal government alleges are 'mobsters'. The Village Voice refers to the operation as 'Mob Bell'. http://villagevoice.com/news/0408,robbins,51285,5.html or, "How Tele-Savvy Wiseguys Bought a Midwest Phone Company" by Tom Robbins ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) Subject: Re: Buyouts of AT&T, MCI Sign of Long Distance's Demise Date: 24 Feb 2005 07:41:49 -0800 Marcus Didius Falco wrote: > During the Internet bubble of the late 1990s, predictions of explosive > growth in Web traffic fueled a construction boom for fiber-optic > networks. The long-distance industry has since been plagued by price > wars and a huge glut of unused capacity. That is the primary reason for the demise of AT&T and MCI. The product (carrying a long distance call) has become so cheap that the skills needed to carry it (managing a long distance network) aren't as important anymore. This has also happened in the computer world. Once programmers had to carefully track every character to avoid wasting scarce computer memory, but today memory is so cheap those tracking skills (and products) aren't as important anymore either. Historically, the steam locomotive required much more maintenance than a diesel which is why diesels replaced steam and many of the skilled backshop jobs. AT&T and Mountain Bell used to advertise their microwave towers built in very tough places yet they did whatever it took 24/7 in the worst weather to keep them going. The high capacity of fibre optic is really no big deal when looking at long distance over the long haul. In the beginning, it was one very thick wire barely carrying one call at a time. Longer calls required setup of trunks connecting one town to the next as well as the appropriate amplification (too much wouldn't work -- it had to be just right). In the 1930s every long distance call needed considerable workup by operators consulting routing charts, and engineers tinkering with routing and amplification and transmission. But they discovered carrier signals and some automation so that a physical circuit could handle more calls and spread the cost. Setup time was reduced saving money too. After the war, the Bell System installed coax, microwave, and automated switching (first for operators, then for the public) that greatly reduced setup costs and improved efficiency. To the present day, the improvements continued lowering cost. (It bothers me that critics of the Bell System think the technology they used in 1983 was no different than that of 1933 or even 1953.) > A traditional phone call requires a continuous circuit to be > "opened" across the network. "When you have to dedicate a line to > connecting two people on opposite ends of the country, that uses a > lot of resources," With VoIP, "You can cram a lot more phone calls > into the same amount of network at the same time." I'm not sure this is entirely true. Yes, the packet-switching nature allows much more flexibility, but also risks conversation trouble if the network happens to be crowded at a moment and the packet is delayed. I believe the Bell System used a voice packet time of transmission on overseas cables -- using the natural pauses in a conversation to sandwich in other calls on the same channel. Further, a long distance call doesn't exactly have a "continuous circuit". One is being multiplex among a great many other calls and data sharing a communication trunk. True, there is setup at either end, but VOIP requires ISP servers doing the same thing at either end as well. I expect that ISPs will be forced to add server capacity and raise prices if they find themselves with heavy VOIP traffic on their systems. The stuff isn't switched for free. ------------------------------ From: mike xero Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2005 05:26:42 PST Subject: Re: Are ISPs Blocking VoIP Calls? I brought this up months ago, about what would stop ISP's from doing this? And I actually don't believe even if the ISP's do block or degrade the service if they are breaking any kind of law. VOIP company's insist they are not phone companies, so they skirt the 911 issue. And since data -- ip is not a regulated service, and since VOIP isn't regulated either, why should the FCC care? So, does the FCC regulate VOIP? So they can protect them, and if so do they fall under the telecom laws -- if so USF,911 etc. Welcome to the world of telecom VOIP carriers, its a tough field. --- Jack Decker wrote: [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: See original article submitted by Jack Decker elsewhere in this current issue of the Digest. 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 V24 #82 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Feb 25 14:59:44 2005 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j1PJxiC10676; Fri, 25 Feb 2005 14:59:44 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2005 14:59:44 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200502251959.j1PJxiC10676@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 V24 #83 TELECOM Digest Fri, 25 Feb 2005 15:00:00 EST Volume 24 : Issue 83 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Arbitration Left ID Theft Victim With $27,000 Bill (Marcus Didius Falco) Is Your Identity Safe? (Marcus Didius Falco) Databases Called Lax With Personal (Marcus Didius Falco) AOL: You've got VoIP (Jack Decker) Qwest Submits Revised Bid for MCI (Telecom dailyLead from USTA) More Plea Deals in Bklyn Mafia/Telco Case (Danny Burstein) Advice on One Call in SS7 Versus Two Calls in VoIP (wflanagan5) Toll-free Number Pointed to Sprint PCS Handset (Eric Friedebach) 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: Fri, 25 Feb 2005 01:01:40 -0500 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Arbitration Left ID Theft Victim With $27,000 Bill http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A48753-2005Feb23.html By Caroline E. Mayer Washington Post Staff Writer Thursday, February 24, 2005; Page E01 Beth Plowman, a Damascus international public health adviser, was shocked when she discovered that a $27,240 arbitration judgment had been levied against her for credit card charges incurred by an identity thief who bought sporting goods all across Europe. Plowman had been in the United States at the time and had no idea about the charges: Someone claiming to be her sister had called the credit card company and asked that all bills be sent to an address in England. When she found out about the charges, Plowman began trying to get them dismissed through the collection agency, not realizing that she also needed to show up at the arbitration hearing. She lost the arbitration and had to hire a lawyer to persuade the collection agency pursuing her for the debt to drop its claim. "I don't have a sister," Plowman said. "The fact that people are being held to pay these debts through an arbitration process is just frightening." While her experience may be unusual, consumer advocates and trial lawyer associations say Plowman is an example of what can go wrong when mandatory arbitration clauses are written into credit card agreements. Longtime critics of such clauses, these groups say mandatory arbitration is being used as an "offensive weapon" by credit card companies seeking speedy resolution to disputes -- sometimes without a consumer's full knowledge. The result, they say, is that the arbitration process may saddle consumers with debts they may not have incurred, as well as substantial arbitration costs, including the credit card company's legal fees. "Before consumers know it, an arbitrator has issued an award against them, and the award can't be challenged on its merits" but only on narrower grounds such as whether the arbitrator was impartial or exceeded his or her power, said Steve Tripoli, consumer advocate for National Consumer Law Center. The center just issued a paper on the practice, citing four consumer cases including Plowman's. "The only thing left for consumers to do is fight the collection" of the award, which is usually hard to overturn once it has been issued, he added. Most arbitration challengers are not as fortunate as Plowman, he said. Banking industry officials disagreed with the law center's findings. The American Bankers Association called it a small set of cases that doesn't prove consumers are harmed by arbitration. Spokeswoman Tracey Mills said a more detailed study done for the association shows that consumers who initiate arbitration cases benefit from the process. Critics say that businesses are more likely to bring cases to arbitration than individuals. In the past decade, mandatory arbitration clauses have been appearing in the fine print of many consumer agreements, including those for credit cards, telephone service, car sales and even exterminator services. These clauses require consumers to agree in advance to waive their rights to a court hearing and refer all disputes to independent, third-party adjudicators. Businesses say arbitration is faster, more efficient and cheaper than litigation. Its critics, however, say mandatory arbitration is a way to protect firms from large jury verdicts and class-action lawsuits. They add that the process itself often stacks the deck against the individual since the cases permit less evidence-gathering than in trials and can be appealed only on narrow grounds. Consumer groups, smarting from their failure last week to block passage of a law that will limit class-action lawsuits, now plan to launch a campaign to get rid of mandatory arbitration provisions. A coalition of consumer advocates, civil and employment rights groups and attorney associations plans to unveil a Web site today listing companies that do not require consumers to commit to arbitration in advance. The coalition will also press for congressional action, noting that Congress has already passed a law barring car manufacturers from imposing mandatory arbitration on their dealers, although dealers can include such provisions in their consumer contracts. Paul Bland, staff attorney for Trial Lawyers for Public Justice, said it is unclear how many consumers may have unknowingly had arbitration decisions issued against them seeking repayment of debt. "However, he said, "in the last six months, we have received scores of phone calls from consumers who want us to represent them challenging collection activities." MBNA, which issued Plowman's credit card, declined to discuss the specific case but said it is confident that the arbitration awards have been granted appropriately. "In fact, several of the awards were upheld in the courts," said the company's general counsel, former FBI director Louis J. Freeh, in a statement. "Trial lawyers have long opposed this straightforward process [of arbitration] since it generally precludes them from litigating," Freeh said. Edward Anderson, the head of the National Arbitration Forum, the nation's largest arbitration firm, which handles as many as 50,000 cases a year, said consumers "get more notice in arbitration than they ever do in the court." "In our system, if you don't respond, we send out two notices; in the courts you get one notice." Banks, he added, cannot collect the money awarded in arbitration decisions unless the awards are confirmed by a judge. Plowman considers herself one of the luckier consumers. She declined to participate in the arbitration proceeding because she had been contacted by a debt collection agency and believed the problem would be corrected once the credit agency realized she was an identity theft victim. In August 2003, the arbitrator issued a $27,240 award against her. She subsequently hired an attorney who helped convince the collection agency that the charges were not hers. The agency dropped its claim, but only after Plowman paid $2,200 in legal fees. Copyright 2005 The Washington Post Company 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 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What I do not understand, is who put in the fix with the 'arbitrator'? Was it the credit card company or the collection agency or ...? How could the credit card company ever have reached a decision that the person was responsible for the fraud? PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2005 01:01:01 -0500 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Is Your Identity Safe? http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A49911-2005Feb24.html How many times have you been asked for your personal financial information and you gave it up without protest? And how much information do you carry around in your wallet or purse that could be used by someone to steal your identity? For instance, do you routinely carry your checkbook? How about a stack of bills that need paying? Or your Social Security card? Any one of those items is treasured by identity thieves. And if you've been following the news lately, you should be very concerned about identity theft. Last week, ChoicePoint Inc. of Alpharetta, Ga., informed more than 100,000 people that their information was sold by the company to con artists. Read http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A30897-2005Feb16.html ID Data Conned From Firm" from last Friday's Post. Among the potential victims of this particular scam are thousands of Washington area residents, according to this follow-up story from Monday's Post -- http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A40379-2005Feb20.html> ID Theft Scam Hits D.C. Area Residents." The conning of ChoicePoint is stunning. This is a very sophisticated company that provides data services to many of the nation's top financial entities, and even the federal government. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A22269-2005Jan19.html Read this profile of the company by The Post's Robert O'Harrow. But ChoicePoint delivered thousands of electronic reports containing names, addresses, Social Security numbers and other personal financial information to criminals in the Los Angeles area who were posing as officials in legitimate debt collection, insurance and check-cashing businesses. In case you don't know, ChoicePoint maintains the CLUE (Comprehensive Loss Underwriting Exchange) database used by insurers to check the five-year claims history of both a homeowner and a particular property. As scary as the ChoicePoint story is, I want to remind you that your identity is more likely to be stolen by someone you know. Read my column from Feb. 13 -- http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A18508-2005Feb12.html "When ID Theft Starts at Home." According to the 2005 Identity Fraud Survey Report -- released by the Better Business Bureau and Javelin as an update of the Federal Trade Commission's 2003 Identity Theft Survey -- relatives, friends and neighbors make up half of all known identity thieves. So what should you do if you find out your information may be in the hands of a con artist? Check out Caroline E. Mayer's article from yesterday's Post -- http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A45534-2005Feb22.html Victims Have Work Ahead: Eternal Vigilance Is Price of Credit." Also, read this column I wrote back in 2002 -- http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A11324-2002Dec4.html> With Identity Theft, It Pays to Be Paranoid," and here's the http://www.consumer.gov/idtheft/ FTC's comprehensive ID theft resources page. 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, 25 Feb 2005 01:02:09 -0500 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Databases Called Lax With Personal Information http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A51929-2005Feb24.html By Jonathan Krim Washington Post Staff Writer The Social Security numbers of millions of Americans, including Vice President Cheney and celebrity heiress Paris Hilton, are available to many subscribers of a widely used information database company, U.S. Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) charged yesterday. Schumer called one feature offered by Westlaw an "egregious" invitation to identity theft. The "People-Find" feature lets some Westlaw users type in any name and receive personal data about that individual, culled from public records, including addresses and Social Security numbers. Westlaw's subscribers include government and law-enforcement agencies, law firms, corporations and news-gathering organizations. Westlaw, a division of Thomson Corp., said Social Security information is restricted to government agencies and a small number of corporations that need it, such as insurance companies investigating fraud. "Fewer than 10 non-government customers have access to this type of information," the company said in a written statement. "Furthermore, our terms of use restricting access go beyond federal law and current industry standards." But Schumer said the information is too easily available to any level of employee, adding that his investigation was prompted by complaints from consumers. He said the company has ignored his requests to restrict access to only those individuals who demonstrate they need the information, such as law-enforcement officers. Schumer's concerns add to a controversy over companies that buy and sell such data with little oversight to protect personal information. Yesterday, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) said the panel would hold a hearing in response to the recent theft of Social Security numbers and other financial data of more than 100,000 people from ChoicePoint Inc., a Georgia-based database firm. After setting up accounts with the company, identity thieves were able to gather information on at least 145,000 individuals. "It's time to turn some sunshine on these developments so the public can understand how and why their personal information is being used," said Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.) in requesting hearings. In the House, Rep. Joe Barton (R-Tex.), head of the Energy and Commerce Committee, has directed his staff to investigate the storage and security practices of database companies. Schumer said comprehensive legislation is needed in an area that is largely unregulated at the federal level and governed by a patchwork of sometimes-conflicting state laws. California, for example, requires companies to report breaches of their systems that result in exposure of personal data, a law that prompted disclosure of the theft at ChoicePoint. Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) has proposed a similar federal law, which has been opposed by many technology and database companies. In a news conference, at which were shown reproductions of Web pages displaying personal data of famous people, Schumer detailed how his staff was able to quickly retrieve Social Security numbers and addresses of former attorney general John D. Ashcroft, former homeland security secretary Tom Ridge, executives of Westlaw and others. They tried President Bush, Schumer said, but his address came up as 1400 Pennsylvania Ave., instead of the White House's address of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. "Westlaw's service could be entitled 'Identity Theft for Dummies,'" Schumer said. "To my mind, what bank robbery was to the Depression era, identity theft is to the information age. Everyone's susceptible." In a written statement, Thomson West, the firm that operates Westlaw, said it shares Schumer's concerns about privacy and identity theft. But the company denied the senator's claims that it has been unresponsive to his inquiries. Researchers at The Washington Post, a Westlaw subscriber, sought to replicate Schumer's exercise and found that only the first five digits of an individual's Social Security number were displayed. But a Schumer spokesman said that a researcher at a major corporation not involved in credit checks or other investigations was able to get the complete numbers. A spokesman for LexisNexis, a Westlaw competitor, said law-enforcement agencies, insurance and financial institutions can also get full Social Security data through LexisNexis's service. But even if a potential customer is in the right industry, he said, they are screened to ensure they are legitimate. Privacy experts say that in addition to raising questions about how well personal information is protected, the disclosures indicate an extreme overuse of Social Security numbers for identification. "It has become the default identifier" for many commercial businesses, banks and Web sites, said Ari Schwartz, associate director of the Center for Democracy and Technology, a Washington group that studies digital rights and privacy issues. When personal information is compromised, a Social Security number can be used as a tool for identity theft. Many privacy advocates have urged businesses to create unique identification numbers for customers to use. "The reliance on the Social Security number has created a false sense of security for businesses and a source of vulnerability for consumers," Schwartz said. Copyright 2005 The Washington Post Company 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 ------------------------------ From: Jack Decker Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2005 11:35:51 -0500 Subject: AOL: You've got VoIP http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9588_22-5589221.html By Jim Hu, CNET News.com America Online is expected to launch an Internet phone service in the United States next month, leapfrogging rivals in a fast-growing market as it seeks to evolve from an also-ran provider of dial-up Internet access to a broadband services powerhouse. Like Yahoo and Microsoft, AOL already offers voice chat on PCs as a free feature of its instant messaging services. AOL's new phone service, by contrast, will take a different path, charging customers a monthly fee to make calls over the Internet using an ordinary handset and a small analog-to-digital telephone adapter. AOL has been testing a U.S.-based phone service with volunteers since last summer, and it launched a similar service in Canada in December. The online giant plans to introduce its VoIP, or voice over Internet Protocol, product to U.S. subscribers in mid-March and then offer it to nonmembers later this year, according to sources familiar with the plan. Sources said the cost of AOL's service will be competitive with other VoIP offerings in the market, where one low-cost provider, Vonage, charges $24.99 a month for unlimited local and long-distance calling. The AOL service will cost less than the $40 Internet phone service offered by corporate cousin Time Warner Cable, the sources added. Full story at: http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9588_22-5589221.html How to Distribute VoIP Throughout a Home: http://michigantelephone.mi.org/distribute.html If you live in Michigan, subscribe to the MI-Telecom group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MI-Telecom/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2005 13:30:04 EST From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA Subject: Qwest Submits Revised Bid for MCI Telecom dailyLead from USTA February 25, 2005 http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=19666&l=2017006 TODAY'S HEADLINES NEWS OF THE DAY * Qwest submits revised bid for MCI BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH * Gap between cable, DSL narrows * Adelphia creditors make all-cash counteroffer, advance negotiations * MCI reports earnings USTA SPOTLIGHT * Telecom Engineering Conference at SUPERCOMM Registration is Open EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES * Sprint unveils CDMA/GSM phone * Is there money in podcasting? VOIP DOWNLOAD * AOL poised to introduce VoIP service * Cablers' VoIP services ready for primetime * VoIP deployment slowed by E-911 snags REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE * Ebbers' defense team goes after Sullivan Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others. http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=19666&l=2017006 ------------------------------ From: Danny Burstein Subject: More Plea Deals in Bklyn Mafia/Telco Case Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2005 14:04:41 -0500 Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC A reputed Gambino wiseguy and his brother yesterday fessed up to bilking taxpayers out of $9 million by inflating expenses at a small Missouri telephone company in order to qualify for government subsidies ... http://www.nypost.com/news/regionalnews/41264.htm _____________________________________________________ Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key dannyb@panix.com [to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded] ------------------------------ From: wflanagan5@comcast.net Subject: Advice on One Call in SS7 Versus Two Calls in VoIP Date: 25 Feb 2005 09:34:47 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Hi. I'm hoping someone can give me some advice. I am working with a firm that has a "call forwarding" service that they want to start. The service application is written on top of VoIP and SIP. What they would like to do is register a number of DIDs that they will provide to their subscribers. When the DID is called, they will forward the call to the user's "real" phone number based on a number of factors, time of day, etc. The issue that I'm running into is this. In VoIP, this looks like 2 calls to the service providers that we're talking with. They want to charge us for the DIDs, the inbound call, and the outbound call. I know in SS7/ISUP you could do a call forward, and this would remain 1 call -- not 2 calls. Does anyone have any suggestions as to the best way to get around this? Paying 2 call charges plus the DID for ALL CALLS is going to kill the business model. Thanks, William ------------------------------ From: Eric Friedebach Subject: Toll-Free Number Pointed to Sprint PCS Handset Date: 25 Feb 2005 08:16:06 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com I am looking at taking on an additional product line that has its own toll-free number. What I would like to do for now is to add an additional Sprint PCS handset to my account and point that existing toll-free number to it. I'm not sure which carrier the toll-free is now, but I will change it to one of the two carriers I use for the other toll-free numbers I have now, either TTI (Worldcom) or United Nortel, with a leaning to United Nortel. Does anybody see a problem with my idea? Eric Friedebach /No hockey!/ ------------------------------ 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 V24 #83 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Feb 25 16:13:24 2005 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j1PLDOc11570; Fri, 25 Feb 2005 16:13:24 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2005 16:13:24 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200502252113.j1PLDOc11570@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 V24 #84 TELECOM Digest Fri, 25 Feb 2005 16:12:00 EST Volume 24 : Issue 84 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Expensive Anti-Piracyware Threatens Open Standard (Lisa Minter) Hollywood Studios File New Round of Web Lawsuits (Lisa Minter) Wal-Mart Is Upgrading Vast In-Store Television Network (Monty Solomon) Federal Effort to Head Off TV Piracy Is Challenged (Monty Solomon) 2nd Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation (NSDI'05) Telecom Update - Canada #470 (Angus Telemanagement) Re: Arbitration Left ID Theft Victim With $27,000 Bill (Lisa Hancock) Re: U.S. Appeals Court Debates Anti-Piracy TV (Michael D. Sullivan) Re: Buyouts of AT&T, MCI Sign of Long Distance Demise (Wesrock@aol.com) Re: Are ISPs Blocking VoIP Calls? (Lisa Hancock) Re: Advice on One Call in SS7 versus Two in VOIP (Thor Lancelot Simon) 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: 25 Feb 2005 08:36:13 -0800 From: Lisa Minter Subject: Expensive Anti-Piracyware Threatens Open Standard By Lucas van Grinsven, European Technology Correspondent AMSTERDAM (Reuters) - A handful of technology companies are overcharging for anti-piracy software needed for digital music stores on the Internet, preventing the emergence of open standards, electronics goods makers said on Friday. Several consumer electronics makers balk at the $1 charge for anti-piracy technology proposed by the Open Mobile Alliance (OMA), they told Reuters. The OMA is a group of handset makers, wireless telecoms operators and other technology companies. Mobile phone makers and consumer electronics makers said $1 per device is too high a price only to protect music and video against illegal copying. They will not be able to recoup that money through revenues expected from digital entertainment. "This kind of price is certainly unreasonable. It's not in proportion to the economic value," said one senior executive at a top five mobile phone maker who declined to be named. He points out that last year alone 684 million mobile phones were sold. If handset makers had put anti-piracy protection software in those phones, the $684 million in royalties would have exceeded total digital music sales on the Web last year. A senior executive at a global top three consumer electronics maker agreed that "this is too expensive." Consumer electronics companies are keen to make devices interoperable with mobile phones, so consumers can play tracks stored on their phone on their home TV or stereo, or vice versa. They are reluctant to sound too harsh, however, because the irony is that they desperately need the OMA's anti-piracy technology which is the first open standard that can be used by all electronics goods makers. Other technologies are owned and controlled by individual companies such as Apple for its iTunes Music Store and Microsoft. The man in charge of the OMA's anti-piracy working group which has put together the open standard, stresses the technology itself has been accepted by all. The problem lies with the price charged by the companies which own the patents. "The terms (for OMA DRM 1.0) have kicked up a lot of dust. People are debating if these are reasonable terms," said Jan van der Meer, chairman of the Digital Rights Management (DRM) working group at the OMA. HOT ITEM "DRM is a hot item. There are many opportunities for an open (anti-piracy) system. There's a real need for it, but the terms need to be reasonable," Van der Meer added. In order for an industry standard to be open, it should be available to everyone at fair and reasonable terms. Electronics goods makers hope that MPEG LA will be willing to cut the terms, which it still calls "proposals." MPEG LA is the organization which has pooled essential anti-piracy patents owned by five companies: InterTrust and ContentGuard, two very small but powerful DRM companies, plus consumer electronics giants Sony Corp and Matsushita Electric Industrial Co Ltd from Japan, and Dutch giant Philips Electronics. Handset makers Nokia and Sony Ericsson and consumer electronics producers Sony and Philips declined to comment on the issue specifically. MPEG LA was not immediately available to comment. Robert Ashcroft, senior vice president Sony Network Application & Content Service Sector, said in general terms that his company is on a "strategic direction to find open and interoperable services and devices." The issue is particularly delicate, because it emerges one week after a surprise opening up of music technology companies related to Microsoft's and Sony's online music stores. They would both support the OMA's standards for music compression and piracy-protection technology. It was seen as an industry breakthrough, and a victory for consumers who would not be restricted to a small set of portable music players, such as Apple's iPods for iTunes tracks. 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 Limited. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ Date: 25 Feb 2005 08:39:26 -0800 From: Lisa Minter Subject: Hollywood Studios File New Round of Web Lawsuits LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Hollywood's major movie studios filed a new round of lawsuits across the United States on Thursday against people who trade illegally copied films and TV shows on the Internet. The civil suits against unnamed "John Doe" defendants seek up to $150,000 per downloaded digital file and come as the U.S. film industry prepares for its annual Oscar telecast in Hollywood where awards for top films and stars are given out. The studios, represented by the Motion Picture Association of America, took the opportunity of the Oscars to again press the case that the illegal copying of films and their black-market distribution on the Internet is costing them millions of dollars a year in lost revenue. The studios claim they lose $3.5 billion worldwide in annual revenues from sales of illegally copied movies on video and DVD formats in street bazaars and black markets. The studios argue that the lost revenue means fewer artists will work to create movies or TV shows. Traditionally the films that are rewarded by Oscar voters at the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences are those that take thematic and commercial risks. "When rampant online theft occurs, these films become that much harder to finance ... we cannot and will not let that happen," MPAA Chief Executive Dan Glickman said in a telephone conference call with reporters. MPAA officials said "several" of the Oscar nominated films had illegal copies on the Internet that could be downloaded, but they named only comedy "Sideways," which is nominated for best picture. "Sideways" is a low-budget movie but was considered a financially risky one for its backers at Fox Searchlight because of its offbeat subject matter. Fox Searchlight is a division of News Corp Ltd's Twentieth Century Fox movie studio. MPAA officials declined to say how many suits it had filed or whether the illegal copies were made by video camera taping in theaters or by copying videos or DVDs that are given away by the studios this time of year to win Oscar votes. Earlier this month, the MPAA filed lawsuits against computer networks utilizing a software technology known as BitTorrent, but these new suits were against end users, or people who actually downloaded the films. Reuters/VNU 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 Limited. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2005 00:50:30 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Wal-Mart Is Upgrading Its Vast In-Store Television Network By CONSTANCE L. HAYS PEARLAND, Tex. - Here in the Houston suburbs, Banana-Vision has arrived. That's the industry nickname for the 42-inch high-definition L.C.D. monitor installed directly over a pyramid of bright yellow bananas in the produce section of the local Wal-Mart store. This TV screen and others scattered through the store are part of the Wal-Mart TV Network, a Web network of in-store programming that the company started in 1998. These days it shows previews of soon-to-be-released movies, snippets of sports events and rock concerts, and corporate messages from the world of Wal-Mart, including some intended to improve its battered public image. But the principal reason for Wal-Mart TV is to show a constant stream of consumer product ads purchased by companies like Kraft, Unilever, Hallmark and PepsiCo. And little wonder. According to Wal-Mart and to an agency that handles its ad sales, the TV operation captures some 130 million viewers every four weeks, making it the fifth-largest television network in the United States after NBC, CBS, ABC and Fox. While other retailers have experimented with in-store television, Wal-Mart's network, which is available in almost all its 2,600 locations, is the most extensive. The company, eager to promote it, is upgrading its broadcasting plans and equipment. http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/21/business/media/21mart.html?ex=1266642000&en=68665de07917ff37&ei=5090 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2005 00:52:24 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Federal Effort to Head Off TV Piracy Is Challenged By TOM ZELLER Jr. Mike Godwin, the legal director for Public Knowledge, a digital-rights advocacy group in Washington, is a fan of Showtime's new drama series "Huff." So three weeks ago, when he missed the season finale, he decided to download it to his personal computer. It took about seven hours to download all 500 megabytes of the hour-long episode over his high-speed Internet connection, using the latest file-sharing software designed to handle large digital files. Still, he did get it. And he did watch it. "It's a great show," he said. To Mr. Godwin, the time-consuming download (and the file's poor quality) indicated that the rampant piracy of digitized broadcast programs -- a threat Hollywood has long warned against -- was hardly imminent. But to the Federal Communications Commission and the Motion Picture Association of America, cases like this one suggest a future of widespread illegal file-sharing that must be stopped before it begins. The debate will be presented in oral arguments tomorrow before the District of Columbia Circuit for the United States Court of Appeals in a lawsuit brought by Public Knowledge and others against the F.C.C., challenging a new regulation that is intended to prevent such bleeding of television content onto the Internet. http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/21/technology/21flag.html?ex=1266642000&en=e286e1f936539c08&ei=5090 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Read NY Times with no login/registration requirements here each day. The file is constantly being refreshed as news items are posted. Just go to http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra/nytimes.html PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2005 15:17:43 -0800 From: Danielle Young Subject: 2nd Symposium on Networked Systems Design/Implementation (NSDI'05) May 2-4, 2005 Boston, MA, USA http://www.usenix.org/nsdi05/proga Early Bird Registration Deadline: April 18, 2005 Sponsored by USENIX, in cooperation with ACM SIGCOMM and ACM SIGOPS Dear Colleague: We are writing to invite you to the 2nd Symposium on Networked Systems Design & Implementation (NSDI '05), April 2-4, 2005, in Boston, MA. http://www.usenix.org/nsdi05/proga NSDI '05 focuses on the design principles of large-scale distributed and networked systems. Our goal is to bring together researchers from across the systems and networking communities to foster cross-disciplinary approaches and to address shared research challenges. We received 112 technical submissions, and from these the NSDI '05 Program Committee selected 25 papers for inclusion in the symposium. The resulting program includes a diverse collection of creative and well-developed papers in areas including distributed systems/operating systems, core networking, and wireless/sensor networks. In addition, NSDI '05 will feature a poster session where attendees can interact with researchers describing their current work in its formative stages and learn more about the leading edge of networked systems design. Finally, NSDI is pleased to feature a keynote address from Tom Leighton from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Akamai. As one of the world's preeminent authorities on algorithms for network applications, Tom Leighton co-founded Akamai Technologies in September 1998. Serving as Chief Scientist, Dr. Leighton is Akamai's technology visionary as well as a key member of the Executive Committee setting the company's direction. Please join us for this exciting symposium presenting the best of current networked systems research and practice. We look forward to seeing you there. Sincerely, Amin Vahdat, University of California, San Diego David Wetherall, University of Washington NSDI '05 Program Chairs 2nd Symposium on Networked Systems Design & Implementation (NSDI '05) May 2-4, 2005 Boston, MA, USA http://www.usenix.org/nsdi05/proga Early Bird Registration Deadline: April 18, 2005 Sponsored by USENIX, in cooperation with ACM SIGCOMM and ACM SIGOPS ------------------------------ From: Angus TeleManagement Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #470, February 25, 2005 Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2005 15:00:00 EST TELECOM UPDATE ************************************************************ published weekly by Angus TeleManagement Group http://www.angustel.ca Number 470: February 25, 2005 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: ** Ottawa Announces Telecom Review ** Executive Shuffle at Bell ** ... And Two Executives Leave Telus ** Rogers & Second Cup Team Up for Wi-Fi ** SuperNet Delays Could Cost Bell $100 Million ** Chubb Sues to Cancel Nortel Insurance ** Bell to Re-Acquire Outsourced Techs ** Cogeco Announces VoIP Partners ** Rogers Picks Nortel ** Thomson Seeks to Buy Globemedia ** Utelcos Merge Sales Forces ** Call-Net Reports Solid Results ** Datacom Market Up 5% ** Telebec Files Dark Fibre Tariff ** CRTC Okays Access to U.S. Emergency Code ** Changing of the Guard at Wi-LAN ** Telecom Coalition Sets Two Gala Dinners ============================================================ OTTAWA ANNOUNCES TELECOM REVIEW: In this week's federal budget, the federal government said it "intends to appoint a panel of eminent Canadians to review Canada's telecommunications policy and regulatory framework ... [and] make recommendations before the end of the year." The Budget says Ottawa will also: ** Give the CRTC the power to impose fines. ** Ask the Commission to "move expeditiously to implement wireless number portability." ** Ask the Task Force on Spam to report quickly (see Telecom Update #433, 461). EXECUTIVE SHUFFLE AT BELL: On Tuesday, Canada's largest telecom company announced multiple changes in its top management team: ** Michael Neuman has resigned as President of Bell Mobility and Bell Distribution Inc. No reason was given. ** Robert Odendaal, who joined Bell last year from European satellite TV broadcaster BSkyB, is now CEO Bell Mobility and Video Services. ** Gary Smith, who also came to Bell from BSkyB last year, has been promoted from Senior VP to President of Bell ExpressVu. ** Alek Krstajic, formerly Chief Marketing Officer of Bell's Consumer Group, is now President of Bell Mobility. ** Kevin Crull, until recently a Senior VP Wireless at AT&T in the U.S., has joined Bell as President, Consumer Solutions. ** Ron Close, founder and former CEO of NetCom Canada, which was acquired by MetroNet and then merged into AT&T Canada in 1999, will head a new VoIP unit within Bell's consumer group. ... AND TWO EXECUTIVES LEAVE TELUS: Two top executives are leaving Telus, apparently as part of a cost-cutting program. EVP Corporate Strategy Chris Carty has already left, and EVP Corporate Development Mark Schnarr will leave soon, but will remain on the company's Board. ROGERS & SECOND CUP TEAM UP FOR WI-FI: Rogers Wireless has begun offering wireless Internet access in "select" Second Cup cafes across Canada. Service is free until April; after that, 15 cents/minute will be billed to the customer's Rogers Wireless account. Users who aren't Rogers customers will be able to charge time to a credit card at $9/hour or $15 for 24 hours. SUPERNET DELAYS COULD COST BELL $100 MILLION: The Alberta government has told Bell Canada to complete the SuperNet project by September 30 or risk losing its $100-million performance bond. The high-speed network, which aims to link 4,200 civic and provincial buildings in 429 communities, was originally supposed to be finished by January. ** Bell and its subcontractor, Axia NetMedia, have agreed to a completion and commissioning plan that they say will meet the new deadline. CHUBB SUES TO CANCEL NORTEL INSURANCE: Chubb Insurance Co. has asked an Ontario court to rescind $40 million in insurance coverage for legal costs of Nortel Networks directors and executives. The insurer says Nortel made misrepresentations to securities regulators "with the intent to deceive Chubb." Nortel says it will "vigorously pursue its rights under the policies." BELL TO RE-ACQUIRE OUTSOURCED TECHS: In 1996, Bell Canada spun off much of its residential installation and repair operations into a separate company, Entourage Technology Solutions Inc. Bell, which currently owns 33% of Entourage, has now reached an agreement to buy another 57% of it, then buy all shares and make it a wholly owned Bell subsidiary. COGECO ANNOUNCES VoIP PARTNERS: Cogeco Cable says its IP- based residential telephone service, to be launched later this year, will use Cisco technology, and will obtain connections to the public switched telephone network and long distance from Telus. ROGERS PICKS NORTEL: Rogers Cable says Nortel Networks is the primary provider of softswitch technology to support the digital phone service it plans to roll out this year. The value of the contract was not revealed. THOMSON SEEKS TO BUY GLOBEMEDIA: Published reports say that Woodbridge Co., an investment company owned by Ken Thomson, has offered $1.5 billion to buy BCE's 68.5% share of Bell Globemedia, which owns the Globe and Mail, the CTV network, and several cable TV channels. BCE head Michael Sabia has said that the media group is not a strategic holding, but has not yet shown any interest in selling it. UTELCOS MERGE SALES FORCES: Hydro One Telecom, which provides Ontario-wide data services, and Toronto Hydro Telecom have merged their sales teams. The Toronto utility telco is managing the joint sales force. CALL-NET REPORTS SOLID RESULTS: Call-Net had $211 million in revenue in Q4 2004, bringing its total for the year to $819 million, up 2% from 2003. Only 48% of its revenue is now from long distance, with the rest coming from local, data, and wireless. ** At year-end Call-Net had 310,800 residential local lines, 160,100 business lines, and 30,600 wireless lines. The company says it will launch a high-speed (DSL) Internet service in Q3. DATACOM MARKET UP 5%: A new report from the Convergence Consulting Group says the Canadian data and Internet access market grew by 5% in 2004 to $6.95 billion. See convergenceonline.com for more information. TELEBEC FILES DARK FIBRE TARIFF: Complying with Telecom Order 2004-21 (see Telecom Update #464), Telebec has filed tariffs for inter- and intra-exchange dark fibre. The rates are identical to Bell Canada's. www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Orders/2005/o2005-21.htm www.crtc.gc.ca/8740/eng/2005/T78.htm#200501545 CRTC OKAYS ACCESS TO U.S. EMERGENCY CODE: In the United States, Area Code 710 is used for federal government emergency services, but it cannot be dialed from Canada. CRTC Telecom Decision 2005-7 requires Canadian carriers to provide access to 710, and to route 710-calls as toll-free calls. www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Decisions/2005/dt2005-7.htm CHANGING OF THE GUARD AT WI-LAN: Calgary-based Wi-LAN, a Wi-Max equipment developer, has named Bill Dunbar as President and CEO, replaying Sayed-Amr El-Hamamsy. Dunbar was formerly CEO of Northwestel and WIC Connexus. Co-Founder Hatim Zaghloul continues as Chairman, but now without executive responsibility. TELECOM COALITION SETS TWO GALA DINNERS: The Coalition for Competitive Telecommunications, representing some 12,500 Canadian businesses, will hold networking and fundraising events in conjunction with Canada's two leading telecom conferences this year. The gala dinners and receptions are scheduled for: ** May 30, during the Canadian Telecom Summit, the principal event for telecom service and equipment providers. (www.telecomsummit.com) ** October 18, during Telemanagement Live, the premier conference on business telecom and networking. (www.telemanagementlive.com) ============================================================ 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 late Friday afternoon each 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 2005 Angus TeleManagement Group Inc. All rights reserved. For further information, including permission to reprint or reproduce, please e-mail rosita@angustel.ca or phone 905-686-5050 ext 500. The information and data included has been obtained from sources which we believe to be reliable, but Angus TeleManagement makes no warranties or representations whatsoever regarding accuracy, completeness, or adequacy. Opinions expressed are based on interpretation of available information, and are subject to change. If expert advice on the subject matter is required, the services of a competent professional should be obtained. ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) Subject: Re: Arbitration Left ID Theft Victim With $27,000 Bill Date: 25 Feb 2005 12:11:25 -0800 Marcus Didius Falco wrote: > Washington Post Staff Writer > Beth Plowman, a Damascus international public health adviser, was > shocked when she discovered that a $27,240 arbitration judgment had > been levied against her for credit card charges incurred by an > identity thief who bought sporting goods all across Europe. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What I do not understand, is who put > in the fix with the 'arbitrator'? Was it the credit card company or > the collection agency or ...? How could the credit card company ever > have reached a decision that the person was responsible for the fraud? > PAT] Yes, I thought your liability from a 'stolen' card (which this is) was $50.00? ------------------------------ From: Michael D. Sullivan Subject: Re: U.S. Appeals Court Debates Anti-Piracy TV Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2005 01:02:06 GMT > U.S. Circuit Judge Harry Edwards told the Federal Communications > Commission it "crossed the line" requiring the new anti-piracy > technology in next-generation television devices. But another appeals > judge on the panel questioned whether consumers can challenge the > FCC's rules in the courtroom. > Edwards, the former chief judge of the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals > for the District of Columbia, questioned the FCC's authority to impose > regulations affecting television broadcasts after such programs are > beamed into households. > The FCC's lawyer, Jacob Lewis, acknowledged the agency never had > exercised such ancillary power but maintained it was permitted by > Congress since lawmakers didn't explicitly outlaw it. > "Ancillary does not mean you get to rule the world," Edwards said. He > said the FCC "crossed the line" beyond its authority approved by > Congress. "You've gone too far," he said. "Are washing machines > next?" Don't read too much into the remarks of judges at oral argument, especially Edwards. He loves to bait lawyers, tell them they've got a loser argument, crossed the line, gone too far, etc., and then he signs onto a decision that goes along with that argument. It's happened more times than I can count. Michael D. Sullivan Bethesda, MD, USA Replace "example.invalid" with ".com". ------------------------------ From: Wesrock@aol.com Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2005 20:18:47 EST Subject: Re: Buyouts of AT&T, MCI Sign of Long Distance's Demise In a message date24 Feb 2005 07:41:49 -0800, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) writes: > The high capacity of fibre optic is really no big deal when looking at > long distance over the long haul. In the beginning, it was one very > thick wire barely carrying one call at a time. Longer calls required > setup of trunks connecting one town to the next as well as the > appropriate amplification (too much wouldn't work -- it had to be just > right). In the 1930s every long distance call needed considerable > workup by operators consulting routing charts, and engineers tinkering > with routing and amplification and transmission. Then, as now, most long distance calls were to nearby points to which the operator had direct trunks or on high-traffic routes to which operators also had direct access. If they needed routing information beyond that it was on the keyshelf (which had the great majority of the remaining routes shown) or on the keyshelf bulletin which had hundreds or thousands more routing instructions, well designed for very quick access. The percentage of calls which had to go to Rate & Route was only a very small percentage. > But they discovered carrier signals and some automation so that a > physical circuit could handle more calls and spread the cost. Setup > time was reduced saving money too. Carrier systems, and before that phantom circuits, were in general use well before the 1930s. In the 1950s, living in Oklahoma City, I found a Bell Labs Record or Bell System Technical Journal article describing "The Fourth Transcontinental," which was built in 1935. It was of special interest since the fourth "transcontinental" started in Oklahoma City and extended to the West Coast. From the East Coast to Oklahoma City by 1935 the toll network was so dense and of adequate capacity that there was no construction needed east of Oklahoma City. The article went into detail as to what building it started from in Oklahoma City, the considerations in routing the cables out of the building and down what streets, and eventually to the actual originating carrier system on SW 89th Street, with a photo of that building.) A new carrier system, I believe designated L carrier, was used on the open wire pairs from that building to the next repeater, the next, and so forth to the West Coast. Carrier systems were designated alphabetically, and while some never saw any use, L is pretty far down the alphabet to consider carrier systems as being developed in the 1930s. Wes Leatherock wesrock@aol.com wleathus@yahoo.com ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com Subject: Re: Are ISPs Blocking VoIP Calls? Date: 25 Feb 2005 09:01:11 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Jack Decker wrote: > Internet telephony companies Vonage and Nuvio have turned to federal > authorities with their complaints that some broadband providers are > blocking or degrading their Voice over IP (define) services. > Last week, the Edison, N.J.-based Vonage confirmed it had met with the > Federal Communications Commission (FCC) about the problem, but > stressed today it had filed no formal complaint. Since VOIP went to great lengths to get unregulated status, I don't understand why they would have any standing with a regulatory agency. AFAIK, ISPs are not regulated either. It is my understanding a business can pick and choose what vendors it wants to carry and what customers it wants to serve. A supermarket can freely pick and choose what brands it sells; it is not compelled to give shelf space to every particular brand or every particular food out there. Supermarkets are free to give preference in terms of price and product placement of their own house brands, and not even carry competitors if they choose. Accordingly, if an ISP wants to sell its own VOIP service, why should it be mandated to carry any others? The only factor would be customer acceptance. For VOIPS to go running crying to the FCC is hypocritical. They want free market when it suits them, but then regulation when they discover some aspects of the free market isn't to their liking. ------------------------------ From: tls@panix.com (Thor Lancelot Simon) Subject: Re: Advice on One Call in SS7 Versus Two Calls in VoIP Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2005 20:44:10 UTC Organization: Public Access Networks Corp. In article , wrote: > The issue that I'm running into is this. In VoIP, this looks like 2 > calls to the service providers that we're talking with. They want to > charge us for the DIDs, the inbound call, and the outbound call. I > know in SS7/ISUP you could do a call forward, and this would remain 1 > call -- not 2 calls. "in SS7/ISUP" you'd still end up creating a third leg, tying up twice as many trunks: so the telco would still charge you for the extra call, because they'd get double the cost for the single shot of revenue otherwise. With actual SS7 interconnection and the ability to set AIN 0.2 triggers on your subscribers' phone lines, you could implement this so that the voice path were unwound all the way back to the originating end office switch and rebuilt, so logically there would be no "third leg". However, good luck trying to actually do this if you are not administratively part of the same telco that owns the switches to which your POTS subscribers are physically connected. You *will not* be able to get the required TCAP interconnection and trigger access you would need to implement this service using SS7 under an interconnection agreement, and even if you were able to, you would probably end up paying quite a lot of money for it per call even if you avoided making that third leg in the call path physical. In other words, services like this are *not* economical in the "SS7/ISUP" world unless you happen to own the telco to which the subscribers are actually (not through resale) connected. Believe me, I spent five years pushing AIN interconnection to try to make a service that sounds much like that of your client economically viable. It didn't work. Maybe you can get a VoIP provider to go for it, since they don't have physical call legs to worry about so they don't *actually* incur twice the cost, but claiming that you wouldn't pay for two calls in the SS7 world is simply wrong and won't be a useful analogy unless the VoIP provider you're dealing with is, to put it bluntly, rather stupid. 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 ------------------------------ 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 V24 #84 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun Feb 27 01:36:09 2005 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j1R6a9k24363; Sun, 27 Feb 2005 01:36:09 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 01:36:09 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200502270636.j1R6a9k24363@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 V24 #85 TELECOM Digest Sun, 27 Feb 2005 01:36:00 EST Volume 24 : Issue 85 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Talon News Web Site Closes Amid Heavy Criticism (Lisa Minter) Tired of TiVo? Beyond Blogs? Podcasts Are Here (Monty Solomon) A Question About Cordless Phone Quality (jonathanztaub@yahoo.com) Ring Tone Surprise (Rich Greenberg) Alleged Mobster, Brother Guilty in Phone Scam (Patrick Townson) Re: Are ISPs Blocking VoIP Calls? (Tony P.) Re: Toll-Free Number Pointed to Sprint PCS Handset (Gary Breuckman) Re: Is Your Identity Safe? (Lisa Hancock) Re: Arbitration Left ID Theft Victim With $27,000 Bill (Gary Breuckman) Re: Arbitration Left ID Theft Victim With $27,000 Bill (Robert Bonomi) 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: 26 Feb 2005 18:03:10 -0800 From: Lisa Minter Subject: Talon News Web Site Closes Amid Heavy Criticism HOUSTON (Reuters) - A Texas-based Web site whose conservative connections touched off a White House media controversy has shut down "to reevaluate operations," according to a message posted on the site. A spokeswoman for Talon News said the site closed because its founder, Bobby Eberle of Pearland, Texas, "can only take so much beating" over the page's political slant, the Houston Chronicle reported on Friday. Talon, which could not immediately be reached for comment, came under fire after its White House reporter, who identified himself as Jeff Gannon, asked a politically loaded question at a White House press conference and was accused by critics of being used by the Bush administration to spread conservative propaganda. Since then, Gannon, whose real name is James Guckert, has been linked to gay porn Web sites and prostitution, and photos of him naked have circulated on the Web. Questions have been raised about how he was able to get coveted White House press credentials working for a little-known organization and working under a fake name, but the White House has denied giving him special treatment. Talon News founder Eberle is a Republican who has another Web site called GOPUSA.com, which touts the Republican Party and conservative causes. Talon News said in its message that the Web site would be redesigned and "a top-to-bottom review of staff and volunteer contributors" would be performed. "The recent public focus on Talon News, while much of it malicious, has indeed brought some constructive elements to the surface," the message said. Spokeswoman Jennifer Ohman was quoted by the Chronicle as saying the controversy had drawn strong criticism from Web site visitors. "The attention by and large was negative. If anything it seemed to fuel the fire," she 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 Limited, Internet News.. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2005 00:04:56 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Tired of TiVo? Beyond Blogs? Podcasts Are Here By KATE ZERNIKE GRAND FORKS, N.D., Feb. 16 - From a chenille-slipcovered sofa in the basement of their friend Dave's mom's house at the edge of a snow-covered field, Brad and Other Brad, sock-footed pioneers in the latest technology revolution, are recording "Why Fish," their weekly show. Clutching a microphone and leaning over a laptop on the coffee table, they praise the beauty of the Red River, now frozen on the edge of town, and plug an upcoming interview with a top-ranked professional walleye fisherman. Then they sign off. http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/19/technology/19podcasting.html?ex=1266555600&en=cfc2a0bf31c67986&ei=5090 ------------------------------ From: jonathanztaub@yahoo.com Subject: A Question About Cordless Phone Quality Date: 25 Feb 2005 13:27:35 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com I've got a question about cordless phones. Recently I bought a cheap Panasonic 900 MHz cordless phone. It is ok but has very low range and the sound quality has some hiss which is not terrible but is noticeable. The thing cost me around $30. I want to have a excellent sound quality over my cordless phone and a range greater than 40 meters. However, I hardly know anything about cordless phones. I do know that most (if not all) wireless routers operate on the 2.4 Ghz frequency and some phone with that frequency may interfere. There are a lot of tech stuff I don't understand like DSS (Digital Spread Spectrum or something like that) and other stuff I may not be aware of. There are expensive cordless phones out there for $150 and even more. I would like to get advice on which phone to buy (probably 900Mhz or 5.8Ghz) which will give me excellent sound quality. Aside from caller id and message indicator, I really don't need any other fancy stuff. ------------------------------ From: richgr@panix.com (Rich Greenberg) Subject: Ring Tone Surprise Date: 25 Feb 2005 17:59:54 -0500 Organization: Organized? Me? I had a visitor the other day and while we were talking, I hear the unmistakeable sound of a 500/2500 phone's metal gongs. Turned out that was his cell phone's ring tone. How unique! A cell phone ring that sounds like a telephone. Rich Greenberg Marietta, GA, USA richgr atsign panix.com + 1 770 321 6507 Eastern time. N6LRT 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: Patrick Townson Subject: Alleged Mobster, Brother Guilty in Phone Scam Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2005 19:56:39 -0600 Two brothers, one a reputed member of a New York crime family, have pleaded guilty to conspiring to bilk the government out of nearly $9 million by inflating expenses at a small Missouri telephone company. http://g.msn.com/0MNBUS00/2?http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7030884&&CM=EmailThis&CE=1 ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: Are ISPs Blocking VoIP Calls? Organization: ATCC Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2005 19:30:58 -0500 In article , hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com says: > Jack Decker wrote: >> Internet telephony companies Vonage and Nuvio have turned to federal >> authorities with their complaints that some broadband providers are >> blocking or degrading their Voice over IP (define) services. >> Last week, the Edison, N.J.-based Vonage confirmed it had met with the >> Federal Communications Commission (FCC) about the problem, but >> stressed today it had filed no formal complaint. > Since VOIP went to great lengths to get unregulated status, I don't > understand why they would have any standing with a regulatory agency. > AFAIK, ISPs are not regulated either. Please explain what they did to obtain non-regulated status. Their infrastructure is most certainly regulated as they use Paetec and Focal switches. What isn't' regulated is the last mile connections that they use. > It is my understanding a business can pick and choose what vendors it > wants to carry and what customers it wants to serve. A supermarket > can freely pick and choose what brands it sells; it is not compelled > to give shelf space to every particular brand or every particular food > out there. Supermarkets are free to give preference in terms of price > and product placement of their own house brands, and not even carry > competitors if they choose. But if an ISP starts blocking other providers of a service, they're practicing content management. Granted, they can do this so the consumer should vote with their feet and ditch blocking ISP's. > Accordingly, if an ISP wants to sell its own VOIP service, why should > it be mandated to carry any others? The only factor would be customer > acceptance. > For VOIPS to go running crying to the FCC is hypocritical. They want > free market when it suits them, but then regulation when they discover > some aspects of the free market isn't to their liking. Many aspects of regulation are an anachronism. IP is IP -- not circuit switched. Once you get over that fact you see that it is a completely different service. ------------------------------ From: Gary Breuckman Subject: Re: Toll-Free Number Pointed to Sprint PCS Handset Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2005 19:25:40 -0600 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Reply-To: puma@catbox.com Eric Friedebach wrote: > I am looking at taking on an additional product line that has its own > toll-free number. What I would like to do for now is to add an > additional Sprint PCS handset to my account and point that existing > toll-free number to it. > I'm not sure which carrier the toll-free is now, but I will change it > to one of the two carriers I use for the other toll-free numbers I > have now, either TTI (Worldcom) or United Nortel, with a leaning to > United Nortel. > Does anybody see a problem with my idea? > Eric Friedebach > /No hockey!/ There is at least one cell carrier (US Cellular?) that's been advertising free incoming calls. I'm not sure why you want your toll-free number to come to a cell phone, but this might be a reason to consider them if you expect a lot of calls. -- Gary Breuckman ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com Subject: Re: Is Your Identity Safe? Date: 25 Feb 2005 13:09:23 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Marcus Didius Falco wrote: > http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A49911-2005Feb24.html > How many times have you been asked for your personal financial > information and you gave it up without protest? Whether you protest or not is irrelevent. It's either provide the information or not get served. Thanks to concentration of businesses and services, it's harder and harder to go somewhere else. > Any one of those items is treasured by identity thieves. And if you've > been following the news lately, you should be very concerned about > identity theft. Yes, you should be. Especially since the authorities may not be doing enough about it. In a recent article in the Phila Inqr, the govt did nothing to go after a thief because the value failed to reach a high enough threshhold (there was only one victim). The thief didn't use a sophisticated computer program. Rather, the thief simply copied the victim's driver's license where he briefly worked as a used car salesman, then left town. There is nothing to stop say a restaurant waiter or drugstore clerk from copying your information illegally, then using it themselves or passing it on. Given that many of these jobs are lowpaid and very transitory, the opportunity and motivation for theft is much higher. Unfortunately, today's world virtually mandates risky transactions -- extensive use of credit cards and other personal data just to get by. I don't know the solution. I do think having a minimal threshhold before prosecuting is very foolish; they should go aggressively after anyone involved in identity theft. Having draconian punishments will mean nothing when the thieves know their risk of getting caught is nil; you will discourage theft by a high certainty of getting caught and punished, even with a low sentence. ------------------------------ From: Gary Breuckman Subject: Re: Arbitration Left ID Theft Victim With $27,000 Bill Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2005 19:29:35 -0600 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Reply-To: puma@catbox.com Lisa Hancock wrote: > Marcus Didius Falco wrote: >> Washington Post Staff Writer >> Beth Plowman, a Damascus international public health adviser, was >> shocked when she discovered that a $27,240 arbitration judgment had >> been levied against her for credit card charges incurred by an >> identity thief who bought sporting goods all across Europe. >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What I do not understand, is who put >> in the fix with the 'arbitrator'? Was it the credit card company or >> the collection agency or ...? How could the credit card company ever >> have reached a decision that the person was responsible for the fraud? >> PAT] > Yes, I thought your liability from a 'stolen' card (which this > is) was $50.00? That's for a card issued to YOU that's stolen, not for your identity stolen and card issued to someone else. Perhaps there were reasons beyond what's been released. -- Gary Breuckman ------------------------------ From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) Subject: Re: Arbitration Left ID Theft Victim With $27,000 Bill Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 03:10:10 -0000 Organization: Widgets, Inc. In article , Marcus Didius Falco wrote: > http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A48753-2005Feb23.html > By Caroline E. Mayer > Washington Post Staff Writer > Thursday, February 24, 2005; Page E01 > Beth Plowman, a Damascus international public health adviser, was > shocked when she discovered that a $27,240 arbitration judgment had > been levied against her for credit card charges incurred by an > identity thief who bought sporting goods all across Europe. [[.. munch ..]] > England. > When she found out about the charges, Plowman began trying to get them > dismissed through the collection agency, not realizing that she also > needed to show up at the arbitration hearing. She lost the arbitration > and had to hire a lawyer to persuade the collection agency pursuing > her for the debt to drop its claim. [[.. munch ..]] > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What I do not understand, is who put > in the fix with the 'arbitrator'? Fact: there *wasn't* any 'fix' put in with the arbitrator. Fact: Ms. Plowman *DID*NOT*SHOW*UP* at the arbitration hearing. Fact: In any legal (or quasi-legal) proceeding, the task of the presiding officer is to resolve any matters that are "in dispute". Fact: If one of the parties fails to show up, and, thus fails to contest the 'facts' presented by the other side, there are _no_ matters 'in dispute', and the side that *did* show up gets a 'default judgement' in their favor. Pure and simple, _their_ version of the 'facts' of the matter is better than what the other side presented -- since the other side presented "nothing". This is a "no brainer" decision in _any_ judicial/quasi-judicial proceeding. > Was it the credit card company or the collection agency or ...? How > could the credit card company ever have reached a decision that the > person was responsible for the fraud? PAT] The credit card company was operating on the basis that the charges _were_ 'legitimate'. It hadn't been established *yet* that there was 'fraud' involved. Ms. Plowman was dealing with the _collection_agency_, and the 'full story' was not getting back to the card issuer. And, presumably, when Ms. Plowman got the _notice_ of the arbitration hearing, she *assumed* (and we all know about _that_ word :) that it "wasn't important" to follow-up on, since she was "talking" to the collection agency on the matter. In article , Lisa Hancock wrote: > Marcus Didius Falco wrote: >> Washington Post Staff Writer >> Beth Plowman, a Damascus international public health adviser, was >> shocked when she discovered that a $27,240 arbitration judgment had >> been levied against her for credit card charges incurred by an >> identity thief who bought sporting goods all across Europe. > ... I thought your liability from a 'stolen' card (which this > is) was $50.00? Does a statutory limit in UNITED STATES LAW apply to transactions that occur _outside_ the USA, for a credit-card with a 'billing address' that is also *outside* the United States, "cleared" by a company outside of the United States? That company may be a subsidiary of a U.S. company, but that does not necessarily mean that U.S. law automatically applies. Doesn't the $50 limit apply only *after* you have _reported_ the card stolen? Which Ms. Plowman did _not_ do? [ I believe that there is a U.S. statutory limit of $250, if the card has -not- been reported as stolen. ] In the case of 'unauthorized charges', don't you have to notify the card company "promptly" after the monthly billing has gone out? Was the _credit- card_company_ *ever* told that the charges were bogus? Ms. Plowman was, apparently, dealing *only* with the collection agency. Did Ms. Plowman present *any* evidence -- either 'circumstantial' or 'hard facts' -- at the arbitration hearing, to substantiate the claim that the charges were the result of a "stolen" card (or identity)? ------------------------------ 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 V24 #85 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Feb 28 01:24:49 2005 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j1S6OnZ04265; Mon, 28 Feb 2005 01:24:49 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 01:24:49 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200502280624.j1S6OnZ04265@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 V24 #86 TELECOM Digest Mon, 28 Feb 2005 01:25:00 EST Volume 24 : Issue 86 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Some Sympathy for Paris Hilton (Monty Solomon) Internet Fame Is Cruel Mistress for Dancer of Numa Numa (Monty Solomon) Content Management, was: Are ISPs Blocking VoIP Calls? (Danny Burstein) Motorola A780 Operating System Hangs (Carl) Do Additional Users of Wireless Router Signal Affect Signal (pattyjamas) Other Firmware for Linksys wrt54g? Satori (pattyjamas@hotmail.com) How to Use Voicepulse VOIP With VPN? (3726414@spamhole.com) New Monopoly in Dept Stores - Federated and May to Merge (Lisa Hancock) Re: Toll-Free Number Pointed to Sprint PCS Handset (Isaiah Beard) Re: Toll-Free Number Pointed to Sprint PCS Handset (Steve Sobol) Re: Are ISPs Blocking VoIP Calls? (John Levine) Re: A Silly Question - 2-Line Phone With One Phone Number (SELLCOM Tech) Re: Buyouts of AT&T, MCI Sign of Long Distance's Demise (Dave Close) Re: 2002220000 Given as Caller ID (Mark Elliott) 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: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 21:24:02 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Some Sympathy for Paris Hilton By JOHN SCHWARTZ POOR Paris Hilton! As unlikely as the preceding sentence might seem, there is ample reason to pity Ms. Hilton, the heiress, reality-TV actress, product pitchwoman and accidental porn starlet. Ms. Hilton just can't seem to get a break in the digital age. She suffered embarrassment back in 2003 when a homemade sex tape hit the Internet, and now her Sidekick -- a high-tech toy that combines phone, organizer and camera and also lets users send e-mail and instant messages -- has been hacked. Its contents, like her movie, were posted to the Internet for any and all to enjoy. "She was pretty upset about it," someone told MSNBC. "It's one thing to have people looking at your sex tapes, but having people reading your personal e-mails is a real invasion of privacy." http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/27/weekinreview/27paris.html?ex=1267246800&en=72b477ed1c2b85ad&ei=5090 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 22:58:51 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Internet Fame Is Cruel Mistress for a Dancer of the Numa Numa By ALAN FEUER and JASON GEORGE There was a time when embarrassing talents were a purely private matter. If you could sing "The Star Spangled Banner" in the voice of Daffy Duck, no one but your friends and family would ever have to know. But with the Internet, humiliation -- like everything else -- has now gone public. Upload a video of yourself playing flute with your nose or dancing in your underwear, and people from Toledo to Turkmenistan can watch. Here, then, is the cautionary tale of Gary Brolsma, 19, amateur videographer and guy from New Jersey, who made the grave mistake of placing on the Internet a brief clip of himself dancing along to a Romanian pop song. Even in the bathroom mirror, Mr. Brolsma's performance could only be described as earnest but painful. His story suggests that the quaint days when cultural trinkets, like celebrity sex tapes, were passed around like novels in Soviet Russia are over. It says a little something of the lightning speed at which fame is made these days. To begin at the beginning: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/26/nyregion/26video.html?ex=1267160400&en=1d48bf539f85dc0e&ei=5090 NOTE: To read hundreds of New York Times news stories each day (the file updates every few minutes around the clock) along with headlines and stories from other major media, please fixate your browser to http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra/nytimes.html . PAT] ------------------------------ From: Danny Burstein Subject: Content Management, was Re: Are ISPs Blocking VoIP Calls? Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 06:37:23 UTC Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC In Tony P. writes: > But if an ISP starts blocking other providers of a service, they're > practicing content management. Granted, they can do this so the > consumer should vote with their feet and ditch blocking ISP's. You think that's interference? How's about this from Verizon: "3. You may NOT use the Service as follows:... ... "(j) to damage the name or reputation of Verizon, its parent, affiliates and subsidiaries, or any third parties; " http://www.verizon.net/policies/vzcom/tos_popup.asp [a] da nny ' sounds pretty close to a content description ' burstein [a] dunno if that url will work directly. if not, start with: www.verizon.net/fios/ _____________________________________________________ Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key dannyb@panix.com [to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded] ------------------------------ From: motorola_a780@hotmail.com (Carl) Subject: Motorola A780 Operating System Hangs Date: 27 Feb 2005 10:32:42 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Hi, In January, I bought a Motorola A780 in Taiwan and took it back to Europe. It is a nice phone with lots of software features and apparently Linux based operating system. Unfortunately, the operating system on my phone seems to hang a little time after startup. When it hangs, it becomes extremely SLOW. It is as if one of the tasks on the operating system is getting all of the CPU time. After waiting a long time, it can sometimes be reactivated again. The place and time when it hangs is also not always the same. Sometimes it even does not go through the startup screen. Sometimes it can play real-video movies. I have already reset and cleared the system several times via the menus on the Phone user interface. But it does not seem to solve the problems. When I first received the phone, it seems to work OK. But at a certain time it started to have this unpredictable slow behavior. Could it be the case that the basic linux system has been messed up? I contacted Motorola in Europe, but they do not seem to be able to give support for this mobile phone. Does anyone know how the more basic software of the system can be reset, such that I can start the system in the same way as a fully fresh en new phone? Many thanks, Carl ------------------------------ From: pattyjamas@hotmail.com Subject: Do Additional Users of Wireless Router Signal Affect Signal? Date: 27 Feb 2005 12:19:30 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Perhaps a dumb question, but a neighbor asked me if they had more than one person using the Internet via Wireless (in a home) would it affect the singal strength? I assume it would not affect the strength or drop a signal (open to correction -- this is a guess). But I do think that perhaps it might affect response time with more users. Thanks for your opinions/facts. (Windows 2000, Linksys WRT54G) Patty ------------------------------ From: pattyjamas@hotmail.com Subject: Other Firmware For Linksys wrt54g? Satori Date: 27 Feb 2005 12:21:39 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com I have put in a few wireless routers but never got into the internals. I now have one in my home and will be adding a Range Extender. I possess a WRT54G, running Windows 2000 and uploaded the latest firmware (version 3+ dated Dec 2004 I think) from Linksys.com. In reading the latest PC Mag, I ran across an interesting article on the Satori firmware and extra options it adds. (www.linksys.org) A few questions: 1. Is this the best choice of stable firmware for my WRT54G to add new options, perhaps increase signal power (if it really works) and tweak other necessary parameters for best performance/range? 2. Are there other firmware vendors worth looking at on linksys.org? Thank you, Patty ------------------------------ From: 3726414@spamhole.com Subject: How to Use Voicepulse VOIP With VPN? Date: 27 Feb 2005 20:59:48 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Hello, I currently run Windows XP Home and connect to the internet via a VPN. I can browse web sites fine, however I am not quite sure how to run Voicepulse VOIP thru the VPN. When the VPN is active and I am browsing, my Voicepulse is "dead" (expected). When I kill the VPN, Voicepulse comes back. My VPN is Windows XP based. Thanks. ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) Subject: New Monopoly in Dept Stores -- Federated and May Co to Merge Date: 27 Feb 2005 18:07:59 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com In this newsgroup the issues of monopoly are often discussed. I just heard on the radio that Federated Dept Stores and the May Co will merge, creating a huge department store chain. Previously Sears and Kmart merged. I am greatly disturbed by this. As a consumer, I have no choice left. At one time my city had a variety of different fine dept stores, with this merger we're down to ONE monopoly. Why are these mergers being allowed? What happened to the principle of anti-trust? This isn't a Bush thing, it went on full swing during the Clinton years, too. Beyond the lack of choice for consumers, employees (both sales clerks and professionals) will be at the mercy of the chain since they can't go to a competitor anymore if conditions get bad. Vendors will be squeezed, too. How is having a massive chain good for the economy? [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: One of the most beautiful department stores I ever saw was the old Wannamaker's store in Philadelphia, with its wonderful pipe organ on the upper floors of the main court, one of the largest organs in the world at the time. The last I heard, Lord and Taylor had taken over the store, and moved all the retail area to the lower floors, and closed off the upper floors entirely. It was Wannamaker in the 1960's, then Lord and Taylor sometime in the 1970's; I guess Philadelphia has gotten as bad as Chicago since those days. Is anything left there at all? PAT] ------------------------------ From: Isaiah Beard Subject: Re: Toll-Free Number Pointed to Sprint PCS Handset Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 10:35:57 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Eric Friedebach wrote: > not sure which carrier the toll-free is now, but I will change it > to one of the two carriers I use for the other toll-free numbers I > have now, either TTI (Worldcom) or United Nortel, with a leaning to > United Nortel. > Does anybody see a problem with my idea? Not at all. I have an MCI toll free number that points to my Sprint PCS phone, and have had no problems with it. All that's needed is to give your PCS number to MCI as the "ring to" number, and you're set. FYI, mobile-to-mobile calls will not be billed as such if the other person calls your toll free number, because the call is being routed off the Sprint network and then back on to it. So if you have unlimited PCS to PCS calls, be sure the other party calls your cell number, and not the toll free number. E-mail fudged to thwart spammers. Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have a toll-free 800 number pointed to my regular number, but in order to know *who is paying for the call* and partly to select the correct answer phrase, I have it ring in on a distinctive (ring-ring) line, as opposed to just my regular line. If I hear that ring-ring, I know it is a call on the 800 line, or just a wrong number dialed in on the distinctive number. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Steve Sobol Subject: Re: Toll-Free Number Pointed to Sprint PCS Handset Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 09:03:28 -0800 Organization: Glorb Internet Services, http://www.glorb.com Gary Breuckman wrote: >> I am looking at taking on an additional product line that has its own >> toll-free number. What I would like to do for now is to add an >> additional Sprint PCS handset to my account and point that existing >> toll-free number to it. 888-480-4638 used to forward to my Verizon cell phone. Now it forwards to my Sprint cell phone. The cell carriers will terminate the call -- they don't care where it's coming from. > There is at least one cell carrier (US Cellular?) that's been > advertising free incoming calls. > I'm not sure why you want your toll-free number to come to a cell > phone, but this might be a reason to consider them if you expect a lot > of calls. Eventually I'm going to switch the tollfree over to a VoIP line, but right now the cell is working just fine. I need to be accessible and am not near a landline very often. JustThe.net - Apple Valley, CA - http://JustThe.net/ - 888.480.4NET (4638) Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / sjsobol@JustThe.net / PGP: 0xE3AE35ED "The wisdom of a fool won't set you free" --New Order, "Bizarre Love Triangle" ------------------------------ Date: 27 Feb 2005 16:03:02 -0000 From: John Levine Subject: Re: Are ISPs Blocking VoIP Calls? Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA >> Since VOIP went to great lengths to get unregulated status, I don't >> understand why they would have any standing with a regulatory agency. >> AFAIK, ISPs are not regulated either. > Please explain what they did to obtain non-regulated status. They went through widely publicised legal battles with Minnesota and other states to avoid regulation. How could you have missed them? > Their infrastructure is most certainly regulated as they use Paetec > and Focal switches. What isn't' regulated is the last mile > connections that they use. They've also managed, so far at least, to avoid contributing to USF and other infrastructure funds and taxes that real phones pay. In this particular case I agree that they made their bed, so they'd better be prepared to sleep in it. I haven't looked in detail at the carrier specific service that Cox and other cablecos provide, but it is my impression that it works and is regulated a lot more like conventional phone service than like Vonage-style parasitic VoIP. R's, John ------------------------------ From: SELLCOM Tech support Subject: Re: A Silly Question - 2-Line Phone With One Phone Number? Organization: www.sellcom.com Reply-To: support@sellcom.com Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 21:33:26 GMT Boat posted on that vast internet thingie: > I do have call waiting. Are you saying that if I have call waiting then I > have two lines, therefore if I got a 2-line phone I would be able to use > both lines at the same time? Still confused ... No, call waiting does not mean more than one line. If you are not paying the telco for two lines, then you don't have two lines. Sorry if I was not clear before. Steve at SELLCOM http://www.sellcom.com Discount multihandset cordless phones by Panasonic 5.8Ghz 2line; TMC ET4300 4line Epic phone, OnHoldPlus, Brickmail voicemail Brick wall "non MOV" surge protection. Firewood splitters www.splitlogs.com If you sit at a desk www.ergochair.biz you owe it to yourself. ------------------------------ From: dave@compata.com (Dave Close) Subject: Re: Buyouts of AT&T, MCI Sign of Long Distance's Demise Date: 27 Feb 2005 21:11:08 -0800 Organization: Compata, Costa Mesa, California > This has also happened in the computer world. Once programmers had to > carefully track every character to avoid wasting scarce computer > memory, but today memory is so cheap those tracking skills (and > products) aren't as important anymore either. I don't think the parallels are very close. The impact of telco changes are almost purely economic, the cost of carrying a call keeps going down, but the impact of cheap computer memory has been sloppy programming. Yes, it gets done more quickly, but it often doesn't work quite right and no one knows it well enough to fix it. Of course, "long distance" may be dead, but we still have those, some of them on this list, who continue to insist on toll-alerting. Any possible value of that system gets less every day. I say to the advocates: isn't it about time to admit toll-alerting is a dead-end? 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 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 00:34:22 -0500 From: Mark Elliott Reply-To: Mark Elliott Subject: Re: 2002220000 Given as Caller ID FYI: There is a VOIP service allowing individuals to make free voice over ip calls worldwide. That id showed up on my cell phone too. Ask your friends if they are calling you using an internet phone! Hope this helps, Mark [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I've had some interesting phone calls lately where the caller ID was given as 'Unknown 119' and 'Unknown 103'. They were overseas calls from Nigeria looking for Lisa when she was not here one day. Playing along with them, I found out they were doing the Nigerian scam. They may have not been in Nigeria, but they certainly did not speak English as I know it. The calls came in on my Vonage VOIP line (which terminates on the PBX but goes through caller ID first.) 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 V24 #86 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Feb 28 20:37:45 2005 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j211bi114135; Mon, 28 Feb 2005 20:37:45 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 20:37:45 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200503010137.j211bi114135@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 V24 #87 TELECOM Digest Mon, 28 Feb 2005 20:37:00 EST Volume 24 : Issue 87 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Another Notice Isn't Answer (Lisa Minter) Why Our Broadband Policy's Still a Mess (Jack Decker) France Telecom Names a New Chief (Telecom dailyLead from USTA) Time Warner / Earthlink Not Honoring Promise (Fred Atkinson) Book Review: Inside the Spam Cartel, Spammer-X (Rob Slade) Shut the CELL Up! New York Post Online Edition: (Marcus Didius Falco) Re: Ring Tone Surprise (Ron Kritzman) Re: Ring Tone Surprise (Brad Houser) Re: Buyouts of AT&T, MCI Sign of Long Distance's Demise (Dave Garland) Re: Buyouts of AT&T, MCI Sign of Long Distance's Demise (Joseph) Re: Arbitration Left ID Theft Victim With $27,000 Bill (Marcus D Falco) Re: 2002220000 Given as Caller ID (Marcus Didius Falco) Re: AOL: You've got VoIP (ukcats4218016@yahoo.com) Re: Buyouts of AT&T, MCI Sign of Long Distance's Demise (Lisa Hancock) 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: 28 Feb 2005 09:26:42 -0800 From: Lisa Minter Subject: Another Notice Isn't the Answer By Fred H. Cate A California law requiring businesses to notify consumers when the security of their personal data is breached is a poor substitute for real action to address the scourge of identity theft. The law makes no distinctions based on the nature of the breach or the risk of subsequent harm. All affected consumers get notices, regardless of whether the company or law enforcement believes the breach will put consumers in danger. Fortunately, evidence suggests that most security breaches do not result in identity theft. But if the California law were adopted nationally, like the boy who cried wolf, the flood of notices would soon teach consumers to ignore them. When real danger threatened, who would listen? Thanks to recent financial and health privacy laws, U.S. consumers are already bombarded with more than 2 billion privacy notices annually. Most are never read; U.S. Postal Service surveys indicate that more than half may never be opened. Another notice hardly seems an appropriate response to identity theft. Moreover, the California law misses the forest for a single tree. The Federal Trade Commission reports that most identity theft is not committed by strangers using third-party data, such as that provided by ChoicePoint. Instead, it involves a relative or friend using data obtained from victims themselves -- situations ignored by the California law. The problem at the heart of most identity theft isn't access to information or consumer inattention, it is the lack of will and effective tools to verify the identity of consumers, especially when granting credit. Stealing even the most personal information would be useless to identity thieves -- whether friends or strangers -- if they could not use it so easily to open credit or obtain products and services in somebody else's good name. The focus on notices, therefore, is all too likely to distract lawmakers from the more urgent need for practical means to protect individuals' identities and to restore the good names of identity theft victims. Identity theft is a serious problem. It requires solutions more serious than just another notice. Fred H. Cate is a distinguished professor of law and director of the Center for Applied Cybersecurity Research at Indiana University. 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, Fred Cate, Center for Applied Cubersecurity Reasearch. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: When Visa first went into business, back in the early 1960's, they were known as BankAmericard, named after Bank of America which started the service. First National Bank of Chicago took an incredible hit on the program in the first two or three years; they lost millions of dollars on fraud. Their original idea was to just send out cards, no questions asked, no application required to every 'customer account' on their book; consequently credit cards were sent out unsolicited to accounts in the names of little babies (whose parents had a bank account for the child) and to people who were deceased, or had moved away. The post office was dropping credit cards all over the place. Many -- far too many -- of the first issue of credit cards fell into the 'wrong hands', to put it politely. When bank quit that foolishness and started requiring at the very least a signed application from everyone, that cut back somewhat on the fraud. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Jack Decker Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 11:47:46 -0500 Subject: Why Our Broadband Policy's Still a Mess http://news.com.com/Why+our+broadband+policys+still+a+mess/2008-1034_3-5590929.html By Jim Hu Staff Writer, CNET News.com Broadband is booming, DSL prices are dropping and cable modem speeds are increasing without additional charge. But to Michael Copps, one of two Democrats on the five-member Federal Communications Commission, that's not enough. As a policy-maker, Copps is outraged that the United States isn't near the top of countries with broadband penetration. While admitting the difficulty in comparing the United States with Japan, Korea or Norway, Copps also voices the growing restlessness of government officials who fret about the private sector's ability to ensure that all Americans get access to broadband. Big changes are reshaping the telecom industry. Giant mergers--SBC Communications acquiring AT&T, Verizon Communications swallowing MCI--raise huge questions about how consumers will be affected. More local-government efforts to create their own broadband networks are facing fierce resistance from the Baby Bells and cable companies such as Comcast. Calling broadband "the most central infrastructure challenge facing the country right now," Copps is wrestling with how to turn the United States into the most connected country in the world. Can private industries do it themselves, or will it take a regulatory prod to get there? Copps recently spoke with CNET News.com about these issues, as well as the recent complaints of Internet phone service Vonage that it's not getting a fair shake from local phone companies. I think we do a grave injustice in trying to hobble municipalities. That's an entrepreneurial approach, that's an innovative approach. Why don't we encourage that instead of having bills introduced--"Oh, you can't do this because it's interfering with somebody's idea of the functioning of the marketplace." And then the marketplace is not functioning in those places. The Bells say that government should not be competing with the private sector. They are not out there trying to put broadband in the municipality. Where is the competition? Full story at: http://news.com.com/Why+our+broadband+policys+still+a+mess/2008-1034_3-5590929.html How to Distribute VoIP Throughout a Home: http://michigantelephone.mi.org/distribute.html If you live in Michigan, subscribe to the MI-Telecom group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MI-Telecom/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 12:41:47 EST From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA Subject: France Telecom Names a New Chief Telecom dailyLead from USTA February 28, 2005 http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=19700&l=2017006 TODAY'S HEADLINES NEWS OF THE DAY * France Telecom names a new chief BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH * Report: Telcos' IPTV services to drive online entertainment growth * BellSouth charts its own course * Qwest would consider a revised bid for MCI * Charter Communications earnings may beat expectations USTA SPOTLIGHT * Carrier Grade Voice Over IP -- Now at www.telecom-bookstore.com EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES * Wireless technologies wow at 3GSM REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE * Speeding spread of broadband: FCC's Copps wants faster rollout * Opinion: Telecom Act of 1996 failed Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others. http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=19700&l=2017006 ------------------------------ From: Fred Atkinson Subject: Time Warner / Earthlink Not Honoring Promise Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 12:01:19 -0500 I periodically switch between Road Runner and Earthlink. I do it whenever one can offer me a deal that saves me some money for a few months. Some weeks back, I was on Road Runner. I spoke with Earthlink. They told me that I could get cablemodem from them for $19.95 per month for three months then the regular price from then forward. I told them to switch me. I've been on Earthlink several weeks since then. When the bill came, it was the regular charge. I called Earthlink, who transfered me to Time Warner. Time Warner says I am not eligible for the $19.95 per month and that they will not give me this rate (which was the incentive I was offered to switch over). I told them I would file a complaint against them. I can think of three options but I'm not sure which is the correct one. First, the county Franchise Office. Next, Consumer Affairs. Finally, the FCC. The Franchise office may be my best bet. I'll probably call them today or tomorrow to find out if they can help with this. Consumer Affairs may be out of jurisdiction, but I am not sure of that. The FCC may consider this a regional matter (or maybe not since they are leaning towards making Internet service under Federal jurisdiction). Can anyone make some suggestions? Regards, Fred [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: How many times have you switched between these two carriers? Did, by any chance, they say something about 'new customers only' rate? Perhaps they did not consider you a 'new customer' ? PAT] ------------------------------ From: Rob Slade Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 08:23:55 -0800 Subject: Book Review: "Inside the Spam Cartel", Spammer-X Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca BKINSPCA.RVW 20041224 "Inside the Spam Cartel", Spammer-X, 2004, 1-932266-86-0, U$49.95/C$72.95 %A Spammer-X %C 800 Hingham Street, Rockland, MA 02370 %D 2004 %G 1-932266-86-0 %I Syngress Media, Inc. %O U$49.95/C$72.95 781-681-5151 fax: 781-681-3585 www.syngress.com %O http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1932266860/robsladesinterne http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/1932266860/robsladesinte-21 %O http://www.amazon.ca/exec/obidos/ASIN/1932266860/robsladesin03-20 %O tl a rl 1 tc 2 ta 2 tv 1 wq 2 %P 413 p. %T "Inside the Spam Cartel: Trade Secrets from the Dark Side" Chapter one is supposed to be a bio of Spammer-X, and gives us the stereotypical blackhat life story. A business model of using spam to generate referrals to porn sites is presented in chapter two. Rough ideas of spamming techniques are outlined in chapter three, although it is rather short on details. (What details are given are quite suspect: SOCKS is not a mail server, but a type of circuit-level proxy firewall.) Chapter four lists various means of harvesting addresses, but concentrates on a) buying them, and b) random address verification. (Which doesn't provide much help to users in terms of suggestions for avoiding getting on spam lists.) Advertising tricks are balanced against some anti-blacklisting tips in chapter five. Interestingly, there is some talk of botnets, but not the SMTP (Simple Mail Transfer Protocol server) carrying viruses. (More technical goofs: Rich Text Format is hardly a Microsoft only technology.) Chapter six looks at various means of payment over the Internet which, for those of paranoid mindset, has some possibly useful points to make about dangers of different forms of online commerce. Chapter seven starts to present some information that may have some general value, as it reviews various types of spam filtering (and filter evasion) techniques. A more advanced examination is in chapter eight. Scams are listed in chapter nine, with a concentration on phishing and 419/advance fee frauds. The author is rather careless with the facts: phishing is initially described as any type of scam (although the text later contradicts itself by redefining the term as related only to banks), Nigeria does have a law against advance fee fraud, and it's Lagos, not Logos. Chapter ten runs through the provisions of the US CAN-SPAM act, and notes how spam can be legal. The material on the analysis of spam, in chapter eleven, initially has some helpful tips, but the later parts of the chapter grow vague. In chapter twelve, Spammer-X points out that the estimated costs of spam are wildly inflated, but his own numbers are biased very low, not counting the costs of maintaining filters, the loss of messages, difficulties in contacting people, spam to mailing lists, and even the problem of bounced messages which is raised in the following chapter. The statistics of spam listed in chapter thirteen are generally of little use. The most interesting data, on yearly trends, is incorrectly described in the text (switching the numbers for virus and spam) and says that spam is down over the Christmas period, which is not supported by the numbers themselves. (This is rather ironic: I reviewed the book over Christmas, and can attest to the fact that there was no drop in the numbers of spam on my accounts.) Chapter fourteen makes some rather far-fetched predictions about the future of spam. The questions in chapter fifteen's FAQ (Frequently Asked Questions list) seem to be simply random rather than significant. Spammer-X closes, in chapter sixteen, by telling us that he has given us an unbiased look at spam, and that spam is good. The promotional blurb on the cover implies that you may hate Spammer-X, but still need to know what he says. It also states that this is a "Must Read" for security professionals and law enforcement personnel. Forget it. The notes on anti-blacklisting tips and techniques for harvesting email, at least those given in the book, are going to be of very little help in either avoiding spam, or in tracking down the perpetrators. It may, of course, be that not all spamming techniques are provided here, and that knowledge of some of them would help system administrators or those who want to track down spammers -- but that still means the text is of extremely limited usefulness. The title is also rather misleading: the author (if, indeed, there is a single author and not a committee) presents us with one particular look at spamming activity. If there is a spam cartel "he" is definitely not in it. The work has some points of interest, but it isn't going to help anybody very much. (Including, fortunately, potential spammers.) copyright Robert M. Slade, 2004 BKINSPCA.RVW 20041224 ====================== (quote inserted randomly by Pegasus Mailer) rslade@vcn.bc.ca slade@victoria.tc.ca rslade@sun.soci.niu.edu Keep your perspective: it's all only ones and zeros http://victoria.tc.ca/techrev or http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 01:23:11 -0500 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Shut The Cell Up New York Post Online Edition: news http://www.nypost.com/news/regionalnews/40168.htm SHUT THE CELL UP By ANGELA MONTEFINISE February 20, 2005 -- Can you hear me now? Unsuspecting cellphone users may find themselves saying that more often now that cellphone jammers illegal gizmos that interfere with signals and cut off reception are selling like hotcakes on the streets of New York. "I bought one online, and I love it," said one jammer owner fed up with the din of dumb conversations and rock-and-roll ringtones. "I use it on the bus all the time. I always zap the idiots who discuss what they want from the Chinese restaurant so that everyone can hear them. Why is that necessary?" He added, "I can't throw the phones out the window, so this is the next best thing." Online jammer seller Victor McCormack said he's made "hundreds of sales" to New Yorkers. "The interest has gone insane in the last few years. I get all sorts of people buying them, from priests to police officers." Jammers come in a variety of shapes and sizes, from portable handhelds that look like cellphones to larger, fixed models as big as suitcases. Their sole goal is to zip inconsiderate lips. The smaller gadgets emit radio frequencies that block signals anywhere from a 50- to 200-foot radius. They range in price from $250 to $2,000. But don't expect to find jammers at the local Radio Shackl they're against Federal Communications Commission regulations because they interfere with emergency calls and the public airwaves. They are illegal to buy, sell, use, import or advertise. A violation means an $11,000 fine, but the FCC's Enforcement Bureau has yet to bust one person anywhere in the country. "This is not a crime that they're going after," said Rob Bernstein, deputy editor at New York City-based Sync magazine. He said jammers are here, and their use is multiplying. "Right now, there's a growing curiosity about jammers in the United States and New York," Bernstein said. "There's no better way to shut up a loudmouth on the phone, so people definitely want them and are finding ways to get them." One way is at a spy shop on Third Avenue, which sells medium-sized jammers out of a back room for $1,500. The sales clerk there said he had sold jammers to a 50-year-old man who bought one to use on the Long Island Railroad, and to restaurateurs. Folks who run auto auctions also buy them to stop people from chit-chatting about prices and rigging their bids, the clerk said. An employee at a West Village spy store said the shop also sells jammers, but only to people from other countries. One local purchaser bought a portable jammer last year, and said he likes using it at Roosevelt Field mall on Long Island. "One time I followed this guy around for 20 minutes," he said. "I kept zapping him and zapping him, until finally he threw the phone on the floor. I couldn't stop laughing. It was so cool." Jammers were first developed to help government security forces avert eavesdropping and thwart phone-triggered bombings. But by the late 1990s they were being sold to the public. There are suspicions that some hotel chains employ jammers to cut down on guests' cellphone use and boost in-room phone charges. With additional reporting by Lindsay Powers and Marianne Garvey NEW YORK POST is a registered trademark of NYP Holdings, Inc. NYPOST.COM, NYPOSTONLINE.COM, and NEWYORKPOST.COM are trademarks of NYP Holdings, Inc. Copyright 2005 NYP Holdings, Inc. 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 New York Post. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 10:51:41 -0600 From: Ron Kritzman Subject: Re: Ring Tone Surprise Rich Greenberg wrote: > I had a visitor the other day and while we were talking, I hear the > unmistakeable sound of a 500/2500 phone's metal gongs. Turned out > that was his cell phone's ring tone. Its one of the built-ins that comes with the newer Blackberrys. Emoveray ethay Igpay Atinlay otay eplyray ------------------------------ From: Brad Houser Subject: Re: Ring Tone Surprise Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 15:17:20 -0800 Organization: Intel Reply-To: Brad Houser Rich Greenberg wrote in message news:telecom24.85.4@telecom-digest.org: > I had a visitor the other day and while we were talking, I hear the > unmistakeable sound of a 500/2500 phone's metal gongs. Turned out > that was his cell phone's ring tone. > How unique! A cell phone ring that sounds like a telephone. My Sprint LG 5350 defaults to this. Certainly a head turner. Sometimes results in comments like "that sounds like my Grandmother's old phone". Brad Houser ------------------------------ From: Dave Garland Subject: Re: Buyouts of AT&T, MCI Sign of Long Distance's Demise Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 02:58:16 -0600 Organization: Wizard Information It was a dark and stormy night when dave@compata.com (Dave Close) wrote: > I say to the advocates: isn't it about time to admit toll-alerting > is a dead-end? Just as soon as a "long distance" call provides no incremental charge to my telephone bill. If you can suggest a deal (available in Minneapolis MN) for less than US$15/mo that includes both unlimited local and LD calls, I'd be grateful to hear of it. ------------------------------ From: Joseph Subject: Re: Buyouts of AT&T, MCI Sign of Long Distance's Demise Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 07:57:17 -0800 Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com On 27 Feb 2005 21:11:08 -0800, dave@compata.com (Dave Close) wrote: > Of course, "long distance" may be dead, but we still have those, some > of them on this list, who continue to insist on toll-alerting. Any > possible value of that system gets less every day. I say to the > advocates: isn't it about time to admit toll-alerting is a dead-end? Hey Dave while you're firing up controversies why don't we have a war about which is the better cellular phone standard CDMA or GSM? :) You have about as much of a chance of settling that one as settling on whether we need or don't need toll alerting. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 01:37:02 -0500 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Re: Arbitration Left ID Theft Victim With $27,000 Bill > http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A48753-2005Feb23.html > By Caroline E. Mayer > Washington Post Staff Writer > Thursday, February 24, 2005; Page E01 > When she found out about the charges, Plowman began trying to get them > dismissed through the collection agency, not realizing that she also > needed to show up at the arbitration hearing. She lost the arbitration > and had to hire a lawyer to persuade the collection agency pursuing > her for the debt to drop its claim. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What I do not understand, is who put > in the fix with the 'arbitrator'? Was it the credit card company or > the collection agency or ...? How could the credit card company ever > have reached a decision that the person was responsible for the fraud? > PAT] Her problem is that she didn't show up to contest the charges so the credit card company got a "default judgement." These can be vacated in court because you can appeal. But generally you can't appeal an arbitration award. hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) then noted: > Marcus Didius Falco wrote: >> Washington Post Staff Writer >> Beth Plowman, a Damascus international public health adviser, was >> shocked when she discovered that a $27,240 arbitration judgment had >> been levied against her for credit card charges incurred by an >> identity thief who bought sporting goods all across Europe. >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What I do not understand, is who put >> in the fix with the 'arbitrator'? Was it the credit card company or >> the collection agency or ...? How could the credit card company ever >> have reached a decision that the person was responsible for the fraud? >> PAT] > Yes, I thought your liability from a 'stolen' card (which this > is) was $50.00? Only if you notify them within 24 or 48 hours. She didn't notify them for weeks, until the bill came in. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 03:25:47 -0500 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Re: 2002220000 Given as Caller ID Mark Elliott wrote: > FYI: > There is a VOIP service allowing individuals to make free voice over > ip calls worldwide. That id showed up on my cell phone too. Ask your > friends if they are calling you using an internet phone! > Hope this helps, > Mark > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I've had some interesting phone calls > lately where the caller ID was given as 'Unknown 119' and 'Unknown 103'. > They were overseas calls from Nigeria looking for Lisa when she was > not here one day. Playing along with them, I found out they were doing > the Nigerian scam. They may have not been in Nigeria, but they certainly > did not speak English as I know it. The calls came in on my Vonage > VOIP line (which terminates on the PBX but goes through caller ID first.) > PAT] I recently had occasion to call Pakistan using a "dial-around" carrier in the US. The call appeared on the Pakistani's cell phone as a local call in Islamabad, meaning it was handled as a VOIP call. Some less-developed countries have made a major effort to prevent VOIP. However, it is my understanding that they are not successful for any length of time before the VOIP people figure out a work-around. ------------------------------ From: ukcats4218016@yahoo.com Subject: Re: AOL: You've got VoIP Date: 28 Feb 2005 08:25:51 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Although AOL's offer could sound pretty interesting, I'm going to stick with my current provider. So far, I have been pretty happy with SunRocket b/c their support system has cleared up any bumps or issues I've had. ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com Subject: Re: Buyouts of AT&T, MCI Sign of Long Distance's Demise Date: 28 Feb 2005 13:35:07 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Dave Close wrote: > I don't think the parallels are very close. The impact of telco > changes are almost purely economic, the cost of carrying a call keeps > going down, but the impact of cheap computer memory has been sloppy > programming. Yes, it gets done more quickly, but it often doesn't work > quite right and no one knows it well enough to fix it. Sloppy programming is an altogether separate issue. Indeed, it was easier to make mistakes under the old way due to tracking the many little bits that could have multiple meanings in different scenarios, and programs that did fancy tricks to save memory and CPU cycles. The stuff I referred too is mostly technical but doesn't hurt code quality. For instance, on the mainframe a data field would be specified in various classes of numeric to maximize efficiency. We don't bother with that today (unless the files and processing are really large and complex) because the computers handle millions of records so very quickly. (PCs support some of that too but I doubt many use PC's packed decimal fields). Cheap computing has allowed things like spreadsheets and word processing to be freely available to individuals. We used to do that stuff on the mainframe, but it was very wasteful to tie up a big expensive mainframe as a typewriter or adding machine. > Of course, "long distance" may be dead, but we still have those, some > of them on this list, who continue to insist on toll-alerting. Any > possible value of that system gets less every day. I say to the > advocates: isn't it about time to admit toll-alerting is a dead-end? Unlimited long distance is available reasonably cheaply for residential customers, but I think business customers still have to pay pretty high WATS rates. It's much cheaper today, but for businesses the meter is still running, so some controls make sense. Remember today business controls are much less than in years past. In the past, only big bosses would be able to dial outside, and still had to place toll calls with the PBX operator who would write up a toll ticket. Not like that today. ------------------------------ 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 V24 #87 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Mar 1 16:04:14 2005 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j21L4Es22650; Tue, 1 Mar 2005 16:04:14 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 16:04:14 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200503012104.j21L4Es22650@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 V24 #88 TELECOM Digest Tue, 1 Mar 2005 16:03:00 EST Volume 24 : Issue 88 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Ex-WorldCom CEO Denies Role in Fraud (Lisa Minter) Time Warner Inc.'s Phone Service Shows Cable's Growing Clout (J Decker) Suggestions Wanted For Router (Fred Atkinson) Internet Society Launches Expand Individual Members (Internet Society) VPN - Problems Pinging LAN IPs (paulfoel) Ebbers Denies Knowledge of Fraud (Telecom dailyLead from USTA) Re: Buyouts of AT&T, MCI Sign of Long Distance's Demise (Pat Townson) Re: Arbitration Left ID Theft Victim With $27,000 Bill (Patrick Townson) Re: Arbitration Left ID Theft Victim With $27,000 Bill (Carl Navarro) Re: Time Warner / Earthlink Not Honoring Promise (Fred Atkinson) Re: Lots of Personal Reports Leaked Out From Choicepoint (AM) Re: 2002220000 Given as Caller ID (Geoffrey Welsh) 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: 28 Feb 2005 19:28:32 -0800 From: Lisa Minter Subject: Ex-WorldCom CEO Denies Role in Fraud By Paul Thomasch NEW YORK (Reuters) - Former WorldCom Inc. Chief Executive Bernard Ebbers took the witness stand in his criminal trial on Monday and flatly denied playing any role in the $11 billion accounting fraud at the telecommunications company. Ebbers, who faces up to 85 years in prison if convicted of fraud and other charges in connection with the accounting scandal, told jurors he would have put a stop to the fraud had he known about it. Instead, he said, he was kept in the dark about any financial tricks used by Chief Financial Officer Scott Sullivan to hide soaring expenses or inflate revenues. "He never told me he had made an entry that wasn't right," Ebbers, 63, testified. "If he had, we wouldn't be here today." The former basketball coach, milkman and bouncer said he had some "general supervisory responsibility" for accounting, but was "not involved in the actual conduct of the department." Control of the department was left to Sullivan, Ebbers told a Manhattan federal courtroom packed with press, spectators, and supporters, including his wife. "As I said before, I wasn't advised by Scott Sullivan of anything ever being wrong with accounting at WorldCom." As expected, Ebbers' testimony contradicted that of Sullivan, who pleaded guilty to fraud and implicated his boss during earlier testimony as the government's star witness. Sullivan testified that he warned his boss that the only way the company could meet its earnings projections would be to make "adjustments" to the financial statements. Ebbers repeatedly responded by telling Sullivan that "we have to hit our numbers," according to the finance chief's testimony. But no other witness has been able to directly link Ebbers to the fraud, meaning the case will largely come down to whether jurors believe Sullivan or Ebbers, who had been portrayed as an intimidating and detail-oriented boss. Ebbers, dressed in a blue suit and pale yellow tie, sought to present a different view on Monday, speaking in detail about his teenage years on a Navajo reservation, his five daughters, and his humble beginnings in the telecommunications business. At one point, he appeared confused by the page numbers on a document introduced into evidence; at another he told jurors he'd donated more than $100 million to charities; later he testified that he considered retirement in 2001 when doctors said "your pumper isn't pumping the way it should." Speaking with a folksy style, Ebbers said his management style reflected that of a coach, who motivated his staff "to play together" like a team. "I considered myself demanding," he said "I expected results. I sometimes said things I shouldn't have said maybe," he testified. Reid Weingarten, lead attorney for the defense, wrapped up his questioning of Ebbers late Monday afternoon, after displaying evidence that Ebbers purchased $5.3 million worth of WorldCom stock with the last of his savings in May 2002, just weeks after he had been forced to resign. By June, investigators uncovered the accounting problems, and all of Ebbers' stock -- including the shares he had just purchased -- eventually became worthless. Asked why he bought more stock after his resignation, Ebbers said: "I believed WorldCom was a great company." He added that he felt "shock" when informed of the accounting problem. "I never thought anything like that had gone on. I had no earthly idea anything like that would occur." After Weingarten's questions, Assistant U.S. Attorney David Anders cross-examined Ebbers about his knowledge of accounting and his role as the company's ultimate decision maker. Anders' cross-examination is scheduled to continue on Tuesday. 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 . Hundreds of 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 Limited. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ From: Jack Decker Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 12:39:14 -0500 Subject: Time Warner Inc.'s Phone Service Shows Cable's Growing Clout http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/mld/myrtlebeachonline/news/local/11005010.htm Time Warner Inc.'s phone service shows cable's growing clout Industries offering similar products By Peter Grant The Wall Street Journal Glenn Britt, chief executive officer of Time Warner Inc.'s cable TV unit, surprised investors and analysts in late 2003 when he announced that his operation planned to roll out phone service using Internet technology in all 31 of its markets by the end of 2004. Earlier moves by cable companies into phone service using traditional "circuit-switched" technology -- the type used by most phone companies -- have taken far longer. Cox Communications Inc., for example, launched phone service in 1997 over its cable lines yet today offers it in just 17 of its 26 markets. "There was a certain skepticism," Britt said. But Time Warner Cable, the country's second-largest cable operator, hit its target. While the rollout has involved a fair share of growing pains, the company now offers phone service in parts of 27 states from Hawaii to Maine. Time Warner has signed up more than 220,000 phone customers and is adding more than 11,000 each week. The speed with which Time Warner moved with the new Internet technology underscores why traditional phone companies are rushing these days to add services such as TV -- and to bulk up by merging. That's because local-phone providers such as Verizon Communications Inc., which plans to buy MCI Inc., and SBC Communications Inc., which has a deal to buy AT&T Corp., are starting to face their most serious competitors yet for local service. "Time Warner shows the severity of the threat that cable companies can pose to incumbent telephone providers," says Kate Griffin, a senior analyst with Yankee Group, a technology consulting firm in Boston. She says cable providers were more cautious in rolling out older circuit-switched phone systems in part because of their cost. "But the margins are there for [Internet phone technology.] Once they decide to enter, they're going to come at it with full guns." That's why other cable companies also are moving quickly. Comcast Corp., the country's largest cable operator, announced last month that it plans to roll out Internet phone service and expects to offer it to all 40 million households its system reaches by the end of next year. (Comcast has offered circuit-switched phone service in some markets for several years.) Cox has begun to use the Internet technology as well when it introduces phone service in new regions. Nationwide, more than 80 percent of households should be able to get phone service from a cable company by the end of 2007, Yankee Group predicts. Full story at: http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/mld/myrtlebeachonline/news/local/11005010.htm How to Distribute VoIP Throughout a Home: http://michigantelephone.mi.org/distribute.html If you live in Michigan, subscribe to the MI-Telecom group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MI-Telecom/ ------------------------------ From: Fred Atkinson Subject: Suggestions Wanted for Router Reply-To: fatkinson@mishmash.com Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 19:11:00 GMT Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net I need to get another router for my home Cisco lab and I was hoping that someone could suggest which would be a best choice. I'd prefer it be rack mountable (one rack unit high). It needs to have at least one (preferably two) fast ethernet ports. It must support trunking (both dot1q and isl) so that it can be interfaced to a switch. Cost is a factor (since it's for home Cisco lab use). If knew what was a best choice, I could possibly track one down on Ebay. I currently have three 2501s. Each has a transceiver, but those won't support trunking for my lab assignments. I'll likely sell one of them when I get this one. Thanks in advance for any suggestions you might have. Fred ------------------------------ From: Internet Society Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 14:00:30 +0100 Subject: Internet Society Launches Epanded Individual Membership Program Reston, VA - 1st March 2005 - The Internet Society is pleased to announce the launch of its expanded Individual Membership Program. A new membership level, called ISOC Members, is now available worldwide at a membership fee of US$75 annually. Through this new membership level ISOC Members have an important opportunity to contribute directly to supporting ISOC's programs and activities. Membership fees will be used to enable greater support of activities that meet the challenges facing the Internet and ISOC today -- for example the Internet governance debate and the Internet standards process. ISOC Members will be reinforcing their commitment to ISOC's goals of keeping the Internet open and benefiting people everywhere. They will also participate in the elections process for ISOC Board of Trustee members and further additional benefits are currently under consideration. ISOC's free membership level will remain just as before and will now be called Associate Members. ISOC Members and Associate Members will share the goal of supporting ISOC's Mission and Principles. All members will have on-line access to ISOC's announcements, briefings, and newsletters. ISOC's surveys and discussion groups remain available to all members. ISOC's Chapter program will continue to help ISOC members participate in activities that are both important and local to them. A complete statement regarding the benefits of the new class of membership will be sent to the current membership in the near future, with specific instructions regarding how to change membership status or join at the new level. The online membership application for both levels is available at: www.isoc.org/members/ ### ABOUT ISOC The Internet Society (www.isoc.org) is a not-for-profit membership organization founded in 1991 to provide leadership in Internet related standards, education, and policy. With offices in Washington, DC, and Geneva, Switzerland, it is dedicated to ensuring the open development, evolution and use of the Internet for the benefit of people throughout the world. ISOC is the organizational home of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) and other Internet-related bodies who together play a critical role in ensuring that the Internet develops in a stable and open manner. For over 13 years ISOC has run international network training programs for developing countries and these have played a vital role in setting up the Internet connections and networks in virtually every country connecting to the Internet during this time. ### FOR FURTHER DETAILS David McAuley Membership Director E-mail: mcauley@isoc.org Internet Society 1775 Wiehle Ave. Suite 102 Reston, VA 20190-5108 USA ------------------------------ From: paulfoel Subject: VPN - Problems Pinging LAN IPs Date: 1 Mar 2005 08:07:07 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Connecting XP client to VPN endpoint (which is a Draytek router). Get allocated a virtual IP address (say, 10.0.0.200 and 255.255.255.255) with the default gateway the same. Can ping both WAN and local ports of the router (local port is 10.0.0.1). However, when I try to ping servers on the LAN I get packet loss. Sometimes it works, sometimes not. (Server IPs are 10.0.0.10 and 10.0.0.11). Help? ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 13:14:03 EST From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA Subject: Ebbers Denies Knowledge of Fraud Telecom dailyLead from USTA March 1, 2005 http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=19737&l=2017006 TODAY'S HEADLINES NEWS OF THE DAY * Ebbers denies knowledge of fraud BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH * Cablevision ends talks to sell Voom unit to Charles Dolan * Verizon, Qwest exchange barbs * Comcast to give away music players to new broadband customers * NTT DoCoMo hits 3G milestone USTA SPOTLIGHT * USTA Webinar: Intercarrier Compensation Updates -- Wednesday, March 2, 1:30 p.m. EST EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES * Interactive TV services gain traction * IMS could speed IP transition REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE * Porposal would criminalize VoIP use in Costa Rica * Opinion: Light regulation works better for today's telecom market * Former telecom mogul charged in tax case Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others. http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=19737&l=2017006 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 21:15:30 EST From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Re: Buyouts of AT&T, MCI Sign of Long Distance's Demise Dave Close asked why toll alerting is still an issue: > Of course, "long distance" may be dead, but we still have > those, some of them on this list, who continue to insist on > toll-alerting. Any possible value of that system gets less > every day. I say to the advocates: isn't it about time to > admit toll-alerting is a dead-end? Lisa Hancock responded: > Unlimited long distance is available reasonably cheaply for > residential customers, but I think business customers still have > to pay pretty high WATS rates. It's much cheaper today, but for > businesses the meter is still running, so some controls make sense. > Remember today business controls are much less than in years past. > In the past, only big bosses would be able to dial outside, and > still had to place toll calls with the PBX operator who would write > up a toll ticket. Not like that today. My question to Lisa and Dave, is WATS still offered by most telcos these days? The theory was that bulk purchase of long distance (WATS) got you a cheaper rate per call, when it wa purchased by the hour. How much cheaper can it get? I thought WATS was now obsolete. PAT ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 21:43:30 EST From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Re: Arbitration Left ID Theft Victim With $27,000 Bill Marcus D. Falco responded to a question posed by myself regards the original newspaper article and an observation by Lisa Hancock: >> Her problem is that she didn't show up to contest the charges so >> the credit card company got a "default judgement." These can be >> vacated in court because you can appeal. But generally you can't >> appeal an arbitration award. >> Yes, I thought your liability from a 'stolen' card (which this >> is) was $50.00? > Only if you notify them within 24 or 48 hours. She didn't notify them for > weeks, until the bill came in. Did you mean to say 'notify them within 24 or 48 hours _of the discovery of the fraud/loss_'? Unless a person has online access to their account via computer (in which case a daily audit of your account would be a good idea, even if not practical), exactly how would one know their card had been 'stolen' or abused until the statement arrived. Now, if your statement did arrive, and all that fraud was spotted, then indeed it would be prudent to call and tell them _immediatly_ about it. I know in the interstate handling of freight, rules about 'notify the shipper and/or delivery service immediatly about damage to the shipment' have an exception for 'concealed damage'. Even if you signed off to accept the shipment, you can later discover the damage (when the shipment is unpacked, for example). Can't the same thing be done in the case of 'concealed fraud' that you do not discover until after the fact? I know my credit card is 'online' so I can check it at any time on a web page, and I would notify all concerned of fraud the instant I saw it on the credit company's web site. PAT ------------------------------ From: Carl Navarro Subject: Re: Arbitration Left ID Theft Victim With $27,000 Bill Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 04:01:54 GMT Organization: Road Runner High Speed Online http://www.rr.com On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 01:37:02 -0500, Marcus Didius Falco wrote: >> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A48753-2005Feb23.html >> By Caroline E. Mayer >> Yes, I thought your liability from a 'stolen' card (which this >> is) was $50.00? > Only if you notify them within 24 or 48 hours. She didn't notify them for > weeks, until the bill came in. What was she thinking? She should have known that someone stole her identity BEFORE the bill came in. Oh, maybe she wasn't a psychic afer all ... ------------------------------ From: Fred Atkinson Subject: Re: Time Warner / Earthlink Not Honoring Promise Reply-To: fatkinson@mishmash.com Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 06:40:13 GMT Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: How many times have you switched > between these two carriers? Did, by any chance, they say something > about 'new customers only' rate? Perhaps they did not consider you > a 'new customer' ? PAT] Pat, I have switched between the two of them a number of times. I always tell them that I switch back and forth and ask them to confirm that I am eligible before making any switch. No, they did not say anything about new customers only. They never have any of the times I switched. And if they did not consider me eligible for this, they should have either told me immediately or called me to discuss their mistake before sending me a bill instead of just sending it to me without the savings I was promised. Fred ------------------------------ From: AM Subject: Re: Lots of Personal Reports Leaked Out From Choicepoint Date: 1 Mar 2005 08:29:13 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com > "Choicepoint" is one of the major accumulators of persnal info about > just about everybody in the US. It's used by credit agencies, > businesses, landlords, law enforcement, oh, and also, identity > thieves. I checked their web-site, I think they sell our data through so many different channels. Through their direct mail service, they even seem to sell personal information of infants ("new parents data"), our "estimated income," etc, for only a few cents per person ... http://www.choicepointdirectlink.net/MDL/index.html# As you know, our address and stuff are all available on the internet. Just see sites like bestpeoplesearch.com, intelius.com, etc. Are they getting data from companies like choicepoint? ------------------------------ From: Geoffrey Welsh Subject: Re: 2002220000 Given as Caller ID Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 15:30:38 -0500 Marcus Didius Falco wrote: > I recently had occasion to call Pakistan using a "dial-around" > carrier in the US. The call appeared on the Pakistani's cell phone as > a local call in Islamabad, meaning it was handled as a VOIP call. I've seen that in North America for years and I don't think it implies VOIP at all ... calls from the U.S. sometimes show local number for caller ID when they ring through to my phone, and I always assumed (yeah, I know ...) that all it meant was that the long distance link terminated locally (and, I would guess, without the correct caller ID) at some local access point that had its own caller ID designation. I understand why a VOIP link might do that, but I don't see why _only_ VOIP would do that. Geoffrey Welsh Ambidextrous? No, I said I'm ambinonscattous - I don't give a crap either way! ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V24 #88 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Mar 1 22:21:22 2005 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j223LL625203; Tue, 1 Mar 2005 22:21:22 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 22:21:22 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200503020321.j223LL625203@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 V24 #89 TELECOM Digest Tue, 1 Mar 2005 22:20:00 EST Volume 24 : Issue 89 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson GSM Cell Density in Metropolitan Areas (Enrico) Re: Suggestions Wanted for Router (Tony P.) Re: Suggestions Wanted for Router (T. Sean Weintz) Re: Shut The Cell Up (Paul A Lee) Re: Shut The Cell Up New York Post Online Edition (Fritz Whittington) Re: Arbitration Left ID Theft Victim With $27,000 Bill (Rich Greenberg) Re: Ring Tone Surprise (Dave VanHorn) Re: Buyouts of AT&T, MCI Sign of Long Distance's Demise (John R. Levine) Re: 2002220000 Given as Caller ID (John R. 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: enrico Subject: GSM Cell Density in Metropolitan Areas Date: 1 Mar 2005 14:42:46 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Dear all, What is the average (or range) value for GSM cell (i.e. base station, antenna, ..) density in metropolitan areas? (e.g. in cities like London, Paris, Rome.) Is there any publicly available information about the topic? Please note that I am *not* asking for actual base station location, as I know that information is protected, rather an average figure (e.g. each operator has on average N base stations per sqKm in a metropolitan area). Is there any "example" data set available from ETSI? Thank you in advance for any pointer. Regards, Enrico ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: Suggestions Wanted for Router Organization: ATCC Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 16:48:35 -0500 In article , fatkinson@mishmash.com says: > I need to get another router for my home Cisco lab and I was hoping > that someone could suggest which would be a best choice. > I'd prefer it be rack mountable (one rack unit high). It needs to > have at least one (preferably two) fast ethernet ports. It must > support trunking (both dot1q and isl) so that it can be interfaced to > a switch. > Cost is a factor (since it's for home Cisco lab use). If knew what > was a best choice, I could possibly track one down on Ebay. > I currently have three 2501s. Each has a transceiver, but those won't > support trunking for my lab assignments. I'll likely sell one of them > when I get this one. > Thanks in advance for any suggestions you might have. > Fred The 2611's will from what I recall. With the number of .com busts there are tons of them floating around for sale, some to be had for less than $500. ------------------------------ From: T. Sean Weintz Subject: Re: Suggestions Wanted for Router Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 17:14:52 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Fred Atkinson wrote: > I need to get another router for my home Cisco lab and I was hoping > that someone could suggest which would be a best choice. > I'd prefer it be rack mountable (one rack unit high). It needs to > have at least one (preferably two) fast ethernet ports. It must > support trunking (both dot1q and isl) so that it can be interfaced to > a switch. > Cost is a factor (since it's for home Cisco lab use). If knew what > was a best choice, I could possibly track one down on Ebay. > I currently have three 2501s. Each has a transceiver, but those won't > support trunking for my lab assignments. I'll likely sell one of them > when I get this one. > Thanks in advance for any suggestions you might have. > Fred LOL ... Good thing you said it was for your "Cisco lab" -- I was about to suggest a Nortel ARN as a good low priced option. Last brand I usually recommend to folks is Cisco. I for usually reccomend Juniper or Bay Networks(aka:Nortel) in that order. If they ask for a third choice, I tell 'em Riverstone . Cisco is overpriced underperforming junk, IMO. ------------------------------ From: Paul A Lee Subject: Re: Shut The Cell Up Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 17:31:45 -0500 Organization: Rite Aid Corporation In TELECOM Digest V24 #87, Marcus Didius Falco wrote (in part): > SHUT THE CELL UP > By ANGELA MONTEFINISE > Unsuspecting cellphone users may find themselves saying that > more often now that cellphone jammers illegal gizmos that > interfere with signals and cut off reception are selling like > hotcakes on the streets of New York. > "I bought one online, and I love it," said one jammer owner > fed up with the din of dumb conversations and rock-and-roll > ringtones. > "I use it on the bus all the time. I always zap the idiots > who discuss what they want from the Chinese restaurant so > that everyone can hear them. Why is that necessary?" > He added, "I can't throw the phones out the window, so this > is the next best thing." > One local purchaser bought a portable jammer last year, and > said he likes using it at Roosevelt Field mall on Long Island. > "One time I followed this guy around for 20 minutes," he > said. "I kept zapping him and zapping him, until finally he > threw the phone on the floor. I couldn't stop laughing. It > was so cool." Great ... So now we have self-important, inconsiderate jerks being challenged by self-important, malicious jerks. The FCC may not be inclined to pursue the jammer users -- yet. I can hardly wait to see what happens, though, when some jammer jerk prevents an emergency assistance call from being placed following a crime or a heart attack. Let's just hope the victim in such an instance is the jerk with the jammer. Paul A Lee Sr Telecom Engineer ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 18:14:36 -0600 From: Fritz Whittington Subject: Re: Shut The Cell Up New York Post Online Edition: news On or about 2005-02-28 00:23, Marcus Didius Falco whipped out a trusty #2 pencil and scribbled: > http://www.nypost.com/news/regionalnews/40168.htm > SHUT THE CELL UP > By ANGELA MONTEFINISE > February 20, 2005 -- Can you hear me now? > Unsuspecting cellphone users may find themselves saying that more > often now that cellphone jammers illegal gizmos that interfere with > signals and cut off reception are selling like hotcakes on the streets > of New York. Seems to me someone ought to sell a gadget that detects the jammer signal and allows you to track it down. This I think is perfectly legal, being only a signal detector and strength meter, basically. You could probably sell millions at $50 each and still make a mint of money. Perhaps have a handy wrist-strap for attaching the 4-pound (1.8 kg) hammer accessory used to disable the illegal equipment. Fritz Whittington "You can get much farther with a kind word and a gun than you can with a kind word alone." -- Al Capone ------------------------------ From: richgr@panix.com (Rich Greenberg) Subject: Re: Arbitration Left ID Theft Victim With $27,000 Bill Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 00:39:12 +0000 (UTC) Organization: Organized? Me? In article , Carl Navarro wrote: > On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 01:37:02 -0500, Marcus Didius Falco > wrote: >>> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A48753-2005Feb23.html >>> By Caroline E. Mayer >>> Yes, I thought your liability from a 'stolen' card (which this >>> is) was $50.00? >> Only if you notify them within 24 or 48 hours. She didn't notify them for >> weeks, until the bill came in. > What was she thinking? She should have known that someone stole her > identity BEFORE the bill came in. > Oh, maybe she wasn't a psychic afer all ... Part of the problem was that someone claiming to be her sister called MBNA and changed the address, so the statements never arrived. True, this SHOULD have set off an alarm, but ... The last time I changed the billing address for a CC, they sent a letter to BOTH addresses confirming it. Of course as I had already moved, the one to the old address was forwarded to the new address ... Rich Greenberg Marietta, GA, USA richgr atsign panix.com + 1 770 321 6507 Eastern time. N6LRT 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 ------------------------------ Reply-To: Dave VanHorn From: Dave VanHorn Subject: Re: Ring Tone Surprise Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 20:51:27 -0500 I had a visitor the other day and while we were talking, I hear the > unmistakeable sound of a 500/2500 phone's metal gongs. Turned out > that was his cell phone's ring tone. > How unique! A cell phone ring that sounds like a telephone. Something you never see anymore, is the "that's my phone". Those old brass bells were slightly different, so each phone had a unique sound. Not that hard to do digitally, but nobody seems to have caught on that this is a GOOD thing. ------------------------------ From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: Buyouts of AT&T, MCI Sign of Long Distance's Demise Date: 1 Mar 2005 21:15:03 -0500 Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA >> Unlimited long distance is available reasonably cheaply for >> residential customers, but I think business customers still have to >> pay pretty high WATS rates. The VoIP carriers all have flat rate business plans priced between $40 and $50/mo, plus the cost of the underlying broadband connection, of course. A little poking around on Verizon's and SBC's web sites found flat rate business packages, too. SBC's is $48.95/mo which is a great price considering that it doesn't depend on someone else's connection. R's, John ------------------------------ From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: 2002220000 Given as Caller ID Date: 1 Mar 2005 21:19:44 -0500 Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > I've seen that in North America for years and I don't think it implies > VOIP at all ... calls from the U.S. sometimes show local number for > caller ID when they ring through to my phone, and I always assumed > (yeah, I know ...) that all it meant was that the long distance link > terminated locally (and, I would guess, without the correct caller ID) Yeah. and without proper billing, either. Incoming long distance calls are supposed to pay per-minute access charges to the terminating phone company, incoming local and intra-LATA calls pay a much lower (often zero) interconnection charge. There have been chronic fights between LECs and IXCs (notably MCI) about long distance disguised as local to avoid paying access. It's increasingly obvious that you can't tell the difference between the two any more, particularly in the presence of VoIP users who might have local numbers and be a thousand miles away, or vice versa, so I presume removing this distinction is one of the goals of the FCC's inquiries into access reform. ------------------------------ 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 V24 #89 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Mar 2 17:58:28 2005 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j22MwSt04199; Wed, 2 Mar 2005 17:58:28 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 17:58:28 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200503022258.j22MwSt04199@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 V24 #90 TELECOM Digest Wed, 2 Mar 2005 17:54:00 EST Volume 24 : Issue 90 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Illegal Drug Sales Booming on Internet (Lisa Minter) BTK Serial Killer Identified From Church Computer Disk (Lisa Minter) Firms Rush to Provide 'Net Phone Services (Jack Decker) MCI to Review Qwest Bid (Telecom dailyLead from USTA) Is Your Identity Safe? (Dan Lanciani) Re: Arbitration Left ID Theft Victim With $27,000 Bill (Marcus D Falco) Re: 2002220000 Given as Caller ID (Marcus Didius Falco) Re: Buyouts of AT&T, MCI Sign of Long Distance's Demise (Steve Sobol) Re: GSM Cell Density in Metropolitan Areas (Koos van den Hout) Re: New Monopoly in Dept Stores; Federated and May to Merge (L Hancock) Phone Prefix 620-924 (Carl Moore) 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: 02 Mar 2005 10:41:18 -0800 From: Lisa Minter Subject: BTK Serial Killer Caught from Church Computer Disk Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 12:53:34 -0600 WICHITA, KANSAS (Associated Press/ New York Times via KWCH) Dennis L. Rader, charged with 10 counts of murder, appeared before a judge Tuesday through a videoconference. Arrest Is Made in Series of Killings in Kansas (February 27, 2005) Relief, and Bewilderment, Over Arrest in Kansas Killings (February 28, 2005) KWCH, via Associated Press His pastor said a computer disk mailed to a television station led the police to Mr. Rader. Computer Disk Led to Arrest in Killings, Pastor Says By MONICA DAVEY - The New York Times Published: March 2, 2005 WICHITA, Kan., March 1 - In the end, the B.T.K. serial killer's downfall may have been his own love of sending letters, poems and packages out to the world. Michael G. Clark, the pastor of Dennis L. Rader, the man now charged with 10 counts of murder in the strangulations that terrorized a city, said Tuesday that one item in the killer's most recent mailing to a local television station helped finally crack the case: an ordinary computer disk. The police here have refused to say what led them to arrest Mr. Rader, a city codes enforcer and a church leader, 31 years after the first killings in Wichita, but they have acknowledged that the B.T.K. serial killer's peculiar and persistent communications with the public, particularly in recent months, worked to their advantage in the investigation. Mr. Clark said that the police told him they used information on the computer disk in B.T.K.'s final mailing on Feb. 16 to trace it back to a computer at Christ Lutheran Church, where Mr. Clark is the pastor. Mr. Rader, the president of the church council, had used the church's computer a few weeks earlier, Mr. Clark said, to print the agenda for a council meeting he was to preside over. "I remember showing him how to use the computer, how to use the printer, because his wasn't working at home," said Mr. Clark, whose church office was searched by the police last week, a day before the police announced the arrest. "What the investigators found, from what I understand, running that disk through scanning and processing, was that that disk had to have been in the church computer system." So, it seems, the killer who suggested that he be called B.T.K. (for bind, torture, kill) in his rambling, eerie mailings in the 1970's may have been ensnared by technology. Mr. Rader, 59, appeared before a judge on Tuesday for the first time, listening as 10 charges of first-degree murder were read aloud. Mr. Rader, who appeared through a videoconference from the county jail, stood somberly, hands crossed before him, lips pursed. Asked whether he understood the charges against him as they were read, Mr. Rader answered in a loud clear voice, "Yes, sir." Though Mr. Rader could not see them from the jail, about a dozen relatives of victims linked to the case sat in the courtroom. As they filed out, they were ashen faced and silent. In the hearing, which lasted a few minutes, Mr. Rader was appointed three public defenders, the first formal representation he has had since his arrest on Friday. Sarah E. McKinnon, an assistant public defender, said a short time later that the defense team had not yet met with Mr. Rader but intended to meet with him later on Tuesday. Ms. McKinnon said she expected a delay in a preliminary hearing now set for March 15, where Mr. Rader will have the opportunity to enter a plea. When the killings began here in 1974, so did B.T.K.'s writings, the police said. He sent them to television stations, left them in libraries and mailed them to the local newspaper. Back then, they were often graphic descriptions of his grisly work, drawings or angry diatribes. After a poem he had sent to The Wichita Eagle-Beacon was accidentally routed to the classified advertising department, he sent an angry letter to a television station saying, "How many do I have to kill before I get my name in the paper or some national attention?" Then, just as suddenly as the letters had begun, they stopped in 1979. The silence lasted 25 years -- until March, 2004 when more packages and letters began arriving at a furious pace. They were left in parks and sent to news outlets, 11 mailings in all. They included a word puzzle, chapter headings for a proposed telling of the B.T.K. tale, a Post Toasties cereal box and a postcard. They were strangely more polite than the earlier letters, one even inquiring about the well-being of television reporters who had, at some point, mentioned on the air having had the flu. The last one arrived on Feb. 16, 2005 at KSAS-TV. At the request of the police, reporters at KWCH-TV, Channel 12, which produces the newscasts for KSAS, did not report on the air all that was in the manila envelope. Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company 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 . Hundreds of 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, New York Times, KWCH-TV Wichita, others. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This entire affair has been such a bummer on our entire community in Independence as it has been for the Wichita community. Wichita is 110 miles northwest of us but, it would seem more like *thousands* of miles away. We are actually closer to Tulsa, OK (eighty miles almost straight south of us) and are considered (for retail sales purposes) as being in the 'Tulsa Market'. This is our very first _serial killer_, and the facts as they are falling in place, that he is from Park City, KS (a tiny little town, like us, six miles north of Wichita, a city employee in Park City, a member (with his family) for _thirty years_ of the local Lutheran Church and chairman of the board of the church council for a couple years. A small town family man, city employee and church goer is NOT supposed to be a serial killer, sorry! I talked to my mother a couple days ago about this sordid mess; she moved back here (from the Chicago area) in 1978, and my brother went to Independence High School, graduating in 1980 I think. Mother said she had never heard a word about this in the now 25 years (this time around) she has lived here. She subscribed to the Wichita newspaper when Dad was alive as well as the Independence Reporter. Murders are _very rare_ in this area; the last one here in Indy was in 2002 I think, and one every four or five years is about our norm. Ditto in Wichita, except murders there are a bit more commonplace; Wichita and Tulsa, where folks claim that 'crime has really gotten very bad' are the 'crime centers' to hear the old people here in Independence talk about it. But a family man, city employee, church-going serial killer in our midst? Its a bit much for the innocents here in our town. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Jack Decker Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 12:20:12 -0500 Subject: Firms Rush to Provide 'Net Phone Services' http://www.mlive.com/business/aanews/index.ssf?/base/business-3/110977813099930.xml Firms rush to provide 'Net phone services FCC decision barring state regulation starts surge BY SCOTT ANDERSON News Business Reporter With a recent federal decision barring state officials from regulating Internet phone calling, an onslaught of both household-name companies and unknowns are jumping into the Michigan market to provide it. Firms as big as Qwest Communications Inc. and lesser-known but rapidly growing Internet firms like Vonage are all rushing to provide voice over Internet protocol -- known as VOIP -- to residential and business customers in the Ann Arbor area and across the state. To place calls via the Internet, customers first need to have a high-speed speed connection, often in the form of digital cable or digital subscriber lines, known as DSL. With it, the often lower-priced VOIP services provide unlimited local and long-distance service across the country using the Internet. The technology also allows customers to check voicemails using e-mail, among other services. There were nine companies in Michigan providing VOIP as of the end of 2004, according to a list compiled by state regulators. But that number is growing, following a ruling by the Federal Communications Commission to keep VOIP providers immune from state regulation. Vonage and other small firms successfully argued regulation would drive up costs to consumers. "It kind of was a green light for us to go into these areas where we had no presence," said Brooke Schulz, spokeswoman for New Jersey-based Vonage. Full story at: http://www.mlive.com/business/aanews/index.ssf?/base/business-3/110977813099930.xml 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: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 12:50:54 EST From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA Subject: MCI to Review Qwest Bid Telecom dailyLead from USTA March 2, 2005 http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=19774&l=2017006 TODAY'S HEADLINES NEWS OF THE DAY * MCI to review Qwest bid BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH * NextWave starts a new chapter * Vonage chief decries VoIP blocking * TDS inks triple-play deal * Time Warner's Parsons seeks to reassure investors over Adelphia * MSO Charter reports earnings USTA SPOTLIGHT * Calling ALL Carriers Ready to Explore! EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES * Cisco to integrate Sony videoconferencing products with VoIP REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE * Ebbers again denies knowledge of accounting fraud Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others. http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=19774&l=2017006 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 03:45:25 EST From: Dan Lanciani Subject: Is Your Identity Safe? > But ChoicePoint delivered thousands of electronic reports containing > names, addresses, Social Security numbers and other personal financial > information to criminals in the Los Angeles area who were posing as > officials in legitimate debt collection, insurance and check-cashing > businesses. I've seen variations of this posted in many groups and lists, and of course we have heard of similar (though perhaps smaller) incidents in the past. Yet nobody ever seems to ask the obvious question: why does ChoicePoint deliver sufficient information for identity theft even to "legitimate" businesses? More abstractly, why is the information required by an entity to verify the identity of a consumer also sufficient for someone to obtain credit or cash in the name of that consumer? There are many ways to set things up such that this is not the case. They range from the highly technical (e.g., public key crypto) to the procedural (credit inquiry locks). IMHO, the current system is designed purely for the convenience of the financial institutions. The consumer is expected to disclose whatever personal information the bank requests and, if the bank likes what it hears, the consumer may get his money, credit, etc. The system is not only haphazard and insecure but unidirectional: there is barely any notion of the bank's authenticating itself to the consumer. It is because many consumers are conditioned to respond unquestioningly to anything that appears to be acting on the bank's behalf that the many phishing scams (online and otherwise) are practical. Recently in my area we had a rash of ATM fraud. The scam involved replacing the door entry card reader at enclosed ATMs with one which recorded the customer's information, and installing minicams to watch the PIN entry. I'll bet that these incidents will be used to push SecureIDs or similar contrivances which force the consumer to jump through additional hoops to prove herself to the bank while doing little to address the underlying problem. N.B. I'm not opposed to high-tech solutions, but we need to think in terms of mutual authentication and zero knowledge proofs (concepts that have been around for so long that most of the patents have expired :). Again, more abstractly, we need to recognize that it is as important for the bank to prove its identity to the consumer as it is for the consumer to prove her identity to the bank. Dan Lanciani ddl@danlan.*com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 22:29:44 -0500 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Re: Arbitration Left ID Theft Victim With $27,000 Bill > Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 21:43:30 EST > From: TELECOM Digest Editor > Subject: Re: Arbitration Left ID Theft Victim With $27,000 Bill > Marcus D. Falco responded to a question posed by myself regards the > original newspaper article and an observation by Lisa Hancock: >>> Her problem is that she didn't show up to contest the charges so >>> the credit card company got a "default judgement." These can be >>> vacated in court because you can appeal. But generally you can't >>> appeal an arbitration award. >>> Yes, I thought your liability from a 'stolen' card (which this >>> is) was $50.00? >> Only if you notify them within 24 or 48 hours. She didn't notify >> them for weeks, until the bill came in. > Did you mean to say 'notify them within 24 or 48 hours _of the > discovery of the fraud/loss_'? Unless a person has online access to > their account via computer (in which case a daily audit of your > account would be a good idea, even if not practical), exactly how > would one know their card had been 'stolen' or abused until the > statement arrived. Now, if your statement did arrive, and all that > fraud was spotted, then indeed it would be prudent to call and tell > them _immediatly_ about it. IANAL, however, I think she would have had to notify them immediately on discovery of the loss. Normally, that is within a day or two of losing the card. In this instance the card was not lost; the number was misused. Presumably she had to notify the issuer within days of receipt of the bill. But then it becomes a matter of contested charges. At this point a good lawyer could have helped her. Apparently, she waited until the case went to collection, without invoking her rights. Credit card companies don't send a case to collection immediately. So there's a question as to why they sent disputed charges to collection and how long it took them to do so. A lawyer could have invoked additional defences. For example, credit card companies will start to query charges as soon as an unusual pattern develops. I've had charges refused because I was in a different country or a different state, or was charging types of items I don't usually charge. Usually, this means I have to call the credit company and talk to them, identifying myself by several bits of information. None of these are impossible for a good thief to find out (mother's maiden name, social security number, billing address and zip code), but they should stop casual theft. In this case there's an implication that the thief claimed to be the woman's sister. But the credit card company should have called the woman's house, or even sent a letter (I have received such letters -- not much help for me because I was out of the country at the time, but possibly helpful in the case of this woman). > I know in the interstate handling of freight, rules about 'notify > the shipper and/or delivery service immediatly about damage to the > shipment' have an exception for 'concealed damage'. Even if you > signed off to accept the shipment, you can later discover the > damage (when the shipment is unpacked, for example). Can't the same > thing be done in the case of 'concealed fraud' that you do not > discover until after the fact? > I know my credit card is 'online' so I can check it at any time > on a web page, and I would notify all concerned of fraud the > instant I saw it on the credit company's web site. The latest I've heard is that some on-line sites, such as Verizon.com, are limiting their liability if their website is hacked. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yeah, but Verizon is not a credit card company. I was speaking about the banks which distribute Visa/MC and put customer balances on line for review, etc. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 00:00:00 GMT From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Re: 2002220000 Given as Caller ID > From: Geoffrey Welsh > Subject: Re: 2002220000 Given as Caller ID > Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 15:30:38 -0500 > Marcus Didius Falco wrote: >> I recently had occasion to call Pakistan using a "dial-around" >> carrier in the US. The call appeared on the Pakistani's cell phone as >> a local call in Islamabad, meaning it was handled as a VOIP call. > I've seen that in North America for years and I don't think it implies > VOIP at all ... calls from the U.S. sometimes show local number for > caller ID when they ring through to my phone, and I always assumed > (yeah, I know ...) that all it meant was that the long distance link > terminated locally (and, I would guess, without the correct caller ID) > at some local access point that had its own caller ID designation. I > understand why a VOIP link might do that, but I don't see why _only_ > VOIP would do that. That could theoretically occur in this country if some IXC were using 'line side" termination (Feature group A or B, IIRC) rather than "trunk side termination" (Feature group C or D). But this is obsolete and I think line side termination was eliminated at least 10 years ago. Thus, the only way it could occur is if some carrier were terminating on a telephone or PBX in the calling area, which now happens only for VOIP. (Until recently it did sometimes occur with cellular carriers for similar reasons.) ------------------------------ From: Steve Sobol Subject: Re: Buyouts of AT&T, MCI Sign of Long Distance's Demise Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 21:19:58 -0800 Organization: Glorb Internet Services, http://www.glorb.com John R. Levine wrote: > A little poking around on Verizon's and SBC's web sites found flat > rate business packages, too. SBC's is $48.95/mo which is a great > price considering that it doesn't depend on someone else's connection. Verizon does a lot of TV advertising of Verizon Freedom in SoCal, too. JustThe.net - Apple Valley, CA - http://JustThe.net/ - 888.480.4NET (4638) Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / sjsobol@JustThe.net / PGP: 0xE3AE35ED "The wisdom of a fool won't set you free" --New Order, "Bizarre Love Triangle" ------------------------------ From: Koos van den Hout Subject: Re: GSM Cell Density in Metropolitan Areas Date: 2 Mar 2005 12:48:42 GMT Organization: http://idefix.net/~koos/ enrico wrote: > What is the average (or range) value for GSM cell (i.e. base station, > antenna, ..) density in metropolitan areas? (e.g. in cities like > London, Paris, Rome.) > Is there any publicly available information about the topic? > Please note that I am *not* asking for actual base station location, > as I know that information is protected, Ow? I can imagine that the cell phone company doesn't want to give a map if I ask nicely, but with some simple AT commands I can make my phone show the current cell number and alert me when it changes. Add a gps unit, some logging software and I can map their cell numbers. I've been playing with this, see http://idefix.net/~koos/gsmgps.html In my country (the Netherlands) I can find the actual location by checking the register of antenna licenses. Koos van den Hout, PGP keyid RSA/1024 0xCA845CB5 via keyservers koos@kzdoos.xs4all.nl or DSS/1024 0xF0D7C263 -?) Fax +31-30-2817051 Camp Wireless, wireless Internet access /\\ http://idefix.net/~kos/ at campsites http://www.camp-wireless.org/ _\_V ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com Subject: Re: New Monopoly in Dept Stores -- Federated and May Co to Merge Date: 2 Mar 2005 09:39:03 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: One of the most beautiful department > stores I ever saw was the old Wannamaker's store in Philadelphia, > with its wonderful pipe organ on the upper floors of the main court, > one of the largest organs in the world at the time. The last I heard, > Lord and Taylor had taken over the store, and moved all the retail > area to the lower floors, and closed off the upper floors entirely. > It was Wannamaker in the 1960's, then Lord and Taylor sometime in > the 1970's; I guess Philadelphia has gotten as bad as Chicago since > those days. Is anything left there at all? PAT] As of now, the Lord & Taylor is still there, just using a small part of the building as you say, and they still play the organ and have a Christmas light show. How long this will continue remains to be seen. When the store was really Wanamaker's, it was a classic elegant full service department store. Not that now. Strawbridge's still has a store downtown in the classic sense. What will happen after the merger remains to be seen. Phila (actually based in Reading PA) has a regional chain, Boscov's, that seems to be doing ok despite being relatively small compared to the nationals. It is a "merchant prince" type dept store owned by the descendants of the founder. The owner personally takes his executive staff and goes around visiting every store to check on things -- not only data on the printouts, but the appearance of displays and sales staff. I like shopping in that store and hope they can survive against the majors. I don't like the big impersonal chains. They're too homogenized and remote from their customers. I feel like I'm buying from a govt agency*. When the dept stores were locally owned, they had a much more of a personal feel to them (regardless if they were elegant or low-end). Federated is converting all their stores into Macy's while May Co. left more of some local flavor in them. Indeed, where I am Macy's had a unit called Bamberger's that they owned since the 1930s, but it operated independently. In more recent years, they dropped the name and indepedence and merged into Macy's. I felt quality of goods and service went down at that point. Nobody seems to have any anti-trust concerns about this merger, which puzzles me. To me it represents all the reasons we developed anti-trust laws in the first place, and the same rationale we were told to justify breaking up the Bell System. *In my state, wine and liquor are sold only by the state govt (or in bars by the drink). They used to be "State Stores" and as Soviet as you could imagine (partly by design to discourage drinking). Now they're still govt owned, but modernized as "Wine & Spirit Shoppe" and much better. The debate over them rages on; some like the system the way it is, others want to do like other states. See: http://www.lcb.state.pa.us/plcb/cwp/view.asp?a=1328&Q=554620&PLCBnav_GID=|&plcbNav=|32369| [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: When Wanamaker had the store, the organ was one of the largest in the world (several hundred ranks of pipes) similar in stature to the Atlantic City Auditorium instrument or the one in Methuen, Massachusetts or the Mormon Tabernacle. When the store was sold to Lord and Taylor, the organ technically was _not_ included in the sale. Its "price" was given as in excess a half million dollars, which is typical for those older, very large instruments. Wanamaker donated it to a Trust, I think the 'Wanamaker Organ Trust' for perpetual care, and Lord & Taylor, under the terms of the Trust is or was obligated to give recitals daily. I think the Wanamaker Endowement Trust still 'owns' the instrument, and pays for and supplies the repair work, but L&T pays for the organists. Left to their own devices, Lord and Taylor would either dismantle it or let it fall into total disrepair, as happened in Atlantic City. I've got a couple of CDs here which are re-issues from the 1950's when Virgil Fox played the Wanamaker Organ. Can you even begin to imagine a modern day 'low price' chain (Walmart comes to mind) providing that sort of entertainment for their customers? Here in Kansas, the state also operates the liquor stores, but the 'convenience mart' places -- like gas station grocery stores, etc -- are allowed to sell beer, just not the 'hard stuff', and taverns can sell 'by the drink' of course. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 12:16:40 EST From: Carl Moore Subject: Phone Prefix 620-924 Some time ago (in Telecom Digest?) I saw reference to 924 prefix at Liberty. I just looked up 620-924 and find that to be LINCOLNVILLE. (using 2004 nanpa.com data) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: For those who do not know, Liberty, KS is a _tiny_ little 'wide spot' in the road southeast of Independence, population about a hundred souls, a Methodist Church, the obligatory road house and a gasoline station. Dobson Cellular One also has its antennas there. 620-924 _does_ ring in there but only as DID-type lines for some of the cell phones based out of there. I think 620-485 picks up the rest of Liberty. 620-924 is or was a lot like 620-870 which was a sort of 'local area toll free' exchange. Cingular Wireless had a bunch of customers on 620-870 (including my own cell phone at one time) then one day Cingular Wireless sent me a note saying 'our agreement with SBC is no longer in effect; to keep your present number you will need to pay extra; otherwise we are going to put your cell phone on 620-330, an Independence number.' I have not seen any Alltel or United States Cellular phones on 620-924 for a long time now. I think SBC took that away from those carriers also. 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 V24 #90 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Mar 3 00:16:01 2005 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j235G0Y07288; Thu, 3 Mar 2005 00:16:01 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2005 00:16:01 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200503030516.j235G0Y07288@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 V24 #91 TELECOM Digest Thu, 3 Mar 2005 00:13:00 EST Volume 24 : Issue 91 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Help: Hookflash and Ground Start Analog CO Trunks (John Bartley) NACT STX Switch (ecooper@igctel.com) Two Voice Lines in a Cat5 Env (tigerhillside@netscape.net) Voom Goes Boom (J Kelly) Vonage's Citron Says VOIP Blocking is Censorship (Jack Decker) Re: New Monopoly in Dept Stores (Bob Goudreau) Re: GSM Cell Density in Metropolitan Areas (John Bartley) Re: GSM Cell Density in Metropolitan Areas (jared) Re: 2002220000 Given as Caller ID (Dean) Re: Other Firmware For Linksys wrt54g? Satori (John Bartley) Re: New Monopoly in Dept Stores -- Federated and May Co (Wesrock) 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: John Bartley Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 13:37:59 -0800 Subject: Help: Hookflash and Ground Start Analog CO Trunks From PABX "Help me Obi-Wan Kenobi, you're my only hope." A Toshiba DK280 system I'm supporting was delivered in 1994, and then configured for loop start CO POTS lines into a Centrex in liew of more exotic trunking arrangements. It has four (4) Toshiba RGLU four-port line cards. Recently, we changed seven of the 16 CO lines, (which are all part of a hunt group to answer calls dialed into one number, and to make outbound calls), from loop start to ground start, to solve a problem with the lines being reseized, and the phone desk operator getting loud 120ipm reorder tones in her ear. So, we changed seven of those lines from loop start to ground start. That solved the reorder tone problem. Since then, however, the Toshiba RGLU cards for those seven lines won't send a hookflash to the CO trunk when a user does a hookflash from a deskset. If the user, on the same phone, hookflashes on one of the nine remaining loop start lines, the hookflash passes OK. Swapping cards does not solve the problem; the cards pass a hookflash OK if they're configured for loop start, but fail as ground start. Other cards which work OK as loop start fail when reconfigured as ground start. Both s how the cards have not failed, but instead poiunt to a design defect. Toshiba's techs, after three calls in which they denied any problem, on the fourth call advised our local dealer supporting the DK280 that, well, yes, there _is_ a problem, they've known about it for some time, and we should buy the Version 3 PKDU cards which will solve the problem. I think it's the best use of taxpayer $$ to stretch this system out another year until our new facility and its new system is ready, for it really is quite useful. Except for the one problem we have, it's perfectly servicable , and we don't have funding to replace it this year. It's my recollection that the use of hookflash signalling, opening the tip-ring connection on the CO line, even for ground-start lines, is decades old , yet the local Toshiba dealer (which shall remain nameless) has a repair clerk who's asserting that is was *not* a standard in 1994 when the sytem was delivered. I want to build a case for hookflash on ground start lines being a normal practice, something any line card sold for ground start use should be able to do when sold, even back in '94. May I ask the collected wisdom here for help? Ideally, I need sources predating September 1994 (Bellcore manuals, FCC Part 68 regs & rulings, et al.), should you know or have them, which I could then wave under the noses of the local rep as well as Toshiba's gummint rep. , to encourage them to replace the defectively designed cards at no additional cost, as those cards were not fit for the duty Toshiba represented them to be fit for. Thank you kindly, all. Replies, if you please, either to the list, or that's impractical, to K7AAY [at} ARRL {daht] NET instead of the spam trap address from which this is posted. John Bartley, K7AAY, USBC/DO, PDX OR, USA rm -rf /bin/laden && newfs -m 99 /dev/iraq ------------------------------ From: ecooper@igctel.com Subject: NACT STX Switch Date: 2 Mar 2005 12:59:09 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Hi, We are searching for a management system for a NACT STX/NTS switching platform. We need functionality that would allow agents and end users to review their accounts, add products, add funds, change call back numbers, add and change end user rates, etc. Any leads would be greatly appreciated. ------------------------------ From: tigerhillside@netscape.net Subject: 2 Voice Lines in a Cat5 Env Date: 2 Mar 2005 15:09:23 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Does the following work? I have two phones in room A. I run a cord from Phone 1 and Phone 2 into a 2 line/1 line splitter. I then plug the splitter into a RJ45 patch panel. Cat5 8 wire cables run from that patch panel to a patch panel in Room B. I plug another 2 line/1 line RJ45 splitter into the patch panel, then run normal phone cables from the splitter to two phone outlets. Yes, I know there are better ways to do this, but this seems cheap and I have the parts (making it very cheap.) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: No reason it should not work. I use 2 line into 1 line splitters here on my PBXtra. Trouble with the PBXtra is it does _not_ pass caller ID, so I have to pick off the caller ID detail _prior to_ the incoming calls (from landline or Vonage) getting fed into the PBXtra. What I wound up doing is feeding the two 'trunk lines' (Vonage and landline) through two 'line splitters', one way going to the PBXtra, the other side of the two splitters feeding into an AT&T two lines in/one line out device. The AT&T device listens and grabs whichever line is ringing and funnels it out supposedly to a single line phone but in my case, a caller ID box, which then responds to whichever line sent in ringing current. The other side of each of the two line splitters takes Vonage and landline into the PBXtra device. Furthermore, on the side of the splitter(s) which feed the 'two into one out' device from AT&T, I also have a common ringer in order to be able to pick up on and hear the ringing cadence, or 'ring-ring' signal from my distinctive ringing line, which otherwise would be useless since although PBXtra _can_ react to 'ring-ring' or 'regular ring' all it can put out on its own common audible is a single ringing signal. So, if you call on my 800 number (which feeds into and triggers the distinctive ring-ring line), what I will actually hear is 'ring-ring ... ring' (the delayed single ring is the PBXtra signaling me. Better than nothing, I guess. If you combine the splitters and such correctly without getting confused at first, as I did, then you can get quite creative in how it all works. The only time mine *might possibly* screw up would be if a call came in on Vonage at the very same instant a call came in on landline. The AT&T device would choose one, and ignore the other, at least until the one it chose got answered, then I presume it would toggle over and take the other line. So rare in my case, I am not concerned about it. PAT] ------------------------------ From: J Kelly Subject: Voom Goes Boom Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 19:22:55 -0600 Organization: http://newsguy.com Reply-To: jkelly@newsguy.com I keep hearing a vocal minority whining about not enough HDTV available. If there are so many people interested in HDTV, explain how Voom only managed to convince around 40,000 suckers into signing up for their service. Now Voom has gone Boom. From the voom.com website: "Voom has ceased taking new customer orders and will shut down by the end of March." ------------------------------ From: Jack Decker Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 22:30:25 -0500 Subject: Vonage's Citron Says VoIP Blocking Is 'Censorship' http://www.internetweek.com/allStories/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=60404872 By Paul Kapustka Courtesy of Advanced IP Pipeline SAN FRANCISCO -- According to Vonage Holdings Corp. CEO Jeffrey Citron, intentional blocking of Voice over IP traffic is more than just a competitive dirty trick -- it's an act of censorship against free speech. In an exclusive interview here Tuesday [March 1], Vonage's chief executive said the issue of the company's recent incident of having some VoIP traffic blocked reaches beyond the market for IP-based voice communications and into the realm of free speech -- and as such, should be protected by the courts, the FCC, or by new telecom regulation that ensures free and open access over the Internet. "What is this [port blocking] really all about?" said Citron, who was in San Francisco Tuesday for the Reuters Technology Summit. "It's really censorship in a way." Though Citron would not identify the ISP that Vonage is claiming to have blocked its VoIP service, he did provide some additional details about the incident, as well as some opinions on where the online world might be headed if technologic tactics like port blocking or traffic manipulation are not actively discouraged or made illegal. [.....] Citron also said that some of Vonage's customers involved in the incident called their ISP, which admitted it was blocking Vonage. "They [the ISP] came out and said [to the customers] 'yes, we are doing this.' So there is no dispute," Citron said. "We were intentionally, willfully, blocked." Full story at: http://www.internetweek.com/allStories/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=60404872 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: Bob Goudreau Subject: Re: New Monopoly in Dept Stores; Federated and May to Merge Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 23:21:34 -0500 [Please obscure my email address as always.] Lisa Hancock wrote: > Nobody seems to have any anti-trust concerns about this merger, which > puzzles me. To me it represents all the reasons we developed > anti-trust laws in the first place, and the same rationale we were > told to justify breaking up the Bell System. I think the reason that anti-trust concerns about this merger are so muted is precisely that it is so UNLIKE the old Ma Bell situation, which was a true monopoly for most of the country (barring the relatively small market share that the independent telcos had). Macy's, Lord & Taylor, etc. don't compete in a "department store market"; instead, they are merely smallish players in a much larger RETAIL market. And over the past few years, they have been getting their butts kicked in that market, by the likes of Wal-Mart, Target, Kohl's, Home Depot, Lowes (both now selling lots of appliances and home furnishings), Costco, Best Buy, Old Navy, Dick's Sporting Goods, Linens & Things, and so on. I would be surprised if even the combined market share of Federated and May approached the market share that Sears, Roebuck achieved in its heyday. In fact, the proposed combination of Federated and May reminds me of the recent shotgun marriage of two other troubled retail giants, Sears and Kmart. Each of these new combo chains, in fact, owns less than 10 percent of the overall retail market (see http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7046395/). The management of some of the old department store chains that have fallen by the wayside (e.g., Montgomery-Ward) seems to have stumbled into the same trap that railroad companies fell prey to half a century ago. Namely, they defined their market sectors too narrowly. While railroad executives believed they were in the "railroad business", their consumers treated them as being in the *transportation* business. Thus, the railroads got their lunch eaten by airlines (to which most of the railroads' former long-distance passengers eagerly flocked) and to a lesser extent by trucking firms (which grabbed a quick-growing share of the freight-transport business, though rail still plays a much more important role in moving freight than it does in moving people). I think this sort of gradual fade into irrelevance is what terrifies the heads of Federated and (heavily-indebted) May. They are starting to notice that department stores are a shrinking sector of the overall retail market, and that many young people think of stuffy old department stores as a place where their parents shop. It will be interesting to see if they can fight this trend, but I have my doubts. That's why the consolidation of the department-store sub-sector of the overall retail market troubles me no more than the shakeout that occurred in the typewriter manufacturer sector a few decades ago, or in the buggy-whip manufacturer sector several decades before that. Bob Goudreau Cary, NC ------------------------------ From: John Bartley Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 15:34:45 -0800 Subject: Re: GSM Cell Density in Metropolitan Areas > enrico wrote: >> What is the average (or range) value for GSM cell (i.e. base station, >> antenna, ..) density in metropolitan areas? (e.g. in cities like >> London, Paris, Rome.) >> Is there any publicly available information about the topic? >> Please note that I am *not* asking for actual base station location, >> as I know that information is protected, On 2 Mar 2005 12:48:42 GMT, Koos van den Hout wrote: > Ow? I can imagine that the cell phone company doesn't want to give a > map if I ask nicely, but with some simple AT commands I can make my > phone show the current cell number and alert me when it changes. Add a > gps unit, some logging software and I can map their cell numbers. I've > been playing with this, see http://idefix.net/~koos/gsmgps.html > In my country (the Netherlands) I can find the actual location by > checking the register of antenna licenses. However, T-Mobile, here Stateside, blocks the data for the local cell's identity, as per a German ham who has an HP 6315 on T-Mobile while he's here. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 20:45:27 -0700 From: jared@nospam.au (jared) Subject: Re: GSM Cell Density in Metropolitan Areas >> What is the average (or range) value for GSM cell (i.e. base station, >> antenna, ..) density in metropolitan areas? (e.g. in cities like >> London, Paris, Rome.) > Ow? I can imagine that the cell phone company doesn't want to give a > map if I ask nicely, but with some simple AT commands I can make my > phone show the current cell number and alert me when it changes. Add a > gps unit, some logging software and I can map their cell numbers. I've > been playing with this, see http://idefix.net/~koos/gsmgps.html > In my country (the Netherlands) I can find the actual location by > checking the register of antenna licenses. A few years ago, using a Nokia mobile phone and Telstra GSM, I watched the display of the cell name riding a train outbound from Melbourne CBD. It was interesting that the cell name sometimes matched the suburb through which the train was going but would then revert to Melbourne CBD. For Australia the ACA radiocommunictions database gives the street addresses in urban areas. www.aca.gov.au ------------------------------ From: Dean Subject: Re: 2002220000 Given as Caller ID Date: 2 Mar 2005 11:54:37 -0800 In fact I think this is not only an indication of VoIP, although it probably was in this case. I think incumbent operators in various countries tend to alter (or completely remove) the calling number from the signaling, as practcally nobody validates that number in order to route the call. It's my understanding that the reason behind this tactic is to avoid paying the agreed upon fees from sending international calls to each other. For example if country A wants to send calls to country C it can opt to send them via country B if the economics favor it. I imagine this is probably illegal -- if indeed it is still going on -- since it probably violates agreements in place but that whole accounting system is unstable anyway. Most operators know this and will block calls without A-numbers but there are always ways around that too if you're not too honest. In the end it seems that all "distance" must become irrelevant in the pricing schemes, as it is more and more difficult to separate local not only from long distance but from international too. On the other hand isn't it precisely this flattening of the cost vs distance curve that, at least in the short term, drives a lot of VoIP offerings? Maybe the only solution to that problem -- if it is a problem -- is to regulate that every communication device (hard or soft) must have a GPS chip which will relate its location to the operator (regardless if the operator is VoIP, CLEC, ILEC, Wireless or whatever), so that location based billing structures can stay in place. Now _that_ would be a crazy idea wouldn't it? ------------------------------ From: John Bartley Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 13:52:48 -0800 Subject: Re: Other Firmware For Linksys wrt54g? Satori On 27 Feb 2005 12:21:39 -0800, pattyjamas@hotmail.com wrote: > I have put in a few wireless routers but never got into the internals. > I now have one in my home and will be adding a Range Extender. > I possess a WRT54G, running Windows 2000 and uploaded the latest > firmware (version 3+ dated Dec 2004 I think) from Linksys.com. > In reading the latest PC Mag, I ran across an interesting article on > the Satori firmware and extra options it adds. (www.linksys.org) > A few questions: > 1. Is this the best choice of stable firmware for my WRT54G to add new > options, perhaps increase signal power (if it really works) and tweak > other necessary parameters for best performance/range? It may or may be competent, I don't know which is the best. I suggest you look at the Sveasoft firmware, discussed here by folks who really use this stuff hard: http://www.seattlewireless.net/index.cgi/SveaSoft > 2. Are there other firmware vendors worth looking at on linksys.org? Op cit. And, I'd also suggest you familiarize yourself with the relevant government regulations, as increasing power and antenna gain could result in signal s trength beyond which is legally permissible. If you are in the US, here's a n overview of the FCC rules: http://www.wi-fiplanet.com/tutorials/article.php/1428941 John Bartley K7AAY http://kiloseven.blogspot.com ------------------------------ From: Wesrock@aol.com Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 20:30:23 EST Subject: Re: New Monopoly in Dept Stores -- Federated and May Co to Merge In a message dated 3/2/05 5:04:16 PM Central Standard Time, Pat writes: > Here in Kansas, the state also operates the liquor stores, but the > 'convenience mart' places -- like gas station grocery stores, etc -- > are allowed to sell beer, just not the 'hard stuff', and taverns can > sell 'by the drink' of course. Curious about your statement that the state of Kansas operates the liquor stores. I have never found one that was state-operated in Kansas, and I have patronized several in Wellington, Arkanasas City, and many in Wichita. None of them show any sign of state ownership, and they are opened, bought, sold and closed by private persons, all of whom say they are the owner(s) of them. Living in Oklahoma, there are details in Oklahoma laws which have various curious effects. There are also curious laws in Kansas, in Missouri, in Arkansas and in Texas, all different from each other, which may result in different products being available or not available, sold in different types of stores, the products advertised or not, and numerous other variations. In Texas, for example, liquor can be sold in durg stores, grocery stores and supermarkets, provided they are in "wet" areas. (Much of the Dallas area is "dry".) But only during certain hours and not on Sunday. When I lived in Missouri it had a different set of rules and also, like Oklahoma (and Kansas at that time), made a distinction between 3.2% beer and "strong" beer. I have never encountered state-owned liquor stores in any of the states I've mentioned -- certainly not in Kansas -- although I know they exist in some states. One curiosity I encounted in the greater Kansas City are quite a few years ago, when Kansas was dry and Missouri was wet, and Missouri had blue laws forbidding retail stores to be open on Sunday, was the distinction this made in traffic on the Missouri and Kansas sides. Kansas shopping centers were jammed on Sundays, but those in Missouri were deserted. On the other hand, bars and restaurants serving strong drink were prospering on the Missouri side. (One Steak & Ale -- with full bar, of course) was on the east [Missouri] side of State Line Avenue not far from one of the busy shopping centers on the Kansas side. Wes Leatherock wesrock@aol.com wleathus@yahoo.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 V24 #91 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Mar 3 15:34:50 2005 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j23KYne14577; Thu, 3 Mar 2005 15:34:50 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2005 15:34:50 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200503032034.j23KYne14577@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 V24 #92 TELECOM Digest Thu, 3 Mar 2005 15:34:00 EST Volume 24 : Issue 92 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Court Overturns $521 Million Ruling Against Microsoft (Lisa Minter) Dell CEO Opposes Internet Limits on Movies (Lisa Minter) Curious connections by a VOIP firm (NY Post) (Danny Burstein) IBM Distinquished Engineer Brian Carpenter to Chair (Internet Society) An Old Story (Dave VanHorn) Telecom Executives Tout Benefits of Merger (Telecom dailyLead from USTA) Re: Voom Goes Boom (Mark Crispin) Re: Vonage's Citron Says VoIP Blocking Is 'Censorship' (Dean) Re: BTK Serial Killer Caught from Church Computer Disk (David Quinton) Re: Is Your Identity Safe? (Scott Dorsey) Re: Hookflash and Ground Start Analog CO Trunks From PABX (Ken Abrams) 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: 02 Mar 2005 22:39:36 -0800 From: Lisa Minter Subject: Court Overturns $521 Million Ruling Against Microsoft By Reed Stevenson SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - A federal appeals court on Wednesday overturned a $521 million patent infringement ruling against Microsoft Corp. and ordered a lower court to retry the case against the world's largest software maker. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit said the original verdict, which found that parts of Microsoft's Internet Explorer Web browser had infringed on technology developed by privately held firm Eolas Technologies Inc. and the University of California, had ignored two of Microsoft's key arguments. The case sparked concerns that Microsoft would have to alter its Internet browser, making it unable to run certain applets, or mini-applications, that run on Web pages. Microsoft's browser is used by 9 of every 10 Web surfers. But a year ago, Microsoft won a ruling by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, which invalidated a claim by the plaintiffs to the browser technology that allows other mini-applications to work with Microsoft's Internet Explorer. "We have maintained throughout this process that the Eolas patent is not valid and today's ruling is a clear affirmation of our position," Microsoft spokeswoman Stacy Drake said in an e-mailed statement. Martin Lueck, the lawyer heading the business litigation group at Robins, Kaplan, Miller & Ciresi LLP that represented Eolas, was not immediately available for comment. Redmond, Washington-based Microsoft said it was looking forward to presenting its case again. No date has been set for a retrial. In Wednesday's ruling by the Appeals Court judges, they said "this court vacates the district court's decisions and remands for further proceedings on these issues," according to court documents. In 2003, an Illinois jury delivered a $521 million verdict against Microsoft, saying it infringed on technology developed by Eolas and the University of California. That ruling was later upheld in early 2004 by Judge James Zagel of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. In response, Microsoft said it would prepare a version of Internet Explorer without the technology in question, but held off on making key changes after the patent office said it would reexamine the Eolas patent. Internet standards groups, including the World Wide Web Consortium, had argued that preexisting inventions may invalidate Eolas' patent claims. Pressure from software developers that depend on Microsoft's Internet Explorer also likely prompted the company's decision to hold off on making changes. Lueck, the lawyer for Eolas, had previously said his client was still open to a settlement with Microsoft. Microsoft's Drake declined to comment on the possibility of a settlement. Shares in Microsoft closed down 2 cents on Nasdaq on Wednesday at $25.26. (Additional reporting by Peter Kaplan in Washington) 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 Limited/Tech Tuesday. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ Date: 02 Mar 2005 22:40:46 -0800 From: Lisa Minter Subject: Dell CEO Opposes Internet Limits on Movies The head of Texas-based Dell Inc., Kevin Rollins, also said entertainment companies should work closely with technology firms to build new businesses delivering music and movies to consumers. Rollins, who took over from Michael Dell as chief executive last summer, was careful to say the company opposes illegal trafficking of digital files. "I'm talking about the music industry, working with them on various standards and encouraging them to innovate on how they deliver their content to customers rather than try to put artificial barriers up," Rollins said in an interview with The Associated Press. "There are many new ways to deliver content to users without having to bar them from access to content or entertainment," Rollins said. "That generally stifles growth, it doesn't assist it." Rollins traveled to Washington this week for a board meeting at the conservative American Enterprise Institute. His younger predecessor, Michael Dell, who remains chairman of the global computer company, generally eschewed visits to the nation's capital in recent years to discuss technology policies. Rollins' remarks came one day after Intel Corp. -- a close partner of Dell -- urged the Supreme Court to stay out of a long-running copyright dispute between the entertainment industry and companies that make software used to share files over the Internet. Through lawsuits and lobbying Congress, entertainment companies hurt by rampant Internet piracy have sought tougher laws and other restrictions against people who illegally send copyrighted files over the Internet. They also have persuaded regulators to require anti-copying technology to be built into some future devices, such as digital televisions. Rollins also disclosed Wednesday that Dell almost certainly will use about $100 million of $4.1 billion it earned overseas to pay for construction at its new $115 million manufacturing plant in North Carolina. North Carolina earlier approved a $242 million incentive package to bring Dell to the state. Most of that package was in the form of tax credits through 2019 for computers or other devices Dell produces or assembles in North Carolina. Congress last year approved a one-time tax break under which companies that repatriate foreign earnings will have that profit taxed at 5.25 percent -- or roughly $250 million for Dell -- instead of the usual 35 percent on income earned in the United States. "It's pretty clear there's a number of things we intend to do with that and are in line with what we believe Congress is asking for -- our factory in North Carolina clearly is one," Rollins said. "It's going to be a good investment for us and mean new jobs here in the U.S." Rollins said Dell also may use part of the $4.1 billion to train its employees throughout the United States. Rollins said Dell will increasingly target future domestic sales to hospitals and doctors' offices, which he described as a potential $1.5 trillion market. The health care industry is under pressure to become more efficient to keep costs down, and Dell is under continuing pressure to find new customers. "That industry has spent (on technology) about half the level of corporate markets in general," Rollins said. "We think we can significantly improve and lower the cost of health care." 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 Limited/Tech Tuesday. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ From: Danny Burstein Subject: Curious Connections by a VOIP Firm (NY Post) Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2005 02:54:13 -0500 Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC "Former NBA superstar Julius Erving is among nearly a dozen headliners, many from the top shelf of Washington politics in the 1990s, who are connected to an odd and little-noticed Wall Street stock deal two weeks ago, The Post has learned. "During the Bush-Kerry presidential race last autumn, Fusion Telecommunications Inc. was linked by The Wall Street Journal to Democratic Party influence peddling in Haiti, but a review of past and present officials at the company shows a more bipartisan balance.... ... "Others connected to the money-losing 54-employee company, which purports to offer 'voice over internet' telephone service in the Third World, include President John F. Kennedy's nephew, and former Massachusetts congressman, Joseph Kennedy II, as well as the elder Bush's one-time budget director Joseph R. Wright Jr ... http://www.nypost.com/business/41600.htm _____________________________________________________ Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key dannyb@panix.com [to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded] ------------------------------ From: Internet Society Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2005 11:47:31 +0100 Subject: IBM Distinquished Engineer Brian Carpenter to Chair IETF Former Chairman of the Internet Society to lead Internet standards body Reston, VA - 3rd March 2005 - The Internet Society (ISOC) today announced that the Internet Architecture Board (IAB) has confirmed IBM Distinguished Engineer Brian E. Carpenter to be the next Chair of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). The IETF, which has provided leadership in the development of Internet standards for nearly 20 years, is a large open international community of network designers, operators, vendors, and researchers concerned with the evolution of the Internet architecture and the smooth operation of the Internet. Brian Carpenter is among the industry's most respected Internet computer scientists and a former Chair of the Internet Architecture Board. He is renowned for Internet standards and technology leadership. Carpenter will also chair the Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG), the body responsible for managing the Internet standards process, including the final approval of specifications as Internet standards. IESG is composed of the IETF area directors that coordinate the worldwide activities of over 100 technical working groups. "The IETF has consistently shown how open consensus-based processes can work to define the technical foundation and stability of the Internet infrastructure," said Carpenter. "My goal as IETF Chair is that these processes continue to improve, in collaboration with other standards bodies, so as to extend the level playing field of open standards in the interests of the whole Internet community." Carpenter takes over from outgoing IETF Chair Harald Alvestrand during the 62nd IETF meeting to be held 6th to 11th March in Minneapolis, MN. "I am happy to leave the great work of leading the IETF in Brian's capable hands, and will enjoy seeing the IETF develop further under his leadership," said Alvestrand. "Brian's unrivalled experience coupled with the enormous respect he commands amongst the Internet commmunity make him an ideal choice for the position of IETF Chair," said Lynn St. Amour, President and CEO of the Internet Society which serves as the organizational home of the IETF. An IBM Distinguished Engineer in the area of Internet Standards and Technology, Carpenter is currently based in Switzerland, working on networking and Grid technology. From 1999 to 2001 he was at iCAIR, the international Center for Advanced Internet Research, sponsored by IBM at Northwestern University in Evanston, Illinois. Before joining IBM, he led the networking group at CERN, the European Laboratory for Particle Physics, in Geneva, Switzerland, from 1985 to 1996. This followed ten years' experience in software for process control systems at CERN, which was interrupted by three years teaching undergraduate computer science at Massey University in New Zealand. He holds a first degree in physics and a Ph.D. in computer science, and is a Chartered Engineer (UK) and a member of the IBM Academy of Technology. He is an active participant in the 6NET project, in the Global Grid Forum, and in the Internet Engineering Task Force, where he has worked on IPv6 and on Differentiated Services. He is also working with the CERN Openlab for Datagrid Applications. He served from March 1994 to March 2002 on the Internet Architecture Board, which he chaired for five years. He also served as a Trustee of the Internet Society, and was Chairman of its Board of Trustees for two years until June 2002. ABOUT ISOC The Internet Society (www.isoc.org) is a not-for-profit membership organization that provides leadership in Internet related standards, education, and policy. With offices in Washington, DC, and Geneva, Switzerland, it is dedicated to ensuring the open development, evolution and use of the Internet for the benefit of people throughout the world. ISOC is the organizational home of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) and other Internet-related bodies who together play a critical role in ensuring that the Internet develops in a stable and open manner. For over 13 years ISOC has run international network training programs for developing countries and these have played a vital role in setting up the Internet connections and networks in virtually every country connecting to the Internet during this time. FOR FURTHER DETAILS: IETF: www.ietf.org Internet Society: www.isoc.org Peter Godwin Communications Manager, Internet Society E-mail: godwin@isoc.org 4, rue des Falaises 1205 Geneva Switzerland ------------------------------ Reply-To: Dave VanHorn From: Dave VanHorn Subject: An Old Story Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2005 10:26:41 -0500 Years ago (disco was in) I got curious about the phone number listed in Michael Crichton's "Andromeda Strain". So, I went to a payphone and dialed it. I was rather shocked to hear a couple rings, then a female voice "Military Emergency" At that point, I hung up the pay phone and went elsewhere. This payphone was on a military base. I never had it get anywhere from a civilian phone. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2005 13:43:08 EST From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA Subject: March 3, 2005 - Telecom executives tout benefits of mergers Telecom dailyLead from USTA March 3, 2005 http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=19798&l=2017006 TODAY'S HEADLINES NEWS OF THE DAY * Telecom executives tout benefits of mergers BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH * Report: Record year for broadband in '04 * Qwest gets second chance, but questions MCI's sincerity * Alcatel buys Native Networks * Cablevision founder replaces board members in fight with CEO son * Comcast, Verizon set to square off in Portland suburbs USTA SPOTLIGHT * Win the Battle for Consumers with Help from USTA EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES * T-Mobile tests Nokia's content distribution service REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE * Ebbers painted as liar as trial nears end Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others. http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=19798&l=2017006 ------------------------------ From: Mark Crispin Subject: Re: Voom Goes Boom Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 21:35:57 -0800 Organization: Networks & Distributed Computing On Wed, 2 Mar 2005, J Kelly wrote: > I keep hearing a vocal minority whining about not enough HDTV > available. If there are so many people interested in HDTV, explain > how Voom only managed to convince around 40,000 suckers into signing > up for their service. Now Voom has gone Boom. Voom's service started out with a hefty (several hundred dollars) investment required in equipment that would not be useful for anything else. Voom did not carry any local channels; you had to have a separate OTA antenna to tune in local digital (or *shudder* analog) channels. Voom didn't carry very many of the popular cable/satellite channels. Voom had more HDTV offerings, but in every other respect they were vastly inferior to comparable offerings from other satellite providers. Voom was not a good choice for people with multiple sets, or for people who have RVs. When Voom cut their prices, they did so to the extent that clearly indicated desparation and a company going under. Bottom line: high prices, inferior choices compared to other satellite services, and a company that from the onset didn't look like it was going to survive. -- Mark -- http://staff.washington.edu/mrc Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate. Si vis pacem, para bellum. ------------------------------ From: Dean Subject: Re: Vonage's Citron Says VoIP Blocking Is 'Censorship' Date: 2 Mar 2005 22:09:46 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Jack Decker wrote: http://www.internetweek.com/allStories/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=60404872 > By Paul Kapustka > Courtesy of Advanced IP Pipeline > SAN FRANCISCO -- According to Vonage Holdings Corp. CEO Jeffrey > Citron, intentional blocking of Voice over IP traffic is more than > just a competitive dirty trick -- it's an act of censorship against > free speech. > In an exclusive interview here Tuesday [March 1], Vonage's chief > executive said the issue of the company's recent incident of having > some VoIP traffic blocked reaches beyond the market for IP-based voice > communications and into the realm of free speech -- and as such, > should be protected by the courts, the FCC, or by new telecom > regulation that ensures free and open access over the Internet. > "What is this [port blocking] really all about?" said Citron, who was > in San Francisco Tuesday for the Reuters Technology Summit. "It's > really censorship in a way." > Though Citron would not identify the ISP that Vonage is claiming to > have blocked its VoIP service, he did provide some additional details > about the incident, as well as some opinions on where the online world > might be headed if technologic tactics like port blocking or traffic > manipulation are not actively discouraged or made illegal. > [.....] > Citron also said that some of Vonage's customers involved in the > incident called their ISP, which admitted it was blocking Vonage. > "They [the ISP] came out and said [to the customers] 'yes, we are > doing this.' So there is no dispute," Citron said. "We were > intentionally, willfully, blocked." > Full story at: http://www.internetweek.com/allStories/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=60404872 > 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/ In the sited article, Citron says: "What are people using broadband to do? Communicate," Citron said. "They [network operators who block VoIP] are restricting your ability to communicate with another person. And that's censorship." I dislike port blocking as much as the next guy. However, I have to ask: is there any possibility for such an argument to stick or is he simply posing? I'm no expert but I don't think the 1st amendment cares about the technology of your bullhorn does it? Regards, Dean ------------------------------ From: David Quinton Subject: Re: BTK Serial Killer Caught from Church Computer Disk Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2005 07:55:43 +0000 On Wed, 2 Mar 2005 12:53:34 -0600, Lisa Minter wrote: > Michael G. Clark, the pastor of Dennis L. Rader, the man > now charged with 10 counts of murder in the strangulations that > terrorized a city, said Tuesday that one item in the killer's most > recent mailing to a local television station helped finally crack the > case: an ordinary computer disk. > The police here have refused to say what led them to arrest Mr. > Rader > Mr. Clark said that the police told him they used information on the > computer disk in B.T.K.'s final mailing on Feb. 16 to trace it back to > a computer at Christ Lutheran Church Sounds to me like he used some flavour of MS Word under a Registered version of Windows? Most people would be surprised at what information there is in a "simple" Word document! Great gifts: Locate your Mobile phone: ------------------------------ From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) Subject: Re: Is Your Identity Safe? Date: 3 Mar 2005 10:22:30 -0500 Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000) Dan Lanciani wrote: > I've seen variations of this posted in many groups and lists, and of > course we have heard of similar (though perhaps smaller) incidents in > the past. Yet nobody ever seems to ask the obvious question: why does > ChoicePoint deliver sufficient information for identity theft even to > "legitimate" businesses? Because there is money in it, and there isn't anybody preventing it. > More abstractly, why is the information required by an entity to > verify the identity of a consumer also sufficient for someone to > obtain credit or cash in the name of that consumer? There are many > ways to set things up such that this is not the case. They range > from the highly technical (e.g., public key crypto) to the > procedural (credit inquiry locks). Because it is a necessary condition to obtain credit to verify your identity. If you have good credit and someone can impersonate you in some way, they can take advantage of it. The only way to prevent this is to make it more difficult to impersonate someone. This could be a technological improvement, such as accurate biometrics like fingerprints, or it could be a social improvement, such as the privacy laws enacted in Europe which are sadly not in force here in the US. > IMHO, the current system is designed purely for the convenience of the > financial institutions. The consumer is expected to disclose whatever > personal information the bank requests and, if the bank likes what it > hears, the consumer may get his money, credit, etc. The system is not > only haphazard and insecure but unidirectional: there is barely any > notion of the bank's authenticating itself to the consumer. It is > because many consumers are conditioned to respond unquestioningly to > anything that appears to be acting on the bank's behalf that the many > phishing scams (online and otherwise) are practical. Of course, because the banks are the ones with the money. > Recently in my area we had a rash of ATM fraud. The scam involved > replacing the door entry card reader at enclosed ATMs with one which > recorded the customer's information, and installing minicams to watch > the PIN entry. This does nothing to prevent fraud. All it does it make it easier to identify the perpetrator after the fraud has been committed. That is not a bad thing, but it's not a solution. --scott "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." ------------------------------ From: Ken Abrams Subject: Re: Hookflash and Ground Start Analog CO Trunks From PABX Organization: SBC http://yahoo.sbc.com Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2005 19:21:15 GMT John Bartley wrote > It's my recollection that the use of hookflash signalling, opening the > tip-ring connection on the CO line, even for ground-start lines, is > decades old , yet the local Toshiba dealer (which shall remain > nameless) has a repair clerk who's asserting that is was *not* a > standard in 1994 when the sytem was delivered. I think your recollection is a little "foggy". ;-) > I want to build a case for hookflash on ground start lines being a > normal practice, something any line card sold for ground start use > should be able to do when sold, even back in '94. Just because you WANT it to be true doesn't necessarily mean that it IS. A flash was (and still is, I believe) never intended to be passed from one switch to another. It is a means for the subscriber (phone) to signal the nearest switch in the chain. It appears that your equipment can serve either as a switch (PBX) or as (dumb) terminal equipment (CENTREX). When a CO termination is ground start, that makes it a trunk between two switches and by design will not pass a flash. When it is loop start, it is a line and will pass the flash. The difference between a PBX "trunk" and a Centrex "line" is not just one of terminology. There are technical design differences between the two. This was true when there was only one supplier for the network and a lot of these standards carried well beyond the date of deregulation. The fact that they offered you a solution by changing cards probably means that this "standard" has been corrupted. One final thought: At the CO end, a ground start PBX trunk originally was not capable of recognizing a momentary open as a flash. Thus, any momentary open exceeding 20 ms (or so) would effect a disconnect. That might still be true. Has the LEC really offered to provide you ground start Centrex lines? At one time those were mutually exclusive. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Actually, on my PBXtra, which goes under the brand name 'Total Com' and is manufactured by ACNC at the phone number 630-241-2800, (but distributed by Mike Sandman through his online catalog http://sandman.com [and he is a good friend of the Digest and well trusted on the net]) you _can_ pass along a hookflash to the next switch down the line, i.e. the central office. It is a three step process: You flash the hook, get back dial tone from the PBXtra, then dial *6 (or 26 if on a rotary dial phone) then when dial tone returns, flash the hook again; that time the PBXtra ignores the flash, the central office sees it instead. It is not a feature I use very often on my system, but I suppose I would use it if I got a 'call waiting' signal on my line, or wanted to make a three-way call. So I guess my answer to the original correspondent would be 'it can be done through software with some types of systems.' 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 V24 #92 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Mar 3 23:30:37 2005 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j244Ua217829; Thu, 3 Mar 2005 23:30:37 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2005 23:30:37 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200503040430.j244Ua217829@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 V24 #93 TELECOM Digest Thu, 3 Mar 2005 23:30:00 EST Volume 24 : Issue 93 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Telco Agrees to Stop Blocking VoIP Calls (Jack Decker) FCC Reaches Telco Settlement to Stop Blocking VOIP (Danny Burstein) Nokio 6010 Reporting in to Mama - Radio Interference? (Ted Koppel) Re: Hookflash and Ground Start Analog CO Trunks From PABX (Pat Townson) Question About my Internet Monthly Bill (half-geek) International DID's (Robert Cabule) Re: Voom Goes Boom (J Kelly) Re: Is Your Identity Safe? (Dan Lanciani) Re: New Monopoly in Dept Stores -- Federated and May Co Merge (Tony P.) Re: Vonage's Citron Says VOIP Blocking is Censorship (Lisa Hancock) Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the Internet. All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jack Decker Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2005 17:42:05 -0500 Subject: Telco Agrees to Stop Blocking VoIP Calls http://news.com.com/Telco+agrees+to+stop+blocking+VoIP+calls/2100-7352_3-5598633.html By Declan McCullagh Staff Writer, CNET News.com A North Carolina telecommunications company accused of deliberately blocking Internet phone traffic has reached a deal with federal regulators to halt the controversial practice. The Federal Communications Commission said Thursday that Madison River Communication will "refrain from blocking" VoIP, or voice over Internet Protocol, calls and will pay a $15,000 fine to the government. "We saw a problem, and we acted swiftly to ensure that Internet voice service remains a viable option for consumers," FCC Chairman Michael Powell said in a statement. The consent decree prevents Madison River from VoIP blocking for 30 months. Based in Mebane, N.C., Madison River reported $194.4 million in revenue for the 2004 calendar year from 120,649 residential voice subscribers, 60,563 business voice subscribers, and 39,562 DSL customers. The company has filed a registration statement for a proposed initial public offering. VoIP provider Vonage confirmed that Madison River was the broadband provider it complained to the FCC about earlier this month, leading to the FCC's investigation. "We're very pleased that the commission took very swift action to address the concerns that we had regarding an Internet service provider's ability to block our customers' communications with each other," Vonage CEO Jeffrey Citron said. "This sends a clear message that port blocking will not be tolerated." Full story at: http://news.com.com/Telco+agrees+to+stop+blocking+VoIP+calls/2100-7352_3-5598633.html How to Distribute VoIP Throughout a Home: http://michigantelephone.mi.org/distribute.html If you live in Michigan, subscribe to the MI-Telecom group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MI-Telecom/ ------------------------------ From: Danny Burstein Subject: FCC Reaches Telco Settlement to Stop Blocking VOIP Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2005 20:04:58 -0500 Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC The Enforcement Bureau of the FCC reached a $15,000 consent decree with Madison River Communication, LLC service on the company's network. "We saw a problem, and we acted swiftly to ensure that Internet voice service remains a viable option for consumers", said FCC Chairman Michael K. Powell. "According to the terms of the consent decree, Madison River commits that it will refrain from blocking VOIP traffic and ensure that such blocking will not recur ..." http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-257175A1.txt [a] http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-257175A1.pdf [b] http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-257175A1.doc [c] [a] garbled ascii text version [b] pdf [c] Microsoft Word. (most FCC docs are available all three ways. URLs are identical except for the trailing extension) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2005 15:59:30 -0500 From: Ted Koppel Subject: Nokio 6010 Reporting in to Mama -- Radio Interference? My new Nokia 6010 has an interesting and somewhat annoying habit. If it's anywhere within a 5 foot radius of my PC speakers, I can hear it periodically transmitting something (sort of a rhythmic dum-diddy-dum-diddy-dum-dum-dum). Sounds like static, but definitely with a paced rhythm. I haven't timed the intervals exactly, but it seems to take place every 17-20 minutes. In a related activity, I hear a big burst of static on my PC speakers, and then some rhythmic noise, about 5-7 seconds before the cell phone begins to ring. This is the first cell phone I've had that caused these noises. Do I have a mutant phone? Is this anything to be concerned about? Ted ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2005 22:22:01 EST From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Re: Hookflash and Ground Start Analog CO Trunks from PABX Earlier today I posted a message here saying that, in regards to my PBXtra, I could simulate a hookflash to the central office even when behind the PBX. I can, but not quite as described. I said earlier: > in a call, flash on PBX, dial *6 (or 26 in rotary) then when dial > tone returns, flash again (straight through to CO). Actually what I should have said was in a call, flash the PBXtra, dial *6 (or 26 rotary) and that _*6 serves as the hookflash. I had not used this feature before and tested it out after printing the message. The *6 causes the PBXtra to disconnect itself from the trunk line for a half second, then reconnect itself which is the essence of the hookflash. You _do not_ do the second hookflash, since the *6 causes it to happen. PAT ------------------------------ From: half-geek Subject: Questions About my Internet Monthly Bill Date: 3 Mar 2005 16:55:49 -0800 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This is a letter I recieved in email today from half-geek. PAT] Hi- I was just wondering, when you get your internet bill, does it list the sites you have been to? TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Hello half-geek; nice to have you as a new reader here. Unless you have a 'measured account' type of service, which as far as I know is very rare, your monthly bill will just show the total due. If you specifically ask your ISP, and have a good reason for doing so, the ISP will probably have logs which show the IP numbers, (network addresses) of those sites, but it is sort of hard for 'regular users' to see those logs or understand them. Usually your monthly bill will just either say 'unlimited monthly use X dollars per month' or it may say 'X number of hours used, Y over your allotment, and balance due, etc'. I hope this answers your question. Want to ask more questions? Feel free to join us in conversations here. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2005 22:05:00 +0100 From: Robert Cabule Subject: International DID's Organization: -= Belgacom Usenet Service =- Dear group, We have DID's available mainly from Europe. Other countries are being added. Calls will be forwarded to your softswitch via SIP or H.323. If interested, please let me know. ------------------------------ From: J Kelly Subject: Re: Voom Goes Boom Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2005 15:15:10 -0600 Organization: http://newsguy.com Reply-To: jkelly@newsguy.com On Wed, 2 Mar 2005 21:35:57 -0800, Mark Crispin wrote: > On Wed, 2 Mar 2005, J Kelly wrote: >> I keep hearing a vocal minority whining about not enough HDTV >> available. If there are so many people interested in HDTV, explain >> how Voom only managed to convince around 40,000 suckers into signing >> up for their service. Now Voom has gone Boom. > Voom's service started out with a hefty (several hundred dollars) > investment required in equipment that would not be useful for anything > else. > Voom did not carry any local channels; you had to have a separate OTA > antenna to tune in local digital (or *shudder* analog) channels. > Voom didn't carry very many of the popular cable/satellite channels. > Voom had more HDTV offerings, but in every other respect they were > vastly inferior to comparable offerings from other satellite > providers. > Voom was not a good choice for people with multiple sets, or for people > who have RVs. > When Voom cut their prices, they did so to the extent that clearly > indicated desparation and a company going under. > Bottom line: high prices, inferior choices compared to other satellite > services, and a company that from the onset didn't look like it was going > to survive. > -- Mark -- > http://staff.washington.edu/mrc > Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate. > Si vis pacem, para bellum. I figured from day one they would go bust. Now there is a big fight among the Dolan family to keep it alive. As you say, without locals in HD, it is screwed. And with limited capacity at a crappy DBS slot it can't survive even with local-into-local since many on the west coast are goign to have trouble seeing a slot that is so low on the horizon. And now they went and sold their satellite that was at 61.5 to Echostar. Voom seems doomed, even if they can convince Cablevision to spin it off. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2005 16:43:55 EST From: Dan Lanciani Subject: Re: Is Your Identity Safe? kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote: > Dan Lanciani wrote: >> More abstractly, why is the information required by an entity to >> verify the identity of a consumer also sufficient for someone to >> obtain credit or cash in the name of that consumer? There are many >> ways to set things up such that this is not the case. They range >> from the highly technical (e.g., public key crypto) to the >> procedural (credit inquiry locks). > Because it is a necessary condition to obtain credit to verify your > identity. I think you've missed the point. In spite of what the banks may tell you, there is no reason for the information required by an entity to verify your identity to also be sufficient for that entity to impersonate you. The attitude of, 'we need to know all about you so we can be sure who you are' (and consumers' acceptance of that attitude) is exactly the problem. > If you have good credit and someone can impersonate you in > some way, they can take advantage of it. > The only way to prevent this is to make it more difficult to > impersonate someone. This could be a technological improvement, such > as accurate biometrics like fingerprints, As I said, there are technical solutions. Biometrics (and fingerprints in particular) are probably not among them. Most such systems depend on giving the bank yet another set of information that is just as useful for impersonation as it is for authentication. I realize that biometric systems seem flashy (and banks would undoubtedly like to use them to defeat consumers' claims of fraud--at least until some scammer demonstrates how easy they are to defeat) but they are really just more hoops for the consumer and they lack provable nonrepudiation characteristics. A system where neither the authentication information provided by the consumer in a transaction _nor_ the information held by the bank is sufficient to later impersonate the consumer would solve most of the problem without flashy fingerprint readers. Combined with mutual authentication it would solve almost all of the problem. (You still can't do much about simple duress.) The technology to achieve this solution has been around for decades. > or it could be a social improvement, such as the privacy laws > enacted in Europe which are sadly not in force here in the US. As I said, there are procedural solutions. Laws to protect "privacy" are probably not among them. Keeping information "secret" while sharing it within an entire industry is a hard (and unnecessary) problem. The goal should be to make the information useless by itself. Credit inquiry locks are a simple procedural approach, but unfortunately credit agencies are opposed to them. >> IMHO, the current system is designed purely for the convenience of the >> financial institutions. The consumer is expected to disclose whatever >> personal information the bank requests and, if the bank likes what it >> hears, the consumer may get his money, credit, etc. The system is not >> only haphazard and insecure but unidirectional: there is barely any >> notion of the bank's authenticating itself to the consumer. It is >> because many consumers are conditioned to respond unquestioningly to >> anything that appears to be acting on the bank's behalf that the many >> phishing scams (online and otherwise) are practical. > Of course, because the banks are the ones with the money. I can't tell whether you are being sarcastic or whether you really believe that banks deserve this privileged position in the authentication hierarchy. Either way, I would point out that (a) it isn't the banks' money and (b) in the long run the fraud is going to cost the banks more than any benefit from such privilege can be worth. >> Recently in my area we had a rash of ATM fraud. The scam involved >> replacing the door entry card reader at enclosed ATMs with one which >> recorded the customer's information, and installing minicams to watch >> the PIN entry. > This does nothing to prevent fraud. All it does it make it easier to > identify the perpetrator after the fraud has been committed. That is > not a bad thing, but it's not a solution. Again, you have missed the point. (Or else you just aren't reading what I wrote at all.) The minicams were installed by the scammers. They had nothing to do with identifying the perpetrator. They were used *by* the perpetrators to commit the fraud! Hmm. I think you've just provided a great example of the problem of unquestioningly assuming that any high-tech security gadget must be working on behalf of the bank ... Dan Lanciani ddl@danlan.*com ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: New Monopoly in Dept Stores -- Federated and May Co to Merge Organization: ATCC Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2005 19:46:10 -0500 In article , Wesrock@aol.com says... > In a message dated 3/2/05 5:04:16 PM Central Standard Time, Pat writes: >> Here in Kansas, the state also operates the liquor stores, but the >> 'convenience mart' places -- like gas station grocery stores, etc -- >> are allowed to sell beer, just not the 'hard stuff', and taverns can >> sell 'by the drink' of course. > Curious about your statement that the state of Kansas operates the > liquor stores. I have never found one that was state-operated in > Kansas, and I have patronized several in Wellington, Arkanasas City, > and many in Wichita. None of them show any sign of state ownership, > and they are opened, bought, sold and closed by private persons, all > of whom say they are the owner(s) of them. > Living in Oklahoma, there are details in Oklahoma laws which have > various curious effects. There are also curious laws in Kansas, in > Missouri, in Arkansas and in Texas, all different from each other, > which may result in different products being available or not > available, sold in different types of stores, the products advertised > or not, and numerous other variations. > In Texas, for example, liquor can be sold in durg stores, grocery > stores and supermarkets, provided they are in "wet" areas. (Much of > the Dallas area is "dry".) But only during certain hours and not on > Sunday. When I lived in Missouri it had a different set of rules and > also, like Oklahoma (and Kansas at that time), made a distinction > between 3.2% beer and "strong" beer. > I have never encountered state-owned liquor stores in any of the > states I've mentioned -- certainly not in Kansas -- although I know > they exist in some states. > One curiosity I encounted in the greater Kansas City are quite a few > years ago, when Kansas was dry and Missouri was wet, and Missouri had > blue laws forbidding retail stores to be open on Sunday, was the > distinction this made in traffic on the Missouri and Kansas sides. > Kansas shopping centers were jammed on Sundays, but those in Missouri > were deserted. On the other hand, bars and restaurants serving strong > drink were prospering on the Missouri side. (One Steak & Ale -- with > full bar, of course) was on the east [Missouri] side of State Line > Avenue not far from one of the busy shopping centers on the Kansas > side. Stupid laws regarding the sale of alcohol are on the books of nearly every state. In Rhode Island you could not sell alcohol at a store on Sundays but taverns and bars were permitted to sell. That just changed and some stores are open, others don't see the benefit. Then we have one dry town, Barrington. But right on the town line there's 1776 Liquors and where do you think everyone in Barrington goes? You guessed it. But I class alcohol as more dangerous than marijuana. Both have their effects but the legality afforded alcohol peeves me sometimes. ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com Subject: Re: Vonage's Citron Says VoIP Blocking Is 'Censorship' Date: 3 Mar 2005 19:57:06 -0800 Jack Decker wrote: http://www.internetweek.com/allStories/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=60404872 > By Paul Kapustka > Courtesy of Advanced IP Pipeline > SAN FRANCISCO -- According to Vonage Holdings Corp. CEO Jeffrey > Citron, intentional blocking of Voice over IP traffic is more than > just a competitive dirty trick -- it's an act of censorship against > free speech. The concept of "freedom of speech" is that the _govt_ can't stop you from speaking. It does not mean that someone has to provide you with the soapbox or bullhorn from which to speak. When it comes to that, you're on your own. My local convenience store and drugstore carry certain newspapers, but not all for my area. Does that mean they are _censoring_ the ones they don't sell? According to Vonage they are. Likewise, my local convenience store carries its own brand of milk from its own dairy. I guess according to Vonage it should be required to carry every brand of milk offered in the area, but for some reason no one seems to care. People who want a specific brand of milk, cheese, or candy bar can go to any store they want to get it. Likewise, there are lots of ISPs, and if one chooses not to support VOIP, a customer can go find another one. As somene else here pointed out, the VOIP industry had a big celebration when it was recently determined that they're not under regulation -- they don't have any of the burdens the traditional phone companies have which saves them a heck of a lot of money and aggravation. But now the VOIP people want to impose those very same regulations on others. Seems rather unfair to me. Someone asked the telecom director of my employer while we don't "save money and use VOIP". The director replied emphatically that the Internet is NOT free -- having it requires routers and servers and networking and all of that comes at a cost. Adding VOIP on an enterprise-wide basis would add quite a load said installation and increase its cost. Right now VOIP is a novelty, but if and when a lot of people start using it I suspect the bandwidth to carry all that chatter will be consequential and drive up ISP costs. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But Lisa, see the two earlier messages in this issue on this topic (Jack Decker and Danny Burstein). It would appear the 'government' in the form of the FCC *did* get involved in this 'censorship' case, and after a friendly chat and a fine, the ISP had a change of attitude. And unlike at your place of employment, where someone else is paying the bill, here we have a public service where presumably the customers are paying the bill for the type of service they wish to receive. 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 V24 #93 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Mar 4 16:23:40 2005 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j24LNeg26103; Fri, 4 Mar 2005 16:23:40 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2005 16:23:40 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200503042123.j24LNeg26103@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 V24 #94 TELECOM Digest Fri, 4 Mar 2005 16:24:00 EST Volume 24 : Issue 94 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson U.S. Probing ChoicePoint Over Data Theft (Lisa Minter) Get Into Biz School? Hacker Offers Crystal Ball (Lisa Minter) British Police Call for Center to Tackle Net Child Porn (Lisa Minter) Installing Intercom System in House (Etop Udoh) FCC Greenlights Verizon Wireless' Spectrum Buy (Telecom dailyLead USTA) Re: New Monopoly in Dept Stores; Federated and May to Merge (L Hancock) Re: Nokio 6010 Reporting in to Mama -- Radio Interference? (jared) Re: Nokio 6010 Reporting in to Mama -- Radio Interference? (Joseph) Re: Nokio 6010 Reporting in to Mama -- Radio Interference? (Robt Bonomi) Re: Voom Goes Boom (Steve Sobol) Re: Is Your Identity Safe? (Scott Dorsey) Re: FCC Reaches Telco Settlement to Stop Blocking VOIP (Lisa Hancock) Re: Buyouts of AT&T, MCI Sign of Long Distance's Demise (Lisa Hancock) Re: Hookflash and Ground Start Analog CO Trunks From PABX (Robt Bonomi) 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: 04 Mar 2005 11:03:59 -0800 From: Lisa Minter Subject: U.S. Probing ChoicePoint Over Data Theft By Aleksandrs Rozens NEW YORK (Reuters) - Federal authorities are investigating the theft of about 145,000 consumer profiles in databases of ChoicePoint Inc. as well as trading in its stock by top executives, the company said on Friday. ChoicePoint, which maintains personal profiles of nearly every U.S. consumer, said the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, which has opened an informal inquiry and the Federal Trade commission has begun a separate inquiry. The company, which sells its data to employers, landlords, marketing companies and about 35 U.S. government agencies, also said it was halting the sale of many information products that contain sensitive consumer data, including social security and driver's license numbers. It said, however, that exceptions would be made where there is a specific consumer-driven transaction or benefit, or where the products support federal, state or local government and criminal justice purposes. The company said the SEC is looking into the circumstances surrounding the theft of the profiles and recent trading in ChoicePoint stock by its chief executive officer, Derek Smith, and chief operating officer and president, Doug Curling. The FTC, meanwhile, is conducting an inquiry into ChoicePoint's compliance with federal consumer information security laws. "We intend to cooperate and to provide requested information and documents to the Securities and Exchange commission," a ChoicePoint spokeswoman said. Also, "In November 2004, Mr. Smith and Mr. Curling adopted plans that provide for prearranged sales of stock over a six-month period," the company spokeswoman said. "These plans are typical for senior executives of public companies and the plans were approved by the company's board of directors." ChoicePoint shares were nearly 4 percent weaker in mid-day trading on Friday. Last month, ChoicePoint announced that criminals gained access to a database of personal records after they posed as legitimate businesses. The consumers whose data was accessed were from 50 states and territories, according to ChoicePoint. These thieves got at profiles of consumers that include Social Security numbers, credit histories, criminal records and other sensitive material. "Law enforcement officials have identified 750 consumers nationwide where some attempt was made to compromise their identity," a company spokeswoman told Reuters on Friday. The identity thieves set up roughly 50 fraudulent business accounts to gain access to the consumer data. ChoicePoint's databases contain 19 billion public records, including driving records, sex-offender lists and FBI lists of wanted criminals and suspected terrorists. The company, based in Alpharetta, Georgia, said its move to halt the sale of some data containing sensitive consumer data will reduce 2005 core revenues by $15 million to $20 million and will reduce to earnings by 10 to 12 cents a share. Last year, ChoicePoint had core revenue of $884.4 million. "The 10 to 12 cent number is a worst-case number. It assumes all lost revenues will flow to the bottom line," said Andrew Jeffrey, analyst, at Needham & Co. He added: "It assumes you maintain the same level of costs and just have less revenue. The company will take some measures to adjust its fixed costs and, as a result, the loss in revenues may not all flow through to the bottom line." Regarding the SEC's investigation, Jeffrey said it "obviously casts a pall over the stock from a sentiment standpoint. The worst-case scenario would be the departure of management. It would be a big negative if that were to come to pass." ChoicePoint said it will continue to serve most of its core markets and customers, but its latest move will likely impact the availability of information to certain customers, especially small businesses. The move to limit the consumer data is expected to be completed within 90 days, the company said, adding that it has strengthened its customer credentialing process. In California, the only state that requires companies to disclose security breaches, ChoicePoint sent warning letters to 30,000 to 35,000 consumers advising them to check their credit reports. U.S. investigators notified the company of the breach in October, but ChoicePoint did not send out the consumer warnings until last week. Just last week, Bank of America Corp. said it lost data tapes containing information on 1.2 million federal employee credit cards, among them U.S. senators. Those tapes were lost in December, but bank officials were not allowed to notify cardholders until they received permission from federal law enforcement authorities. 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 . Hundreds of 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 Limited. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ Date: 04 Mar 2005 11:07:17 -0800 From: Lisa Minter Subject: Get Into Biz School? Hacker Offers Crystal Ball A person who applied to Harvard Business School posted instructions on how to check the application status at several business schools, including Stanford, Duke and Dartmouth, on Business Week's online technology forum this week. Roughly 100 people who applied to Harvard followed the directions, but many did not learn their fate since decisions had not been entered into the computer yet. Harvard's next batch of acceptances will be sent out later this month. "The school views this as electronic breaking and entering, and regards this as a very serious breach," Harvard Business School spokesman Jim Aisner said. The school has identified all people who tried to check their status, Aisner said. He did not say whether those applicants were accepted or rejected. The schools all use ApplyYourself, a Fairfax, Virginia-based company that manages Web pages used by students to apply to roughly 300 universities. The schools also use the company to tell applicants if they got in. ApplyYourself Chief Executive Len Metheny said the company made immediate modifications to its systems and applicants did not obtain information about anyone but themselves. "The person who did this reverse engineered a way to access the decision page for his own record and then told others how to do it," Metheny said. The Harvard Crimson, which first reported the story, said the hacker wrote: "I know everyone is getting more and more anxious to check (the) status of their apps to (Harvard Business School). So I looked around on their site and found a way." The notice has been removed from the Business Week site. Officials at the schools and ApplyYourself would not say whether they plan to press charges. 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 . Hundreds of 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, Harvard Crimson and Reuters Limited. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ Date: 04 Mar 2005 11:02:40 -0800 From: Lisa Minter Subject: British Police Call for Center to Tackle Net Child Porn A multi-national crackdown under the so-called Operation Ore and greater use of the Internet in general have led to an explosion in convictions for child pornography offences. Arrests and convictions in Britain have quadrupled in two years, according to children's charity NCH. Now police have sent a new proposal to work with Internet Service Providers (ISPs) and children's charities to Home Office Minister Paul Goggins. "It's the way forward," said Assistant Chief Constable Stuart Hyde of the Association of Chief Police Officers. "It's making sure we have joined-up thinking and working between the agencies and across industry," he added. NCH said new figures showed 2,234 people were cautioned or charged with child pornography offences in 2003, compared with 549 in 2001. John Carr, NCH's Internet safety adviser, said the rise in offences was undoubtedly linked to the success of Operation Ore, but also followed the growth of home Internet use. "That's not to say that the Internet is to blame, any more than the telephone service is to blame for people who misuse telephones, but we can say that the Internet has facilitated a massive increase in this type of criminal behavior," he added. "I think that what's happened is that the Internet has made it easier for a lot of people who might previously have suppressed their interest in this type of material ..." Carr said NCH also intended to write to Home Secretary Charles Clarke to ask him to put pressure on more ISPs to block customers from accessing known child pornography sites. 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 . Hundreds of 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 Limited. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ From: Etop Udoh Reply-To: sdruid11@bellsouth.net Subject: Installing Intercom System in House Organization: BellSouth Internet Group Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2005 07:43:35 -0500 I have a friend who wants a replacement intercom system installed in his house. His old system suffered electrical damage. The old wiring for speakers and so forth are still there and intact. He just wants the old system pulled out, and the new system put in. The only issues are doorbells, garage doors and other things which were interfaced with and working with the original unit, and a couple of intercoms and speakers which weren't working before that he probably wants to get operational if at all possible and I assume that would involve some troubleshooting. The system is said to include message recording and so forth. The replacement unit is an upgraded unit since the one they had is no longer made or available for sale and they were told that it should interface with their existing wiring just fine as long as the number of wire pairs for speakers and power match. I am a Telephone tech, Computer and Electronic tech but I am not low- voltage certified but am somewhat familiar with what it entails as far as telephones and computers are concerned. My question is is this something that I can install for my friend considering my background, and how much should I charge for the job if it is something that I can do. I'm sure he has been asking around and getting bids and offers for job and I just want to make sure that I don't get cheated if I can do the job. ==================================================================== | Etop Udoh | Http://www.geocities.com/sdruid11 | | P.O. Box 1054| Http://www.angelfire.com/ga3/sdruid | |Snellville, Ga| Http://home.bellsouth.net/p/pwp-sdruid | | 30078 | Http://www.geocities.com/siliconvalley/bit/9122 | |--------------| Http://home.earthlink.net/~sdruid11 | | A+ Certified Net+ Certified | | \/ \/ | |sdruid11@earthlink.net |sdruid11@bellsouth.net |sdruid11@yahoo.com| | !! ..........Peace and Love to All......... !! | ==================================================================== ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2005 13:43:01 EST From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA Subject: FCC Greenlights Verizon Wireless' Spectrum Buy Telecom dailyLead from USTA March 4, 2005 http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=19841&l=2017006 TODAY'S HEADLINES NEWS OF THE DAY * FCC greenlights Verizon Wireless' spectrum buy BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH * MCI shareholder to play active role in merger talks * Philadelphia's Wi-Fi plan, opposed by Comcast, is in trouble * ESPN seeking agency for wireless service rollout * Report predicts downward trend for CLEC revenues USTA SPOTLIGHT * SUPERCOMM: TIA's and USTA's Premiere Event EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES * TiVo sticks to its guns VOIP DOWNLOAD * TowerStream tests wireless VoIP service in NYC * VoIP puts 911 burden on user end * How will VoIP be sold to the everyday user? REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE * Ebbers trial comes to an end * Telco agrees to stop blocking VoIP calls Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others. http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=19841&l=2017006 ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com Subject: Re: New Monopoly in Dept Stores -- Federated and May Co to Merge Date: 4 Mar 2005 07:44:20 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Tony P. wrote: > Stupid laws regarding the sale of alcohol are on the books of nearly > every state. In Rhode Island you could not sell alcohol at a store on > Sundays but taverns and bars were permitted to sell. That just changed > and some stores are open, others don't see the benefit. Alcohol laws are a special case explicitly described in the Constitution. When Prohibition was repealed by the 21st Amendment, the Amendment stated that control was up to the states. Thus, states have special power to regulate alcohol unlike other commodities. Some states won't allow mail order (Internet) alcohol orders and this is now under litigation as to whether that's Constitutional -- without the 21st Amend states wouldn't be allowed to do so because of the Commerce Clause. It's come down to two conflicting passages in the Constitution and which one takes precedence. IMHO the 21st Amendment takes precedence, "stupid laws" or not. Of course, we could always repeal the 21st Amend . Growing up in Pennsylvania where liquor/wine was only sold in State Stores (their original name) it was unsettling for me to see them sold in supermarkets in some other states. Bob Goudreau wrote: > Macy's, Lord & Taylor, etc. don't compete in a "department store > market"; instead, they are merely smallish players in a much larger > RETAIL market. That has always been a basic issue in anti-trust -- to define the market place. When IBM was hit with an antitrust suit in the 1950s, IBM clearly had a near monopoly in punched-card machines but far less of one in computers (there was Univac doing well in those days), and not a monopoly at all in all of information processing. Likewise for the Bell System -- in basic telephones, yes, but what about if one included private communications like intercoms or private telephone networks that large organizations maintained on their own? What about if one included radio communications and movie soundtracks which the Bell System once was involved with but dropped out of (IIRC by orders of the govt)? The other issue about the Bell System was that it was heavilly _regulated_ by both the states and feds. The Bell System was not allowed to use its technology to go into other fields, where it probably could've been quite successful. As to dept stores, I agree there are other players, but there always_ were other players in retail. Dept stores once had to compete with a lot of neighborhood specialty stores and small chains. Discount stores of one kind or another have been competing against them for many years. Those kinds of smaller stores are mostly gone now. > I would be surprised if even the combined market share of Federated > and May approached the market share that Sears, Roebuck achieved in > its heyday. With Sears, it depends on the defined market. I don't think Sears was as big in dept stores as in its catalog. In any event, to me the classic dept store is a defined market and potentially a very big one. Cities used to have a large variety of dept stores. Shopping malls once had different big stores than the next mall down the road, now they're all the same. For example, in my area there are two big malls about 10 miles about. Years ago no big store was duplicated, but today, thanks to mergers and closures, all the big stores are duplicated in both. Will there be a need for two big Federated stores in _each_ mall? As a shopper, if Wanamaker's didn't have what I wanted, I'd go up the street to Strawbridges, and then over to Gimbel's. Three different stores, run by three different companies. As mentioned, I _also_ had the choice of numerous smaller specialty stores and discount stores. > The management of some of the old department store chains that have > fallen by the wayside (e.g., Montgomery-Ward) seems to have stumbled > into the same trap that railroad companies fell prey to half a century > ago. Namely, they defined their market sectors too narrowly. While > railroad executives believed they were in the "railroad business", > their consumers treated them as being in the *transportation* > business. Thus, the railroads got their lunch eaten by airlines (to > which most of the railroads' former long-distance passengers eagerly > flocked) and to a lesser extent by trucking firms (which grabbed a > quick-growing share of the freight-transport business, though rail > still plays a much more important role in moving freight than it does > in moving people). First, a correction. The railroads knew they were in the transportation business and set up bus, trucking and even aviation units and cooperative agreements. But the govt made the railroads get out of most of that stuff. Second, the traditional old line dept stores actually had considerable variety. The modern mgmt have eliminated a lot of departments and special services. Gimbels, for example, had a scouting/camping dept, art supplies dept, and bookstore. > I think this sort of gradual fade into irrelevance is what terrifies > the heads of Federated and (heavily-indebted) May. ... It's their own fault, and merger won't fix it, anymore than merging the Pennsylvania and New York Central railroads saved them. [snip]... > That's why the consolidation of the department-store sub-sector of the > overall retail market troubles me no more than the shakeout that > occurred in the typewriter manufacturer sector a few decades ago, or > in the buggy-whip manufacturer sector several decades before that. Unlike typewriters and buggy whips, people still need clothes and furnishings. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2005 23:09:51 -0700 From: jared@nospam.au (jared) Subject: Re: Nokio 6010 Reporting in to Mama -- Radio Interference? Have has similar experience with a GSM phone and a car radio tuned to the AM band. > My new Nokia 6010 has an interesting and somewhat annoying habit. If > it's anywhere within a 5 foot radius of my PC speakers, I can hear it > periodically transmitting something (sort of a rhythmic > dum-diddy-dum-diddy-dum-dum-dum). Sounds like static, but definitely > with a paced rhythm. I haven't timed the intervals exactly, but it > seems to take place every 17-20 minutes. In a related activity, I > hear a big burst of static on my PC speakers, and then some rhythmic > noise, about 5-7 seconds before the cell phone begins to ring. > This is the first cell phone I've had that caused these noises. Do I > have a mutant phone? Is this anything to be concerned about? > Ted ------------------------------ From: Joseph Subject: Re: Nokio 6010 Reporting in to Mama -- Radio Interference? Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2005 05:24:41 -0800 Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com On Thu, 03 Mar 2005 15:59:30 -0500, Ted Koppel wrote: > My new Nokia 6010 has an interesting and somewhat annoying habit. If > it's anywhere within a 5 foot radius of my PC speakers, I can hear it > periodically transmitting something (sort of a rhythmic > dum-diddy-dum-diddy-dum-dum-dum). Sounds like static, but definitely > with a paced rhythm. I haven't timed the intervals exactly, but it > seems to take place every 17-20 minutes. In a related activity, I > hear a big burst of static on my PC speakers, and then some rhythmic > noise, about 5-7 seconds before the cell phone begins to ring. > This is the first cell phone I've had that caused these noises. Do I > have a mutant phone? Is this anything to be concerned about? It's not just the Nokia 6010. *Any* GSM will exhibit the characteristics you refer to. It's the phone communicating with the system periodically. You'll hear the buzz-buzz even more when the 6010 is ringing. You'll hear a different type of interference when a TDMA phone rings (more like a low hum.) It's normal and your phone is not defective. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The first time this happened to me, I was walking around downtown. My cellular phone (and its holder) were clipped on my belt. Right next to that was my Walkman FM radio which was also clipped on my belt, and I was listening to it through my headphones. Suddenly the radio started humming and buzzing, as though there was some interference nearby. I wondered to myself, what is going on there in Potts (I was walking right past the Potts Funeral Home when it started). I got a few steps beyong Potts and the inter- ference stopped. I found out later it was a call coming in on the cell phone; apparently the cell tower had been trying to locate me for the call. I did not realize it at the moment, and just thought it was some kind of spurious interference noise. But later at home, I sat the cellular phone on a table next to my Bose radio, and I was not wearing my headphones (so I could hear the phone 'ringing' [or actually giving its electronic chirp of a call coming in]) and the Bose radio did the same thing: played a spurt of interference noise when it was happening. I just assumed either the cell phone or the Bose radio was faulty. Your explanation helped explain it. PAT] ------------------------------ From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) Subject: Re: Nokio 6010 Reporting in to Mama -- Radio Interference? Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2005 16:59:51 -0000 Organization: Widgets, Inc. In article , Ted Koppel wrote: > My new Nokia 6010 has an interesting and somewhat annoying habit. If > it's anywhere within a 5 foot radius of my PC speakers, I can hear it > periodically transmitting something (sort of a rhythmic > dum-diddy-dum-diddy-dum-dum-dum). Sounds like static, but definitely > with a paced rhythm. I haven't timed the intervals exactly, but it > seems to take place every 17-20 minutes. In a related activity, I > hear a big burst of static on my PC speakers, and then some rhythmic > noise, about 5-7 seconds before the cell phone begins to ring. > This is the first cell phone I've had that caused these noises. Do I > have a mutant phone? Is this anything to be concerned about? > Ted What you've got is *normal* operation of the phone. Any cell phone does much similar things, on a similar schedule. The phone transmits "every once in a while", a "Here I am" notification to the network, letting it know that the subscriber is on-line/available, as well as a double-check on the transmit-power-level. needed to reach the cell tower, and a bunch of other 'housekeeping' details. In addition, before an incoming call 'rings', the cell system sends an "inquiry" to find out where you are, i.e. are you still in the 'last reported location', or somewhere else nearby, or 'not online at all'? Once you're "location verified", then it'll attempt the ring. Now, _why_ this stuff is being picked up on the PC speakers -- that's a whole nuther story. Could be that you're on a different frequency band than prior phones. Could be a somewhat 'dirty' signal (relatively unlikely) from the phone, Could be any of a bunch of other things. ------------------------------ From: Steve Sobol Subject: Re: Voom Goes Boom Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2005 22:39:38 -0800 Organization: Glorb Internet Services, http://www.glorb.com J Kelly wrote: > I figured from day one they would go bust. Now there is a big fight > among the Dolan family to keep it alive. Why? They're not going to succeed. The Dolans keep on trying to branch out and failing *miserably.* (Come on ... someone ask me about Northcoast PCS. Or the Cleveland Indians.) JustThe.net - Apple Valley, CA - http://JustThe.net/ - 888.480.4NET (4638) Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / sjsobol@JustThe.net / PGP: 0xE3AE35ED "The wisdom of a fool won't set you free" --New Order, "Bizarre Love Triangle" ------------------------------ From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) Subject: Re: Is Your Identity Safe? Date: 4 Mar 2005 10:14:28 -0500 Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000) Dan Lanciani wrote: > I think you've missed the point. In spite of what the banks may tell > you, there is no reason for the information required by an entity to > verify your identity to also be sufficient for that entity to > impersonate you. The attitude of, 'we need to know all about you so > we can be sure who you are' (and consumers' acceptance of that > attitude) is exactly the problem. Then how can it be complete to verify your identity? The information that verifies that you are who you are is exactly the same information that verifies that someone else is who you are. --scott "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com Subject: Re: FCC Reaches Telco Settlement to Stop Blocking VOIP Date: 4 Mar 2005 07:32:59 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Danny Burstein wrote: > "We saw a problem, and we acted swiftly to ensure that Internet voice > service remains a viable option for consumers", said FCC Chairman > Michael K. Powell. I don't understand. Why couldn't the consumers simply switch to another ISP? Why did the FCC have to intervene? Why does VOIP have to get special govt protection not normally offered to other products and services in the free marketplace? In other words, if my local store doesn't carry a particular product I want, the govt won't come in and order that store to carry said product. I simply have to go to another store. Consumers make choices like this every day, choosing a dept store or supermarket for the things they carry and service they offer. Now if it was a regulated local telephone company that failed to pass on calls I would understand since they have certain obligations being a common carrier. But I don't believe ISPs have any common carrier obligations nor privileges and thus ought to be free to do as they please. ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com Subject: Re: Buyouts of AT&T, MCI Sign of Long Distance's Demise Date: 4 Mar 2005 08:17:24 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com TELECOM Digest Editor wrote: > My question to Lisa and Dave, is WATS still offered by most telcos > these days? The theory was that bulk purchase of long distance (WATS) > got you a cheaper rate per call, when it wa purchased by the hour. > How much cheaper can it get? I thought WATS was now obsolete. I was using "WATS" as a generic term for discounted long distance service purchased as a bulk product, not for a specific Bell offering. I don't know how the specifics work today for large organizations. My employer, with its thousands of employees, obviously pays more than $50/month for business long distance service. The effective per minute rate is pretty low. However, the point remains that there's still a cost to it. ------------------------------ From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) Subject: Re: Hookflash and Ground Start Analog CO Trunks From PABX Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2005 16:50:27 -0000 Organization: Widgets, Inc. In article , Ken Abrams wrote: > A flash was (and still is, I believe) never intended to be passed from one > switch to another. It is a means for the subscriber (phone) to signal the > nearest switch in the chain. > It appears that your equipment can serve either as a switch (PBX) or > as (dumb) terminal equipment (CENTREX). When a CO termination is > ground start, that makes it a trunk between two switches and by design > will not pass a flash. When it is loop start, it is a line and will > pass the flash. > The difference between a PBX "trunk" and a Centrex "line" is not just > one of terminology. There are technical design differences between > the two. This was true when there was only one supplier for the > network and a lot of these standards carried well beyond the date of > deregulation. The fact that they offered you a solution by changing > cards probably means that this "standard" has been corrupted. > One final thought: At the CO end, a ground start PBX trunk originally > was not capable of recognizing a momentary open as a flash. Thus, any > momentary open exceeding 20 ms (or so) would effect a disconnect. > That might still be true. > Has the LEC really offered to provide you ground start Centrex lines? > At one time those were mutually exclusive. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Actually, on my PBXtra, which goes > under the brand name 'Total Com' and is manufactured by ACNC at the > phone number 630-241-2800, (but distributed by Mike Sandman through > his online catalog http://sandman.com [and he is a good friend of the > Digest and well trusted on the net]) you _can_ pass along a hookflash > to the next switch down the line, i.e. the central office. Do you even understand the difference between a _POTS_ (analog "loop start") line, and a "ground start" (aka "wink start") *trunk* line? Does your "Total Com" connect to the C.O. with POTS lines? If so, the fact that "flash" works with _your_ system it totally irrelevant to the question of passing flash on a C.O. "ground start" *TRUNK* line. [[.. balance of 'ignorance in action' snipped ..]] [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It is always so pleasant to receive your replies, since you phrase them in such a congenial way, and pepper them in your own, sort of special way. I think I know the difference between loop start and ground start lines. On older, ground start payphones for example, a coin deposited would trigger a metal 'finger' like thing which would apply ground to the line. Children used to stick a pin in the handset cord of a payphone to get the same results. The TotalCom Pbxtra device connects to whatever it connects to (mine does have a POTS line (dial 9+), an VOIP line (dial 8+) and a Cingular Wireless cell phone (dial 7+) and other 'local' extensions (dial 100 through 104.) All I said was flashing during a call, then dialing *6 causes a hookflash to be sent back to whatever switch is next in line. It does it through software, I think. You can also program the entire system (as opposed to individual stations) to have *5 apply ground. I do not know how to install that program; I have never studied it. The various system-wide programs it is capable of doing are accomplished by shorting two pins on the RS-232 connector on the bottom, then using the station plugged into the zero port to dial in the desired program codes. By itself, the PBXtra can do _nothing_; the entire unit has to be programmed from the zero port with a jumper attached through the RS-232 port, much as we used to program the old Motorola 'brick phones' by reversing two leads on the battery connector. 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 V24 #94 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Mar 4 18:04:37 2005 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j24N4b327287; Fri, 4 Mar 2005 18:04:37 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2005 18:04:37 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200503042304.j24N4b327287@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 V24 #95 TELECOM Digest Fri, 4 Mar 2005 18:04:00 EST Volume 24 : Issue 95 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Telecom Update (Canada) #471, March 4, 2005 (John Riddell) Vonage (Henry Cabot Henhouse III) Re: Voom Goes Boom (Isaiah Beard) Re: Vonage's Citron Says VoIP Blocking Is 'Censorship' (Isaiah Beard) Re: Vonage's Citron Says VoIP Blocking Is 'Censorship' (Dean) Re: Vonage's Citron Says VoIP Blocking Is 'Censorship' (Chas. Cryderman) Municipal WiFi and Incumbents (Dean) Re: FCC Reaches Telco Settlement Regards Blocking VOIP (jmeissen) Re: Nokia 6010 Reporting in to Mama - Radio Interference (John Levine) Re: New Monopoly in Department Stores (Bill Ranck) Re: Nokia 6010 Reporting in to Mama - Radio Interference? (Isaiah Beard) Re: Phone Prefix 620-924 (Isaiah Beard) 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: Fri, 04 Mar 2005 16:00:32 -0500 From: John Riddell Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #471, March 4, 2005 ************************************************************ TELECOM UPDATE ************************************************************ published weekly by Angus TeleManagement Group http://www.angustel.ca Number 471: March 4, 2005 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: ** Richard French Named CRTC Vice-Chair ** Nortel Shakes Up Executive Suite ** Virgin Mobile Begins Service ** 450 to Get 10-Digit Dialing ** CAIP Organizes to Influence Telecom Review ** Shaw Plans Cellphone Service ** Plaintiffs Against BCE/BCI Lose Appeal ** Nortel Gets Another Extension ** Aliant Expands Broadband Access ** Survey Shows User Support for Wireless Portability ============================================================ RICHARD FRENCH NAMED CRTC VICE-CHAIR: Richard French has been appointed head of the CRTC's telecom branch, replacing Vice- Chairman David Colville, who retired in December. French, a former Bell Canada executive and Quebec cabinet minister, more recently held posts with Bombardier in Germany and Tata Communications in India. ** Rita Cugini has been named a full-time member of the Commission representing Ontario. NORTEL SHAKES UP EXECUTIVE SUITE: Nortel Networks has named Gary Daichendt, currently a Cisco Systems EVP, as President and COO, effective March 14. Bill Owens, now President and CEO, will become Vice-Chairman and CEO. Newly appointed CFO Peter Currie will assume the additional post of Executive VP. Pascal Debon will become special advisor to Owens. VIRGIN MOBILE BEGINS SERVICE: Virgin Mobile Canada, a joint venture of Richard Branson's Virgin Group and Bell Mobility, launched its youth-oriented prepaid wireless service in Ontario and Quebec March 2. Airtime price: 25 cents/minute for the first five minutes; then 15 cents/minute. Phone prices start at $99. ** Twelve days earlier, Bell Mobility lowered its prepaid airtime price to 30 cents/minute for the first two minutes and 5 cents/minute thereafter. 450 TO GET 10-DIGIT DIALING: Following a public consultation, the CRTC has decided to apply 10-digit local dialing to area code 450, serving the Montreal region, beginning in October 2006. (See Telecom Update #451, 466) CAIP ORGANIZES TO INFLUENCE TELECOM REVIEW: The Canadian Association of Internet Providers says it will launch TelecomAct Campaign as a vehicle to "advance recommendations and react to proposed changes" with regard to the federal government's review of telecom policy (see Telecom Update #470). Contact Joanne Stanley at 613-236-6550. www.caip.ca SHAW PLANS CELLPHONE SERVICE: According to published reports, CEO Jim Shaw says that Shaw Communications plans to offer wireless service in about six months. PLAINTIFFS AGAINST BCE/BCI LOSE APPEAL: The Supreme Court of Canada has dismissed an appeal by plaintiffs in a $1-billion suit against BCI and BCE. The suit was previously dismissed by Ontario Court of Appeal. (See Telecom Update #415) NORTEL GETS ANOTHER EXTENSION: Nortel Networks has received court permission to delay its 2004 annual meeting to the end of June -- the fourth extension of this deadline. Nortel plans to file its 2004 results by the end of April. ALIANT EXPANDS BROADBAND ACCESS: Aliant says it will invest more than $35 million in 2005 to bring broadband connections to 90,000 more homes in Atlantic Canada. SURVEY SHOWS USER SUPPORT FOR WIRELESS PORTABILITY: A survey of Canadian wireless users by Solutions Research Group reports 79% support for introduction of Wireless Number Portability; 13% were opposed and only 8% not sure. Support was strongest among business users and youth. ============================================================ 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 late Friday afternoon each 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 2005 Angus TeleManagement Group Inc. All rights reserved. For further information, including permission to reprint or reproduce, please e-mail rosita@angustel.ca or phone 905-686-5050 ext 500. The information and data included has been obtained from sources which we believe to be reliable, but Angus TeleManagement makes no warranties or representations whatsoever regarding accuracy, completeness, or adequacy. Opinions expressed are based on interpretation of available information, and are subject to change. If expert advice on the subject matter is required, the services of a competent professional should be obtained. ------------------------------ From: Henry Cabot Henhouse III Subject: Vonage Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2005 11:25:59 -0800 So, anyone else notice that Vonage has taken a dump? I've tried from a number of different networks, nada, zip, kerflunk. Busy when you navigate thru the voice mail, no response from the website, mungled voice response when you call their main number. Ya know, all this just to save $20 a month. I'm porting my number BACK to Verizon. At least they don't have these stupid VOIP outages and calls that sound like you're in a sfx chamber. Bah! ------------------------------ From: Isaiah Beard Subject: Re: Voom Goes Boom Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2005 14:47:58 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Mark Crispin wrote: > On Wed, 2 Mar 2005, J Kelly wrote: >> I keep hearing a vocal minority whining about not enough HDTV >> available. If there are so many people interested in HDTV, explain >> how Voom only managed to convince around 40,000 suckers into signing >> up for their service. Now Voom has gone Boom. > Voom's service started out with a hefty (several hundred dollars) > investment required in equipment that would not be useful for anything > else. Aside from that and all the other drawbacks mentioned, it's important to realize that Voom was the pet project of Charles Dolan, chairman of Cablevision. The rest of Cablevision's board was not very happy having a cable provider own and operate a competing satellite carrier, so every attempt has been made by this board to kill off the company. Satellite radio started off with only a tiny niche market, and yet it lasted and has mushroomed into a promising industry because there no foes in the boradroom trying to kill it off. If Voom had the support, it likely would have succeeded in time, too. E-mail fudged to thwart spammers. Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply. ------------------------------ From: Isaiah Beard Subject: Re: Vonage's Citron Says VoIP Blocking Is 'Censorship' Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2005 15:05:33 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com > My local convenience store and drugstore carry certain newspapers, but > not all for my area. Does that mean they are _censoring_ the ones > they don't sell? According to Vonage they are. You comparison is overbroad and overreaching, and compares apples to oranges. I would think of it more this way: let's say that your phone company provider, be it Verizon or other LEC, decided that profanity should no longer be used on its phone lines, and installs special filters to capture and "bleep out" such speech. Would that be acceptable? Okay, you're a clean-talking person, and I can respect that. What if Verizon happened to be more, say, left leaning in who it favors politically, and every time you wanted to talk to someone about how great the president is, the connection would go dead, because Verizon doesn't want to carry that kind of traffic? Yet strangely, calls praising anyone of Democratic affiliation never have this problem. That would be a little odd, wouldn't it? Would that be acceptable? Of course, Verizon could say "If you don't like it, go find another phone carrier!," but gee, they've done a really good job of stifling competition lately, and your ISP happens to be blocking Vonage. Pity, that. Or! Even if we don't want to argue the constitutional route, let's go the technical route as to what are ethical business practices. Let's say that the local wireless provider installs a Motorola mobile telephone switch. Instantly, every phone in the network that isn't manufactured by Motorola gets lower connection priorities, are forced to transmit and receive in downsampled codes, miss calls, and calls that do make it through randomly drop, while all Motorola-branded phones are exhibiting remarkably crystal-clear reception. Would that be considered acceptable and ethical to you? E-mail fudged to thwart spammers. Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply. ------------------------------ From: Dean Subject: Re: Vonage's Citron Says VoIP Blocking Is 'Censorship' Date: 4 Mar 2005 12:37:16 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But Lisa, see the two earlier messages > in this issue on this topic (Jack Decker and Danny Burstein). It > would appear the 'government' in the form of the FCC *did* get > involved in this 'censorship' case, and after a friendly chat and a > fine, the ISP had a change of attitude. And unlike at your place of > employment, where someone else is paying the bill, here we have a > public service where presumably the customers are paying the bill for > the type of service they wish to receive. PAT] Yes Pat, but it didn't do it on the basis of the 1st Amendment. As I understand it, the fine was to preserve "Net Freedom" (Powell's term) and although I like it, I still don't understand the legal basis for this action. It seems to me the Telco's ought to be concerned about this because if there is now a "must carry" rule for VoIP traffic, what happens when they start to offer TV/video? Will they be forced to allow competing networks to service their customers? (I don't mean specific channels because the analogy breaks down there). In other words, can I have an SBC broadband connection and bypass SBC's future TV offering to get my TV service (over that same broadband connection) from "PatTV"? If that's the case doesn't SBC lose some of its incentive to push broadband? (I presume the profit margin for the TV service will be much higher than for the access service, so that's where they'll expect to make their money, right?) Regards, Dean ------------------------------ Subject: Vonage's Citron Says VoIP Blocking Is 'Censorship' Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2005 15:49:19 -0500 From: Charles Cryderman > The concept of "freedom of speech" is that the _govt_ can't stop you > from speaking. It does not mean that someone has to provide you with the > soapbox or bullhorn from which to speak. When it comes to that, you're > on your own. I totally agree with this. But remember the courts do as they please. A case in point. A very religious married couple in Ann Arbor, Michigan owned a apartment building. Because of their religious beliefs, chose not to rent to un-married persons. Now this was private property and their religious beliefs told them not to, but the courts ruled that they were in violation of the law. So in essence the court said, your right to do as you wish with you private property and to follow your religious teaching do not exists. What takes precedent, the Constitution or laws made by Congress? I was taught that nothing supersedes the Constitution yet the courts do it all the time. > As somene else here pointed out, the VOIP industry had a big > celebration when it was recently determined that they're not under > regulation -- they don't have any of the burdens the traditional phone > companies have which saves them a heck of a lot of money and > aggravation. But now the VOIP people want to impose those very same > regulations on others. Seems rather unfair to me. See this a misconception that the VoIP providers do not have to follow some regulations. What they want to insure is that they do not have to collect a bunch of crap taxes and fees per line. In my opinion none of the companies should be forced to do this. But these providers do pay into these. For the lines that they install to terminate to they are paying E911, sales tax and into the universal service fund. Just not for the customer access side. Why? because the law requires these fees based on a telephone line, not access to making telephone calls. > Someone asked the telecom director of my employer while we don't "save > money and use VOIP". The director replied > emphatically that the Internet is NOT free -- having it requires routers > and servers and networking and all of that comes at a cost. Adding VOIP > on an enterprise-wide basis would add quite a load said installation and > increase its cost. Your telecom director is correct and wrong. Yes, it cost money for the internet access, but less then having the telephone lines. The cost to set this up in a business environment is very high. The Cisco telephones alone cost about $150.00 each from what I understand. Then of course the routers and other items cost. For business they have to decide the payback. If they are only being billed a few hundred dollars a month the hardware cost alone could make it unwise. But if you company is being bill a few thousand a month I would recommend that it be looked at. If the payback is less then a year or two they should go with VoIP. I would even go as far as to say, borrow to do it. > Right now VOIP is a novelty, but if and when a lot of people start > using it I suspect the bandwidth to carry all that chatter will be > consequential and drive up ISP costs. VoIP maybe a novelty to you, but for my employer it is what we are doing. Billions of minuets per month are going across our VoIP network and we are adding more everyday. So much so that we have removed good old fashion TDM switches and plan to have them all gone as soon as we can. VoIP is no more a novelty today then the internet. There are some that have no access or desire for the internet and see it as a novelty, the opposite is true for VoIP. Within the next 5 to 10 years, other then the slow pokes at the LECs no one will have TDM switches in their networks. Our Esteemed Moderator posted: > But Lisa, see the two earlier messages in this issue on this topic > (Jack Decker and Danny Burstein). It would appear the 'government' > in the form of the FCC *did* get involved in this 'censorship' case, > and after a friendly chat and a fine, the ISP had a change of > attitude. And unlike at your place of employment, where someone else > is paying the bill, here we have a public service where presumably > the customers are paying the bill for the type of service they wish > to receive. Did you notice as well, Pat that all along we have been talking about a ISP doing this. It wasn't, it was a regulated telephone company that did it. So all the brew-ha-ha about ISPs wanting freedom from regulation had nothing to do with it after all. Chip Cryderman ------------------------------ From: Dean Subject: Municipal Wi-FI and Incumbents Date: 4 Mar 2005 13:38:18 -0800 This is from yesterday's Guardian. It includes an interesting juxtaposition of Verizon's and BT's positions on municipal Wi-Fi networks. http://www.guardian.co.uk/online/story/0,,1428626,00.html Excerpt: ........ So far, so good. But city hall soon ran into serious problems that could stifle the wireless dreams of municipalities across the world. US cable companies, which see citizen-funded networks as a threat to their commercial fiefdoms, backed a bill that effectively outlawed municipal wireless in the state of Pennsylvania. In December, the state passed a bill forbidding any municipality in the state from running an "information network". Only a last-minute deal with Verizon, the state's de facto monopoly provider of broadband, saved Philadelphia's vision. Verizon promised to allow the city's network, but at the expense of the rest of the state. At least 15 US states are considering similar telco-backed bills to ban municipal networks. To Dianah Neff, Philadelphia's chief information officer, municipal wireless is no mere luxury. Neff, a veteran public servant, sees municipal networks as a potential leveller in a city where 70% of state school children receive free school meals. "We have a vibrant downtown," she says, "but we need to make sure all our neighbourhoods can compete in the knowledge economy. .......... Chris Clark, chief executive for BT Wireless Broadband, said the UK's biggest broadband supplier would not be taking the same approach as Verizon. "The community wireless projects, which started in an environment of concern about rural service, are evolving into providing all sorts of innovative services," he says. "It would be a pity to see such innovation stifled. More recently, a number of metropolitan wireless projects have been in the pipeline. BT is fully supportive of these initiatives." TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: City of Independence was looking very favorably at muni-wi-fi for our town, but SBC -- Southwestern Bell -- put a kibosh on it, threatening to get the state commission to do a rule like that proposed for Pennsylvania. SBC did not like the idea at all of a community giving away for free the DSL service they charge an arm and a leg for. PAT] ------------------------------ From: jmeissen@aracnet.com Subject: Re: FCC Reaches Telco Settlement to Stop Blocking VOIP Date: 4 Mar 2005 21:54:18 GMT Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com In article , wrote: > Danny Burstein wrote: >> "We saw a problem, and we acted swiftly to ensure that Internet voice >> service remains a viable option for consumers", said FCC Chairman >> Michael K. Powell. > I don't understand. > Why couldn't the consumers simply switch to another ISP? Why did the > FCC have to intervene? It's not always that simple. Here in my high-tech haven in the Pacific Northwest Verizon has managed to price DSL service at a level which prevents other ISP's from competing for DSL broadband customers (the bare DSL circuit is 50% more than Verizon Online's monthly charge, without including any ISP charges). The ONLY other broadband choice is Comcast (cable), and there is NO choice of ISP with them. And you're not going to run VOIP over a dial-up connection. John Meissen jmeissen@aracnet.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: And some telcos -- such as SBC -- flatly refuse to sell DSL to anyone (other then their own customers with SBC phone service) at all. They know the handwriting is on the wall, and they are going to fight to the bitter end to hang on to their increasingly shrinking market. In Bell's arrogance they never used to have to put up with any competition to speak of; it had to be their way or no way at all, and they still like to act that way. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: 4 Mar 2005 22:04:32 -0000 From: John Levine Subject: Re: Nokia 6010 Reporting in to Mama -- Radio Interference? Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA >> My new Nokia 6010 has an interesting and somewhat annoying habit. If >> it's anywhere within a 5 foot radius of my PC speakers, I can hear it >> periodically transmitting something ... > Now, _why_ this stuff is being picked up on the PC speakers -- that's > a whole nuther story. The little song that GSM phones sing seems to be in a low enough frequency range that it's picked up inductively by just about any audio system. My car has a shelf under the radio, and if I put the phone there, the radio picks up the song. Often on conference calls with speakerphones, we have to remind people not to put their GSM phones close to the phone because we'll all hear it singing. 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 ------------------------------ From: Bill Ranck Subject: Re: New Monopoly in Dept Stores -- Federated and May Co to Merge Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2005 22:12:09 UTC Organization: Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia, USA hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: > Second, the traditional old line dept stores actually had considerable > variety. The modern mgmt have eliminated a lot of departments and > special services. Gimbels, for example, had a scouting/camping dept, > art supplies dept, and bookstore. >> I think this sort of gradual fade into irrelevance is what terrifies >> the heads of Federated and (heavily-indebted) May. ... > It's their own fault, and merger won't fix it, anymore than merging > the Pennsylvania and New York Central railroads saved them. It seems obvious to me that the traditional, old line, department stores have been replaced by *malls*. No, it's not one big store with clothing, furniture, housewares, and whatnot all under one name, but effectively the malls today have all the same stuff in a series of small independent or chain stores under one roof. It's better in some ways because there will be competing stores in a mall selling similar merchandise, while a department store does not have competing departments. So, it seems that malls have both centralized and de-centalized the retail industry at the same time. The telecom industry seems to be working its way toward that same kind of situation. Bill Ranck Blacksburg, Va. ------------------------------ From: Isaiah Beard Subject: Re: Nokia 6010 Reporting in to Mama -- Radio Interference? Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2005 15:09:28 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Ted Koppel wrote: > My new Nokia 6010 has an interesting and somewhat annoying habit. If > it's anywhere within a 5 foot radius of my PC speakers, I can hear it > periodically transmitting something (sort of a rhythmic > dum-diddy-dum-diddy-dum-dum-dum). Sounds like static, but definitely > with a paced rhythm. I haven't timed the intervals exactly, but it > seems to take place every 17-20 minutes. In a related activity, I > hear a big burst of static on my PC speakers, and then some rhythmic > noise, about 5-7 seconds before the cell phone begins to ring. > This is the first cell phone I've had that caused these noises. Do I > have a mutant phone? Is this anything to be concerned about? I've been noticing lately that a lot of the newer GSM phones are starting to do this. I worry that GSM handset manufacturers are starting to get a little bit careless in taking steps to avoid interference. You will find, however, that CDMA based phones (those on Verizon, Sprint, Alltel and a few others) will not have this problem. This is not to say that they are immune to interfering with toher equipment; they just happen to do it in a way that is far less noticeable to the layperson. E-mail fudged to thwart spammers. Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply. ------------------------------ From: Isaiah Beard Subject: Re: Phone Prefix 620-924 Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2005 15:22:11 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to Carl Moore: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: For those who do not know, Liberty, KS > is a _tiny_ little 'wide spot' in the road southeast of Independence, > population about a hundred souls, a Methodist Church, the obligatory > road house and a gasoline station. Dobson Cellular One also has its > antennas there. 620-924 _does_ ring in there but only as DID-type > lines for some of the cell phones based out of there. telcodata.us reports the 620-924 exchange as being assigned to the "Tri-County Telephone Association," whatever that may be, and lists the switch as a Nortel DMS-10 RSLE. > I think 620-485 picks up the rest of Liberty. That it does. The TOTAH telephone company. Another Nortel DMS-10. E-mail fudged to thwart spammers. Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Tri-County Telephone Association was formerly the 'Tri-County Telephone Cooperative Society'; it is a group of citizens in southeast Kansas who, back at the start of the last century started rural telephone service in this area, or actually a bit east of us covering the area between Pittsburg, KS and somewhere east of Cherryvale, KS, when Southwestern Bell could not be bothered with them. Once they got set up with 'modern' equipment in the 1930's and Rural Electrification Administration bailed them out of debt, Southwestern Bell started looking at the area with -- as Jimmy Carter would have said -- lust in their heart. Comes the 1950's and they got totally out of their debt to REA, and the farmer's wives got to be too old to run the switchboard, and the farmer's daughters moved away to the big city, Bell's lust got even stronger; all kinds of scummy tricks were played on them; but to their credit, Tri-County stared right back at Southwestern Bell and gave them an old fashioned Archie Bunker-style Bronx cheer, and went with other _independents_ such as Totah and GTE instead. That's pretty much where it stands even today. Since Divestiture, I think they have gotten on somewhat friendlier terms with Bell. 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 V24 #95 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat Mar 5 17:34:15 2005 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j25MYFA07323; Sat, 5 Mar 2005 17:34:15 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2005 17:34:15 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200503052234.j25MYFA07323@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 V24 #96 TELECOM Digest Sat, 5 Mar 2005 17:34:00 EST Volume 24 : Issue 96 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson MCI and AT&T Leave Little Guys Behind (Marcus Didius Falco) Conflicting Portraits Of Ebbers Drawn (Marcus Didius Falco) Applying 'Sell Discipline' to the (Marcus Didius Falco) It's Degrading: VoIP Firms Urge More FCC Action (Jack Decker) Re: Nokio 6010 Reporting in to Mama - Radio Interference (P McKerracher) Re: Nokio 6010 Reporting in to Mama - Radio Interference (Mark Atwood) Re: Nokio 6010 Reporting in to Mama - Radio Interference? (CharlesH) Re: Vonage (Flatus Ohlfahrt) Re: Vonage (Tony P.) Re: Vonage (John Levine) Re: Hookflash and Ground Start Analog CO Trunks From PABX (Ken Abrams) Re: Municipal Wi-FI and Incumbents (Tony P.) Re: Is Your Identity Safe? (Dan Lanciani) Re: New Monopoly in Dept Stores -- Federated and May Co to Merge (Henry) Last Laugh! Virgin Mobile Canada (exp315@canada.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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 05 Mar 2005 03:11:14 -0500 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: MCI and AT&T Leave Little Guys Behind http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A2825-2005Mar2.html By Yuki Noguchi Thursday, March 3, 2005; Page E01 Lobbying against the regional Bells is about to become a lonely cause for XO Communications Inc. of Reston. For years, XO, MCI Inc. and AT&T Corp. were more or less comrades fighting regional phone giants such as Verizon Communications Inc. and SBC Communications Inc. to open up local markets and get access to the Bells' facilities. Now MCI and AT&T plan to merge with the very regional phone giants they lobbied against -- Verizon and SBC. XO is a relatively small company, with about $1 billion in annual revenue and 5,000 employees. The much larger AT&T and MCI bankrolled many of the battles over issues central to the local phone industry and funded advocacy groups to back them up. But now, SBC is buying AT&T for $16 billion, and Verizon has agreed to buy MCI for $6.75 billion. Qwest Communications International Inc., another regional phone company, is also bidding for MCI. That dries up a huge chunk of funding and leaves XO among the handful of small telecommunications companies that aren't part of the growing Baby Bell phone empire. "It's going to be a big decrease in funding when they walk away," said Heather B. Gold, senior vice president for government relations for XO, which opened a regulatory office in the District after it acquired another independent telecom company, Allegiance TelecomInc., last year. "We will have to build more coalitions [among the smaller companies] to replace the single or double source of support," she said. XO didn't always have the same interests as AT&T and MCI. XO doesn't sell to residential consumers, for example, and owns its own network in most major cities. It leases high-capacity lines used for business Internet connections. AT&T and MCI relied on regulations that allowed them to lease local lines from the regional companies at discounted rates and resell local phone service under their own brands. AT&T and MCI fought vigorously to keep those discounted rates in place, but they lost the battle and were forced to pull back from the consumer phone business. This year AT&T and MCI won't be with XO but against it as XO fights approval of the mergers in front of the Federal Communications Commission. "We plan to lobby against these mergers as anticompetitive," Gold said. The mergers come at a time when companies like XO are already weakened by other business dynamics. XO has been in and out of bankruptcy protection, and in the Washington area alone, dozens of telecommunications companies collapsed with the technology crash that started in 2000. Companies like Teligent Inc., E.spire Communications Inc., Net2000 Communications Inc., and WinStar LLC -- which were never lobbying powerhouses to begin with -- fell into bankruptcy and off the radar screen. In recent years, AT&T actively funded advocacy groups such as Voices for Choices, which paid for television and newspaper advertisements against Bell-backed legislation that would have hurt the companies trying to compete in the local markets. It also funded studies for third-party telecommunications groups and associations. Many of AT&T's hired guns are expected to stop lobbying for non-Bell companies when AT&T becomes part of SBC, according to industry sources. Those include the LawMedia Group, a strategy group headed by former House Judiciary Committee minority counsel Julian Epstein, and DCI Group, another lobbying strategy group. Also likely to exit the competitive telecom scene with the AT&T merger: Steve Ricchetti and Charlie Black, well-connected Democratic and Republican strategists, respectively, and co-chairmen of Voices for Choices. AT&T general counsel Jim Ciccone, regarded as one of the industry's most effective lobbyists, may even join forces with SBC, making that regional giant even more effective against smaller rivals, some say. He declined to comment. "Clearly, it's a very different ecosystem without AT&T and MCI," said Andrew D. Lipman, who leads the telecommunications practice at Georgetown-based Swidler BerlinLLP, a law firm that represents MCI and represented dozens of upstart companies allied with AT&T and MCI. "To some extent it's like the U.S. and the U.K. pulling out of NATO." Lipman said AT&T was a critical and much-heeded voice, not just on Capitol Hill and at the FCC, but at the state level, where telecommunications policies are hammered out at state utilities commissions and legislatures. "AT&T has offices in virtually every state capital," public utilities commission and attorney general's office, Lipman said. That is matched by only the regional Bells, which have their own lobbying infrastructure to counter that, he said. "There is a recognition that the other players are going to have to pony up to the bar and pay more for their advocacy." That reality is reflected in the fate of the competitive industry's trade associations, which this week merged into a single entity. In 2003, the Competitive Telecommunications Association (CompTel), which represented some of those local companies, merged with the Association of Communications Enterprises (Ascent), another industry association, as membership numbers declined. This week, the other remaining industry association representing these independent telecommunications companies, ALTS, or the Association for Local Telecommunications Services, merged with CompTel/Ascent. The combined firm is called CompTel/ALTS. "I feel sadness; there's no question about it," Ernest B. KellyIII, president of Ascent until 2002, said about the fate of the hundreds of small companies that have gone under. At Ascent's height in early 2000, it had more than 850 members. Now the combined entity has about 370. "They still have a voice," Kelly said, "but they won't have the resources and they won't have the impact." Copyright 2005 The Washington Post Company 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 . Hundreds of 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: Sat, 05 Mar 2005 03:13:26 -0500 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Conflicting Portraits Of Ebbers Drawn http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A64357-2005Mar1.html WorldCom's Detail Man or Hands-Off Mentor? By Brooke A. Masters Washington Post Staff Writer Wednesday, March 2, 2005; Page A01 NEW YORK -- WorldCom Inc. former chief executive Bernard J. Ebbers was so obsessed with cutting costs that he canceled the employees' coffee service to save $4 million. But when the company's accountants made more than $2 billion in operating expenses simply disappear, Ebbers never noticed, according to his testimony at his criminal trial. Over the past five weeks, jurors in this Manhattan courtroom have been shown two radically different faces of the entrepreneur who built WorldCom from an obscure Mississippi phone service reseller to the nation's second-largest long-distance firm. One is that of a hard-charging businessman so immersed in WorldCom's finances that he noticed $18,000 cost overruns in a $3 billion budget and sent angry memos when he thought subordinates' presentations were insufficiently detailed. Prosecutors say he was so driven to protect his personal fortune in WorldCom stock that he orchestrated a scheme to inflate the company's earnings from 2000 to 2002 by falsely reclassifying certain operating expenses, known as line costs, as capital expenditures. The other view of WorldCom's chief was on full display as Ebbers, 63, took the stand in his own defense Monday. Describing himself as a former milkman and warehouse operator, Ebbers told the jury he focused on hiring talented subordinates to handle areas in which he was weak, such as technology and accounting, and coaching them to do their best. In the crucial period of the fraud, Ebbers said, he was in the process of disengaging from WorldCom because he had developed heart trouble and was "embarrassed" by his inability to understand the technology that was a growing part of his business. Soon jurors will have to reconcile the two pictures, or discard one, as they decide whether to convict Ebbers of conspiracy, securities fraud and seven counts of filing false documents with the Securities and Exchange Commission. WorldCom filed for bankruptcy protection in July 2002 and now operates as MCI Inc. of Ashburn. While the government presented its case, and during parts of Ebbers's cross-examination Tuesday, jurors saw flashes of the demanding and details-oriented boss who dominated WorldCom for nearly two decades, leading it through more than 65 mergers. WorldCom's former "whiz kid" finance chief Scott D. Sullivan, who was just 33 when Ebbers elevated him to the No. 2 job, told the jurors that his boss could be intimidating and difficult to budge. When Ebbers disagreed with one of Sullivan's financial decisions, Sullivan said, "He would make comments to me in the presence of other people, 'We'll just get a new CFO, that's what we'll do.' . . . He said it in a kidding way, but I didn't take it as a joke." Another witness quoted Ebbers as referring to the diminutive Sullivan dismissively as "short man" when he was displeased. That history is why, Sullivan said, he "took it as a command to commit accounting fraud" when Ebbers ordered him in private one-on-one meetings to "hit the numbers" for revenue and earnings that Wall Street analysts were expecting. "I knew it was wrong. I knew it was against the law," said Sullivan, now 43. "I capitulated." Ebbers said on the stand that he rarely had one-on-one conversations with Sullivan and that the finance chief never told him about the illegal accounting entries. "If he had, we wouldn't be here today," Ebbers added. There are no documents or third-party witnesses that conclusively link Ebbers to the fraud, so prosecutors have sought to show that Ebbers must have known that the company was hiding line costs -- fees WorldCom paid to use other carriers' networks -- because he was intimately familiar with the company's finances, down to the smallest expenses. Budget analyst G. Brady Connor, who works at WorldCom's successor, MCI, testified earlier that at a meeting in Atlanta, Ebbers boasted of his cost-cutting efforts. Not only did the chief executive say he used parking lot video cameras to monitor the length of smoking breaks and count employees' lunchtime walks around a lake at the Clinton, Miss., campus, but he boasted of a trick he was using at the company's offices in Arlington. Connor testified that Ebbers said he was working with a security guard "to manually fill up the bottled-water machines with tap water, and the employees didn't know the difference." Ebbers, according to Connor, also said he canceled the company's coffee service because he believed employees were stealing coffee that WorldCom provided. The company was running through bags of coffee far faster than it was using filters, Ebbers said, so employees must be taking bags home. Prosecutors have also shown the jury that Ebbers tossed around financial terms like "incremental revenue," "cash earnings" and "EBITDA margin" (financial speak for a kind of earnings) at meetings with securities analysts. During two days on the stand, Ebbers kept his temper, appearing grandfatherly and occasionally a bit lost when the government asked him to pick out specific information from a financial document. He talked proudly of his five daughters and eight grandchildren and modestly described his more than $100 million in anonymous charitable contributions. He smilingly acknowledged his reputation for cost-cutting, noting that in his early career as a motel owner, he angered guests by requiring them to return the towels they had used or pay a fee. A subordinate had recommended the coffee service cancellation after he asked for imaginative ways to reduce expenses, he said. "I did not ever count coffee filters or coffee bags," he insisted. "But I can tell you I agreed with it [the cost-saving recommendation]. . . . I don't consider, when you are playing with shareholders' money, that $4 million is a small number." But Ebbers repeatedly insisted that he never focused on accounting or on the company's line costs during the period of the fraud because he trusted Sullivan and others to handle financial matters. "The closest thing I've ever had to an accounting course is a preliminary course on economics," Ebbers said, adding later, "I know what I don't know." Ebbers testified that he had no idea WorldCom had a problem with too-high line costs even though he traveled to Virginia in June 2001 to attend a meeting on the subject. "I was invited there by Scott Sullivan to do my cheerleading thing and give the troops a little pep talk," he said. Asked why a pep talk was necessary, Ebbers paused and said, "Scott Sullivan told me there was some lack of harmony in the group." As Tuesday wore on, Ebbers began to wear out under cross-examination by Assistant U.S. Attorney David B. Anders, insisting dozens of times that he did not recall documents or incidents that his subordinates had testified about earlier in the trial. Ebbers said he had no memory of an October 2000 encounter with then-controller David F. Myers at which Myers said he thought Ebbers was apologizing for the first fraudulent accounting entry. Ebbers also said he did not recall telling his head of investor relations, C. Scott Hamilton, that he would be "wiped out" if the company told Wall Street to expect lower earnings and the stock price fell as a result. Faced with half a dozen documents that showed line costs fluctuating by $600 million, $700 million, even $900 million in a single month, Ebbers looked tired and coughed as he insisted that he either had never read the document or had not noticed the particular line item in three budget reports he was shown. "I did not notice that," Ebbers said. "If I would have noticed it, we would not be here." "I just didn't see it." Anders pressed, "WorldCom reduced its line costs by over $2 billion and you had no idea?" "That's correct," replied Ebbers, who resumes the stand Wednesday. Copyright 2005 The Washington Post Company 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 . Hundreds of 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, the Washington Post Company. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 05 Mar 2005 03:14:46 -0500 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Applying 'Sell Discipline' to the Baby Bells http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A55213-2005Feb26.html Applying 'Sell Discipline' to the Baby Bells Evergreen Manager Moves From Acquisitive Firms to Wireless and Utility Stocks By Danielle Kost Bloomberg News Sunday, February 27, 2005; Page F04 Timothy O'Brien says he revived the $300 million Evergreen Utility & Telecommunications Fund by knowing when to sell stocks. He decided this year to reduce his stakes in Verizon Communications Inc. and SBC Communications Inc. after they unveiled plans to make acquisitions. The Evergreen fund rose 30 percent in the past 12 months, outperforming the 3.3 percent gain of the Standard & Poor's Diversified Telecommunications Services Index and the 6.4 percent advance of the S&P 500-stock index. "As merger mania was heating up in the telecommunications space, we were concerned that the Bell companies were more likely to be the buyers than the sellers," said O'Brien, 50, in an interview from his office at Evergreen Investment Services Inc. in Boston. "Typically, you want to own the sellers." O'Brien took over the Evergreen fund in April 2002 after it lost almost 40 percent of value in the previous two years. Since then, the fund has risen at an annual rate of 15 percent, tripling the average 5 percent gain of competing funds, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. He "really turned around the fund's performance," said Andrew Gogerty, an analyst at mutual fund research firm Morningstar Inc. in Chicago. "Before that, it wasn't a very strong-performing fund." O'Brien has brought a "sell discipline" to the fund, Gogerty said. "He won't hold onto a falling stock to see if it will turn over. He will be the first one to admit when he makes a mistake." O'Brien's willingness to sell is reflected in the decisions to scale back positions in New York-based Verizon, SBC of San Antonio and Atlanta-based BellSouth Corp., companies whose shares are down or little changed in the past year. O'Brien has about 2 percent of his mutual fund's assets in Verizon, SBC and BellSouth, down from as much as 3.5 percent at the start of the year. Verizon plans to buy MCI Inc., of Ashburn, for $6.75 billion, and SBC is acquiring AT&T Corp. of Bedminster, N.J., for $16 billion. Atlanta-based Cingular Wireless LLC, which is owned jointly by SBC and BellSouth, paid $41.3 billion to buy AT&T Wireless Services Inc. in October. None of the transactions will provide an immediate boost to profits, O'Brien said. MCI emerged from the largest U.S. bankruptcy in history in April, and AT&T's revenue fell for a 20th straight quarter in the final three months of last year. O'Brien holds about 60 stocks, which account for about 90 percent of the fund's investments. The rest of the assets are split between bonds and cash. One of the fund's best-performing stocks is its largest holding, TXU Corp. Shares of Texas's biggest power producer almost tripled in the past year. Only Apple Computer Inc. has done better among companies in the S&P 500. The Evergreen fund increased its stake in TXU in October 2002, a year in which the stock fell 66 percent as the company cut jobs and its dividend. TXU chief executive C. John Wilder was hired a year ago to improve the company's finances. He has been selling assets and reducing the company's debt. The stock closed Friday at $78.20 a share. TXU has been "a home run for us," said O'Brien, who has degrees from the University of Massachusetts in Amherst and the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School in Philadelphia. Before joining Evergreen, he oversaw similar funds for Eaton Vance Corp. and Gabelli Asset Management Inc. While O'Brien has reduced the fund's positions in telecom companies, he has increased its wireless holdings. He added to his position in Western Wireless Corp. during the third quarter and initiated one in Leap Wireless International Inc. in August. "I wouldn't call them household names," O'Brien said. Western Wireless sells mobile-phone services in 19 western U.S. states. The Bellevue, Wash.-based firm benefits from operating in rural markets with fewer competitors. Last month, Alltel Corp., the sixth-largest U.S. wireless company, agreed to buy it for $4.42 billion. Shares of Western Wireless gained 56 percent in the past year and finished the week at $39.24. Leap Wireless, a company spun off from Qualcomm Inc. that sells unlimited local wireless calling services at a flat rate, emerged from Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in August. The San Diego-based company's shares have risen 2.1 percent since then and closed Friday at $27.15. Leap Wireless added a net 29,000 customers in the fourth quarter for a total gain of about 97,000 for the year. "They've got a strong balance sheet," O'Brien said. "They kind of fly underneath the radar." Exelon Corp., created in a merger five years ago by utilities in Philadelphia and Chicago, is the fund's second-largest investment. The owner of utilities has increased profit by cutting jobs and boosting sales from low-cost nuclear plants. It agreed to buy Public Service Enterprise Group Inc. for $12.8 billion in December, the biggest utility acquisition in U.S. history. Exelon's stock rose 33 percent in the past year. It ended the week at $45.50 "The company has been very sensible," O'Brien said. Copyright 2005 The Washington Post Company 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 . Hundreds of 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, the Washington Post Company. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ From: Jack Decker Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2005 23:09:22 -0500 Subject: It's Degrading: VoIP Firms Urge More FCC Action http://itmanagement.earthweb.com/erp/article.php/3487686 It's Degrading: VoIP Firms Urge More FCC Action By Roy Mark Internet telephony firms praised Thursday's action by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to fine a small telecom for blocking Voice over Internet Protocol (define) traffic, but said problems of keeping broadband networks open to all IP applications remain. Over the last six months, both consumer VoIP provider Vonage and wholesaler Nuvio complained to the FCC about both telecom and cable broadband providers either blocking or degrading VoIP calls. In some cases, the providers offer their own VoIP service and in Vonage's and Nuvio's opinion are discriminating against unaffiliated VoIP companies. Thursday, Madison River Communications of Mebane, N.C., which owns and operates four rural telephone companies in Georgia, Alabama, North Carolina and Illinois, admitted no guilt in port blocking complaints brought by Vonage, but agreed to a $15, 000 fine and promised to drop the practice. Chris Murray, Vonage's director of government affairs, said in Madison River's case, one of the company's subsidiaries was blocking VoIP calls to and from a customer who chose to get VoIP service instead of leasing a second, hard-wired telephone line. "They gave no notice [to the customer]. [His Vonage service] had been working and one day he woke up and it didn't work," Murray said. Full story at: http://itmanagement.earthweb.com/erp/article.php/3487686 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: Phil McKerracher Subject: Re: Nokia 6010 Reporting in to Mama -- Radio Interference? Date: Sat, 05 Mar 2005 00:24:39 GMT Joseph wrote in message news:telecom24.94.8@telecom-digest.org: > On Thu, 03 Mar 2005 15:59:30 -0500, Ted Koppel > wrote: >> My new Nokia 6010 has an interesting and somewhat annoying habit. If >> it's anywhere within a 5 foot radius of my PC speakers, I can hear it >> periodically transmitting something (sort of a rhythmic >> dum-diddy-dum-diddy-dum-dum-dum). Sounds like static, but definitely >> with a paced rhythm. I haven't timed the intervals exactly, but it >> seems to take place every 17-20 minutes. In a related activity, I >> hear a big burst of static on my PC speakers, and then some rhythmic >> noise, about 5-7 seconds before the cell phone begins to ring. >> This is the first cell phone I've had that caused these noises. Do I >> have a mutant phone? Is this anything to be concerned about? > It's not just the Nokia 6010. *Any* GSM will exhibit the > characteristics you refer to. It's the phone communicating with the > system periodically... True. I was told by a contact at ETSI (the organisation that defined many of the GSM standards) that this was originally an oversight -- they had not realised that the modulation scheme was effectively 100% amplitude modulation, which would be "detected" by any rectifying circuit nearby. It caused a lot of consternation in the early days. The "solution" they eventually agreed was to reduce the power transmitted by the phones by a factor of 10. This had been proposed anyway, to reduce the cell size and hence increase system capacity (also to increase battery life). Phil McKerracher www.mckerracher.org ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Nokia 6010 Reporting in to Mama -- Radio Interference? From: Mark Atwood Organization: EasyNews, UseNet made Easy! Date: Sat, 05 Mar 2005 00:46:32 GMT >> My new Nokia 6010 has an interesting and somewhat annoying habit. If >> it's anywhere within a 5 foot radius of my PC speakers, I can hear it >> periodically transmitting something (sort of a rhythmic >> dum-diddy-dum-diddy-dum-dum-dum). Sounds like static, but definitely >> with a paced rhythm. I haven't timed the intervals exactly, but it >> seems to take place every 17-20 minutes. In a related activity, I >> hear a big burst of static on my PC speakers, and then some rhythmic >> noise, about 5-7 seconds before the cell phone begins to ring. We've been hearing those beeps on the peecee speakers at our office for some weeks now, and never figured out what was causing them until I read this post. 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: CharlesH Subject: Re: Nokia 6010 Reporting in to Mama -- Radio Interference? Organization: SBC http://yahoo.sbc.com Date: Sat, 05 Mar 2005 04:17:11 GMT Joseph wrote: > On Thu, 03 Mar 2005 15:59:30 -0500, Ted Koppel > wrote: >> My new Nokia 6010 has an interesting and somewhat annoying habit. If >> it's anywhere within a 5 foot radius of my PC speakers, I can hear it >> periodically transmitting something (sort of a rhythmic >> dum-diddy-dum-diddy-dum-dum-dum). Sounds like static, but definitely >> with a paced rhythm. I haven't timed the intervals exactly, but it >> seems to take place every 17-20 minutes. In a related activity, I >> hear a big burst of static on my PC speakers, and then some rhythmic >> noise, about 5-7 seconds before the cell phone begins to ring. >> This is the first cell phone I've had that caused these noises. Do I >> have a mutant phone? Is this anything to be concerned about? > It's not just the Nokia 6010. *Any* GSM will exhibit the > characteristics you refer to. It's the phone communicating with the > system periodically. You'll hear the buzz-buzz even more when the > 6010 is ringing. You'll hear a different type of interference when a > TDMA phone rings (more like a low hum.) It's normal and your phone is > not defective. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The first time this happened to me, I > was walking around downtown. My cellular phone (and its holder) were > clipped on my belt. Right next to that was my Walkman FM radio which > was also clipped on my belt, and I was listening to it through my > headphones. Suddenly the radio started humming and buzzing, as though > there was some interference nearby. I wondered to myself, what is > going on there in Potts (I was walking right past the Potts Funeral > Home when it started). I got a few steps beyong Potts and the inter- > ference stopped. I found out later it was a call coming in on the > cell phone; apparently the cell tower had been trying to locate me for > the call. I did not realize it at the moment, and just thought it was > some kind of spurious interference noise. But later at home, I sat the > cellular phone on a table next to my Bose radio, and I was not wearing > my headphones (so I could hear the phone 'ringing' [or actually > giving its electronic chirp of a call coming in]) and the Bose radio > did the same thing: played a spurt of interference noise when it was > happening. I just assumed either the cell phone or the Bose radio was > faulty. Your explanation helped explain it. PAT] This kind of interference is specific to phones which use a TDMA (Time Division Multiple Access) protocol (such as GSM), where the phone transmits only during its time slice several hundred times per second, resulting in a pulsing which causes the observed interference. CDMA (Code Division Multiple Access) phones, when they are in a call or doing occasional bookkeeping with cellular system, transmit continuously over a wide frequency range (1.25MHz, for example), and do not cause interference like this. In fact, without knowing the specific pattern being used by the phone, it is practically impossible to distinguish its signal from background noise. Which is one reason (along with the difficulty of jamming it), that the military was interested in CDMA long before there were cellular phones. ------------------------------ From: Flatus Ohlfahrt Subject: Re: Vonage Date: 5 Mar 2005 00:27:25 GMT Organization: USAF Ret On Fri, 04 Mar 2005 19:25:59 GMT, Henry Cabot Henhouse III wrote in news:telecom24.95.2@telecom-digest.org: > So, anyone else notice that Vonage has taken a dump? I've > tried from a number of different networks, nada, zip, > kerflunk. > Busy when you navigate thru the voice mail, no response > from the website, mungled voice response when you call > their main number. > Ya know, all this just to save $20 a month. > I'm porting my number BACK to Verizon. At least they don't > have these stupid VOIP outages and calls that sound like > you're in a sfx chamber. > Bah! We've had Vonage for about a year and a half. For us, it's been steady improvement. The few outages we've experienced have been cable company related. From the performance you describe, it certainly sounds as if the problems may be related to your particular installation. Flatus ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: Vonage Organization: ATCC Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2005 19:56:50 -0500 In article , sooper_chicken@hotmail.com says: > So, anyone else notice that Vonage has taken a dump? I've tried from > a number of different networks, nada, zip, kerflunk. > Busy when you navigate thru the voice mail, no response from the > website, mungled voice response when you call their main number. > Ya know, all this just to save $20 a month. > I'm porting my number BACK to Verizon. At least they don't have > these stupid VOIP outages and calls that sound like you're in a sfx > chamber. > Bah! They definitely have some problems in different parts of the country but my service in the northeast has been rock solid. I wonder -- I know I'm on a Paetec switch so is it a Focal issue? ------------------------------ Date: 5 Mar 2005 04:46:26 -0000 From: John Levine Subject: Re: Vonage Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > So, anyone else notice that Vonage has taken a dump? I've tried from > a number of different networks, nada, zip, kerflunk. > Busy when you navigate thru the voice mail, no response from the > website, mungled voice response when you call their main number. No kidding. I ported my number to Lingo almost a month ago due to Vonage's poor service and non-existent support, and I'm still trying to get hold of someone at Vonage who can cancel my account. Perhaps they'll notice that I cancelled the credit card. ------------------------------ From: Ken Abrams Subject: Re: Hookflash and Ground Start Analog CO Trunks From PABX Organization: SBC http://yahoo.sbc.com Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2005 23:12:25 GMT Robert Bonomi wrote > Do you even understand the difference between a _POTS_ (analog "loop > start") line, and a "ground start" (aka "wink start") *trunk* line? The real question IS: Why is Robert questioning someone else's understanding when he has so little himself? Loop start lines are not always analog and ground start and wink start are two ENTIRELY different things. ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: Municipal Wi-FI and Incumbents Organization: ATCC Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2005 19:59:50 -0500 In article , cjmebox- telecomdigest@yahoo.com says: > This is from yesterday's Guardian. It includes an interesting > juxtaposition of Verizon's and BT's positions on municipal Wi-Fi > networks. > http://www.guardian.co.uk/online/story/0,,1428626,00.html > Excerpt: > ..... > So far, so good. But city hall soon ran into serious problems that > could stifle the wireless dreams of municipalities across the world. US > cable companies, which see citizen-funded networks as a threat to their > commercial fiefdoms, backed a bill that effectively outlawed municipal > wireless in the state of Pennsylvania. In December, the state passed a > bill forbidding any municipality in the state from running an > "information network". Only a last-minute deal with Verizon, the > state's de facto monopoly provider of broadband, saved Philadelphia's > vision. Verizon promised to allow the city's network, but at the > expense of the rest of the state. At least 15 US states are considering > similar telco-backed bills to ban municipal networks. > To Dianah Neff, Philadelphia's chief information officer, municipal > wireless is no mere luxury. Neff, a veteran public servant, sees > municipal networks as a potential leveller in a city where 70% of state > school children receive free school meals. "We have a vibrant > downtown," she says, "but we need to make sure all our neighbourhoods > can compete in the knowledge economy. > .......... > Chris Clark, chief executive for BT Wireless Broadband, said the UK's > biggest broadband supplier would not be taking the same approach as > Verizon. "The community wireless projects, which started in an > environment of concern about rural service, are evolving into providing > all sorts of innovative services," he says. "It would be a pity to see > such innovation stifled. More recently, a number of metropolitan > wireless projects have been in the pipeline. BT is fully supportive of > these initiatives." > TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: City of Independence was looking very > favorably at muni-wi-fi for our town, but SBC -- Southwestern Bell -- > put a kibosh on it, threatening to get the state commission to do a > rule like that proposed for Pennsylvania. SBC did not like the idea > at all of a community giving away for free the DSL service they > charge an arm and a leg for. PAT] And we all know why Verizon and SBC don't like the idea. First - Skype is now available for the Palm OS. So tell me, what happens when for say $10 a month you can use the muni network. You load Skype on your laptop or PDA and use it to make and receive calls while in the city. This kills both wire line and wireless. The incumbent carriers are scared. They can see that their years of reliance on tariff are coming to a crashing halt. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I did something sort of exciting for me a couple days ago. Our local McDonalds has a WiFi network but I have never seen anyone use it. So when I went over for lunch the other day, I took along my IBM ThinkPad laptop (it is a really ancient model, the 770, but it is networked both with wires and with my wireless NetGear router card) and played around on line with it while I had lunch. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2005 01:59:57 EST From: Dan Lanciani Subject: Re: Is Your Identity Safe? kludge@panix.com Fri Mar 4 10:14:28 2005 wrote: > Dan Lanciani wrote: >> I think you've missed the point. In spite of what the banks may tell >> you, there is no reason for the information required by an entity to >> verify your identity to also be sufficient for that entity to >> impersonate you. The attitude of, 'we need to know all about you so >> we can be sure who you are' (and consumers' acceptance of that >> attitude) is exactly the problem. > Then how can it be complete to verify your identity? The currently fashionable approach would be for the credit agency (or equivalent) to hold the consumer's public key and deliver it to the bank or other entity desiring to verify the consumer's identity. The consumer could then sign the credit application (or whatever) with her secret key, proving her identity. (There are details, of course, and the application should probably be encrypted with the bank's well-known public key.) An advantage of using public key crypto is that even the credit agency doesn't have enough information to impersonate the consumer. If you don't like public key crypto and you don't mind that the credit agency (but not the bank) has enough information to impersonate the consumer then take a look at Kerberos's model. It can provide mutual authentication of two parties without giving either enough information to impersonate the other, all using traditional symmetric crypto. One nice thing about both approaches is that they could be phased in in such a way that they were completely optional both for consumers and banks. Let consumers register their public keys with the credit agencies who could then deliver them along with all the other personal data. Let banks use them for verification if they so choose. (Maybe provide a little incentive by saying that if a consumer registers a key and the bank decides not to use it and there is fraud the bank is strongly presumed to be at fault.) Another feature is that unlike biometric and SecureID schemes, these approaches do not require the deployment of esoteric hardware. More importantly, since the required computing equipment on the consumer's end is working only for the consumer (i.e., it is not attempting to conceal something from its owner) it can be implemented as software on general purpose machines, e.g., desktops and PDAs. Chances are that the majority of consumers interested in registering their keys already have the required hardware. (This is not to say that the banks couldn't develop a nice easy-to-use crypto appliance for those who don't want to use general-purpose machines.) To extend the approach to frequent transactions it would be a good idea to add an IrDa port to ATMs so they could talk to PDAs directly. (You don't want the consumer to have to copy long strings of digits by hand.) Again this does not require the bank to issue special "secure" hardware to the consumer because the PDA works for its owner, not for the bank. > The information that verifies that you are who you are is exactly the > same information that verifies that someone else is who you are. That's true, and it is why there is ultimately no solution for the simple duress problem. The best we can do with something known is prove that that something is indeed known. However, we can contrive to do this in such a way that the something known is not disclosed in the process. And the entity to whom we are making the proof does not itself need to know the something at any time. That solves the phishing problem and the unintentional-disclosure-by-central-agency problem. Dan Lanciani ddl@danlan.*com ------------------------------ From: henry999@eircom.net (Henry) Subject: Re: New Monopoly in Dept Stores -- Federated and May Co to Merge Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2005 17:48:51 +0200 Organization: Elisa Internet customer wrote: > ... in Kansas, and I have patronized several in Wellington ... Ah -- Wellington, Kansas. I haven't thought about that town in years but it holds a special spot in my life story. It was the first place I was ever served in a bar, almost 40 years ago. I was 16 years old and on a cross-country trip with my 17-year-old high school buddy and his parents. The parents had friends in Wellington and we stayed with them a night or two. One evening while the old folks were gabbing, my pal and I went to check out the town. We went into a bar where there wasn't much happening and started playing pool. There was a sign on the wall that said something like: 'In order to play pool you must show your draft card" -- the draft card, of course, being required in those days when a male turned 18. Well, we shot pool for a while and nobody seemed bothered -- nobody asked to see the cards, anyway -- so we started to wonder: If they think we're 18, maybe we can get a beer? I still had some growing to do at that point; I was about 5'3" and I wrestled in the 112-pound class. My friend was taller, heavier and shaving every day, so he went up to the bar while I sat at the table. By golly, a minute later there he was, coming back with two bottles of Coors. Cheers, Henry [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Smile ... thanks for sharing that. Kansas, like Chicago, IL, was a different place forty years ago, but to a large extent, Kansas has been able to stay the way it was 'back then' ... I think what I like best about small town, Kansas is that although almost everyone knows everyone else, we all tend to mind our own business and expect others to do the same. The courtesy and 'laid back' attitudes around here are hard to find in larger cities. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Exp315@canada.com Subject: Last Laugh! Virgin Mobile Canada Date: 5 Mar 2005 13:18:28 -0800 Question to Virgin Mobile Canada: will your Canadian service link up with your U.S. service? Answer: We are experiencing technical difficulties. Your email was not sent to us, please try again later. Way to inspire confidence guys! ------------------------------ 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 V24 #96 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun Mar 6 17:56:26 2005 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j26MuQR17150; Sun, 6 Mar 2005 17:56:26 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 17:56:26 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200503062256.j26MuQR17150@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 V24 #97 TELECOM Digest Sun, 6 Mar 2005 17:55:00 EST Volume 24 : Issue 97 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Watching the Detectors (Monty Solomon) RadioSHARK Review (Monty Solomon) Harvard Applicants Breached Security (Monty Solomon) ChoicePoint Data Cache Became a Powder Keg (Marcus Didius Falco) All Wired up (Marcus Didius Falco) FYI: Paper About Metcalfe's Law (Marcus Didius Falco) If You Use Ebay (LB@notmine.com) Strange Call ID (Spyros Bartsocas) Corporate Identify -- Verizon vs. "Bell Telephone" (Lisa Hancock Re: Nokia 6010 Reporting in to Mama -- Radio Interference? (Joseph) Re: Nokia 6010 Reporting in to Mama -- Radio Interference? (Tony P.) Re: Vonage (Isaiah Beard) Re: Vonage (DevilsPGD) Re: Vonage's Citron Says VoIP Blocking Is 'Censorship' (Joel M. Hoffman) Re: Vonage's Citron Says VoIP Blocking Is 'Censorship' (Dana) 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: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 16:05:44 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Watching the Detectors Author Patrick Radden Keefe is keeping an eye on electronic intelligence gathering By Don Aucoin, Globe Staff | March 5, 2005 Six years ago, when Patrick Radden Keefe was a graduate student at Cambridge University in England, he happened upon British newspaper stories that mentioned an international surveillance network with the code name Echelon. Intrigued, he immersed himself in the subject. "It's one of those classic stories where I got clips from the newspaper and suddenly there's a handful of articles and suddenly I need a new folder and then it's a file cabinet," Keefe says. "The next thing you know I need a bigger apartment." Those bulging files and that overstuffed apartment have paid off: At 28, with a few months before he graduates from Yale Law School, Keefe is making a splash with "Chatter: Dispatches From the Secret World of Global Eavesdropping," a book that tries to fill in the shadowy portrait of electronic intelligence gathering by the United States and its allies. On a recent weekday, as he sits on a couch in his childhood home in the Ashmont section of Dorchester, it is the growing culture of domestic secrecy and surveillance that seems to worry Keefe most. While he acknowledges there is a legitimate need for intelligence gathering in the post-9/11 world, he hopes his book will generate a public discussion about the trade-offs between security and privacy that, he says, are being made by government authorities without consulting the American people. http://www.boston.com/ae/books/articles/2005/03/05/watching_the_detectors/ ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 14:10:08 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: RadioSHARK Review Griffin Technology radioSHARK By Eric Bangeman http://arstechnica.com/reviews/hardware/radioshark.ars ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 03:40:06 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Harvard Applicants Breached Security Tried via computer to learn status By Hiawatha Bray and Robert Weisman, Globe Staff | March 4, 2005 For at least two hours after midnight Wednesday, a computer hacker enabled applicants to the Harvard Business School to find out whether they'd been accepted, weeks before Harvard planned to release the news. According to Harvard, more than 100 would-be graduate students took advantage of the digital loophole, and some of them glimpsed preliminary decisions on their applications. The loophole affected other schools, including the Sloan School of Management at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and business schools at Stanford, Duke, Carnegie Mellon, and other universities. But officials at Stanford and MIT said none of their admissions decisions had yet been posted to their sites. In a security breach at ApplyYourself Inc., the Fairfax, Va. company that runs the admissions computer systems for the business schools and 400 other colleges and universities, a hacker found a way to let applicants peek at confidential admissions data. "This is the first incident of this kind," said Len Metheny, the chief executive of ApplyYourself. "Once we learned about it, within literally 2 (?) hours, we had made appropriate adjustments to the system ... We still remain confident that it's a secure system." But Steven Nelson, the executive director of Harvard's MBA program, said their admissions data were vulnerable for nine hours, during which 119 applicants from countries around the world tried to get at their admissions status. http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2005/03/04/harvard_applicants_breached_security/ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 05 Mar 2005 22:55:37 -0500 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: ChoicePoint Data Cache Became a Powder Keg http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A8587-2005Mar4.html Identity Thief's Ability To Get Information Puts Heat on Firm By Robert O'Harrow Jr. Washington Post Staff Writer Saturday, March 5, 2005; Page A01 The man on the phone called himself James Garrett. Speaking with a lilting accent, the man said he was an executive with a Los Angeles company called M.B.S Financial. He told an employee at ChoicePoint Inc. that he wanted to open an online account with the company to receive electronic reports on people. It was the kind of request that ChoicePoint, one of the nation's largest information services, gets all the time. Thousands of corporate and government clients rely on the company to provide them with publicly available information on people for help in hiring, fraud detection, journalist research, national security and debt collection. But the man's call last fall was different, according to a detective's description of the encounter and testimony presented in a later court hearing. Unknown to ChoicePoint, the caller was not Garrett, an actor in the Los Angeles area. Police said he was a con artist involved in a vast identity-theft scam that succeeded in making off with records of at least 145,000 people. The real Garrett was just another victim. The imposter's attempt to gain access to even more files would not only expose the scam, but spark a national outrage and congressional hearings over whether the nation's growing commercial data industry is doing enough to guard personal information. Yesterday, the burgeoning scandal led ChoicePoint to cut off access to some sensitive data to thousands of small businesses. The company also announced in filings with the government that two senior executives were under investigation by the Securities and Exchange Commission for stock trades that took place after they learned about the scheme last fall but before they made it public. On the day the man called ChoicePoint in late September, he was close to getting what he wanted. He had already filed an application for the right to download reports to his computer, for about $15 each, claiming he needed sensitive personal information like Social Security numbers to track down targets of his collection agency. But to the ChoicePoint employee on the other end of the line, something wasn't quite right. For starters, the caller used a Los Angeles copy store to fax his paperwork to open an account. That seemed strange for a businessman, and even more so when an in-house investigator realized that similar requests had recently been made by others in the Los Angeles area. Something also seemed out of kilter about the local government documents the man forwarded to prove his business existed. Authorities in Los Angeles were called for help. The officer assigned to the case, a sheriff's detective named Duane Decker, asked the company whether it could lure the man posing as Garrett back to the copy store as part of a modest sting operation. ChoicePoint would convince Garrett he needed to go back to the copy store to sign a faxed copy of his application and send it back to the company. The ruse worked. On Oct. 27, a man claiming to be Garrett showed up as promised at the Copymat store on Sunset Boulevard. He approached the counter, asked for a document filed for James Garrett and paid the bill. Decker, lingering nearby, asked the man if he was Garrett. When the man said yes, Decker asked him to step outside. As they left the store, the detective said he thought he had an easy case in hand. He couldn't have been more wrong. The man Decker stopped was Olatunji A. Oluwatosin, a 41-year-old Nigerian national. Oluwatosin claimed he was picking up the paperwork for another man named Bobby, according to testimony at Oluwatosin's court hearing. On the way out of the store with Decker, Oluwatosin dropped the paperwork he had just received from ChoicePoint and other forms for a company dubbed Gala Financial. At the time, he was carrying five cell phones, only one of them in his own name. Three credit cards bore the names of other people, including at least one woman. At Decker's request, Oluwatosin shared his address in North Hollywood. Once there, Decker said he found a printout of a ChoicePoint search involving another name, that of a man he later learned had lost $12,000 to identity thieves. Decker also found a receipt for a public storage business not far away. Before long, searching in unit B-245, Decker found what he later told a state court judge were the tell-tale signs of an identity theft operation: new televisions, electric generators and other products in shipping boxes stripped bare of details about where the goods came from. The paperwork offered other leads. Decker found addresses that turned out to be commercial mail services. Investigators asked to see the unopened mail at some of those locations. One clerk brought out two large bags containing credit card applications, financial statements and other mail that had been redirected from homes around the nation. Driving to more than a dozen commercial mail services in one day, Decker and a postal inspector identified redirected mail from more than 700 people. Further investigation revealed links to 22 other ChoicePoint accounts that had been opened under false pretenses. "I realized that this was just absolutely huge and out of control," Decker said. Identity theft and fraud has become a national problem in a few short years. In 2003, federal authorities estimated that about 750,000 people fell victim to some identity scam. Now the prevailing estimate is close to 10 million. Driving the rise is a growing number of clever criminals who use people's Social Security numbers and other facts of their lives to take on their personas to run up credit cards bills, empty bank accounts and commit other crimes. But consumer advocates say it's also the failure of so many information brokers, retailers and credit issuers to adequately protect records or do enough to stop swindlers by verifying the identities of customers. Credit card companies, marketers and others have lost millions of files to hackers and identity thieves in recent years. Two years ago, ChoicePoint itself was hit by another identity theft scheme involving personal records of thousands of people. ChoicePoint, based in Alpharetta, Ga., has assembled a huge trove of personal data in recent years. Much of that information, such as court rulings, driver records and real estate details, comes from government agencies. The company also purchases information from the three major credit bureaus and other information services. Its ability to create and electronically transmit exhaustive dossiers on people makes it a favorite of many Fortune 500 companies, government agencies and law enforcement and Homeland Security authorities. Today, it has more than 100,000 customers and revenue approaching $1 billion, a large proportion based on the resale of details about individuals. Before granting service, ChoicePoint typically requires a photocopy of a driver's license and business records on file with a state or local government agency. A ChoicePoint employee would then verify that such a person and company exists. Identity thieves skirted this system by using fake IDs and by setting up front companies on paper, registered with government agencies in phony names, according to court and company records. Olatunji Oluwatosin pleaded no contest to identity theft in a California court last month. He was sentenced to 16 months in state prison. Authorities are still investigating who else may be involved in the scandal. They believe others, possibly many others, worked with him. ChoicePoint officials, meanwhile, said they have since identified more than 50 accounts that appear to be phony. The company has warned people to watch for unauthorized activity on their credit reports and has offered to give them free access to that information, at an estimated cost of $2 million. The real James Garrett said he first noticed that something was amiss when he received a call from a credit card company. The company told him that a card in his name had been redirected to another address. When Garrett went to police to report the fraud, police told him he was apparently part of an identity theft ring, possibly related to terrorist financing, Garrett said yesterday. An investigator in the ChoicePoint case later told him that identity thieves had obtained not only his name and address, but his Social Security number, credit card password and mother's maiden name. "They knew everything about me," Garrett said. Behind the scenes, the case continues to expand. Decker and other authorities in Los Angeles have discussed the case with the FBI and Secret Service, which has indicated it may have another identity theft suspect with ties to the ChoicePoint case. The Federal Trade Commission has begun an inquiry. At the same time, public ire is intensifying. Congress is planning to hold hearings about the breach and the information industry in general. Some of those hearings may involve questions about national security. Democrats, including Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) have asked for a study about how terrorists might use information brokers like ChoicePoint. In response to the thefts, ChoicePoint said in an SEC filing that it is "discontinuing the sale of information products that contain sensitive consumer data ... except where there is either a specific consumer-driven transaction or benefit or where the products support federal, state or local government and law enforcement purposes." "We fully support a continued national discussion of how to ensure that information is used responsibly, that the positive benefits of information use are preserved and that the illegal uses of data are severely punished," the company's filing said. The company has defended the sale of hundreds of thousands of shares since November, before the scandal became public, by ChoicePoint chief executive Derek V. Smith and president and chief operating officer Douglas C. Curling, saying the transactions were part of scheduled sales arranged last fall. Smith said he personally did not know about the security breach until January. Decker, meanwhile, said that after four months it feels like his investigation is just beginning. "Sometimes you're looking at Social Security numbers, and all of the sudden a name pops out and you realize, 'These are real people, all of them,' " he information is out there," he said. "They could all be victims, if not now, in the future. Special correspondent Kimberly Edds contributed to this story from Los Angeles. Copyright 2005 The Washington Post Company 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 . Hundreds of 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, The Washington Post Company. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 05 Mar 2005 23:50:51 -0500 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: All Wired Up http://www.guardian.co.uk/online/story/0,3605,1428626,00.html Plans to cover huge areas with wireless internet access are gathering pace. And, finds Sean Dodson, companies that stand to lose are taking the threat seriously. Thursday March 3, 2005 The Guardian Once the preserve of first-class business lounges, the mobile internet is fast becoming a reality. Last month, Southern Trains announced it was rolling out Wi-Fi access along its London to Brighton route. For about the cost of a bacon sandwich, commuters will soon be able enjoy internet access as they race across the Ouse viaduct. Not to be outdone, service station operator Moto said it was installing Wi-Fi hotspots at 43 of its motorway locations and you will even be able to check email at 35,000 feet: Boeing is installing Wi-Fi access points in its new fleet of long-haul aircraft. Wi-Fi, short for wireless fidelity, is the branding given to interoperability-tested products based on IEEE 802.11, an industry standard that allows data to be sent over the radio spectrum rather than through a cable or phone line. Now a standard feature on all but the cheapest laptops, the protocol is coming pre-packaged in a variety of electronic devices including mobile phones, palmtop computers and even the latest Nintendo games console. Until now, only a patchy blanket of disparate wireless networks has allowed these devices to connect to the internet and it has been difficult for users to roam between those networks since most cover only small geographical areas. But that is changing. Philadelphia is steaming ahead with an ambition to become the world's most wired - or unwired - city, with a $10m plan to bathe 135 square miles with wireless coverage - potentially accessible by 1.5m residents. Over the next 18 months, more than 4,000 wireless antennae will be attached to the city's lampposts, trans mitting free internet access into the city's parks and public places. But, more controversially, Philadelphia's residents and businesses will also be tempted with wireless broadband for about the cost of a dial-up connection. According to the mayor, John F Street, Philadelphia is "singularly obsessed" with bringing the benefits of high-speed internet access "anywhere, anytime, to anyone that needs it". Cities as diverse as New York, Taipei, Calgary and Adelaide are competing to launch similar "muni nets". Smaller scale networks have been deployed on corporate and university campuses and, more recently, in large shopping areas, such as a 42-square block section of downtown St Louis, Missouri. Smaller US cities, such as Salem and Austin, offer city-wide wireless access, while in Europe, the genteel Dutch city of Leiden offers a foretaste of the wireless city. The UK picture is more parochial, though no less passionate. A patchwork of smaller wireless networks, often funded by local councils, is beginning to blossom. Yesterday, Access to Broadband, a pressure group partially funded by the government, reported to the Department for Trade and Industry that there were at least 550 smaller scale wireless networks operating in towns and villages across the UK. Nearly 90% employ wireless networking. These tiny, cooperative projects are in remote corners, but what they have in common with Philadelphia is that they have been established in the wake of the market's failure to deliver affordable high-speed internet connections to everyone who needs it. The rural outposts going wireless are those that feel they are poorly served by BT. There are also moves to furnish London with city-wide wireless networks. Lewisham council is building a wireless network in south London, while the closest Britain has to wireless Philadelphia is a three-mile ribbon in central Bristol. What unites these groups is the belief that cheap wireless access has the power to even out the inequalities inherent in the network society. But not everyone is convinced by such egalitarianism. In Philadelphia, critics have argued that local government-run networks will result in poor service and be a waste of taxpayers' money. Far from being an anti-poverty weapon, say dissenters, municipal networks are more likely to be aimed at attracting hi-tech businesses. As Scott Wallsten wrote in the Philadelphia Inquirer last week: "Does anyone really believe that impoverished families are going to run to the store and plunk down more than $500 on a computer just because they can suddenly save a few bucks a month on internet access?" The mayor's office responded swiftly, saying its pilot projects had engaged with low-income groups, citing the People's Emergency Centre (PEC), a homeless shelter in beleaguered west Philly, as an indication of how wireless networks can reach the poorest. Three years ago, PEC created a small wireless network for the surrounding area (average annual family income below $20,000) and offered to share its leased internet line with local residents for $5 per month - roughly a quarter of the commercial rate. The network -- which remains popular -- was supported by courses, whose successful students could buy a refurbished computer with a wireless card for $120. So far, so good. But city hall soon ran into serious problems that could stifle the wireless dreams of municipalities across the world. US cable companies, which see citizen-funded networks as a threat to their commercial fiefdoms, backed a bill that effectively outlawed municipal wireless in the state of Pennsylvania. In December, the state passed a bill forbidding any municipality in the state from running an "information network". Only a last-minute deal with Verizon, the state's de facto monopoly provider of broadband, saved Philadelphia's vision. Verizon promised to allow the city's network, but at the expense of the rest of the state. At least 15 US states are considering similar telco-backed bills to ban municipal networks. To Dianah Neff, Philadelphia's chief information officer, municipal wireless is no mere luxury. Neff, a veteran public servant, sees municipal networks as a potential leveller in a city where 70% of state school children receive free school meals. "We have a vibrant downtown," she says, "but we need to make sure all our neighbourhoods can compete in the knowledge economy. "We are not using taxpayers' dollars to build the network," she adds. "We will finance it through taxable bonds or bank financing." Moreover, Neff believes the network will be cost neutral, meaning that the start-up costs will be offset by a reduction in the cost of civic services. "We need outdoor access for our field operations, whether that's building inspectors, health and social workers or public safety. Our inspectors need access to engineering diagrams in the field if there's a water main break," she explains. "DSL or cable doesn't meet our needs." Chris Clark, chief executive for BT Wireless Broadband, said the UK's biggest broadband supplier would not be taking the same approach as Verizon. "The community wireless projects, which started in an environment of concern about rural service, are evolving into providing all sorts of innovative services," he says. "It would be a pity to see such innovation stifled. More recently, a number of metropolitan wireless projects have been in the pipeline. BT is fully supportive of these initiatives." While such sentiments will be welcomed by broadband campaigners, some wish to go further and establish truly free wireless networks. If municipal wireless represents a leveller approach to the network society, then the "free networkers" represents its diggers. The idea of a free, wireless network to "act as a direct counter strategy to top-down, telecom-provided monopoly networking", was born in Southwark nearly five years ago. Julian Priest, then a web designer, posited the idea that the wireless protocol could be used on a city-wide scale. His company wanted to share its spare internet bandwidth with Backspace, a community of digital artists working over the road. However, it is illegal to stretch an overhead cable across a street. Priest and James Stevens, of Backspace, solved the problem by connecting the buildings with wireless technology. The realisation that the network could be extended followed quickly. The pair's idea to float a "data cloud" over London inspired a generation of free networkers to take to the roofs armed with antenna. Ad hoc free networks have since been established across the world, as far away as Indonesia, Nepal and Tanzania. Priest is lobbying Ofcom - the industry regulator -- to establish a "spectrum commons" that would set aside certain frequency bands for public use. 802.11 has grown out of the thin sliver of the spectrum given to public use, "but it has to share that space with everything else," says Priest. "It's become an incredibly noisy and chaotic channel and we need more space." Free networkers, like Priest, believe that the transit of data through the air should be free. Not just in terms of cost but in terms of content. "People need to take responsibility for their own network," says Pete Gomes, of Wireless London, a pressure group established in January to promote free networks in the capital. "Because of the scale of London, the possibility of creating a unified wireless system from grass roots activity is complex. We are in a position where we are embedding infrastructure for the future and if London doesn't realise that, we could easily be left behind." Links Wireless Philadelphia www.phila.gov/wireless/ Wireless London http://wirelesslondon.info ------------------------------------------------------------------------ "In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move." Douglas Adams, The Restaurant at the End of the Universe 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 . Hundreds of 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, the Guardian Newspaper Group. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 05 Mar 2005 23:47:45 -0500 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Paper About Metcalfe's Law From the CyberLaw list ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 23:20:58 CST From: Andrew Odlyzko Subject: FYI: paper about Metcalfe's Law Dear Colleagues, Sorry for the spam, but I thought you might be interested in the paper described below. Comments are invited. Andrew A refutation of Metcalfe's Law and a better estimate for the value of networks and network interconnections Andrew Odlyzko Digital Technology Center University of Minnesota Benjamin Tilly Abstract Metcalfe's Law states that the value of a communications network is proportional to the square of the size of the network. It is widely accepted and frequently cited. However, there are several arguments that this rule is a significant overestimate. (Therefore Reed's Law is even more of an overestimate, since it says that the value of a network grows exponentially, in the mathematical sense, in network size.) This note presents several quantitative arguments that suggest the value of a general communication network of size n grows like n*log(n). This growth rate is faster than the linear growth, of order n, that, according to Sarnoff's Law, governs the value of a broadcast network. On the other hand, it is much slower than the quadratic growth of Metcalfe's Law, and helps explain the failure of the dot-com and telecom booms, as well as why network interconnection (such as peering on the Internet) remains a controversial issue. FULL PAPER AT: http://www.dtc.umn.edu/~odlyzko/doc/metcalfe.pdf 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 . Hundreds of 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, Andrew Odlyzko. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ From: LB@notmine.com Subject: If You Use Ebay Date: Sun, 06 Mar 2005 09:45:42 -0500 Organization: Optimum Online You may need to sign in, but it is free and the site is worth it. From the NY Times. EBay's Joy Ride: Going Once ... By GARY RIVLIN Many longtime sellers and Wall Street analysts, long bullish on eBay, now say they are uncertain about the company's ability to sustain its torrid rate of growth. http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/06/business/yourmoney/06ebay.html?th Definitely worth the time to read the whole thing. LB [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Actually, you can read NY Times on line here each day with no obligation for login or registration. Just go to http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra/nytimes.html PAT] ------------------------------ From: Spyros Bartsocas Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 22:09:59 +0200 Subject: Strange Call ID I live in Greece. I received a call from my cousin in NY. On my caller Id his number appeared as 0044212xxxxxxx (where the x's show his actual 212 area code POTS number. How is this possible? ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com Subject: Corporate Identify -- Verizon vs. "Bell Telephone" Date: 5 Mar 2005 19:53:56 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com As has been done for years, the regular telephone bill mailing contained an advertising insert for premium products and services. On a recent Verizon leaflet, at the bottom was a small line, "Bell Telephone Company of Pennsylvania". This was curious since that's a very old name that hasn't been used for years. Even in the Bell era, they shortened it to just "Bell of Pennsylvania". After divesture they became "Bell Atlantic", and IIRC they legally changed their name to that. Further, IIRC, their name change to Verizon was a legal name change as well, not just a marketing tool. So, I'm curious as to why they would use an old name on modern sales literature, esp when they're pushing their most modern high tech services. (They changed their name to Verizon specifically to sound high tech and not old fashioned with 'Bell Telephone'). The only thing I could think of is perhaps it's to distinguish this mailing for this state, and former Bell customers (as opposed to GTE customers). ------------------------------ From: Joseph Subject: Re: Nokia 6010 Reporting in to Mama -- Radio Interference? Date: Sat, 05 Mar 2005 15:27:12 -0800 Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com On Fri, 04 Mar 2005 15:09:28 -0500, Isaiah Beard wrote: > I've been noticing lately that a lot of the newer GSM phones are > starting to do this. I worry that GSM handset manufacturers are > starting to get a little bit careless in taking steps to avoid > interference. Nonsense. GSM phones have always done this. I think you're stating this because GSM has become more mainstream than it was several years ago. > You will find, however, that CDMA based phones (those on Verizon, > Sprint, Alltel and a few others) will not have this problem. That's because CDMA uses a different scheme to communicate with the system than does TDMA and GSM. Just because it's cellular does not mean everything works exactly the same way from different system to different system. ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: Nokia 6010 Reporting in to Mama -- Radio Interference? Organization: ATCC Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2005 19:13:32 -0500 In article , phil@mckerracher.org says ... > Joseph wrote in message > news:telecom24.94.8@telecom-digest.org: >> On Thu, 03 Mar 2005 15:59:30 -0500, Ted Koppel >> wrote: >>> My new Nokia 6010 has an interesting and somewhat annoying habit. If >>> it's anywhere within a 5 foot radius of my PC speakers, I can hear it >>> periodically transmitting something (sort of a rhythmic >>> dum-diddy-dum-diddy-dum-dum-dum). Sounds like static, but definitely >>> with a paced rhythm. I haven't timed the intervals exactly, but it >>> seems to take place every 17-20 minutes. In a related activity, I >>> hear a big burst of static on my PC speakers, and then some rhythmic >>> noise, about 5-7 seconds before the cell phone begins to ring. >>> This is the first cell phone I've had that caused these noises. Do I >>> have a mutant phone? Is this anything to be concerned about? >> It's not just the Nokia 6010. *Any* GSM will exhibit the >> characteristics you refer to. It's the phone communicating with the >> system periodically... > True. I was told by a contact at ETSI (the organisation that defined > many of the GSM standards) that this was originally an oversight -- > they had not realised that the modulation scheme was effectively 100% > amplitude modulation, which would be "detected" by any rectifying > circuit nearby. It caused a lot of consternation in the early days. > The "solution" they eventually agreed was to reduce the power > transmitted by the phones by a factor of 10. This had been proposed > anyway, to reduce the cell size and hence increase system capacity > (also to increase battery life). > Phil McKerracher > www.mckerracher.org So GSM that we have today is a patch on top a patch. Nice to think about that. ------------------------------ From: Isaiah Beard Subject: Re: Vonage Date: Sun, 06 Mar 2005 09:12:49 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Henry Cabot Henhouse III wrote: > So, anyone else notice that Vonage has taken a dump? I've tried from > a number of different networks, nada, zip, kerflunk. Been working fine in the 732 area code. Tony P. wrote: > They definitely have some problems in different parts of the country but > my service in the northeast has been rock solid. I wonder -- I know I'm > on a Paetec switch so is it a Focal issue? Nope, I'm on a Focal switch, and it's been working fine for me all week. E-mail fudged to thwart spammers. Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply. ------------------------------ From: DevilsPGD Subject: Re: Vonage Date: Sat, 05 Mar 2005 19:22:34 -0700 Organization: Disorganized In message John Levine wrote: > No kidding. I ported my number to Lingo almost a month ago due to > Vonage's poor service and non-existent support, and I'm still trying > to get hold of someone at Vonage who can cancel my account. Perhaps > they'll notice that I cancelled the credit card. Why not use Vonage's website to cancel your account? ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Vonage's Citron Says VoIP Blocking Is 'Censorship' Organization: Excelsior Computer Services From: joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Date: Sun, 06 Mar 2005 15:55:37 GMT > Yes Pat, but it didn't do it on the basis of the 1st Amendment. As I > understand it, the fine was to preserve "Net Freedom" (Powell's term) > and although I like it, I still don't understand the legal basis for > this action. It seems to me the Telco's ought to be concerned about > this because if there is now a "must carry" rule for VoIP traffic, what > happens when they start to offer TV/video? Will they be forced to allow In the end, the only reason VoIP is so cheap is that it passes the costs off to other sectors. Personally, I have seen the quality of my phone service plummet in the past ten years, and I'd be willing to pay a little more to get my good service back. I don't want to pay a little less, get even worse service, and on top of it end up paying more for basic Internet. But that's where VoIP is leading. -Joel ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Please feed the 35mm lens/digicam databases: http://www.exc.com/photography ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ From: Dana Subject: Re: Vonage's Citron Says VoIP Blocking Is 'Censorship' Date: Sun, 06 Mar 2005 11:35:05 -0900 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Isaiah Beard wrote: >> My local convenience store and drugstore carry certain newspapers, but >> not all for my area. Does that mean they are _censoring_ the ones >> they don't sell? According to Vonage they are. > You comparison is overbroad and overreaching, and compares apples to > oranges. No, his comparison is right on. Not carrying all possible newspapers in an area is similar to blocking access to ports that certain services use. > I would think of it more this way: let's say that > your phone company provider, be it Verizon or other LEC, decided > that profanity should no longer be used on its phone lines, and > installs special filters to capture and "bleep out" such speech. > Would that be acceptable? This is a strawman argument, as this is in no way compariable to the situation with Vonage. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Actually, back in the 'teens and '20s of the last century, Bell had a rule against using profanity on the telephone. For example, the cover of the 1920 Chicago Telephone Company (predecessor to Illinois Bell) had this notice on the cover of the phone directory: "When addressing our operators, please do not use profanity. Please address our operators in the same courteous voice you would want them to use in their reponses to you. It is not our operator's fault if the line you have requested is engaged or does not respond. Would you like it if the operator responded with a curse when telling you the number did not respond." Apparently people would ask for the number of the train station information line (for example), and find it always in use or slow to respond. So people would curse out the operator and blame her for it, then slam down the reciever. ------------------------------ 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 V24 #97 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun Mar 6 18:33:32 2005 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j26NXVZ18092; Sun, 6 Mar 2005 18:33:32 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 18:33:32 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200503062333.j26NXVZ18092@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 V24 #98 TELECOM Digest Sun, 6 Mar 2005 18:33:00 EST Volume 24 : Issue 98 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Pricing Comparison, was: Vonage's Citron Says VoIP ... (Danny Burstein) Re: Municipal Wi-FI and Incumbents (Tony P.) Re: Vonage (John Levine) Re: New Monopoly in Dept Stores-Federated and May Co to Merge (Wesrock) Re: Last Laugh! Virgin Mobile Canada (n28110) Re: FCC Reaches Telco Settlement to Stop Blocking VOIP (Isaiah Beard) Re: Paris Hilton's Sidekick Hacked (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Re: Buyouts of AT&T, MCI Sign of Long Distance's Demise (Geoffrey Welsh) Re: GSM Cell Density in Metropolitan Areas (Dana) Trying to Collect on Derek South Judgment (Markus_Danz@hotmail.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: Danny Burstein Subject: Pricing Comparison, was: Vonage's Citron Says VoIP... Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 22:52:24 UTC Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC In joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) writes: > In the end, the only reason VoIP is so cheap is that it passes the > costs off to other sectors. Or, to put the shoe on the other foot: In the middle, a key reason that VOIP is so cheap is that huge amounts of secondary fees, taxes, and contributions (many of which do, in fact, get kicked over to other parts of the legacy telcos and other powerful beneficiaries) have been added to the traditional phone bill, raising it way above the base cost. As of now at least, very few of these have hit the VOIP product line. 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: Yeah, and can you imagine there are folks who want to place the blame on VOIP because it is so inexpensive; they seem to feel all those taxes and fees the landline telcos pay are justified. Why they want to blame VOIP instead of placing the blame of the government, squarely where it belongs, is anyone's guess. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: Municipal Wi-FI and Incumbents Organization: ATCC Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2005 19:16:29 -0500 In article , kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net says: > In article , cjmebox- > telecomdigest@yahoo.com says: >> This is from yesterday's Guardian. It includes an interesting >> juxtaposition of Verizon's and BT's positions on municipal Wi-Fi >> networks. >> http://www.guardian.co.uk/online/story/0,,1428626,00.html >> Excerpt: >> ..... >> So far, so good. But city hall soon ran into serious problems that >> could stifle the wireless dreams of municipalities across the world. US >> cable companies, which see citizen-funded networks as a threat to their >> commercial fiefdoms, backed a bill that effectively outlawed municipal >> wireless in the state of Pennsylvania. In December, the state passed a >> bill forbidding any municipality in the state from running an >> "information network". Only a last-minute deal with Verizon, the >> state's de facto monopoly provider of broadband, saved Philadelphia's >> vision. Verizon promised to allow the city's network, but at the >> expense of the rest of the state. At least 15 US states are considering >> similar telco-backed bills to ban municipal networks. >> To Dianah Neff, Philadelphia's chief information officer, municipal >> wireless is no mere luxury. Neff, a veteran public servant, sees >> municipal networks as a potential leveller in a city where 70% of state >> school children receive free school meals. "We have a vibrant >> downtown," she says, "but we need to make sure all our neighbourhoods >> can compete in the knowledge economy. >> .......... >> Chris Clark, chief executive for BT Wireless Broadband, said the UK's >> biggest broadband supplier would not be taking the same approach as >> Verizon. "The community wireless projects, which started in an >> environment of concern about rural service, are evolving into providing >> all sorts of innovative services," he says. "It would be a pity to see >> such innovation stifled. More recently, a number of metropolitan >> wireless projects have been in the pipeline. BT is fully supportive of >> these initiatives." >> TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: City of Independence was looking very >> favorably at muni-wi-fi for our town, but SBC -- Southwestern Bell -- >> put a kibosh on it, threatening to get the state commission to do a >> rule like that proposed for Pennsylvania. SBC did not like the idea >> at all of a community giving away for free the DSL service they >> charge an arm and a leg for. PAT] > And we all know why Verizon and SBC don't like the idea. First - Skype > is now available for the Palm OS. So tell me, what happens when for > say $10 a month you can use the muni network. You load Skype on your > laptop or PDA and use it to make and receive calls while in the city. > This kills both wire line and wireless. The incumbent carriers are > scared. They can see that their years of reliance on tariff are coming > to a crashing halt. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I did something sort of exciting for > me a couple days ago. Our local McDonalds has a WiFi network but I > have never seen anyone use it. So when I went over for lunch the > other day, I took along my IBM ThinkPad laptop (it is a really > ancient model, the 770, but it is networked both with wires and > with my wireless NetGear router card) and played around on line > with it while I had lunch. PAT] Speaking of which, I noted a Cisco wireless router hanging from the ceiling of my local Shaw's (Aka Albertsons and boy do I hate that fact!) today. One of these days I'll borrow a friends iPaq with the 802.11b card in it and see if I can connect. ------------------------------ Date: 6 Mar 2005 00:36:11 -0000 From: John Levine Subject: Re: Vonage Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > They definitely have some problems in different parts of the country > but my service in the northeast has been rock solid. I wonder -- I > know I'm on a Paetec switch so is it a Focal issue? No, my service which became unsuably bad was switched by Paetec, too. 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 ------------------------------ From: Wesrock@aol.com Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2005 20:05:11 EST Subject: Re: New Monopoly in Dept Stores -- Federated and May Co to Merge In a message dated Sat, 5 Mar 2005 17:48:51 +0200, henry999@eircom.net (Henry) writes: > We went into a bar where there wasn't much happening and started > playing pool. There was a sign on the wall that said something like: > 'In order to play pool you must show your draft card" -- the draft card, > of course, being required in those days when a male turned 18. > Well, we shot pool for a while and nobody seemed bothered -- nobody > asked to see the cards, anyway -- so we started to wonder: If they > think we're 18, maybe we can get a beer? I still had some growing to > do at that point; I was about 5'3" and I wrestled in the 112-pound > class. My friend was taller, heavier and shaving every day, so he went > up to the bar while I sat at the table. By golly, a minute later there > he was, coming back with two bottles of Coors. > Cheers, > Henry And it was 3.2% beer in Kansas 40 years ago. Anything stronger was illegal then, in both Kansas and Oklahoma. As Pat says, Kansas, like other places, has changed over the past 40 years. Especially towns like Wellington, on the Kansas Turnpike with its volume of travelers the towns want to lure, and with a very viable supermarket (Dillon's, the Kansas operation of Kroger's), which Independence seems to lack. Wellington has a WalMart supercenter, too, near the Dillon's store. The county of which Wellington is the county seat produces more wheat than any other county in the United States, and with the wheat and tourist traffic and a crew change point on the BNSF (formerly Santa Fe) Chicago-Los Angeles main line, it's a pretty prosperous place. (The county history museum has a great deal of local Santa Fe history.) Wes Leatherock wesrock@aol.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 06 Mar 2005 02:21:52 GMT From: n28110 Subject: Re: Last Laugh! Virgin Mobile Canada Organization: Shaw Residential Internet Dear Virgin Mobile Canada, I'm too cheap to buy service from a company that has a roaming agreement with U.S. carriers. Can I get cheap cellular in the U.S. too? wrote in message news:telecom24.96.15@telecom-digest.org: > Question to Virgin Mobile Canada: will your Canadian service link up > with your U.S. service? > Answer: We are experiencing technical difficulties. Your email was not > sent to us, please try again later. > Way to inspire confidence guys! ------------------------------ From: Isaiah Beard Subject: Re: FCC Reaches Telco Settlement to Stop Blocking VOIP Date: Sun, 06 Mar 2005 09:11:19 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: > Danny Burstein wrote: >> "We saw a problem, and we acted swiftly to ensure that Internet voice >> service remains a viable option for consumers", said FCC Chairman >> Michael K. Powell. > I don't understand. > Why couldn't the consumers simply switch to another ISP? Why did the > FCC have to intervene? You seem to think that everyone has a choice when it comes to broadband. Unfortunately, most do not. DSL does not reach every household, and cable companies do not always offer the quality of service thaat one would expect in a broadband connection, if the cable company even feels it is cost effective to provide such a service in a particular area. And even in areas where both "last miles" are served, I still wouldn't call that a variety. > Why does VOIP have to get special govt protection not normally offered > to other products and services in the free marketplace? It is not getting special government protection. On the other hand, the duopolies are getting special government regulation, because they have demonstrated in the past (and are demonstrating again) that they fully intend to prevent other players from offering services. > In other words, if my local store doesn't carry a particular product > I want, the govt won't come in and order that store to carry said > product. No, because that store doesn't have an exclusive right-of-way or franchise agreement with the municipality. Cable and phone companies however, do have such agreements in place, and thus they are often the only two providers (again, assuming both serve your area) that can physically offer the service. If Krogers, Costco, Food Lion, Path Mark, Wal-Mart or what-have-you, however, secured an exclusive agreement to be the ONLY store in your town, and they would ONLY carry certain brands of milk, you can bet that some sort of regulatory body would want to intervene. > Now if it was a regulated local telephone company that failed to pass > on calls I would understand since they have certain obligations being > a common carrier. But I don't believe ISPs have any common carrier > obligations nor privileges Well sir, you believe wrong. :) A dialup ISP may not have such exclusive agreements, but then dial up and VoIP are often mutually exclusive. Vonage isn't really happy unless it's running over broadband, and for now, braodband choices are still quite limited. E-mail fudged to thwart spammers. Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply. ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Paris Hilton's Sidekick Hacked Organization: Excelsior Computer Services From: joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Date: Sun, 06 Mar 2005 16:35:20 GMT > Paris Hilton's address book, famously kept on a T-Mobile Sidekick, has > been popping up all over the internet after someone managed to figure > out her password. Do we know for sure that this was just a guessed password? -Joel ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Please feed the 35mm lens/digicam databases: http://www.exc.com/photography ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ From: Geoffrey Welsh Subject: Re: Buyouts of AT&T, MCI Sign of Long Distance's Demise Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 14:10:56 -0500 hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: > My employer, with its thousands of employees, obviously pays more than > $50/month for business long distance service. The effective per > minute rate is pretty low. However, the point remains that there's > still a cost to it. One of my employer's U.S. offices recently relocated and our friendly CLEC offered us a nice bundle which included flat rate lines -- where flat rate meant nationwide calling, not just local. These days the price difference between local & long distance calls (or flat rate service) is fading. Geoffrey Welsh Ambidextrous? No, I said I'm ambinonscattous - I don't give a crap either way! ------------------------------ From: Dana Subject: Re: GSM Cell Density in Metropolitan Areas Date: Sun, 06 Mar 2005 11:40:02 -0900 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com John Bartley wrote: >> enrico wrote: >>> What is the average (or range) value for GSM cell (i.e. base station, >>> antenna, ..) density in metropolitan areas? (e.g. in cities like >>> London, Paris, Rome.) >>> Is there any publicly available information about the topic? >>> Please note that I am *not* asking for actual base station location, >>> as I know that information is protected, > On 2 Mar 2005 12:48:42 GMT, Koos van den Hout > wrote: >> Ow? I can imagine that the cell phone company doesn't want to give a >> map if I ask nicely, but with some simple AT commands I can make my >> phone show the current cell number and alert me when it changes. Add a >> gps unit, some logging software and I can map their cell numbers. I've >> been playing with this, see http://idefix.net/~koos/gsmgps.html >> In my country (the Netherlands) I can find the actual location by >> checking the register of antenna licenses. > However, T-Mobile, here Stateside, blocks the data for the local > cell's identity, as per a German ham who has an HP 6315 on T-Mobile > while he's here. T-Mobile does not have a policy in place to block the cell identity of their cell sites in the states. And all sites in the states are listed with the FCC, so it is possible to look up in the fcc database and see how many sites are in use for a paticular region or city. ------------------------------ From: Dana Subject: Re: GSM Cell Density in Metropolitan Areas Date: Sun, 06 Mar 2005 11:41:21 -0900 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Koos van den Hout wrote: > enrico wrote: >> What is the average (or range) value for GSM cell (i.e. base station, >> antenna, ..) density in metropolitan areas? (e.g. in cities like >> London, Paris, Rome.) >> Is there any publicly available information about the topic? >> Please note that I am *not* asking for actual base station location, >> as I know that information is protected, > Ow? I can imagine that the cell phone company doesn't want to give a > map if I ask nicely, but with some simple AT commands I can make my > phone show the current cell number and alert me when it changes. Add a > gps unit, some logging software and I can map their cell numbers. I've > been playing with this, see http://idefix.net/~koos/gsmgps.html > In my country (the Netherlands) I can find the actual location by > checking the register of antenna licenses. In America the same info is available via the FCC. > Koos van den Hout, PGP keyid RSA/1024 0xCA845CB5 via keyservers > koos@kzdoos.xs4all.nl or DSS/1024 0xF0D7C263 -?) > Fax +31-30-2817051 Camp Wireless, wireless Internet access /\\ > http://idefix.net/~kos/ at campsites http://www.camp-wireless.org/ _\_V ------------------------------ From: Markus_Danz@hotmail.com Subject: Trying to Collect on Derek South Judgment Date: 6 Mar 2005 12:36:37 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Trying to collect judgment on Derek South of Tao Software, England and Dallas, Texas, USA. Large judgment, fee paid. Can anyone help? Danke, Markus_Danz@hotmail.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 V24 #98 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Mar 7 01:21:36 2005 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j276La521142; Mon, 7 Mar 2005 01:21:36 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2005 01:21:36 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200503070621.j276La521142@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 V24 #99 TELECOM Digest Mon, 7 Mar 2005 01:21:00 EST Volume 24 : Issue 99 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Internet Passes Radio for Political News - Survey (Lisa Minter) Yahoo to Invest in Blogs, Analyst Says (Lisa Minter) Identity Theft : What's in a Name? Economist.com (Marcus Didius Falco) Vonage Outage Last Thursday, was: Vonage (Danny Burstein) Re: Vonage (John R. Levine) Re: Strange Call ID (John Levine) Re: Strange Call ID (Mark Crispin) Re: Nokia 6010 Reporting in to Mama - Radio Interference (M. Sullivan) Re: Corporate Identity: Verizon vrs "Bell Telephone" (Michael Sullivan) Re: New Monopoly in Department Stores; Federated, May Merge (B Goudreau) Re: Vonage's Citron Says VOIP Blocking is 'Censorship' (DevilsPGD) 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: 06 Mar 2005 20:30:44 -0800 From: Lisa Minter Subject: Internet Passes Radio for Political News - Survey WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Internet surpassed radio as a source for political news in the United States last year as more people went online to keep up with the presidential election campaign, according to a new report released on Sunday. Twenty-nine percent of U.S. adults used the Internet to get political news last year, according to the Pew Internet and American Life Project. That's up from 4 percent in 1996 and 18 percent in 2000. Television remained the dominant medium for most voters, but 18 percent said they got most of their political news from the Internet, compared with 17 percent who said they turned to the radio for their news. For those with a broadband connection at home, the Internet rivaled newspapers in importance. Most Internet users surveyed said they voted to re-elect Republican President Bush but supporters of Democratic challenger Sen. John Kerry were more likely to say the Internet helped them settle on a candidate. The nonpartisan Pew Internet and American Life Project surveyed 2,200 U.S. adults between Nov. 4 and Nov. 24, 2004. The survey's margin of error was plus or minus two percentage points, or plus or minus three percentage points for questions that surveyed the smaller subset of Internet users. 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 . Hundreds of 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 Limited and Pew Internet. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ From: Lisa Minter Subject: Yahoo to Invest in Blogs, Analyst Says Date: 07 Mar 2005 00:00:00 GMT SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Internet media company Yahoo Inc. is likely to build and buy tools that help its users create, publish and search blogs, Susquehanna Financial Group Marianne Wolk said in a note on Friday. Wolk also said she also expects the company to expand into social networking software, which lets users share and organize content. Yahoo recently integrated RSS feeds into its MyYahoo home page. RSS, or really simple syndication, allows users to receive content from sources such as news organizations and Web blogs. It also is a way for Web publishers to syndicate their content. "We believe Yahoo is likely to continue to invest in the blogosphere; we see Yahoo building and buying blog tools and RSS search capabilities to complement MyYahoo's readership/aggregation service," Wolk wrote in her note. Wolk added that she expects a potential new advertising market to grow around blog content. A Yahoo spokeswoman declined to comment. Google Inc., Microsoft Corp. Web unit MSN, Time Warner Inc.'s AOL and Ask Jeeves Inc. each have invested in blogging tools. Ask Jeeves acquired search capabilities through its Bloglines acquisition in February. 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 . Hundreds of 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, Limited. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 06 Mar 2005 21:57:09 -0500 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Identity Theft : What's in a Name? Economist.com http://economist.com/printedition/displayStory.cfm?Story_ID=3D3730381 Identity theft From The Economist print edition Collecting, and stealing, personal information is big business PLATO asked What is man? and St Augustine asked Who am I? A new breed of criminals has a novel answer: I am you! Although impostors have existed for ages, the growing frequency and cost of identity theft is worrisome. Around 10m Americans are victims annually, and it is the leading consumer-fraud complaint over the past five years. The cost to businesses was almost $50 billion, and to consumers $5 billion, in 2002, the most recent year that America's Federal Trade Commission collected figures. After two recent, big privacy disasters, people and politicians are calling for action. In February, ChoicePoint, a large data-collection agency, began sending out letters warning 145,000 Americans that it had wrongly provided fraudsters with their personal details, including Social Security numbers. Around 750 people have already spotted fraudulent activity. And on February 25th, Bank of America revealed that it lost data tapes that contain personal information on over 1m government employees, including some Senators. Although accident and not illegality is suspected, all must take precautions against identity theft. Faced with such incidents, state and national lawmakers are calling for new regulations, including over companies that collect and sell personal information. As an industry, the firms such as ChoicePoint, Acxiom, LexisNexis and Westlaw are largely unregulated. They have also grown enormous. For example, ChoicePoint was founded in 1997 and has acquired nearly 60 firms to amass databases with 19 billion records on people. It is used by insurance firms, landlords and even police agencies. California is the only state with a law requiring companies to notify individuals when their personal information has been compromised which made ChoicePoint reveal the fraud (albeit five months after it was noticed, and after its top two bosses exercised stock options). Legislation to make the requirement a federal law is under consideration. Moreover, lawmakers say they will propose that rules governing credit bureaus and medical companies are extended to data-collection firms. And alongside legislation, there is always litigation. Already, ChoicePoint has been sued for failing to safeguard individuals' data. Yet the legal remedies would still be far looser than in Europe, where identity theft is also a menace, though less frequent and costly. The European Data Protection Directive, implemented in 1998, gives people the right to access their information, change inaccuracies, and deny permission for it to be shared. Moreover, it places the cost of mistakes on the companies that collect the data, not on individuals. When the law was put in force, American policymakers groaned that it was bad for business. But now they seem to be reconsidering it. Copyright 2005 The Economist Newspaper and The Economist Group. 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 . Hundreds of 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, Economist Group. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ From: Danny Burstein Subject: Vonage Outage Last Thursday, was: Vonage Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 23:39:15 UTC Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC ( lots of earlier posts deleted. One left in for some context) In John Levine writes: >> They definitely have some problems in different parts of the country >> but my service in the northeast has been rock solid. I wonder -- I >> know I'm on a Paetec switch so is it a Focal issue? > No, my service which became unsuably bad was switched by Paetec, too. A bunch of people have grumbled about problems last week. It turns out there was a Vonage system outage. FYI, quoting from an AP dispatch: "Vonage ... suffered an outage that left about half of its 500,000 subscribers without phone service for about 45 minutes. "The outage was caused by a glitch with a software upgrade Thursday night, said Brooke Schulz, a spokeswoman for Vonage Holdings Corp. "The problem struck at about 2:45 p.m. EST, and Vonage stabilized the network with a software patch within an hour... "Vonage said about 50% of all inbound and outbound traffic was affected by Friday's disruption. To which I'd only add, "big deal. yawn." Unlike all the whiners who, for some reason, love to point out each and every hiccup the alternates run into. (Although it will be of interest to see who, if anyone, in the Vonage<->PSTN chain files the FCC reports.) _____________________________________________________ Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key dannyb@panix.com [to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded] ------------------------------ From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: Vonage Date: 6 Mar 2005 21:36:42 -0500 Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA >> No kidding. I ported my number to Lingo almost a month ago due to >> Vonage's poor service and non-existent support, and I'm still trying >> to get hold of someone at Vonage who can cancel my account. Perhaps >> they'll notice that I cancelled the credit card. > Why not use Vonage's website to cancel your account? I just did, now making three attempts to cancel. We'll see what happens. Since they can't charge me any more and the number's been ported away, I don't much care what they do. ------------------------------ Date: 7 Mar 2005 03:43:52 -0000 From: John Levine Subject: Re: Strange Call ID Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > I live in Greece. I received a call from my cousin in NY. On my caller > Id his number appeared as 0044212xxxxxxx (where the x's show his > actual 212 area code POTS number. > How is this possible? It's a bug somewhere, but good luck tracking it down. I have Lingo VoIP service here in the US, and when calls are forwarded from my Lingo phone to my cell phone, occasionally the numbers show up as 01144NXXXXXX, the same bug you're seeing. In my case the calls are all domestic US calls so it would be extremely unlikely that the bug was due to them being routed through the UK. 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 ------------------------------ From: Mark Crispin Subject: Re: Strange Call ID Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 15:17:43 -0800 Organization: Networks & Distributed Computing On Sun, 6 Mar 2005, Spyros Bartsocas wrote: > I live in Greece. I received a call from my cousin in NY. On my caller > Id his number appeared as 0044212xxxxxxx (where the x's show his > actual 212 area code POTS number. > How is this possible? I have occasionally received international calls with caller ID on a cell phone, and once or twice I've seen a country code as a caller ID on a landline phone. So clearly it is possible. It seems thought that most US landline caller ID boxes assume that all numbers are in xxx-xxx-xxxx format. -- 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: Has anyone received a phone call from someone calling via Vonage recently? My caller ID (on those calls) shows the number, but identifies the caller as 'Vonage User'. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Michael D. Sullivan Subject: Re: Nokia 6010 Reporting in to Mama -- Radio Interference? Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2005 04:46:41 GMT In article , kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net says: >> True. I was told by a contact at ETSI (the organisation that defined >> many of the GSM standards) that this was originally an oversight -- >> they had not realised that the modulation scheme was effectively 100% >> amplitude modulation, which would be "detected" by any rectifying >> circuit nearby. It caused a lot of consternation in the early days. >> The "solution" they eventually agreed was to reduce the power >> transmitted by the phones by a factor of 10. This had been proposed >> anyway, to reduce the cell size and hence increase system capacity >> (also to increase battery life). > So GSM that we have today is a patch on top a patch. Nice to think about > that. But the 3G migration path for GSM is UMTS, also known as W-CDMA. It does not use time division multiplexing; instead it uses a version of CDMA that occupies 5 MHz down- and upstream (as opposed to cdma2000, EV- DO, etc., which use 1.25 MHz down- and upstream per channel). Thus, eventually the buzzing side-effect of GSM will disappear. -- Michael D. Sullivan Bethesda, MD, USA Replace "example.invalid" with ".com". ------------------------------ From: Michael D. Sullivan Subject: Re: Corporate Identify -- Verizon vs. "Bell Telephone" Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2005 04:51:56 GMT In article , hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com says: > As has been done for years, the regular telephone bill mailing > contained an advertising insert for premium products and services. > On a recent Verizon leaflet, at the bottom was a small line, > "Bell Telephone Company of Pennsylvania". > This was curious since that's a very old name that hasn't been used > for years. Even in the Bell era, they shortened it to just "Bell of > Pennsylvania". After divesture they became "Bell Atlantic", and IIRC > they legally changed their name to that. Further, IIRC, their name > change to Verizon was a legal name change as well, not just a > marketing tool. > So, I'm curious as to why they would use an old name on modern sales > literature, esp when they're pushing their most modern high tech > services. (They changed their name to Verizon specifically to sound > high tech and not old fashioned with 'Bell Telephone'). > The only thing I could think of is perhaps it's to distinguish this > mailing for this state, and former Bell customers (as opposed to GTE > customers). The various mergers and corporate name changes that have taken place over the last 20 years among the Bell companies have not, for the most part, changed the legal name of the operating company within each state. All of the Bell Atlantic companies use the Bell Atlantic name to do business, but the state operating companies all have individual names, auch as Bell Telephone Co. of Pa. I think some of them have changed their names, however. Most likely the reason for the old name appearing on the modern literature is a state PUC or statutory requirement that the actual name of the operating company be provided on marketing documents. This would be the name that appears on the tariff, as well. Michael D. Sullivan Bethesda, MD, USA Replace "example.invalid" with ".com". ------------------------------ From: Bob Goudreau Subject: Re: New Monopoly in Dept Stores; Federated and May to Merge Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 23:53:25 -0500 Lisa Hancock wrote: > The other issue about the Bell System was that it was heavilly > _regulated_ by both the states and feds. The Bell System was not > allowed to use its technology to go into other fields, where it > probably could've been quite successful. More to the point, the Bell system monopoly was actually sanctioned by the government. No analogous situation has ever existed in US retail, thankfully. >> I would be surprised if even the combined market share of Federated >> and May approached the market share that Sears, Roebuck achieved in >> its heyday. > With Sears, it depends on the defined market. I don't think Sears was > as big in dept stores as in its catalog. The defined market that Sears itself paid attention to was "retail", and Sears was for decades the market leader in the US. I remember in the 1980s when Sears execs were warily watching Kmart creep up to almost match their market share. They were so busy keeping tabs on Kmart that they were caught flat-footed when Wal-mart zoomed by BOTH companies and became the new king of the retail hill (where it remains today, of course). > As a shopper, if Wanamaker's didn't have what I wanted, I'd go up > the street to Strawbridges, and then over to Gimbel's. Three > different stores, run by three different companies. As mentioned, I > also_ had the choice of numerous smaller specialty stores and > discount stores. And we still do, including a vast plethora of new specialty and discount stores out there in cyberspace. The way people choose to shop is heavily influenced by the available technology. The railroads were what made it possible for Sears to invent the nationwide mail-order retail channel in the late 19th century. Likewise, suburban living patterns gave rise to the classic shopping mall in the mid-20th century. Refrigeration and transportation advances made the modern supermarket possible. As new ways of buying things become available and popular with consumers, it is inevitable that some of the older ways will wane in popularity. And that's a good thing; "creative destruction", as Schumpeter called it. >> The management of some of the old department store chains that have >> fallen by the wayside (e.g., Montgomery-Ward) seems to have stumbled >> into the same trap that railroad companies fell prey to half a century >> ago. Namely, they defined their market sectors too narrowly. While >> railroad executives believed they were in the "railroad business", >> their consumers treated them as being in the *transportation* >> business. Thus, the railroads got their lunch eaten by airlines (to >> which most of the railroads' former long-distance passengers eagerly >> flocked) and to a lesser extent by trucking firms (which grabbed a >> quick-growing share of the freight-transport business, though rail >> still plays a much more important role in moving freight than it does >> in moving people). > First, a correction. The railroads knew they were in the > transportation business and set up bus, trucking and even aviation > units and cooperative agreements. But the govt made the railroads get > out of most of that stuff. I think this actually reinforces (not refutes) my point. (And the "railroad business vs. transportation business" observation isn't actually even my own; it's the one made famous by Theodore Levitt in his 1960 Harvard Business Review article entitled "Marketing Myopia".) The behavior of the railroad companies shows that they clearly saw their other business lines as mere adjuncts to support their crown jewels, which were the railroad lines. So much so that when they were forced to choose between the old, proven business and the new, higher-growth lines, the railroad execs chose to stick with what they knew and to sell off the other stuff. They could have chosen instead to sell off their rail assets and concentrate on the higher-growth markets. Of course, that kind of bold step is one that most companies find hard to take when faced with such a decision, and who can blame them? A lot of people were probably skeptical when an old Finnish industrial conglomerate whose chief products were paper, rubber and cables decided a quarter century ago to get into telecom equipment and to ditch the older slow-growth product lines. But the move was a success, and now practically everyone has heard of Nokia. On the other hand, the formerly stodgy old French water company Gnrale des Eaux chose to get rid of its original utility businesses several years ago in order to complete its transformation to Vivendi Universal, an entertainment conglomerate whose stock price has not so far been kind to its shareholders. > Second, the traditional old line dept stores actually had considerable > variety. The modern mgmt have eliminated a lot of departments and > special services. Gimbels, for example, had a scouting/camping dept, > art supplies dept, and bookstore. That's exactly right. The department stores have been trimming departments as business trickles away to other retailers, especially "category killers". How many people would buy a TV or a pair of skis at Macy's these days, when they know they could get a better selection and better prices at Best Buy or a sporting goods superstore? >> That's why the consolidation of the department-store sub-sector of >> the overall retail market troubles me no more than the shakeout >> that occurred in the typewriter manufacturer sector a few decades >> ago, or in the buggy-whip manufacturer sector several decades >> before that. > Unlike typewriters and buggy whips, people still need clothes and > furnishings. But unlike clothes and furnishings, department stores aren't something that consumers actually BUY. People just don't particularly need department stores any more in order to purchase their clothes and furnishings. They can buy their clothes and furnishings elsewhere, and they increasingly are doing so, which is why the department store chains are having so much trouble in the first place. Department stores themselves are not a product that consumers buy; they are merely a vehicle, a means to sell products. Other retail channels have waxed and waned over the years (how many door-to-door salesmen are still around, for instance?), but a channel is not a market. It would be absurd to define the particular retail sales channel known as "department stores" as a market in its own right, to which antitrust measures must be applied in isolation without treating discount stores, "big box" and "category killer" specialty stores, on-line and catalog retailers, etc. as part of the same market. One might as well try to apply antitrust rules to nonsensical categories such as "retailers whose names begin with the letter 'N'", or "retailers whose logos don't use the color red". Bob Goudreau Cary, NC [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have seen mentions of Sears, Roebuck occasionally in this thread. Back in the 1920's, Sears Roebuck was a very large chain of stores. The radio station they started acknowledged this fact by its call sign: 'W'(orlds)'L'(argest)'S'(tore), based in Chicago. WLS is on AM radio 890 kc, which was and still is a clear channel frequency. It was called 'The Prairie Farmer Station' in those days, and I think it was part of the Mutual Network. ------------------------------ From: DevilsPGD Subject: Re: Vonage's Citron Says VoIP Blocking Is 'Censorship' Date: Sun, 06 Mar 2005 22:40:00 -0700 Organization: Disorganized In message joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) wrote: >> Yes Pat, but it didn't do it on the basis of the 1st Amendment. As I >> understand it, the fine was to preserve "Net Freedom" (Powell's term) >> and although I like it, I still don't understand the legal basis for >> this action. It seems to me the Telco's ought to be concerned about >> this because if there is now a "must carry" rule for VoIP traffic, what >> happens when they start to offer TV/video? Will they be forced to allow > In the end, the only reason VoIP is so cheap is that it passes the > costs off to other sectors. Not exactly. The difference isn't that VoIP is "passing the cost", but rather, that with VoIP, the customer is providing the connection from their premises to the telco. Back in my ISP days, the ISP I worked for provided DSL over dry copper pairs. We were selling 2.5Mb/1Mb and later 7Mb/1.5Mb before either the telco or cableco were offering any soft of connectivity. We gave customers a choice: Either provide your own copper pair from your location to the nearest CO, or pay us more and we'll cover the loop costs (As well as handle the installation and whatnot) VoIP is similar. You can either pay a telco to bring the service to your door, or you can pay a cheaper rate if you provide the last mile yourself. VoIP is virtually always more expensive then traditional telco services if you include the cost of the internet connection. However, since I already have an internet connection, I don't include the cost of my internet connection in the cost of VoIP service. In message Dana wrote: >> I would think of it more this way: let's say that >> your phone company provider, be it Verizon or other LEC, decided >> that profanity should no longer be used on its phone lines, and >> installs special filters to capture and "bleep out" such speech. >> Would that be acceptable? > This is a strawman argument, as this is in no way compariable to the > situation with Vonage. How about if Verizon (or other LEC) decided to censor conversations about other telcos? > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Actually, back in the 'teens and '20s > of the last century, Bell had a rule against using profanity on the > telephone. For example, the cover of the 1920 Chicago Telephone > Company (predecessor to Illinois Bell) had this notice on the cover of > the phone directory: "When addressing our operators, please do not use > profanity. Please address our operators in the same courteous voice > you would want them to use in their reponses to you. It is not our > operator's fault if the line you have requested is engaged or does not > respond. Would you like it if the operator responded with a curse when > telling you the number did not respond." Apparently people would ask > for the number of the train station information line (for example), > and find it always in use or slow to respond. So people would curse > out the operator and blame her for it, then slam down the reciever. While likely true, this is completely different -- They were requesting that customers not swear AT the company, rather then limiting the content that they would carry. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You mentioned that VOIP was 'less expensive' because the end user paid for the transport instead of (for example) telco. This is true, but the end user is paying for the connection anyway; what added expense does anyone have as a result of VOIP in that case, other than buying the adapter? 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 V24 #99 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Mar 7 19:55:43 2005 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j280th304227; Mon, 7 Mar 2005 19:55:43 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2005 19:55:43 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200503080055.j280th304227@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 V24 #100 TELECOM Digest Mon, 7 Mar 2005 19:55:00 EST Volume 24 : Issue 100 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Bells Ringing in Net Phone 911 (Jack Decker) Firms Taking Action Against Worker Blogs (Monty Solomon) Is Router Needed For One Computer With VOIP? (elaine4funs@nospam.com) Voicepulse - is Router Needed For One Computer? (wilbur@post.com) Nortel Hires Former Cisco Executive (Telecom dailyLead from USTA) Latest on Worldcom (Spider) Re: Vonage Outage Last Thursday, was: Vonage (DevilsPGD) Re: Vonage Outage Last Thursday, was: Vonage (Thor Lancelot Simon) Re: Strange Call ID (Spyros Bartsocas) Re: Strange Call ID (Tim@Backhome.org) Re: Strange Call ID (Dean) Re: Strange Call ID (DevilsPGD) Re: Vonage's Citron Says VoIP Blocking Is 'Censorship' (Dana) Re: Vonage's Citron Says VoIP Blocking Is 'Censorship' (Isaiah Beard) Re: Paris Hilton's Sidekick Hacked (news01@jmatt.net) Re: Last Laugh! was Re: Reporter Name (Carl Moore) Re: Nokia 6010 Reporting in to Mama -- Radio Interference? (Joseph) Re: New Monopoly in Dept Stores; Federated and May to Merge (Henry) Re: New Monopoly in Dept Stores; Federated and May to Merge (L. Hancock) Re: Pricing Comparison, was: Vonage's Citron Says VoIP (Garrett Wollman) Re: Pricing Comparison, was: Vonage's Citron Says VoIP (Mike Sullivann) Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the Internet. All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jack Decker Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2005 01:20:21 -0500 Subject: Bells Ringing in Net Phone 911 Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com http://news.com.com/Bells+ringing+in+Net+phone+911/2100-7352_3-5600445.html By Ben Charny Staff Writer, CNET News.com A 17-year-old girl's call to 911 earlier this month after both her parents were shot by intruders never got through to police. Rather, the Houston teen got a recording from the Net phone company her family recently began using telling her that 911 service wasn't available. She managed to escape to summon authorities and an ambulance from elsewhere -- with a phone that did provide 911 connection. This nightmarish scenario is fresh evidence of continuing 911 problems for Net phone providers, say executives gathering for this week's Voice on the Net Spring 2005 trade show in San Jose, Calif. Net phone providers sell voice over Internet Protocol, or VoIP, telephone services that use the unregulated Internet rather than the more expensive, heavily taxed and less efficient traditional phone network. That network is dominated by the four local phone giants, also called the Baby Bells, which provide 911 services. The majority of U.S. Net phone providers still cannot successfully route a 911 call to the right emergency calling center and also provide emergency operators with the caller's phone number and location. There has been recent progress, however. The Bells are closer than ever to allowing Net phone operators direct access to their emergency call infrastructure, which would ease a major hurdle in offering better 911 VoIP service. Full story at: http://news.com.com/Bells+ringing+in+Net+phone+911/2100-7352_3-5600445.html How to Distribute VoIP Throughout a Home: http://michigantelephone.mi.org/distribute.html If you live in Michigan, subscribe to the MI-Telecom group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MI-Telecom/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2005 02:03:40 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Firms Taking Action Against Worker Blogs By ANICK JESDANUN AP Internet Writer NEW YORK (AP) -- Flight attendant Ellen Simonetti and former Google employee Mark Jen have more in common than their love of blogging: They both got fired over it. Though many companies have Internet guidelines that prohibit visiting porn sites or forwarding racist jokes, few of the policies directly cover blogs, or Web journals, particularly those written outside of work hours. Simonetti had posted suggestive photographs of herself in uniform, while Jen speculated online about his employer's finances. In neither case were their bosses happy when they found out. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=47450847 ------------------------------ Subject: Is Router Needed For One Computer With VOIP? From: elaine4funs@nospam.com Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2005 11:18:44 -0600 If I have a cable broadband connection, do I need to purchase the router to use Vonage and access the internet at the same time? [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: In addition to the telephone adapter device needed to operate the VOIP phone, you need some sort of router/splitter device to use the internet at the same time. Otherwise you are stuck with plugging in the phone when you wish to use it, or plugging in the computer when you wish to surf the net. but not both at the same time. The router allows you do to both at one time; but depending on the type of VOIP service you get, many of the telephone adapters in fact are routers as well. Vonage is like that; the TA used includes a simple router in the same unit. Bring the cable in one side, send output to the telephone and the computer at the same time. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Voicepulse - is Router Needed For One Computer? From: wilbur@post.com Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2005 11:45:51 -0600 They recommend the Sipura modem. Do you also need the Netgear router if you're going to access the net and use the phone service at the same time? [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: See the answer given to Elaine elsewhere in this issue. It will make the whole simpler and much less complex to have some sort of router (Netgear is fine, but so is Linksys) if you want to use the computer and VOIP at the same time. But you may want to consider a VOIP service like Vonage, for instance, which uses a telephone adapter which has a router built in, so you get by with one nice, neat little connection. For any interested parties, I still have Vonage e-coupons which you redeem for one month of free Vonage service. You use the link in the email I send you; this walks you through the sign up process to start using Vonage. You use _your credit card_ to pay for the installation costs, and the number assignment, and the first month of service. Then, the e-coupon kicks in and you get the *second month* of whatever service plan you purchased for free. Write ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu to request your e-coupon. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2005 13:34:53 EST From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA Subject: Nortel Hires Former Cisco Executive Telecom dailyLead from USTA March 7, 2005 http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=19874&l=2017006 TODAY'S HEADLINES NEWS OF THE DAY * Nortel hires former Cisco executive BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH * Insight Communications to go private in deal led by Carlyle Group * Vonage hits VoIP milestone * Some doubts about mobile TV * Cox announces VoIP plans * Cablevision tells Sears that Voom service will continue USTA SPOTLIGHT * Order USTA's Best-Selling VoIP Implementation and Planning Guide Today EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES * Yahoo! games going mobile REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE * Bells open testing with VoIP providers for 911 calls Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others. http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=19874&l=2017006 ------------------------------ From: spider Subject: Latest on Worldcom Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2005 18:11:49 GMT I recently received the following Re: Worldcom. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> United States District Court Southern District of New York Securities and Exchange Commission,: Plaintiff, :Civ No. 02-CV-4963 (JSR) v. : Worldcom, Inc., : Defendant. : Eligibility Criteria 1. You are not entitled to any recovery from the Trust for any Eligible Securities you sold prior to June 25, 2002. 2. You are not entitled to a recovery from the Trust with respect to any Eligible Securities you acquired prior to April 29, 1999. <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< In other words, in order to recover any money from the SEC for the Worldcom fraud, you had to have bought your shares after the fraud started and not sold your shares until the fraud was made public. I sold my shares 7 days too early. I won't get a dime of restitution. It took me a while to figure out what was happening here. There is only one group of people who are eligible for restitution: Former employees of Worldcom! The employees were forced to buy Worldcom stock for their 401Ks. Worldcom then forbid their employees from selling their Worldcom stock until the fraud was discovered. They will get restitution. People like me are going to get nothing, According to the SEC and the United States District Court we didn't get cheated. This stinks to high heaven. Only a small, carefully selected group of people will get restitution. The individual investor without political or financial clout can go pound sand. I have lost all respect for the SEC and the Courts. I will never put a dime in the stock market ever again. If this is the government's idea of restoring investor credibility, then they have completely lost it. The stock market is just a place to lie, steal and cheat with the full connivance of the government and the court system. ------------------------------ From: DevilsPGD Subject: Re: Vonage Outage Last Thursday, was: Vonage Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2005 00:46:30 -0700 Organization: Disorganized In message Danny Burstein wrote: > "Vonage ... suffered an outage that left about half of its 500,000 > subscribers without phone service for about 45 minutes. > "The outage was caused by a glitch with a software upgrade Thursday > night, said Brooke Schulz, a spokeswoman for Vonage Holdings Corp. > "The problem struck at about 2:45 p.m. EST, and Vonage stabilized the > network with a software patch within an hour... > "Vonage said about 50% of all inbound and outbound traffic was > affected by Friday's disruption. > To which I'd only add, "big deal. yawn." Unlike all the whiners who, > for some reason, love to point out each and every hiccup the > alternates run into. Since that outage all three of my ATAs are dropping inbound calls 15-30 seconds after I answer. Whether it's related or not, I don't know, but they're connected via two different ISPs, at two physical locations, all the ATAs have been rebooted. At this point, I'm pretty sure it's Vonage's fault, not mine. ------------------------------ From: tls@panix.com (Thor Lancelot Simon) Subject: Re: Vonage Outage Last Thursday, was: Vonage Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2005 14:42:10 UTC Organization: Public Access Networks Corp. Reply-To: tls@rek.tjls.com In article , Danny Burstein wrote: > FYI, quoting from an AP dispatch: > "Vonage ... suffered an outage that left about half of its 500,000 > subscribers without phone service for about 45 minutes. > "The outage was caused by a glitch with a software upgrade Thursday > night, said Brooke Schulz, a spokeswoman for Vonage Holdings Corp. > "The problem struck at about 2:45 p.m. EST, and Vonage stabilized the > network with a software patch within an hour... Unfortunately, the actualy duration of the problem was several hours; Vonage is, quite simply, lying. And the problem recurred on two successive days. If Vonage were a regulated entity -- which it's gone to great lengths to not be -- there would be significant penalties not just for this sort of service failure (note that Vonage hasn't exactly contacted its customers and offered to refund any of their money for the time that their phones were out of service) -- but also for lying about it. If Vonage isn't going to be a regulated entity, fine. But in that case it is just totally inappropriate for them to turn around and use a complaisant FCC board as a stick to beat _other_ unregulated entities with when they happen to do things that Vonage finds inconvenient. We can argue about whether or not telecom regulation is a good thing. But "just however much regulation Vonage likes, whenever Vonage happens to like it", I think, is unquestionably a bad thing. 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 ------------------------------ From: Spyros Bartsocas Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2005 12:46:42 +0200 Subject: Re: Strange Call ID > So clearly it is possible. It seems thought that most US landline caller > ID boxes assume that all numbers are in xxx-xxx-xxxx format. A GE caller id phone I used to have, displayed 10 digit caller ID as xxx-xxx-xxxx, but longer (international) caller id's would appear as XXXXXXXXXXXX (no dashes). ------------------------------ From: Tim@Backhome.org Subject: Re: Strange Call ID Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2005 08:22:44 -0800 Organization: Cox Communications Mark Crispin wrote: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Has anyone received a phone call from > someone calling via Vonage recently? My caller ID (on those calls) > shows the number, but identifies the caller as 'Vonage User'. PAT] If I call my wireline phone from my Vonage phone it shows my name. ------------------------------ From: Dean Subject: Re: Strange Call ID Date: 7 Mar 2005 11:53:04 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Spyros Bartsocas wrote: > I live in Greece. I received a call from my cousin in NY. On my caller > Id his number appeared as 0044212xxxxxxx (where the x's show his > actual 212 area code POTS number. > How is this possible? Spyro, Iit's not that easy to know exactly what happened. Who knows what the carrier(s) of that particular international call did to it prior to delivery? Generally speaking though, the calling number carried can be manipulated by a variety of parties carrying the call, is almost never necessary in order to route the call properly (but maybe for charging) and is obviously not necessarily the actual/real number belonging to the party who's calling you (assuming they even have a "real" e.164 number and are not just calling from skype or something like it). In this case, my buest guess is the call was routed via the UK and the calling number was modified thus for reasons internal to some/all of the carriers involved (i.e. not necessarily a bug; they could be using it this way to settle charges between them or something like that). Another possibility is that your cousin was using a calling card platform located in the UK, etc etc. Regards, Dean ------------------------------ From: DevilsPGD Subject: Re: Strange Call ID Date: Sun, 06 Mar 2005 22:40:00 -0700 Organization: Disorganized In message Spyros Bartsocas wrote: > I live in Greece. I received a call from my cousin in NY. On my caller > Id his number appeared as 0044212xxxxxxx (where the x's show his > actual 212 area code POTS number. > How is this possible? The caller probably used a calling card that terminated calls in a nonstandard way. ------------------------------ From: Dana Subject: Re: Vonage's Citron Says VoIP Blocking Is 'Censorship' Date: Sun, 06 Mar 2005 22:32:31 -0900 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com DevilsPGD wrote: > In message joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel > M. Hoffman) wrote: >>> Yes Pat, but it didn't do it on the basis of the 1st Amendment. As I >>> understand it, the fine was to preserve "Net Freedom" (Powell's term) >>> and although I like it, I still don't understand the legal basis for >>> this action. It seems to me the Telco's ought to be concerned about >>> this because if there is now a "must carry" rule for VoIP traffic, what >>> happens when they start to offer TV/video? Will they be forced to allow >> In the end, the only reason VoIP is so cheap is that it passes the >> costs off to other sectors. > Not exactly. > The difference isn't that VoIP is "passing the cost", but rather, that > with VoIP, the customer is providing the connection from their > premises to the telco. > Back in my ISP days, the ISP I worked for provided DSL over dry copper > pairs. We were selling 2.5Mb/1Mb and later 7Mb/1.5Mb before either > the telco or cableco were offering any soft of connectivity. > We gave customers a choice: Either provide your own copper pair from > your location to the nearest CO, or pay us more and we'll cover the > loop costs (As well as handle the installation and whatnot) > VoIP is similar. You can either pay a telco to bring the service to > your door, or you can pay a cheaper rate if you provide the last mile > yourself. > VoIP is virtually always more expensive then traditional telco > services if you include the cost of the internet connection. However, > since I already have an internet connection, I don't include the cost > of my internet connection in the cost of VoIP service. > In message Dana > wrote: >>> I would think of it more this way: let's say that >>> your phone company provider, be it Verizon or other LEC, decided >>> that profanity should no longer be used on its phone lines, and >>> installs special filters to capture and "bleep out" such speech. >>> Would that be acceptable? >> This is a strawman argument, as this is in no way compariable to the >> situation with Vonage. > How about if Verizon (or other LEC) decided to censor conversations > about other telcos? Same thing we are not talking about the content of the message, but how the message gets from one point to another. What the carriers and ISP's are saying about VOIP from providers like Vonage, is that their broadband subscribers (carriers and isp's) are using Vonage for long distance, and the carriers and ISP's cannot compete at the prices that Vonage is offering because of the fact that Vonage does not have to pay the same fees as the carriers and ISP's are paying. This same argument raised it's ugly head when phone calling over the internet first started when it sounded very bad. My father got one of those types, and used to love calling from Florida to New York via AOL bypassing phone company long distance charges. If companies like Vonage are ot going to be held to the same fees that long distance carriers have to pay, watch for many legal fights in the future. It will not be long when consumers without broadband access start to complain about their long distance costs, when consumers with a broadband access and a Vonage account are pretty much getting long distance for free. But then I look at my deal with GCI cable for internet access allows me so many free minutes of plain old telephone long distance service pretty cheap. I just see a lot of legal fights coming up over the internet and it's applications such as phone and video capabilities. ------------------------------ From: Isaiah Beard Subject: Re: Vonage's Citron Says VoIP Blocking Is 'Censorship' Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2005 14:41:50 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Dana wrote: > Isaiah Beard wrote: >>> My local convenience store and drugstore carry certain newspapers, but >>> not all for my area. Does that mean they are _censoring_ the ones >>> they don't sell? According to Vonage they are. >> You comparison is overbroad and overreaching, and compares apples to >> oranges. > No, his comparison is right on. It would be right on if grocery stores and newsstands had exclusivity arrangements. They do not. However, cable ISPs have exclusive franchise agreements in many areas where they provide service, and by default and through fancy FCC footwork, ILECs are often the only other game in town. A duopoly doesn't make for much choice. >> I would think of it more this way: let's say that >> your phone company provider, be it Verizon or other LEC, decided >> that profanity should no longer be used on its phone lines, and >> installs special filters to capture and "bleep out" such speech. >> Would that be acceptable? > This is a strawman argument, If it was a straw man argument, then you would have a quick and easy rebuttal other than this. > as this is in no way compariable to the situation with Vonage. On the contrary: your retail store argument is the only straw man here. E-mail fudged to thwart spammers. Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply. ------------------------------ From: news01@jmatt.net Subject: Re: Paris Hilton's Sidekick Hacked Date: 7 Mar 2005 10:31:52 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Dr. Joel M. Hoffman wrote: >> Paris Hilton's address book, famously kept on a T-Mobile Sidekick, has >> been popping up all over the internet after someone managed to figure >> out her password. > Do we know for sure that this was just a guessed password? Articles I read said that it was a well-known hole in T-Mobile's website which allowed somebody who knew a customer's phone number to reset her password. See http://www.computerworld.com/developmenttopics/websitemgmt/story/0,10801,100104,00.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2005 14:04:07 EST From: Carl Moore Subject: Last Laugh! was Re: Reporter Name A 2-year-old item, but wasn't Truman's daughter called Margaret? ----- Forwarded message # 1: From: John David Galt Subject: Last Laugh! was Re: Reporter Name Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 11:05:42 -0800 Organization: Diogenes the Cynic Hot-Tubbing Society >>> By JENNIFER 8. LEE >> Her middle initial is "8"? Or is that some kind of typo? >>> http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/09/technology/09PORN.html >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It is obviously some kind of typo, but >> that is how it arrive here from Monty Solomon. I didn't insert it >> here. It I had caught it I would have deleted the '8'. PAT] > Nope. That is, in fact, her name. What is "8." short for? [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: 'Eight' is short for 'eighteen', her real name, although no one calls her that. Actually, the 'typo' in the original message was in putting a 'period' behind the 8, which is her 'full name'. The newspapers make that mistake now and then when writing about former president 'Harry S Truman'. His middle name, in fact, was merely the initial /S/ and there shouldn't be a period after a complete name. There were many conjectures over the years about what the 'S' stood for in his name. His wife Bess and his daughter Margaruite both confirmed it meant nothing at all. Just 'S'. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Joseph Subject: Re: Nokia 6010 Reporting in to Mama -- Radio Interference? Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2005 12:00:33 -0800 Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com On Sat, 5 Mar 2005 19:13:32 -0500, Tony P. wrote: > So GSM that we have today is a patch on top a patch. Nice to think about > that. Be glad that it wasn't cooked up by the bunch in Redmond. ------------------------------ From: henry999@eircom.net (Henry) Subject: Re: New Monopoly in Dept Stores; Federated and May to Merge Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2005 17:23:25 +0200 Organization: Elisa Internet customer > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have seen mentions of Sears, Roebuck > occasionally in this thread. Back in the 1920's, Sears Roebuck was a > very large chain of stores. The radio station they started > acknowledged this fact by its call sign: 'W'(orlds)'L'(argest)'S'(tore), > based in Chicago. WLS is on AM radio 890 kc... Interesting. I knew a different version of the 'World's Largest Store' story. The way I heard it, the radio station was owned by the same outfit that owned the Merchandise Mart (also in Chicago). Cheers, Henry ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com Subject: Re: New Monopoly in Dept Stores; Federated and May to Merge Date: 7 Mar 2005 13:15:01 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Bob Goudreau wrote: > More to the point, the Bell system monopoly was actually sanctioned by > the government. No analogous situation has ever existed in US > retail, thankfully. I don't know of anything major, but Pennsylvania's liquor stores (wine and hard stuff) were and remain the sole source of that for within Pennsylvania. At the end of WW II the govt had a monopoly on reactor by-products used for medical and physics research. > The defined market that Sears itself paid attention to was "retail", > and Sears was for decades the market leader in the US. Yes and no. While Sears had a big array of products, it didn't sell everything and there were other retail stores that did. (Did Sears have book departments? Grocery stores?) Further, Sears was a "full service" store, but there were other high-end and low-end stores (esp low-end discounters). Sears may have been the _biggest_, but it certainly had plenty of competition in retail. >> As a shopper, if Wanamaker's didn't have what I wanted, I'd go up >> the street to Strawbridges, and then over to Gimbel's. Three >> different stores, run by three different companies. As mentioned, I >> also_ had the choice of numerous smaller specialty stores and >> discount stores. >> And we still do, including a vast plethora of new specialty and >> discount stores out there in cyberspace. The way people choose to >> shop is heavily influenced by the available technology. ... Again, yes and no. I don't like buying clothing via the Internet because size labels have terribly high variances (I have "large" items that are too tight on me and "medium" items that swim on me. You have to try something on every time regardless of the stated "size".) I don't like the discount/specialty stores since they don't offer the service/support/guarantee/integrity that the traditional stores do. For instance, at "Best Buy" I bought software that came with a rebate. It turned out I could've bought the same product at another store. The other store had a cheaper price (no rebate). They never sent me the rebate check (for $20) so I grossly overpaid. The big dept stores will cheerfully take stuff back, the discounters don't like it even if it's obviously defective merchandise. Further, the discounters are fast and free on product spec labels, I remember them pushing TVs supposedly having stereo but were actually mono. Lastly, on sale items, the dept store prices are competitive. Some specialty/discount stores have a relatively short life. > I think this actually reinforces (not refutes) my point. (And the > "railroad business vs. transportation business" observation isn't > actually even my own; it's the one made famous by Theodore Levitt in > his 1960 Harvard Business Review article entitled "Marketing Myopia".) > The behavior of the railroad companies shows that they clearly saw > their other business lines as mere adjuncts to support their crown > jewels, which were the railroad lines. So much so that when they were > forced to choose between the old, proven business and the new, > higher-growth lines, the railroad execs chose to stick with what they > knew and to sell off the other stuff. They could have chosen instead > to sell off their rail assets and concentrate on the higher-growth > markets. As I said, the railroads were FORBIDDEN by the govt to do what you suggest, and ORDERED to divest what things they had done. For example, the railroads set up bus lines to more efficiently serve light-volume areas, but the govt ordered them out. Railroads were regulated, just like the phone company, and the phone company was tightly limited into what communication product markets it could enter. (Western Electric had sound systems they had to discontinue.) Now Hollywood was late in shifting its resources to television, initially it hated TV thinking of it as an enemy. Further, IBM was exactly as you describe, seeing punch cards as its business, not electronic computers, and had to rush to catch up when they finally realized they missed the first boat. Fortunately, they were doing some experiments and research, Watson Sr was not as anti-electronics as claimed and he initiated basic research during the war. > That's exactly right. The department stores have been trimming > departments as business trickles away to other retailers, especially > "category killers". How many people would buy a TV or a pair of skis > at Macy's these days, when they know they could get a better selection > and better prices at Best Buy or a sporting goods superstore? The thing is, I'm far from convinced those other stores are truly superior. They actually seem to have a smaller selection and not the most desirable models. I recall shopping for a VCR and a TV (a few years ago) at both types I ended up getting the best price and selection from a traditional dept store, not the discounters or specialty. I checked the mfr's web site and only the dept stores had the most desirable model I wanted. > People just don't particularly need department stores any more in > order to purchase their clothes and furnishings. They can buy their > clothes and furnishings elsewhere, and they increasingly are doing so, > which is why the department store chains are having so much trouble in > the first place. I would be curious: take men's dress suits. What is the breakdown for men buying suits? I dobut Walmart/Kmart are that big. One discounter, Today's Man, went out of business. > The radio station they started > acknowledged this fact by its call sign: 'W'(orlds)'L'(argest)'S'(tore), > based in Chicago. WLS is on AM radio 890 kc, which was and still is a > clear channel frequency. I used to listen to it at night in Phila. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: WLS comes booming in at night here in Independence, also. PAT] ------------------------------ From: wollman@lcs.mit.edu (Garrett Wollman) Subject: Re: Pricing Comparison, was: Vonage's Citron Says VoIP... Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 23:05:03 UTC Organization: MIT Laboratory for Computer Science In article , TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to Danny Burstein : > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yeah, and can you imagine there are > folks who want to place the blame on VOIP because it is so > inexpensive; they seem to feel all those taxes and fees the landline > telcos pay are justified. Why they want to blame VOIP instead of > placing the blame of the government, squarely where it belongs, is > anyone's guess. PAT] Regulated telcos don't pay taxes. Only their customers pay taxes. Some of those taxes are itemized on the bill, and some are just buried in the rates, but one way or another, every dime of tax paid by the telco comes ultimately from the ratepayers. This is not a problem insofar as the taxes in question are general taxes that apply to all businesses (or, more specifically, all businesses which offer a service which is substitutable for the service the telcos offer, in proportion to the service's relative value). At present, we have a regulatory system where some services are taxed specifically, and other, eminently substitutable services are not so taxed or indeed regulated at all, depending entirely on where in the protocol stack these services are implemented. There is no question that substitutability is valuable in a competitive marketplace; indeed, it is a necessary condition of having a competitive marketplace. The problem, however, is that differential taxation and regulation of otherwise substitutable services causes consumers to make choices between services for reasons external to the market, to wit, on the basis of that differential taxation. Telcos see this problem most clearly, because they are the ones being discriminated against in the current scenario. Unfortunately, the approach they have taken in their campaign, demanding that everyone be regulated and taxed in the same way as they are, is both counterproductive for the economy as a whole and ultimately futile as more and more non-telco voice services are designed to be unregulatable and untaxable. The telephone regulatory regime needs to begin the process now of phasing itself out of existence. A good start would be eliminating direct taxation and cross-subsidy of telephone services (e.g., USF, franchise fees, state sales and excise taxes), while simultaneously prohibiting the itemization of non-tax costs of doing business, so that consumers are able to make a reasoned choice among different (but substitutable) communications offerings. -GAWollman -- Garrett A. Wollman | As the Constitution endures, persons in every wollman@csail.mit.edu | generation can invoke its principles in their own Opinions not those | search for greater freedom. of MIT or CSAIL. | - A. Kennedy, Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. ___ (2003) ------------------------------ From: Michael D. Sullivan Subject: Re: Pricing Comparison, was: Vonage's Citron Says VoIP... Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2005 05:27:50 GMT In article , wollman@lcs.mit.edu says: > Regulated telcos don't pay taxes. Only their customers pay taxes. > Some of those taxes are itemized on the bill, and some are just buried > in the rates, but one way or another, every dime of tax paid by the > telco comes ultimately from the ratepayers. Regulated telcos are in fact liable for, and do pay taxes of many different kinds, some or all of which are ultimately recovered from ratepayers. There are also taxes that are imposed directly on the end user of telecommunications, which are merely collected by the telco. An example of the latter is the federal telecommunications excise tax, which is levied on the end user directly by federal law, but is collected and remitted to the government by the telco. This is very different from the taxes and tax-like fees and charges that are imposed directly on the telco, but which are ultimately recovered from the end user. For example, the Federal USF charge is assessed on the carrier based on its end-user interstate telecom revenues; it must be paid by the carrier, whether or not the carrier can recover it from its customer, either as a line item or as a hidden component of its rates. Likewise, there are state taxes and fees, such as gross receipts taxes, state USF fees, 911 charges, sales taxes, intrastate telecommunications excise taxes, etc. These are typically levied directly on the telco, but the telco passes them through to the customer one way or another. And then there are income taxes, state and federal, levied on the telco and paid by it, but taken into account as a cost of doing business when setting rates. While it's true that, ultimately, all of the taxes on telcos ultimately come out of the pockets of their customers, either directly or indirectly, that is also true of every other business. What is unique about the telecom industry is that the state and federal governments have latched onto telecom as a cash cow, imposing thousands of separate taxes across the country above and beyond the normal income, property, and sales taxes that are imposed on other businesses. There is absolutely no justification for imposing all of these costs on telecom providers, and their customers, alone, other than the fact that they are sitting ducks. One reason why telecom companies tend to pass these taxes and fees through as line items, rather than absorb them as a cost of doing business, is because they are imposed arbitrarily and are subject to frequent change, so they can't in many instances be internalized into the cost of doing business like income and property taxes. Stores pass through the sales tax as a line item on your register receipt for the same reason. Doing this makes consumers aware that the government, and not the carrier, is responsible for much of the total cost (up to 1/3, or even more) of telecommunications services. Did you know that your telephone bill is inflated by 10% or so in order to subsidize rural telephone companies, many of which are highly profitable? That's what the federal USF charge does, in part. Thank Ted Stevens for this subsidy, not your carrier. People in rural areas pay less than urban customers for telephone service because the urban subscribers pay a huge subsidy to the rural telcos, all in the name of supporting universal service in high cost areas. Likewise, states impose a 911 surcharge on telecom providers, which is passed through to the customer. In some cases, states have used the funds collected, which were supposed to subsidize the cost of upgrading 911 dispatching facilities, to redecorate police stations while leaving 911 service unimproved. Why should telcos and their subscribers pay for redecorating police stations, or even for upgrading other areas' 911 centers, when these are general government public welfare expenditures? The answer is that it's easier to levy taxes on telecom than to raise income taxes. Michael D. Sullivan Bethesda, MD, USA Replace "example.invalid" with ".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 V24 #100 ******************************