From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Mar  8 17:41:06 2005
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j28Mf5a12777;
	Tue, 8 Mar 2005 17:41:06 -0500 (EST)
Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2005 17:41:06 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200503082241.j28Mf5a12777@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 #101

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 8 Mar 2005 17:40:00 EST    Volume 24 : Issue 101

Inside This Issue:                            Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Richard Clarke: Real ID's, Real Dangers (NY Times) (Marcus Didius Falco)
    Voip in Northern KY (Kevin)
    SPRING VON: Vonage CEO Slams VOIP Blocking (Jack Decker)
    Ohio Law Require Auction License for eBay Sellers (Lisa Minter)
    Qualcomm Picks New CEO (Telecom dailyLead from USTA)
    Hackers Wreck Christian Family Group Web Site (Lisa Minter)
    Home PBX Info: Switching Between Landline and VOIP (Lee Sweet)    
    Re: Vonage's Citron Says VoIP Blocking Is 'Censorship' (DevilsPGD)
    Re: Vonage's Citron Says VoIP Blocking Is 'Censorship' (Lisa Hancock)
    Re: Vonage Outage Last Thursday, was: Vonage (Tim@Backhome.org)
    Re: Vonage (Tony P.)
    Re: New Monopoly in Dept Stores; Federated and May to Merge  (Goudreau)
    Re: New Monopoly in Dept Stores; Federated and May to Merge (wesrock)
    Re: Last Laugh! was Re: Reporter's Name (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.  

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

Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2005 19:01:41 -0500
From: Marcus Didius Falco <falco_marcus_didius@yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: Richard Clarke: Real ID's, Real Dangers (NY Times)


 From the New York Times --
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/06/magazine/06ADVISER.html

THE SECURITY ADVISER
Real ID's, Real Dangers
By RICHARD A. CLARKE

Have you ever wondered what good it does when they look at your
driver's license at the airport? Let me assure you, as a former
bureaucrat partly responsible for the 1996 decision to create a
photo-ID requirement, it no longer does any good whatsoever. The ID
check is not done by federal officers but by the same kind of
minimum-wage rent-a-cops who were doing the inspection of carry-on
luggage before 9/11.

They do nothing to verify that your license is real. For $48 you can
buy a phony license on the Internet (ask any 18-year-old) and fool
most airport ID checkers. Airport personnel could be equipped with
scanners to look for the hidden security features incorporated into
most states' driver's licenses, but although some bars use this
technology to spot under-age drinkers, airports do not. The photo-ID
requirement provides only a false sense of security.

Congress is debating the Real ID bill in part because many states have
been issuing real driver's licenses, complete with the hidden security
features, to people who have established their identities using phony
birth certificates or fake Social Security cards. Indeed, some 9/11
hijackers obtained real driver's licenses using false documents. The
Real ID bill has, however, provoked negative reaction from those who
think it has little to do with terrorism and a lot to do with making
life difficult for illegal immigrants. While the bill has passed the
House, it faces difficulty in the Senate. If portions of it do pass,
it will mean that the next time you apply for a driver's license, you
may need substantial proof that you are who you claim to be.

The Real ID legislation has caused the right and the left of the
political spectrum to worry again that a national ID card is in the
offing. Since we use licenses as de facto national ID's now, we should
make them difficult to counterfeit and relatively easy to verify. With
existing technology, that can be done. The Homeland Security
Department is testing ''smart cards'' (credit-card-size devices with
computer chips and embedded biometric information, like fingerprints)
for all workers in the transportation industry and is also
experimenting with voluntary smart cards for expedited passage through
airport security. President Bush has directed that all federal
employees, starting later this year, carry smart cards for access to
federal buildings and computer networks.  Industry analysts estimate
that tens of millions of Americans will be using government-issued
smart cards in a few years.

Should we feel safer or be concerned about Big Brother government and
the loss of privacy? Since we are already widely using government-
issued ID's for a variety of purposes, employing cards that are
difficult to counterfeit seems on its face like a good idea. Verifiable,
secure ID's will certainly reduce some crimes (nine
million Americans were victims of identity theft last year, according
to the Federal Trade Commission) and may create an impediment to
terrorism. 

I would voluntarily give up credit and other information for a card to
avoid long airport lines, but I am not sure the Internal Revenue
Service should have access to that data. Moreover, the government's
performance to date with anti-terrorism laws does not inspire trust;
the new authorities in the Patriot Act, which we readily gave the
government to fight terrorists, are now being used for a variety of
other purposes. For example, reports suggest that federal agents have
been persuading courts to order that personal records be turned over
regardless of whether there is any suspicion about the person involved
and regardless of whether the crime being investigated is linked to
terrorism.

If Americans are going to have to carry smart cards, we will want
fellow citizens whom we trust ensuring the data collected are not used
by the wrong people or for the wrong purposes.  Technology will not
help us there; we will need strict privacy rules, truly independent
oversight and tough punishment for government abuse. Only then will we
be comfortable using the new security technologies, which actually can
make us safer.  The National Intelligence Reform Act of last year
provided for a new Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board, which
could do the necessary work to restrain the government's tendencies to
overreach. The quality of President Bush's nominees for that board
will show how serious he is about protecting freedoms in America while
he is promoting them abroad.

Copyright 2005 The New York Times 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, New York Times Company

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

                            John F. McMullen
                    http://www.westnet.com/~observer
                   BLOG: http://johnmacrants.blogspot.com/
  
------------------------------

From: Kevin <kevin@xxvwkebxyz.com>
Subject: Voip in Northern KY
Organization: Comcast Online
Date: Tue, 08 Mar 2005 15:46:51 GMT


Hi,

Does anyone know if there's any VOIP service in Northern KY/Cincinnati
area?  Per the vonage website, I can't get a number with any of the
local area codes.  I don't know if that means that I can still sign up
and get a number with another area code ... which doesn't make any
sense but I guess it's possible.

Thanks,

Kevin

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

From: Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@witheld on request>
Date: Tue, 08 Mar 2005 08:53:59 -0500
Subject: SPRING VON: Vonage CEO slams VOIP blocking


http://www.itworld.com/Net/3303/050308vonagevoip/


Stephen Lawson, IDG News Service, San Francisco Bureau

The top executive of VOIP (Voice over IP) provider Vonage Holdings
Corp. is satisfied with regulators' response to a carrier that blocked
Vonage's service but sees a broader danger ahead with technology for
detecting the data service that customers are using.

In an interview Monday at the Spring VON (Voice on the Net) trade show
in San Jose, California, Vonage Chief Executive Officer (CEO) Jeffrey
Citron also said traditional carriers can't afford to compete all-out
with Vonage and other VOIP upstarts despite having greater resources.

[.....]

"I think it's a technical issue that extrapolates itself into a First
Amendment issue," Citron said. Service providers that own
infrastructure and deliver content or services over it now have the
capability to look into the packets going to and from a customer's
connection and determine what kind of service they are using and even
the content of those packets, he said. It is technically possible for
network operators to read e-mail, block e-mail messages based on
content and limit access to Web sites, Citron said.

In addition to anti-competitive moves against VOIP companies and other
content and service providers, the problem raises censorship issues,
he said.

"What happens when the media property that owns distribution is owned
by a religious group?" Citron asked. Laws should be brought up to date
to prevent abuse, he said.

Full story at:
http://www.itworld.com/Net/3303/050308vonagevoip/

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: Tue, 8 Mar 2005 09:52:34 PST
From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: Ohio Law Would Require Auction License for eBay Sellers


CNN, via Yahoo News on Tuesday reports that the State of Ohio has
become very unfriendly toward online sellers using E-Bay.
According to CNN-Money, State of Ohio now requires an auction license
of people who want to sell on E-Bay, as well as a one-year training
class required of sellers _and_ a fifty thousand dollar security 
bond. The auction license costs two hundred dollars. If you fail to
do these things, they have some jail time waiting for you. Their
excuse is they want to 'cut back on internet fraud using E-Bay'.
			
http://money.cnn.com/2005/03/07/technology/ohio_ebay/index.htm

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

Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2005 13:26:36 EST
From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA <usta@dailylead.com>
Subject: Qualcomm Picks New CEO


Telecom dailyLead from USTA
March 8, 2005
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=19903&l=2017006

TODAY'S HEADLINES

NEWS OF THE DAY
* Qualcomm picks new CEO
BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH
* Cox Communications may sell four cable systems
* Siemens decides to keep mobile business unit open
* McKinsey: Telecoms must automate customer service
* Analyst: Stand-alone VoIP providers may face hurdles
* Vonage's Citron sour on cable's triple play
* DirecTV president Stern resigns; CEO Carey to assume duties
USTA SPOTLIGHT 
* Calling ALL Carriers Ready to Explore!
EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES
* Nokia tests mobile TV service
REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE
* Jurors review videos of Ebbers

Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others.
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=19903&l=2017006
------------------------------

From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: Hackers Deface Christian Family Group Web Site
Date: Tue, 08 Mar 2005 14:11:08 -0500


http://www.wlbz2.com/newscenter/article.asp?id=20748

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

From: Lee Sweet <lee@datatel.com>
Date: Tue, 08 Mar 2005 15:20:57 -0500
Subject: Home PBX Info: Switching Between Landlines and VoIP


I've got an application that may apply to many with VoIP.  I've got
two home landlines (one for myself, and one for my wife).  I also have
a Vonage line for LD and Fax.  We are keeping the landlines for the
usual reasons, including inability to port, E-911, etc.

Now, what I want to do is have all outbound LD calls go out on the
Vonage line automatically.  Right now, I have a separate cordless
phone for that line, but that's not the optimal answer!  :-) \

I'd like to have the various corded and cordless phones and the three
lines hooked to some sort of home PBX where, either by dialing the
required '1' (best answer) or perhaps an '8', calls are connected to
the Vonage line.  Else, they go out the (correct) landline. (I assume
each handset could know its 'proper' outbound landline for local
traffic if each input phone jack on the PBX can be programmed to use
the appropriate outbound line.)

Now, before PAT jumps in with his PBXtra recommendation :-) , I've 
discussed this with Mike Sandman, and he really doesn't recommend it 
for this application.

I'll bet a lot of people have Vonage as an extra LD/Fax line, still 
have landlines, and would like to do this.

Any recommendations/pointers about home PBX info?  Thanks!

Lee Sweet
Datatel, Inc.
Manager of Telephony Services 
   and Information Security
How higher education does business
Voice: 703.968.4661
Fax: 703.968.4625
Cell: 703.932.9425
lee@datatel.com
www.datatel.com

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I _know_ what Mike Sandman says about
PBXs in general as opposed to multi-button phones with all the
features such as holding, call transfer, flash, etc on individual
buttons. He has never yet met a PBX he liked, and Lee, he told me 
that you called last week and he explained 'why PBXtra would not
be suitable.' I talk to Mike on the phone a couple times per week. 

Mike's complaints can be summarized thusly: (1) People cannot be trained
to do a proper flashhook, therefore as often as not cutting off the
person. (2) People cannot be trained to correctly dial the number they
want to reach, and forget the 9 or 8 or whatever at the start of the 
call. (3) People do not usually have their houses wired in a 'star'
configuration (needed for using PBX) although their office may be
thus wired. Mike seems to feel a phone with umpty-dozen buttons (for
line selection and feature use) is a better deal, even though to 
install/move such a phone requires many pairs of wires and is quite
labor-intensive to install/move/replace. That's Mike's opinion, to
which he is certainly entitled. If I have overlooked other complaints
by Mike, perhaps you or he will permit me to stand corrected. Oh, and
we have talked off and on about 'custom calling features' such as
hookflash to three way call, hookflash to answer call waiting, and
hookflash to interject other features in the middle of a call, such
as forward to voicemail, etc but he does not think all that matters; 
its just the dreaded hookflash used on PBX transfers, etc which he
dislikes so much. 

PBXtra works perfectly well in small applications like mine: more than
one phone instrument in a large (geographic space) house; a person who
is a wee bit handicapped like myself getting to a phone in time to
anwer it before the caller disconnects; a situation where there are a
bunch of computers, each of them has their own 'extension' and modem,
in addition to a phone in my bedroom, my parlor/dining area, the
computer room, a phone where Lisa sits to work, etc. The traffic both
inbound and outbound is very slow here, so the PBXtra being 'virtually
non-blocking' is almost an overkill. The phone in my bedroom (ext. 104)
and the one in my parlor (ext. 105) are both wireless headset style 
phones, with a range of about half a city block, which I guess is also
an overkill. I put all my long distance calls via Vonage (dial 8 +)
and all my local calls over Prairie Stream (dial 9+) and answer 
incoming calls from either line by dialing *70 (forced pickup from the
'operator' line). The modem ability (between computers or in/out from
wherever to a computer is about 28.8). Not the best, but okay, since I
usually use the cable for the computers, not the modems. 

Do as you wish, Lee, but Mike Sandman is just one voice in the 
wilderness here, mine is another voice.  PAT] 

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

From: DevilsPGD <ihatespam@crazyhat.net>
Subject: Re: Vonage's Citron Says VoIP Blocking Is 'Censorship'
Date: Sun, 06 Mar 2005 22:40:00 -0700
Organization: Disorganized


In message <telecom24.97.14@telecom-digest.org> 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.

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That is what I said yesterday. It is
unfair to amortize the entire cost of the connectivity off to VOIP
since you have the connection there already.   PAT]

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

From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Subject: Re: Vonage's Citron Says VoIP Blocking Is 'Censorship'
Date: 8 Mar 2005 06:57:27 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.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.

> 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?

Actually, I think a more proper analogy would be them not letting
me call certain destinations, rather than the content of the call
itself.

I want to clarify some confusion I had -- I misunderstood that the
blockage was done by an ISP, not apparently a telephone company.  ISPs
are totally free market and they can do what they choose, blocking or
not.  Local telephone companies are regulated "critical service"
carriers and as such have more obligations.

Charles Cryderman wrote:

> 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.

That's a good point.

Actually, in your specific example, court decisions have gone both
ways.  In some cases a 'mom and pop' apt owner, say of a duplex, can
exercise their religion to deny to a unmarried or gay couple; but
that's a pretty isolated narrow situation.

> 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.

Not paying into those 'taxes' saves them a heck of a lot of money and
allows them to undercut their competition.  Given that benefit, it's
wrong for them to turn around and demand that same competition help
them.

To me it's like I set up a hot dog cart in the parking lot of a
convenience store (that also sells hot dogs) and I get the govt to say
it's ok for me not to pay taxes for my spot that the host store has to
pay.  Now I'm demanding the host store provide me with hot dogs as
well for me to sell.

Perhaps another analogy would be people who ride on the bumper of a
bus for free, and then complain if the bus is discontinued for lack of
ridership.

> 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.

I correct myself on this -- a regulated local telephone company has
different obligations than an ISP.  But to me it's still cream
skimming.

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

From: Tim@Backhome.org
Subject: Re: Vonage Outage Last Thursday, was: Vonage
Date: Tue, 08 Mar 2005 06:46:26 -0800
Organization: Cox Communications


Thor Lancelot Simon wrote:

> In article <telecom24.99.4@telecom-digest.org>, Danny Burstein

> Unfortunately, the actualy duration of the problem was several hours;
> Vonage is, quite simply, lying.  And the problem recurred on two
> successive days.

No doubt about it.  It caused major problems for me.

> 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.

What this proves is that Vonage is simply not a viable replacement for
wireline service.  I've been a Vonage user from the beginning,
suffering through echos and quality issues for the first several
months.

I figured it was all worth it for the unlimited, inexpensive "out
WATS."  But, now that SBC offers unlimited nation-wide toll for a
competitive price, it makes me think about using only my wireline
(which I never got rid of).  The only advantage Vonage offers today
are virtual numbers.

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

From: Tony P. <kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net>
Subject: Re: Vonage
Organization: ATCC
Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2005 19:09:28 -0500


In article <telecom24.98.3@telecom-digest.org>, johnl@iecc.com says...

>> 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.

Must be some accident of living in RI then. All I can say is I've been 
extremely fortunate that my only outages both involved snow/ice storms. 

The same kind of storms that would probably have knocked my Verizon 
service out of commission. 

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

From: Bob Goudreau <BobGoudreau@withheld on request>
Subject: Re: New Monopoly in Dept Stores; Federated and May to Merge 
Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2005 22:59:42 -0500


[Please remove my email address.]

Lisa Hancock 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.

Yes, we have a similar setup here in NC: state Alcoholic Beverage
Commissions are the only sellers of hard liquor (though not beer and
wine).  But as you mentioned in an earlier Digest, the repeal of
Prohibition gave states special and unique constitutional powers with
respect to alcohol.

> At the end of WW II the govt had a monopoly on reactor by-products
> used for medical and physics research.

I'm having a little trouble thinking of reactor by-products as retail
items that would be bought by consumers :-).  I was thinking more
along the lines of the experience my wife's East German-born
sister-in-law (who unfortunately passed away two weeks ago) had when
she escaped the iron curtain in the early 1980s and first encountered
a West German retail store, with its exhilarating but confusing array
of choices, so very different from the limited selection of crappy
products available in the state-run retail outlets of East Germany.

> As I said, the railroads were FORBIDDEN by the govt to do what you
> suggest, and ORDERED to divest what things they had done.

I think you missed my point.  They could have chosen to divest the
entire regulated railroad business instead (in the way that AT&T chose
to give up the local telco business in the early 1980s), leaving the
now-separate rump company to concentrate exclusively on rail while the
new successor company (which would have purchased the non-rail assets)
chased the newer markets.  Instead, the execs chose to stay with the
rump themselves.  They bet on the wrong pony.  Of course, sometimes
the ho-hum legacy business turns out to be the winning horse after
all.  It now looks like that's what happened with AT&T; the Baby Bells
seem to have been the winning choice there, while AT&T's grandiose
plans to make money in the computer business came to naught (twice!).

>> 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 doubt Walmart/Kmart are that big.  One
> discounter, Today's Man, went out of business.

I think the main issue here is that demand for men's suits has been
gradually declining for a few decades.  Not quite buggy-whip status
(yet), but casual clothing is far more prevalent in the workplace than
it was in the 1950s or 1960s.  I've never heard of Today's Man, but
perhaps the competition from the likes of Men's Wearhouse was too much
for them in the overall slow-growing (or even shrinking) market for
men's suits.

TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to Henry:

>> [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).

Our esteemed Editor is correct, according to
http://www.wlshistory.com/WLS20/.

The Merchandise Mart was a spinoff of Marshall Field's.  See
http://www.merchandisemart.com/marchitecture/history.html.


Bob Goudreau
Cary, NC

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

From: Wesrock@aol.com
Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2005 16:50:47 EST
Subject: Re: New Monopoly in Dept Stores; Federated and May to Merge


In a message dated 7 Mar 2005 13:15:01 -0800, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
writes:

> 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.)

It was the Motor Carrier Act of 1935 that prohibited railroads from
owning motor carriers.  Such operations that were in existence before
the passage of that act were grandfathered.

The Santa Fe Trail Transportation Company was perhaps the dominant
freight and passenger motor carrier in many parts of the western
Midwest/Southwest region.  The Santa Fe Trail Transportation Company's
bus operation, known as Santa Fe Trailways, was one of the core
companies that first former the National Trailways Bus System, and
then many of the largest, dominated by Santa Fe Trailways, merged to
form Transcontinental Bus Systerm, Inc., which continued to use the
name of its large Texas (non-railroad-owned) component, Continental
Trailways.

There were a number of such major motor carriers, both freight and
passenger, organized before 1935 by major railroads, which continued
in operation for many decades; their successors may continue to be in
operation.

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

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

From: Wesrock@aol.com
Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2005 16:55:02 EST
Subject: Last Laugh! was Re: Reporter Name


Pat wrote:

> 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]

Scholarly works have been written on this subject.  Harry S (or S.) 
Truman often signed documents without the period, also signed many with the 
period.

     
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 #101
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Mar  9 03:42:16 2005
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j298gGF18606;
	Wed, 9 Mar 2005 03:42:16 -0500 (EST)
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2005 03:42:16 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200503090842.j298gGF18606@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 #102

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 9 Mar 2005 03:42:00 EST    Volume 24 : Issue 102

Inside This Issue:                            Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Harvard Applicants Breached Security / Applicants' Behavior (M Solomon)
    On EBay, E-Mail Phishers Find a Well-Stocked Pond (Monty Solomon)
    Cablevision's Voom Gets a Reprieve (Monty Solomon)
    Credit Information Stolen From DSW Stores (Monty Solomon)
    New Approaches to Television Archiving (Monty Solomon)
    Vari, Varo and Varc -parameters for Ericsson MD110 BC9 (Ben)
    Dead Phone at New House, Short Circuits Say SBC! (Japple)
    Re: Ohio Law Would Require Auction License for eBay Sellers (LB@notmine)
    Re: Ohio Law Would Require Auction License for eBay Sellers (Tony P.)
    Re: Richard Clarke: Real ID's, Real Dangers (NY Times) (Thomas Horsley)
    Re: Richard Clarke: Real ID's, Real Dangers (NY Times) (Steve Sobol)
    Re: DoJ: VoIP Providers Avoiding CALEA Mandate (Tony P.)
    Re: Best Phone to Use For Radio Telephone Interviews? (Tony P.)
    Re: Voip in Northern KY (John Levine)
    Re: New Monopoly in Dept Stores; Federated and May to Merge (Wesrock)
    Re: Vonage Outage Last Thursday, was: Vonage (Tony P.)
    Re: Hackers Deface Christian Family Group Web Site (Ed Clarke)
    Re: Home PBX Info: Switching Between Landlines and VoIP (Soren Rathje)
    Re: "Broadcast Flag", was Re: My New DVR From Cable One (Tony P.)
    Re: A Great Phone, Tied Down (Tony P.)
    Re: Any Old Mechanical Systems Still in Use in the US? (Tony P.)
    Re: Voip in Northern KY (Christopher Sabine)

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 Mar 2005 18:34:06 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Harvard Applicants Breached Security / Applicants' Behavior


Harvard rejects 119 accused of hacking
Applicants' behavior 'unethical at best'

By Robert Weisman, Globe Staff  |  March 8, 2005

Harvard Business School will reject the 119 applicants who hacked into
the school's admissions site last week, the school's dean, Kim
B. Clark, said yesterday.

"This behavior is unethical at best -- a serious breach of trust that
can not be countered by rationalization," Clark said in a
statement. "Any applicant found to have done so will not be admitted
to this school."

A half dozen business schools were swamped by a wave of electronic
intrusions Wednesday morning, after a computer hacker posted
instructions on a BusinessWeek Online message board. Harvard is the
second school to say definitively that it will deny the applications
of proven hackers. The first was Carnegie Mellon's Tepper School of
Business, where only one admission file was targeted.

 ...

http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2005/03/08/harvard_rejects_119_accused_of_hacking_1110274403/


Harvard applicants breached security
Tried via computer to learn status
By Hiawatha Bray and Robert Weisman, Globe Staff  |  March 4, 2005
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2005/03/04/harvard_applicants_breached_security/

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

Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2005 18:54:13 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: On EBay, E-Mail Phishers Find a Well-Stocked Pond


By IAN AUSTEN

Donald Jay Alofs got a call last fall at home asking if he had
recently bought several thousand dollars worth of electronics. Mr.
Alofs had not, and he had a good reason for not being on a spending
spree: he was in the hospital at the time.

Things got worse for Mr. Alofs, a coin collector and dealer who buys
and sells on eBay. His inbox was soon filled with e-mail messages from
irate buyers: someone had used his eBay account to sell about $780,000
worth of coins -- about five times the online business Mr.  Alofs had
done over several years -- and many of the coins offered for sale never
existed.

Adding insult to injury, fees for hosting photos for the fraudulent
auctions had been financed with $300 from Mr. Alofs's account with
PayPal, eBay's online payment service.

The source of the trouble, he believes, was that his eBay and PayPal
accounts were hijacked through what is known as phishing, a type of
online fraud that collects victims' account passwords and other
information, after he responded to an e-mail that appeared to come
from a legitimate business.


http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/07/technology/07ebay.html?ex=1267851600&en=961346a7f16ccb24&ei=5090

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

Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2005 21:45:50 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Cablevision's Voom Gets a Reprieve


By SETH SUTEL AP Business Writer

NEW YORK (AP) -- Cablevision Systems Corp., a New York-area cable
television provider, has reached a deal with its own chairman to keep
a satellite TV venture running through the end of the month while he
continues trying to assemble a deal that would keep the business
afloat.

The announcement late Tuesday signaled a cease-fire in a bitter family
feud that has rocked the country's sixth-largest cable
company. Cablevision CEO James Dolan had earlier sided with other
board members against his father Charles, the company's chairman and
founder, in voting to shut down the startup satellite venture, called
Voom.

      - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=47514074

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

Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2005 22:13:23 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Credit Information Stolen From DSW Stores


COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) -- Credit card information from customers of more
than 100 DSW Shoe Warehouse stores was stolen from a company
computer's database over the last three months, a lawyer for the
national chain said Tuesday.

The company discovered the theft of credit card and personal shopping
information on Friday and reported it to federal authorities, said
Julie Davis, general counsel for the chain's parent, Retail Ventures
Inc. The Secret Service is investigating, she said.

DSW was alerted by a credit card company that noticed suspicious
activity, she said.

Customers should check their credit card statements and report any
irregularities, Davis said. She did not know how many customers might
be affected.

      - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=47512557

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

Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2005 23:12:14 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: New Approaches to Television Archiving


by Jeff Ubois
http://firstmonday.org/issues/issue10_3/ubois/

Abstract

Worldwide, more than 30 million hours of unique television programming
are broadcast every year, yet only a tiny fraction of it is preserved
for future reference, and only a fraction of that preserved footage is
publicly accessible. Most television broadcasts are simply lost
forever, though television archivists have been working to preserve
selected programs for fifty years. Recent reductions in the cost of
storage of digital video could allow preservation of this portion of
our culture for a small fraction of the worldwide library budget, and
improvements in the distribution of online video could enable much
greater collaboration between archival institutions.


Contents

Non-commercial broadcasters, educational institutions, and libraries
For-profit organizations with television archives
Governmental institutions
Fans and amateurs
Collaborative possibilities
Cataloging
Technical standards and low-cost approaches to preservation and access
Legal strategies
Building a social consensus about television archiving

http://firstmonday.org/issues/issue10_3/ubois/

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

From: ben.smans@excite.com (Ben)
Subject: Vari, Varo and Varc -parameters for Ericsson MD110 BC9
Date: 8 Mar 2005 15:25:59 -0800


Does anyone can provide me the VARI, VARO and VARC parameters for
analog routes (TL11/TL39) in BC90C for Ericsson MD110?  If possible,
i'd like the options for the digits. Thanks in advance.

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

From: Japple <spam_me_to_hell@yahoo.com>
Subject: Dead Phone at New House, Short Circuits Say SBC!
Date: 8 Mar 2005 23:34:49 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


Hello, 

I just moved to a new house and I tried getting the phone line set up,
and no dialtone. So SBC sent someone out and they said that of the
four jacks in the house, three were shorted out ... it's an older
house and he couldn't figure out where the short was. (except at $55
per 20 minutes)

The three lines ran into the crawl space, and I don't know how they
were spliced. He was able to get one line working, but the other three
are dead.  Now, I'm stuck, either trying to figure out where the
shorts are or rewiring the other three jacks ...

I just don't understand how three lines were shorted when the previous
owners just moved out. Because they did previously have service!
What's the best way to figure out where the short is?

Any ideas?

If I do rewire the other jacks, and run new cable, the SBC guy
recommended running all new wires, one wire per jack to get the best
connection ... what do you think about this? And how do I connect four
wires to the phone box? connect them each directly, or splice them
right to the main two wires that are already connected?

Thanks.

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

From: LB@notmine.com
Subject: Re: Ohio Law Would Require Auction License for eBay Sellers
Date: Tue, 08 Mar 2005 19:40:20 -0500
Organization: Optimum Online


Lisa Minter wrote:

> CNN, via Yahoo News on Tuesday reports that the State of Ohio has
> become very unfriendly toward online sellers using E-Bay.
> According to CNN-Money, State of Ohio now requires an auction license
> of people who want to sell on E-Bay, as well as a one-year training
> class required of sellers _and_ a fifty thousand dollar security
> bond. The auction license costs two hundred dollars. If you fail to
> do these things, they have some jail time waiting for you. Their
> excuse is they want to 'cut back on internet fraud using E-Bay'.

> http://money.cnn.com/2005/03/07/technology/ohio_ebay/index.htm

For those that care there is large discussion of this in the group
alt.marketing.online.ebay

LB

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

From: Tony P. <kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net>
Subject: Re: Ohio Law Would Require Auction License for eBay Sellers
Organization: ATCC
Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2005 20:47:31 -0500


In article <telecom24.101.4@telecom-digest.org>, lisa_minter2001
@yahoo.com says:

> CNN, via Yahoo News on Tuesday reports that the State of Ohio has
> become very unfriendly toward online sellers using E-Bay.
> According to CNN-Money, State of Ohio now requires an auction license
> of people who want to sell on E-Bay, as well as a one-year training
> class required of sellers _and_ a fifty thousand dollar security 
> bond. The auction license costs two hundred dollars. If you fail to
> do these things, they have some jail time waiting for you. Their
> excuse is they want to 'cut back on internet fraud using E-Bay'.

> http://money.cnn.com/2005/03/07/technology/ohio_ebay/index.htm

Tax revenue. That's what every state is about. 

On a related note -- a couple years ago I get notice from the state of
RI that I never filed my 1990 taxes and owe them $1,300 between fines,
etc.  So the past few years they snatched my refunds.

This year I decided I want receipts from this point forward, and I'll
keep my tax records for more than three years so I can prove I filed.
Turns out the RI Division of Taxation won't give a receipt. I got the
woman to stamp my copy with their "RECEIVED - RI DIV TAX" verbiage
with the date and all.

Hopefully the state will lose one more of my returns -- then I can
bring the receipted version to the news hounds and watch as the sparks
fly.

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

Subject: Re: Richard Clarke: Real ID's, Real Dangers (NY Times)
From: tom.horsley@att.net (Thomas A. Horsley)
Organization: AT&T Worldnet
Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2005 01:10:09 GMT


Here's a thought: Combine two hot button issues into one -- if they
are gonna force us to have national ID cards, then they should also
force all the ChoicePoint and Eqifaxes of the world to only release
information when the person they are releasing it to has verified
proof of our consent via our smart cards.

>>==>> The *Best* political site <URL:http://www.vote-smart.org/> >>==+
      email: Tom.Horsley@worldnet.att.net icbm: Delray Beach, FL      |
<URL:http://home.att.net/~Tom.Horsley> Free Software and Politics <<==+

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

From: Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net>
Subject: Re: Richard Clarke: Real ID's, Real Dangers (NY Times)
Date: Tue, 08 Mar 2005 18:33:09 -0800
Organization: Glorb Internet Services, http://www.glorb.com


Marcus Didius Falco wrote:

> Have you ever wondered what good it does when they look at your
> driver's license at the airport? Let me assure you, as a former
> bureaucrat partly responsible for the 1996 decision to create a
> photo-ID requirement, it no longer does any good whatsoever. The ID
> check is not done by federal officers but by the same kind of
> minimum-wage rent-a-cops who were doing the inspection of carry-on
> luggage before 9/11.

And that's why the extra security measures being taken by the Feds in
many cases are stupid. The airports have needed real security
*forever*, but even after 9/11, we don't have it because the Feds were
half-assed about it. I personally feel that the current measures do
little to actually enhance security. But hey, they make good window
dressing.

> hijackers obtained real driver's licenses using false documents. The
> Real ID bill has, however, provoked negative reaction from those who
> think it has little to do with terrorism and a lot to do with making
> life difficult for illegal immigrants. 

Well, I'd sure hope that we'd make life difficult for illegal
immigrants. I wonder how many of the idiots complaining live where I
live (Southern California). I don't want them here. They leech off the
system.

I'm not against people taking the time to move here and become legal,
naturalized citizens ... people doing it the *right* way. Just people
trying to take shortcuts.

Anyone remember the drive (pardon the pun) to give illegals driver
licenses?


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: Tony P. <kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net>
Subject: Re: DoJ: VoIP Providers Avoiding CALEA Mandate
Organization: ATCC
Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2005 17:24:43 -0500


In article <telecom23.427.7@telecom-digest.org>, Jack Decker <VOIP
News> says:

> http://www.americasnetwork.com/americasnetwork/article/articleDetail.jsp?id=121788

> Source: Warren Publishing, Inc.

> COMMUNICATIONS DAILY via NewsEdge Corporation : FBI and Justice
> Dept. officials told the House Telecom Subcommittee Wed. that there
> have been difficulties establishing wiretaps through some VoIP
> carriers. While members emphasized the importance of law enforcement
> having access to VoIP communications, some had questions about DoJ's
> and FBI's problems with access and if updates to the Communications
> Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA) were needed. While the DoJ
> and FBI said they were trying to "work with" VoIP providers, they also
> said many products were introduced without thought to CALEA, though
> they declined to provide any specifics.

> Some members wanted more information about the problems FBI and DoJ
> officials face from VoIP providers when trying to obtain a
> wiretap. Laura Parsky, DoJ deputy asst. attorney general, said the
> information about specific problems was too sensitive. "We don't want
> terrorists migrating to these networks," she said. Marcus Thomas, FBI
> deputy asst. director, said it didn't appear to be "disingenuous effort"
> that prevented law enforcement access to networks. Rather, he said,
> many have deployed networks without giving much thought to law
> enforcement access. Thomas said CALEA was supposed to create an
> atmosphere where innovators factored CALEA standards into its
> development, but that atmosphere never developed. Rep. Buyer (R-Ind.)
> told law enforcement witnesses that they should do a better job of
> articulating their concerns, since they appeared to be rather
> vague. Parsky said more information could be given in a classified
> forum.

I'm pretty sure that most VoIP providers encrypt from the terminal
adapter back to the server. But everything is based on IP aware
telephone switches so it isn't a problem to tap at the switch.

It's because law enforcement by and large is ignorant when it comes to 
technology. 

Even the FBI, the leading agency in the U.S. trips over it's own feet 
when it comes to information technology. 

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

From: Tony P. <kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net>
Subject: Re: Best Phone to Use For Radio Telephone Interviews?
Organization: ATCC
Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2005 17:28:09 -0500


In article <telecom23.430.10@telecom-digest.org>, kludge@panix.com 
says:

> JayKay <jkarevoll@yahoo.com> wrote:

>> I get called fairly often by radio stations for commentary. My current
>> phone, AT&T 2-line 962, apparently doesn't cut it and I often find
>> myself calling the studios back from the fax phone (a little better)
>> or (after hooking it up) from a 25-year old rotary phone for call
>> clarity (even better).

>> But I'd like to get a new office phone that would be OK for these
>> talk/news people.

>> Any suggestions?

> As far as audio quality goes, I honestly have not used anything that
> sounds better than an old 500-set on the other end.  Your next step up
> is probably a hybrid and dedicated mike.

A WE or AE touch tone set will give the best overall quality. They
still make knock offs of each but just get on ebay and pick one up.

I've got a bid in on a yellow 2500 set as I speak. 

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

Date: 9 Mar 2005 00:03:17 -0000
From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
Subject: Re: Voip in Northern KY
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


> Does anyone know if there's any VOIP service in Northern KY/Cincinnati
> area?

Lingo, AT&T Callvantage, and Packet8 all have Cincinnati numbers.
Callvantage and Packet8 also have Covington numbers.

I dumped Vonage for Lingo last month, largely because Vonage's
reliability collapsed and their customer service disappeared.

See my web page on the topic at http://net.gurus.com/phone which has
some signup links with coupons if you want to sign up.

R's,

John

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

From: Wesrock@aol.com
Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2005 20:37:45 EST
Subject: Re: New Monopoly in Dept Stores; Federated and May to Merge


In a message dated Mon, 7 Mar 2005 22:59:42 -0500, Bob Goudreau
<BobGoudreau@withheld on request> writes:

> I think you missed my point.  They could have chosen to divest the
> entire regulated railroad business instead (in the way that AT&T chose
> to give up the local telco business in the early 1980s), leaving the
> now-separate rump company to concentrate exclusively on rail while the
> new successor company (which would have purchased the non-rail assets)
> chased the newer markets.  Instead, the execs chose to stay with the
> rump themselves.  They bet on the wrong pony.

This seems to ignore the reality that the railroads are thriving
businesses today.  Intercity bus services has been declining and many
cities are without any intercity bus service at all.  The motor
freight business more and more is turning to the railroads to carrying
their long-haul freight in trailers or containers.  J.B. Hunt, the
nation's largest trucking company, is one of the largest customers of
the railroads.  I believe UPS is the largest single customer of the
railroads.


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

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

From: Tony P. <kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net>
Subject: Re: Vonage Outage Last Thursday, was: Vonage
Organization: ATCC
Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2005 20:48:37 -0500


In article <telecom24.101.10@telecom-digest.org>, Tim@Backhome.org 
says:

> Thor Lancelot Simon wrote:

>> In article <telecom24.99.4@telecom-digest.org>, Danny Burstein

>> Unfortunately, the actualy duration of the problem was several hours;
>> Vonage is, quite simply, lying.  And the problem recurred on two
>> successive days.

> No doubt about it.  It caused major problems for me.

>> 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.

> What this proves is that Vonage is simply not a viable replacement for
> wireline service.  I've been a Vonage user from the beginning,
> suffering through echos and quality issues for the first several
> months.

> I figured it was all worth it for the unlimited, inexpensive "out
> WATS."  But, now that SBC offers unlimited nation-wide toll for a
> competitive price, it makes me think about using only my wireline
> (which I never got rid of).  The only advantage Vonage offers today
> are virtual numbers.

I'd like to know what part of $88 you consider reasonable. That's what 
Verizon was getting from me for unlimited national/local. 

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

From: Ed Clarke <clarke@cilia.org>
Subject: Re: Hackers Deface Christian Family Group Web Site
Date: 9 Mar 2005 02:11:40 GMT
Organization: Ciliophora Associates, Inc.
Reply-To: clarke@cilia.org


On 2005-03-08, Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com> wrote:

> http://www.wlbz2.com/newscenter/article.asp?id=20748

This is the second time it's happened. They claim that "thousands of
dollars worth of intellectual property" was destroyed. No backups?
After it happened before??

This sounds like the punch line of a joke -- "How'd it happen?  Well,
I stuck my hand under the press like this and ..."
 

This signature left blank.

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

From: Soren Rathje <soren%lolle.org@spam.me>
Subject: Re: Home PBX Info: Switching Between Landlines and VoIP
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2005 08:42:59 +0100
Organization: Organized... Who me?


Lee Sweet wrote:

[snip]

> Now, what I want to do is have all outbound LD calls go out on the
> Vonage line automatically.  Right now, I have a separate cordless
> phone for that line, but that's not the optimal answer!  :-) \

[snip]

> Lee Sweet
> Datatel, Inc.
> Manager of Telephony Services
>    and Information Security
> How higher education does business
> Voice: 703.968.4661
> Fax: 703.968.4625
> Cell: 703.932.9425
> lee@datatel.com
> www.datatel.com

The short answer is: Asterisk
(www.voip-info.org/tiki-index.php?page=Asterisk)

The long answer: ...

I use Asterisk with 1 Danish VoIP, 1 UK VoIP and 1 US VoIP provider as
well as 1 regular PSTN line. The dialprefix tells Asterisk which way
to go :) Incoming calls go either direct to an extension or into a ACD
where all phones ring. Unanswered calls go to VoiceMail. Conferences
can be hosted if family meetings are required.

Asterisk can do regular FXO/FXS using hardware from Digium (inventors
site), ISDN-BRI from various sources or T1/E1 equipment from various
sources.

Protocols are limited to OSP, Enum, Dundi, ADSI, SIP, H.323, MGCP,
SCCP (Cisco Call Manager), IAX. Other projects (there are many)
available for install are: Nortel native protocol support, FAX
send/receive and SS7.

The smallest system for Asterisk reported so far is an X-Box, I've
heard of people working on Sony PS/2 implementation and also builds
ment for install on LinkSys WBR's so basically anything bigger goes,
AMD, Intel or PowerPC running some form of Unix; Linux, BSD, OS X,
Solaris ... (pending hardware support)

Anyway, for my last homesystem, I downloaded the Asterisk@Home ISO,
made a CD, put it in the pc and powered up. The @home project will
format the disk, install CentOS-3 (stripped down RedHat Enterprise),
install Asterisk PLUS additional tools so in fact you will (almost)
never need to telnet to the box, you can do mostly everything from a
browser. I had it up and running in a usable state in a couple of
hours.

http://sourceforge.net/projects/asteriskathome/

Really good reading is here, especially the WiKi is a goldmine of
information!

www.asterisk.org
www.digium.com
www.voip-info.org/tiki-index.php?page=Asterisk

/Soren

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

From: Tony P. <kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net>
Subject: Re: "Broadcast Flag", was Re: My New DVR From Cable One
Organization: ATCC
Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2005 17:29:35 -0500


In article <telecom23.429.3@telecom-digest.org>, jkelly@newsguy.com 
says:

> On Mon, 13 Sep 2004 15:35:53 -0000, pv+usenet@pobox.com (Paul Vader)
> wrote:

>> Danny Burstein <dannyb@panix.com> writes:

>>> Nope. He was just given given advance warning. New recording equipment
>>> is supposed to recognize a "do not record" flag that gets sent
>>> over-the-air along with the signal. Periodically a couple of the

>> Except that it isn't sent over the air, and the flag is part of their
>> licensing agreement with macrovision. Cable one was just passing along
>> FUD. 

> Not FUD.  The flag is sent over the air, and it has nothing to do with
> Macrovision.  

> Unfortunately, Hollywood pulled a hold-up. It threatened to derail the
> DTV transition by withholding "high-value content" from over-the-air
> DTV, unless the FCC imposed "content protection" (aka DRM) on all
> future televisions and related devices. The idea was that content
> owners would implant a "broadcast flag" into DTV programming.  When
> devices detect the flag, they have to "protect" (i.e., lock up in DRM
> jail) the programming.

> Sadly, the FCC bought it. Thanks to an FCC ruling, as of July 2005,
> it will be illegal to manufacture or import DTV tuners unless they
> include DRM technologies mandated by the FCC.

> See more at: http://www.eff.org/IP/Video/HDTV/ 

But if you read the FCC documents about it, they make it clear that
anyone with a little technical knowledge can easily defeat the DRM
functions.

The courts are going to slap down on the FCC anyhow. First they pushed
the V-Chip, now the DRM. I can see the FCC devolving into what it
should have been in the first place, a bandwidth manager.

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

From: Tony P. <kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net>
Subject: Re: A Great Phone, Tied Down
Organization: ATCC
Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2005 17:32:41 -0500


In article <telecom23.432.7@telecom-digest.org>, monty@roscom.com 
says...

> Ten O'Clock Tech
> by Arik Hesseldahl 

> But a week ago I swerved in new direction and dropped about $300 for
> an upgrade to the v710, which appears to be Motorola's highest-end
> phone that works on Code Division Multiple Access (CDMA) networks,
> namely that of Verizon Wireless, a joint venture of Verizon and
> Vodafone.

> But then I learned that the phone can't do this via Bluetooth. I've
> been syncing my PalmOne Tungsten T handheld with my Mac for about year
> now using Bluetooth without difficulty. Exactly why this phone
> couldn't do the same thing seemed ridiculous.

> It turns out Verizon has had certain features in the phone disabled.
> Full Bluetooth support is one of them. This rules out the phone
> connecting to any Bluetooth devices other than a headset, such as a
> wireless keyboard or a printer or indeed another Bluetooth-enabled
> phone.

> Another missing feature is the ability to move a photo from the phone
> directly to a computer via Bluetooth or a data cable. When you take
> pictures on this phone, the only way to save them on a computer is to
> send them by e-mail over Verizon's wireless network, for which there
> is a charge.

> The network works just fine and sending pictures in this way is more
> or less flawless. But it's irritating to know that when you just want
> to take a picture and save it for yourself, you can't just move it
> directly from the phone to a computer. And Verizon operates a Web
> service called Pix Place, where you can send pictures and then
> download them to a PC. But why add an extra step to a process that
> should be simple?

> A Verizon Wireless spokeswoman tells me this is standard operating 
> procedure across its camera phone lines. Verizon's product is not the 
> phone, she says, but rather the network itself. Indeed.

> http://www.forbes.com/personaltech/2004/09/13/cx_ah_0913tentech.html

You answered your own question. It's because they charge to email
it. If you could just suck the pictures off the unit with Bluetooth it
would erode their revenue stream.

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

From: Tony P. <kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net>
Subject: Re: Any Old Mechanical Systems Still in Use in the US?
Organization: ATCC
Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2005 17:39:44 -0500


In article <telecom23.454.9@telecom-digest.org>, johnl@iecc.com says...

>> The single 5E in town, where there was once two xbars, handles eight
>> LEC exchanges and at least three CLEC exchanges.

> Really?  I've heard of Bell handling switching for tiny independents
> (VZ North for Naushon Island, for example), but I've never heard of a
> LEC selling switching to a CLEC.

Space! ESS and DMS systems also sit on a smaller footprint than SxS
and X-bar systems.

Got to maximize revenue somehow. 

BTW, the DMS-100 in my city handles 51 exchanges. In addition there
are several other switches in the building.

<http://www.telcodata.us/switchinfo.html?clli=PRVDRIWADS2&results=1>

I note the map feature is interesting. There's a whole cluster of
switches in Providence.

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

From: Christopher Sabine <jsabine@cinci.rr.com>
Subject: Re: VOIP in Northern KY
Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2005 18:04:50 -0500


Kevin,

You can get another number from Vonage in Cincinnati.  It just means
that Vonage doesn't have any local numbers in Cincinnati.  I use
Vonage is a secondary line and have numbers in Columbus and Salt Lake
City that I use.

Chris

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

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 #102
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Mar  9 15:12:05 2005
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j29KC4R23239;
	Wed, 9 Mar 2005 15:12:05 -0500 (EST)
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2005 15:12:05 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200503092012.j29KC4R23239@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 #103

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 9 Mar 2005 15:10:00 EST    Volume 24 : Issue 103

Inside This Issue:                            Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    FCC Chief Warns VoIP-Backers of Rock Star Syndrome (Jack Decker)
    Powell: VoIP Already Changing Perceptions (Jack Decker)
    Google Window-Shops for VoIP (Jack Decker)
    "Take Action," Vonage CEO Citron Tells VoIP Industry (Jack Decker)
    VOIP / NonVOIP Small Questions (gallwapa@gmail.com)
    Cell Phone Radiation Dangers (Dean)
    How to Insert Newline Into 3com RAS 1500 Message? (Tree by the river)
    Walkie Talkie (Jason)
    AOL's Got VoIP (Telecom dailyLead from USTA)
    Re: Dead Phone at New House, Short Circuits Say SBC! (HorneTD)
    Re: Dead Phone at New House, Short Circuits Say SBC! (Lisa Hancock)
    Re: Dead Phone at New House, Short Circuits Say SBC! (Allen McIntosh)
    Re: Harvard Applicants Breached Security/Applicants' Behavior (jtaylor)
    Re: New Monopoly in Dept Stores; Federated and May to Merge (B Goudreau)
    FCC Says: Consumers Can Put an End to Port Blocking (Jack Decker)    
    Re: Vonage Outage Last Thursday (Randy Hayes)
    Re: Vonage Outage Last Thursday, was: Vonage (Tim@Backhome.org)
    Re: Vonage Outage Last Thursday, was: Vonage (John Levine)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

From: Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@withheld at request>
Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2005 13:19:01 -0500
Subject: FCC Chief Warns VoIP-Backers of Rock Star Syndrome


http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20050308/wr_nm/telecoms_fcc_voiceoverinternet_dc_3

Tue Mar 8, 5:55 PM ET
	
By Eric Auchard

SAN JOSE, Calif. (Reuters) - The outgoing chief regulator of
U.S. communications markets on Tuesday said phone calls via the
Internet have become a fact of life but warned the emerging industry
not to become cocky in its success.

In his last public speech as chairman of the Federal Communications
Commission (news - web sites), Michael Powell told Internet-based
phone service providers that the industry has been secured against
efforts to use regulation to defeat it.

"There is something about the voice over 'net industry that has really
taken root, that won't be uprooted," Powell told an audience at the
Voice on the Net (VON) conference.

Powell made protecting Internet services from traditional phone
regulations a touchstone issue in his eight-year stint at the FCC
(news - web sites), first as a Republican member of the commission,
and for the last four years, as chairman. But his legacy remains in
question if opponents of the free-wheeling Internet industry succeed
in bringing it under the existing regulatory regime.

"The future is so bright for voice over the net," Powell said, then
warned: "But you won't be a rock star forever."

He said that the industry's growing success made it vulnerable to
critics who will increasingly hold it responsible for service outages,
security breakdowns or other disruptions.

Powell compared the position of Internet communications to a decade
ago when the mobile phone industry became a mainstream communications
technology. Flush with success, the wireless industry ignored customer
complaints about network reliability and invited increased government
regulation, he said.

Full story at:

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20050308/wr_nm/telecoms_fcc_voiceoverinternet_dc_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 <jack-yahoogroups@withheld on request>
Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2005 13:04:05 -0500
Subject: Powell: VoIP Already Changing Perceptions


http://www.newtelephony.com/news/53h8142739.html

By Charlotte Wolter
Posted on: 03/08/2005

In his final public speech as chairman of the FCC, Michael Powell told
an appreciative audience at the Voice on the Net (VON) conference in
San Jose, Calif., the industry has done much already to change how the
world, and regulators, view VoIP.

He said this will lead to less regulation and more protection for
VoIP, citing the FCC's recent decision against Madison River
Telephone Company LLC's blockage of VoIP as an example.

"But we're not naive," he added. "We know that danger still lurks in
the weeds. We recognize that the owners of broadband distribution
platforms might have motive and incentive to play with your bits to
filter them or block them."

Full story at:
http://www.newtelephony.com/news/53h8142739.html

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

From: Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@withheld on request>
Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2005 12:29:34 -0500
Subject: Google Window-Shops for VoIP


http://news.com.com/Google+window-shops+for+VoIP/2100-7352_3-5605025.html

By Ben Charny
Staff Writer, CNET News.com

SAN JOSE, Calif.--A team of Google honchos met this week with several
Net telephone service providers, sources familiar with the talks told
CNET News.com, renewing speculation that the search giant may be
exploring a move into the fast-growing market.

"They were fairly aggressive about getting our opinions," said one
Internet phone executive who facilitated several meetings between
Google and Net phone interests here at Spring 2005 Voice on the
Net. The executive requested anonymity because of the sensitive nature
of the meetings.

[.....]

The meetings offer further confirmation of the view that as the Net
phone business starts to take off, search giants and Web portals such
as Yahoo may not be far behind. Among the announcements at VON,
America Online said it plans to unveil a VoIP service in the next
month, heightening speculation that Yahoo, Microsoft's MSN and Google
 -- its biggest Web rivals -- may be exploring similar moves.

Full story at:
http://news.com.com/Google+window-shops+for+VoIP/2100-7352_3-5605025.html

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

From: Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@withheld on request>
Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2005 13:05:50 -0500
Subject: "Take Action," Vonage CEO Citron Tells VoIP Industry


http://www.newtelephony.com/news/53h8142038.html

By Charlotte Wolter
Posted on: 03/08/2005

Vonage CEO Jeffrey Citron today urged the VoIP community to get
involved politically by contacting Congress and urging legislation
that is favorable to VoIP.

Citron says Vonage is looking to expand its service to new territories
in the coming year, referring specifically to Mexico City and London,
although he said the company also is looking at Europe and Asia as
potential areas of growth.

Speaking at the Voice on the Net (VON) conference in San Jose, Calif.,
Citron told a large audience during the keynote address, "All of
you should write your Congresspersons and let them know that you want
a network bill of rights to protect your right to use communications
like Vonage (Holdings Corp.)."

Citron was referring to the broadband bill of rights articulated by
departing FCC Chairman Michael Powell. Powell has advocated that
consumers have the right to connect any device to the network that
does not harm the network; be able to download and run any application
that is legal and paid for; and be able to access any legal content;
and get information about the features of any service.

Full story at:
http://www.newtelephony.com/news/53h8142038.html

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

From: gallwapa@gmail.com
Subject: VOIP / NonVOIP Small questions
Date: 9 Mar 2005 10:15:55 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


Excuse my lack of knowledge, but telecom isn't my specialty.  We're
currently investigating claims with regard to G.729A and G.729B and
VoIP.  As far as I can tell, these codecs do not affect VoIP
conversations over our Data WAN?

We currently have 40+ sites connected by T1s to carry data across
those networks.  The T1s are provided by QWEST, and again excuse my
lack of knowledge please.  Thanks!

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

From: Dean <cjmebox-telecomdigest@yahoo.com>
Subject: Cell Phone Radiation Dangers
Date: 9 Mar 2005 08:56:41 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


A while back some on this list engaged in a lively debate about cell
phone radiation risks. This article may have some information of
interest to those of you who think this issue isn't dead yet.

The cell phone industry: Big Tobacco 2.0?

By Molly Wood, senior editor, CNET.com
Tuesday, March 8, 2005

http://www.cnet.com/4520-6033-5741203-1.html

Regards,

Dean

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

Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2005 16:56:34 GMT
From: tlode@nyx.net (the tree by the river)
Subject: How to Insert Newline Into 3com RAS 1500 Message?
Organization: Nyx Net, Free Internet access (www.nyx.net)


I'm setting up a 3com RAS 1500 remore access server and need to
configure a custom initial welcome message and login prompt.  There
are special codes like $date, $hostname, $port, etc., for inserting
those values into the message text, but I can't find any mention of
how to insert a newline, even one at the end of the message.  The
result is that the welcome message and prompt all run together.

The factory default message does include a newline at the end, so it
is obviously possible for the system to have one stored as part of the
field, but I can't figure out how to get it in there.

Anyone know the secret?  Seems like you'd always want to do this, and
surely I can't be the first person ever to set custom welcome messages
and prompts.


 soc.singles FAQ       [ Nyx Net, free ISP  ]   Misc.Fitness.Weights page
www.trygve.com/ssfaq.html  [ http://www.nyx.net ]    www.trygve.com/mfw.html
 the Furbeowulf Project - build your own supercomputer for less than $79.95:
               http://www.trygve.com/furbeowulf.html

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

From: jason <cheanglong@gmail.com>
Subject: Walkie Talkie
Date: 9 Mar 2005 00:38:56 -0800


Hello all,

I need to know more about walkie talkie and how the frequency range
work.  Let'say a walkie talkie with frequency range work from 2400 to
2500 Mhz, while the IF is 5 Mhz.

So how will the channels be allocated for transmitting and receiving
if it is a single duplex type?

Can anyone enlighthen please.
Any helpful link or docment is appreciated.

Thanks a lot in advance. 


Regard and thanks. 

Jason

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

Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2005 12:51:00 EST
From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA <usta@dailylead.com>
Subject: AOL's Got VoIP


Telecom dailyLead from USTA
March 9, 2005
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=19934&l=2017006


TODAY'S HEADLINES

NEWS OF THE DAY
* AOL's got VoIP
BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH
* Alltel enters deal with EchoStar
* Comcast, Motorola forge alliance, extend set-top deal
* Fiber market gets back on its feet
* Dolan gets more time to save Voom
* Microsoft unveils communication convergence software
* Analysis: MCI must weigh long-term, short-term goals
USTA SPOTLIGHT 
* IP Telephony Principles and Applications
EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES
* Samsung takes wraps of seven-megapixel phone
REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE
* Powell touts VoIP in VON speech
* Chicago mulls Wi-Fi network

Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others.
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=19934&l=2017006

Legal and Privacy information at http://www.dailylead.com/about/privacy_legal.jsp

SmartBrief, Inc.
1100 H ST NW, Suite 1000
Washington, DC 20005

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

From: HorneTD <hornetd@mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Dead Phone at New House, Short Circuits Say SBC!
Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2005 17:21:02 GMT
Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net


Japple wrote:

> Hello, 

> I just moved to a new house and I tried getting the phone line set up,
> and no dialtone. So SBC sent someone out and they said that of the
> four jacks in the house, three were shorted out ... it's an older
> house and he couldn't figure out where the short was. (except at $55
> per 20 minutes)

> The three lines ran into the crawl space, and I don't know how they
> were spliced. He was able to get one line working, but the other three
> are dead.  Now, I'm stuck, either trying to figure out where the
> shorts are or rewiring the other three jacks ...

> I just don't understand how three lines were shorted when the previous
> owners just moved out. Because they did previously have service!
> What's the best way to figure out where the short is?

> Any ideas?

> If I do rewire the other jacks, and run new cable, the SBC guy
> recommended running all new wires, one wire per jack to get the best
> connection ... what do you think about this? And how do I connect four
> wires to the phone box? connect them each directly, or splice them
> right to the main two wires that are already connected?

> Thanks.

There is no easy way to find these shorts without special equipment.
You will have to trace the lines physically.  The most likely culprit
is a common point on the wires that serve all three jacks.  If the
three jacks are connected from one to the other, called daisy chained,
or they are served by a common splice a single fault at any jack will
down them all.

The advice to run new lines is sound.  I would suggest that you use a
66M block to do your splicing.  The reason for that is that you use
readily removable bridging clips to connect each jacks line to your
network interface device.  Removing the bridging clips isolates the
associated jack for trouble shooting and repair.

Do you have a place to mount your telephone splicing block that will
be out of the way and yet reasonably convenient?  There are weather
proof housings available that are designed to protect 66 blocks.  One
of these can be mounted on the outside of the home adjacent to your
Network Interface Device (NID) if you do not have a convenient place
indoors.  http://www3.sympatico.ca/bparker/index1.html#03 is a pretty
good sight for telephone basics.

http://www.homephonewiring.com/ is an excellent sight for techniques and 
tools.  It also has supplies available for purchase.

http://www.siemon.com/int/installation_instructions/pdf/S66_Field-Terminated_M_Series_Blocks.pdf is a manufacturers site on wiring 66 blocks.


Tom H

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

From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Minter)
Subject: Re: Dead Phone at New House, Short Circuits Say SBC!
Date: 9 Mar 2005 07:18:27 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


Japple wrote:

> I just moved to a new house and I tried` getting the phone line set up, 
> and no dialtone. So SBC sent someone out and they said that of the 
> four jacks in the house, three were shorted out ... it's an older 
> house and he couldn't figure out where the short was. (except at $55 
> per 20 minutes)

That's a common problem.  Either it's a full short, or worse, an
intermittent break or leakage which degrades voice quality and hurts
dial up computer use.

I'm not an expert, but I'd say wiring technique is more critical today
than in the past for plain voice service because data transmission is
much more sensitive to things like crosstalk or interwire capacitance
or plain old static.  Perhaps another reader could offer suggestions.

My recommendation is to abandon all old phone wiring and rewire the
house using modern standards that will give the best quality for high
speed data transmission and multi-line phone service.  Others can give
tips on the best way to do this.

When we needed new wiring, we had the phone company do it for us.  Not
cheap but reliable.  I presume a qualified electrician familiar with
modern phone requirements could do so as well, possibly cheaper.

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

From: Allen McIntosh <nospam@mouse-potato.com>
Reply-To: nospam@mouse-potato.com
Subject: Re: Dead Phone at New House, Short Circuits Say SBC!
Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2005 08:10:46 -0500
Organization: Optimum Online


> I just don't understand how three lines were shorted when the previous
> owners just moved out. Because they did previously have service!
> What's the best way to figure out where the short is?

It is possible that the previous owners shorted out the jacks so you
couldn't make phone calls the day the house traded hands (when the
calls might have been on their account).  I happened to me once -- had
to replace several phone jacks.  In your shoes, I'd start by looking
at all the phone jacks, and disconnecting any that didn't look right
(after writing down how they were wired, of course).

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

From: jtaylor <jtaylor@deletethis.hfx.andara.com>
Subject: Re: Harvard Applicants Breached Security / Applicants' Behavior
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2005 08:55:45 -0400
Organization: MCI Canada News Reader Service


Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com> wrote in message
news:telecom24.102.1@telecom-digest.org:

> Harvard rejects 119 accused of hacking
> Applicants' behavior 'unethical at best'

> By Robert Weisman, Globe Staff  |  March 8, 2005

> Harvard Business School will reject the 119 applicants who hacked into
> the school's admissions site last week, the school's dean, Kim
> B. Clark, said yesterday.

Now, as soon as this item became news, I wondered if they would do this.

Which brings up a possible scenario -- hire a hacker to find out the status
of <some large number of applicants> EXCEPT yourself ...

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

From: Bob Goudreau <BobGoudreau@withheld on request>
Subject: Re: New Monopoly in Dept Stores; Federated and May to Merge 
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2005 08:37:28 -0500


Wes Leatherock wrote:

> This seems to ignore the reality that the railroads are thriving
> businesses today.  Intercity bus services has been declining and many
> cities are without any intercity bus service at all.  The motor
> freight business more and more is turning to the railroads to carrying
> their long-haul freight in trailers or containers.  J.B. Hunt, the
> nation's largest trucking company, is one of the largest customers of
> the railroads.  I believe UPS is the largest single customer of the
> railroads.

The few railroad companies that *survived* are currently doing well,
though their business is now all freight and no passengers.  (Not
counting Amtrak here, since it is *not* doing well financially and is
not exactly a traditional corporation either.)

However, most of the railroads that were around 50-60 years ago could
not survive the brutal consolidation of the industry; they were
liquidated or sold to competitors.  Today's railroads collectively are
a much smaller slice of the overall economy than were their prewar
predecessors.

It looks like the telcos are going through the same sort of shakeout
right now themselves.  Eventually, there won't be a "telephone
business" any more; there will just be a "communications business"
within which voice will be one application (albeit still a popular
one).  It's already started with the landline telcos as customers like
me drop their RBOC service and choose to funnel their voice traffic
over their broadband connection.  In a few years it's going to spread
even to mobile telephony as technology advances and the wireless
internet becomes ubiquitous.

Bob Goudreau
Cary, NC

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I am wondering about a few passenger
trains I have ridden in the past and wonder what they are doing now,
if they are even still in business: Around 1970 or so, I went with a
friend of mine from Chicago on the City of New Orleans to the Mardis
Gras in New Orleans. We left about 4 in the afternoon and got into New
Orleans about 9 the next morning. It was a wonderful train ride. Then,
about 1950 or so I rode the train by myself (or actually with my
cousin Ken, who is four years younger than myself). We took the Santa
Fe train between Independence and Chicago. I do not remember much
about that trip except that my grandmother fixed a *huge* sack of food
for Ken and I to eat on the trip, and my grandfather gave each of us a
silver dollar coin to use for our 'expenses' on the way. We landed at
the Dearborn Station in Chicago about a day later, where my parents
picked us up. I just barely remember three years before that, in 1947,
when my mother and grandmother took me on the same Santa Fe train
between Coffeyille and Chicago to meet my father and grandfather at
Dearborn Station. They had already come to Chicago area to live, and
we had gone there to live with them. I don't know why I just now
remembered those train trips. I do remember at the time they were all
quite elegant trains, and I do remember that when my younger cousin
and I rode the train back to Chicago, the conductor gave us quite a
tour through the entire train, including the area where newspapers and
mail were conveyed. The train went very slow at one point and almost
came to a halt; the conductor took a huge stack of newspapers which
were tied up and handed them off the train to a man waiting next to
the track with a car who grabbed up all the papers, put them in the
car and drove away, then the train took up speed and off we went
again. I doubt any of those things even exist any longer.  PAT]

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

From: Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@withheld on request>
Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2005 13:23:04 -0500
Subject: FCC: Consumers Can Put End to VOIP Port Blocking


http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1773983,00.asp?kc=EWRSS03119TX1K0000594

By Mark Hachman, ExtremeTech

SAN JOSE, Calif. Members of the Federal Communications Commission
claim market forces, not regulation, will likely prevent a repeat of
an ISP blocking voice-over-IP traffic.

In a "town hall" meeting Monday night at the VON Conference & Expo
here, Jeffrey Carlisle, chief of the FCC's Wireline Competition
Bureau, and Robert Pepper, chief of policy development at the FCC,
answered audience questions on regulatory issues. A key topic was the
recent blocking of VOIP traffic by Madison River Communications, a
wholly owned subsidiary of Madison River Telephone Company LLC, and
whether that scenario could repeat itself with other ISPs.

PointerVOIP port blocking draws congressional interest. Click here to
read more.

According to Carlisle, consumers are becoming more savvy about their
broadband providers and will notice if services such as those provided
by Vonage Holdings Corp. stop working. The industry is going through a
"frontier period," Carlisle said, where corporations could press the
limits of the law.

"Consumers will know if they're not able to get something," Carlisle
said. "If I see a Vonage box in the store, [bring it home], and I
can't get Vonage, I'm going to know about that." In that case,
consumers will simply choose another broadband provider that provides
the services that they're looking for, he said.

[COMMENT: Well, heck, yes, if I don't like what my current broadband
provider is doing I'll simply go down to the local broadband service
store and select another provider from among the multitude of choices
there.  Riiiiiight.  Sounds like some people at the FCC still need to
get a clue!]

Full story at:
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1773983,00.asp?kc=EWRSS03119TX1K0000594

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, 09 Mar 2005 13:02:35 -0600
From: Randal Hayes <randal.hayes@uni.edu>
Subject: Re: Vonage Outage Last Thursday


Whenever a communications technology outage is reported and the cause
is attributed to some problem with a software load or other
maintenance work performed *in the middle of a workday* I always ask
myself, "What were they thinking, performing this type of work during
a busy period?!?"
 
I do not know what the peak hours for Vonage are, but even with a
customer base that is currently more residential in nature, and,
acknowledging that a global environment complicates what a carrier's
busy-hours are (it may be 4:00 AM CST in the U.S., but it's primetime
for those in the U.S. calling Europe, etc.), one would have to believe
a Thursday afternoon would not be the wisest time to perform
non-emergency, but potentially intrusive work on the network!

Vonage, or even the VOIP environment are not unique here; for several
years some of the largest carriers have experienced outages during
some of their busiest periods due to scheduling non-emergency software
loads and upgrades during peak periods ... what idiocy!

Is common sense a thing of the past for some people, or is the belief
in performing quality work a thing of the past for some people..or
both?
 

Randy Hayes
University of Northern Iowa
randal.hayes@uni.edu

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

From: Tim@Backhome.org
Subject: Re: Vonage Outage Last Thursday, was: Vonage
Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2005 05:58:29 -0800
Organization: Cox Communications


Tony P. wrote:

> In article <telecom24.101.10@telecom-digest.org>, Tim@Backhome.org
> says:

>> Thor Lancelot Simon wrote:

>>> In article <telecom24.99.4@telecom-digest.org>, Danny Burstein

>>> Unfortunately, the actualy duration of the problem was several hours;
>>> Vonage is, quite simply, lying.  And the problem recurred on two
>>> successive days.

>>> No doubt about it.  It caused major problems for me.

>>> 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.

>> What this proves is that Vonage is simply not a viable replacement for
>> wireline service.  I've been a Vonage user from the beginning,
>> suffering through echos and quality issues for the first several
>> months.

>> I figured it was all worth it for the unlimited, inexpensive "out
>> WATS."  But, now that SBC offers unlimited nation-wide toll for a
>> competitive price, it makes me think about using only my wireline
>> (which I never got rid of).  The only advantage Vonage offers today
>> are virtual numbers.

> I'd like to know what part of $88 you consider reasonable. That's what
> Verizon was getting from me for unlimited national/local.

Well, compared to long-distance bills I had of $1,100 per month in the
mid-1970s, which would equate to $,4000 or $5,000 per month today, $88 seems
quite reasonable.

You are comparing Vonage's total cost with SBC's total cost.  I guess
if wireline, E911, commercial power protection, etc., is not worth
much to you then go with Vonage and the unpredictable outages.

I have a critical conference call later this morning.  I'll use my
Vonage, but my SBC phone is close at hand in the event the Vonage
connection zaps 45 minutes, or so, into the conference call.  That has
happened twice in the past two months.

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

Date: 9 Mar 2005 16:17:02 -0000
From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
Subject: Re: Vonage Outage Last Thursday, was: Vonage
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


> I'd like to know what part of $88 you consider reasonable. That's what 
> Verizon was getting from me for unlimited national/local. 

SBC now charges $49, same as Vonage, except that SBC thows in a phone
wire and offers E-911 as part of the deal.


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 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 #103
******************************


    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Mar 10 05:55:16 2005
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j2AAtGf29243;
	Thu, 10 Mar 2005 05:55:16 -0500 (EST)
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 05:55:16 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200503101055.j2AAtGf29243@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 #104

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 10 Mar 2005 05:55:00 EST    Volume 24 : Issue 104

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Canadian Security Co's Speak Out Against Anti-Circumvention (M Falco)
    "Hollywood Hacking Bill" Author Named Dem. Liaison (Marcus Didius Falco)
    Cell Phones Do Much More Than Make Calls (Monty Solomon)
    TiVo Patent Suit Advances on Federal Court Denial of Echostar (Solomon)
    Vonage Being Blocked -- Again (Jack Decker) 
    Phone Doesn't Disconnect (cyklone006@gmail.com)
    Shooting Victim Gets to Pay Phone (Carl Moore)
    Re: "Broadcast Flag", was Re: My New DVR From Cable One (Dan Lanciani)
    Re: Vonage Outage Last Thursday (DevilsPGD)
    Re: Vonage Outage Last Thursday (Brian Inglis)
    Re: Vonage Outage Last Thursday (Tim@Backhome.org)
    Re: Vonage Outage Last Thursday, was: Vonage (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: Wed, 09 Mar 2005 23:26:40 -0500
From: Marcus Didius Falco <falco_marcus_didius@yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: Canadian Security Co's Speak Out Against Anti-circumvention


  ------ Forwarded Message
  From: Michael Geist < >
  Date: Tue, 08 Mar 2005 17:30:17 -0500
  To: <dave farber. >
  Subject: Canadian Security Co's Speak Out Against Anti-circumvention
  Legislation
  
  Dave,

  A substantial group of Canada's security technology companies have sent a 
  public letter to the Industry and Heritage Ministers to express concern 
  about the potential for DMCA-like legislation in Canada.  Years of 
  discussions and no one bothered to ask these guys what they think.

  The public letter has been posted online at 
<http://www.cippic.ca/en/news/documents/Letter_to_Ministers_Emerson_and_Frulla_from_Security_Business_Community.pdf>

  A release and backgrounder are at
     http://www.cippic.ca/en/news/documents/Press_Release_-_Security_Businesses.pdf
  http://www.cippic.ca/en/news/documents/Backgrounders_of_Participants.pdf

  This might be a sign of Canada's technology community waking up to the 
  implications of copyright reforms that directly impact their businesses.

Best,

MG

March 8, 2005

BY COURIER

The Honourable David L. Emerson, P.C., M.P.
Minister of Industry
235, Queen Street, 11th Floor, East Tower
Ottawa, Ontario   K1A 0H5

The Honourable Liza Frulla, P.C., M.P.
Minister of Canadian Heritage and Status of Women
15 Eddy Street
Gatineau, Quebec  K1A 0M5

Dear Minister Emerson and Minister Frulla:

Re: Proposals to include Anti-Circumvention Rights in A Bill to Amend 
the Copyright Act

We write to you as leaders of Canada's security research business
community.  We understand that the Canadian government in the near
future will introduce legislation to amend the Copyright Act to
introduce rights to prohibit the circumvention of technological
protection measures, or "TPMs".  Any such amendment will have profound
negative consequences for security researchers and businesses that
commercialize such research.  The business community involved with
security research and related services has a great deal at stake in
this legislation, both economically and technologically.  Despite
these considerations, the government has yet to consult with us.  We
urge the government to take our concerns into account prior to
implementing any such amendment.

Legal protection for TPMs is the equivalent of making screw-drivers
illegal because they can be used to break and enter.  Good legislation
targets the illegal act, not the legal tools the crook might use.
Canada is already well-served by laws protecting copyright.  Outlawing
the technological tools - the screw-drivers of the technology
community - undermines Canada's commitment to fostering an economy
built on innovation and opportunity.

Understand that the science and business of digital security implicates the 
practical application of circumvention technologies. To understand security 
threats, researchers must understand security weaknesses.  We are not in 
the business of circumventing technological safeguards for the purposes of 
exploiting the weaknesses we find; rather, we are in the businesses of 
finding and addressing those weaknesses.  In this way, our work offers 
crucial support to the business interests of those who seek to protect 
their copyrighted works through technology.  Indeed, technological 
protection measures and digital rights management systems themselves are 
practical applications of the work of this research community.

We observe that in other jurisdictions, rights holders have often
sought to enforce anti-circumvention rights for reasons other than
copyright protection.  Anti-circumvention rights have anti-competitive
applications.  These have been well documented and should be familiar
to you.  We won't dwell on them here. More troubling from a public
policy perspective, however, are those attempts to assert
anti-circumvention rights to silence critical research into security
holes.  Such attempts are at base motivated by a desire to maintain
control over security research in respect of particular platforms or
applications.  Centralized control over security research does not
make for good public policy. Security weaknesses are best found - and
addressed - when a variety of security researchers examine a platform
or application. The odds of one party devising the best response to a
security issue are slim; the likelihood of an optimal response
improves significantly when a community of security researchers has
the opportunity to examine and test a platform or application.
Anti-circumvention laws throw a shroud of legal risk over that
community, and dampen security research at the edges.  Simply,
anti-circumvention laws that provide for excessive control make for
bad security policy.

The American experience under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act
(the "DMCA") should be instructive in this regard. Professor Ed Felton
of Princeton University was threatened with litigation (as were
conference organizers) for attempting to present his findings on
security holes in the work of the Secure Digital Music Initiative
industry working group.  Dmitri Sklyarov, a Russian programmer, was
jailed for travelling to the United States and presenting the results
of his work on a software tool that could be used to read Adobe's
"e-book" files.  American security researchers are choosing to avoid
research with DMCA implications. Global experts on security now avoid
traveling to the United States. Richard Clarke, former White House
cybersecurity and counterterrorism adviser, has observed that the
DMCA's anti-circumvention provisions have had a "chilling effect on
vulnerability research."  The DMCA has had a demonstrably negative
impact on security research in the United States.

Canada has historically been a global leader in the science of
cryptography.  Canada is now turning to apply that strength to the
business of digital security.  The Canadian government should support
this emerging industry, not erect market barriers or create new risks
of legal liability.  In the late nineties, the Canadian government
made online connectivity a priority with the goal of making Canada
"the most connected nation in the world".  Consistent with that goal,
Canada released its Cryptography Policy in 1998, envisioning digital
security as key to "building Canada's information economy and
society", and making a commitment to fostering the development of the
digital security business sector. In 1998, the Canadian government
recognized the importance of this business sector to securing reliable
electronic commerce.  In the context of anti-circumvention laws, these
considerations have barely merited a mention.

Proponents of anti-circumvention laws protest that these laws do not
target "legitimate" security research, and that laws may be crafted
with exceptions for such research.  With respect, the DMCA carries
such exceptions.  They have proven both inadequate and ineffective in
protecting security researchers from threats of litigation.  Moreover,
such exceptions offer little security against the threat of
litigation.  Rights-holders have not hesitated to assert
anti-circumvention rights against researchers to maintain control over
public dissemination of security research implicating their
applications and platforms, even where such claims have only the most
tenuous basis in fact.  Nonetheless, such threats create a "liability
chill".  Security researchers and businesses generally lack the time
and resources to defend such claims, with the result that the mere
threat achieves the claimant's objective.  The mere threat of
liability for circumvention is a mischief itself that may only be
addressed by not creating the basis for the threat in the first place.

In our view, the best policy would be to introduce no change to the
law at all.  Rights-holders are well protected by traditional rights
under the Copyright Act.  An infringement remains an infringement
regardless of whether or not a TPM is circumvented. TPMs themselves
provide a second layer of protection sufficient to deter all but the
most sophisticated would-be infringers. Legally privileging TPMs would
add a third layer of protection; however, we seriously question
whether the marginal value of this legal protection outweighs the
severe impairment it causes to legitimate security research.

We welcome the opportunity to discuss the matters addressed in this
letter with you.  We look forward to being consulted by the government
on future developments in this area.

Yours truly,

Brian O'Higgins
Chief Technology Officer
Third Brigade, Ltd.

Brian Flood
Chief Executive Officer
VE Networks, Inc.

Bob Young,
Co-founder and Director, Red Hat, Inc.
Founder and CEO of Lulu, Inc.
Owner, Hamilton Tiger-Cats Football Team
Hugh Ellis
Chief Executive Officer
Cinnabar Networks Inc.

John Detombe
Director
AEPOS Technologies Corporation

Austin Hill
President
Synomos Inc.

John Alsop
Founder and Chairman
Borderware Technologies Inc.

Michael Kouritzin
Chief Executive Officer
Random Knowledge Inc.

Dr. Stefan Brands
President
Credentica

Carl C. Bond
President
Innusec, Inc.

Djenana Campara
Chief Technology Officer
Klocwork Inc.

Randy Sutton,
President
Elytra Enterprises Inc.


Professor Michael A. Geist
Canada Research Chair in Internet and E-commerce Law
University of Ottawa Law School, Common Law Section

  ------ End of Forwarded Message

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

Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 00:41:40 -0500
From: Marcus Didius Falco <falco_marcus_didius@yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: Hollywood Hacking Bill Author Named Dem. Liaison


  From Declan's list

  ---------- Forwarded message ----------
  Subject: "Hollywood Hacking Bill" Author Named as Democrat Liaison to
  Entertainment Industry
  From: Richard Forno <rforno@infowarrior.org>

This is beyond absurd. Howard Berman is the Congresscritter who, a few
years ago, wanted to enact laws that would let the entertainment
industry "hack" private computers in their quest for copyright
investigations.....his proposed law would also indemnify the
entertainment cartels if those actions resulted in problems for the
folks being "hacked" -- even if the "hack" resulted in not finding any
"infringing" materials.

As of today, the Democrats have the glaringly-ignorant shill of the
entertainment industry (Berman) working for the greedy entertainment
industry itself. How very convenient for all sides.  Except the public
(and many artists) of course.

Anyway, some info on the old Berman Bill that shows how his mind works:
http://news.com.com/2100-1023-945923.html?tag=3Dfd_lede

 ... and the new press release from today ...

Pelosi Appoints Berman as Chief Liaison to the Entertainment Industry
http://democraticleader.house.gov/press/releases.cfm?pressReleaseID=886

Washington, D.C House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi today announced
the appointment of California Congressman Howard L. Berman as chief
liaison between the House Democratic Caucus and the entertainment
industry.

Berman, a senior California lawmaker who has worked closely and
productively with the film industry for years, will hold a more
regular and institutionalized dialogue with industry representatives
on issues vital to those who make and market films, music, and other
copyrighted materials.  Berman is the top Democrat on the House
Judiciary Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet and Intellectual
Property.

"Howard Berman has long been a leader on copyright enforcement and
stopping Internet piracy," Pelosi said.  "He understands the business
and creative interests of the entertainment industry, which comprises
the largest and fastest growing sector of the U.S. economy and creates
a surplus balance of trade.  This appointment will put in place a
process for even greater communication and mutual understanding
between House Democrats and the entertainment industry."

"Entertainment is my hometown industry," said Berman, "and it's one
I've been working with closely for all the years I've been in
Congress.  I welcome this new way to emphasize its issues to the
Democratic leadership."
_______________________________________________ Politech mailing list
Archived at http://www.politechbot.com/ Moderated by Declan McCullagh
(http://www.mccullagh.org/)


                       John F. McMullen
               http://www.westnet.com/~observer

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

Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2005 22:45:08 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Cell Phones Do Much More Than Make Calls


By MATT MOORE AP Business Writer

HANOVER, Germany (AP) -- The mobile phone is a phone no more. The new
models unveiled at the CeBIT technology show Wednesday let users do
far more than just call a friend to catch up.

How about sending them a brief film clip of you standing by a fountain
in Rome? Or perhaps a photo of the Eiffel Tower with an image quality
so fine it could be blown up and placed in a 10x14-inch frame.

Between a new Samsung handset that sports a seven-megapixel camera _
better resolution than most nonprofessional digital cameras _ and a
wide range of mobiles that download and stream music like an MP3
player, cell "phones" are now a lot more than just a keypad and three
hours of talk time.

The slew of new features on phones is an astounding leap from just two
years ago, when an integrated camera that took fuzzy images was an
attention-getter. And since 2002, music and mobiles has meant much
more than just ringtones.

All these new bells and whistles have become a big selling point, not
just for the makers, but for the carriers who want to increase their
revenue.

      - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=47544259

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

Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2005 22:47:06 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: TiVo Patent Suit Advances on Federal Court Denial of Echostar


ALVISO, Calif., March 9 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- TiVo Inc.  (Nasdaq:
TIVO), the creator of and a leader in television services for digital
video recorders (DVRs), today announced that the federal district
court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division has denied
motions to dismiss and transfer TiVo's patent infringement case
against Echostar Communications Corporation (ECC) and affiliated
companies. In that case, TiVo has alleged that ECC and certain
subsidiaries are violating a key TiVo patent (U.S. Patent
No. 6,233,389 issued to TiVo in May 2001, known as the "Time Warp"
patent).  The defendants had sought to transfer the case out of Texas,
and two of the defendants argued that they were not subject to
jurisdiction in Texas. The Court denied both motions.

Key TiVo inventions protected by this patent include a method for
recording one program while playing back another; watching a show as
it is recording; and a storage format that supports advanced
capabilities -- such as pausing live television, fast-forwarding,
rewinding, instant replays, and slow motion.

     - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=47542335

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

From: Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@withheld on request>
Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2005 21:53:56 -0500
Subject: Vonage Being Blocked -- Again
Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com


http://informationweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=159400250

Vonage Being Blocked -- Again
March 9, 2005 		
	
Vonage Holdings Corp. said it is investigating a new potential
incident of its Voice over IP service being blocked, this time by a
cable television company that also provides Internet services.  

By Paul Kapustka - Advanced IP Pipeline
	  	
Vonage Holdings Corp. said it is investigating new potential incident
of its Voice over IP service being blocked, this time by a cable
television company that also provides Internet services.

Brooke Schulz, Vonage's vice president for corporate communications,
confirmed that the company is "investigating a new instance" of
service interruption that appears to be another case of port
blocking. Schulz said the incident involves Vonage customers who use
high-speed Internet services provided by a cable operator, somewhere
in the Midwest U.S.

[.....]

Over the past two weeks, industry sources who declined to be named
said they had heard rumors that some Vonage customers in the Midwest
were having their services blocked. On Wednesday, Schulz confirmed
that Vonage is "investigating an instance [of service outages] on a
cable operator's system in the Midwest."

Full story at:
http://informationweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=159400250

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: cyklone006@gmail.com
Subject: Phone Doesn't Disconnect
Date: 9 Mar 2005 17:30:50 -0800


Hello. I am having problems with people -- usually telemarketers
calling my home. When I hang up the phone, and wait a few seconds, and
then pick it up again, they are still on the line. How is this done?
Can I do something about it?


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You need to wait a few more seconds.
Give it about a full minute to make sure the line disconnects, but
it usually should not take that long. And of course, make sure all 
of your numbers -- landline, cellular and VOIP are listed on the
federal and (your) state 'do not call' lists as well.  PAT]

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

Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2005 15:23:33 EST
From: Carl Moore <cmoore@ARL.ARMY.MIL>
Subject: Shooting Victim Gets to Pay Phone


A story dated yesterday got onto the WPVI-TV web site (channel 6,
"Action News", Philadelphia), entitled "Shooting Outside Logan
Restaurant".  It says a man was shot and "He was able to walk to a
nearby pay phone and call 911".  I'm letting you know because of
previous blurbs in this Digest about fewer pay phones due to cell
phones being so popular.

For as long as it's good, here is the reference:
http://abclocal.go.com/wpvi/news/030805_nw_loganshooting.html

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

Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 00:40:32 EST
From: Dan Lanciani <ddl@danlan.com>
Subject: Re: "Broadcast Flag", was Re: My New DVR From Cable One


kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net (Tony P.) wrote:

> But if you read the FCC documents about it, they make it clear that
> anyone with a little technical knowledge can easily defeat the DRM
> functions.

So have they given up on the (complicated but fairly robust)
encryption/ authentication/key-revocation scheme for digital
interconnects that was being bandied about in the beginning?  (The
actual OTA signal would have been in the clear in any case, but
building an ATSC receiver probably takes more than a little technical
knowledge and even then isn't what I'd call easy.  Unless of course
someone comes up with a good GNUradio cookbook. :)

> The courts are going to slap down on the FCC anyhow.

We live in hope ...


Dan Lanciani
ddl@danlan.*com

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

From: DevilsPGD <ihatespam@crazyhat.net>
Subject: Re: Vonage Outage Last Thursday
Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2005 17:34:23 -0700
Organization: Disorganized


In message <telecom24.103.16@telecom-digest.org> Randal Hayes
<randal.hayes@uni.edu> wrote:

> Vonage, or even the VOIP environment are not unique here; for several
> years some of the largest carriers have experienced outages during
> some of their busiest periods due to scheduling non-emergency software
> loads and upgrades during peak periods ... what idiocy!

> Is common sense a thing of the past for some people, or is the belief
> in performing quality work a thing of the past for some people ... or
> both?

Personally, I do most of the maintenance work on my servers during "peak
hours"

Why?  Well, two reasons: 

1) My system is redundant enough that users don't notice the outage.
2) If something blows up and I need assistance (usually in the form of
a hardware failure in a remote data center), I can get that support
during the day.  At night it's hit and miss.

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

Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 07:03:05 GMT
From: Brian Inglis <Brian.Inglis@SystematicSW.Invalid>
Subject: Re: Vonage Outage Last Thursday
Reply-To: Brian.Inglis@SystematicSW.ab.ca
Organization: Systematic Software


On Wed, 09 Mar 2005 13:02:35 -0600 in comp.dcom.telecom, Randal Hayes
<randal.hayes@uni.edu> wrote:

> Vonage, or even the VOIP environment are not unique here; for several
> years some of the largest carriers have experienced outages during
> some of their busiest periods due to scheduling non-emergency software
> loads and upgrades during peak periods ... what idiocy!

> Is common sense a thing of the past for some people, or is the belief
> in performing quality work a thing of the past for some people..or
> both?

It works, ship it ... we're all beta test sites now!


Thanks. Take care, 

Brian Inglis 	Calgary, Alberta, Canada

Brian.Inglis@CSi.com 	(Brian[dot]Inglis{at}SystematicSW[dot]ab[dot]ca)
    fake address		use address above to reply

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

From: Tim@Backhome.org
Subject: Re: Vonage Outage Last Thursday
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 01:34:04 -0800
Organization: Cox Communications


Randal Hayes wrote:

> Is common sense a thing of the past for some people, or is the belief
> in performing quality work a thing of the past for some people ... or
> both?

Maybe creative lying is more of a thing of the past. ;-)

So far as I know the wireline LECs still do major generic loads at 200
AM on Saturday morning.

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

From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Subject: Re: Vonage Outage Last Thursday, was: Vonage
Date: 9 Mar 2005 12:06:40 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


Tony P. wrote:

> I'd like to know what part of $88 you consider reasonable. That's
> what Verizon was getting from me for unlimited national/local.

My Verizon charge for that is about $40 (with discount for combining
cell phone), and also gives a package of features.  FCC line
cost, etc. extra but the total cost is much less than $88.

There are other wireline competitors with cheap packages, too.

Note that many people may be paying close to that already just to have
a regional-wide free calling area.  I had that it and it was another
only $15 to go unlimited national.  I don't make that many toll calls
but it paid for me; plus I have the convenience of not watching the
clock anymore or worrying about toll calls.  I also can call back
other callers so they don't run up their bill, so my friends save
money too.

A lot of people who use VOIP still keep a wireline in reserve or for
other uses.  There is still a cost for that.

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

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 #104
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Mar 10 17:50:04 2005
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j2AMo3A04466;
	Thu, 10 Mar 2005 17:50:04 -0500 (EST)
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 17:50:04 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200503102250.j2AMo3A04466@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 #105

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 10 Mar 2005 17:50:00 EST    Volume 24 : Issue 105

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    New Orleans Installs Surveillance Cameras (Monty Solomon)
    LexisNexis: 32,000 Consumers' Data Stolen (Monty Solomon)
    U.S. Citizens' Data Possibly Compromised (Monty Solomon)
    Elite Computer Pirates Plead Guilty in Bootlegging Crackdown (M Solomon)
    Rejected Harvard Applicants say School's Reaction to Web Page (Solomon)
    MIT Says it Won't Admit Hackers (Monty Solomon)
    Drug-Error Risk at Hospitals Tied to Computers (Monty Solomon)
    QuickerTek 27db Transceiver for AirPort (Monty Solomon)
    Motorola Postpones iTunes Phone Debut (Monty Solomon)
    BT Strikes Long-Term Network Deal With Reuters (Telecom dailyLead USTA)
    Draytek Router Problem: Class C Address Only on LAN Interface (paulfoel)
    Long Distance Carrier Verification (Michael Muderick)
    Comunications ATA 186 to ATA 186 (Without Gatekeeper, CallManager)(SoGo)
    Vonage Outage Last Thursday (Randal Hayes)
    Motorola Says It Is Working on More iTunes Phones (Lisa Minter)
    LexisNexis Says 32,000 Profiles Stolen (Lisa Minter)
    Microsoft Gives First Key Details on New Xbox (Lisa Minter)
    AOL Jumps Into VoIP Service (Jack Decker)
    Re: Cell Phone Radiation Dangers (Joseph)
    Re: Cell Phone Radiation Dangers (Isaiah Beard)
    Re: Vonage Outage Last Thursday (Robert Bonomi)
    Re: Vonage Outage Last Thursday (Lisa Hancock)
    Re: Home PBX Info: Switching Between Landlines and VoIP (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: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 07:28:57 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: New Orleans Installs Surveillance Cameras


By Mary Foster, Associated Press  |  March 9, 2005

NEW ORLEANS -- The man marched down the street in daylight, armed with
a paintball rifle that had been converted to shoot with lethal
force. He then blasted a newly installed camera in hopes of ridding
the drug-ridden neighborhood of police surveillance.

But the shooter's image was saved on the camera's hard drive.

"All it did was get him arrested," said New Orleans' chief technology
officer, Greg Meffert, with a chuckle. "The camera immediately notified
the police and tracked him until he was caught." And when they got him,
they found he was wanted on a murder warrant.

The arrest was the first success story from a new crime-fighting
system of cameras that New Orleans is installing citywide.

The bulletproof cameras can monitor an eight-block area, communicate
with the authorities, and provide evidence in court. Police hope the
system will catch criminals in the act and serve as a deterrent in a
city long plagued by drugs and murders.

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2005/03/09/new_orleans_installs_surveillance_cameras/

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

Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 07:27:47 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: LexisNexis: 32,000 Consumers' Data Stolen


By Jeffrey Goldfarb and Andy Sullivan 

LONDON/WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Data broker LexisNexis on Wednesday said
that identity thieves have gained access to profiles of 32,000 U.S.
citizens, prompting calls for better consumer protections after a rash
of similar break-ins.

The U.S. Secret Service said it is investigating the incident, while a
company spokeswoman said the FBI has also launched an investigation.

The announcement comes amid heightened scrutiny of data brokers and
other companies that handle consumer information, after rival
ChoicePoint Inc. <CPS.N> said last month that thieves had gained
access to at least 145,000 consumer profiles.

U.S. lawmakers plan at least two hearings over the coming week and are
considering new regulations.

LexisNexis, a subsidiary of Anglo-Dutch Reed Elsevier
<REL.L><ELSN.AS>, said a billing complaint by a customer of its
Seisint unit in the past week led to the discovery that an identity
and password had been misappropriated.

The information accessed included names, addresses, Social Security
and driver's license numbers, but not credit histories, medical
records or financial information.

LexisNexis, which bought Seisint last year, said it is contacting the
32,000 people affected and offering them credit monitoring and other
support to detect any identity theft.

The company is also changing the way it handles passwords and other
security features, said Kurt Sanford, president and CEO of the
company's corporate and federal markets division.

http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2005/03/09/consumer_data_stolen_from_reed_elsevier/


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: For the complete report on this
incident involving LexisNexis, see the article by Lisa Minter
elsewhere in this issue of the Digest, and also review our 
supplementary news section http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra .   PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 07:28:22 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: U.S.Citizens' Data Possibly Compromised


By Ellen Simon, Associated Press Writer  |  March 9, 2005

NEW YORK --Using stolen passwords from legitimate customers, intruders
accessed personal information on as many as 32,000 U.S. citizens in a
database owned by the information broker LexisNexis, the company said.

The announcement Wednesday comes on the heels of a series of similar
high-profile breaches, the most serious affecting another large data
broker, ChoicePoint Inc. in which scores of identities were stolen.

The ChoicePoint case, as well as other data losses including one
affecting some 1.2 million federal employees with Bank of America charge
cards, have prompted an outcry for federal oversight of a loosely
regulated commercial sector. In the data-brokering business, sensitive
data about nearly every adult American is bought and sold.

The first in a series of Capitol Hill hearings are scheduled for
Thursday.

At LexisNexis, criminals found a way to compromise the logins and
passwords of a handful of legitimate customers to get access to the
database, said Kurt Sanford, the company's chief executive, told The
Associated Press.

The database that was breached, called Accurint, sells reports for $4.50
each that include an individual's Social Security number, past
addresses, date of birth and voter registration information, including
party affiliation.

No credit history, medical records or financial information were
accessed in the breach, LexisNexis parent company Reed Elsevier Group
PLC said in a statement.

The Accurint database is part of the Seisint unit, which LexisNexis
bought in August. Sanford said a team examining Seisint's data
security routines in February noticed abnormal usage patterns and
suspicious billing on some accounts.

http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2005/03/09/us_citizens_data_possibly_compromised/

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Also see the article by Lisa Minter in
this issue of the Digest.   PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 07:27:50 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Elite Computer Pirates Plead Guilty in Bootlegging Crackdown


By Matt Apuzzo, Associated Press Writer  |  March 8, 2005

HARTFORD, Conn. -- Three top members of a global computer piracy
network admitted Thursday that they shuttled millions of dollars in
computer games, movies and software around the world through a coded
system of Web sites and chat rooms.

The men pleaded guilty in U.S. District court to federal copyright
charges, becoming the first Americans convicted in what the Justice
Department said was the largest-ever investigation of software piracy.

All said they made no money off the conspiracy and U.S. Attorney Kevin
O'Connor said they considered themselves "the Robin Hoods of
cyberspace."

But investigators said the bootlegged software ended up on the streets
of foreign countries, selling for pennies on the dollar.

The investigation -- dubbed "Operation Higher Education" because many
pirates use computers at universities -- spanned across the United
States and about a dozen foreign countries. FBI agents in New Haven
said the case broke open when they infiltrated the clandestine "warez"
community on the Internet.


http://www.boston.com/news/local/connecticut/articles/2005/03/08/feds_crack_down_on_internet_software_piracy_sites/

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

Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 07:29:20 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Rejected Harvard Applicants say School's Reaction to Web Excessive


Rejected Harvard applicants say school's reaction to Web page "hack"
excessive

By Jay Lindsay, Associated Press Writer  |  March 8, 2005

BOSTON --His decision came late at night, with his laptop propped in
front of him in bed. Instructions on a Web site promised business
school applicants an early online look at whether they'd been
accepted.  Intrigued, he began typing.

A minute later he'd accessed the Harvard Business School's admission
site, though all he saw was a blank page.

That split-second decision cost the 28-year-old New Yorker a chance to
attend Harvard Business School this year. On Monday, Harvard became
the second school, after Carnegie Mellon, to announce its blanket
rejection of any applicant who used a method detailed in a
BusinessWeek Online forum to try to get an early glimpse at admissions
decisions in top business schools.

On Tuesday, some of the 119 applicants denied Harvard admission
because they visited the site said the school overreacted, and
disputed that accessing a public Web page with their own
identification numbers was either a "hack" or "unethical," as Harvard
Business School Dean Kim Clark said in a statement.

The applicant said he spent months completing Harvard's rigorous
application process.

http://www.boston.com/news/education/higher/articles/2005/03/08/harvard_applicants_who_hacked_into_system_rejected_for_admission/

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

Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 07:28:24 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: MIT Says it Won't Admit Hackers


Business school joins Harvard in decision

By Robert Weisman, Globe Staff  |  March 9, 2005

The dean of MIT's Sloan School of Management yesterday said Sloan will
join Harvard Business School in rejecting applications from
prospective students who hacked into a website last week to learn
whether they had been admitted before they were formally notified.

Stanford's Graduate School of Business, meanwhile, asked its own
applicant-hackers to come forward and explain their actions, in a sign
that the California school soon may take tougher action as well.

Thirty-two applicants apparently sought an early peek at the
confidential data in their admission files at Sloan, while 41 files
were targeted at Stanford and 119 at Harvard. Harvard on Monday became
the second victimized business school to say outright it would not
admit proven hackers. The first was Carnegie Mellon's Tepper School of
Business, where one admission file was violated.

Those schools, along with Dartmouth's Tuck School of Business and
Duke's Fuqua School of Business, all use an independent website run by
ApplyYourself Inc. of Fairfax, Va., to receive applications and, in
some cases, manage communications with applicants.

After midnight last Wednesday, hundreds of business school admission
files were targeted by computers around the globe when a hacker posted
detailed instructions on a BusinessWeek Online forum. Most of the
hackers saw only blank screens, though some who accessed admission
files at Harvard viewed preliminary decision information.

http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2005/03/09/mit_says_it_wont_admit_hackers/

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

Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 07:28:47 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Drug-Error Risk at Hospitals Tied to Computers


By Scott Allen, Globe Staff  |  March 9, 2005

Hospital computer systems that are widely touted as the best way to
eliminate dangerous medication mix-ups can actually introduce many
errors, according to the most comprehensive study of hazards of the
new technology. The researchers, who shadowed doctors and nurses in a
Philadelphia hospital for four months, found that some patients were
put at risk of getting double doses of their medicine while others get
none at all.

Doctors at the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania identified
22 types of mistakes they have made because of difficulty using
computerized drug-ordering, such as failing to stop old medications
when adding new ones or forgetting that the computer automatically
suspended medications after surgery. Some doctors interviewed for the
study said they made computer-related mistakes several times a week.

The findings underscore the complexity of improving safety in US
hospitals, where the Institute of Medicine estimates that errors of
all kinds kill 44,000 to 98,000 patients a year.

The University of Pennsylvania researchers stressed that computers
hold great potential, but said many systems are overhyped and hard to
use, prompting one Los Angeles hospital to turn off its drug-ordering
system altogether.

http://www.boston.com/yourlife/health/other/articles/2005/03/09/drug_error_risk_at_hospitals_tied_to_computers/

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

Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 12:21:10 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: QuickerTek 27db Transceiver for AirPort


http://www.quickertek.com/27dbtrans.html

27db Transceiver for AirPort Base Station; Adds up to 1/2 Mile
Line-of-Sight Range!

If you have Wi-Fi range issues, this is the solution for you . Plus, 
the user can add one of these to each end of the network if needed. 
The transceiver is also great for point-to-point systems, college 
dorms, distant AP's like house boats trying to connect to wireless 
access points etc. Typical installations would include classrooms or 
fixing range problems with your ITunes and AirPort Express by adding 
this to the PowerBook or Desktop.

The 27db transceiver operates on all 2.4GHz, Wi-Fi systems. The
transceiver is Wi-Fi compliant, supporting both 802.11g and 802.11b.
and works with both OS9.x and OS10.x systems. This product is designed
especially for Apple's Airport Extreme wireless systems and allows the
maximum power output allowed by the FCC. Apple wireless products have
RF output of 30mW; our product is 500mW.

This transceiver works on Apple Base Stations (Graphite, Snow, and
both Extremes models). It comes with a 2.2Dbi antenna, but all other
QuickerTek omni and directional Base Station antennas can be added.

http://www.quickertek.com/27dbtrans.html
http://www.quickertek.com/pr/2005_08_02_27DbiTrans.pdf 
http://www.quickertek.com/faq.html

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

Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 12:23:14 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Motorola Postpones iTunes Phone Debut


By MATT MOORE AP Business Writer

HANOVER, Germany (AP) -- Motorola Inc. postponed plans Thursday to
unveil a cell phone that can buy and play songs from Apple Computer
Inc.'s iTunes download service, a sudden decision which may reflect
tensions with cellular companies who also want to sell music to mobile
phone users.

The company briefed reporters on the new offering earlier in the week
and planned to unveil the phone at the big CeBIT technology show
here. Motorola's two-story exhibition booth included a display of
iMacs running iTunes, but the new phones weren't there.

Motorola spokeswoman Monica Rohleder said in Chicago that the company
remains in discussions with a number of wireless carriers regarding
the first iTunes phone and will announce it "when it's ready to go,"
close to its expected release time this summer.

She asserted that the last-minute change in plans was no reflection of
a dispute with carriers who offer Motorola phones in their handset
lineups.

      - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=47560470

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

Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 13:05:15 EST
From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA <usta@dailylead.com>
Subject: BT Strikes Long-term Network Deal With Reuters


Telecom dailyLead from USTA
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=19974&l=2017006

TODAY'S HEADLINES

NEWS OF THE DAY
* BT strikes long-term network deal with Reuters
BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH
* Verizon sets fiber rollout in Comcast's back yard
* Motorola delays iTunes phone announcement
* Vonage alleges more port-blocking
* AT&T to forge ahead with SoIP plans despite SBC deal
* Report: Africa's mobile phone market booming
* Nokia may snare lead in 3G race before long
* Comcast gets access to CA with Motorola deal
USTA SPOTLIGHT 
* Telecom Crash Course -- The must-have book for telecom professionals
EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES
* Sony bets big on mobile PlayStation
REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE
* Two names emerge as possible replacements for Michael Powell
* Jurors in Ebbers trial seek clarification, guidance

Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others.
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=19974&l=2017006

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

From: paulfoel <BertieBigBollox@gmail.com>
Subject: Draytek Router Problem - Class C Address Only on LAN Interface?
Date: 10 Mar 2005 06:31:53 -0800


Now this is really weird ...

Set up network Draytek 2600+ as ADSL router connecting to broadband.
Local LAN port was given the address of 10.0.0.254 with a netmask of
255.255.0.0.

This is because we have all the DHCP stuff on 10.0.1.x, servers on
10.0.2.x, printers on 10.0.3.x etc. Should work, yeh ?

Trouble is if you pinged say 10.0.2.10 from the Draytek you got 50%
packet loss ...

Speaking to Draytek it seems they only support class C addresses on
the LAN port. It totally ignores the first three octets and only looks
at the last ...

So, if we've got a server 10.0.2.10, and a DHCP allocated PC with
10.0.1.10 the router gets confused when trying to ping 10.0.2.10
because it only looks at the last .10.

Got round it by changed the DHCP range to start at 50 (there are less
than 50 servers etc) to make sure the last octet is unique on the lan.

Pretty disappointed with the draytek router. We tried a cheap netgear
router and this handled the subnets fine ...

Any comments ???

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

Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 10:57:28 -0500
From: Michael Muderick <michael.muderick@verizon.net>
Subject: Long Distance Carrier Verification


Has anyone tried 700-555-4141 lately to verify long distance carrier?
It's still a published number, but in the Phila. area, I keep getting
a busy signal.  Is there a new number available?

Michael Muderick

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

From: frsanchez@gmail.com (SoGo)
Subject: Comunications ATA 186 to ATA 186 (Without Gatekeeper/CallManager)
Date: 10 Mar 2005 08:11:00 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


I have two customer. Both connected to Internet (ADSL)

Each customer has an IP fixes and an equipment with ATA 186.  The
configuration would be:

Customer 1: extension 1000
Customer 2: extension 2000

When client 1 dialing 2000, they call to VoIP phone of customer 2 ...
and vice versa.

This simple configuration can be made without having to use a
Gatekeeper (Asterisk, CallManager, ...)

The solution seems to be in that ATA of customer 1 puts as gateway ATA
of customer 2, and vice versa.

I was not able to find answers in the Cisco documentation.

Would know somebody like doing it? Would you have any url/link that
explained it?

I really need help. Thanks.

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

Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 10:59:25 -0600
From: Randal Hayes <randal.hayes@uni.edu>
Subject: Re: Vonage Outage Last Thursday


DevilsPGD <ihatespam@crazyhat.net> wrote about Re: Vonage Outage 
Last Thursday on Wed, 09 Mar 2005 17:34:23 -0700

> Personally, I do most of the maintenance work on my servers during
> "peak hours"

> Why?  Well, two reasons: 

> 1) My system is redundant enough that users don't notice the outage.

> 2) If something blows up and I need assistance (usually in the form of
a hardware failure in a remote data center), 

> I can get that support during the day.  At night it's hit and miss.

 
A) We're talking about carriers here ... not internal support for a
company. 

B) From a corporate/institutional standpoint, for a scheduled upgrade,
I always, and I mean always, have all my ducks in a row with the
vendor such that I've never, in 23 years in this business, had a
problem getting immediate vendor support, even at 4:00 AM; it's called
extremely good planning.

Randy Hayes 

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

Date: 10 Mar 2005 03:45:38 -0800
From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: otorola Says It Is Working on More iTunes Phones


HANOVER, Germany (Reuters) - Motorola said on Thursday it is working
on several mobile phones that are compatible with Apple's iTunes music
service and some of which can store eight hours of songs.

One model, the E790, was initially scheduled for a European launch
this summer, but that introduction has been delayed after discussions
with operators, Motorola said at the fringes of CeBIT, the world's
biggest electronics fair here.

The model is a surprise as it was originally planned ahead of the
ROKR, which is also a music phone with iTunes and which Motorola has
banged the drum about, but has not yet shown.

The ROKR is expected to be unveiled later this month at a music event
in Florida.

Rival Sony Ericsson showed its first phone with a built-in Sony
Walkman last week.

"Over the course of the year, you'll see more (iTunes) devices," said
Alberto Moriondo, Motorola's global director of entertainment for
mobile devices.

Major handset makers have started collaborating with online digital
music stores. Sony Ericsson said its first Walkman phone will be on
the market around August or September. Nokia which said it will use
Microsoft's music technology alongside other standards, has yet to
unveil a dedicated music phone.

Motorola hopes to benefit from its association with Apple, which makes
the world's most popular digital player iPod and runs the world's most
popular music store, iTunes Music Store.
 
"The Walkman for the 21st century is the Apple brand," Moriondo said.

The fact that some iTunes phones can store eight hours of music or
more is different from initial announcements last year that Motorola
phones would only carry a small number of songs.  Motorola's E790
handset will work on second-generation mobile networks, and not the
faster, third-generation (3G) systems.

Motorola at CeBIT also unveiled two more phones for third-generation
networks, one medium-priced flip phone model and a slightly
higher-priced handset which has taken some design features from the
popular RAZR model.

The Schaumberg, Illinois-based company has said it will launch 16
handsets for 3G networks this year.

Motorola also introduced new flip phone handsets for the entry-level
segment of the market, to be available in the second half of 2005.

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 News Service.

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

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

Date: 10 Mar 2005 03:46:49 -0800
From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: LexisNexis Says 32,000 Profiles Stolen


By Jeffrey Goldfarb and Andy Sullivan

LONDON/WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Data broker LexisNexis on Wednesday said
that identity thieves have gained access to profiles of 32,000
U.S. citizens, prompting calls for better consumer protections after a
rash of similar break-ins.

The U.S. Secret Service and the FBI said they were investigating the
incident.

The announcement comes amid heightened scrutiny of data brokers and
other companies that handle consumer information, after rival
ChoicePoint Inc.  said last month that thieves had gained access to at
least 145,000 consumer profiles.

U.S. lawmakers plan at least two hearings over the coming week and are
considering new regulations.

LexisNexis, a subsidiary of Anglo-Dutch Reed Elsevier (ELSN.AS), said
a billing complaint by a customer of its Seisint unit in the past week
led to the discovery that an identity and password had been
misappropriated.

The information accessed included names, addresses, Social Security
and driver's license numbers, but not credit histories, medical
records or financial information.

LexisNexis, which bought Seisint last year, said it is contacting the
32,000 people affected and offering them credit monitoring and other
support to detect any identity theft.

The company is also changing the way it handles passwords and other
security features, said Kurt Sanford, president and CEO of the
company's corporate and federal markets division.

"LexisNexis sincerely regrets these circumstances and continues to
work aggressively and expeditiously to minimize the impact of this
incident to consumers and our customers," Sanford said in a statement.

A spokesman declined further comment.

Seisint, based in Boca Raton, Florida, uses property records and other
public data to build profiles on millions of U.S. consumers, which it
sells to law-enforcement agencies and financial institutions.

A Seisint-created criminal-information database called Matrix came
under fire when it provided government officials with the names of
120,000 people whose personal information supposedly fit the profile
of a terrorist.

GROWING PROBLEM

Identity theft is a growing problem as criminals use stolen personal
information to run up charges, costing companies and individuals
billions of dollars each year.

Until recently identity thieves could find credit-card numbers and
other sensitive information on customer receipts, bills and other
easy-to-obtain forms, but have recently turned their attention to
companies that hold such information in bulk.

"As the value of what you're trying to steal increases, so does the
effort that the bad guys will put into it," said Paul Beechey, a
security expert with UK defense group QinetiQ.

Along with LexisNexis and ChoicePoint, financial group Bank of America
Corp. and discount-store owner Retail Ventures Inc have reported lost
or stolen personal information on customers in recent weeks.

The only reason the public is aware of these incidents is because of a
California law that requires companies to disclose them, said Jim
Dempsey, executive director of the Center for Democracy and
Technology, a Washington public-interest group.

Florida Democratic Sen. Bill Nelson who has introduced a bill that
would impose tougher regulations on the industry, learned about the
Seisint breach Wednesday morning as he spoke about identity theft on
the Senate floor.

"Are we going to do anything about it? I sure hope so, and I hope that
we are going to have Congress start to take action," Nelson said.

Reed Elsevier, which bought Seisint in July 2004 for $745
million, reaffirmed financial targets in the wake of the theft.

The company's shares in London closed down 1.87 percent at 537 1/2
pence.

Though Seisint represents only about 1.5 percent of Reed Elsevier's
revenues, analysts said the situation could harm management's
credibility and acquisition track record.

(Additional reporting by Emma Thomasson and Theo Kolker in
Amsterdam and Adam Pasick in London)

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/Tech Tuesday.

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

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: So 32 thousand people get their records
ripped off due to the clumsiness of Lexis/Nexis and their management's
main concern is 'this may make it harder for *them* to aquire still
another company'.  My heart really bleeds for them.   PAT]

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

Date: 10 Mar 2005 03:47:32 -0800
From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: Microsoft Gives First Key Details on New Xbox


In a speech at the Game Developers Conference here, J Allard, the
Microsoft executive overseeing the software development tools for the
new Xbox, said the new streamlined interface would help draw more
users to the platform.

"We've got to create a consistent experience so that consumers can
enter our worlds much more easily," he told a packed convention center
audience. "If we want to get to 10 or 20 million subscribers we've got
to create some consistency."

Microsoft is expected to release the new Xbox in time for the 2005
holidays, but the company has kept mum so far on both timing and the
name of the new device.

Among the features Allard demonstrated was an on-screen "Gamer Card"
that gives information other players can see on a gamer's location,
achievements in various games, time playing specific games and level
of skill.

Other features include a custom music player and a "store" where
players could make small purchases, for pennies or a few dollars, of
new characters, parts for virtual racing cars and the like.

The theme of Allard's speech was the "HD Era," which he described as a
time when all games are in high-definition, players are constantly
connected through mobile phones, instant messaging and the Internet
and gamers can personalize their environments to suit their tastes.

"The HD consumer needs more than a hi-definition Super Bowl," Allard
said. "The opportunity is real and now, but make no mistake we have
the power to blow it."

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 . 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 <jack-yahoogroups@withheld at request>
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 13:32:50 -0500
Subject: AOL Jumps Into VoIP Service


http://blogs.pcworld.com/staffblog/archives/000548.html

Posted by Aoife McEvoy
Tuesday, March 08, 2005, 02:27 PM (PST)

Big news from one of the big dogs: AOL is yet another company to jump
on the Voice-over-IP bandwagon (albeit a little late in the
game). AOL's setup will mimic the services from companies like
Vonage, VoicePulse, Lingo, and BroadVoice, where you connect an
adapter to your broadband router and telephone. You don't even need
to turn on your PC to reach out and call someone.

Full story at:
http://blogs.pcworld.com/staffblog/archives/000548.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: Joseph <JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Cell Phone Radiation Dangers
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 06:11:58 -0800
Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com


On 9 Mar 2005 08:56:41 -0800, Dean <cjmebox-telecomdigest@yahoo.com>
wrote:

> A while back some on this list engaged in a lively debate about cell
> phone radiation risks. This article may have some information of
> interest to those of you who think this issue isn't dead yet.

They've brought out this pony for a couple decades now and haven't
found anything.  Why should we believe this latest scare?

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

From: Isaiah Beard <sacredpoet@sacredpoet.com>
Subject: Re: Cell Phone Radiation Dangers
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 14:51:37 -0500
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com


Dean wrote:

> A while back some on this list engaged in a lively debate about cell
> phone radiation risks. This article may have some information of
> interest to those of you who think this issue isn't dead yet.

> The cell phone industry: Big Tobacco 2.0?

> By Molly Wood, senior editor, CNET.com
> Tuesday, March 8, 2005

Oh, C|Net.  Now we KNOW it's quality journalism.  </sarcasm>

Consider that Ms. Wood readily admits she has an agenda (she has an
axe to grind with cell phone manufacturers over what she perceives as
"iron-clad control over phone releases and pricing, its
ever-lengthening contracts, and the annoying habit it has of crippling
Bluetooth phones so that [she] can't use them the way [she wants]
to").  I would thus take this with a heavy handful of salt.

E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.

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

From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi)
Subject: Re: Vonage Outage Last Thursday
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 16:27:20 -0000
Organization: Widgets, Inc.


In article <telecom24.103.16@telecom-digest.org>, Randal Hayes
<randal.hayes@uni.edu> wrote:

> Whenever a communications technology outage is reported and the cause
> is attributed to some problem with a software load or other
> maintenance work performed *in the middle of a workday* I always ask
> myself, "What were they thinking, performing this type of work during
> a busy period?!?"

Methinks the visible problems do _not_ occur *during* the loading of
the new software or other maintenance work.  Rather, that the problem
manifests itself only "when the conditions are right" to provoke the
failure.  Which, not surprisingly generally occurs during times of
peak activity.  And, that once the manifestation is apparent, the
"cause of the problem" is traced back to a flaw in the new software or
other maintenance work.

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

From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Subject: Re: Vonage Outage Last Thursday
Date: 10 Mar 2005 08:40:52 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


Randal Hayes wrote:

> Whenever a communications technology outage is reported and the cause
> is attributed to some problem with a software load or other
> maintenance work performed *in the middle of a workday* I always ask
> myself, "What were they thinking, performing this type of work during
> a busy period?!?"

When the Bell System was trying out prototype ESS gear, they had a
real central office served by their new switch.  They had to make some
changes and planned to do so at 3am.  However, they hesitated about
taking the switch down at that time, since if a call did come through,
it likely would've been an emergency.  Sure enough, a call did come up
and it was indeed an emergency.  The engineers realized 24 hr service
had to be truly 24 hour service.

I don't know about today, but ESS was originally built with
two CPUs.  One was handling calls and one was reserved in
case of failure or to do maintenance.  Early ESS turned out to
be extremely reliable -- the longest outage was on account of a
failed air conditioner.  (IIRC this was the Morris IL test).

One of things the big Bell System was able to do was 'beta test' new
hardware and software under very controlled conditions before rolling
it to the whole country.  A small community would be selected,
residents notified and trained accordingly, and the system tested.
Not everything passed the test -- certain call features weren't
popular and their initial tone ringers were disliked.  The experience
the engineers gained from seeing and maintaining their switch in real
service serving real people was invaluable.

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

From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi)
Subject: Re: Home PBX Info: Switching Between Landlines and VoIP
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 12:51:18 -0000
Organization: Widgets, Inc.


In article <telecom24.101.7@telecom-digest.org>,
Lee Sweet  <lee@datatel.com> wrote:

> I've got an application that may apply to many with VoIP.  I've got
> two home landlines (one for myself, and one for my wife).  I also have
> a Vonage line for LD and Fax.  We are keeping the landlines for the
> usual reasons, including inability to port, E-911, etc.

> Now, what I want to do is have all outbound LD calls go out on the
> Vonage line automatically.  Right now, I have a separate cordless
> phone for that line, but that's not the optimal answer!  :-) \

> I'd like to have the various corded and cordless phones and the three
> lines hooked to some sort of home PBX where, either by dialing the
> required '1' (best answer) or perhaps an '8', calls are connected to
> the Vonage line.  Else, they go out the (correct) landline. (I assume
> each handset could know its 'proper' outbound landline for local
> traffic if each input phone jack on the PBX can be programmed to use
> the appropriate outbound line.)

> Now, before PAT jumps in with his PBXtra recommendation :-) , I've 
> discussed this with Mike Sandman, and he really doesn't recommend it 
> for this application.

> I'll bet a lot of people have Vonage as an extra LD/Fax line, still 
> have landlines, and would like to do this.

> Any recommendations/pointers about home PBX info?  Thanks!

Any _real_ PBX can do what you're looking for.  

With minimal systems, you implement an outside line access code for
each line -- say '7' for His, '8' for Hers, and '9' for long distance.

Smarter systems support 'call routing', where the outgoing line used
is selected by the first digit(s) of the number being called.  This
allows you to route international calls differently from domestic long
distance, handle different areacodes differently, handle toll-free
calls differently from toll calls, etc., etc.

As mentioned in another response, the lowest cost approach is Asterix.
free software, an old PC (a 486 box is plenty fast enough), and some
inexpensive 'line cards' for the telephony interfaces.

More features and capabilities than you can *possibly* use, but you
don't pay anything for those "surplus" capabilities.

I've only played with it a *little* bit -- don't know off-hand if it
will do 'call routing' on a per extension basis out of the box.  BUT,
if it doesn't, it would be a fairly simple matter for a programmer to
_add_ that capability -- one of the *big* advantages of a system where
you have the source code.  <grin>

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

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 #105
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Mar 11 00:35:18 2005
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j2B5ZH706941;
	Fri, 11 Mar 2005 00:35:18 -0500 (EST)
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 00:35:18 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200503110535.j2B5ZH706941@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 #106

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 11 Mar 2005 00:35:00 EST    Volume 24 : Issue 106

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Google Lets Users Customize News Site (Lisa Minter)
    Online Payment Company Settles Privacy Charges (Lisa Minter)
    Jail Sentence For Phone Line "Denial of Service" (Danny Burstein)
    FCC to Cellcos: Clean up Your Bills and Invoices (Danny Burstein)
    Wiring Two Lines on One Jack (emb120skw@aol.com)
    Technion (Choreboy)
    Re: Long Distance Carrier Verification (No Spam)
    Re: Drug Error Risk Tied to Computers (LB)
    Re: Long Distance Carrier Verification (bhamilton)
    Re: Phone Doesn't Disconnect (bhamilton)
    Re: Any Old Mechanical Systems Still in Use in USA? (bhamilton)
    Re: Home PBX and VoIP Tie-In (Lee Sweet)
    107-Year-Old Woman From Independence (Wesrock@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: 10 Mar 2005 19:10:13 -0800
From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: Google Lets Users Customize News Site


SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Web search leader Google Inc. on
Thursday said it added tools to its news site that lets users
customize the stories they see.

The move from Silicon Valley-based Google and Microsoft Corp.'s MSN
Internet unit added features to make it easier for their users to
create personalized welcome pages tailored with the information they
want to receive.

With the new tools, users of Google News can create customized pages
on the site that gathers news stories from around the Web, the company
said.

Google News users can now prioritize existing news topics such as top
stories, health, entertainment or sports to change the look of the
site's front page. Users also can create new categories to capture
news stories that contain certain key words.

Google News is available on mobile phones and handheld devices that
can read Web pages. News customization is now available only on
personal computers.

Separately, Yahoo announced on Thursday that it had given its mobile
users the ability to access all of their personalized My Yahoo
headlines and the first part of related stories, including those that
come from RSS and Atom feeds, on most mobile phones and handheld
devices in the United States.

My Yahoo recently added support for open content syndication standards
like Really Simple Syndication and Atom, which allow users to receive
content from sources such as news organizations and blogs.

Google gets the lion's share of its revenue from Web search advertising,
but does not show ads on its news site.

"It's something that we'll consider. We're not making any decisions at
this time," Director of Consumer Web Products Marissa Mayer said when
asked whether the company plans to add ads to its news site.

Google's news aggregation site is still in testing as the company
builds out its features.

Mayer added that Google was not trying to offer a personalized home
page like those from competitors, which allow users to view news or
information such as horoscopes or stock quotes and quickly connect to
other services such as e-mail.

"We're not trying to make this be your one-stop shop on the Web,"
Mayer said.

Shares of Google closed down $1.37, or 0.8 percent, to $79.98 on the
Nasdaq. Yahoo shares finished off 41 cents, or 1.3 percent to $31.91
also on Nasdaq.
           
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 News Service.

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

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

Date: 10 Mar 2005 19:12:15 -0800
From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: Online Payment Company Settles Privacy Charges


WASHINGTON (Reuters) - An Internet payment company has agreed to
return the money it earned from selling a list of nearly 1 million
customers to telemarketers and junk mailers without permission,
federal regulators said on Thursday.

Utah-based CartManager International sold the names, addresses, phone
numbers and purchase history of consumers who used its "shopping cart"
software to make purchases on thousands of Web sites, the Federal
Trade Commission said.

Many of those Web sites told visitors that any personal information
they provided would be kept private, the FTC said.

CartManager said that it would retain "full ownership" of consumer
data, but buried that notice in a lengthy online agreement and did not
explain how it intended to use that information.

CartManager parent company Vision I Properties LLC agreed to pay back
the &#36;9,000 it earned from the sale of customer data and clearly
disclose when it intends to sell customer data in the future. The
company faces increased penalties if does not abide by the agreement.

CartManager was not immediately available for comment.

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

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

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

From: Danny Burstein <dannyb@panix.com>
Subject: Jail Sentence for Phone Line "Denial of Service"
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 21:17:30 -0500
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC


Fascinating ... could this be extended to spammers? Please? Looks close 
enough to be worth a looksee ...

"Ex-GOP Party Head Charged in Phone Jamming"

"By ERIK STETSON Associated Press Writer March 10, 2005, 1:23 PM EST"

"CONCORD, N.H. The former executive director of the New Hampshire 
Republican Party was sentenced Thursday to seven months in prison for 
jamming Democratic telephone lines during the 2002 election.

"Chuck McGee pleaded guilty to federal charges of conspiring to make 
anonymous calls with the intent to annoy or harass. He was also fined 
$2,000 and ordered to perform 200 hours of community service."

    ...

"The computer-generated calls -- more than 800 in all -- lasted for about 
an hour and a half and also disrupted a union phone line."

rest at (watch for line wrap):

http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/wire/sns-ap-gop-phone-jamming,0,1684971,print.story?coll=sns-ap-nationworld-headlines

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I am not sure if they would warrant _jail_
time or not. It would depend on the judge's interpretation of the
facts; most spammers and/or telemarketers simply go through a list of
email addresses and/or phone numbers. A nusiance yes, but not the sort
of willful and deliberate behavior of Chuck McGee. Or even if you say
that spammers/telemarketers are a little bit deliberate and willful,
they do not single out one person or organization as this man did. 

I am reminded of the same situation happening to Jerry Falwell's
"Moral Majority" organization, in Lynchburg, VA several years ago.
Someone living in the Atlanta area programmed his computer to dial the
800 number for Falwell exactly once per minute, around the clock for
several weeks. The phone room operators in Lynchburg kept receiving 
these 'dead calls' (total silence) but because of the volume of calls,
no one detected anything unusual, just that they had a 'lost call', 
i.e. a call where the caller 'hung up' (so they thought) before an
operator was available to take the call. Finally an operator during 
the slower overnight hours wised up to the fact that these spurious
'lost calls' were coming once per minute at times when there was
absolutely no reason for them at all ... 

Their first thought was to blame the 'telephone company' and a call
to the Bell repair techs brought a couple of techs out to investigate.
This was a very large account for Bell, after all, with inbound 800
traffic totalling several hundred thousand dollars per month. The
techs wanted to appease the customer, and they got in that centrex
ACD (automatic call distributor) cabinet and over a couple days tried
to isolate the problem. Their main hassle was it was very difficult
to 'busy out' certain lines to test; the volume of 'regular' calls
was so heavy the techs had a hard time getting a line isolated to
busy it out, there was one seizure after another, often times several
seizures at the same instant. Finally, Bell came to the conclusion 
there was nothing wrong with the customer premise equipment. About the
same time, someone on Dr. Falwell's staff in charge of reconciling 
and paying the phone bill each month noticed that the same phone 
number was showing up 'quite a lot of the time', and Bell started
looking in that direction, still trying to appease the customer. 

Telco back-tracked it through AT&T to Atlanta, and telco there filled
in the blanks, and when telco security representatives and Atlanta
Police showed up with a search warrant, they found the computer busy
at its task, dialing 800-MoralMajority once per minute, sitting there
several seconds, then disconnecting and doing it again. Bell told
Falwell they would write it off as long as he (Falwell) okayed them
filing charges. If he would not file charges, they they would sue him
for payment instead. Falwell agreed to let the telco handle it for him
(obviuously!) and the total damage was a little over a million dollars
in bogus 800 charges, over the several months it had been going on. I
guess the guy wound up getting a jail term of six months or so, and
had to make a couple thousand dollars in restitution as part of his
parole agreement.  PAT]

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

From: Danny Burstein <dannyb@panix.com>
Subject: FCC to Cellcos: Clean up Your Bills and Invoices
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 17:12:02 -0500
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC


"FCC Extends Truth-in-Billing Rules to Wireless Phones; Seeks Comment on
Additional Measures to Increase Ability of Consumers to Make Informed
Choices ...

"Federal Communications Commission has expanded the federal consumer
protection rules that apply to consumers=D5 wireless phone bills. It has
also asked for comment on additional measures to facilitate the ability of
telephone consumers to make informed choices among competitive
telecommunications service offerings.

"The actions come in response to consumer concerns with the billing
practices of wireless and other interstate providers, outstanding
issues from the FCC=D5s 1999 Truth-in-Billing Order and a petition
filed by the National Association of State Utility Consumer Advocates
(NASUCA).

rest at:

http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-257319A1.txt [a]
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-257319A1.doc [b]
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-257319A1.pdf [c]

with further info at:

http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-257319A2.txt [a]
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-257319A2.doc [b]
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-257319A2.pdf [c]

and

http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-257319A3.txt [a]
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-257319A3.doc [b]
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-257319A3.pdf [c]


[a] mangled ascitt/txt
[b] Word Doc
[c] pdf

(Most FCC material is available in all three ways. URLs are
identical except for trailing 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: emb120skw@aol.com
Subject: Wiring Two Lines on One Jack
Date: 10 Mar 2005 19:21:37 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


Hi,

I would like to wire one jack for two lines. Here is the setup of the
wires after opening the jack.

The red screw terminal has two blue and 1 orange wires connected to
it.  The green screw terminal has 2 white/blue and 1 white/orange wire
connected to it. I'm just curious as to why there are 3 wires
connected per terminal.

The yellow an black screw terminals are not connected to any
wires. Now what should I do to be able to access a second line?

Thank you!

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Red/green is traditionally one pair;
and yellow/black is  traditionally the second pair. You want to use 
the unused yellow/black screw terminals for your second line. Can
you tell us more about the _type of phone instrument_ currently in
use on your (I presume) working single line? With no other knowledge
it is difficult to answer your question; was this/is this part of
a business phone arrangment? Does the pair which is 'wired' at
present go to a working instrument?   PAT]

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

From: Choreboy <choreboyREMOVE@localnet.com>
Subject: Technion
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 19:18:35 -0500
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com


This afternoon I rushed into the room to answer a call on the third
ring.  "This is Tell Nants calling on behalf of Bell South in regards
to telemarketing.  Sorry we missed you.  If you have any questions,
call 1-866..."

It's pretty bad when somebody programs a robot to call homes and hang
up without saying what it's about.

The call came from 954 443 9404, which is Technion Communications.  On
the web I've found complaints that their telemarketing robots will
bombard a Bell South customer day after day.  Apparently the law
doesn't apply if the victim has a business relationship with the
client, in this case Bell South.

Two hours later I found a similar message on my answering machine,
again telling me to call Bell South at the 866 number.  Because the
robot was programmed start speaking immediately, I didn't get the
whole message.  That could lure the victim into calling in case it was
important.  (On the web I've found a document where Technion argues to
the FCC that the law doesn't apply if they can lure the victim into
making the call.)

It seems like harassment to me.  Can I do anything to stop it?  

Choreboy

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

Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 18:12:52 -0500
From: No Spam <nospam@resi.com>
Subject: Re: Long Distance Carrier Verification


At 05:50 PM 3/10/05, Michael Muderick wrote to inquire:

> Has anyone tried 700-555-4141 lately to verify long distance carrier?
> It's still a published number, but in the Phila. area, I keep getting
> a busy signal.  Is there a new number available?

> Michael Muderick

I'm sure someone will chime in with the 'official' word, but in
practice I've always used 700-555-4141 as the inTER-lata PIC
verification, and 700-555-4242 as the inTRA-lata PIC verification (not
applicable in all markets).  That having been said, your carrier of
choice still has to have translations set up for that to work.  I
believe historically the LEC's would send anything in NPA 700 to the
PIC'd carrier.

It worked from my home phone about two months ago (Philly suburban),
and it does work from my Focal (clec) provided service here as well.

The other thing you can do is try 'double 0' to get to the PIC'd LD
operator.  That might tell you something, but if the PIC'd carrier is
a reseller, you could end up anywhere.

Good luck!

Joshua

my opinions are my own and not necessarily those of my employer
but sometimes we agree

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

From: LB@notmine.com
Subject: Re: Drug-Error Risk at Hospitals Tied to Computers
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 22:41:59 -0500


Monty Solomon wrote:

> By Scott Allen, Globe Staff  |  March 9, 2005

> Hospital computer systems that are widely touted as the best way to
> eliminate dangerous medication mix-ups can actually introduce many
> errors, according to the most comprehensive study of hazards of the
> new technology. The researchers, who shadowed doctors and nurses in a
> Philadelphia hospital for four months, found that some patients were
> put at risk of getting double doses of their medicine while others get
> none at all.

> Doctors at the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania identified
> 22 types of mistakes they have made because of difficulty using
> computerized drug-ordering, such as failing to stop old medications
> when adding new ones or forgetting that the computer automatically
> suspended medications after surgery. Some doctors interviewed for the
> study said they made computer-related mistakes several times a week.

> The findings underscore the complexity of improving safety in US
> hospitals, where the Institute of Medicine estimates that errors of
> all kinds kill 44,000 to 98,000 patients a year.

> The University of Pennsylvania researchers stressed that computers
> hold great potential, but said many systems are overhyped and hard to
> use, prompting one Los Angeles hospital to turn off its drug-ordering
> system altogether.

> http://www.boston.com/yourlife/health/other/articles/2005/03/09/drug_error_risk_at_hospitals_tied_to_computers/

Some of those problems are the result of poor design and/or programming as well as poor testing and quality
control.

LB

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

From: bham <bhamlin3@cox.net>
Subject: Re: Long Distance Carrier Verification
Date: 10 Mar 2005 19:57:18 -0800


If you are getting a busy signal this means that there is most likely
trouble with your local phone company. Whenever you call that number
and you get the name of your long distance company or some other type
of message then the trouble is usually with your long distance carrier.
I would call your local phone company's repair line and advise them
that you are getting a busy signal on the 700 number and they can check
the routing for you. This is really a problem if you are getting a fast
busy which you didn't indicate.

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

From: bham <bhamlin3@cox.net>
Subject: Re: Phone Doesn't Disconnect
Date: 10 Mar 2005 20:01:26 -0800


Normally should take between 3-15 seconds to disconnect a call. If
trouble persists, disconnect all phones except for one and see if it
still happens. If it doesn't happen anymore the trouble is with one of
the phones you unhooked. If you are still having the trouble see if
you get your dialtone back after 15 seconds. If not, call repair
service at your local phone company to have your line tested to make
sure nothing is wrong. There are a number of issues that could cause
this type of problem that an electronic line test might find out.

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

From: bham <bhamlin3@cox.net>
Subject: Re: Any Old Mechanical Systems Still in Use in the US?
Date: 10 Mar 2005 20:05:22 -0800


The bells are totally digital. I was told a few years ago that US West
(Qwest) had the last XBAR offices around in Wyoming and now those are
gone. Most large telcos are now in the process converting their older
1ESS switches to either 5ESS or DMS.

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

From: Lee Sweet <lee@datatel.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 16:57:47 -0500
Subject: Re: Home PBX and VoIP Tie-in


Soren Rathje <soren%lolle.org@spam.me> responded to me:

> Lee Sweet wrote:

[snip]
> Now, what I want to do is have all outbound LD calls go out on the
> Vonage line automatically.  Right now, I have a separate cordless
> phone for that line, but that's not the optimal answer!  :-) 

Soren Rathjes said ...

The short answer is: Asterisk
(www.voip-info.org/tiki-index.php?page=Asterisk)

> 8<snip>8

> and Lee Sweet adds:

> You took the words out of my about-to-reply mouth, and thanks for the 
> added sourceforge info!  Last night I google'd "home pbx" and 
> Asterisk and Digium were near the top.  By purchasing one FXS 
> (station) and one FXO (telco analog line) card for a PC, I figure I 
> can do all I want.

Sounds great from what I've read, and this week I'll download the 
tarball and look at the docs.

Thanks for the second opinion!

(And, for PAT's response re PBXtra, it could *almost* do what I want, 
but I need CLID info, and that's not there.)

Lee Sweet
Datatel, Inc.
Manager of Telephony Services 
   and Information Security
How higher education does business
Voice: 703.968.4661
Fax: 703.968.4625
Cell: 703.932.9425
lee@datatel.com
www.datatel.com


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The way I get Caller-ID was by
first suspending the DISA (the PBXtra was otherwise grabbing 
calls on the first half-ring and providing its own ringing tone
meaning caller-ID never had a chance to get transmitted (between
first and second rings). You suspend DISA by using program code
508000 and another string of numbers, then 'saving' the program
code with 50911. Henceforth the line(s) just ring until they get
answered. To get the caller-ID I tapped both incoming lines (Prairie
Stream and Vonage) into an AT&T two-line splitter and sent the output 
to the (1) single caller-ID display unit and (2) a common audible
or 'side ringer'. By suspending the DISA (thus preventing the
PBXtra from doing 'call supervision' it also permits me to use
my _own_ answering machine/voicemail (which cuts in after a
reasonable number of rings) rather than having PBXtra grab the
incoming call on the first ring and processing it itself and the
two CO's (Vonage and Prairie Stream) thinking the call was answered.
PAT]

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

From: Wesrock@aol.com
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 18:48:32 EST
Subject: 107-Year-old Woman From Independence


Pat,

Not telecom related at all, as far as I know, but on the front page of
the Oklahoman Today there was a photo of a 107-year-old woman, now in
an old folks home in McLoud, Oklahoma, who was born in Independence in
1898.  It was her birthday party.


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 #106
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Mar 11 20:53:29 2005
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j2C1rTr16089;
	Fri, 11 Mar 2005 20:53:29 -0500 (EST)
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 20:53:29 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200503120153.j2C1rTr16089@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 #107

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 11 Mar 2005 20:52:00 EST    Volume 24 : Issue 107

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    NEC NEAX IPX (phillip)
    Mike Wendland: Phone Over Internet is Last Nail in (Jack Decker)
    Michael Powell on Charlie Rose Tonight 3/11/05 (Monty Solomon)
    Remote Physical Device Fingerprinting (Monty Solomon)
    FCC Approves National Standard For Cell Phone Bills (Telecom dailyLead)
    Re: Wiring Two Lines on One Jack (LB@notmine.com)
    Re: Wiring Two Lines on One Jack (Clark W. Griswold, Jr.)
    Re: Wiring Two Lines on One Jack (Robert Bonomi)
    Re: Wiring Two Lines on One Jack (Carl Navarro)
    Re: Wiring Two Lines on One Jack (Brad Houser)
    Re: Wiring Two Lines on One Jack (John Beaman)
    Re: Long Distance Carrier Verification (Dave Garland)
    Re: Long Distance Carrier Verification (Bill Matern)
    Re: Technion (Robert Bonomi)
    Re: Technion (sean)
    Re: Cell Phone Radiation Dangers (Dean)
    Re: Vonage Outage Last Thursday (Steve Sobol)
    A Push to Explain Cell Phone Costs (Carl Moore)
    Re: Other Firmware For Linksys wrt54g? Satori (gary)
    Re: Jail Sentence for Phone Line "Denial of Service" (Robert Bonomi)
    Re: FCC to Cellcos: Clean up Your Bills and Invoices (Lisa Hancock)
    Re: DoJ: VoIP Providers Avoiding CALEA Mandate (Sean)
    Iraq's 'Saviors' Guilty of Vandlism (Patrick Townson)

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: phillip <phillip.sass@med.va.gov>
Subject: NEC NEAX IPX
Date: 11 Mar 2005 08:57:48 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


Has anyone using a NEC NEAX IPX telephone switch run across telephone
lines mysteriously becoming unforwarded from voicemail? BTW, the
voicemail system we are using is Cisco Unity. This is a random
occurance that is becoming a hot issue. Also what are the experiences
with integrating this switch with Cisco Unity. We are having issues
there as well.

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

From: Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@Withheld at request>
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 07:58:06 -0500
Subject: Mike Wendland: Phone Over the Internet is Last Nail in Coffin
Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com


http://www.freep.com/money/tech/mwendland11e_20050311.htm

MIKE WENDLAND: Phone over the Internet is last nail in landline coffin

BY MIKE WENDLAND
FREE PRESS COLUMNIST

The most basic way the world communicates -- by telephone -- is
rapidly moving to the Internet.

The technology is called Voice over Internet Protocol, or VoIP. Just
as cell phones started us down the road of replacing our traditional
landline phones, so VoIP will eventually cut the wired connection.

Oh, there will still be landline phones, just like some people still
have rotary dial phones. But in the next few years, many of us will be
making our calls via the Internet.

This week, America Online, arguably the most influential Internet
service in the world, announced that it will start to bring VoIP
service to its customers within a month.

Full story at:
http://www.freep.com/money/tech/mwendland11e_20050311.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/

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

Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 08:57:26 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Michael Powell on Charlie Rose Tonight 3/11/05


MICHAEL POWELL
Chairman, Federal Communications Commission

The Charlie Rose Show
http://www.charlierose.com/

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

Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 20:00:59 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Remote Physical Device Fingerprinting


http://www.caida.org/outreach/papers/2005/fingerprinting/

Remote physical device fingerprinting

To be presented at the IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, May
8-11, 2005

Tadayoshi Kohno
Department of Computer Science and Engineering
University of California, San Diego

Andre Broido and kc claffy
Cooperative Association for Internet Data Analysis - CAIDA
San Diego Supercomputer Center,
University of California, San Diego

We introduce the area of remote physical device fingerprinting, or
fingerprinting a physical device, as opposed to an operating system or
class of devices, remotely, and without the fingerprinted device's
known cooperation. We accomplish this goal by exploiting small,
microscopic deviations in device hardware: clock skews. Our techniques
do not require any modification to the fingerprinted devices. Our
techniques report consistent measurements when the measurer is
thousands of miles, multiple hops, and tens of milliseconds away from
the fingerprinted device, and when the fingerprinted device is
connected to the Internet from different locations and via different
access technologies. 

Further, one can apply our passive and semi-passive techniques when
the fingerprinted device is behind a NAT or firewall, and also when
the device's system time is maintained via NTP or SNTP. One can use
our techniques to obtain information about whether two devices on the
Internet, possibly shifted in time or IP addresses, are actually the
same physical device. Example applications include: computer
forensics; tracking, with some probability, a physical device as it
connects to the Internet from different public access points; counting
the number of devices behind a NAT even when the devices use constant
or random IP IDs; remotely probing a block of addresses to determine
if the addresses correspond to virtual hosts, e.g., as part of a
virtual honeynet; and unanonymizing anonymized network traces.

http://www.caida.org/outreach/papers/2005/fingerprinting/

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

Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 12:21:03 EST
From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA <usta@dailylead.com>
Subject: FCC Approves National Standard for Cell Phone Bills


Telecom dailyLead from USTA
March 11, 2005
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=19980&l=2017006

TODAY'S HEADLINES

NEWS OF THE DAY
* FCC approves national standard for cell phone bills
BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH
* Dolan to use own coin to fund Voom
* FCC chief calls for return of civil discourse
* EchoStar faces accounting investigation, report says
USTA SPOTLIGHT 
* At SUPERCOMM:  Register today for the IP Video Conference
EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES
* Tokyo plans citywide WiMAX network
* Wireless companies display wares at CeBit
VOIP DOWNLOAD
* Report: VoIP key to wireless growth
* Search players next to enter VoIP space?
* Cox embraces VoIP
* Q-and-A with Vonage's chief
REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE
* SEC plans charges against former Qwest CEO

Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others.
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=19980&l=2017006

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

From: LB@notmine.com
Subject: Re: Wiring Two Lines on One Jack
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 06:21:25 -0500
Organization: Optimum Online


emb120skw@aol.com wrote:

> Hi,

> I would like to wire one jack for two lines. Here is the setup of the
> wires after opening the jack.

> The red screw terminal has two blue and 1 orange wires connected to
> it.  The green screw terminal has 2 white/blue and 1 white/orange wire
> connected to it. I'm just curious as to why there are 3 wires
> connected per terminal.

> The yellow an black screw terminals are not connected to any
> wires. Now what should I do to be able to access a second line?

> Thank you!

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Red/green is traditionally one pair;
> and yellow/black is  traditionally the second pair. You want to use
> the unused yellow/black screw terminals for your second line. Can
> you tell us more about the _type of phone instrument_ currently in
> use on your (I presume) working single line? With no other knowledge
> it is difficult to answer your question; was this/is this part of
> a business phone arrangment? Does the pair which is 'wired' at
> present go to a working instrument?   PAT]

As Pat says red-green and black-yellow are what you care about.  You
(actually the telco does this when you sign up) would normally add the
extra line to the yellow-black at the box where the phone enters the
premises.  The extra wires sound like they go to extra phones.  If that
box (with extra wires) is outside the premises you might want to ask the
telco or the cops unless those wires clearly go to extra phones or devices
you know about.

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

From: Clark W. Griswold, Jr. <spamtrap100@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Wiring Two Lines on One Jack
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 07:56:10 -0700


emb120skw@aol.com wrote:

> I would like to wire one jack for two lines. Here is the setup of the
> wires after opening the jack.

> The red screw terminal has two blue and 1 orange wires connected to
> it.  The green screw terminal has 2 white/blue and 1 white/orange wire
> connected to it. I'm just curious as to why there are 3 wires
> connected per terminal.

I think you will find that your house was not wired "home run" to each
jack. In other words, one pair goes back to the demarc block and the
two other pairs go to other jacks in the house.

> The yellow an black screw terminals are not connected to any
> wires. Now what should I do to be able to access a second line?

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Red/green is traditionally one pair;
> and yellow/black is  traditionally the second pair. You want to use 
> the unused yellow/black screw terminals for your second line. Can
> you tell us more about the _type of phone instrument_ currently in
> use on your (I presume) working single line? With no other knowledge
> it is difficult to answer your question; was this/is this part of
> a business phone arrangment? Does the pair which is 'wired' at
> present go to a working instrument?   PAT]

The colors don't really matter other than for keeping track of what's
going on.  You need to start at the demarc and select an unused pair
for the second line.  When you get to the phone jack, you need to know
if your phone is a single line or dual line phone. If its a dual line
phone, then Pat's advice is correct. Wire line 1 to the inner pair of
the jack (red/green on some jacks) and wire line 2 to the outer pair
(yellow/black).

If the phone is a single line phone and you want it to access Line 2,
you will need to wire Line 2 to the inner pair.

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

From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi)
Subject: Re: Wiring Two Lines on One Jack
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 15:49:36 -0000
Organization: Widgets, Inc.


In article <telecom24.106.5@telecom-digest.org>, <emb120skw@aol.com>
wrote:

> Hi,

> I would like to wire one jack for two lines. Here is the setup of the
> wires after opening the jack.

> The red screw terminal has two blue and 1 orange wires connected to
> it.  The green screw terminal has 2 white/blue and 1 white/orange wire
> connected to it. I'm just curious as to why there are 3 wires
> connected per terminal.

Because your wiring is a 'spider web'.  <grin>

The 3 pairs of wires go to three different places.

Two of them go to other jacks, or where other jacks 'used to be'.

The other pair goes "towards" where the phone line comes into your
house.  Maybe 'directly", or may to another jack that is 'closer' to
the entry-point.

> The yellow an black screw terminals are not connected to any
> wires. Now what should I do to be able to access a second line?

You need another pair of wires from the telco entry-point (or wherever
the 2nd line originates) to that jack.  connected to the black/yellow
terminals.

Of course, this implies that you _have_ a "second line", from the
telephone company, or 'somebody else' (e.g. a VoIP provider).

Then, obviously, you have to have a "two line capable" telephone
instrument, or some sort of a 'switch' (as in a simple mechanical
"DPDT" device) between the phone and the wall jack.

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

From: Carl Navarro <cnavarro@wcnet.org>
Subject: Re: Wiring Two Lines on One Jack
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 17:03:52 GMT
Organization: Road Runner High Speed Online http://www.rr.com


On 10 Mar 2005 19:21:37 -0800, emb120skw@aol.com wrote:

> Hi,

> I would like to wire one jack for two lines. Here is the setup of the
> wires after opening the jack.

> The red screw terminal has two blue and 1 orange wires connected to
> it.  The green screw terminal has 2 white/blue and 1 white/orange wire
> connected to it. I'm just curious as to why there are 3 wires
> connected per terminal.

> The yellow an black screw terminals are not connected to any
> wires. Now what should I do to be able to access a second line?

If you haven't already guessed, the blue pair in a cable is the first
line and the orange par is the second.

The reason for 3 wires is that one jack is feeding another one or two
jacks somewhere else in the building.  If you carefully tag the 3
cables that go to the jack, you can remove one at a time until you
don't get dial tone, or remove them all and put them back one at a
time until you get dial tone.  That is the feed pair to that jack and
if you search, you'll find that 2 or more other jacks are now dead.

The trick is to find the closest jack to the demarc and hope that it
is the one that feeds dial tone to the whole building.  Get out your
toner and probe and start testing :-) or just do it by trial and
error.

When you're finished, you'll bring the second dial tone into the
building on the orange pair and wire that orange pair to the
black/yellow wires on the jack.  If you need to send that dial tone to
another location, you'll need to put 2 or 3 pairs down on every jack
just as they did with the first line.

I would guess that the reason for the orange pair is because the
previous tenant either had DSL, or a broken blue pair on that cable.

Carl Navarro

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

From: Brad Houser <bradDOThouser@intel.com>
Subject: Re: Wiring Two Lines on One Jack
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 11:52:59 -0800
Organization: Intel
Reply-To: Brad Houser <bradDOThouser@intel.com>


<emb120skw@aol.com> wrote in message
news:telecom24.106.5@telecom-digest.org:

> Hi,

> I would like to wire one jack for two lines. Here is the setup of the
> wires after opening the jack.

> The red screw terminal has two blue and 1 orange wires connected to
> it.  The green screw terminal has 2 white/blue and 1 white/orange wire
> connected to it. I'm just curious as to why there are 3 wires
> connected per terminal.

> The yellow an black screw terminals are not connected to any
> wires. Now what should I do to be able to access a second line?

Many homes were wired with a "daisy chain" or loop. The Blue/Blue-White
lines are probably going off in two directions, no way of telling from
your description, but it could be one to the demarc and one to another
jack. The Orange/Orange-White pair could also be going to one of the
first two locations, or to a third location. There may even be yet
another Orange pair that isn't connected that could be used for line
two. You need to figure out what is available for use, if you don't want
to change any of the other phones. You can do this by trial and error
or by "toning" the lines. (Ask your Home Depot electrical guy if you
don't have one of these.)

You could also have a situation where the lines are "home run" but
someone added a jack by extending a line from that jack to another.

Brad Houser

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

Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 08:55:16 -0600
From: John Beaman <jbeaman@good-sam.com>
Subject: Re: Wiring Two Lines on One Jack 


emb120skw@aol.com wrote to inquire about Wiring Two Lines on One Jack
on 10 Mar 2005 19:21:37 -0800:

> Hi,

> I would like to wire one jack for two lines. Here is the setup of the
> wires after opening the jack.

> The red screw terminal has two blue and 1 orange wires connected to
> it.  The green screw terminal has 2 white/blue and 1 white/orange wire
> connected to it. I'm just curious as to why there are 3 wires
> connected per terminal.

> The yellow an black screw terminals are not connected to any
> wires. Now what should I do to be able to access a second line?

> Thank you!

Greetings,

  Sounds to me like your residence is wired with CAT3 (4 pair) cable
instead of the old standard wiring used for phone jacks.  It would
also seem that your phone jacks are "daisy chained" together instead
of each being wired directory from the demark (star topology).  I am
also assuming that the orange pair is wired to the terminals because
there is an open in one of the blue pairs, and someone just grabbed
the next available pair as a workaround.  Or, they could be used as
some sort of intercom / door access system.  Please see the attached
chart documenting the relationship

Standard wire               Cat 3

Tip- Green -----Line 1----- Blue
Ring- Red  -----Line 1----- White/Blue stripe
Tip- Black -----Line 2----- Orange
Ring-Yellow ----Line 2----- White/Orange stripe

With that in mind, there is no reason you cannot use the green or
brown pair for your second line.  Provided that they are not in use at
any other jacks.  I would highly recommend opening up the other phone
jacks, and see if you can find another jack where the orange pair is
in use.  While that would not be conclusive, it would further
substantiate my guess about the orange pair being used in place of the
blue pair.

JB
The Evangelical Lutheran Good Samaritan Society.

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

From: Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com>
Subject: Re: Long Distance Carrier Verification
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 23:34:32 -0600
Organization: Wizard Information


It was a dark and stormy night when Michael Muderick
<michael.muderick@verizon.net> wrote:

> Has anyone tried 700-555-4141 lately to verify long distance carrier?

Works fine here (Minneapolis, with LDC Lightyear).

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

From: Bill Matern <wtm@ncomm.com>
Subject: Re: Long Distance Carrier Verification
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 12:49:10 -0500
Organization: MV Communications, Inc.


When I worked on a 700 number service, the number was 700-555-1212 to
find out about your IXC.  This was over 10 years ago.  However, when I
just tired it in Salem, NH it did not work, but you may want to try
this alternative number.

On Verizon's site, they indicate the 700-555-4141 number so it
probably has changed in that time.  This number did not work either
for me.

Bill

Some info on 700 numbers (from http://www.nanpa.com/faq/sitefaq.html)

Area code 700 was assigned in 1983 on the eve of the introduction of
long distance competition in the US. The intent was that interexchange
carriers could use 700 numbers to implement new services quickly. When
a 700 number is dialed, the local exchange carrier processing the call
routes it to the presubscribed interexchange carrier, unless the
caller has overridden presubscription by dialing 101XXXX before the
number. Thus each interexchange carrier has access to all 7.92 million
700 numbers. 700 numbers are different from all other North American
Numbering Plan numbers because the destinations are not unique, and,
in fact, depend on the network the caller has selected.

Michael Muderick <michael.muderick@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:telecom24.105.12@telecom-digest.org:

> Has anyone tried 700-555-4141 lately to verify long distance carrier?
> It's still a published number, but in the Phila. area, I keep getting
> a busy signal.  Is there a new number available?

> Michael Muderick

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

From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi)
Subject: Re: Technion
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 16:26:38 -0000
Organization: Widgets, Inc.


In article <telecom24.106.6@telecom-digest.org>,
Choreboy  <choreboyREMOVE@localnet.com> wrote:

> This afternoon I rushed into the room to answer a call on the third
> ring.  "This is Tell Nants calling on behalf of Bell South in regards
> to telemarketing.  Sorry we missed you.  If you have any questions,
> call 1-866..."

> It's pretty bad when somebody programs a robot to call homes and hang
> up without saying what it's about.

> The call came from 954 443 9404, which is Technion Communications.  On
> the web I've found complaints that their telemarketing robots will
> bombard a Bell South customer day after day.  Apparently the law
> doesn't apply if the victim has a business relationship with the
> client, in this case Bell South.

The language of the statute (47 USC 227) does *NOT* support that
interpretation.  It gives a free pass if the _caller_ has a "prior
business relationship" with the party being called.  There is nothing
to indicate that the party with the prior business relationship can
"delegate" that right to a third party.

See: <http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/47/227.html> 

Particularly sections (a) (3) (B), and (a) (4) (B)

> Two hours later I found a similar message on my answering machine,
> again telling me to call Bell South at the 866 number.  Because the
> robot was programmed start speaking immediately, I didn't get the
> whole message.  That could lure the victim into calling in case it was
> important.  (On the web I've found a document where Technion argues to
> the FCC that the law doesn't apply if they can lure the victim into
> making the call.)

> It seems like harassment to me.  Can I do anything to stop it?  

Consider a small-claims lawsuit for 'statutory damages' ($500) under
47 USC 227.

File a formal complaint with the Federal *TRADE* Commission, for
violation of the 'telemarketing rule".

Get on the federal "Do Not Call" list, if you're not there already.

The FTC rules make it clear that 3rd-party telemarketing agencies have
to scrub against that list -- even if their client is 'exempt' from
regulation.

Dunno about Bell South, but SBC -- who is *really* egregious with
their telemarketing --_will_ flag a customer account for "do not call
for marketing purposes", upon request.

I betcha Bell South will too.  The law *requires* that companies
maintain their _own_ internal Do not call list -- for *anyone* who has
expressly requested that "that company" not call them.  The 'prior
business relation- ship' exemption does *not* trump the
company-maintained 'do not call' list for marketing calls.

Note: When requesting (demanding) addition to the company DNC list,
the companies are prone to tell you that it will take some period of
time before that request becomes effective.  Reply that the only delay
sanctioned by law is for a number entered on the *NATIONAL* Do Not
Call registry. that there is *NO* provision in law for any delay in
implementing a company-specific "do not call" request.  For a telco,
require that they put in the account 'notes' that "customer has
directed that his number be put on the company-maintained do-not-call
list, and that therefore, in compliance with federal statute, all
telemarketing calls cease IMMEDIATELY."  

The telco _is_ "responsible" (as in 'legally liable') for the actions
of any 'agent' or contract marketing service that violates the law.
This opens the door for small-claims action against *both* the actual
telemarketer, and the telco.  subpoenaing the records for when
_anyone_ "requested" addition to the company-maintained do-not-call
list, when the add was _actually_ made, and the date/time of the last
call each such number, does wonders for showing 'knowing and wilful'
violation --- allowing for treble damages to be collected.

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

From: sean <sean@snerts-r-us.org>
Subject: Re: Technion
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 12:27:33 -0500
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com


Choreboy wrote:

> This afternoon I rushed into the room to answer a call on the third
> ring.  "This is Tell Nants calling on behalf of Bell South in regards
> to telemarketing.  Sorry we missed you.  If you have any questions,
> call 1-866..."

> It's pretty bad when somebody programs a robot to call homes and hang
> up without saying what it's about.

> The call came from 954 443 9404, which is Technion Communications.  On
> the web I've found complaints that their telemarketing robots will
> bombard a Bell South customer day after day.  Apparently the law
> doesn't apply if the victim has a business relationship with the
> client, in this case Bell South.

> Two hours later I found a similar message on my answering machine,
> again telling me to call Bell South at the 866 number.  Because the
> robot was programmed start speaking immediately, I didn't get the
> whole message.  That could lure the victim into calling in case it was
> important.  (On the web I've found a document where Technion argues to
> the FCC that the law doesn't apply if they can lure the victim into
> making the call.)

> It seems like harassment to me.  Can I do anything to stop it?  

> Choreboy

Give em a dose of their own medicine:

Get a cheap PC and a cheap modem, and set up a script to repeat dial
the 800 number over and over and over, with a recorded message saying
that auto dial robots are illegal.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But _your_autodial robot is _also_
illegal. People have tried that, thinking they would not get caught,
but they do get caught, and frequently punished, sometimes severely. 

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

From: Dean <cjmebox-telecomdigest@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Cell Phone Radiation Dangers
Date: 10 Mar 2005 22:08:55 -0800


Isaiah Beard wrote:

> Dean wrote:

>> A while back some on this list engaged in a lively debate about cell
>> phone radiation risks. This article may have some information of
>> interest to those of you who think this issue isn't dead yet.

>> The cell phone industry: Big Tobacco 2.0?

>> By Molly Wood, senior editor, CNET.com
>> Tuesday, March 8, 2005

> Oh, C|Net.  Now we KNOW it's quality journalism.  </sarcasm>

> Consider that Ms. Wood readily admits she has an agenda (she has an
> axe to grind with cell phone manufacturers over what she perceives as
> "iron-clad control over phone releases and pricing, its
> ever-lengthening contracts, and the annoying habit it has of crippling
> Bluetooth phones so that [she] can't use them the way [she wants]
> to").  I would thus take this with a heavy handful of salt.

> E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
> Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.

OK OK, I'm not saying there's anything absolutely definitive in that
article. But it seems certainly prudent to use a headset and try to
keep the antenna at a certain distance -- just as she suggests toward
the end of the article. (although I think I read somewhere that the
cord of the headset can have some adverse effect too - one can only
take so many precautions and still be reasonable:-)

Regards,

Dean

PS As for Ms Wood's honesty, I am certainly not qualified to offer an
opinion (haven't read her enough). But the evidence you mention is
hardly enough to dismiss her as biased. If I had to guess, I would say
that her grievances are shared by the vast majority of people
interested in telecom, and I don't think too many of us want to see
phone manufacturers brought to their knees by unwarranted lawsuits.

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

From: Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net>
Subject: Re: Vonage Outage Last Thursday
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 22:52:53 -0800
Organization: Glorb Internet Services, http://www.glorb.com


Brian Inglis wrote:

> It works, ship it ... we're all beta test sites now!

Given this discussion of apparent Vonage incompetence, their whining
about their traffic being blocked is quite funny. Seems they are quite
capable of blocking their own traffic, if inadvertently. ;)


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: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 10:24:01 EST
From: Carl Moore <cmoore@ARL.ARMY.MIL>
Subject: "A Push to Explain Cell Phone Costs"


For as long as it's good:
http://abclocal.go.com/wpvi/news/31105-bb-cellphones.html

Story starts "Have trouble understanding how all those fees add
up on your cellphone bill?"

In the path I furnished above, notice "bb", which stands for
"Bizarre Bazaar" -- strange but true stories.

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

From: gary <garys_groups@nb.net>
Subject: Re: Other Firmware For Linksys wrt54g? Satori
Date: 11 Mar 2005 07:35:47 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


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?

> 2. Are there other firmware vendors worth looking at on linksys.org?

> Thank you,

> Patty

Patty,

Look on the bottom of your router, on the sticker that has your s/n
and mac address, it should have you hardware version. (WRTG54g vx.x)

If your version is 2.2 or greater you will probably have to subscibe
to sveasoft.com for $20/yr and use the Alchemy release as I have. If
your version is 2.0 or lower then you should be able to load the older
versions like Satori(available without subscription) or openwrt(only
supports through v2.0)

The signal power increase does work, but so do better antennas

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

From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi)
Subject: Re: Jail Sentence for Phone Line "Denial of Service"
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 15:39:37 -0000
Organization: Widgets, Inc.


In article <telecom24.106.3@telecom-digest.org>, Danny Burstein
<dannyb@panix.com> wrote:

> Fascinating ... could this be extended to spammers? Please? Looks close 
> enough to be worth a looksee ...

No chance.  unfortunately.

The statute involved (47 USC 223) is *expressly* limited to
_telephone_calls_ made with the intent to harass or annoy.

> "Ex-GOP Party Head Charged in Phone Jamming"

> "By ERIK STETSON Associated Press Writer March 10, 2005, 1:23 PM EST"

> "CONCORD, N.H. The former executive director of the New Hampshire 
> Republican Party was sentenced Thursday to seven months in prison for 
> jamming Democratic telephone lines during the 2002 election.

> "Chuck McGee pleaded guilty to federal charges of conspiring to make 
> anonymous calls with the intent to annoy or harass. He was also fined 
> $2,000 and ordered to perform 200 hours of community service."

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

From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Subject: Re: FCC to Cellcos: Clean up Your Bills and Invoices
Date: 11 Mar 2005 09:41:32 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


Danny Burstein wrote:

> "FCC Extends Truth-in-Billing Rules to Wireless Phones; Seeks
> Comment on Additional Measures to Increase Ability of Consumers to
> Make Informed Choices ...

I wonder if this will make bills _harder_ to understand.

As a result of all the "fair disclosure" laws, companies now send out
whole books in fine print on their numerous policies.  They're
impossible for a lay person to understand, and they're constantly
changing.  Overloading someone with detail is an easy way to fraud
someone.

Years ago our electric bill was on a postcard.  Name, address, KWH
hours used, total cost.  Now it's several pages of graphs and charts.
Our phone bill used to be one small slip of paper -- fixed costs on one
side, toll charges on the other.  Now it's so thick it requires extra
postage -- and I don't even have toll charges!  (And it's on
double-sided paper too!)

I'm pretty sure it was the PUCs that ordered the breakouts of
toll/non-toll and basic/non-basic data blocks.  Further, all imposed
charges, ie 911, FCC line, should be rolled up in service and
equipment; all taxes rolled into one item just as the old days.

Can anyone justify mailing out the Encyclopedia Britannica for a
monthly utility bill?

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

From: sean <sean@snerts-r-us.org>
Subject: Re: DoJ: VoIP Providers Avoiding CALEA Mandate
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 13:26:59 -0500


Tony P. wrote:

> I'm pretty sure that most VoIP providers encrypt from the terminal
> adapter back to the server. But everything is based on IP aware
> telephone switches so it isn't a problem to tap at the switch.

Most do NOT encrypt. That is what makes this so funny. It's extremely
easy to tap VOIP. All one needs to tap SIP based voip is the latest
vesrion of ETHEREAL - capture the packets, and it will save the sip
streams as .au files that can be played in windows media player!

I have verified this works for tapping Vonage calls.

> It's because law enforcement by and large is ignorant when it comes to 
> technology. 

> Even the FBI, the leading agency in the U.S. trips over it's own feet 
> when it comes to information technology. 

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

From: Patrick Townson <ptownson@telecom-digest.org>
Subject: Iraq's 'Saviours' Guilty of Vandalism
Date: Fri, Mar 11 2005 00:00:00 GMT


A very sad story about a bit of 'collateral damage' in the
historically significant country called Iraq. Now it seems, one of
the Seven Wonders of the World, the 'Hanging Gardens' has been
irreparably damaged by Iraq's 'saviors'; American troops have
ruined it.  I thought I read somewhere they were trying to take care
of the museums and other historical artifacts in this part of the 
world where so much of the Old Testament was based. I guess I 
thought wrong, but what else is old?  

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1106088610017&call_pageid=968256290204&col=968350116795

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 #107
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat Mar 12 01:04:56 2005
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j2C64u017789;
	Sat, 12 Mar 2005 01:04:56 -0500 (EST)
Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 01:04:56 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200503120604.j2C64u017789@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 #108

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 12 Mar 2005 01:05:00 EST    Volume 24 : Issue 108

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Swedish Raid on ISP Called Major Blow to Piracy (Lisa Minter)
    GOP Party Head Sentenced to Seven Months in Phone Jamming (M Solomon)
    Apple Can Demand Names of Bloggers, Judge Says (Monty Solomon)
    EFFector 18.4: EFF Announces New Privacy Tool (Monty Solomon)
    EFFector 18.5: EFF Asks Court to Protect Online Journalists (M Solomon)
    EFFector 18.6: Action Alert - Help Save the Orphan Works! (M Solomon)
    EPIC Alert 12.04 (Monty Solomon)
    EPIC Alert 12.05 (Monty Solomon)
    Privacy Self-Regulation, A Decade of Disappointment (Monty Solomon)
    Need PC Based Call Attendant/Answering Service (pgrogan@gmail.com)
    Re: How to Make Skype Wireless? (summitcircle)
    Re: Long Distance Carrier Verification (Diamond Dave)
    Re: Wiring Two Lines on One Jack (Marcus Didius Falco)

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: 11 Mar 2005 21:10:27 -0800
From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: Swedish Raid on ISP Called Major Blow to Piracy


By Steve Gorman

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - The U.S. film industry on Friday hailed a raid
by Swedish police against an Internet service provider as a major blow
to European piracy of movies and music on the Web.

The raid was carried out on Thursday at the Stockholm offices of
Bahnhof, Sweden's oldest and largest ISP, which U.S.  copyright
protection experts have considered a haven for high-level Internet
piracy for years.

"This was a very big raid," said John Malcolm, worldwide anti-piracy
operations director at the Motion Picture Association of America
(MPAA), which represents Hollywood's major studios.

"The material that was seized contained not only evidence of a piracy
organization operating in Sweden but of online piracy organizations
operating throughout all of Europe," he told Reuters.

Bahnhof, the first major ISP raided by the Swedes without advance
notice, was home to some of the biggest and fastest servers in Europe,
the MPAA said in a statement.

Authorities in Sweden seized four computer servers -- one reputed to
be the biggest pirate server in Europe -- containing enough digital
film and music content for up to 3-1/2 years of uninterrupted play,
the organization said.

Malcolm said authorities in Scandinavian countries had been reluctant
to take such action in the past but were recently cracking down on
piracy. About 20 individuals suspected of Internet piracy have been
the targets of smaller raids by Swedish authorities during the past
month.

The servers seized during the operation contained a total of 1,800
digital movie files, 5,000 software application files and 450,000
digital audio files -- amounting to 23 terabytes of data.

The MPAA says the film industry loses &#36;3.5 billion a year to
videotapes and DVDs sold on the black market, but it has no estimate
for how much Internet piracy costs the industry.

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 . 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/VNU News Service. 

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

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

From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: GOP Party Head sentenced to Seven Months in Phone Jamming
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 21:45:41 -0500


By Erik Stetson, Associated Press Writer  |  March 10, 2005

CONCORD, N.H. -- The former executive director of the state Republican
Party was sentenced Thursday to seven months in prison for jamming
Democratic telephone lines during the 2002 general election.

Chuck McGee pleaded guilty in federal court to conspiring to make
anonymous calls to annoy or harass. He also was fined $2,000 and
ordered to perform 200 hours of community service. He faced up to 5
years in prison and a $250,000 fine.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/new_hampshire/articles/2005/03/10/ 
former_gop_party_head_sentenced_to_seven_months_in_phone_jamming/

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

From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Apple Can Demand Names of Bloggers, Judge Says
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 22:24:36 -0500


By LAURIE J. FLYNN

SAN FRANCISCO, March 11 - A California judge ruled Friday that Apple
Computer has the right to subpoena the names of sources and documents
relating to confidential company information that was published late
last year by three Web sites.

Judge James P. Kleinberg of the Santa Clara County Superior Court in
San Jose, Calif., said in a 13-page ruling that Apple's interest in
protecting its trade secrets outweighed the public's right to
information about Apple and the right of bloggers to disseminate that.

The ruling skirted the question of whether the Web sites were
protected by the same laws that protect professional journalists, as
civil liberties groups had argued, and focused on the notion that the
published information included trade secrets and was essentially
stolen property.

The ruling came in the three-month-old lawsuit brought by Apple
against the unnamed individuals, presumably Apple employees, who
reportedly leaked information about new music software, code-named
Asteroid, which the company said constituted a trade secret. Under
California law, divulging trade secrets is subject to civil and
criminal penalties.

That information was published on three Apple enthusiast Web sites,
Apple Insider, Think Secret and PowerPage. The Web sites were not
named in the suit.

In the course of discovery, Apple served a subpoena on Nfox.com, the
e-mail service provider for PowerPage, seeking information and
documents that might identify the source of the disclosure of Apple's
new product.  The Web sites sought to block that subpoena.

The case has been closely watched for its potential impact on the
publishers of Web sites and bloggers, who say the privilege of reporters
to protect their confidential sources should extend to online writers.

But Judge Kleinberg wrote that assuming Apple's accusations are true,
the information is "stolen property, just as any physical item, such
as a laptop computer containing the same information on its hard drive
(or not) would be."

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/12/technology/12blog.html? 
hp&ex=1110603600&en=65f05a7ccf104a46&ei=5094

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: To read New York Times on line each day
with no login or registration requirements, read it here at our site
at http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra/nytimes.html . Hundreds of new
items each day.   PAT]

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

Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 22:55:18 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: EFFector 18.4: EFF Announces New Privacy Tool


EFFector  Vol. 18, No. 4  February 11, 2005  donna@eff.org

A Publication of the Electronic Frontier Foundation
ISSN 1062-9424

In the 320th Issue of EFFector:

 * EFF Announces New Privacy Tool
 * EFF Urges Congress to Vote "No" on Real ID Bill
 * Mandatory Student IDs Contain RFIDs
 * BayFF Event: EFF Celebrates Innovation, Feb. 22 
 * EFF Seeks Summer Interns
 * MiniLinks (17): RIAA Sues Dead People
 * Administrivia

http://www.eff.org/effector/18/04.php

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

Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 22:56:24 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: EFFector 18.5: EFF Asks Court to Protect Online Journalists


EFFector  Vol. 18, No. 5  February 18, 2005  donna@eff.org

A Publication of the Electronic Frontier Foundation
ISSN 1062-9424

In the 321st Issue of EFFector:

 * EFF Asks Court to Protect Online Journalists
 * RFID Tracking Program Ended in Sutter School
 * EFF Warns Consumers about the Dangers of EULAs
 * BayFF Event: EFF Celebrates Innovation, Tuesday, Feb. 22 
 * EFF Seeks Summer Interns
 * MiniLinks (18): European Parliament Rejects Software Patents 
 * Administrivia

http://www.eff.org/effector/18/05.php

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

Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 22:55:35 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: EFFector 18.6: Action Alert - Help Save the Orphan Works!


EFFector  Vol. 18, No. 6  February 25, 2005  donna@eff.org

A Publication of the Electronic Frontier Foundation
ISSN 1062-9424

In the 322nd Issue of EFFector:

 * Action Alert: Help Save Orphan Works!
 * Online Journalists Get Their Day in Court
 * Fight the Broadcast Flag From Your Armchair
 * Patent Threats Hurt Scientific Research
 * Texas E-voting Forum Open to the Public
 * EFF, Public Knowledge to Hold Press Conference 
   on Grokster Case, March 1
 * CFP 2005: Panopticon - April 12-15
 * MiniLinks (10): FCC "Can't Regulate Washing Machines" 
 * Administrivia

http://www.eff.org/effector/18/06.php

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

Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 22:54:47 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: EPIC Alert 12.04


======================================================================
                          E P I C  A l e r t
======================================================================
Volume 12.04                                         February 26, 2005
----------------------------------------------------------------------

                           Published by the
             Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC)
                           Washington, D.C.

            http://www.epic.org/alert/EPIC_Alert_12.04.html

======================================================================
Table of Contents
======================================================================

[1] EPIC Urges ChoicePoint To Give Access to 145,000 Victims
[2] California School Drops RFID Tracking Program After EPIC Protest
[3] EPIC Opposes Sharp Increase in TSA Surveillance Spending
[4] EPIC Comments on DC Metro's Public Access to Records Policy
[5] Bipartisan Legislation Introduced to Enhance Open Government
[6] News in Brief
[7] EPIC Bookstore: Michael Chesbro's Privacy Handbook
[8] Upcoming Conferences and Events

http://www.epic.org/alert/EPIC_Alert_12.04.html

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

Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 22:54:52 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: EPIC Alert 12.05


========================================================================
                           E P I C  A l e r t
========================================================================
Volume 12.05                                              March 11, 2005
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                           Published by the
              Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC)
                           Washington, D.C.

            http://www.epic.org/alert/EPIC_Alert_12.05.html

========================================================================
Table of Contents
========================================================================

[1] EPIC Launches West Coast Office, Continues to Probe ChoicePoint
[2] New Report: FTC Market Approach Fails to Protect Consumer Privacy
[3] "Spotlight on Surveillance" Highlights Federal Spending on Snooping
[4] EPIC Urges Careful Scrutiny of Proposed Federal Profiling Agency
[5] Comments Outline Voter Registration Problems in the 2004 Election
[6] News in Brief
[7] EPIC Bookstore: William S. Hubbartt's Workplace Privacy
[8] Upcoming Conferences and Events

http://www.epic.org/alert/EPIC_Alert_12.05.html

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

Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 22:56:07 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Privacy Self-Regulation, A Decade of Disappointment


Excerpt from EPIC Alert 12.05
http://www.epic.org/alert/EPIC_Alert_12.05.html

EPIC Report: Privacy Self-Regulation, A Decade of Disappointment:

     http://www.epic.org/reports/decadedisappoint.html

A high-resolution PDF version of the report features advertisements
for personal data sold by major companies, including Victoria's Secret
and 1-800-FLOWERS:

     http://www.epic.org/reports/decadedisappoint.pdf

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

From: pgrogan@gmail.com
Subject: Need PC Based Call Attendant/Answering Service
Date: 11 Mar 2005 21:20:14 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


I'm looking for an inexpensive (under 400) software/hardware solution
that will act as an answering service/call attendant.  Preferably
something that can run off of a PC and with Vonage (VoIP).  Here are
the features that I need:

-Multiple Mailboxes
-Ability to transfer caller to my cell phone (if caller chooses this
 option)

Any ideas?  This software package seems like it might work, but I have
never heard of them:

http://www.nch.com.au/ivm/index.html

TIA

Ron

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

From: summitcircle <phil@summitcircle.com>
Subject: Re: How to Make Skype Wireless ?
Date: 11 Mar 2005 18:07:57 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


Tina,

There are plenty of companies that sell phones made specifically for
Skype. Some of these phones are wireless. One of the more popular ones
that I have noticed can be found at http://www.dualphone.net/

If you are interested in all the other vendors who have created phones
for Skype you can the directory of Skype phone vendors that I have
created at http://www.summitcircle.com/

Louis Philip

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

From: Diamond Dave <dmine45.NOSPAM@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Long Distance Carrier Verification
Organization: The BBS Corner / Diamond Mine On-Line
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 21:31:07 -0500


On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 10:57:28 -0500, Michael Muderick
<michael.muderick@verizon.net> wrote:

> Has anyone tried 700-555-4141 lately to verify long distance carrier?
> It's still a published number, but in the Phila. area, I keep getting
> a busy signal.  Is there a new number available?

Have you done the obvious and dialed it as 1-700-555-4141 ?

Dave

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

Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 21:34:59 -0500
From: Marcus Didius Falco <falco_marcus_didius@yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Wiring Two Lines on One Jack


LB@notmine.com responded to emb120skw@aol.com on the topic of
Re: Wiring Two Lines on One Jack on Fri, 11 Mar 2005 06:21:25 -0500

> emb120skw@aol.com wrote:

>> Hi,

>> I would like to wire one jack for two lines. Here is the setup of the
>> wires after opening the jack.

>> The red screw terminal has two blue and 1 orange wires connected to
>> it.  The green screw terminal has 2 white/blue and 1 white/orange wire
>> connected to it. I'm just curious as to why there are 3 wires
>> connected per terminal.

>> The yellow an black screw terminals are not connected to any
>> wires. Now what should I do to be able to access a second line?

>> Thank you!

>> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Red/green is traditionally one pair;
>> and yellow/black is  traditionally the second pair. You want to use
>> the unused yellow/black screw terminals for your second line. Can
>> you tell us more about the _type of phone instrument_ currently in
>> use on your (I presume) working single line? With no other knowledge
>> it is difficult to answer your question; was this/is this part of
>> a business phone arrangment? Does the pair which is 'wired' at
>> present go to a working instrument?   PAT]

> As Pat says red-green and black-yellow are what you care about.  You
> (actually the telco does this when you sign up) would normally add
> the extra line to the yellow-black at the box where the phone enters
> the premises.  The extra wires sound like they go to extra phones.
> If that box (with extra wires) is outside the premises you might
> want to ask the telco or the cops unless those wires clearly go to
> extra phones or devices you know about.

Many years ago the standard was somewhat different, and the yellow
wire was sometimes used as a ground. Then, for a time, I think the
yellow wire was used to power the lights on princess phones. Almost
certainly the yellow wire is either dead or shorted to one of the
other wires. Check this with a volt meter.

In any event, with modern equipment you can use the red-green and 
yellow-black pairs as described by others.

As others have said, your wiring is almost certainly from jack to jack
in a loop topology (not a star pattern). That is, there are one or two
loops of wire through the house, originating and terminating at the
service entrance. Each wire is normally continuous. If a wire is not
continuous, but is a sort of spur, this can work for telephone, but
will sometimes act as an antenna and put noise on the line.

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

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 #108
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat Mar 12 16:03:20 2005
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j2CL3KD24166;
	Sat, 12 Mar 2005 16:03:20 -0500 (EST)
Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 16:03:20 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200503122103.j2CL3KD24166@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 #109

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 12 Mar 2005 16:03:00 EST    Volume 24 : Issue 109

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    AT&T Billing (Choreboy)
    Skype Phone Numbers (UK)
    Re: Need PC Based Call Attendant/Answering Service (LB@notmine.com)
    Re: Need PC Based Call Attendant/Answering Service (Tony P.)
    Re: Cell Phone Radiation Dangers (Tony P.)
    Re: Cell Phone Radiation Dangers (Tim Keating)
    Re: Wiring Two Lines on One Jack (Wesrock@aol.com)
    Re: Vonage Outage Last Thursday (Tony P.)
    Re: FCC to Cellcos: Clean up Your Bills and Invoices (Tony P.)
    Re: How to Make Skype Wireless ? (John Levine)
    Re: How to Make Skype Wireless ? (Phillip LeNir)
    Re: Wiring Two Lines on One Jack (Paul Coxwell)
    Re: Long Distance Carrier Verification (Steve Sobol)
    Re: Technion (Choreboy)
    Re: Privacy Self-Regulation, A Decade of Disappointment (Peter Pearson)

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: Choreboy <choreboyREMOVE@localnet.com>
Subject: AT&T Billing
Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 13:52:41 -0500
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com


Robert Bonomi wrote:

> The telco _is_ "responsible" (as in 'legally liable') for the actions
> of any 'agent' or contract marketing service that violates the law.

That reminds me of a string of bad experiences with AT&T.  Five or six
years ago I had another carrier.  Then an AT&T agent phoned and
offered a plan with no monthly charge and two hours free.  I agreed.

When the letter came a couple of weeks later, it said there would be a
$5 monthly charge and there was no mention of free minutes. I phoned
AT&T, whose representative said they were not responsible for lies
their agents told.

The representative said he'd put me on a plan with no monthly charge
and send me a calling card for my two free hours.

I read the document that came with the card.  There was no mention of
free minutes.  Instead, it said I'd be billed 35 a minute.  I would
have been billed $42 for the two "free" hours the AT&T representative
had promised.

I never used AT&T and no charge appeared on my telephone bill.  My
bills were paid by automatic bank draft.  I didn't check them promptly
because they were always the same.  After five years or so, I saw on
my bank statement that my phone bill had jumped $8.50.

AT&T was now charging me. By now we were two days into AT&T's third
billing cycle, so it would cost me $25.50.  Their representative said
they had sent me a card six months ago informing me of their increase,
so there was nothing I could do.

She offered to switch me to an account with no monthly charge but not
refund any money.  I wanted to know why I had been switched *from* an
account with no monthly charge.  She spoke as if I'd agreed to it by
receiving the post card.

I had saved that card.  It said that in the future they would abide by
state law if they changed their rates.  If that was an announcement
that they would change my account, it was deceptive.  Anyway, it said
continuing to use or pay for an AT&T service would constitute
acceptance of the "agreement."  I hadn't used or paid for any AT&T
service in years.

I said I wanted to cancel any account I had.  AT&T required me to jump
through hoops with them and Bell South.  

If AT&T had signed me up for a different kind of account without even
notifying me, that sounded like slamming.  I complained to the FCC. 
They said as long as AT&T had not stolen me from another carrier, they
could do as they pleased with me.

Eventually, AT&T refunded two months' charges.  They did not explain why
they refused to refund the third month.

AT&T seems like a criminal enterprise to me.

Choreboy

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note Yet, Traditional Bell and its apologists
keep talking complaining about what a bum deal telco is getting from the
alternative services such as the CLECs and VOIP, etc. This is just
IMO, but I think AT&T, SBC, etc have mostly brought on their own
troubles over the years.  PAT]

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

From: Alan Burkitt-Gray <ABurkitt@EUROMONEYPLC.COM>
Subject: Skype Phone Numbers
Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 11:50:07 -0000


Knowing Digest readers' interest in VoIP and Skype, I thought you
might like to see the item we published in our free email newsletter,
Global Telecoms Business Top 5 Daily, yesterday. Incidentally, if
anyone wants to get on our mailing list, drop me an email directly. It
goes out at around 12.30 UK time, 7.30am ET, Mon-Fri.

Alan Burkitt-Gray Editor, Global Telecoms Business
<mailto:aburkitt@euromoneyplc.com> aburkitt@euromoneyplc.com tel +44
20 7779 8518 or +1 212 224 3880 

Skype launches real phone numbers at Eur30 a year

Peer-to-peer phone operator Skype is beta-testing its SkypeIn service,
offering customers real phone numbers from 30 area codes in the US as
well as London and Hong Kong, plus non-geographic French
numbers. Customers can buy up to three numbers for their Skype account
at Eur30 (about $40) a year each, with no charges for incoming calls
and with free voicemail.

There's been no formal announcement of any launch, but details have
just appeared on the company's site, with the warning: "Right now
we're just testing the service, so there might be some kinks and it
might not be entirely stable all the time."

Meanwhile Skype's CEO Niklas Zennstrm said yesterday that one million
users have bought SkypeOut, enabling them to call regular phone
numbers around the world at Eur0.017 a minute. The minimum pre-pay
amount is Eur10.

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

From: LB@notmine.com
Subject: Re: Need PC Based Call Attendant/Answering Service
Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 02:37:09 -0500
Organization: Optimum Online


pgrogan@gmail.com wrote:

> I'm looking for an inexpensive (under 400) software/hardware solution
> that will act as an answering service/call attendant.  Preferably
> something that can run off of a PC and with Vonage (VoIP).  Here are
> the features that I need:

> -Multiple Mailboxes
> -Ability to transfer caller to my cell phone (if caller chooses this
>  option)

> Any ideas?  This software package seems like it might work, but I have
> never heard of them:

> http://www.nch.com.au/ivm/index.html

> TIA

> Ron

A search in Google for answering service call attendant software
returned 146,000 hits.

http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=mozclient&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&q=answering+service+call+attendant+software


LB

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

From: Tony P. <kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net>
Subject: Re: Need PC Based Call Attendant/Answering Service
Organization: ATCC
Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 10:59:04 -0500


In article <telecom24.108.10@telecom-digest.org>, pgrogan@gmail.com 
says:

> I'm looking for an inexpensive (under 400) software/hardware solution
> that will act as an answering service/call attendant.  Preferably
> something that can run off of a PC and with Vonage (VoIP).  Here are
> the features that I need:

> -Multiple Mailboxes
> -Ability to transfer caller to my cell phone (if caller chooses this
>  option)

> Any ideas?  This software package seems like it might work, but I have
> never heard of them:

> http://www.nch.com.au/ivm/index.html

Asterisk PBX -- runs on pretty much any Linux distribution. The
software doesn't cost anything. It's the hardware that will cost you.

I know that Digium (Who curiously produces Asterisk - nice business
model if you ask me.) produces a bunch of FXO and FXS cards, I think a
four port FXS will run you about $300 or so. And an FXO add on for
that is about $100. You don't mention number of CO lines or stations
so what I've recommended is a 4:1 ratio.

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

From: Tony P. <kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net>
Subject: Re: Cell Phone Radiation Dangers
Organization: ATCC
Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 10:44:30 -0500


In article <telecom24.107.16@telecom-digest.org>, cjmebox-
telecomdigest@yahoo.com says:

> Isaiah Beard wrote:

>> Dean wrote:

>>> A while back some on this list engaged in a lively debate about cell
>>> phone radiation risks. This article may have some information of
>>> interest to those of you who think this issue isn't dead yet.

>>> The cell phone industry: Big Tobacco 2.0?

>>> By Molly Wood, senior editor, CNET.com
>>> Tuesday, March 8, 2005

>> Oh, C|Net.  Now we KNOW it's quality journalism.  </sarcasm>

>> Consider that Ms. Wood readily admits she has an agenda (she has an
>> axe to grind with cell phone manufacturers over what she perceives as
>> "iron-clad control over phone releases and pricing, its
>> ever-lengthening contracts, and the annoying habit it has of crippling
>> Bluetooth phones so that [she] can't use them the way [she wants]
>> to").  I would thus take this with a heavy handful of salt.

>> E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
>> Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.

> OK OK, I'm not saying there's anything absolutely definitive in that
> article. But it seems certainly prudent to use a headset and try to
> keep the antenna at a certain distance -- just as she suggests toward
> the end of the article. (although I think I read somewhere that the
> cord of the headset can have some adverse effect too - one can only
> take so many precautions and still be reasonable:-)

> Regards,

The problem is that many of the headsets are now Bluetooth enabled.
Those put out signals on what, 2.4GHz at relatively low power.

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

From: Tim Keating <NotForJunkEmail@directinternet11.com1>
Subject: Re: Cell Phone Radiation Dangers
Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 12:27:01 -0500
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com


On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 06:11:58 -0800, Joseph <JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com>
wrote:

> On 9 Mar 2005 08:56:41 -0800, Dean <cjmebox-telecomdigest@yahoo.com>
> wrote:

>> A while back some on this list engaged in a lively debate about cell
>> phone radiation risks. This article may have some information of
>> interest to those of you who think this issue isn't dead yet.

> They've brought out this pony for a couple decades now and haven't
> found anything.  Why should we believe this latest scare?

Because the technology has change dramatically over time. 

A couple of decades ago:

  A. Cell phones were fairly rare and air time was expensive. 
           (short and infrequent calls). 
  B. Used benign handsets.
      Most where trunk or bag units with antenna mounted on the
      exterior of motor vehicles.  (Increased Distance from RF radiator). 
  C. Operated in or around the 900 Mhz band..  
      The human body is more transparent to lower frequency RF energy.
  D. Volume of tissue which absorbed RF energy was much greater, thus 
      overall exposer per in^3 was way lower. 


The danger has increased because:

    a. Self contained hand unit proximity to  users head.
       (Inverse square law.. increases exposer dramatically.)
    b. Higher operating frequencies. (1.8 to 2.0 Ghz). 
       (Overall RF absorption gets concentrated into a relatively
       small volume centered above the users ear.).
    c.  People are using them wit greater frequency and talking for
        long periods. 

http://www.willthomas.net/Investigations/Articles/cellphones.htm

Care to roll the dice again?? 

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

From: Wesrock@aol.com
Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 09:30:11 EST
Subject: Re: Wiring Two Lines on One Jack


In a message dated Fri, 11 Mar 2005 21:34:59 -0500, Marcus Didius Falco
<falco_marcus_didius@yahoo.co.uk> writes:

> Many years ago the standard was somewhat different, and the yellow
> wire was sometimes used as a ground. Then, for a time, I think the
> yellow wire was used to power the lights on princess phones. Almost
> certainly the yellow wire is either dead or shorted to one of the
> other wires. Check this with a volt meter.

The yellow wire was indeed used for ground, required for the generally
used type of party-line ringing, and also for calling party
identification when DDD came along.

Two wires were required, as for all electrical circuits, for the
lights on Princess and Trimline phones.  They were normally on
yellow-black.  Usually a wall war was used, but there were also
separate plug-in transformers with binding post terminals that could
be put in an inconspicuous location and multipled (normally on the
yellow-black) to several Princess or Trimline phones.

Later examples of Trimline phones got the power for the lights from
the phone pairs (another task for the C.O. battery).


Wes Leatherock
wesrock@aol.com

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

From: Tony P. <kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net>
Subject: Re: Vonage Outage Last Thursday
Organization: ATCC
Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 10:49:09 -0500


In article <telecom24.107.17@telecom-digest.org>, sjsobol@JustThe.net 
says:

> Brian Inglis wrote:

>> It works, ship it ... we're all beta test sites now!

> Given this discussion of apparent Vonage incompetence, their whining
> about their traffic being blocked is quite funny. Seems they are quite
> capable of blocking their own traffic, if inadvertently. ;)

I've had Vonage for 5 months now and haven't had any outages at all
that were caused by their alleged incompetence.

One was ISP related where the cable service for a good chunk of
Providence went dark during a snow storm. The other was a chunk of ice
damaging a piece of cable on the outside of the house. Seems the
methods employed by the previous building owner weren't held to
exacting standards. They've got the siding off the building now so I
should tack down a section of CAT-5 and replace the damaged wire. But
why should I?  I don't own the building and it only affected the phone
in the bedroom.  It also severed by connection to the NID which means
there's no chance of getting a reverse voltage on my VoIP line.

I think that many of the problems people are having in the mid-west
are ISP related. Therefore I understand Vonage whining about being
denied access to certain ports necessary for their service to
function.

Maybe I've had good luck. Who knows. 

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

From: Tony P. <kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net>
Subject: Re: FCC to Cellcos: Clean up Your Bills and Invoices
Organization: ATCC
Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 10:55:15 -0500


In article <telecom24.107.21@telecom-digest.org>, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com 
says:

> Danny Burstein wrote:

>> "FCC Extends Truth-in-Billing Rules to Wireless Phones; Seeks
>> Comment on Additional Measures to Increase Ability of Consumers to
>> Make Informed Choices ...

> I wonder if this will make bills _harder_ to understand.

> As a result of all the "fair disclosure" laws, companies now send out
> whole books in fine print on their numerous policies.  They're
> impossible for a lay person to understand, and they're constantly
> changing.  Overloading someone with detail is an easy way to fraud
> someone.

> Years ago our electric bill was on a postcard.  Name, address, KWH
> hours used, total cost.  Now it's several pages of graphs and charts.
> Our phone bill used to be one small slip of paper -- fixed costs on one
> side, toll charges on the other.  Now it's so thick it requires extra
> postage -- and I don't even have toll charges!  (And it's on
> double-sided paper too!)

> I'm pretty sure it was the PUCs that ordered the breakouts of
> toll/non-toll and basic/non-basic data blocks.  Further, all imposed
> charges, ie 911, FCC line, should be rolled up in service and
> equipment; all taxes rolled into one item just as the old days.

> Can anyone justify mailing out the Encyclopedia Britannica for a
> monthly utility bill?

There are certain details that shouldn't be rolled up under one fee. I
suspect that in the days of the Bell System the equipment rental
charges were actually subsidizing certain elements of service.

But you're right about the electric bills. I don't so much object to
the graphs but the increased fees ever since de-regulation took
place. You see, now we have a separate distribution and generation
charge.  Theoretically you could choose the source for your
electricity but the cost differential is inconsequential for
residential users. Instead the de-regulation benefits business.

I don't for a moment think the Narragansett Electric was going to walk
away owning just the distribution network and not make people pay top
dollar for it. All this at the time that our electric system
infrastructure is crumbling.

There are echoes of Enron all over the place. Now you just have to dig
a bit deeper to find them.

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

Date: 12 Mar 2005 16:20:50 -0000
From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
Subject: Re: How to Make Skype Wireless ?
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


> There are plenty of companies that sell phones made specifically for
> Skype. Some of these phones are wireless. One of the more popular ones
> that I have noticed can be found at http://www.dualphone.net/

These all seem to be phones that have a base unit plug into your
computer's USB port, and handsets that talk to that base unit.

Has anyone seen (or even heard rumors of) a usable WiFi phone for
Skype that talks to your LAN rather than to a proprietary base?  Zyxel
makes a phone for normal SIP but it doesn't seem to be compatible with
Skype.


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

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

Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 11:36:11 PST
From: Philip LeNir <phil@summitcircle.com>
Subject: Re: How to Make Skype Wireless ?


John,

I have not actually found any products that can be purchased right now
 ... however ... I've noticed a series of press releases that indicate
a variety of companies are headed in this direction and that Skype is
organizing partnerships that will make it attractive for Hardware
vendors to produce these types of devices.

I certainly believe that Skype is creating a business ecosystem around
itself, and as such provide value for its customers that it could not
do on its own.

Title: "Skype alights on Broadreach hotspots"
http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/70029/skype-alights-on-broadreach-hotspots.html

"Anyone with a wireless-ready device can now use Broadreach hotspots
for free to make Skype voice calls, which are also free.

What's the catch? There isn't one. Broadreach has configured its
hotspots to recognise the Skype protocol and allow that traffic to
connect. Any of the Skype services - eg instant messaging - can be
used in this way."

My opinion: This makes a Skype enabled WiFi phone more attractive to
users. It also sets a precedent that wireless providers cannot be
happy with... it is completely free...you do not have to pay the WiFi
provider any money what so ever to make wireless calls to anywhere in
the world (assuming the callee has Skype.. otherwise 2 cents per
minute with SkypeOut).  See related article below regarding Motorola's
acquisition of MeshNetworks.

Title: "i-mate & Skype form global partnership"
http://www.skype.com/company/news/2005/imate.html

"Newly manufactured i-mate PDA2K and i-mate PDA2 handsets will
be produced with Skype's award-winning software preloaded, enabling
i-mate owners to use Skype immediately on start-up of their
device. Both handsets are dual mode GSM/GPRS Wifi handsets that, with
Skype included, allow users to make free, superior quality voice calls
wherever they are worldwide."

My opinion: I haven't had a chance to read too deeply into this, but I
figure it will probably work over a home area WiFI network.


Title: "Motorola launches Skype alliance"
http://news.zdnet.co.uk/communications/wireless/0,39020348,39187936,00.htm

"The handset manufacturer is developing Wi-Fi compatible mobiles, and
will bundle popular VoIP application Skype with the planned devices"

My opinion: I think that Motorola is covering its bases and making a
wise bet on the future.

Title: "Motorola Extends Broadband Wireless Technology
Portfolio with Acquisition of MeshNetworks"
http://www.motorola.com.cn/en/news/2005/01/0202_01.asp

Title: "Motorola Mesh Networks Solution Transforms The
Way Minnesota Town Communicates"
http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/050228/cgm031_1.html

My opinion: I don't think it will take Motorola long to combine the
technology they got with MeshNetworks, Skype enabled WiFi phones, as
well as the various pushes to completely WiFi enabled entire cities
(as a public service ... Philadelphia, San Franscisco, Taipei are three
examples I know of) and thus threaten Cell phone providers.


Philip.

Find a Skype phone, Skype add-on or Skype community
at http://www.summitcircle.com/

 --- John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> wrote:

>> There are plenty of companies that sell phones made specifically for
>> Skype. Some of these phones are wireless. One of the more popular ones
>> that I have noticed can be found at http://www.dualphone.net/

> These all seem to be phones that have a base unit plug into your
> computer's USB port, and handsets that talk to that base unit.

> Has anyone seen (or even heard rumors of) a usable WiFi phone for
> Skype that talks to your LAN rather than to a proprietary base?  Zyxel
> makes a phone for normal SIP but it doesn't seem to be compatible with
> Skype.

> 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: Paul Coxwell <paulcoxwell@tiscali.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Wiring Two Lines on One Jack
Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 19:25:51 -0000


> John Beaman <jbeaman@good-sam.com> wrote:

> Standard wire               Cat 3

> Tip- Green -----Line 1----- Blue
> Ring- Red  -----Line 1----- White/Blue stripe
> Tip- Black -----Line 2----- Orange
> Ring-Yellow ----Line 2----- White/Orange stripe

Other way around for the tip and ring colors in the last column.

Conductors with a white base color are tip, those with blue or orange
base are ring.

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

From: Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net>
Subject: Re: Long Distance Carrier Verification
Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 08:45:48 -0800
Organization: Glorb Internet Services, http://www.glorb.com


Bill Matern wrote:

> When I worked on a 700 number service, the number was 700-555-1212 to
> find out about your IXC.  This was over 10 years ago.  However, when I
> just tired it in Salem, NH it did not work, but you may want to try
> this alternative number.

> On Verizon's site, they indicate the 700-555-4141 number so it
> probably has changed in that time.  This number did not work either
> for me.

Apple Valley, CA, March 12th: 700-555-4141 works just fine with VZ as
the ILEC and Sprint as the IXC. Has worked everywhere else I've tried
it, too. I've never seen -1212 advertised as the IXC number.


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: Choreboy <choreboyREMOVE@localnet.com>
Subject: Re: Technion
Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 13:52:51 -0500
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com


Robert Bonomi wrote:

> In article <telecom24.106.6@telecom-digest.org>,
> Choreboy  <choreboyREMOVE@localnet.com> wrote:

[...]

>> It seems like harassment to me.  Can I do anything to stop it?

[...]

> I betcha Bell South will too.  The law *requires* that companies
> maintain their _own_ internal Do not call list -- for *anyone* who has
> expressly requested that "that company" not call them.  The 'prior
> business relation- ship' exemption does *not* trump the
> company-maintained 'do not call' list for marketing calls.

Thanks.  I seem to be on Technion's DNC list now.

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

From: Peter Pearson <ppearson@nowhere.invalid.lga.highwinds-media.com>
Subject: Re: Privacy Self-Regulation, A Decade of Disappointment
Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 11:26:54 -0800


Monty Solomon wrote:

> EPIC Report: Privacy Self-Regulation, A Decade of Disappointment:

>      http://www.epic.org/reports/decadedisappoint.html

Summary: Freedom is ugly. The FTC should do something. The
"specifics", if you can call them that, of the "something" are: (1)
abandon its faith, (2) reexamine something, (3) reexamine something
else, (4) investigate something, (5) investigate something else, and
(6) develop a mechanism for opting out.


Peter Pearson
To get my email address, substitute:
nowhere -> spamcop, invalid -> net

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

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

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

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 50
                        Independence, KS 67301
                        Phone: 620-402-0134
                        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 #109
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat Mar 12 22:52:48 2005
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j2D3qlO26610;
	Sat, 12 Mar 2005 22:52:48 -0500 (EST)
Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 22:52:48 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200503130352.j2D3qlO26610@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 #110

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 12 Mar 2005 22:53:00 EST    Volume 24 : Issue 110

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Qwest Cost Creep (jared)
    FCC Wants Comments Re: Should VoIP co's Get Numbers Direct (Jack Decker)
    Enron Update, was: FCC to Cellcos: Clean up Your Bills (Danny Burstein)
    Satellite Radio as "Broadcast Audio Internet"? (AES)
    Re: Privacy Self-Regulation, A Decade of Disappointment (Peter Pearson)
    A Decade of Disappointment - Part I (Patrick Townson)
    Re: Wiring Two Lines on One Jack (Tony P.)
    Re: Cell Phone Radiation Dangers (Steve Sobol)
    Re: AT&T Billing (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: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 16:25:15 -0700
From: jared@nospam.au (jared)
Subject: Qwest Cost Creep


In the middle of last year I changed to QWEST and a plan that reduced
my monthly charges to about $33. Now in March it's up to > $50. Even a
simple phone line with no features is apparently $28 per month
 ... that's only twice what QWEST advertises (i.e., before fine print).

One of the tricky changes was to start charging a monthly fee for long
distance that had been bundled in the plan. No notice, just a few
dollars more. I asked the customer service representative why and all
she could say was that they didn't know that there was going to be a
charge for long distance with that plan.

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That's a problem (one of several) I had
with SBC:  I'd call to complain the bill had gone up, they would
review it and say "if we do thus and so, the bill will go down to be
X dollars." I'd say okay, then the next month the bill would arrive
and be higher still. I'd have to talk to two or three different people
(with a wait on hold for each of them) to get the promised adjustment. 
None of them knew anything about what the others had said or promised.

Once they transferred me to a man 'in Topeka, who is our employee but
he deals with state regulatory matters'. The man talked to me for 
about thirty minutes, detirmined I was 'eligible for lifeline service'
(a program of reduced rates for handicapped/elderly people) and told
me absolutely what my new monthly rate would be after he had audited
my entire bill. Guess what? When the next bill arrived it was **no
where close** to that amount. Bell said the reason the bill was 25
pages long that month was because they had to prorate it since the
'guy in Topeka' had re-rated me. The next month's bill _was_ a few
pages (not many!) smaller, but the bottom line total was still
higher. Then, according to the service rep they had detirmined I was
not eligible for lifeline rates unless I would send them once again
send them notes from doctor, SRS (Kansas medicaid public assistance)
and some other paperwork. When I finally fled to Prairie Stream and
Cable One (since SBC would not allow Prairie Stream to handle my DSL),
they had me up to $140 per month; I was choking on the phone bill. And
the lies they tell about their various service offerings ... their
claims ... just incredible.  I was so happy to get out of their noose.
PAT]

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

From: Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@withheld on request>
Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 18:07:40 -0500
Subject: FCC Wants Comments Re: Should VoIP co's Get Numbers Direct?


The following is an excerpt from an FCC public notice, which can be
read in full at:

PDF: http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-663A1.pdf
DOC: http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-663A1.doc
TEXT: http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-663A1.txt

The basic issue here is whether VoIP companies will be allowed to
obtain numbers directly from NANPA.  Right now, when a VoIP company
wants a block of numbers, they have to go to a CLEC that has numbers
assigned to them, and use numbers out of the CLEC's number pool.  The
problem with this is that the CLEC then owns the numbers rather than
the VoIP company.  Consider the case of where a CLEC is giving poor
service or goes out of business; calls to customers may not complete
properly and it may not be the VoIP company's fault, but rather the
fault of the CLEC that owns the number.

So, allowing this change would let the VoIP company to own their own
numbers, and therefore they would have both more flexibility and more
responsibility.  When a CLEC that the VoIP company partners with isn't
completing calls properly, the VoIP company could move the termination
point for the numbers to another CLEC.  I think allowing this change
would allow VoIP companies to provide better service to customers, and
by the way it would also probably remove the current impediments for
customers wanting to take their phone number from one VoIP provider to
another (or to a landline or cellular company, for that matter -- in
other words, local number portability for VoIP numbers would probably
be a reality).

Maybe I'm missing something but I don't see any real downside to this.
Those that just don't like VoIP will probably find some reason to
oppose it but I think that if VoIP companies had control of their own
number space, rather than using numbers out of the various CLEC's
pool, it would make thing far easier for everyone.  Note this has
nothing to do with whether they would still use the CLEC's for actual
call completion, it only addresses who owns the block of numbers out
of which customer numbers are assigned.

Comments are due by April 15 and those who wish to send a comment can
go to http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/ for details.  

Instructions for sending an e-mail comment are at:

http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/email.html or you can send a brief comment
to the FCC using the online form at
http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/upload_v2.cgi . 

You will need the Proceeding number, which is 99-200 (this is called a
"CC Docket No."  on the Public Notice).

Here is the excerpt:

PUBLIC NOTICE
Federal Communications Commission
445 12th St., S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20554
News Media Information 202 / 418-0500
Internet: http://www.fcc.gov
TTY: 1-888-835-5322

DA 05-663
March 11, 2005

WIRELINE COMPETITION BUREAU SEEKS COMMENT ON RNK, INC. D/B/A RNK
TELECOM, NUVIO CORPORATION, UNIPOINT ENHANCED SERVICES D/B/A POINTONE,
DIALPAD COMMUNICATIONS, INC., VONAGE HOLDINGS CORPORATION, AND VOEX,
INC. PETITIONS FOR LIMITED WAIVER OF SECTION 52.15(g)(2)(i) OF THE
COMMISSION'S RULES REGARDING ACCESS TO NUMBERING RESOURCES

PLEADING CYCLE ESTABLISHED:

CC Docket No. 99-200

Comment Date: April 11, 2005
Reply Comment Date: April 26, 2005

RNK, Inc. d/b/a RNK Telecom (RNK), Nuvio Corporation (Nuvio), Unipoint
Enhanced Services d/b/a PointOne (PointOne), Dialpad Communications,
Inc. (Dialpad), Vonage Holdings Corporation (Vonage), and VoEX,
Inc.(VoEX) have filed petitions with the Commission for a limited
waiver of section 52.15(g)(2)(i) of the Commission's rules. The
petitions request a limited waiver of the Commission's numbering
rules to allow RNK, Nuvio, PointOne, Dialpad, Vonage, and VoEX to
obtain numbering resources from the North American Numbering Plan
Administrator (NANPA) and/or the Pooling Administrator (PA). RNK,
Nuvio, Point One, Dialpad, Vonage, and VoEX seek the same relief that
the Commission granted in an Order allowing SBCIS to obtain numbering
resources directly from the NANPA and/or the PA until the Commission
adopts final numbering rules for IP-enabled services.

We invite comment on the Petitions for Limited Waiver. Pursuant to
applicable procedures set forth in sections 1.415 and 1.419 of the
Commission's rules, interested parties may file comments on or
before April 11, 2005; and reply comments on or before April 26,
2005. Comments may be filed using the Commission's Electronic
Comment Filing System (ECFS) or by filing paper copies. See Electronic
filing of Documents in Rulemaking Proceedings, 63 Fed. Reg. 24121
(1998).

[End of excerpt]

I have Gmail invites available if anyone needs one -- e-mail me.  If I
think there's a chance you might be a spammer, I'll probably ignore
your request.

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 <dannyb@panix.com>
Subject: Enron Update, was: FCC to Cellcos: Clean up Your Bills
Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 22:55:57 UTC
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC


In <telecom24.109.9@telecom-digest.org> Tony
P. <kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net> writes:

> I don't for a moment think the Narragansett Electric was going to
> walk away owning just the distribution network and not make people pay
> top dollar for it. All this at the time that our electric system
> infrastructure is crumbling.

> There are echoes of Enron all over the place. Now you just have to dig
> a bit deeper to find them.

Speaking of Enron:

"Federal regulators handed a major victory Friday to Western utilities
and cities trying to escape exorbitant contracts they made with
disgraced energy giant Enron Corp. during the power crunch of 2000-01.

"In a six-page order issued Friday evening, the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission determined that Enron was engaging in illegal
activity at the time it entered the contracts with the utilities - and
that therefore, a hearing should be held to determine whether Enron
should be allowed to collect profits it would have received had those
contracts been fulfilled.

http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB111060370422077742,00.html?mod=home_whats_news_us
	(paid subscription

Comment: fascinating that this was released by the feds Friday evening, 
eh? That time, as we all know, is used when you want a story to be 
buried ...

_____________________________________________________
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
		     dannyb@panix.com 
[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]

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

From: AES <siegman@stanford.edu>
Subject: Satellite Radio as "Broadcast Audio Internet"?
Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 13:31:06 -0800
Organization: Stanford University


Random thoughts re satellite radio (as it might be, not necessarily as 
it is):

1) Think of a satellite radio system in technical terms as basically a
couple of hundred one-way high-audio-quality phone lines coming into
your house, office or car, no matter where you are.  If you buy the
service and get your radio authorized, you can listen to any line you
want, any time you want.  There is however no way for any line to
"ring your phone" individually, and no way for the system to determine
what you're actually listening to, or to charge you on an individual
basis for listening to any individual line.

In other words, it's kind of a one-way broadcast audio Internet.

2) Suppose a commercial firm wanted to build and provide such a
satellite radio service with about the same technical capabilities and
the same current or likely magnitude of customer base as XM or Sirius
at present or in the foreseeable future, but with no content ­­ in
other words a kind of "common carrier" service ­­ with income derived
from (a) listener subscriptions and (b) selling channels to content
providers.

What might this cost? ­­ that is, what might be a subscriber's monthly
"phone bill", and what might be the cost to a content provider to buy
a channel, just to cover the operating costs of the system, plus a
modest profit for the provider?

3) Obviously this depends on how the system's costs are allocated
between these two sources, but might the subscriber's cost be about
the same as XM or Sirius subscription rates at present, and channel
costs to content providers be maybe thousands or tens of thousands per
month, not millions per month?

4) That would be an interesting system.  "Broadcasters" ­­ aka
"content providers" ­­ could purchase channels, provide content (e.g.,
music), and cover their costs of buying the channel and generating the
content by selling advertising, although without further technical
developments they'd have trouble determining just how much audience
they were delivering to their advertisers, and thus what they could
charge for the ad slots on their channel.

5) But if the channels were cheap enough a large number of "interest
groups" of all types ­­ political, religious, ethnic, athletic,
social, religious, academic, educational, environmental, you name it ­­

Could buy (or share) channels, and send content to their members,
or to broader audiences, supported by their own membership or their
donors or sponsors in the manner of KPFA, KQED, WBAI, the Sierra Club,
and so on.

That would be a socially interesting and socially valuable/desirable
situation, at least IMHO.  In fact, maybe that's the way satellite
radio should be required (legislatively) to operate . . . ?

6)  What if any of the above aspects does satellite radio have now?  

Does or will XM or Sirius sell a channel to a content provider and/or 
interest group now (disclaiming any responsibility for what's on it)?  

If they sell to some content providers now, can they be required to sell 
to any and all providers willing to pay?  

Assuming they get up to some acceptable level of subscribers, can or
could subscriber fees similar to those at present cover their basic
operating costs (i.e., just for providing the empty channels) and
modest profit?

Or are they counting on advertising revenues for a major portion of 
their future profits? (as do essentially all other forms of commercial 
media, radio, TV and print, at present)

7)  My personal take or viewpoint on all this is summed up in:

     "Power tends to corrupt.  Absolute power corrupts absolutely."   
      British philosopher Lord Acton around 1890.

      "Dependence on advertising tends to corrupt.  Total dependence 
       on  advertising  corrupts totally."   Today's version.

The second line is my view of the situation in essentially all areas
of journalism and broadcast media today.  The right kind of satellite
radio could be a way around it.

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

From: Peter Pearson <ppearson@nowhere.invalid.lga.highwinds-media.com>
Subject: Re: Privacy Self-Regulation, A Decade of Disappointment
Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 11:26:54 -0800


Monty Solomon wrote:

> EPIC Report: Privacy Self-Regulation, A Decade of Disappointment:

>      http://www.epic.org/reports/decadedisappoint.html

Summary: Freedom is ugly. The FTC should do something. The "specifics",
if you can call them that, of the "something" are: (1) abandon its faith,
(2) reexamine something, (3) reexamine something else, (4) investigate
something, (5) investigate something else, and (6) develop a mechanism
for opting out.


Peter Pearson
To get my email address, substitute:
nowhere -> spamcop, invalid -> net

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I went to that web site and read
entirely the essay mentioned (A Decade of Disappointment) and found
it well worth the time to reprint here for inclusion in our archives.
But it is _quite large_ so it will appear in two parts; much of it
will appear in this issue, the balance in the next issue.  PAT]

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

From: Patrick Townson <ptownson@cableone.net>
Subject: A Decade of Disappointment - Part I
Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 15:43:22 -0600


  Privacy Self Regulation: A Decade of Disappointment
  By Chris Jay Hoofnagle
  March 4, 2005

  A hi-resolution version report is available in PDF (2.5 MB).

  [Front Cover: Lists of personal information for sale from website
   registrations.]


  [Inside Front Cover: Letter forwarded to EPIC explaining that an
   individual has no rights in personal information held by the company,
   Locateplus.com.]


  Summary

  The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is capable of creating reasonable
and effective privacy protections for American consumers. There is no
better example of this than the Telemarketing Do-Not-Call Registry.
The Registry, which was created and is now run by the FTC, makes it
easy for individuals to opt-out of unwanted telemarketing.  Now, more
than 80 million numbers now no longer ring at the dinner hour.

  Prior to the creation of the Registry, the telemarketing industry
created self-regulatory protections that were largely useless.  One
had to write a letter to opt out of telemarketing, or pay to opt out
by giving their credit card number to the Direct Marketing Association
(DMA). The industry's self-regulatory efforts didn't even cover all
telemarketers-only those that were members of the DMA.  At its peak,
the self-regulatory opt-out system had less then 5 million
enrollments.

  FTC's success in the telemarketing field demonstrates that it can
protect Americans' privacy effectively and fairly. However,
telemarketing was a 20th century problem.  This report argues that it
is time for the agency to move into the 21st century.  It is time for
the agency to apply the principles of telemarketing privacy regulation
into the online world.

  The FTC can protect privacy better than the industry can with
self-regulation. We now have ten years of experience with privacy
self-regulation online, and the evidence points to a sustained failure
of business to provide reasonable privacy protections.

  New tracking technologies exist that individuals are unaware of, and
old tracking technologies continue to be employed. Some companies
deliberately obfuscate their practices so that consumers remain in the
dark.  Spyware has developed and flourished under
self-regulation. Emerging technologies represent serious threats to
privacy and are not addressed by self-regulation or law.

  Self regulation has failed to produce easy to use anonymous payment
mechanisms.

  And finally, the worst identification and tracking policies from the
online world are finding their way into the offline world. In other
words, the lack of protection for privacy online not only has resulted
in a more invasive web environment, but has also started to drag down
the practices of ordinary, offline retailers.

  EPIC calls upon the Federal Trade Commission and Congress to
seriously reconsider its faith in self-regulatory privacy approaches.
They have led to a decade of disappointment; one where Congress has
been stalled and the public anesthetized, as privacy practices
steadily worsened.  We call on the government to create a floor of
standards for protection of personal information based on Fair
Information Practices.


  I. The FTC Registry Is Better Than Market Alternatives

  The Federal Trade Commission's (FTC) Telemarketing Do-Not-Call
Registry was a stunning privacy success.  Americans enrolled 10
million numbers in the Registry in its first day of operation.  Now,
the phone has stopped ringing on the more than 60 million numbers that
were enrolled by the public.  The nuisance of telemarketing will now
be a thing of the past.  Those who wish to receive telemarketing may
still do so, but others have an easy option to preserve the dinner
hour from interruption.

  When one analyzes the decisions made by the FTC, it reveals that the
agency took steps to effect consumers' desires.  The FTC publicized
the existence of the Registry and gave it a simple name and URL on the
Internet.  The FTC allowed people to enroll free by telephone or by
the Internet.  The FTC minimized "authentication" burdens.  That is,
the FTC made it easy for people to enroll by not requiring the
consumer to jump through unnecessary hoops. Some from the industry
suggested that only the line subscriber-not even a spouse or
roommate-could enroll.

  The Do-Not-Call Registry was a success because the FTC took the
opposite approach from the self-regulatory system created by the
Direct Marketing Association (DMA).  In every respect, the FTC ensured
that the Registry would be easy to use and fair, while the DMA's
opt-out mechanism was difficult to use and relatively unknown.

  For starters, the DMA's system only applied to the industry
association's members.  Telemarketers who had not joined the group
were not bound to comply with consumers' desire to opt-out.  The FTC's
approach applied to a much broader group of telemarketers.

  Second, the DMA's list was named the "Telephone Preference Service."
The name and acronym, "TPS," had no meaning to the public.  To some,
it could mean a list of people who preferred to be telemarketed.  The
FTC approach, on the other hand, was sensibly named and assigned a
easy to remember URL, http://donotcall.gov, on the Internet.

  Third, the DMA's list required the consumer to actually write a
letter for free enrollment.  To enroll online, the consumer had to pay
a fee and give their credit card number to the DMA.  The FTC's
approach allows free Internet, mail, and telephone enrollment.

        The FTC's Registry is universal, free, and easy to
use. Individuals could enroll online or by phone.  The DMA's only
applied to its members, cost money to enroll online, and was difficult
to find. It's no wonder why the DMA's list only had 5 million
enrollments, while the FTC's has more than 80 million.

  These forces combined to make the DMA's market approach to
telemarketing ineffective.  The numbers speak for themselves.  USA
Today commented in 2002 that: "In 17 years, just 4.8 million consumers
have signed up with the DMA's do-not-call list. By contrast, just five
states -- New York, Kentucky, Indiana, Florida and Missouri -- have
signed up roughly the same number in far less time."[i]

  Today's self-regulatory approaches to Internet privacy are much like
the failed ones employed by the DMA for telemarketing.  They are
difficult to use, confusing, and often offer no real protection at
all.  This report details the current state of privacy on the
Internet, and illustrates the myriad ways in which threats to privacy
are becoming ever more grave, as new technologies are developed, new
practices become commonplace, and companies are not held accountable
for disregarding privacy risks.  Collection of personal information on
the Internet runs rampant, both through direct and indirect means,
both in the open and in secret.  It is imperative that the FTC act now
to correct these market failures.  The FTC effectively and fairly
corrected the failures of a 20th century nuisance-telemarketing.  It
is time for the agency to move into the 21st century and correct the
failures of self-regulation to meaningfully protect Internet privacy.

  II. Ten Years of Self-Regulation and Still No Privacy In Sight

  EPIC has completed three Surfer Beware reports assessing the state
of privacy on the Internet. "Surfer Beware I: Personal Privacy and the
Internet," a 1997 report, reviewed privacy practices of 100 of the
most frequently visited web sites on the Internet.  It checked for
collection of personal information, establishment of privacy policies,
cookie usage, and anonymous browsing.  The inquiry found that few
sites had easily accessible privacy policies, and none of these
policies met basic standards for privacy protection.  However, at that
time, most of the sites surveyed allowed users to access web content
and services without disclosing any personal data. The report ended
with a recommendation of continuing support for anonymity and the
development of both good privacy policies and practices.

  In 1998, EPIC produced "Surfer Beware II: Notice Is Not Enough," a
report based on a survey of the privacy practices of 76 new members of
the Direct Marketing Association ("DMA"), a proponent of
self-regulation of privacy protection. The DMA released guidelines in
1997 that would require all future members of the DMA to publicize
privacy policies and provide an opt-out capability for information
sharing.  Of the 76 new members surveyed, only 40 had web sites, and
only 8 of these sites had policies satisfying the DMA's requirements.
The report concluded that DMA's self-regulation efforts were not
effective.

  The 1999 report "Surfer Beware III: Privacy Policies without Privacy
Protection" assessed the privacy practices of the 100 most popular
shopping web sites on the Internet. It examined whether these sites
complied with common accepted privacy principles, used profile-based
advertising, and employed cookies. The survey determined that 18 of
the sites had no privacy policy displayed, 35 of the sites used
profile-based advertising, and 86 of the sites used cookies. None of
the companies adequately addressed Fair Information Practices,
commonly-accepted responsibilities covering collection, access to, and
control over personal information. Surfer Beware III concluded that
current practices of the online shopping industry provided little
meaningful privacy protection for consumers.

  The Federal Trade Commission ("FTC") has given self-regulation a
decade to produce reasonable privacy protections online.  The FTC
first visited online privacy in 1995, and with minor fluctuations
since then, has adopted a policy that embraces the idea that
self-regulation is "the least intrusive and most efficient means to
ensure fair information practices online, given the rapidly evolving
nature of the Internet and computer technology."[ii] It certainly is
the least intrusive approach for companies exploiting personal
information, but it has not efficiently ensured Fair Information
Practices.  Of the five Fair Information Practices[iii] endorsed by
the FTC-notice, choice, access, security, and accountability-only
notice can be said to be present as a result of privacy statements.

  The first fluctuation in the FTC's commitment to self-regulation
occurred in 1998, after the agency's survey of online practices showed
that the lowest level of protection for consumer, notice of privacy
practices, was not widely implemented.  In a survey of 1400 web sites
conducted by the Commission, 92% of the commercial sites collected
personal information but only 14% had privacy notices.  Of the
commercial sites, only 2% had a "comprehensive" privacy policy.[iv] In
reaction to these findings, the FTC was "still hopeful" that industry
efforts would produce adequate privacy protections.[v] At the time,
Chairman Pitofsky recommended that Congress pass legislation if
self-regulation failed to produce significant progress.[vi]

  A year later in testimony to Congress, the FTC renewed its faith in
self-regulation, noting that many web sites had adopted privacy
policies.  But protections beyond mere disclosure of practices lagged
behind.  Only a small number of surveyed sites had incorporated
choice, access, and security into their practices. No meaningful
avenue for enforcement existed at all.  Commissioner Sheila Anthony
concurred with the report's findings but dissented from its
recommendations, noting, "industry progress has been far too slow
since the Commission first began encouraging the adoption of voluntary
fair information practices in 1996. Notice, while an essential first
step, is not enough if the privacy practices themselves are toothless.
I believe that the time may be right for federal legislation to
establish at least baseline minimum standards."


        "Notice, while an essential first step, is not enough if the
privacy practices themselves are toothless."


  In 2000, a 3-2 majority of the FTC formally recommended that
Congress adopt legislation requiring commercial web sites and network
advertising companies to comply with Fair Information Practices.[vii]
However, a year later with the appointment of a new FTC Chairman, the
FTC embraced self-regulation again.  Chairman Muris decided to focus
the Commission's attention on enforcing existing laws rather than
create new legislative protections for online privacy.[viii] Chairman
Muris indeed has expanded privacy protections through the creation of
a do-not-call list and with application of the agency's powers to
prevent unfair and deceptive trade practices.

  The overall effect of the FTC's approach has been to delay the
adoption of substantive legal protection for privacy. The adherence to
self-regulatory approaches, such as the Network Advertising Initiative
that legitimized third-party Internet tracking and the Individual
References Service Group principles that concerned sale of SSNs,
allowed businesses to continue using personal information while not
providing any meaningful privacy protection.  Ten years later, online
collection of information is more pervasive, more invasive, and just
as unaccountable as ever-and increasingly, the public is anesthetized
to it.

  It doesn't have to be this way. The FTC has been effective in
protecting privacy when dealing with 20th century nuisances.  It's
time for the FTC to apply the lessons from telemarketing and other
efforts to address the 21st century problem of Internet privacy.



  III. Today's Tracking Methods Are More Pervasive and Invasive

  Seven years ago, EPIC's report Surfer Beware I reviewed the status
of Internet users' privacy rights and protections on the 100 most
frequently visited web sites.  The report was concerned primarily with
the solicitation, collection, use, and protection of personal
information obtained either from user-input forms or cookies.

  Today, there are many more methods through which users can be
tracked, profiled, and monitored in the online world.  Cookie
technology has matured-cookies are widespread and new uses have been
developed. Entirely new technologies have emerged as well, some of
which are all but unknown to consumers.  Few of these methods are
regulated, either internally by industry or externally by
government. Without privacy legislation to protect Internet users from
improper use of the information collected on the web, companies are
unlikely to voluntarily cease privacy-invasive practices.

  Cookies

  Surfer Beware I discussed an Internet tracking technology over which
there was "a great deal of controversy"-cookies.  It found that about
a quarter of the most frequently visited web sites used
cookies. Today, many websites use cookies for one reason or
another. In addition, there are several new wrinkles in the use of
this tracking technology.

  Third Party Cookies

  Today, websites that a user explicitly visits are not the only
entities which place cookies in your web browser-many web sites
contain advertising served by outside commercial providers, and these
providers may also send a cookie to your browser.  These are known as
"third party cookies."  Some web browsers, such as Firefox allow users
to block third party cookies.

  Many web pages today have arrangements with third party ad servers
that serve advertisements to their pages.  For example, the MSN
Privacy Statement lists two dozen third party ad networks that may
place cookies in a user's browser.[ix]

  Privacy policies (such as MSN's) tend to frame these third party
cookies as a benefit to the user, allowing advertisers to "deliver
targeted advertisements that they believe will be of most interest to
you."

  Persistent Cookies

  A persistent cookie is one that remains on a user's computer after
she has quit the browser.  These cookies can be used to set and
remember a user's web site preferences, settings, and passwords from
one browser session to the next, but can also be used for tracking and
monitoring purposes.  A troubling recent trend is to design these
cookies to remain not just for many browser sessions, but for many
years.  Google's search cookie, for example, will not expire until
January 17, 2038.  This kind of long range tracking of users raises
significant privacy risks.

  Web Bugs

  A web bug is a graphic on a web page that allows tracking and
monitoring of visitors to that page. Web bugs are usually invisible,
"clear" images only 1-by-1 pixel in size. They are capable of
transmitting, back to the bug's originating server your Internet
Protocol ("IP") address, the page you visited, the time you visited,
browser information, and information from existing cookies in the
browser.

        For market approaches to work, consumers must grasp both
technology and practices.  But in a Pew Internet Report, 56% surveyed
couldn't identify a cookie.[x]

  Web bugs are sometimes used for the innocuous purpose of counting
how many times a particular page is viewed and gathering statistics
about browser usage and web site usage. There are, however, much more
invasive uses, such as compiling a detailed web-browsing profile of a
particular user.

  Web bugs are designed specifically to be secret and invisible.  Many
Internet users today are aware of cookies, and may perceive them from
the appearance of visible advertisements.  There are also tools to
manage cookies. Web bugs, however, can transmit information and set
cookies even when there is no telltale banner advertisement on the
website tipping off a user that information might be collected about
them. Furthermore, just one "allowed" cookie from an ad network opens
the door for all web bugs within that network to collect browsing
information about that user.  With companies such as DoubleClick,
providing advertising to countless web sites, this risk is
significant. For instance, if a user with a DoubleClick cookie in
their browser loads a web page with a DoubleClick web bug on it, that
bug can grab the identifying information in the cookie and transmit it
back to the server along with the other information collected by the
bug.

  Google's Gmail Content Extraction

  On April 1, 2004, Google announced the launch of their new Gmail
service.  Gmail is a web-based e-mail service offering one-gigabyte of
e-mail storage to users.  Gmail is supported by advertisers who buy
keywords, much like the Google search engine's AdWords advertising
program, which lead to targeted advertisements displayed alongside an
e-mail message in a Gmail user's inbox. Gmail uses "content
extraction" (a term from Google's patents) on all e-mails sent to and
from a Gmail account in order to target the advertising to the user.

        "If Google ogles your e-mail, will Ashcroft be far behind?"[xi]

  Many privacy advocates hold the position that the Gmail service
violates the privacy rights of both Gmail users and non-subscribers.
Non-subscribers who e-mail a Gmail user have "content extraction"
performed on their e-mail even though they have not consented to have
their communications monitored, nor may they even be aware that their
communications are being analyzed.

  This is a significant development in Internet tracking technology
because it is one of the first with the capacity and the structure to
monitor and record not just transactional data and personal
information, but the content of private communications.

  Spyware

  Spyware and adware are extremely invasive and annoying technologies
that have flourished in the self-regulatory world of Internet
privacy. Both can be broadly described as pieces of software placed on
a user's computer by a third party that perform unwanted
functions. Spyware and adware collect information about the user,
sometimes in complete secrecy without the knowledge of the user.  Some
programs display pop-up ads on the user's monitor, while others track
and record everything the user does online.  Information is sometimes
collected by the programs for the sole purpose of sending that data
back to an advertiser, and other times used to immediately serve
pop-up ads to the user. Users often inadvertently download and install
spyware and adware along with other desired computer programs, most
commonly file-sharing applications.  McAfee, an Internet security firm
that sells popular virus protection and other personal computer
security programs, reported more than 2.5 million "potentially
unwanted programs" on its customers' computers, as of March 2004.[xii]

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: In the next issue of the Digest, we
will begin with Part IV of this essay, discussing even more nefarious
schemes to invade your privacy getting started.   PAT

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

From: Tony P. <kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net>
Subject: Re: Wiring Two Lines on One Jack
Organization: ATCC
Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 15:58:25 -0500


In article <telecom24.109.7@telecom-digest.org>, Wesrock@aol.com says...

> In a message dated Fri, 11 Mar 2005 21:34:59 -0500, Marcus Didius Falco
> <falco_marcus_didius@yahoo.co.uk> writes:

>> Many years ago the standard was somewhat different, and the yellow
>> wire was sometimes used as a ground. Then, for a time, I think the
>> yellow wire was used to power the lights on princess phones. Almost
>> certainly the yellow wire is either dead or shorted to one of the
>> other wires. Check this with a volt meter.

> The yellow wire was indeed used for ground, required for the generally
> used type of party-line ringing, and also for calling party
> identification when DDD came along.

> Two wires were required, as for all electrical circuits, for the
> lights on Princess and Trimline phones.  They were normally on
> yellow-black.  Usually a wall war was used, but there were also
> separate plug-in transformers with binding post terminals that could
> be put in an inconspicuous location and multipled (normally on the
> yellow-black) to several Princess or Trimline phones.

Yep -- I remember that setup well. There were different wall warts
depending on the configuration being set up. Our house had one but the
current was higher because there were two Trimlines and one Princess
in use.
 
> Later examples of Trimline phones got the power for the lights from
> the phone pairs (another task for the C.O. battery).

Yep, got one of those on my desk right now. A yellow Trimline to be 
specific. Has green LED's to provide the lighting. 


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: One thing I have noticed which is
different between the older Trimline phones (with a separate power
supply) and the newer units is that the newer units (with an LED to
light the buttons) run from telco battery instead of an external power
supply. The old units would stay lighted all the time unless you
flipped the switch to turn off the light bulb. The newer units (with
an LED powered from telco battery) are dark when the phone is on hook
and also go dark for a few seconds as the buttons are pressed. That
is unfortunate, because the older units also made very nice 'night
lights' in a darkened room. With the newer (telco battery powered
LED) units, you can not see the phone in a dark room until you have
already found it and have it off hook.  PAT]

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

From: Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net>
Subject: Re: Cell Phone Radiation Dangers
Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 14:02:03 -0800
Organization: Glorb Internet Services, http://www.glorb.com


Tony P. wrote:

>>> Consider that Ms. Wood readily admits she has an agenda (she has an
>>> axe to grind with cell phone manufacturers over what she perceives as
>>> "iron-clad control over phone releases and pricing, its
>>> ever-lengthening contracts, and the annoying habit it has of crippling
>>> Bluetooth phones so that [she] can't use them the way [she wants]
>>> to").  I would thus take this with a heavy handful of salt.

If Miss Wood thinks that retail phone pricing and contracts are the
fault of the MANUFACTURERS, she's probably too stupid to carry a cell
phone in the first place. I doubt the removal of certain functions is
done by the manufacturers on their own, either.

> The problem is that many of the headsets are now Bluetooth enabled.
> Those put out signals on what, 2.4GHz at relatively low power.

So? My phone runs on 1.9GHz ... I still haven't heard anything
definitive either way, either that cell phones DO or DON'T cause
illness.

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: Tim@Backhome.org
Subject: Re: AT&T Billing
Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 15:17:32 -0800
Organization: Cox Communications


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note Yet, Traditional Bell and its apologists
> keep talking complaining about what a bum deal telco is getting from the
> alternative services such as the CLECs and VOIP, etc.

> This is just IMO, but I think AT&T, SBC, etc have mostly brought on
> their own troubles over the years.  PAT]

No doubt about it.  They were the most arrogant suits in town in the
1950s and 60s.  Had they been able to reason objectively they would
have never let Carterfone get out of hand.

Then again, their history from the late 1800s, on through WWII, made
them feel they were more powerful than the U.S. Government or any mere
private enterprise domestic corportation.

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

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 #110
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat Mar 12 23:53:17 2005
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j2D4rHI27159;
	Sat, 12 Mar 2005 23:53:17 -0500 (EST)
Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 23:53:17 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200503130453.j2D4rHI27159@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 #111

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 12 Mar 2005 23:53:00 EST    Volume 24 : Issue 111

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    A Decade of Disappointment - Part II (Patrick Townson)
    Re: Ohio Law Would Require Auction License on eBay (Gene S. Berkowitz)
    Why Pay to be an Identity Thief? CMU Will Show You How (Marcus Falco)
    Hackers Target U.S. Power Grid (Marcus Didius Falco)

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 <ptownson@cableone.net>
Subject: A Decade of Disappointment - Part II
Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 15:43:22 -0600


This is part 2 in a 2-part essay written by Chris Jay Hoofnagle on
Privacy.  The first part appeared in the issue before this. The
two parts will be merged into a longer essay for the Telecom Archives.

  Privacy Self Regulation: A Decade of Disappointment
  By Chris Jay Hoofnagle
  March 4, 2005


  IV. More Invasive Tracking Mechanisms Are on the Horizon

  There are several new and emerging technologies that have the
potential to present significant privacy problems as they become more
advanced and more widely used.

  Digital Rights Management

        "Digital copyright management systems.are not some remote,
futuristic nightmare.they will enable an unprecedented degree of
intrusion into and oversight of individual decisions about what to
read, hear, and view."[xiii]

  Digital Rights Management (DRM) systems use technical means to
protect an owner's interest in software, music, text, film, artwork,
etc.  DRM can control file access (number of views, length of views),
altering, sharing, copying, printing, and saving, through either the
software or hardware of a computer or device.

  Some DRM technologies are being developed with little regard for
privacy protection.  These systems require the user to reveal his or
her identity in order to access protected content. Upon authentication
of identity and valid rights to the content, the user can access the
content. Widespread use of DRM systems could lead to an eradication of
anonymous consumption of content.

  DRM systems could lead to a standard practice where content owners
require all purchasers of media to identify themselves.  DRM can also
link or tie certain content inextricably to one particular user.
Windows Media Player, for example, has an embedded globally-unique
identifier that can track users and the content they are viewing.

  Trusted Computing

  Trusted computing is a platform for pervasive DRM in personal
computers.  The Trusted Computing Group, an industry consortium with
members Microsoft, Intel, Hewlett Packard, and Advanced Micro Devices,
is overseeing the creation of industry-wide specifications for trusted
computing hardware and software.

        Computer freedom itself is at stake here.  DRM can convert a
flexible, user-controlled computer into an inflexible,
copyright-owner-controlled surveillance device.  Your next computer
may really be a TV that watches you.

  Trusted computing systems combine hardware and software elements to
create a platform that gives software vendors an incredible amount of
control over what users do with their computers.  These systems have
been developed to protect the security of the computer from its owner
when she uses proprietary or copyrighted information.

  While trusted computing does enable a number of important security
and privacy-enhancing functions, it also creates new threats to
privacy and anonymity that should be seriously considered.  For
example, by augmenting the security functions already present on
personal computers, trusted computing may offer greater protection
from malicious programs or remote exploits.  On the other hand,
Trusted Computing could make it difficult or impossible for users to
access content anonymously.

  As trusted computing technology develops, it could have significant
impact on computer users' privacy in the digital and online world.

  Single Sign On Services

  "Project Liberty" is an online identification and authentication
system.  It allows individuals to use a single sign-on in order to
access many different web pages, and is being developed by a coalition
of companies.  A similar system has been designed by Microsoft, known
as Passport or .NET Passport.

  Identification and authentication systems present privacy risks for
individuals.  They can become virtual tollbooths for the Internet,
requiring identity before one can view web pages. This violates a
fundamental principle of privacy-the idea of collection limitation. It
is illegitimate to collect information unless it is actually necessary
to complete some function. However, with a proliferation of
authentication systems, it becomes easier to compel individuals to
identify themselves for no legitimate reason. These systems also
enable profiling, which results in more spam, direct mail, and
telemarketing for individuals.


  V. The Privacy Friendly Are Mimicking the Privacy Invasive

  In Surfer Beware I, EPIC noted that news web sites usually did not
require disclosure of personal information in order to access their
content, a practice that enhances privacy.  The report stated that
many of the top web sites allow "users to visit without giving up
personal information.  Anonymity plays a particularly important role
for those sites.that are providing news and information to the on-line
community."  EPIC thought that it was especially appropriate for news
sites not to attempt to identify site visitors, as anonymous access to
political information shields individuals from law enforcement
scrutiny and politically-motivated retribution.

  But the ability to view the news anonymously is dramatically limited
now.  More and more news websites are requiring disclosure of personal
information in various forms in order to access news articles.

  EPIC conducted a survey of the websites of the top twenty-five US
newspapers (by daily circulation).[xiv] Thirteen of these top
twenty-five sites require disclosure of some personal information in
order to access content.  Seven newspapers (including three of the top
five) actually require "registration." All seven of these sites
require disclosure of personally identifiable information.  The other
five sites require only disclosure of information which is not, on its
own, personally identifiable (gender, postal code/country, and birth
year).

  Internet users are becoming increasingly frustrated with the
prevalence of registration requirements on Internet sites. Evidence
suggests that users will go out of their way to avoid divulging
personal information on news sites.  Many users who don't want to
divulge personal information in order to read the news online are
engaging in "privacy self defense," as they enter false information in
registration pages, or turn to services such as Bugmenot.com.
Bugmenot is a website through which users can "share" personal login
information, and as of August, 2004, claims to have "liberated" more
than 18,000 pages from the confines of required registration.

  Online users have strong reservations about the use and abuse of
their personal information. Surveys show that people value anonymity,
especially on the Internet, and simply don't want to give up their
information.

        A 2003 Annenberg Survey found that 57% of those polled
believed that if a company has a privacy policy, the company will not
share information with other entities.[xv]

  The mere existence of a "privacy policy" also does not ensure that a
person's information will remain "private" in the common sense of the
word-both the LA Times and Chicago Tribune websites do not allow users
to opt out of information sharing, advertising and communications from
the newspapers and their "affiliates" (although you can opt out of
sharing of your information with their advertisers and other third
parties).  There is also some indication that some newspapers have
been checking the data provided at registration against third party
commercial databases for accuracy.[xvi]

  Compulsory site registration is likely to become a "vicious cycle"
of privacy violations-increasing prevalence of privacy self-defense
through providing "bad" or incorrect information might result in an
increased tendency on the part of newspapers to require more invasive
information from users, and to compare this information to commercial
databases to ensure accuracy.

  VI. Previous Self-Regulatory Initiatives Have Failed

  Instead of driving towards legally accountable privacy frameworks,
the FTC has a predilection towards self-regulatory initiatives.  One
notable effort was the NAI-The Network Advertising Initiative.  The
NAI was announced in 1999 shortly after DoubleClick, an online target
advertising company, was the subject of a FTC investigation.  The
investigation was spawned by reports that the company was planning to
link its anonymous surfing data with detailed offline customer
profiles from Abacus Direct.  Public protest led them to suspend their
plans to merge their anonymous data with the personal information they
had purchased.

  Strong public opposition to online profiling caused Congress and the
FTC to make efforts to address the practice.  In November 1999, the
FTC and Department of Commerce announced the formation of the NAI at a
Workshop on Online Profiling.  Less than a year later and with little
involvement from consumer and privacy groups, the self-regulatory NAI
principles were publicized.

  The NAI standards were too weak to provide privacy commensurate with
surfers' expectations.  They encompassed only notice, opt-out, and
"reasonable" security. NAI members could transfer information amongst
themselves to an unlimited degree, so long as it is used for
advertising.  No meaningful enforcement mechanism was incorporated.

  Even where the NAI set privacy standards, they were burdensome for
individuals to exercise.  For instance, users who didn't want to be tracked
by DoubleClick's cookies had to download and leave an "opt-out cookie" in
their browser.  For those who think that deleting their cookies enhances
their privacy protections, they will have to repeatedly remember to download
the cookie.

  Further contributing to the irrelevance of NAI is the fact that its
membership has depleted to two: DoubleClick and Atlas DMT.

  New Tracking Methods Undermine the Already Weak NAI Provisions

  Behavioral targeting is becoming increasingly popular with web ads
that follow users as they browse the web.  These ads can be targeted
to a visitor's online habits.  Many of these ads rose in popularity
from keyword searches, however, more omniscient tactics are also at
work.  Revenue Science, for instance, offers their customers web bugs
to collect user information.  Individual sites can determine which
data gets used for targeting and the information collected does not
get shared among different sites using the service.  Customers of
Revenue Science include ESPN, Reuters, Dow Jones, Newsweek, The Wall
Street Journal and many others.

  As more network advertisers benefited from electronic espionage, the
relevancy of the NAI dwindled as the two member companies no longer
controlled the industry.  Companies such as Google, Overture,
Aquantive and Omniture are all influential stakeholders in the
targeted advertising market and profiling business.  Although they are
not NAI members, the common theme of self-regulation has remained
popular.  Not surprisingly, the core of the weak NAI principles can
still be identified throughout the privacy policies of the major
network advertisers.

  The NAI Principles Didn't Provide Privacy Then and Don't Provide it
  Now

  The NAI principles have not contributed to an environment where
privacy is protected.  Only notice has effectively been conveyed
online.  Although consent varies depending on opt-out/opt-in policies,
most advertisers operate on a no consent or opt-out model.  While
access is often provided for, a user is often only given access to the
information that they have voluntarily provided to the company.
However, in order for meaningful access to be attained, a user must
able to receive the same electronic profile that is of value to the
marketer.  Accountability and enforcement are equally meaningless
concepts without a central authority to monitor and impose the
standards.  Without enforceable rights, Internet users will continue
to be tracked and profiled as they become pawns of the advertising
industry.

  IRSG: Freeing the Commercial Data Brokers From Privacy
  Responsibilities

  The Individual Reference Services Group (IRSG) Principles were
developed by commercial data brokers in the late 1990s in order to
manage fomenting criticism regarding their business model.  These data
brokers sold Social Security Numbers and detailed dossiers on
Americans to marketers, insurers, private investigators, landlords,
and law enforcement.

  The IRSG Principles set forth a weak framework of protections.  They
allowed companies to sell non-public personal information "without
restriction" to "qualified subscribers."  The problem is that everyone
with an account is "qualified."

  Under the IRSG Principles, individuals can only opt-out of the sale
of personal information to the "general public," but commercial data
brokers don't consider any of their customers to be members of the
general public.  For instance, data broker ChoicePoint gives
individuals no right to opt out and claims that "We feel that removing
information from these products would render them less useful for
important business purposes, many of which ultimately benefit
consumers."

  The IRSG Principles have been carefully crafted in order to ensure
maximum flexibility for data brokers. They represent another
self-regulatory failure that has resulted in easy access to detailed
dossiers on Americans by both commercial and law enforcement
interests.  By turning a blind eye to the commercial sector, Congress
allowed commercial data brokers to become "Big Brother's Little
Helpers."  They have created a national data center of personal
information for law enforcement.[xvii]

  NAI and IRSG Were Successful-For Those Invading Privacy

  These self-regulatory initiatives served their purpose-to stop
Congress from creating real, enforceable rights while allowing
privacy-invasive activities to continue.  They placated the FTC,
causing Congress not to act.  The end result has been that the FTC
hasn't taken action to address traditional network advertisers or
newer forms of privacy invasive tracking.  Similarly, since Congress
didn't act on data brokers, the IRSG has dissolved, and its member
companies continue to sell personal information widely.

  VII. Anonymous Purchasing Options: Another Market Failure

       A list of Internet shoppers who paid with an American Express
card.  The company offering the list, American List Counsel, offers to
segment the consumers by age, estimated income, dollar amount per
order, and annual purchase amount.  Even if a given online retailer
extends strong privacy protections to customers, popular payment
methods are not anonymous and provide an avenue for online profiling.
Credit card companies use and sell personal information for target
marketing, and provide an easy trail for law enforcement access to
purchasing information.

  Currently, there are not ubiquitous and easy to use anonymous online
purchasing mechanisms. Companies in recent years have offered
anonymous purchasing services based on various models, but these
approaches tend to be cumbersome and costly.

  In testimony to Congress in 1997, the Federal Trade Commission
discussed anonymous payment systems and recommended that: "federal
government should wait and see whether private industry solutions
adequately respond to consumer concerns about privacy and billing
dispute resolution issues that arise with the growth of electronic
payment systems, and then step in to regulate only if those efforts --
be they market-created responses, voluntary self-regulation or
technological fixes, or some combination of these -- are
inadequate."[xviii] How much longer does the consumer have to wait for
user-friendly, ubiquitous anonymous payment options?

  VIII. Information [In]Security

  One of the five fair information practices endorsed by the FTC is
security-the responsibility that data collectors take reasonable steps
to assure that information collected from consumers is secure from
unauthorized use.[xix]

  Collection of personal information creates security risks for
individuals.  As companies amass personal information or send it
elsewhere for processing, the databases become attractive targets for
malicious actors.

  It is difficult for individuals to assess the security and integrity
of data collectors' systems.  And recent events indicate that security
in the data collection and processing industries falls fall short of
being "reasonable."  A recent case in point involves Acxiom, a
publicly-traded corporation that sells personal data and processes it
for client companies.  In a written statement to the FTC in June 2003,
Acxiom's CEO assured that its security practices were "exceptional"
and multi-leveled: ".it must be noted that Acxiom undertakes
exceptional security measures to protect the information we
maintain.and around the information we process for our clients to
ensure that information will not be made available to any unauthorized
person or business."[xx]

  A month after making this statement, Acxiom was informed by law
enforcement officials that an Ohio man was able to download and crack
Acxiom's password database.  The method of stealing the personal
information shows that Acxiom did have extraordinary security
measures-the problem was that they were extraordinarily sloppy.  The
man, using FTP access operated for Acxiom's clients, was able to
browse around Acxiom's system and download a single file containing
all the passwords.[xxi] In the course of the Ohio investigation,
Acxiom learned that a second man used the same technique to access
over 8 gigabytes of personal information from April 2002 to August
2003.[xxii]

        Acxiom did have extraordinary security measures-they were
extraordinarily sloppy.

  And, while the SSNs and credit card numbers of 20 million were
accessed, the identities of companies that provided the personal
information to Acxiom remain secret.

  Other indications of information insecurity abound thanks to a
California law that took effect in July 2003.  That law requires data
collectors to notify individuals when their data has been stolen.  As
a result, the public has heard of many information security breaches
that normally would have been kept secret.

  The first publicized notice of a security breach involved a banking
consultant who had financial details on his computer.  An office
burglar stole the computer, which had credit line information, Social
Security Numbers, and other bank account information.[xxiii] Since
then, news of security breaches routinely appear in the national
media.

  IX. Bad Online Practices Are Leeching into the Offline World

  The trend of collecting personal information and monitoring purchase
habits is not strictly limited to the on-line environment.
Increasingly, merchants are requiring consumers to produce
identification or reveal personal information at the point of sale or
when they wish to return or exchange an item.

  What's Your Phone Number?

  Increasingly, cashiers are asking individuals for their phone
numbers.  This places individuals at risk that they will receive
telemarketing based on the most trivial of purchases in the offline
world.

        Consumers don't realize that giving a phone number to a
cashier invites telemarketing under the "established business
relationship" loophole to the Telemarketing Do-Not-Call Registry.

  But the problem extends beyond a cashier's request for information,
rather, it is the presumption that the disclosure of personal
information has become a precondition of sale.  While a customer may
feel uneasy about revealing this information, many do not know that
this disclosure is voluntary.  And because individuals want to shield
their personal information from disclosure, some data companies have
developed stealth information collection techniques for offline
retailers.  For instance, Trans Union, a credit reporting agency,
offered "Translink / Reverse Append," a product that gave retailers
name and address information from credit card numbers collected at the
register.[xxiv] Consumers are not actually asked for their address,
and probably are not aware that their address is discoverable.

  The exact purpose for this information collection varies from store
to store.  Nine West asks for customer information in order to create
a database of transaction histories for each customer, containing shoe
size and width.  Victoria's Secret has recently begun asking
customer's for their telephone numbers so that they may be informed of
promotions. Sometimes, it is difficult to find out how the information
is being used.

  Grocers Get Loyalty and We Get Less

  Frequent shopper or loyalty card programs vary depending on the type
of retailer or service.  Generally, grocery stores will offer loyalty
cards where a customer reveals a significant amount of personal
information in exchange for a card which makes them eligible for
in-store discounts. There is a high privacy risk associated with these
cards as a great deal of personal data is revealed and all purchased
are tracked.

  Consumers are led to believe that they saving money when in reality,
the prices at non-savings card stores are often lower.

        The Wall Street Journal reported that, ".according to industry
experts.[loyalty] cards are designed to make customers feel like they
got a bargain, without actually lowering prices overall."

  A 2003 Wall Street Journal study found that "most likely, you are
saving no money at all [from supermarket shopping cards]. In fact, if
you are shopping at a store using a card, you may be spending more
money than you would down the street at a grocery store that doesn't
have a discount card."[xxv]

  The Wall Street Journal study surveyed card and non-card grocery
stores in five different American cities and concluded that "In all
five of our comparisons, we wound up spending less money in a
supermarket that doesn't offer a card, in one case 29% less."[xxvi]
The author further wrote that ".according to industry experts, our
shopping experience was typical, because cards are designed to make
customers feel like they got a bargain, without actually lowering
prices overall. 'For many customers, the amount of money saved has not
risen,' says Margo Georgiadis, a specialist in loyalty programs at
McKinsey & Co. The difference is that stores now make you carry a card
to get the discounts, whereas before they just offered plain old sale
prices."[xxvii]

  Making a Return? Your Papers Better Be in Order

       A receipt from H&M, a popular clothing store, which now
requires government issued photo identification for all returns.

  A review of the return policies of select retailers indicates that
asking for identification for returns, even when an original receipt
is present, is becoming a common practice.  In some situations, this
requirement is even printed on the receipt while other merchants fail
to post any notice of this condition.  While some retailers simply
take the identification to match the name and contact information,
others go as far as to enter the driver's license number into their
computer system.  Often, a customer might not even know that this is
occurring, or they may feel as though the recording of their driver's
license number is a necessary step.  Given the sensitivity of the
information contained on a driver's license, when combined with credit
card information that is often available at a return, this practice
places the customer at risk of identity theft.

  Consumer Returns Database

  Some point of sale return information is being added to a
little-known system known as the "Consumer Returns Database."[xxviii]
The database is offered by The Return Exchange which offers a
standardized return system to retailers. It operates in real-time by
monitoring consumer return patterns it helps merchants identify
fraudulent or abusive customers.

  It is unclear what standards are applied to identify an abusive
customer, or the rights that a customer has to access and correct the
database.  A list of the retailers who participate in the database is
not publicly available.  By the time a customer is aware that negative
information exists about them in the database, it is because they have
already been branded as a fraudulent or abusive returner.

  Firing the Customer

  Combined, collection of returns information and loyalty behavior can
tip the balance of power between the consumer and the retailer.  Left
unchecked, this data will be used for customer exclusion.  As the
Boston Globe recently put it, slow service or unattractive prices are
being used "as a behavior modification tool to transform an
unprofitable customer into either a profitable customer or a former
customer."[xxix]

        "Filene's banned two sisters from all 21 of its stores last
year after the clothing chain's corporate parent decided they had
returned too many items and complained too often about
service."[xxxiii]

  There is a growing movement in the "customer relationship
management" or profiling industry where businesses are encouraged to
eliminate customers who complain or who return goods.  Jim Dion,
president of retail consulting firm Dionco Inc., recently urged
storeowners to create disincentives for certain customers.[xxx] Dion
characterized 20% of the population as "bottom feeders," who complain
and have low-levels of loyalty.  Businesses, he argues, should try to
eliminate these customers: "It'd be cheaper to stop them at the door
and give them $10 not to come in."[xxxi] An article in DMNews quotes
Dion as suggesting that retailers "should consider a
preferred-customer database-prefer that they don't shop here."[xxxii]

  And major businesses are adopting these recommendations.  Best Buy's
consumer exclusion tactics were recently detailed by the Wall Street
Journal.  Literally, Best Buy is trying to eliminate its most savvy
customers, ones that recognize good deals, in favor of less thrifty
customers that the company can charge more.[xxxiv] Other companies
engage in consumer exclusion in more subtle ways, for instance,
Harrah's casinos automatically identifies callers and charges them for
hotel rooms based on their perceived profit potential.[xxxv] The
company hides the profiling system because consumers, if fully
informed, would find the practices creepy.

  First-Degree Price Discrimination

  "First-degree price discrimination," a practice where businesses
attempt to "perfectly exploit the differences in price sensitivity
between consumers," is a growing problem resulting from collection of
consumer information.[xxxvi] As Professor Janet Gertz has explained:
"By profiling consumers, financial institutions can predict an
individual's demand and price point sensitivity and thus can alter the
balance of power in their price and value negotiations with that
individual. Statistics indicate that the power shift facilitated by
predictive profiling has proven highly profitable for the financial
services industry. However, there is little evidence that indicates
that any of these profits or cost savings are being passed on to
consumers. For this reason, and because most consumers have no
practical ability to negotiate price terms for the exchange of their
data, many characterize the commercial exploitation of consumer
transaction data as a classic example of a market failure."[xxxvii]

  First-degree price discrimination is a goal of some in the
information business.  CIO Insight Magazine recently published an
article discussing pricing ceilings where price discrimination is
described as a goal for the industry: "The ideal strategy? To capture
the value of the product or service for a particular customer or
customer segment."[xxxviii]

  X. Recommendations

  The FTC has to move into the 21st century and meaningfully address
Internet privacy.  Ten years of self-regulation has led to serious
failures in this field. The online privacy situation is getting worse,
so bad that offline retailers are emulating the worst Internet
practices.

  The FTC certainly is capable of protecting privacy online. It has to
rise to the challenge and exercise more skepticism in the market as a
proxy for consumer interest.  Sometimes the market advances consumer
interests, but when it comes to privacy, the market has been a driving
force in eroding both practices and expectations.  In order to rise to
the challenge of effectively protecting individuals' privacy, we
recommend the following:

    a.. The FTC should abandon its faith in
self-regulation. Self-regulatory systems have served to stall Congress
while anesthetizing the public to increasingly invasive business
practices.  Self-regulation has only been reliable in promoting
privacy notices, the least substantive aspect of privacy protection.
The public's, and even the FTC's own conception of Fair Information
Practices, commands a broader array of privacy protection including
access, choice, security, and accountability.  b.. The FTC should
reexamine the Network Advertising Initiative in light of the
agreement's dwindling membership and the existence of new, more
invasive tracking measures.  c.. The FTC should reexamine the IRSG
Principles to ensure that they provide some measure of meaningful
privacy.  d.. The FTC should investigate the emerging technologies
identified in this report, including digital rights management,
trusted computing, and single sign on services.  e.. The FTC should
investigate the emerging offline business practices identified in this
report, including unnecessary requests for information at point of
sale or return, customer return databases, customer exclusion, and
first degree price discrimination.  f.. The FTC should work with the
banking agencies to develop a unified mechanism for opting out under
the Gramm-Leach-Bliley and Fair Credit Reporting Acts.  Just as it
made no sense for individuals to opt-out of every telemarketing call,
it currently makes no sense for an individual to have to contact every
single financial institution separately to protect privacy.

  *This report was written with assistance from EPIC Internet Public
Interest Opportunity Program (IPIOP) Clerks Dina Mashayekhi, Tara Wheatland,
and Amanda Reid.

  [i] Consumers deserve stronger shield against telemarketers, USA Today,
Sept. 17, 2002.  In just one year, the New York DNC list amassed 2 million
enrollments.  Telemarketing's Troubled Times, CBS News, Apr. 1, 2002, at
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/04/01/eveningnews/main505124.shtml.

  [ii] Self Regulation and Privacy Online, Before the House Commerce
Subcomm. on Telecom., Trade, and Consumer Protection, 106th Cong., Jul. 13,
1999, available at http://www.ftc.gov/os/1999/07/pt071399.htm.

  [iii] FTC, Staff Report: Public Workshop on Consumer Privacy on the Global
Information Infrastructure, Dec. 1996, available at
http://www.ftc.gov/reports/privacy/privacy1.htm.

  [iv]FTC, Privacy Online: A Report to Congress, Jun. 4, 1998, available at
http://www.ftc.gov/reports/privacy3/index.htm.

  [v]FTC, Self-regulation Is the Preferred Method of Protecting Consumers'
Online Privacy; Jul. 21, 1998, available at
http://www.ftc.gov/opa/1998/07/privacyh.htm.

  [vi] Consumer Privacy on the World Wide Web, Before the House Comm. on
Commerce Subcomm. on Telecommunications, Trade, and Consumer Protection,
105th Cong. (Jul. 21, 1998) (statement of the FTC), available at
http://www.ftc.gov/os/1998/07/privac98.htm.

  [vii]FTC, Online Profiling:A Report to Congress Part 2 Recommendations,
Jul. 2000, available at http://www.ftc.gov/os/2000/07/onlineprofiling.htm.

  [viii] Timothy J. Muris, Protecting Consumers' Privacy: 2002 and Beyond,
Remarks delivered at the Privacy 2001 Conference, Oct. 4, 2001, available at
http://www.ftc.gov/speeches/muris/privisp1002.htm.

  [ix] Ad4Ever; AdCentric Online; Ad Dynamix;  AdSolution; Avenue A;
BlueStreak; BridgeTrack; DoubleClick; efluxa; Enliven; Flycast; i33;
Mediaplex; PlanetActive; Pointroll; Profero; Qksrv; RealMedia; RedAgency;
TangoZebra; TargetGraph; TrackStar; Travelworm; Unicast.

  [x]Pew Internet & American Life Project, Trust and Privacy Online: Why
Americans Want to Rewrite the Rules, Aug. 20, 2000.

  [xi] Company Needs to Engage Privacy Advocates in a Thorough Debate, San
Jose Mercury News, Apr. 15, 2004.

  [xii] David McGuire, States Speed up Spyware Race, Wash. Post, May 13,
2004, available at
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A24746-2004May13.html

  [xiii] Julie E. Cohen, A Right to Read Anonymously: A Closer Look at
"Copyright Management" in Cyberspace, 28 Conn. L. Rev. 981 (Summer 1996).

  [xiv]BurrellesLuce, Top 100 Daily Newspapers in the U.S. by Circulation
2004.

  [xv] Joseph Turow, Americans and Online Privacy: The System is Broken,
Annenberg Public Policy Center, June 2003.

  [xvi] Rachel Metz, We Don't Need No Stinkin' Login, Wired Jul. 20, 2004,
available at http://wired.com/news/infostructure/0,1377,64270,00.html


  [xvii] Chris Jay Hoofnagle, Big Brother's Little Helpers, 29 N.C.J. Int'l
L. & Com. Reg. 595 (Summer 2004).

  [xviii]FTC, Wait, Watch Closely and See is Right Stance for Government on
Privacy Issues for Electronic Payment Systems, Says FTC Official, Sept. 18,
1997, available at http://www.ftc.gov/opa/1997/09/medine.htm.

  [xix]FTC, Online Profiling:A Report to Congress Part 2 Recommendations,
Jul. 2000, available at http://www.ftc.gov/os/2000/07/onlineprofiling.htm.

  [xx] Information Flows, Before the FTC, Jun. 18, 2003, available at
http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/workshops/infoflows/present/030618morgan.pdf.

  [xxi] Robert O' Harrow, Jr., No Place to Hide 71-72, Free Press (2005).
DOJ, Milford Man Pleads Guilty to Hacking Intrusion and Theft of Data Cost
Company $5.8 Million, Dec. 18, 2003, available at
http://www.usdoj.gov/criminal/cybercrime/baasPlea.htm.

  [xxii]DOJ, Florida Man Charged with Breaking Into Acxiom Computer Records,
Jul. 21, 2004, available at
http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/2004/July/04_crm_501.htm.

  [xxiii] Customer Data Was on Stolen PC, Wells Fargo Says, Reuters, Nov.
21, 2003.

  [xxiv] In re Trans Union, 2000 FTC LEXIS 23 (2000).

  [xxv] Katy McLaughlin, The Discount Grocery Cards That Don't Save You
Money, Wall Street Journal, Jan. 21, 2003, at
http://wsj.com/article/0,,SB1043006872628231744,00.html.

  [xxvi] Id.

  [xxvii] Id.

  [xxviii] http://www.thereturnexchange.com/

  [xxix] Bruce Mohl, Facing their demons: To face demons, firms dump maxim,
Boston Globe, Jul. 27, 2003.

  [xxx] Mickey Alam Khan, Technology Creates Tough Environment for
Retailers, DMNews, Jan. 13, 2003.

  [xxxi] Id.

  [xxxii] Id.

  [xxxiii] Joshua Freed, The customer is always right? Not anymore, San
Fran. Chron., Jul. 5, 2004.

  [xxxiv] Gary McWilliams, Analyzing Customers, Wall Street Journal, Nov. 8,
2004.

  [xxxv] Christina Binkley, Taking Retailers' Cues, Harrah's Taps Into
Science of Gambling, Wall Street Journal, Nov. 22, 2004.

  [xxxvi] Anthony Danna & Oscar H. Gandy, Jr., All That Glitters is Not
Gold: Digging Beneath the Surface of Data Mining, 40 Journal of Business
Ethics 373, 381 (2002).

  [xxxvii] Janet Dean Gertz, The Purloined Personality: Consumer Profiling
in Financial Services, 39 San Diego L. Rev. 943, 964-5 (Summer 2002).

  [xxxviii] Amy Cortese, Price Flexing: How the Web Adds New Twists, CIO
Insight, at http://www.cioinsight.com/article2/0,3959,43528,00.asp.

  [Inside Back Cover: Personal information sold by magazines. Some segment
their subscribers by age, sex, religion, and whether there are children in
the household.]

  [Back Cover: More lists of personal information sold based on Internet
registrations. List brokers sell personal information en masse segmented by
age, sex, sexual orientation, and race.]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This report came to us from EPIC, and
you can examine the several good reports at their web site:
http://www.epic.org, or read the original report at its URL:
Page URL: http://www.epic.org/reports/decadedisappoint.html .

In the archives, these two parts (last issue and current issue) will 
be merged into one.    PAT]

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

From: Gene S. Berkowitz <first.last@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Ohio Law Would Require Auction License for eBay Sellers
Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 22:20:53 -0500


In article <telecom24.102.9@telecom-digest.org>, 
kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net says:

> In article <telecom24.101.4@telecom-digest.org>, lisa_minter2001
> @yahoo.com says:

>> CNN, via Yahoo News on Tuesday reports that the State of Ohio has
>> become very unfriendly toward online sellers using E-Bay.
>> According to CNN-Money, State of Ohio now requires an auction license
>> of people who want to sell on E-Bay, as well as a one-year training
>> class required of sellers _and_ a fifty thousand dollar security 
>> bond. The auction license costs two hundred dollars. If you fail to
>> do these things, they have some jail time waiting for you. Their
>> excuse is they want to 'cut back on internet fraud using E-Bay'.

>> http://money.cnn.com/2005/03/07/technology/ohio_ebay/index.htm

> Tax revenue. That's what every state is about. 

> On a related note -- a couple years ago I get notice from the state of
> RI that I never filed my 1990 taxes and owe them $1,300 between fines,
> etc.  So the past few years they snatched my refunds.

> This year I decided I want receipts from this point forward, and I'll
> keep my tax records for more than three years so I can prove I filed.
> Turns out the RI Division of Taxation won't give a receipt. I got the
> woman to stamp my copy with their "RECEIVED - RI DIV TAX" verbiage
> with the date and all.

> Hopefully the state will lose one more of my returns -- then I can
> bring the receipted version to the news hounds and watch as the sparks
> fly.

Haven't you ever heard of Certified Mail / Return Receipt?  I have
signed, stamped return post cards for every Fed & State return since I
started filing.

--Gene

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

Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 22:43:29 -0500
From: Marcus Didius Falco <falco_marcus_didius@yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: Why Pay to be an Identity Thief? CMU Will Show You How


    ------ Forwarded Message
    From: Steven Cherry < >
    Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 02:33:41 -0500
    To: "David J. Farber" < >
    Subject: Why Pay to be an Identity Thief?

Dave,

We just posted an article I think of interest to IP:

<http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/WEBONLY/wonews/mar05/0305nthef.html>
Why Pay to be an Identity Thief? Experimental Software Makes It Free

By Steven Cherry

Thieves purchased sensitive personal data from ChoicePoint, but a
Carnegie Mellon University researcher can get the same information
free on the Web

    Steven Cherry, +1 212-419-7566
    Senior Associate Editor
    IEEE Spectrum, 3 Park Ave,  New York, NY 10016
    <http://www.spectrum.ieee.org>

    ------ End of Forwarded Message


Why Pay to be an Identity Thief? Experimental Software Makes It Free

By Steven Cherry

Thieves purchased sensitive personal data from ChoicePoint, but a Carnegie
Mellon University researcher can get the same information free on the Web

11 March 2005 -- The U.S. database industry is under a legal microscope
following the pilfering of information that could allow thieves to
steal the identities of hundreds of thousands of people. In a hearing
yesterday, senators threatened legislation to regulate large brokers
of financial and other data such as Lexis Nexis, Bank of America, and
Choicepoint all of which have disclosed problems in the last two
months. It was the incident at Alpharetta, Ga.-based ChoicePoint that
kindled the current concern in Washington, D.C. In mid-February the
firm, whose data is used to check the legitimacy of the potential
customers of other companies, revealed that it had been tricked into
selling the records of 145 000 people to thieves posing as legitimate
ChoicePoint customers.

But why should an identity thief bother with an expensive charade?
Carnegie-Mellon University associate professor of computer science,
Latanya Sweeney, has found an even simpler way than paying a company
in the personal database industry, which critics say is
underregulated. She's found a way to extract all the data she wants
for free from the World Wide Web. For over a decade, Sweeney has been
exploring the intersection of technology and privacy. Her latest work
builds on earlier Web-searching tools that create software agents to
extract names, address, birth dates, and Social Security numbers from
resumes posted online; everything you need to apply for a new credit
card in someone else's name. Sweeney will report= her findings at a
symposium devoted to national security sponsored by the American
Association for Artificial Intelligence and held at Stanford
University, in California, 21 - 23 March.

With her software, Sweeney can gather the key data with just a little
Web surfing. She starts with a filter that searches for documents
likely to be resumes and then extracts the key data values: name,
social security number, address, and date of birth. R=E9sum=E9s are
found in a two-part process: first, a program Sweeney wrote last year
finds long lists of names. Then a specialized Google search filter
looks for resumes associated with those names that contain Social
Security numbers.

Social Security numbers and the other needed fields, such as birth
date, are isolated using a combination of techniques. For example,
dates can be formatted in several different ways, but there are now
standard techniques for parsing them. If a resume has all the needed
data except a birth date, the software grabs it from one of the many
sites that offer them, such as Anybirthday.com. Social Security
numbers have a distinctive format: nnn-nn-nnnn. Another program of
Sweeney's, SSN Watch, checks the numbers that are found.

How important are those Social Security numbers? Last September, the
commissioner of the U.S. Federal Trade Commission told Congress that
they play "a pivotal role in identity theft. Identity thieves use the
Social Security number as a key to access the financial benefits
available to their victims."

Obviously, if people are posting their Social Security numbers to the
Web, and if doing so leaves them highly vulnerable to identity theft,
then they ought to stop. Sweeney's work addressed that issue. The
Identity Angel project, which she launched earlier this year, looks
for e-mail addresses in those resumes, and sends individuals automated
notices that their identity information was found online. She says a
follow-up study showed that more than 90 percent of the people
subsequently removed the information from the Web.

Nonetheless, even with a digital Samaritan patrolling the ether, U.S.
identities remain at risk. A November study by the U.S. Government
Accountability Office found that "Social Security numbers appear in
any number of records exposed to public view almost everywhere in the
nation, primarily at the state and local levels of government."

The GAO reported that many states and hundreds of the nation's 3141
counties put Social Security numbers directly on the Internet and that
"this could affect millions of people." The agency concluded that the
risk of exposure for Social Security numbers in public records "is
highly variable and difficult for any one individual to anticipate or
prevent."

That risk is much lower across the Atlantic, where a 1995 European
Union directive on data privacy ensures that personal data is kept
secret by default.

According to Stephen J. Kobrin, a professor of multinational
management at the University of Pennsylvania, in Philadelphia, this
represents a fundamental difference between the United States and
Europe. "In America privacy is seen as an alienable commodity subject
to the market," he wrote in 2002 report. In contrast, he says, in
Europe, privacy is considered to be "a fundamental human right." Not
only do explicit privacy statutes exist there, but they are also
enforced by dedicated regulatory agencies.

In other words, the current U.S. crisis of identity theft is a result
of policy choices that Americans have made, sometimes implicitly,
sometimes explicitly. They are choices that can be revisited anytime.

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, IEEE Spectrum and Steven Cherry.

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

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

Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 22:44:07 -0500
From: Marcus Didius Falco <falco_marcus_didius@yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: Hackers Target U.S. Power Grid


* Original: FROM..... Dave Farber

BTW Pat Wood is a very good person who actually wanted to be at the FCC

Dave

  ------ Forwarded Message
  From: Fred Langa < >
  Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 10:33:57 -0500
  Subject: "Hackers target U.S. power grid" (wash post)

Describing his reaction to the demonstration [of how easily hackers
might break into electrical grid computers] Patrick H. Wood III, the
chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, said: 'I wished
I'd had a diaper on.'"

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7152899

Fred Langa

Current Projects/Affiliations Info:
http://www.langa.com/about_fred.htm

Free Newsletter ("The LangaList"): subscribe@langa.com

Free LangaList Link Exchange: http://www.langa.com/code.htm

Hackers target U.S. power grid
Government quietly warns utilities to beef up computer security

By Justin Blum
The Washington Post
Updated: 8:33 a.m. ET March 11, 2005

WASHINGTON - Hundreds of times a day, hackers try to slip past
cyber-security into the computer network of Constellation Energy Group
Inc., a Baltimore power company with customers around the country.

"We have no discernable way of knowing who is trying to hit our system,"
said John R. Collins, chief risk officer for Constellation, which operates
Baltimore Gas and Electric. "We just know it's being hit."

Hackers have caused no serious damage to systems that feed the
nation's power grid, but their untiring efforts have heightened
concerns that electric companies have failed to adequately fortify
defenses against a potential catastrophic strike. The fear: In a
worst-case scenario, terrorists or others could engineer an attack
that sets off a widespread blackout and damages power plants,
prolonging an outage.

Patrick H. Wood III, the chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, warned top electric company officials in a private meeting
in January that they need to focus more heavily on cyber-security. 
Wood also has raised the issue at several public appearances.
Officials will not say whether new intelligence points to a potential
terrorist strike, but Wood stepped up his campaign after officials at
the Energy Department's Idaho National Laboratory showed him how a
skilled hacker could cause serious problems.

Wood declined to comment on specifics of what he saw. But an official
at the lab, Ken Watts, said the simulation showed how someone could
hack into a utility's Internet-based business management system, then
into a system that controls utility operations. Once inside, lab
workers simulated cutting off the supply of oil to a turbine
generating electricity and destroying the equipment.

Describing his reaction to the demonstration, Wood said: "I wished I'd
had a diaper on."

Growing concerns

Many electric industry representatives have said they are concerned
about cyber-security and have been taking steps to make sure their
systems are protected. But Wood and others in the industry said the
companies' computer security is uneven.

"A sophisticated hacker, which is probably a group of hackers
 ... could probably get into each of the three U.S. North American
power [networks] and could probably bring sections of it down if they
knew how to do it," said Richard A. Clarke, a former counterterrorism
chief in the Clinton and Bush administrations.

Clarke said government simulations show that electric companies have
not done enough to prevent hacking. "Every time they test, they get
in," Clarke said. "It's nice that the power companies think that
they've done things, and some of them have. But as long as there's a
way to get into the grid, the grid is as weak as its weakest company."

Some industry analysts play down the threat of a massive cyber-attack,
saying it's more likely that terrorists would target the physical
infrastructure such as power plants and transmission lines. James
Andrew Lewis, director of technology policy at the Center for
Strategic and International Studies in the District, said a
coordinated attack on the grid would be technically difficult and
would not provide as much "bang for the buck" as high-profile physical
attacks. Lewis said the bigger vulnerability may be posed not by
outside hackers but by insiders who are familiar with their company's
computer networks.

But in recent years, terrorists have expressed interest in a range of
computer targets. Al Qaeda documents from 2002 suggest cyber-attacks on
various targets, including the electrical grid and financial institutions,
according to a translation by the IntelCenter, an Alexandria firm that
studies terrorist groups.

Power grid seen as vulnerable

A government advisory panel has concluded that a foreign intelligence
service or a well-supported terrorist group "could conduct a
structured attack on the electric power grid electronically, with a
high degree of anonymity, and without having to set foot in the target
nation," according to a report last year by the Government
Accountability Office, the investigative arm of Congress.

Cyber-security specialists and government officials said that
cyber-attacks are a concern across many industries but that the threat
to the country's power supply is among their top fears.

Hackers have gained access to U.S. utilities' electronic control
systems and in a few cases have "caused an impact," said Joseph
M. Weiss, a Cupertino, Calif.-based computer security specialist with
Kema Inc., a consulting firm focused on the energy industry. He said
computer viruses and worms also have caused problems.

Weiss, a leading expert in control system security, said officials of
the affected companies have described the instances at private
conferences that he hosts and in confidential conversations but have
not reported the intrusions publicly or to federal authorities. He
said he agreed not to publicly disclose additional details and that
the companies are fearful that releasing the information would hurt
them financially and encourage more hacking.

Weiss said that "many utilities have not addressed control system
cyber-security as comprehensively as physical security or
cyber-security of business networks."

The vulnerability of the nation's electrical grid to computer attack
has grown as power companies have transferred control of their
electrical generation and distribution equipment from private,
internal networks to supervisory control and data acquisition, or
SCADA, systems that can be accessed through the Internet or by phone
lines, according to consultants and government reports. That
technology has led to greater efficiency because it allows workers to
operate equipment remotely.

Other systems that feed information into SCADA or that operate utility
equipment are vulnerable and have been largely overlooked by
utilities, security consultants said.

Some utilities have made hacking into their SCADA systems relatively
easy by continuing to use factory-set passwords that can be found in
standard documentation available on the Internet, computer security
consultants said.

The  North American Electric  Reliability Council,  an industry-backed
organization  that sets  voluntary standards  for power  companies, is
drafting  wide-ranging guidelines  to replace  more  narrow, temporary
precautions   already   on   the   books  for   guarding   against   a
cyber-attack. But computer security specialists question whether those
standards go far enough.

Officials at several power companies said they had invested heavily in
new equipment and software to protect their computers. Many would
speak only in general terms, saying divulging specifics could assist
hackers.

"We're very concerned about it," said Margaret E. "Lyn" McDermid,
senior vice president and chief information officer for Dominion
Resources Inc., a Richmond-based company that operates Dominion
Virginia Power and supplies electricity and natural gas in other
states. "We spend a significant amount of time and effort in making
sure we are doing what we ought to do."

Executives at Constellation Energy view the constant hacking attempts
 -- which have been unsuccessful -- as a threat and monitor their
systems closely. They said they assume many of the hackers are the
same type seen in other businesses: people who view penetrating
corporate systems as fun or a challenge.

"We feel we are in pretty good shape when it comes to this," Collins
said.  "That doesn't mean we're bulletproof."

Old equipment may be a threat

The biggest threat to the grid, analysts said, may come from power
companies using older equipment that is more susceptible to
attack. Those companies many not want to invest large amounts of money
in new computer equipment when the machines they are using are
adequately performing all their other functions.

Security consulting firms said that they have hacked into power
company networks to highlight for their clients the weaknesses in
their systems.

"We are able to penetrate real, running, live systems," said Lori
Dustin, vice president of marketing for Verano Inc., a Mansfield,
Mass., company that sells products to companies to secure SCADA
systems. In some cases, Dustin said, power companies lack basic
equipment that would even alert them to hacking attempts.

O. Sami Saydjari, chief executive of the Wisconsin Rapids, Wis.-based
consulting firm Cyber Defense Agency LLC, said hackers could cause the
type of blackout that knocked out electricity to about 50 million
people in the Northeast, Midwest and Canada in 2003, an event
attributed in part to trees interfering with power lines in Ohio. He
said that if hackers destroyed generating equipment in the process,
the amount of time to restore electricity could be prolonged.

"I am absolutely confident that by design, someone could do at least as
[much damage], if not worse" than what was experienced in 2003, said
Saydjari, who was one of 54 prominent scientists and others who warned the
Bush administration of the risk of computer attacks following Sept. 11,
2001. "It's just a matter of time before we have a serious event."


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, Washington Post Company.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

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

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

End of TELECOM Digest V24 #111
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun Mar 13 18:44:30 2005
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j2DNiTT04753;
	Sun, 13 Mar 2005 18:44:30 -0500 (EST)
Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 18:44:30 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200503132344.j2DNiTT04753@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 #112

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 13 Mar 2005 18:44:00 EST    Volume 24 : Issue 112

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    A Spiritual Connection (Marcus Didius Falco)
    Behind the Digital Divide (Marcus Didius Falco)
    Re: FCC Wants Comments was Re: Should VoIP Get Numbers Direct? (Tim)
    Re: Draytek Router Problem - Class C Address Only on LAN? (Geoff Welsh)
    Re: Cell Phone Radiation Dangers (Tony P.)
    Re: Ohio Law Would Require Auction License for eBay Sellers (Tony P.)
    Re: Satellite Radio as "Broadcast Audio Internet"? (John McHarry)
    Re: Need PC Based Call Attendant/Answering Service (andrew@voicent.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: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 03:48:51 -0500
From: Marcus Didius Falco <falco_marcus_didius@yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: A Spiritual Connection  from Economist.com


http://economist.com/printedition/displayStory.cfm?Story_ID=3D3713955

A spiritual connection
Mar 10th 2005
 From The Economist print edition

Technology and society: Around the world, mobile phones seem to have a
spiritual or supernatural dimension that other forms of technology
lack.

THOSE who go into the priesthood are said to have a calling from God. Now
the purveyors of faith the world over are using mobile phones to give
believers a call in a more literal sense. Catholics can sign up for daily
inspirational text messages from the pope simply by texting Pope On to a
special number (53141 in Ireland, for example). The Irish Jesuits offer a
service called Sacred Space, accessible via smartphone, which encourages
users to spend ten minutes reflecting on a specially chosen scripture for
the day. In Taiwan, limited-edition phones made by Okwap, a local
handset-maker, offer Matsu wallpaper and religious ringtones, along with a
less tangible feature each one has been specially blessed at a temple to
Matsu. And Muslims around the world can use the F7100 handset, launched
last July by LG of South Korea, both to remind them of prayer times (the
phone has an alarm system that works in 500 cities) and to find the
direction of Mecca using the handset's built-in Mecca indicator compass
(see picture).

Mobile phones also make it easy to donate money to religious
groups. In Britain, a company called MS Wireless Marketing offers a
TXT & Donate Islamic Prayer Alert service for .25 ($0.48) per
day. The profits go to Muslim charities such as Muslim Hands and
Islamic Relief. There are also dozens of Christian charities that
accept text-message donations.

Phones and religious beliefs do not always mix smoothly, however. 
Finnish authorities shut down a service which claimed to offer text
messages from Jesus for 1.20 ($1.55) each, and bishops in the text-mad
Philippines put a stop to people attending confession and receiving
absolution via text messages.

That technology and religion can be so intertwined is not new. After
all, the first book to roll off Gutenberg's new-fangled printing press
was the Bible. But unlike the personal computer, which has remained
paradoxically impersonal, the mobile phone has transcended its
pragmatic beginnings as a yuppie business tool and has burrowed its
way into popular consciousness, says Mizuko Ito, an anthropologist at
the University of Southern California. Fashion models don them like
jewellery and strut the catwalk, teenage girls in Japan use them as
lockets, sticking photographs of their friends into their battery
compartments, and some Ghanaians even choose to be buried in giant
mobile-phone coffins.

Mobile phones are a uniquely personal form of technology, thanks in
large part to their mobility. When you leave the house, you probably
take your keys, your wallet and your phone. Laptop computers are
carried by far fewer people, and do not have the same personal
associations. Mobile phones provide scope for self-expression, through
the choice of ringtone and screen wallpaper. At the same time, mobile
phones' ability to communicate with unseen, distant people using
invisible radio waves is almost magical.

Indeed, the notion that phones might be capable of supernatural or
spiritual communication goes right back to the inventor of the
telephone himself, Alexander Graham Bell.

According to Avital Ronell, a professor of philosophy at New York
University and the author of The Telephone Book: Technology,
Schizophrenia, and Electric Speech , Bell was just as interested in
using his invention to contact the dead as he was in talking to his
associate Thomas Watson. Bell and Watson had attended regular seances
in Salem, says Dr Ronell. Bell even drew up a contract with his
brother, agreeing that whoever lived the longest should try to contact
the other. For his part, Watson was an avid medium who spent hours
listening to the weird hisses and squeals of early telephone lines in
case they proved to be the dead trying to make contact.  AFP

Answering the call

The telephone still maintains such ghostly connections. In China,
people celebrating the Hungry Ghost Festival burn life-sized paper
effigies of everything from televisions to mobile phones so that the
dead can enjoy them in the afterlife. These phone offerings enable the
dead to call each other, rather than the living. Why shouldn't the
dead be as technologically advanced as we are? asks Genevieve Bell, an
anthropologist who works for Intel, the world's largest chipmaker. She
spent two years in Asia conducting field research about attitudes to
technology in different countries. In parts of southern China, she
found, it is customary to take your mobile phone to a local Buddhist
monk for blessing.

Even phone numbers can have supernatural connotations. In Beijing, a
man recently paid $215,000 for a lucky phone number. In Cantonese, the
number four sounds like the word for death, and is therefore unlucky,
while the number eight sounds like the word for fortune, and is
therefore lucky. It's not uncommon even for migrant workers to pay up
to a month's salary for a lucky telephone number, says James Katz,
professor of communications at Rutgers University. Since phones are
the most personal of all high-tech devices, it is hardly surprising
that their use should reflect the entire spectrum of personal beliefs.

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

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

Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 03:54:13 -0500
From: Marcus Didius Falco <falco_marcus_didius@yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: Behind the Digital Divide Economist.com


http://economist.com/printedition/displayStory.cfm?Story_ID=3D3714058

REPORTS

Reuters

Development: Much is made of the digital divide between rich and poor. What
do people on the ground think about it?

IN THE village of Embalam in southern India, about 15 miles outside
the town of Pondicherry, Arumugam and his wife, Thillan, sit on the
red earth in front of their thatch hut. She is 50 years old; he is not
sure, but thinks he is around 75. Arumugam is unemployed. He used to
work as a drum-beater at funerals, but then he was injured, and now he
has trouble walking. Thillan makes a little money as a part-time
agricultural labourer about 30 rupees ($0.70) a day, ten days a
month. Other than that, they get by on meagre (and sporadic)
government disability payments.

In  the new  India of  cybercafes and  software tycoons,  Arumugam and
Thillan, and the  millions of other villagers around  the country like
them,  seem like  anachronisms. But  just  a few  steps outside  their
section  of the  village a  section known  as the  colony ,  where the
untouchables traditionally  live the sheen of  India's technology boom
is  more  evident  in  a  green room  equipped  with  five  computers,
state-of-the-art  solar  cells  and   a  wireless  connection  to  the
internet. This  is the  village's Knowledge Centre,  one of 12  in the
region   set   up   by    a   local   non-profit   organisation,   the
M.   S.  Swaminathan   Research  Foundation   (MSSRF).   The  centres,
established  with the aid  of international  donor agencies  and local
government support, offer villagers  a range of information, including
market prices  for crops, job listings, details  of government welfare
schemes, and health advice.

A conservative estimate of the cost of the equipment in the Embalam
centre is 200,000 rupees ($4,500), or around 55 years' earnings for
Thillan.  Annual running costs are extra. When asked about the centre,
Thillan laughs. I don't know anything about that, she says. It has no
connection to my life. We're just sitting here in our house trying to
survive.

Scenes like these, played out around the developing world, have led to
something of a backlash against rural deployments of new information
and communications technologies, or ICTs, as they are known in the
jargon of development experts. In the 1990s, at the height of the
technology boom, rural ICTs were heralded as catalysts for leapfrog
development , information societies and a host of other digital-age
panaceas for poverty.

Now they have largely fallen out of favour: none other than Bill Gates, the
chairman of Microsoft, derides them as distractions from the real problems
of development. Do people have a clear view of what it means to live on $1
a day? he asked at a conference on the digital divide in 2000. About 99% of
the benefits of having a PC come when you've provided reasonable health and
literacy to the person who's going to sit down and use it. That is why,
even though Mr Gates made his fortune from computers, the Bill & Melinda
Gates Foundation, now the richest charity in the world, concentrates on
improving health in poor countries.

The backlash against ICTs is understandable. Set alongside the
medieval living conditions in much of the developing world, it seems
foolhardy to throw money at fancy computers and internet links. Far
better, it would appear, to spend scarce resources on combating AIDS,
say, or on better sanitation facilities. Indeed, this was the
conclusion reached by the recently concluded Copenhagen Consensus
project, which brought together a group of leading economists to
prioritise how the world's development resources should be spent (see
articles). The panel came up with 17 priorities: spending more on ICTs
was not even on the list.

Still, it may be somewhat hasty to write off rural technology
altogether.  Charles Kenny, a senior economist at the World Bank who
has studied the role of ICTs in development, says that traditional
cost-benefit calculations are in the best of cases an art, not a
science . With ICTs, he adds, the picture is further muddied by the
newness of the technologies; economists simply do not know how to
quantify the benefits of the internet.

The view from the ground

Given the paucity of data, then, and even of sound methodologies for
collecting the data, an alternative way to evaluate the role of ICTs
in development is simply to ask rural residents what they
think. Applied in rural India, in the villages served by the MSSRF,
this approach reveals a more nuanced picture than that suggested by
the sceptics, though not an entirely contradictory one.

Villagers like Arumugam and Thillan older, illiterate and lower caste
appear to have little enthusiasm for technology. Indeed, Thillan, who
lives barely a five-minute walk from the village's Knowledge Centre,
says she did not even know about its existence until two months ago
(even though the centre has been open for several years). When Thillan
and a group of eight neighbours are asked for their development
priorities a common man's version of the Copenhagen Consensus they
list sanitation, land, health, education, transport, jobs the list
goes on and on, but it does not include computers, or even
telephones. They are not so much sceptical of ICTs as oblivious; ICTs
are irrelevant to their lives. This attitude is echoed by many
villagers at the bottom of the social and economic ladder. In the
fishing community of Veerapatinam, the site of another MSSRF centre,
Thuradi, aged 45, sits on the beach sorting through his catch. I'm
illiterate, he says, when asked about the centre. I don't know how to
use a computer, and I have to fish all day.

But surely technology can provide information for the likes of
Thuradi, even if he does not sit down in front of the computers
himself? Among other things, the centre in this village offers
information on wave heights and weather patterns (information that
Thuradi says is already available on television). Some years ago, the
centre also used satellites to map the movements of large schools of
fish in the ocean. But according to another fisherman, this only
benefited the rich: poor fishermen, lacking motorboats and navigation
equipment, could not travel far enough, or determine their location
precisely enough, to use the maps.

Such stories bring to mind the uneven results of earlier
technology-led development efforts. Development experts are familiar
with the notion of rusting tractors a semi-apocryphal reference to
imported agricultural technologies that littered poor countries in the
1960s and 1970s. Mr Kenny says he similarly anticipates a fair number
of dusty rooms with old computers piled up in them around the
countryside.

That may well be true, but it does not mean that the money being
channelled to rural technology is going entirely unappreciated. Rural
ICTs appear particularly useful to the literate, to the wealthier and
to the younger those, in other words, who sit at the top of the
socio-economic hierarchy In the 12 villages surrounding Pondicherry,
students are among the most frequent users of the Knowledge Centres;
they look up exam results, learn computer skills and look for
jobs. Farmers who own land or cattle, and who are therefore relatively
well-off, get veterinary information and data on crop prices.

I'm illiterate, says one fisherman. I don't know how to use a
computer, and I have to fish all day.

Outside the Embalam colony, at a village teashop up the road from the
temple, Kumar, the 35-year-old shop owner, speaks glowingly about the
centre's role in disseminating crop prices and information on
government welfare schemes, and says the Knowledge Centre has made his
village famous . He cites the dignitaries from development
organisations and governments who have visited; he also points to the
fact that people from 25 surrounding villages come to use the centre,
transforming Embalam into something of a local information hub.

At the centre itself, Kasthuri, a female volunteer who helps run the
place, says that the status of women in Embalam has improved as a
result of using the computers. Before, we were just sitting at home,
she says. Now we feel empowered and more in control. Some economists
might dismiss such sentiments as woolly headed. But they are
indicators of a sense of civic pride and social inclusiveness that
less conventional economists might term human development or
well-being.

A question of priorities

Given the mixed opinions on the ground, then, the real issue is not
whether investing in ICTs can help development (it can, in some cases,
and for some people), but whether the overall benefits of doing so
outweigh those of investing in, say, education or health. Leonard
Waverman of the London Business School has compared the impact on GDP
of increases in teledensity (the number of telephones per 100 people)
and the primary-school completion rate. He found that an increase of
100 basis points in teledensity raised GDP by about twice as much as
the same increase in primary-school completion. As Dr Waverman
acknowledges, however, his calculations do not take into account the
respective investment costs and it is the cost of ICTs that makes
people such as Mr Gates so sceptical of their applicability to the
developing world.


AFP

Now that's what I call antivirus technology

Indeed, Ashok Jhunjhunwala, a professor at the Indian Institute of
Technology in Chennai (formerly Madras), argues that cost is the
deciding factor in determining whether the digital divide will ever be
bridged. To that end, Dr Jhunjhunwala and his colleagues are working
on a number of low-cost devices, including a remote banking machine
and a fixed wireless system that cuts the cost of access by more than
half. But such innovation takes time and is itself expensive.

Perhaps a more immediate way of addressing the cost of technology is
to rely on older, more proven means of delivering information. Radios,
for example, are already being used by many development organisations;
their cost (under $10) is a fraction of the investment (at least $800)
required for a telephone line. In Embalam and Veerapatinam, few people
actually ever sit at a computer; they receive much of their
information from loudspeakers on top of the Knowledge Centre, or from
a newsletter printed at the centre and delivered around the
village. Such old-fashioned methods of communication can be connected
to an internet hub located further upstream; these hybrid networks may
well represent the future of technology in the developing world.

But for now, it seems that the most cost-effective way of providing
information over the proverbial last mile is often decidedly
low-tech. On December 26th 2004, villagers in Veerapatinam had
occasion to marvel at the reliability of a truly old-fashioned source
of information. As the Asian=20 tsunami swept towards the south Indian
shoreline, over a thousand villagers were gathered safely inland
around the temple well. About an hour and a half before the tsunami,
the waters in the well had started bubbling and rising to the surface;
by the time the wave hit, a whirlpool had formed and the villagers had
left the beach to watch this strange phenomenon.

Nearby villages suffered heavy casualties, but in Veerapatinam only
one person died out of a total population of 6,200. The villagers
attribute their fortuitous escape to divine intervention, not
technology. Ravi, a well-dressed man standing outside the Knowledge
Centre, says the villagers received no warning over the speakers. We
owe everything to Her, he says, referring to the temple deity. I'm
telling you honestly, he says. The information came from Her.


Copyright 2005 The Economist Newspaper and The Economist Group.

http://economist.com/printedition/displayStory.cfm?Story_ID=3D3713955

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 Economist Group.

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

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

From: Tim@Backhome.org
Subject: Re: FCC Wants Comments Re: Should VoIP co's Get Numbers Direct?
Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 04:03:09 -0800
Organization: Cox Communications


Jack Decker wrote:

> point for the numbers to another CLEC.  I think allowing this change
> would allow VoIP companies to provide better service to customers, and
> by the way it would also probably remove the current impediments for
> customers wanting to take their phone number from one VoIP provider to
> another (or to a landline or cellular company, for that matter -- in
> other words, local number portability for VoIP numbers would probably
> be a reality).

What is scary is that the FCC has allowed Vonage and others to claim
true LNP when that presently simply isn't the case based on what you
are stating.  So, someone who has trusted Vonage (or other VoIPs) by
switching perhaps a coveted number to Vonage has, in fact, placed
ownership of that number in potential, if not actual, jepordy.

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

From: Geoffrey Welsh <reply@newsgroup.please>
Subject: Re: Draytek Router Problem - Class C Address Only on LAN Interface?
Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 09:49:39 -0500


paulfoel wrote:

> Pretty disappointed with the draytek router. We tried a cheap netgear
> router and this handled the subnets fine ...

Most 'residential' broadband routers support only a class C address
range on their LAN port.

Geoffrey Welsh <Geoffrey [dot] Welsh [at] bigfoot [dot] com>
Ambidextrous?  No, I said I'm ambinonscattous - I don't give a crap
either way! 

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

From: Tony P. <kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net>
Subject: Re: Cell Phone Radiation Dangers
Organization: ATCC
Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 10:43:27 -0500


In article <telecom24.110.8@telecom-digest.org>, sjsobol@JustThe.net 
says:

> Tony P. wrote:

>>>> Consider that Ms. Wood readily admits she has an agenda (she has an
>>>> axe to grind with cell phone manufacturers over what she perceives as
>>>> "iron-clad control over phone releases and pricing, its
>>>> ever-lengthening contracts, and the annoying habit it has of crippling
>>>> Bluetooth phones so that [she] can't use them the way [she wants]
>>>> to").  I would thus take this with a heavy handful of salt.

> If Miss Wood thinks that retail phone pricing and contracts are the
> fault of the MANUFACTURERS, she's probably too stupid to carry a cell
> phone in the first place. I doubt the removal of certain functions is
> done by the manufacturers on their own, either.

>> The problem is that many of the headsets are now Bluetooth enabled.
>> Those put out signals on what, 2.4GHz at relatively low power.

> So? My phone runs on 1.9GHz ... I still haven't heard anything
> definitive either way, either that cell phones DO or DON'T cause
> illness.

Go and read up on Part 97 of the FCC rules for Amateurs. It was scary
enough for them to require certifications of RF safety. But then, we
hams are allowed to run 1500W in the HF bands and a couple hundred in
the 2M and 70CM bands so I guess the RF exposure is a little more
intense at those levels.

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

From: Tony P. <kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net>
Subject: Re: Ohio Law Would Require Auction License for eBay Sellers
Organization: ATCC
Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 10:47:36 -0500


In article <telecom24.111.2@telecom-digest.org>, first.last@comcast.net 
says:

> In article <telecom24.102.9@telecom-digest.org>, 
> kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net says:

>> In article <telecom24.101.4@telecom-digest.org>, lisa_minter2001
>> @yahoo.com says:

>>> CNN, via Yahoo News on Tuesday reports that the State of Ohio has
>>> become very unfriendly toward online sellers using E-Bay.
>>> According to CNN-Money, State of Ohio now requires an auction license
>>> of people who want to sell on E-Bay, as well as a one-year training
>>> class required of sellers _and_ a fifty thousand dollar security 
>>> bond. The auction license costs two hundred dollars. If you fail to
>>> do these things, they have some jail time waiting for you. Their
>>> excuse is they want to 'cut back on internet fraud using E-Bay'.

>>> http://money.cnn.com/2005/03/07/technology/ohio_ebay/index.htm

>> Tax revenue. That's what every state is about. 

>> On a related note -- a couple years ago I get notice from the state of
>> RI that I never filed my 1990 taxes and owe them $1,300 between fines,
>> etc.  So the past few years they snatched my refunds.

>> This year I decided I want receipts from this point forward, and I'll
>> keep my tax records for more than three years so I can prove I filed.
>> Turns out the RI Division of Taxation won't give a receipt. I got the
>> woman to stamp my copy with their "RECEIVED - RI DIV TAX" verbiage
>> with the date and all.

>> Hopefully the state will lose one more of my returns -- then I can
>> bring the receipted version to the news hounds and watch as the sparks
>> fly.

> Haven't you ever heard of Certified Mail / Return Receipt?  I have
> signed, stamped return post cards for every Fed & State return since I
> started filing.

When one works right across the street from the building that taxation
is in (It's part of Dept. of Administration) it's easier to just walk
in and drop it off as I have other business in that building many
times per month.

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

From: John McHarry <jmcharry@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Satellite Radio as "Broadcast Audio Internet"?
Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 04:13:26 GMT
Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net


I don't think the inability to directly measure audience is much more
of a problem for satellite content providers than it is for AM and FM
broadcasters. About all they have to work with is Arbitron and the
like, which is pretty dicey for smaller markets. At least the
satellite broadcasters would have national data.

I have thought for some time that XM and Sirius are likely to start
leasing channels, or even timeshares of channels, rather than to keep
trying to fill all their channels themselves. Some of the content
looks a lot like that now, although I have no idea what the business
arrangements are.

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

From: andrew@voicent.com
Subject: Re: Need PC Based Call Attendant/Answering Service
Date: 12 Mar 2005 21:42:54 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


If you are a developer than you can use Voicent Gateway to create your
own voice mail software. Voicent Gateway is an open standard based
VoiceXML gateway that works on a PC with a voice modem.

The shareware version, as well as autodialer and reminder products,
are available for free download at http://www.voicent.com/download.

Thanks,

Andrew

Voicent Smart AutoDialer Software - Easy to use and affordable
http://www.voicent.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 #112
******************************


    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun Mar 13 23:07:44 2005
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j2E47iC06375;
	Sun, 13 Mar 2005 23:07:44 -0500 (EST)
Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 23:07:44 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200503140407.j2E47iC06375@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 #113

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 13 Mar 2005 23:05:00 EST    Volume 24 : Issue 113

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Outsourcing Innovation -- and Why Apple Doesn't (Marcus Didius Falco)
    Vonage or Lingo Allow For Faxing? (zcarenow@yahoo.com)
    Cell Phone Reception (bumblebee4451@yahoo.com)
    Re: Qwest Cost Creep (J Kelly)

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 Mar 2005 21:36:09 -0500
From: Marcus Didius Falco <falco_marcus_didius@yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: Outsourcing Innovation -- and Why Apple Doesn't


Some excerpts from the latest Business Week 'Technology' issue:
 From Business Week:

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/05_12/b3925601.htm

Outsourcing Innovation

First came manufacturing. Now companies are farming out R&D to cut
costs and get new products to market faster. Are they going too far?

As the Mediterranean sun bathed the festive cafs and shops of the Cte
d'Azur town of Cannes, banners with the logos of Motorola (MOT ),
Royal Philips Electronics (PHG ), palmOne (PLMO ), and Samsung
fluttered from the masts of plush yachts moored in the harbor. On
board, top execs hosted nonstop sales meetings during the day and
champagne dinners at night to push their latest wireless gadgets. 

Outside the city's convention hall, carnival barkers, clowns on
stilts, and vivacious models with bright red wigs lured passersby into
flashy exhibits. For anyone in the telecom industry wanting to shout
their achievements to the world, there was no more glamorous spot than
the sprawling 3GSM World Congress in Southern France in February.

Yet many of the most intriguing product launches in Cannes took place
far from the limelight. HTC Corp., a red-hot developer of multimedia
handsets, didn't even have its own booth. Instead, the Taiwanese
company showed off its latest wireless devices alongside partners that
sell HTC's models under their own brand names. Flextronics
Corp. demonstrated several concept phones exclusively behind closed
doors. And Cellon International rented a discrete three-room apartment
across from the convention center to unveil its new devices to a
steady stream of telecom executives. The new offerings included the
C8000, featuring eye-popping software. Cradle the device to your ear
and it goes into telephone mode. Peer through the viewfinder and it
automatically shifts into camera mode. Hold the end of the device to
your eye and it morphs into a videocam.

HTC? Flextronics? Cellon? There's a good reason these are hardly
household names. The multimedia devices produced from their prototypes
will end up on retail shelves under the brands of companies that don't
want you to know who designs their products. Yet these and other
little-known companies, with names such as Quanta Computer, Premier
Imaging, Wipro Technologies (WIT ), and Compal Electronics, are fast
emerging as hidden powers of the technology industry.

They are the vanguard of the next step in outsourcing -- of innovation
itself. When Western corporations began selling their factories and
farming out manufacturing in the '80s and '90s to boost efficiency and
focus their energies, most insisted all the important research and
development would remain in-house.

But that pledge is now pass. Today, the likes of Dell (DELL ),
Motorola, (MOT ) and Philips are buying complete designs of some
digital devices from Asian developers, tweaking them to their own
specifications, and slapping on their own brand names. It's not just
cell phones. Asian contract manufacturers and independent design
houses have become forces in nearly every tech device, from laptops
and high-definition TVs to MP3 music players and digital
cameras. "Customers used to participate in design two or three years
back," says Jack Hsieh, vice-president for finance at Taiwan's Premier
Imaging Technology Corp., a major supplier of digital cameras to
leading U.S. and Japanese brands. "But starting last year, many just
take our product. Because of price competition, they have to."

While the electronics sector is furthest down this road, the search
for offshore help with innovation is spreading to nearly every corner
of the economy. On Feb. 8, Boeing Co. (BA ) said it is working with
India's HCL Technologies to co-develop software for everything from
the navigation systems and landing gear to the cockpit controls for
its upcoming 7E7 Dreamliner jet. Pharmaceutical giants such as
GlaxoSmithKline (GSK ) and Eli Lilly (LLY )are teaming up with Asian
biotech research companies in a bid to cut the average $500 million
cost of bringing a new drug to market.  And Procter & Gamble Co. (PG )
says it wants half of its new product ideas to be generated from
outside by 2010, compared with 20% now.

Competitive Dangers Underlying this trend is a growing consensus that
more innovation is vital -- but that current R&D spending isn't
yielding enough bang for the buck. After spending years squeezing
costs out of the factory floor, back office, and warehouse, CEOs are
asking tough questions about their once-cloistered R&D operations: Why
are so few hit products making it out of the labs into the market? How
many of those pricey engineers are really creating game-changing
products or technology breakthroughs? "R&D is the biggest single
remaining controllable expense to work on," says Allen J. Delattre,
head of Accenture Ltd.'s (ACN ) high-tech consulting practice.
"Companies either will have to cut costs or increase R&D
productivity."

The result is a rethinking of the structure of the modern corporation.
What, specifically, has to be done in-house anymore? At a minimum,
most leading Western companies are turning toward a new model of
innovation, one that employs global networks of partners. These can
include U.S.  chipmakers, Taiwanese engineers, Indian software
developers, and Chinese factories. IBM (IBM ) is even offering the
smarts of its famed research labs and a new global team of 1,200
engineers to help customers develop future products using
next-generation technologies. When the whole chain works in sync,
there can be a dramatic leap in the speed and efficiency of product
development.

The downside of getting the balance wrong, however, can be
steep. Start with the danger of fostering new competitors. Motorola
hired Taiwan's BenQ Corp. to design and manufacture millions of mobile
phones. But then BenQ began selling phones last year in the prized
China market under its own brand. That prompted Motorola to pull its
contract. Another risk is that brand-name companies will lose the
incentive to keep investing in new technology. "It is a slippery
slope," says Boston Consulting Group Senior Vice-President Jim
Andrew. "If the innovation starts residing in the suppliers, you could
incrementalize yourself to the point where there isn't much left."

Such perceptions are a big reason even companies that outsource
heavily refuse to discuss what hardware designs they buy from whom and
impose strict confidentiality on suppliers. "It is still taboo to talk
openly about outsourced design," says Forrester Research Inc. (FORR )
consultant Navi Radjou, an expert on corporate innovation.

The concerns also explain why different companies are adopting widely
varying approaches to this new paradigm. Dell, for example, does
little of its own design for notebook PCs, digital TVs, or other
products.  Hewlett-Packard Co. (HPQ ) says it contributes key
technology and at least some design input to all its products but
relies on outside partners to co-develop everything from servers to
printers. Motorola buys complete designs for its cheapest phones but
controls all of the development of high-end handsets like its
hot-selling Razr. The key, execs say, is to guard some sustainable
competitive advantage, whether it's control over the latest
technologies, the look and feel of new products, or the customer
relationship. "You have to draw a line," says Motorola CEO Edward J.
Zander. At Motorola, "core intellectual property is above it, and
commodity technology is below."

Wherever companies draw the line, there's no question that the
demarcation between mission-critical R&D and commodity work is sliding
year by year.  The implications for the global economy are
immense. Countries such as India and China, where wages remain low and
new engineering graduates are abundant, likely will continue to be the
biggest gainers in tech employment and become increasingly important
suppliers of intellectual property. Some analysts even see a new
global division of labor emerging: The rich West will focus on the
highest levels of product creation, and all the jobs of turning
concepts into actual products or services can be shipped out.
Consultant Daniel H. Pink, author of the new book A Whole New Mind,
argues that the "left brain" intellectual tasks that "are routine,
computer-like, and can be boiled down to a spec sheet are migrating to
where it is cheaper, thanks to Asia's rising economies and the miracle
of cyberspace."  The U.S. will remain strong in "right brain" work
that entails "artistry, creativity, and empathy with the customer that
requires being physically close to the market."

You can see this great divide already taking shape in global
electronics.  The process started in the 1990s when Taiwan emerged as
the capital of PC design, largely because the critical technology was
standardized, on Microsoft Corp.'s (MSFT ) operating system software
and Intel Corp.'s (INTC ) microprocessor. Today, Taiwanese
"original-design manufacturers" (ODMS), so named because they both
design and assemble products for others, supply some 65% of the
world's notebook PCs. Quanta Computer Inc. alone expects to churn out
16 million notebook PCs this year in 50 different models for buyers
that include Dell, Apple Computer (AAPL ), and Sony (SNE ).

Now, Taiwanese ODMs and other outside designers are forces in nearly
every digital device on the market. Of the 700 million mobile phones
expected to be sold worldwide this year, up to 20% will be the work of
ODMs, estimates senior analyst Adam Pick of the El Segundo (Calif.)
market research firm iSuppli Corp. About 30% of digital cameras are
produced by ODMs, 65% of MP3 players, and roughly 70% of personal
digital assistants (PDAs). Building on their experience with PCs,
they're increasingly creating recipes for their own gizmos, blending
the latest advances in custom chips, specialized software, and
state-of-the-art digital components. "There is a lot of great
capability that has grown in Asia to develop complete products," says
Doug Rasor, worldwide strategic marketing manager at chipmaker Texas
Instruments Inc. TI often supplies core chips, along with rudimentary
designs, and the ODMs take it from there. "They can do the system
integration, the plastics, the industrial design, and the low-cost
manufacturing, and they are happy to put Dell's name on it. That is a
megatrend in the industry," says Rasor.

Taiwan's ODMs clearly don't regard themselves as mere job shops. Just
ask the top brass at HTC, which creates and manufactures smart phones
for such wireless service providers as Vodafone and Cingular as well
as equipment makers it doesn't identify. "We know this kind of product
category a lot better than our customers do," says HTC President Peter
Chou. "We have the capability to integrate all the latest
technologies. We do everything except the Microsoft operating system."

Or stop in to Quanta's headquarters in the Huaya Technology Park
outside Taipei. Workers are finishing a dazzling structure the size of
several football fields, with a series of wide steps leading past
white columns supporting a towering Teflon-and-glass canopy. It will
serve as Quanta's R&D headquarters, with thousands of engineers
working on next-generation displays, digital home networking
appliances, and multimedia players. This year, Quanta is doubling its
engineering staff, to 7,000, and its R&D spending, to $200 million.

Why? To improve its shrinking profit margins -- and because foreign
clients are demanding it. "What has changed is that more customers
need us to design the whole product," says Chairman Barry Lam. For
future products, in fact, "it's now difficult to get good ideas from
our customers. We have to innovate ourselves."

Sweeping Overhaul India is emerging as a heavyweight in design,
too. The top players in making the country world-class in software
development, including HCL and Wipro, are expected to help India boost
its contract R&D revenues from $1 billion a year now to $8 billion in
three years. One of Wipro's many labs is in a modest office off dusty,
congested Hosur Road in Bangalore. There, 1,000 young engineers
partitioned into brightly lit pods jammed with circuit boards, chips,
and steel housings hunch over 26 development projects. Among them is a
hands-free telephone system that attaches to the visor of a European
sports car. At another pod, designers tinker with a full dashboard
embedded with a satellite navigation system.  Inside other Wipro labs
in Bangalore, engineers are designing prototypes for everything from
high-definition TVs to satellite set-top boxes.

Perhaps the most ambitious new entrant in design is Flextronics. The
manufacturing behemoth already builds networking gear, printers, game
consoles, and other hardware for the likes of Nortel Networks (NT ),
Xerox (XRX ), HP, Motorola, and Casio Computer. But three years ago,
it started losing big cell-phone and PDA orders to Taiwanese
ODMs. Since then, CEO Michael E. Marks has shelled out more than $800
million on acquisitions to build a 7,000-engineer force of software,
chip, telecom, and mechanical designers scattered from India and
Singapore to France and Ukraine. Marks's splashiest move was to pay an
estimated $30 million for frog design Inc., the pioneering Sunnyvale
(Calif.) firm that helped design such Information Age icons as Apple
Computer Inc.'s original Mac in 1984. So far, Flextronics has
developed its own basic platforms for cell phones, routers, digital
cameras, and imaging devices. His goal is to make Flextronics a
low-cost, soup-to-nuts developer of consumer-electronics and tech
gear.

Marks has an especially radical take on where all this is headed: He
believes Western tech conglomerates are on the cusp of a sweeping
overhaul of R&D that will rival the offshore shift of
manufacturing. In the 1990s, companies like Flextronics "completely
restructured the world's electronics manufacturing," says Marks. "Now
we will completely restructure design."  When you get down to it, he
argues, some 80% of engineers in product development do tasks that can
easily be outsourced -- like translating prototypes into workable
designs, upgrading mature products, testing quality, writing user
manuals, and qualifying parts vendors. What's more, most of the core
technologies in today's digital gadgets are available to anyone. And
circuit boards for everything from cameras to network switches are
becoming simpler because more functions are embedded on
semiconductors.  The "really hard technology work" is migrating to
chipmakers such as Texas Instruments, Qualcomm (QCOM ), Philips,
Intel, and Broadcom (BRCM ), Marks says. "All electronics are on the
same trajectory of becoming silicon surrounded by plastic."

Why then, Marks asks, should Nokia (NOK ), Motorola, Sony-Ericsson,
Alcatel (ALA ), Siemens (SI ), Samsung, and other brand-name companies
all largely duplicate one another's efforts? Why should each spend $30
million to develop a new smartphone or $200 million on a cellular base
station when they can just buy the hardware designs? The ultimate
result, he says: Some electronics giants will shrink their R&D forces
from several thousand to a few hundred, concentrating on proprietary
architecture, setting key specifications, and managing global R&D
teams. "There is no doubt the product companies are going to have
fewer people design stuff," Marks predicts. "It's going to get ugly."

Granted, Marks's vision is more than a tad extreme. True, despite the
tech recovery, many corporate R&D budgets have been tightening. HP's
R&D spending long hovered around 6% of sales, but it's down to 4.4%
now. Cisco Systems' (CSCO ) R&D budget has dropped from its old
average of 17% to 14.5%. The numbers also are falling at Motorola,
Lucent Technologies (LU ), and Ericsson. In November, Nokia Corp. said
it aims to trim R&D spending from 12.8% of sales in 2004 to under 10%
by the end of 2006.

Close to the Heart

Still, most companies insist they will continue to do most of the
critical design work -- and have no plans to take a meat ax to R&D. A
Motorola spokesman says it plans to keep R&D spending at around 10%
for the long term. Lucent says its R&D staff should remain at about
9,000, after several years of deep cuts. And while many Western
companies are downsizing at home, they are boosting hiring at their
own labs in India, China, and Eastern Europe. "Companies realize if
they want a sustainable competitive advantage, they will not get it
from outsourcing," says President Frank M.  Armbrecht of the
Industrial Research Institute, which tracks corporate R&D spending.

Companies also worry about the message they send investors. 
Outsourcing manufacturing, tech support, and back-office work makes
clear financial sense. But ownership of design strikes close to the
heart of a corporation's intrinsic value. If a company depends on
outsiders for design, investors might ask, how much intellectual
property does it really own, and how much of the profit from a hit
product flows back into its own coffers, rather than being paid out in
licensing fees? That's one reason Apple Computer lets the world know
it develops its hit products in-house, to the point of etching
"Designed by Apple in California" on the back of each iPod.

Yet some outsourcing holdouts are changing their tune. Nokia long
prided itself on developing almost everything itself -- to the point
of designing its own chips. No longer. Given the complexities of
today's technologies and supply chains, "nobody can master it all,"
says Chief Technology Officer Pertti Korhonen. "You have to figure out
what is core and what is context." Lucent says outsourcing some
development makes sense so that its engineers can concentrate on
next-generation technologies. "This frees up talent to work on new
product lines," says Dave Ayers, vice-president for platforms and
engineering. "Outsourcing isn't about moving jobs. It's about the
flexibility to put resources in the right places at the right time."

It's also about brutal economics and the relentless demands of
consumers.  To get shelf space at a Best Buy (BBY ) or Circuit City
often means brand-name companies need a full range of models, from a
$100 point-and-shoot digital camera with 2 megapixels, say, to a $700
8-megapixel model that doubles as a videocam and is equipped with a
powerful zoom lens. On top of this, superheated competition can reduce
hit products to cheap commodities within months. So they must get out
the door fast to earn a decent margin. "Consumer electronics have
become almost like produce," says Michael E. Fawkes, senior
vice-president of HP's Imaging Products Div. "They always have to be
fresh."

Such pressures explain outsourcing's growing allure. Take cell phones,
which are becoming akin to fashion items. Using a predesigned platform
can shave 70% of development costs off a new model, estimates William
S. Wong, a senior vice-president for marketing at Cellon. That can be
a huge savings. As a rule of thumb, it takes around $10 million and up
to 150 engineers to develop a new cell phone from scratch. If Motorola
or Nokia guess wrong about the market trends a year into the future,
they can lose big. So they must develop several versions.

With most of its 800 engineers in China and France, Cellon creates
several basic designs each year and spreads the costs among many
buyers. It also has the technical expertise to morph that basic phone
into a bewildering array of models. Want a 2-megapixel camera module
instead of 1-megapixel?  Want to include a music player, or change the
style from a gray clamshell to a flaming-red candy-bar shape? No
problem: Cellon engineers can whip up a prototype, run all the tests,
and get it into mass production in a Chinese factory in months.

Moving Up the Food Chain

Companies are still figuring out exactly what to outsource. PalmOne
Inc.'s collaboration with Taiwan's HTC on its popular Treo 650 smart
phone illustrates one approach. Palm has long hired contractors to
assemble hardware from its own industrial designs. But in 2001, it
decided to focus on software and shifted hardware production to
Taiwanese ODMs. PalmOne designers still determine the look and feel of
the product, pick key components like the display and core chips, and
specify performance requirements. But HTC does much of the mechanical
and electrical design.  "Without a doubt, they've become a part of the
innovation process," says Angel L. Mendez, senior global operations
vice-president at palmOne. "It's less about outsourcing and more about
the collaborative way in which design comes together." The result:
PalmOne has cut months off of development times, reduced defects by
50%, and boosted gross margins by around 20%.

Hewlett-Packard, a company with such a proud history of innovation
that its advertising tag line is simply "invent," also works with
design partners on all the hardware it outsources. "Our strategy is
now to work with global networks to leverage the best technologies on
the planet," says Dick Conrad, HP's senior vice-president for global
operations. According to iSuppli, HP is getting design help from
Taiwan's Quanta and Hon Hai Precision for PCs, Lite-On for printers,
Inventec for servers and MP3 players, and Altek for digital
cameras. HP won't identify specific suppliers, but it says the
strategy has brought benefits. Conrad says it now takes 60% less time
to get a new concept to market. Plus, the company can "redeploy our
assets and resources to higher value-added products" such as advanced
printer inks and sophisticated corporate software, he says.

How far can outsourced design go? When does it get to the point where ODMs 
start driving truly breakthrough concepts and core technologies? It's not 
here yet. Distance is one barrier. "To be a successful product company 
requires intimacy with the customer," says Azim H. Premji, chairman of 
India's Wipro. "That is very hard to offshore in fast-changing markets." 
Another hurdle is that R&D spending by ODMs remains relatively low. Even 
though Premier develops most of its own cameras and video projectors, "the 
really core technology," such as the digital signal processors, is invented 
in the U.S., says vice-president Hsieh. Premier's latest wallet-size video 
projector, for example, was based on a rough design by Texas Instruments, 
developer of the core chip. With margins shrinking fast in the ODM 
business, however, Premier and other Taiwanese companies know they need to 
move up the innovation food chain to reap higher profits.

That's where Flextronics and its design acquisitions could get
interesting.  Inside frog's hip Sunnyvale office, designers are
working to create a radically new multimedia device, for an unnamed
corporate client, that won't hit the market until 2007. The plan, says
Patricia Roller, frog's co-CEO, is to use Flextronics software
engineers in Ukraine or India to develop innovative applications, and
for Flextronics engineers to design the working prototype. Flextronics
then would mass-produce the gadgets, probably in China.

Who will ultimately profit most from the outsourcing of innovation
isn't clear. The early evidence suggests that today's Western titans
can remain leaders by orchestrating global innovation networks. Yet if
they lose their technology edge and their touch with customers, they
could be tomorrow's great shrinking conglomerates. Contractors like
Quanta and Flextronics that are moving up the innovation ladder,
meanwhile, have a shot at joining the world's leading industrial
players. What is clear is that an army of in-house engineers no longer
means a company can control its fate. Instead, the winners will be
those most adept at marshaling the creativity and skills of workers
around the world.

By Pete Engardio and Bruce Einhorn
With Manjeet Kripalani in Bangalore, Andy Reinhardt in Cannes,
Bruce Nussbaum in Somers, N.Y., and Peter Burrows in San
Mateo, Calif.

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/05_12/b3925608.htm

Outsourcing
Commentary: Apple's Blueprint for Genius
Handling its own design work is one reason for best-sellers reason for 
best-sellers like the iPod and Shuffle. Steve Jobs is the other
By Peter Burrows

"Designed by Apple in Cupertino."

The words are printed in such small type on the back of Apple's (AAPL
) tiny new iPod Shuffle MP3 player that you have to squint to read
them. But they speak volumes about why Apple is standing so far out
from the crowd these days. At a time when rivals are outsourcing as
much design as possible to cut costs, Apple remains at its core a
product company -- one that would never give up control of how those
products are created.

In this age of commodity tech products, design, after all, is what
makes Apple Apple. This focus is apparent to anyone who has used one
of its trailblazing products. While the Silicon Valley pioneer sells
only a few dozen models, compared to the hundreds offered by many of
its rivals, many of those "designed in Cupertino" products are
startling departures from the norm -- and they often set the
directions for the rest of the industry.  Examples abound, from the
iPod, to the flat screen look of the new iMac, to the simple smallness
of the new Mac mini PC.

What's the secret? The precise details are almost impossible to get,
because Apple treats its product-development processes like state
secrets -- going so far as to string black drapes around the
production lines at the factories of the contract manufacturers it
hires to assemble its products. In one case, says a source who once
worked on an Apple project, the outfit even insisted that its wares be
built only on the midnight shift, when fewer prying eyes might be
around.

"INSANELY GREAT."  But the general themes are clear. Most CEOs are
focused on achieving their financial and operational goals, and on
executing a strategy. But Apple's Steve Jobs believes his company's
ultimate advantage comes from its ability to make unique, or as he
calls them, "insanely great" products.

Jobs's entire company is focused on that task. That means while rival
computer makers increasingly rely on so-called outsourced design
manufacturers (ODMs), for key design decisions, Jobs keeps most of
those tasks in-house. Sure, he relies on ODMs to manufacture his
products, but the big decisions on Apple products are made in Silicon
Valley.

Jobs himself is a crucial part of the formula. He's unique among big-time 
hardware CEOs for his hands-on involvement in the design process. Even 
product-design experts marvel at the power of the Jobs factor.

FIRST, AN IDEA.  "I've been thinking hard about the Apple
product-development process since I left," says design guru Donald
Norman, co-founder the design consultants Nielsen Norman Group, who
left Apple in 1997. "If you follow my [guidelines], it will guarantee
good design. But Steve Jobs doesn't want good design. He wants great
design, and my method will never give you that. That takes a rare
leader, who can bring both the cohesion and commitment and style. And
Steve has it."

Many executives believe that outsourcing design allows them to lower
the salaries they must pay, and lets them have engineers working on
the products across all time zones. Jobs thinks that's
short-sighted. He argues that the cost-savings aren't worth what you
give up in terms of teamwork, communication, and the ability to get
groups of people working together to bring a new idea to life. Indeed,
with top-notch mechanical, electrical, software, and industrial
designers all housed at Apple's Infinite Loop campus in Cupertino,
Calif., the company's design capability is more vertically integrated
than almost any other tech outfit.

Typically, a new Apple product starts with a big idea for an unmet
customer need. For the original iPod, it was for an MP3 player that,
unlike earlier models, could hold and easily manage your entire music
collection. Then, Apple's product architects and industrial designers
figure out what that product should look like and what features it
should have -- and, importantly, not have. "Apple has a much more
holistic view of product design," says David Carey, president of
design consulting firm Portelligent. "Good product design starts from
the outside, and works its way inside."

HALF MEASURE.  Already, that's different from the process by which the
bulk of tech products are made. Increasingly, tech companies meet with
ODMs to see what designs they have cooked up. Then, the ODMs are asked
to tweak those basic blueprints to add a few features, and to match
the look and feel of the company's other products.

That's where the "design" input might end for most companies. But
since it's almost always trying to create one-of-a-kind products,
Apple has to ask its own engineers to do the critical electrical and
mechanical work to bring products to life.

In the iPod Shuffle, for example, designers cut a circuit card in two
and stacked the pieces, bunk-bed style, to make use of the empty air
space created by the height of the battery in the device. "They
realized they could erase the height penalty [of the battery] to help
them win the battle of the bulge," says Carey, whose company did a
detailed engineering analysis of the iPod Shuffle.

SCREW-FREE.  Even more important, Apple's products are designed to run
a particular set of programs or services. By contrast, a Dell (DELL )
or Gateway (GTW ) PC must be ready for whatever new features Microsoft
(MSFT ) comes out with, or whatever Windows program a customer opts to
install.

But Apple makes much of its own software, from the Mac operating
system to applications such as iPhoto and iTunes. "That's Apple's
trump card," says one Apple rival. "The ODMs just don't have the
world-class industrial design, the style, or the ability to make
easy-to-use software -- or the ability to integrate it all. They may
some day, but they don't have it now."

Of course, Apple also sets its self apart by designing machines that
are also little works of art -- even if it means making life difficult
for manufacturers contracted to build those designs. During a trip to
visit ODMs in Asia, one executive told securities analyst Jim Grossman
of Thrivent Investment Management about Steve Jobs's insistence that
no screws be visible on the laptop his company was manufacturing for
Apple. The executive said his company had no idea how to handle the
job and had to invent a new tooling process for the job. "They had to
learn new ways to do things just to meet Apple's design," says
Grossman.

TOUGH CUSTOMER.  That's not to say Apple is completely bucking the
outsourcing trend. All its products are manufactured by ODMs in
Asia. Just as it buys chips and disk drives from other suppliers,
sources say Apple lets ODMs take some role in garden-variety
engineering work -- but not much. "This is an issue for Apple, because
the A-team engineers [at the ODMs] don't like working with Apple. It's
like when you were a kid, all your dad let you do was hold the
flashlight, rather than let you try to fix the car yourself," says an
executive at a rival MP3 maker.

In fairness, Apple's reliance on a smaller number of products than its 
rivals and go-it-alone design means it's always a dud or two from disaster. 
But at the moment, it's proving that "made in Cupertino" is a trademark for 
success.

Burrows is Computer editor in BusinessWeek's Silicon Valley
bureau

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/05_12/b3925611.htm

OUTSOURCING INNOVATION/Online Extra

R&D Jobs: Who Stays, Who Goes?

A recent in-depth outsourcing study of a hypothetical 1,000-person team 
found only 722 needed to be kept. Others say that's way too many

   After decades of streamlining and downsizing practically every aspect of 
their businesses, corporate budget-cutters and efficiency wonks are zeroing 
in on one of the most sacrosanct areas of the organization: research and 
development. R&D can account for anywhere from 5% to 18% of the costs of a 
major electronics company.

Human considerations aside, the task is fraught with risk. Do nothing,
and a company could end up at a severe disadvantage against nimbler,
lower-cost rivals that have mastered the art of using networks of
contractors, design partners, and technology providers in India,
China, or Eastern Europe. But cut too deeply, and the whole
product-development process could go out of whack. Over the long run,
a company could even lose its ability to generate future breakthrough
products.

"PORTABLE" POSITIONS.  So how to assess which jobs must remain
in-house and which ones can safely take place more cheaply and
efficiently offshore?  This is a red-hot question in management
circles today, with consultants busily applying cold calculus to each
step of the product-development process. "R&D used to be treated as
one big black box," says Vivek Paul, CEO of Indian info-tech services
giant Wipro Technologies (WIT ), whose contract R&D service employs
8,000 engineers. "Now, companies are deconstructing the whole R&D
chain, sorting out what's strategic and what's not."

To help provide answers, Parametric Technology (PTC), a Needham
(Mass.)  producer of collaborative design software for 31,000 clients
worldwide, commissioned a study of a typical R&D workforce of a
typical electronics company. It concluded that about 30% of the jobs
were "portable," meaning companies could shift them offshore.

The PTC study used two basic questions: First, how critical is a
particular job to the company's competitive advantage? Second, how
easy is it to physically transfer that taskn to a remote location?

CREATING CRITERIA.  More specifically: Does an employee add enough
value to the company to justify the higher cost of keeping that slot
on the U.S.  payroll, or is the employee doing more routine, low-value
work that an offshore worker could accomplish for much less pay? Is
the staffer mainly upgrading or reducing costs of existing product
lines, or devoted to future products? Is he or she integral to
creating technology that the company regards as part of its strategic
core, or can the intellectual property be purchased on the market?

Deciding whether a job can move also involves even deeper issues: Can
it be digitalized and done entirely on a computer, or does it require
close personal contact with customers or other members of a team? Can
the entire task fit into one distinct piece, or "module," that can be
plugged in or out of a product-development project, much as a chassis
or seat assembly can be bolted onto a car? If so, can that entire
module of work move out of the company? Does a staffer have special
institutional knowledge of the corporation's culture, needs, and
history that any outsider lacks?

Using such criteria, the PTC study classified each R&D position as
"most critical," "moderately critical," or "less critical." It then
estimated how many of the jobs in each category were easily
transportable. Starting with an R&D operation of 1,000 engineers,
PTC's details its opinion as to whittling down the operation:

Most critical: Only about 150 staffers fall into this category. It
includes product managers who develop and guide strategies for product
lines, and program or project managers who monitor development
milestones, schedules, and budgets. Systems engineers, who define a
product in its broadest terms, also rank as critical. They set
specific performance standards, for example, for core components such
as certain digital displays, microprocessors, and software
platforms. Only 9 of the 150 positions can be outsourced, the PTC
study estimates. Head count: 991.

Moderately critical: Mechanical analysts who determine if designs hold
up to certain levels of stress and electrical engineers who scrutinize
the performance of a circuit board fall into the moderately critical
category.  So do engineers who translate conceptual designs into
working prototypes as well as computer engineers who supply the
information-technology systems needed to develop a product. Of the 600
jobs in this category, PTC tags 144 for outsourcing. Head count: 847.

Less critical: Here's where the real downsizing can take place. Those
who can go: designers of auxiliary systems the company can purchase
from the outside and "value engineers" who mainly upgrade products
already on the market or find ways to reduce their manufacturing
costs. "Documentation specialists," who do detailed schematic drawings
for the factory, write operating manuals, or compile lists of
components also come under this category. Some 250 of the 1,000
workers do these types of jobs, and 135 of them can be
outsourced. Final head count of R&D staff: 722.

Of course, many other analysts find this figure conservative. Wipro's
Paul believes anywhere from 40% to 60% of an electronics company's R&D
jobs can be farmed out overseas. One thing that's clear: R&D jobs may
not stick around, but outsourcing them will.


Copyright 2000-2004, by The McGraw-Hill Companies Inc.


                            John F. McMullen
                    http://www.westnet.com/~observer
                   BLOG: http://johnmacrants.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 . 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, Business Week, McGraw-Hill.

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

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

From: zcarenow@yahoo.com
Subject: Vonage or Lingo Allow For Faxing?
Date: 13 Mar 2005 18:57:54 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


Do any of these services allow the capability for me to use my fax
machine to fax out and receive faxes from others? Thanks.

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

From: bumblebee4451@yahoo.com
Subject: Cell Phone Reception
Date: 13 Mar 2005 18:38:13 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


I have been having problems with my cell phone (LG) dropping calls in
my home.  Seems like you talk for a few minutes and the call is
dropped.  Getting tired of this and thinking it was my phone, I went
to Verizon since I was near the end of my contract and got 2 new LG
6100 camera phones (one for me and one for my son).  I paid over $200
 -- there is a rebate.

Well don't you know it the same thing happens with this phone.  I did
some testing and find that the signal bars are very weak in my area
(suburban), its not just my house ( a regular wood house) but
seemingly a few miles area the signal is weak.  I drove about a mile
east and the signal bars got stronger and then they got the strongest
a few miles a way.  The phone worked fine there.

So does this mean my area is in a dead zone?

What can be done?  How can Verizon put someone in a contract if it
knows that cell reception will be poor in there area?  Why doesn't
Verizon fix this so we all could get uniform service.  It seems a rip
off if I can't use my cell phone in my home.

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

From: J Kelly <jkelly@*newsguy.com>
Subject: Re: Qwest Cost Creep
Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 18:06:17 -0600
Organization: http://newsguy.com
Reply-To: jkelly@*newsguy.com


On Sat, 12 Mar 2005 16:25:15 -0700, jared@nospam.au (jared) wrote:

> In the middle of last year I changed to QWEST and a plan that reduced
> my monthly charges to about $33. Now in March it's up to > $50. Even a
> simple phone line with no features is apparently $28 per month
> ... that's only twice what QWEST advertises (i.e., before fine print).

> One of the tricky changes was to start charging a monthly fee for long
> distance that had been bundled in the plan. No notice, just a few
> dollars more. I asked the customer service representative why and all
> she could say was that they didn't know that there was going to be a
> charge for long distance with that plan.

I'm no fan of Qwest, but I haven't had the cost creep you mention
since buying into their unlimited long distance plan quite some time
back.  The sent me a letter to explain the new plan they had, which
was 5 cents a minute, with a $20 cap, a better deal than the $20
unlimited for people that may use less than 400 minutes in some
months.

They also sent me a letter later on stating that their would now be a
monthly fee if useage was under a certain amount, but I always use
more than 400 minutes per month so always end up at the $20 max that
they charge for LD anyway.

I guess I can't recall ever having them just raise my rate without
notice, and I've been a Qwest/US West customer since 1993.

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

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 #113
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Mar 14 17:22:05 2005
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j2EMM5q13948;
	Mon, 14 Mar 2005 17:22:05 -0500 (EST)
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 17:22:05 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200503142222.j2EMM5q13948@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 #114

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 14 Mar 2005 17:21:00 EST    Volume 24 : Issue 114

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Technology & Development: The Real Digital Divide (Marcus Didius Falco)
    Generation M: Media in the Lives of 8-18 Year-olds (Monty Solomon)
    Payroll Website Still Not Secured (Monty Solomon)
    European Telecom Market Heats Up (Telecom dailyLead from USTA)
    Industry Officials Debate Policies For Internet Telephony (Jack Decker)
    Notes From The Ebbers Trial (Eric Friedebach)
    Offering USA (ASR-80%) (Phil Lall)
    Re: Vonage or Lingo Allow For Faxing? (sean)
    Re: Vonage or Lingo Allow For Faxing? (DevilsPGD)
    Re: Vonage or Lingo Allow For Faxing? (John Levine)
    Re: Vonage or Lingo Allow For Faxing? (Tim@Backhome.org)
    Re: Vonage or Lingo Allow For Faxing? (ukcats4218016@yahoo.com)
    Re: Hackers Target U.S. Power Grid (hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com)
    Re: Cell Phone Reception (LB@notmine.com)
    Re: Cell Phone Reception (Gene S. Berkowitz)
    Re: Cell Phone Reception (Justin Time)
    Re: Draytek Router Problem - Class C Address Only on LAN? (paulfoel)

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 Mar 2005 03:55:57 -0500
From: Marcus Didius Falco <falco_marcus_didius@yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: Technology and Development: The Real Digital Divide 


Cute picture of an African boy holding a "phone" made of clay at:
http://economist.com/images/20050312/1105LD1.jpg

http://economist.com/printedition/displayStory.cfm?Story_ID=3D3742817

Technology and development

The real digital divide
Mar 10th 2005
 From The Economist print edition

Encouraging the spread of mobile phones is the most sensible and effective
response to the digital divide.

IT WAS an idea born in those far-off days of the internet bubble: the worry
that as people in the rich world embraced new computing and communications
technologies, people in the poor world would be left stranded on the wrong
side of a digital divide . Five years after the technology bubble burst,
many ideas from the time that eyeballs matter more than profits or that
internet traffic was doubling every 100 days have been sensibly shelved.
But the idea of the digital divide persists. On March 14th, after years of
debate, the United Nations will launch a Digital Solidarity Fund to finance
projects that address the uneven distribution and use of new information
and communication technologies and enable excluded people and countries to
enter the new era of the information society . Yet the debate over the
digital divide is founded on a myth that plugging poor countries into the
internet will help them to become rich rapidly.

The lure of magic

This is highly unlikely, because the digital divide is not a problem
in itself, but a symptom of deeper, more important divides: of income,
development and literacy. Fewer people in poor countries than in rich
ones own computers and have access to the internet simply because they
are too poor, are illiterate, or have other more pressing concerns,
such as food, health care and security. So even if it were possible to
wave a magic wand and cause a computer to appear in every household on
earth, it would not achieve very much: a computer is not useful if you
have no food or electricity and cannot read.

Yet such wand-waving through the construction of specific local
infrastructure projects such as rural telecentres is just the sort of
thing for which the UN's new fund is intended. How the fund will be
financed and managed will be discussed at a meeting in September. One
popular proposal is that technology firms operating in poor countries
be encouraged to donate 1% of their profits to the fund, in return for
which they will be able to display a Digital Solidarity logo. (Anyone
worried about corrupt officials creaming off money will be heartened
to hear that a system of inspections has been proposed.)

This sort of thing is the wrong way to go about addressing the
inequality in access to digital technologies: it is treating the
symptoms, rather than the underlying causes. The benefits of building
rural computing centres, for example, are unclear (see the article in
our Technology Quarterly in this issue). Rather than trying to close
the divide for the sake of it, the more sensible goal is to determine
how best to use technology to promote bottom-up development. And the
answer to that question turns out to be remarkably clear: by promoting
the spread not of PCs and the internet, but of mobile phones.

Plenty of evidence suggests that the mobile phone is the technology
with the greatest impact on development. A new paper finds that mobile
phones raise long-term growth rates, that their impact is twice as big
in developing nations as in developed ones, and that an extra ten
phones per 100 people in a typical developing country increases GDP
growth by 0.6 percentage points (see article).

And when it comes to mobile phones, there is no need for intervention
or funding from the UN: even the world's poorest people are already
rushing to embrace mobile phones, because their economic benefits are
so apparent.  Mobile phones do not rely on a permanent electricity
supply and can be used by people who cannot read or write.

Phones are widely shared and rented out by the call, for example by
the telephone ladies found in Bangladeshi villages. Farmers and
fishermen use mobile phones to call several markets and work out where
they can get the best price for their produce. Small businesses use
them to shop around for supplies. Mobile phones are used to make
cashless payments in Zambia and several other African countries. Even
though the number of phones per 100 people in poor countries is much
lower than in the developed world, they can have a dramatic impact:
reducing transaction costs, broadening trade networks and reducing the
need to travel, which is of particular value for people looking for
work. Little wonder that people in poor countries spend a larger
proportion of their income on telecommunications than those in rich
ones.

The digital divide that really matters, then, is between those with
access to a mobile network and those without. The good news is that
the gap is closing fast. The UN has set a goal of 50% access by 2015,
but a new repor from the World Bank notes that 77% of the world's
population already lives within range of a mobile network.

And yet more can be done to promote the diffusion of mobile
phones. Instead of messing around with telecentres and infrastructure
projects of dubious merit, the best thing governments in the
developing world can do is to liberalise their telecoms markets, doing
away with lumbering state monopolies and encouraging
competition. History shows that the earlier competition is introduced,
the faster mobile phones start to spread.  Consider the Democratic
Republic of Congo and Ethiopia, for example. Both have average annual
incomes of a mere $100 per person, but the number of phones per 100
people is two in the former (where there are six mobile networks), and
0.13 in the latter (where there is only one).

Let a thousand networks bloom

According to the World Bank, the private sector invested $230 billion
in telecommunications infrastructure in the developing world between
1993 and 2003 and countries with well-regulated competitive markets
have seen the greatest investment. Several firms, such as Orascom
Telecom (see article) and Vodacom, specialise in providing mobile
access in developing countries.

Handset-makers, meanwhile, are racing to develop cheap handsets for
new markets in the developing world. Rather than trying to close the
digital divide through top-down IT infrastructure projects,
governments in the developing world should open their telecoms
markets. Then firms and customers, on their own and even in the
poorest countries, will close the divide themselves.

Copyright 2005 The Economist Newspaper and The Economist Group. 

http://economist.com/printedition/displayStory.cfm?Story_ID=3D3713955

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 Newspaper Group. 

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

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

Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 23:55:31 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Generation M: Media in the Lives of 8-18 Year-olds


A national Kaiser Family Foundation survey found children and teens
are spending an increasing amount of time using "new media" like
computers, the Internet and video games, without cutting back on the
time they spend with "old" media like TV, print and music. Instead,
because of the amount of time they spend using more than one medium at
a time (for example, going online while watching TV), they're managing
to pack increasing amounts of media content into the same amount of
time each day.

The study, Generation M: Media in the Lives of 8-18 Year-olds,
examined media use among a nationally representative sample of more
than 2,000 3rd through 12th graders who completed detailed
questionnaires, including nearly 700 self-selected participants who
also maintained seven-day media diaries.

http://www.kff.org/entmedia/entmedia030905pkg.cfm

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

Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 00:44:27 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Payroll Website Still Not Secured


By Hiawatha Bray, Globe Staff  |  March 1, 2005

Boston software entrepreneur Aaron Greenspan, who revealed serious
security flaws in the website of Tennessee payroll company PayMaxx
Inc. last week, said yesterday that the site remains insecure.
Greenspan said that a computer hacker still could use the site to
obtain the Social Security numbers of hundreds of Americans.

Greenspan called the management of PayMaxx incompetent, and urged 
Congress to investigate the company. "They have no idea what they're 
doing," he said.

Greenspan's company, Think Computer Corp., had its payrolls prepared
by PayMaxx, of Franklin, Tenn., until late last year. After ending
their relationship, Greenspan found that his name, address, Social
Security number, and other personal data were still available on the
PayMaxx website, which could be accessed by entering zeroes in the
site's login windows. Greenspan also found that he could obtain the
same information about other PayMaxx customers by typing random
numbers into the browser's address window. He estimated that up to
100,000 files could be accessed this way.

http://www.boston.com/business/globe/articles/2005/03/01/payroll_website_still_not_secured/


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There are so many real idiots out there
working on websites, etc. I am _hardly_ a brilliant web designer, but
don't any of these fools know simple security measures they can take
to thwart all but the most detirmined hackers?  PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 12:39:45 EST
From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA <usta@dailylead.com>
Subject: European Telecom Market Heats Up


Telecom dailyLead from USTA
March 14, 2005
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=20043&l=2017006


TODAY'S HEADLINES

NEWS OF THE DAY
* European telecom market heats up
BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH
* Qwest ups ante in battle for MCI
* Malone gets cozy with Cablevision
* AT&T tests WiMAX service
* Leap agrees to sell licenses to Verizon Wireless
* China Telecom gets license to operate Internet cafe chain
USTA SPOTLIGHT 
* Calling ALL Carriers Ready to Explore!
EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES
* RIM adds IM to BlackBerry
* New breed of mobiles do more than just voice
REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE
* SEC filing details severance package for AT&T's Dorman

Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others.
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=20043&l=2017006

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

From: Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@withheld on request>
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 12:46:55 -0500
Subject: Industry Officials Debate Policies For Internet Telephony


http://www.vonage-forum.com/article1727.html

Industry Officials Debate Policies For Internet Telephony
March 9, 2005
By Drew Clark

A regional Bell telephone company, a rural carrier, a cable company
and an Internet phone company disagreed Wednesday about the
obligations and prices that communications companies must pay when
they offer Internet telephony to rural America.

Speaking at a telecommunications forum hosted by a task force of the
Congressional Rural Caucus, Vonage CEO Jeffrey Citron said subsidies
between long-distance and local telephone service must be eliminated.

Kevin Hess, vice president of federal affairs for the rural firm TDS
Telecom, disagreed and said the current inter-carrier subsidization
systems "remain the appropriate mechanism of compensation." Hess also
said voice-over-Internet protocol (VoIP) providers like Vonage must
contribute equally to the universal service fund (USF), which is
designed to finance phone service to all Americans.

Reps. Charles (Chip) Pickering, R-Miss., and Rick Boucher, D-Va., also
addressed the task force, and each outlined their bills to pre-empt
state regulation of Internet-based services. Pickering's bill is
focused on VoIP; Boucher's deals with all Internet services.

[.....]

Both Citron and Boucher said USF should be revised to permit monies
for broadband networks. Currently, the $6 billion fund subsidizes only
traditional phone networks.

"I personally think that broadband should be part of that equation,"
Boucher said, adding that "the time may come in the not-too-distant
future in which USF can be greatly restricted in scope, and perhaps
eliminated altogether."

Full story at:
http://www.vonage-forum.com/article1727.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: Eric Friedebach <friedebach@yahoo.com>
Subject: Notes From The Ebbers Trial
Date: 14 Mar 2005 11:22:00 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


Dan Ackman, 03.11.05, Forbes.com

NEW YORK - Reading consequence into notes from a jury room is always
an inexact science, if only because it's impossible to know whether a
particular note came from one juror or 12. Despite the uncertainty,
the future for Bernard Ebbers looks a lot brighter today than it did
two days ago, as the jury in his fraud and conspiracy trial ended its
sixth day of deliberations without a verdict.

Indeed, the jury may not even be close to finishing its work, as just
this morning it asked for a "flip chart," or poster board and markers,
apparently so it could diagram the charges.

More favorable for Ebbers, the former billionaire CEO of WorldCom, was
the fact that the jury also asked for the direct testimony and
cross-examination of Cynthia Cooper. While Cooper was an internal
auditor for WorldCom -- and the whistle-blower who first exposed the
accounting fraud -- at the trial she was a witness for the defense.
Sources close to the defense say their calling her was meant as a
powerful signal that Ebbers was on the side of those who didn't know
about the fraud as it occurred.

http://www.forbes.com/business/2005/03/11/cx_da_0311ebbers.html

Eric Friedebach
/An Apollo Sandwich from Corky & Lenny's/

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

Reply-To: Phil Lall <phillall@lycos.com>
From: Phil Lall <phillall@lycos.com>
Subject: Offering USA (ASR-80%)
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 01:01:39 -0800


We have developed a domestic USA network that offers superb quality
and reliability with aggressive pricing that is especially attractive
for the carrier that does not want to deal with a sophisticated USA
routing scheme and wants to send all of it's USA traffic to only one
carrier.  INCLUDING Alaska and Hawaii.  Pricing for USA is:

                    Onnet        $.0075
                    Offnet        $.0129
                    Flat-        1c

Regards,

Phil
phillall@lycos.com

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

From: sean <sean@snerts-r-us.org>
Subject: Re: Vonage or Lingo Allow For Faxing?
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 00:59:59 -0500
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com


zcarenow@yahoo.com wrote:

> Do any of these services allow the capability for me to use my fax
> machine to fax out and receive faxes from others? Thanks.

Vonage does. Dunno 'bout lingo.

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

From: DevilsPGD <ihatespam@crazyhat.net>
Subject: Re: Vonage or Lingo Allow For Faxing?
Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 23:35:24 -0700
Organization: Disorganized


In message <telecom24.113.2@telecom-digest.org> zcarenow@yahoo.com
wrote:

> Do any of these services allow the capability for me to use my fax
> machine to fax out and receive faxes from others? Thanks.

Vonage sells fax lines.  My experience has been very reliable using
the fax line, but faxes using the primary line aren't anywhere near as
reliable.

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

Date: 14 Mar 2005 06:36:14 -0000
From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
Subject: Re: Vonage or Lingo Allow For Faxing?
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


> Do any of these services allow the capability for me to use my fax
> machine to fax out and receive faxes from others? Thanks.

In theory, faxes work over Vonage.  In practice, even when the voice
quality was good, faxes were pretty iffy.  I had the old Cisco ATA.
If the newer TAs recognize fax tones and just send the fax data,
they'd probably work a lot better.

Lingo also claims they support faxing, but I haven't tried it.

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: Tim@Backhome.org
Subject: Re: Vonage or Lingo Allow For Faxing?
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 02:12:30 -0800
Organization: Cox Communications


zcarenow@yahoo.com wrote:

> Do any of these services allow the capability for me to use my fax
> machine to fax out and receive faxes from others? Thanks.

Fax works fine with Vonage (at least on a good broadband pipe such as
cable).  In fact, if you want to pay the fee, you can have the second
port on the adapter dedicated as a fax line.  Unlike the primary line,
the fax line has a limited number of free minutes per month.  If you
do a whole lot of faxing, you get around that by switching to the
primary line to send faxes then back to the fax line to receive faxes.

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

From: ukcats4218016@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: Vonage or Lingo Allow For Faxing?
Date: 14 Mar 2005 05:18:25 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


I'm pretty sure most of the large VoIP companies have fax capabilities.
I have SunRocket, and my fax works great, both outoging and incoming.

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

From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Subject: Re: Hackers Target U.S. Power Grid
Date: 14 Mar 2005 10:01:01 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


Power grids existed long before networked-computers came out.  Why
would the grid be so vulnerable now?  Shouldn't those critical networks
be isolated from outside access altogether?

Secondly, they should be more worried about grid overloads from all the
power source shifting done today.  The grids were not designed to
handle that kind of loads and problems like the recent NYC-NE blackout
will occur again.

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

From: LB@notmine.com
Subject: Re: Cell Phone Reception
Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 23:34:53 -0500
Organization: Optimum Online


bumblebee4451@yahoo.com wrote:

> I have been having problems with my cell phone (LG) dropping calls in
> my home.  Seems like you talk for a few minutes and the call is
> dropped.  Getting tired of this and thinking it was my phone, I went
> to Verizon since I was near the end of my contract and got 2 new LG
> 6100 camera phones (one for me and one for my son).  I paid over $200
>  -- there is a rebate.

> Well don't you know it the same thing happens with this phone.  I did
> some testing and find that the signal bars are very weak in my area
> (suburban), its not just my house ( a regular wood house) but
> seemingly a few miles area the signal is weak.  I drove about a mile
> east and the signal bars got stronger and then they got the strongest
> a few miles a way.  The phone worked fine there.

> So does this mean my area is in a dead zone?

> What can be done?  How can Verizon put someone in a contract if it
> knows that cell reception will be poor in there area?  Why doesn't
> Verizon fix this so we all could get uniform service.  It seems a rip
> off if I can't use my cell phone in my home.

If you are still in the trial period try a Motorola V265.

LB

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

From: Gene S. Berkowitz <first.last@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Cell Phone Reception
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 00:25:20 -0500


In article <telecom24.113.3@telecom-digest.org>, bumblebee4451@yahoo.com 
says:

> I have been having problems with my cell phone (LG) dropping calls in
> my home.  Seems like you talk for a few minutes and the call is
> dropped.  Getting tired of this and thinking it was my phone, I went
> to Verizon since I was near the end of my contract and got 2 new LG
> 6100 camera phones (one for me and one for my son).  I paid over $200
>  -- there is a rebate.

> Well don't you know it the same thing happens with this phone.  I did
> some testing and find that the signal bars are very weak in my area
> (suburban), its not just my house ( a regular wood house) but
> seemingly a few miles area the signal is weak.  I drove about a mile
> east and the signal bars got stronger and then they got the strongest
> a few miles a way.  The phone worked fine there.

> So does this mean my area is in a dead zone?

> What can be done?  How can Verizon put someone in a contract if it
> knows that cell reception will be poor in there area?  Why doesn't
> Verizon fix this so we all could get uniform service.  It seems a rip
> off if I can't use my cell phone in my home.

If you want uniform service, you'll have to allow cell towers in your 
neighborhood.  Everyone wants cell service, but NIMBY ...

--Gene

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: On my personal cell phone, which is on
Cingular Wireless, my latest contract is about to run out, and when
I was downtown Friday, I went in the Cingular Wireless store and
talked to the lady about getting a new phone in exchange for renewing
my contract. There were several hangups, IMO: the newer phones are
a bit smaller and (a) they would not work with my existing Cell Socket
device; I use a Nokia 5165, which is an older phone, but it works
quite well (and, it also works quite well when tied into my PBXtra
through the Cell Socket) ... (b) the picture quality on the newer
phones, while it has gotten better, _still_ has a way to go before the
picture quality is as good as an inexpensive digital PC camera, and
(c) the lady told me unlike Cingular Wireless text messages, to send
a picture costs more money, around 40 cents per transmission. If there
was a way to avoid that transmission charge (for example by somehow
transferring the picture directly to my computer, then using my own
email to move the picture around, I might be inclined to get a new
phone and try it. PAT]

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

From: Justin Time <a_user2000@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Cell Phone Reception
Date: 14 Mar 2005 06:31:38 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


The best thing for you to do right now is take the phones back to
Verizon and cancel the contract.  They have to give you 30 days for
"buyer's remorse."  In your instance, it's not the phones, but the
service.  OBTW, the contract usually has a clause about "not all areas
being served."

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

From: paulfoel <BertieBigBollox@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Draytek Router Problem - Class C Address Only on LAN Interface?
Date: 14 Mar 2005 03:18:23 -0800


Hmmm. Seems a bit strange that it allows you create whatever netmask
you like on the LAN port but, in affect, only looks at the last octet.

Also, we've found that it does actually allow different subnets just
only allows 255 entries in the ARP table. So, if theres a machine with
10.0.1.1 and one with 10.0.2.1 they are constantly switching around in
the ARP table (which is not cool and does'nt work too well).

Also, how can they define their router as 'residential' use? Doesn't it
support something like 16 LAN to LAN VPNs or something? Not exactly
home use ???

Any idea if 3COM, Linksys etc are the same ?

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

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 #114
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Mar 15 19:06:21 2005
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j2G06Kc24380;
	Tue, 15 Mar 2005 19:06:21 -0500 (EST)
Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 19:06:21 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200503160006.j2G06Kc24380@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 #115

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 15 Mar 2005 19:06:00 EST    Volume 24 : Issue 115

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Former WorldCom CEO Guilty on All Counts (Lisa Minter)
    Hacker Whose E-Mail Called Police Goes to Jail (Lisa Minter)
    Comcast and TiVo Announce Strategic Partnership (Monty Solomon)
    Business/Payroll Website Still Not Secured (Marcus Didius Falco)
    Low-Tech Methods Used in Data Theft (Marcus Didius Falco)
    Vodafone to Acquire TIW's Assets in Romania (Telecom dailyLead USTA)
    Re: Cell Phone Reception (Thomas A. Horsley)
    Re: Cell Phone Reception (LB@notmine.com)
    Re: Cell Phone Reception (Justin Time)
    Re: Hackers Target U.S. Power Grid (John Levine)
    Re: Offering USA (ASR- (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: 15 Mar 2005 13:44:56 -0800
From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@cableone.net>
Subject: Former WorldCom CEO Guilty on All Counts


Former WorldCom CEO Bernard Ebbers Convicted

The verdict marked a colossal fall for Ebbers, who had turned a humble
Mississippi long-distance provider into a global telecommunications
power, swallowing up companies along the way and earning the nickname
"Telecom Cowboy."

A federal jury in Manhattan returned guilty verdicts on all nine
counts, including securities fraud, conspiracy and lying to
regulators; a decision that could send Ebbers, 63, to prison for the
rest of his life. Sentencing was set for June 13.

The former chief executive reddened deeply when the jury announced its
verdict after eight days of deliberations, and his wife, Kristie,
burst into tears in the courtroom's front row. Later, as his lawyer
spoke outside, promising an appeal, Ebbers and his wife nearly
toppled by the enormous crew of cameras and reporters camped outside
the federal courthouse; made their way to a nearby street,
hailed a cab and drove away.

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales called the conviction a "triumph of
our legal system." He said the jury had recognized that the fraud
"extended from the middle management levels of this company all the
way to its top executive."

In a six-week trial, prosecutors painted Ebbers as obsessed with
keeping WorldCom stock high, and panicked about pressure he was
getting over $400 million in personal loans that were backed by
his own WorldCom shares.

From late 2000 to mid-2002, the government claimed, Ebbers intimidated
chief financial officer Scott Sullivan into covering up billions of
dollars in out-of-control expenses and recognizing improper revenue.

"He was WorldCom, and WorldCom was Ebbers," prosecutor William Johnson
told jurors. "He built the company. He ran it. Of course he directed
this fraud."

The defense claimed all along that the fraud was masterminded by
Sullivan, who testified as the star government witness that Ebbers
instructed him quarter after quarter to "hit our numbers"; meet
Wall Street expectations.

Ebbers himself took the witness stand at trial's end and flatly denied
any role in the fraud. He said he viewed his role at the company as a
visionary and cheerleader, was uncomfortable with accounting and left
it to Sullivan.

"He's never told me he made an (accounting) entry that wasn't right,"
Ebbers said of Sullivan. "If he had, we wouldn't be here today."

The largely blue-collar jury of seven women and five men considered
the case for eight days, an uncommonly long deliberation for
white-collar cases, but never showed signs of discord.

The jurors were ushered away from the courthouse without speaking to
the media, and Judge Barbara Jones instructed reporters not to badger
them.

Outside court, top defense lawyer Reid Weingarten said he was
"devastated" but predicted Ebbers "will ultimately be vindicated" on
appeal. He said he had no regrets about calling Ebbers to testify.

"I did not think Mr. Ebbers ever acted with criminal intent," he
said. "Obviously we're disappointed by the result, but the fight will
continue."

Legal experts said the appeal would be difficult. Weingarten said part
of the case would center on prosecutors' refusal to grant immunity to
three former WorldCom executives the defense wanted to call as
witnesses.

The nine criminal counts against Ebbers, securities fraud, conspiracy
and seven counts of making false filings to the Securities and
Exchange Commission carry up to 85 years in prison. He will be free on
bail until sentencing.

The conviction comes more than two years after an internal auditor
began asking questions about curious accounting at WorldCom, touching
off a scandal that eventually unearthed $11 billion in cooked
books.

With the entire telecom industry suffering a dot-com hangover,
the fraud was driven by soaring "line costs"; the fees WorldCom
paid to smaller local telephone carriers to use their networks. 

Besides Sullivan, three former WorldCom accounting officials who have
pleaded guilty in the case testified they were pressured to cover up
the expenses. Only Sullivan directly implicated Ebbers.

Ebbers still faces civil litigation, including from the company, which
backed up his $400 million in personal loans when Bank of America
demanded more and more collateral as the stock price fell.

The company struck a $750 million settlement with federal regulators
to repay aggrieved investors, a small sum compared to the tens of
billions of dollars of market capitalization that evaporated in the
scandal.

WorldCom, which was based in Clinton, Miss., since re-emerged as MCI
Inc., based in Ashburn, Va.

Twelve former directors of the company, plus some investment banks
that underwrote WorldCom securities and auditing firm Arthur Andersen,
also face a civil trial brought by angry investors. That trial is
scheduled to get under way later this month.

In winning a conviction against Ebbers, federal prosecutors in
Manhattan rang up another victory in a remarkable string of
white-collar prosecutions that began in the summer of 2002.

Martha Stewart, Adelphia Communications founder John Rigas and former
dot-com banking star Frank Quattrone were all found guilty during that
stretch, with the same prosecutor, David Anders, handling both
Quattrone and Ebbers. 

The prosecutors have also wrung guilty pleas from countless other
executives, including ImClone Systems Inc. founder Sam Waksal and five
other former WorldCom officials who agreed to cooperate against
Ebbers.

Sullivan and the three former WorldCom executives who have pleaded
guilty in the case still face sentencing. They hope to win lighter
prison terms or none at all by cooperating with the government against
Ebbers.

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 . 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, Associated Press.

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

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

Date: 14 Mar 2005 22:37:02 -0800
From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: Hacker Whose E-Mail Called Police Goes to Jail


SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - A Louisiana man who wrote malicious e-mails
that caused some computers to dial the 911 emergency number was
sentenced on Monday to six months in prison.

A U.S. federal judge sentenced David Jeansonne, 44, to the prison term
as well as six months home detention after he admitted sending e-mails
to about 20 subscribers of Microsoft's WebTV, a television Internet
service since renamed MSN TV.

Code embedded in the e-mail changed the subscriber's WebTV number to
dial 911 rather than WebTV. Police dispatched officers on at least 10
occasions because of the 2002 hoax, officials said.

Jeansonne pleaded guilty last month 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 . 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: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 10:45:05 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Comcast and TiVo Announce Strategic Partnership


Multi-Year Agreement to Make the TiVo Service Available to 
Comcast Customers

PHILADELPHIA, and ALVISO, Calif., March 15 /PRNewswire/ -- Comcast
(Nasdaq: CMCSA, CMCSK), the nation's leading provider of cable,
entertainment and communications products and services, and TiVo Inc.
(Nasdaq: TIVO), the creator of and a leader in television services for
digital video recorders (DVRs), today announced that the companies
have reached an agreement to make the TiVo(R) service and advertising
capability widely available to Comcast customers in the majority of
its markets around the country.

Under the terms of the agreement, Comcast and TiVo will work together
to develop a version of the TiVo service that will be made available
on Comcast's current primary DVR platform. New software will be
developed by TiVo and will be incorporated into Comcast's existing
network platforms. The new service will be marketed with the TiVo
brand, and is expected to be available on Comcast's DVR products in a
majority of Comcast markets in mid-to-late 2006.

This long-term, non-exclusive partnership will provide millions of
Comcast customers with the opportunity to choose the TiVo service,
including TiVo's award-winning user interface and features like Season
Pass(TM) and WishList(TM), as an additional option. In addition, the
service will showcase TiVo's home networking, multimedia, and
broadband capabilities.


     - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=47664337

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

Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 15:34:48 -0500
From: Marcus Didius Falco <falco_marcus_didius@yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: Boston.com / Business / Payroll Website Still Not Secured

  
  ------ Forwarded Message
  From: Aaron Greenspan <>
  Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 11:08:34 -0500
  To: David Farber <t>
  Subject: [IP] more on Payroll website still not secured

Professor Farber,

A friend of mine forwarded me the post that went out to
interesting-people on the flaw I discovered at PayMaxx. While the
Globe article covers part of it, the real crux of the issue is
outlined in my white paper:

http://www.thinkcomputer.com/corporate/news/identitycrisis.pdf

Thanks,

Aaron

Aaron Greenspan
President & CEO
Think Computer Corporation

http://www.thinkcomputer.com

Payroll website still not secured

By Hiawatha Bray, Globe Staff  |  March 1, 2005

Boston software entrepreneur Aaron Greenspan, who revealed serious
security flaws in the website of Tennessee payroll company PayMaxx
Inc. last week, said yesterday that the site remains
insecure. Greenspan said that a computer hacker still could use the
site to obtain the Social Security numbers of hundreds of Americans.

Greenspan called the management of PayMaxx 'incompetent,' and urged
Congress to investigate the company. "They have no idea what they're
doing," he said.

Greenspan's company, Think Computer Corp., had its payrolls prepared
by PayMaxx, of Franklin, Tenn., until late last year. After ending
their relationship, Greenspan found that his name, address, Social
Security number, and other personal data were still available on the
PayMaxx website, which could be accessed by entering zeroes in the
site's login windows. Greenspan also found that he could obtain the
same information about other PayMaxx customers by typing random
numbers into the browser's address window. He estimated that up to
100,000 files could be accessed this way.

After being contacted by the Globe, PayMaxx shut down the insecure website
service. But yesterday, Greenspan said he found another way into the
system. This time, he demonstrated for the Globe how a data thief could
obtain the Social Security numbers of people listed in the PayMaxx system.

Greenspan said that PayMaxx apparently used workers' Social Security
numbers to identify them to the website software. But the company's method
made it easy to read those numbers by merely activating the 'view source'
feature found on all Web browsers.

A spokesperson for PayMaxx said that the company would shut down the
site entirely until questions about its security were resolved. The
spokesperson also said that there was no indication that anybody had
stolen personal data from the site.

Greenspan said he's contacted the office of US Senator Charles Schumer,
Democrat of New York. Schumer has called for legislation to limit
data-mining services that contribute to identity theft. Congressional
concern over the potential privacy threat erupted in February, when
mistakenly sold 140,000 files to criminals.

Hiawatha Bray can be reached at bray@globe.com.

Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company

NOTE: To read several hundred New York Times items on line here each
day with no login nor registration requirement, set your browser to
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra/nytimes.html .    PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 15:33:59 -0500
From: Marcus Didius Falco <falco_marcus_didius@yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: Los Angeles Times: Low-Tech Methods Used in Data Theft


http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-scam14mar14,0,2533939.story


Low-Tech Methods Used in Data Theft

By David Colker
Times Staff Writer

Executives at besieged information broker ChoicePoint Inc. have said they 
had no idea how vulnerable the company was to the identity thieves who 
recently tapped into personal data on 145,000 Americans, igniting a 
national furor over privacy.

Chairman Derek Smith told CNBC last week, for instance, that management 
"never realized the sophistication organized crime" would demonstrate in 
order to access ChoicePoint files.

But documents in a criminal case against a brother-and-sister team
that pulled a similar scam several years ago suggest that penetrating
ChoicePoint's defenses could take little more than a home computer, a
fax machine and a bottle of Wite-Out.

"This is an old-fashioned kind of thing," said Deputy Special Agent
Dale Pupillo of the U.S. Secret Service, which investigates cases of
credit card fraud and identity theft. Hackers capable of stealing data
electronically increasingly pose a threat, but "this was kind of
low-tech."

That worries consumer advocates and lawmakers. Several members of
Congress have proposed laws that would require data brokers to
establish effective security systems to keep the Social Security
numbers and other confidential data they gather and store out of the
hands of fraud artists.

ChoicePoint executives declined to be interviewed for this article but
issued a statement reiterating the company's view that recent data
thefts from ChoicePoint and rival information broker LexisNexis
provide "ample proof of the seriousness and sophistication of this
type of fraud."

Both ChoicePoint and LexisNexis, a unit of Reed Elsevier, have said
they will institute new policies to ensure that only government
agencies and legitimate businesses can gain access to their data,
which are used to verify employment applications, screen credit
applicants and investigate security risks.

But it might not be wise to trust the companies to police themselves,
said Edmund Mierzwinski, consumer program director for the advocacy
organization U.S. Public Interest Research Group.

"I question whether companies [that have been] so cavalier with
confidential consumer information will really change their attitude
without tough new laws and a lot of lawsuits," Mierzwinski said.

Court documents in the 2002 case of Bibiana and Adedayo Benson who
were convicted and sentenced to federal prison shed light on what it
took to steal data from ChoicePoint and open fraudulent credit card
and bank accounts in the names of unknowing victims.

The case, which led to at least $1 million in losses, attracted no
public attention at the time. Like the most recent security breach, it
involved con artists using simple and time-tested methods to hoodwink
the data broker.

According to the court records, Bibiana Benson applied for a
ChoicePoint account in the name of Christine Lorraine Burton on April
2, 2000.

To get the account, Benson needed two things: Burton's Social Security
number and a professional or business license. ChoicePoint requires a
copy of "business or professional licensing," according to its current
application form, because information obtained from its databases may
be used only for "business reasons."

Benson had the Social Security number. (The documents don't say how
she obtained it, but authorities say there was evidence her brother
was involved in identity theft before the ChoicePoint infiltration.)
The California real estate broker's license in Burton's name was a
fake. Benson faxed the license to ChoicePoint along with the
application form.

The real Christine Burton, who was living in a small town in Indiana,
told a Secret Service investigator that she had no real estate license
and never had resided in California, and the California Department of
Real Estate said there was no license on record in Burton's name.

But it's easy to fake a document such as a real estate license if it
only has to withstand scrutiny as a fax, forgery expert James Black
said.

"Piece of cake," said Black, who has testified in many forgery
cases. "All you need is a [valid] license form, Wite-Out and a copy
machine."

Investigators discovered the fake real estate license when they
searched Bibiana Benson's home, the court records show. There is no
indication in the records whether ChoicePoint attempted to check on
the authenticity of the license.

Benson who pleaded guilty in September 2002 to a felony count of
unlawful use of identification told an investigator after her arrest
that she was working with a ring of identity thieves.

She said ring members would give her names, often taken from building
mailboxes, and that she would then do the research using her online
account with ChoicePoint, securing the Social Security numbers and
other information needed to steal people's identities.

Ring members paid $45 to $65 per record, she said. ChoicePoint
accounts given to investigators showed she examined at least 7,000
personal data files in a two-year period.

Her brother Adedayo, who pleaded guilty to three felony counts, used
the information to establish fraudulent accounts.

The first step was to rent mailboxes at private mailbox companies in
the San Fernando Valley and Beverly Hills.

Then he would apply for credit cards in the name of consumers whose
data his sister had stolen, using the mailboxes as the return address,
the court records show.

"Once I took over the box," he told investigators after his arrest, "I
just called the bank and asked them to send me a credit card to the
mailbox number. I called several banks."

He would then use the card to buy expensive goods and take out cash
advances.

The court documents detail only a few of his purchases; one receipt
from Circuit City is for two laptop computers.

Another part of the scam was producing fake driver's licenses. One
that Adedayo Benson used, complete with his picture, was in the name
of Dale Patterson.

Investigators determined that the person whose identity was lifted for
the card was a woman whose full name was Dale Veronica Patterson.

Forgery expert Black said that obtaining fake driver's licenses was
one of the least challenging jobs for the fraud ring.

"We could go over to MacArthur Park," Black said, referring to the
Mid-Wilshire area park that has long had crime problems, "and come
back about an hour later with 10 fake licenses, with pictures.

"It's an old game."


If you want other stories on this topic, search the Archives at 
latimes.com/archives.


Copyright 2005 Los Angeles Times


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

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

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

Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 12:23:03 EST
From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA <usta@dailylead.com>
Subject: Vodafone to Acquire TIW's Assets in Romania, Czech Republic


Telecom dailyLead from USTA
March 15, 2005
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=20069&l=2017006

TODAY'S HEADLINES

NEWS OF THE DAY
* Vodafone to acquire TIW's assets in Romania, Czech Republic
BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH
* Comcast forms partnership with TiVo
* Virgin Mobile, Nokia unveil inexpensive phone for teen market
* BT offers Ethernet services outside of U.K.
* Malone, now on Cablevision board, has doubts about Voom
* Fox Sports to offer wireless highlights
USTA SPOTLIGHT 
* USTA/Deloitte Tax Summit@SUPERCOMM
EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES
* Inmarsat launches first of three birds
REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE
* Still no sign of verdict in Ebbers trial

Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others.
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=20069&l=2017006

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

Subject: Re: Cell Phone Reception
From: tom.horsley@att.net (Thomas A. Horsley)
Organization: AT&T Worldnet
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 22:39:56 GMT


TELECOM Digest Editor queried:
> If there was a way to avoid that transmission charge (for example by
> somehow transferring the picture directly to my computer...

Go visit the forums over on http://www.howardforums.com/, the
phone hackers there have info on just about every model phone
(where to find cables that hook to your computer, what software
and drivers you need to extract info off the phone, etc).
I have an audiovox 8910 I extract pictures from all the time
using bitpm and a cable for a different model LG phone.

>>==>> The *Best* political site <URL:http://www.vote-smart.org/> >>==+
      email: Tom.Horsley@worldnet.att.net icbm: Delray Beach, FL      |
<URL:http://home.att.net/~Tom.Horsley> Free Software and Politics <<==+

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

From: LB@notmine.com
Subject: Re: Cell Phone Reception
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 18:31:23 -0500
Organization: Optimum Online


Gene S. Berkowitz wrote:

> In article <telecom24.113.3@telecom-digest.org>, bumblebee4451@yahoo.com
> says:

>> I have been having problems with my cell phone (LG) dropping calls in
>> my home.  Seems like you talk for a few minutes and the call is
>> dropped.  Getting tired of this and thinking it was my phone, I went
>> to Verizon since I was near the end of my contract and got 2 new LG
>> 6100 camera phones (one for me and one for my son).  I paid over $200
>>  -- there is a rebate.

>> Well don't you know it the same thing happens with this phone.  I did
>> some testing and find that the signal bars are very weak in my area
>> (suburban), its not just my house ( a regular wood house) but
>> seemingly a few miles area the signal is weak.  I drove about a mile
>> east and the signal bars got stronger and then they got the strongest
>> a few miles a way.  The phone worked fine there.

>> So does this mean my area is in a dead zone?

>> What can be done?  How can Verizon put someone in a contract if it
>> knows that cell reception will be poor in there area?  Why doesn't
>> Verizon fix this so we all could get uniform service.  It seems a rip
>> off if I can't use my cell phone in my home.

> If you want uniform service, you'll have to allow cell towers in your
> neighborhood.  Everyone wants cell service, but NIMBY ...

> --Gene

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: On my personal cell phone, which is on
> Cingular Wireless, my latest contract is about to run out, and when
> I was downtown Friday, I went in the Cingular Wireless store and
> talked to the lady about getting a new phone in exchange for renewing
> my contract. There were several hangups, IMO: the newer phones are
> a bit smaller and (a) they would not work with my existing Cell Socket
> device; I use a Nokia 5165, which is an older phone, but it works
> quite well (and, it also works quite well when tied into my PBXtra
> through the Cell Socket) ... (b) the picture quality on the newer
> phones, while it has gotten better, _still_ has a way to go before the
> picture quality is as good as an inexpensive digital PC camera, and
> (c) the lady told me unlike Cingular Wireless text messages, to send
> a picture costs more money, around 40 cents per transmission. If there
> was a way to avoid that transmission charge (for example by somehow
> transferring the picture directly to my computer, then using my own
> email to move the picture around, I might be inclined to get a new
> phone and try it. PAT]

Pat,

How many pictures do you take?

Since I use a phone for talking first a little math showed me that
buying a hookup would not be economical for me.

LB

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Ditto here; mainly I have a cell phone
to catch incoming calls (landline forwards on busy or no answer to
cell phone) and to call Jeff (the cab driver) to come fetch me to go
back home if I am out. I was sitting at Uncle Jack's (local restaurant
and watering hole) the other day when a young guy came in with a newer
style camera/picture phone. He showed me how it worked and emailed me
a picture of myself. I'm afraid my eyes and interests were bigger than 
my budget once again. It really would not be economical for me either, 
and only serve to raise my monthly bill a few dollars.  PAT]

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

From: Justin Time <a_user2000@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Cell Phone Reception
Date: 15 Mar 2005 05:22:08 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


TELECOM Digest Editor Noted in response to a question:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: On my personal cell phone, which is on
> Cingular Wireless, my latest contract is about to run out, and when
> I was downtown Friday, I went in the Cingular Wireless store and
> talked to the lady about getting a new phone in exchange for renewing
> my contract. There were several hangups, IMO: the newer phones are
> a bit smaller and (a) they would not work with my existing Cell Socket
> device; I use a Nokia 5165, which is an older phone, but it works
> quite well (and, it also works quite well when tied into my PBXtra
> through the Cell Socket) ... (b) the picture quality on the newer
> phones, while it has gotten better, _still_ has a way to go before the
> picture quality is as good as an inexpensive digital PC camera, and
> (c) the lady told me unlike Cingular Wireless text messages, to send
> a picture costs more money, around 40 cents per transmission. If 
> there was a way to avoid that transmission charge (for example by somehow
> transferring the picture directly to my computer, then using my own
> email to move the picture around, I might be inclined to get a new
> phone and try it. PAT]

And what the lady in the Cingular store DIDN'T tell you was that all
the new phones are GSM.  While on the average the sound quality is
better with GSM (a poor analogy would be FM and AM radio) they will
not work in an analog service area.

The TDMA phone you are now carrying, the 5165, should have about 5 more
years of service life left -- assuming the phone itself doesn't die --
before they shut down the older TDMA networks.  As more people move to
GSM, the service on TDMA will become somewhat spotty (like  GSM was a
couple of years ago) and the few channels allocated will be busy, the
ability to make an analog roaming call in the event of an emergency can
be a mitigating factor.  

If you don't do a lot of traveling -- I know you take the cab, -- then
moving to GSM and its price plans may be a good move -- if the right
phone can be found.  If there is an old AT&T Wireless office near you,
stop in and see if they have any stock left.  The "Blue" phones are no
longer being ordered and are not offered for sale, but if you ask they
may trot one or two out of the stock in the back room.  Any they sell
and activate are ones that are not written off.

OBTW, Cingular calls the two networks "Blue" and "Orange."  Blue being
the AT&T equipment, Orange the Cingular.  The biggest problem they
have right now in this merger is getting the back offices merged.
Working for the government (and no, we're not here to help), we can
only order "Blue" as "Orange" isn't the name on the contract.

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I am sort of provincial these days; I 
only rarely get out of Independence, and then I go to Coffeyville or
perhaps Neodesha or Cherryvale. We _had_ an AT&T Wireless office here 
in town four years ago, then one day the same storefront (122 North Penn)
had a Cingular Wireless sign in front of it, but the same people were
working there. The manager said to me "about a week ago AT&T decided
to trade our agency to Cingular Wireless, and all the customers as
well."

At the time I migrated here from the Chicago area, I had an AT&T
Wireless phone, but AT&T has or had a policy that if their customer 
roamed out of range, AT&T would hold the customer on _their_ tower
as long as possible, even though the transmission got pretty
awful. They would only release the call to another tower (a competitor)
when they absolutely had to, and then to a Cell One system. I had a
Chicago area 630 number on my phone (also a 'blue' Nokia 5165) which 
was registered with AT&T. The phone said 'AT&T' on the LED when I was
in Chicago, St. Louis or Tulsa on the bus coming here, and it did all
the AT&T features. Once the bus got north of Tulsa the screen display
changed to say 'AT&T Extended Area'; I got handed off to Cellular One
(a company named 'Dobson Cell One' is big in this area), but according
to conversations I had on the phone with Mike Sandman, the connection
sounded pretty awful (as AT&T customer being handled by Dobson which I
would be here.)

I went by the AT&T (but now Cingular Wireless) dealer a few days after
I first migrated here and asked them to switch my phone over to 
Cingular. The lady said it could not be done. Yes, it is the same
phone (Nokia 5165) which she had a stack of sitting in her window,
but AT&T has some firmware installed which locks out anyone but themselves
and no programming is possible. She said she would give me the very
same 'blue phone' (Nokia 5165) but they could _not_ do anything with
the AT&T. AT&T confirmed the same thing, as did the other cellular
dealers in town (Radio Shack sells Alltel [which also goes through
Dobson here]), United States Cellular agreed, and do did Dobson Cell
One: "take whatever phone you like and get it turned on, but the AT&T
Wireless Phone can go in the garbage can when you give up using AT&T."

So I got the AT&T Wireless Nokia 5165 cut over to prepaid to use in 
emergencies and got a Wichita area 316 number installed on it. It
still refers to itself as 'AT&T Extended Area' (Wichita is too far
away to reach us directly, and Tulsa is too far south to reach us 
directly. I mostly use the Cingular Wireless Nokia 5165 since they
have cellular towers in town (one is five blocks away from me, at the
Presbyterian Church bell tower). They both work fine in my Cell Socket
so I guess I will just keep what I have and use it until it either 
falls apart or gets turned off totally. I know GSM is very popular
here, all the kids carrying cell phones have these newer (and
relatively small, and IMO flimsy) little things. PAT]

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

Date: 15 Mar 2005 05:13:27 -0000
From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
Subject: Re: Hackers Target U.S. Power Grid
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


> Power grids existed long before networked-computers came out.  Why
> would the grid be so vulnerable now?

See below.

> Shouldn't those critical networks be isolated from outside access
> altogether?

You'd think so.

> Secondly, they should be more worried about grid overloads from all
> the power source shifting done today.  The grids were not designed to
> handle that kind of loads and problems like the recent NYC-NE
> blackout will occur again.

Exactly.  The links between utilities were designed as backup, not the
primary source of power.  But that's what they've become, and they
haven't been reengineered to match.

R's,

John

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

From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi)
Subject: Re: Offering USA (ASR-
Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 05:24:57 -0000
Organization: Widgets, Inc.


In article <telecom24.114.7@telecom-digest.org>, Phil Lall
<phillall@lycos.com> wrote:

> We have developed a domestic USA network that offers superb quality
> and reliability with aggressive pricing that is especially attractive
> for the carrier that does not want to deal with a sophisticated USA
> routing scheme and wants to send all of it's USA traffic to only one
> carrier.  INCLUDING Alaska and Hawaii.  Pricing for USA is:
>
>                    Onnet        $.0075
>                    Offnet        $.0129
>                    Flat-        1c
>
> Regards,

> Phil
> phillall@lycos.com

Can't/Won't  tell us who the company is.

Posting from a freemail account.

Prices "too good to be true".

<sniff>  <*SNIFF*>  is that eau d'NorVergance  he's wearing?

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

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 #115
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Mar 16 09:45:29 2005
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j2GEjSP01753;
	Wed, 16 Mar 2005 09:45:29 -0500 (EST)
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 09:45:29 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200503161445.j2GEjSP01753@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 #116

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 16 Mar 2005 09:46:00 EST    Volume 24 : Issue 116

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Online Banking Industry Very Vulnerable to Cross-Site Script (M Solomon)
    Know your Enemy: Tracking Botnets (Monty Solomon)
    3 Verizon Phones -- Throw Away or What? (Paintblot)
    British Firm Breaks Ground in Surveillance Science (Marcus Didius Falco)
    What Happened To Channel 1 (davisdynasty83)
    Iridium II: Is Satellite Radio Doomed? (delete 'z' for my real address)
    Correlator (Flavia)
    Re: Former WorldCom CEO Guilty on All Counts (Thomas A. Horsley)
    Re: Vonage or Lingo Allow For Faxing? (Hank Karl)
    Re: Cell Phone Reception (Joseph)
    Attacked by a Dog Which was Playing (Patrick Townson)

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, 15 Mar 2005 11:53:47 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Online Banking Industry Very Vulnerable to Cross-Site Scripting 


Online Banking Industry Very Vulnerable to Cross-Site Scripting Frauds 

Phishing Attacks reported by members of the Netcraft Toolbar community
show that many large banks are neglecting to take sufficient care with
the development and testing of their online banking facilities.

Well known banks have created an infestation of application bugs and
vulnerabilities across the Internet, allowing fraudsters to insert
their data collection forms into bona fide banking sites, creating
convincing frauds that are undetectable to most customers. Indeed, a
personal finance journalist writing for The Motley Fool was brave
enough to publicly admit to having fallen for a fraud running on
Suntrust's site and having her current account cleaned out. It's a
reasonable premise that if a Motley Fool journalist can fall for a
fraud, anyone can.

One fraud recently blocked by the Netcraft Toolbar was at Citizens
Bank. Fraudsters composed and mass mailed a phishing mail which
exploited a program on CitizensBank.com, loading Javascript from the
attackers' server hosted at Telecom Italia. Customers were presented
with a page bearing the CitizensBank.com URL in the address bar, while
the browser window displays a form from the Telecom Italia server
asking for user login information.

The script being exploited allows visitors to search for Citizens Bank
branch offices in their town. Along with search scripts, branch
locator pages are frequently carelessly coded and are targets for
fraudsters who are actively analyzing financial web sites for
weaknesses.

http://news.netcraft.com/archives/2005/03/11/online_banking_industry_very_vulnerable_to_crosssite_scripting_frauds.html

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

Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 11:53:06 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Know Your Enemy: Tracking Botnets


Using honeynets to learn more about Bots

The Honeynet Project & Research Alliance
http://www.honeynet.org
Last Modified: 13 March 2005

Honeypots are a well known technique for discovering the tools,
tactics, and motives of attackers. In this paper we look at a special
kind of threat: the individuals and organizations who run botnets. A
botnet is a network of compromised machines that can be remotely
controlled by an attacker. Due to their immense size (tens of
thousands of systems can be linked together), they pose a severe
threat to the community. With the help of honeynets we can observe
the people who run botnets -- a task that is difficult using other
techniques. Due to the wealth of data logged, it is possible to
reconstruct the actions of attackers, the tools they use, and study
them in detail. In this paper we take a closer look at botnets,
common attack techniques, and the individuals involved.

We start with an introduction to botnets and how they work, with
examples of their uses. We then briefly analyze the three most common
bot variants used. Next we discuss a technique to observe botnets,
allowing us to monitor the botnet and observe all commands issued by
the attacker. We present common behavior we captured, as well as
statistics on the quantitative information learned through monitoring
more than one hundred botnets during the last few months. We conclude
with an overview of lessons learned and point out further research
topics in the area of botnet-tracking, including a tool called
mwcollect2 that focuses on collecting malware in an automated fashion.

http://www.honeynet.org/papers/bots/

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

From: Paintblot <sssssssssssff@ef.com>
Subject: 3 Verizon Phones - Throw Away or What?
Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 16:04:03 -0800
Organization: Cox Communications


I'm permanently leaving the USA in a few weeks. I have a Verizon
account with 3 telephones, 2 of which are almost new. These phones
have 2 year contracts. When we leave, what should I do? I cannot take
them back to Verizon, because all they'll want is the big dollar
contract buyout, which I won't pay (let them attack my credit, who
cares, I'm not coming back here). Sell the phones? Aren't they banned
from continuing to work on the Verizon network, and locked into the
Verizon network?  Just destroy them and throw them away?

Any advice appreciated!

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: My personal advice, for whatever it is
worth, is sell them for a few dollars each and get what you can out of
them. If you know anyone you can generally trust, sell them a phone
(for ten or twenty dollars?) with the understanding that _they_ can
continue to pay the bill for the remainder of the contract (or until
they get tired of paying the bill and/or the phone gets turned off, 
whichever comes first. PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 21:32:20 -0500
From: Marcus Didius Falco <falco_marcus_didius@yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: British Firm Breaks Ground in Surveillance Science


http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=7892255


By Mark Trevelyan, Security Correspondent

MALVERN, England (Reuters) - The "suicide bomber" clips a
shrapnel-filled belt around his waist and buttons up his jacket to
conceal it.

As he turns back and forth in front of a semi-circular white panel,
about the size of a shower cubicle, a computer monitor shows the
metal-packed cylinders standing out clearly in white against his body.

This is no real security alarm: it's a demonstration at the British
technology group QinetiQ of a scanning device that sees under people's
clothes to spot not just metal but other potential threats like
ceramic knives or hidden drugs.

The electromagnetic technology, known as Millimeter Wave (MMW), is
just one aspect of a potential revolution in security screening being
pioneered at QinetiQ, formerly part of the research arm of the British
defense ministry.

"Actually, detecting a suicide bomber in the lobby of an airport is
not a great thing to happen," Simon Stringer, new managing director of
QinetiQ's security business, says with British understatement.

"It's slightly better than having him do it in the departure lounge or
perhaps on the plane, but you're still doing to have to deal with a
significant problem."

That's why, he says, the trend for the future will be to move the
scanners outside the terminal building and operate them in "stand-off
mode" -- checking people from a distance before they even set foot
inside.

The advantage is obvious: to spot potential attackers without alerting
them to the fact, and gain precious seconds for security forces to
prevent an attack.

ARE YOU SWEATING TOO MUCH?

Another prospect in store for air travelers is "hyperspectral sensing"
that will check for chemicals called pheromones, secreted by the human
body, which may indicate agitation or stress.

"People under stress tend to exude slightly different pheromones, and
you can pick this up ... There are sensing techniques we're working
on," Stringer said.

The stress may have an innocent cause, such as fear of flying, but
could also betray the nervousness of a potential attacker. The point
is to alert security staff to something unusual that may need further
investigation.

As with MMW, the technology could function at a distance and without
the need for people to wait in line. By conducting such checks while
people are approaching the airport and moving through it, authorities
could avoid bottlenecks and queues.

SUSPICIOUS MOVEMENTS

As the passenger proceeds through the terminal, the next layer of
surveillance could be carried out through "cognitive software" which
monitors his or her movements and sounds a silent alarm if it picks up
an unusual pattern.

"Someone who's been back in and out of the same place three times or
keeps bumping into the same people might be something that's worthy of
further investigation ... I think that's really the sort of
capabilities we're going to be looking at," Stringer said in an
interview.

While many of these technologies are still under development, others
have already been rolled out to clients by QinetiQ, which made group
operating profit of 28 million pounds ($53.9 million) in the six
months to last September.

Millimeter wave, for example, has been tested at airports and, in a
different application, is being used by British immigration
authorities and Channel Tunnel operator Eurotunnel to detect illegal
immigrants trying to enter the country as stowaways in the back of
trucks.

Stringer says the potential market for MMW runs into the hundreds of
millions of dollars and goes well beyond the transport sector.

"We're spending quite a lot of time talking to multinationals who want
to establish perimeter security systems around plant, installations
and buildings," he said.

QinetiQ -- owned 30 percent by private equity group Carlyle and 56
percent by the British government -- expects rapid growth for its
security business as it gears up for a stock market launch.

BIG BROTHER?

But how will ordinary people embrace the prospect of surveillance
technology that sees through their clothes, checks how much they're
sweating and tracks their airport wanderings between the tax-free
shops and the toilets?

Stringer acknowledges that some might see this as George Orwell's Big
Brother come true. "There are always going to be issues of privacy
here and they're not to be belittled, they're important."

But he says smarter technology will actually make the checks less
intrusive than those now in standard practice, such as being searched
head to foot after setting off a metal detector alarm.

"Personally I find that more irritating than the idea of someone just
scanning me as I walk through," he said.

"You're under surveillance in airports anyway. What you're looking at
here is just being applied more intelligently."


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: davisdynasty83 <davisdynasty83@yahoo.com>
Subject: What Happened To Channel 1
Date: 15 Mar 2005 19:06:16 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


I've always wondered what happened to Channel 1 as a viable television
channel. Is there a substantial reason behind this? I am very
interested in this particular issue and if anyone could provide me
with any information pertaining to this subject I would greatly
apprecaite it.

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This is a topic we have covered here on
a few occassions in the past. The generally accepted answer is that
the lowest of the television channels (one through four or five) are
allocated in very close proximity to the 'VHF-low' radio frequencies. 
In fact, channel one on television overlapped a section of the VHF-low
area and caused much interference with VHF-low radio activities (30-50
megs) so it was decided to return the use of that frequency to the 
VHF-low people (often times small town police/sheriff forces,
etc). This decision (to return the 'channel one' allocation to the
VHF-low people) was made back in the early days of television, around
the 1940's. So for most people, they can never remember a time when
there 'used to be a channel one'. More modern (over the air)
television sets do not even include a '1' dial any longer, and haven't
for about a half-century. Now cable-ready television sets and channel
one is a totally different matter.   PAT]

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

From: Walter Dnes (delete the 'z')<wzaltdnes@waltdnes.org> 
Subject: Iridium II: Is Satellite Radio Doomed?
Date: 16 Mar 2005 05:27:14 GMT
Reply-To: see_my_sig_at_bottom_of_message@waltdnes.org


I was originally going to post this in answer to another posting, but
this goes off on its own tangent, so I'm giving it a separate thread.

When the original Iridium was being drawn up on the planning boards,
the accountants went over the numbers very meticulously.  They
compared the cost of of an inconvenient bulky Iridium receiver with
the cost of an inconvenient bulky mobile-telephone receiver
(break-even).  They compared the projected worldwide coverage of
Iridium with the miniscule footprints of mobile-telephone
transmitters, which were almost all located in a few major city
centres (advantage Iridium).  They compared the horrendously high
cost-per-minute of Iridium usage with the horrendously high
cost-per-minute of international long distance (break even).  Etc,
etc.  After going through the entire business plan, Iridium looked
like a winner.

But the telecom industry changed between the drawing board and launch
pad.  Inconvenient bulky mobile-telephone receivers were replaced by
dinky little cellphones.  Cellphone companies built out their coverage
area to include almost all potential customers in the 1st world.  And
cellphone and long distance rates plummeted due to competition.
Iridium was doomed even if it launched on budget and on spec.  The
only major customers now are mineral exploration companies and US DOD
in really isolated places with no telecom infrastructure.

I'm sure that satellite radio went through much the same number
crunching under the eyes of watchful accountants 10 years ago.  Back
then, we had reached the extreme limit of regular modems at 33.6
kbits/sec.  FM-mono yes, but nowhere near good enough for FM-stereo
quality, let alone CD quality.  Besides, if someone really wanted to
listen to it a lot, you'd need a second phone line, another $30/month.

Things change.  A lot of satellite radio's target households have
broadband and can get "internet radio" now.  Both satellite and
internet radio have to pay royalties.  But internet radio only pays
incremental bandwidth costs over the net, while satellite radio has to
pay for a network of satellites to be launched and maintained in
orbit.  Satellite radio requires an antenna or dish of some sort,
while internet radio is simply another item in your browser's bookmark
list.  The car was supposed to be the last refuge of satellite radio
that internet radio couldn't touch.  But 3G, WiFi, and WiMax are
showing that it can be done.

I think that satellite radio will be another "Pola-Vision".
Interesting technology that was rendered obsolete by other
developments as it came out.


Walter Dnes; my email address is *ALMOST* like wzaltdnes@waltdnes.org
Delete the "z" to get my real address.  If that gets blocked, follow
the instructions at the end of the 550 message.

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

From: flavia_rafols@yahoo.es (Flavia)
Subject: Correlator
Date: 16 Mar 2005 02:15:10 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


Hello!

I work in a project with Spread Spectrum Technik.
I must to program a correlator. I have read about matched filters.
That is wie to program a fir filter?

I have a question.  I wanted to know how can I choose a PN-Code. I
have a noise and die Spectrum, and ideal I want to choose a code which
the spectrum complementary. How can I make it?

I know that I can produce codes with simulink, but how can I choose a
code with the complementary spectrum for my noise?

Thanks and regards,

Flavia Rafols

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

Subject: Re: Former WorldCom CEO Guilty on All Counts
From: tom.horsley@att.net (Thomas A. Horsley)
Organization: AT&T Worldnet
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 02:13:21 GMT


I think what the jurors "got" wasn't necessarily a complete grasp of a
complex case, but simple recognition that Ebbers should have known
what was going on even if he really didn't, and that he should go to
jail for either fraud or incompetence, so they might as well convict
him :-).

>>==>> The *Best* political site <URL:http://www.vote-smart.org/> >>==+
      email: Tom.Horsley@worldnet.att.net icbm: Delray Beach, FL      |
<URL:http://home.att.net/~Tom.Horsley> Free Software and Politics <<==+

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I am reminded of a new book written by
Fred Goldstein entitled 'The Great Telecom Meltdown' which does cover
a lot of the history of telecom since 1879 to the present, but with
much emphasis on the post-divestiture era, and specifically the time
frame from 1996-2003. It is a very technical book; you cannot just
flip the pages to read it. I'll do a more detailed review of it here
in a few days, but not only WorldCom/MCI but Qwest as well are
discussed. And the story of Bernard Ebbers is _not_ the end of the
tale. It appears the folks in Denver are in for some hard times with
the law in the near future.  Fred also gets into a discussion of the 
'dot.com' bubble bursting and the myth of 'the internet is doubling in
size every hundred days' which was considered to be gospel in the
late 1990's. PAT]

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

From: Hank Karl <notgiven@nothere.com>
Subject: Re: Vonage or Lingo Allow For Faxing?
Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 22:06:06 -0500
Organization: NETPLEX Internet Services - http://www.ntplx.net/


They both have a fax line "free" with the business service.

On 13 Mar 2005 18:57:54 -0800, zcarenow@yahoo.com wrote:

> Do any of these services allow the capability for me to use my fax
> machine to fax out and receive faxes from others? Thanks.

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

From: Joseph <JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Cell Phone Reception
Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 22:43:38 -0800
Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com


On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 22:39:56 GMT, tom.horsley@att.net (Thomas A.
Horsley) wrote:

> Go visit the forums over on http://www.howardforums.com/, the
> phone hackers there have info on just about every model phone
> (where to find cables that hook to your computer, what software
> and drivers you need to extract info off the phone, etc).
> I have an audiovox 8910 I extract pictures from all the time
> using bitpm and a cable for a different model LG phone.

I really don't think those who contribute to Howardforums would
appreciate you calling them *hackers!* Would you like someone to call
you a hacker?  Howardforums prides itself for not allowing information
that is proprietary.  They do not even allow discussion of phone
unlocking which is very legal but it's a subject that the board owner
has forbidden in discussions.  Be very careful of what you accuse
someone of being.

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

From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick Townson)
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 6:00:00 EST
Subject: Attacked by a Dog Which was Playing


Buffy is  _huge_ dog of the Australian Cattle Dog variety. When I
say huge, I mean of the Irish Wolfhound type of animal. She is 
several months old, very playful, and came into my life about two
weeks ago. She is very 'rough around the edges, had not been
housebroken when I got her and had obviously been mistreated in
her younger days by her previous master. I say that because when
I roll up a newspaper in my hands and she sees me doing it, she
becomes _very_ submissive and quiet, afraid she is going to get
swatted, etc. And, very important, she has not been 'fixed' as of
yet. When she came here to live, she had a collar which was far
too tight, had caused some skin irritations on her. One of the guys
who hangs around here a lot, a kid named Eric brought her over and
asked me if I could 'give her a good home'. After finding out the
hard way that Buffy had not been housebroken, and watching her cower
and become submissive right after she made a mess in my parlor, I saw
the problem. She was expecting to get swatted for doing what comes
natural for dogs -- for all of us I guess. 

By using the word 'potty' and opening the door to my backyard I
finally got her to understand to let me know when she wanted to go
outside to do 'it', and now she is pretty much housebroken. And that
brings me to the gist of this story: About 4 AM this morning, while I
was asleep, Buffy started making a ruccus. I stumbled out of bed, went
to the back door mumbling 'potty' and pushed the door open. Buffy was
all excited and in trying to get out the door with me in it she
knocked me down. I fell, banged up my own face pretty well, and
chipped a tooth which was about gone anyway. Remember, she _is_ a very
big dog, weighing close to a hundred pounds, who likes to jump in the
air and race around the room as she communicates with me. She came
back inside, saw my face all bloody as I laid on the bed and decided
she would lick my face to tell me she was sorry, etc. Needless to say,
the two cats totally *hate* Buffy, and run to hide when they see her
coming. 

Now comes about 8 AM, I had not been able to get back to sleep, my
face is all swollen up and I am missing a couple of teeth. Lisa's 
mother shows up (she had a key to get in and out as does Justin
(Lisa's husband) and Eric, mainly in case I wind up croaking sometime
in the middle of the night. She gets _very_ anxious seeing me there
with swollen face, missing tooth and calls Lisa to come over. Lisa
arrives, looks me over and says sarcastically 'well what happened to 
you, did Justin or Eric come over during the night and decide to beat
you up, or punish you?'  I told her it was that damn dog that Eric
had brought over. Now they want me to call the Animal Control officer
for the city and have Buffy taken away to the Animal Shelter and a 
certain death I imagine.  But I am going to continue trying to work 
with the animal if I can; she loves me and I love her, and even if the
two cats still hate her, I am sure they will learn to at least
tolerate her. But, I have to go to the doctor myself later today and
have him decide what to do about my swollen face, if anything. And as
for now, Buffy is curled up under my feet at the computer desk sound
asleep.    

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 #116
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Mar 16 16:49:26 2005
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j2GLnQp05176;
	Wed, 16 Mar 2005 16:49:26 -0500 (EST)
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 16:49:26 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200503162149.j2GLnQp05176@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 #117

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 16 Mar 2005 16:30:00 EST    Volume 24 : Issue 117

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Spain Leads 12-Nation Crackdown on Internet Child Porn (Lisa Minter)
    E-Mail Paranoia (Lisa Minter)
    Ebbers Convicted of $11 Billion Fraud (Telecom dailyLead from USTA)
    VoIP's Next Step: Hearings On The Hill (Jack Decker)
    Lifespan of a Desktop PC? (Lisa Hancock)
    The Lost Lessons of the 1920s and 1930s (Lisa Hancock)
    FTC Goes After Spyware Firm (Justin Time)
    Hosting Content on Zombie Computer Networks (Gareth Morrissey)
    Re: What Happened To Channel 1 (Michael Quinn)
    Re: 3 Verizon Phones - Throw Away or What? (Justin Time)
    Re: 3 Verizon Phones - Throw Away or What? (Joseph)
    Re: 3 Verizon Phones - Throw Away or What? (John Levine)
    Re: Cell Phone Reception (Dean)
    Re: Cell Phone Reception (John Levine)
    Re: Los Angeles Times: Low-Tech Methods Used in Data Theft (L. Hancock)
    Re: Former WorldCom CEO Guilty on All Counts (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: 16 Mar 2005 07:09:54 -0800
From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: Spain Leads 12-Nation Crackdown on Internet Child Porn


MADRID (Reuters) - Spain said Wednesday it was coordinating a
12-nation police operation against Internet child pornography and
around 500 arrests were expected.

Police were making simultaneous searches of homes in Spain, France,
Italy, Sweden, the Netherlands, Chile, Argentina, Panama, Costa Rica,
Mexico, the Dominican Republic and Uruguay, the Interior Ministry said
in a statement.

Nineteen people had been arrested so far throughout Spain and
worldwide arrests were expected to total around 500, the ministry
said.

The operation targets child pornography distributed through a
Spanish-language Internet chat room.

Police had found more than 20,000 items containing child porn,
including videos, photographs and MP3 files and had also seized video
cameras and documents, the ministry said.

The investigation began in January when a Spaniard complained to
authorities about "highly aggressive" photographs of very young
children that were available through an Internet chat room, the
Interior Ministry said.

Spanish police monitored the site to find out who was
putting the material on the Internet and tracked down more than
900 connections from all over the world in two weeks.

Spain then informed Eurojust and IbeRed, organizations that coordinate
judicial cooperation in Europe and Latin America respectively.
Investigating judges from all countries involved took part in planning
meetings before Wednesday's swoop.


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


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Is it just me, or do other readers
think that child porn is getting increasingly common? It seems like
every few weeks now, we read where X-hundred people have been arrested
for it. Then before long, another X-hundred more have been arrested.
Whoever said that child porn was a universally disliked crime?  I
think more people are 'into it' than we realize.   PAT] 

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

From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: E-Mail Paranoia
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 00:00:00 GMT             
 

I love the Toshiba laptop I bought last year. I keep just about
everything related to work, school, and my finances on it. So when I
received an e-mail from Toshiba warning that my model may have a
data-threatening memory defect, I was anxious to find out whether my
machine was affected. A link in the message took me to a Toshiba Web
page, which promised to download a utility to my PC that would check
for a defective memory module. All I had to do was click one button.

But just as I was about to click that button, a doubt bubbled up from
the depths of my digital credulity. Could the whole thing be a scam?
Was I about to download and install a Trojan horse, backdoor program,
or worm? As it turned out, it wasn't a trick: Toshiba really did send
out an e-mail containing an embedded link leading to an executable
file download located at a long, complex Web address. Trouble is,
phishing exploits, browser hijackers, and other online scams often
hook their victims by using similar-looking e-mail messages.

Fortunately, you can learn to spot these e-mail cons by using a
handful of investigative techniques and a boatload of common
sense. Here are some of the ways to tell a genuine message from a
bogus one.

Don't Take the Bait

If you keep just this one thing in mind, you'll protect yourself from
the majority of e-mail attacks: Assume any message could be
malicious. It matters not who the sender appears to be, or whether the
message's corporate logos, artwork, and embedded links look
authentic. It's a trivial matter for scam artists to create fake
messages that contain return addresses, images, and URLs lifted from
the real company's own Web site.

Next, use your newfound paranoia to examine messages critically. If
you don't have an account with Citibank, for example, the company
won't be sending you any account-related e-mail. But even messages
that appear to come from firms you have an account with may not be
real. Remember, your new motto is "Trust No One."

Before clicking a link or taking any action requested in a message,
determine for certain that the message is genuine. Return addresses,
embedded links, and images can be deceiving. Look for dire warnings
and other classic con techniques, undoubtedly accompanied by a link to
a bogus Web site where you'll be asked to enter personal information.

Legitimate e-mails and scams can look very much alike. Both may be
text-based, reasonably well written, and plausible (although phishing
messages often contain typos and poorly composed sentences with
questionable logic). Both also contain real addresses to each
company's Web site. The only difference is that, for example, a
faux-Citibank message also may have a link to a short-lived phishing
site where the unsuspecting visitor is asked to enter personal
information. Rather than providing a link to a specific page, genuine
messages from companies that are savvy to phishing and other online
fraud will generally instruct you to visit or log in to the company's
main Web site.

Another clue: A phishing message may be delivered to an e-mail address
that you don't use with that company or institution. Note that I've
received phishing messages at a widely publicized (and indexed)
address (nettips@pcworld.com), whereas a genuine PayPal message came
to my personal address, which I had previously verified with
PayPal. If you get a message at an address you never registered with
the company, it's fake.

Intuition and a suspicious nature are a good start, but to separate
real messages from bogus ones, you also need to decipher their Web
addresses. In a couple text-based messages I received, all addresses
were plain text, so what I clicked was what I got. Clicking
"https://www.paypal.com" took me to the real PayPal Web site. But
clicking
"http://218.45.31.164/signin/citifi/scripts/login2/index.html" didn't
exactly lead to a Citibank Web site.

One  clue  is   the  string  of  numbers  following   the  URL  prefix
"http://".  Every Web  site resides  at a  specific  Internet Protocol
address,  so, for  example, you  can get  to the  PCWorld.com  site by
typing  65.220.224.30  in  your   browser's  address  bar  instead  of
www.pcworld.com. However, "218.45.31.164" doesn't lead to the Citibank
Web site, even  though the rest of the address  looks like other links
you may  routinely click. The  only way you  can be sure to  reach the
real   Citibank   site   is   to  type   the   domain-name-based   URL
www.citibank.com  into your  browser's address  window  manually. (And
once you do,  be sure to click the Consumer  Alert link that describes
these  fraudulent e-mail  messages.) If  you're not  sure where  an IP
address leads, don't click it.

Substituting a numeric IP address for a domain name in a URL isn't the
only way a malicious message will try to trick you. The address
"www.citibank.com" is the real deal, but "www.citibank.phishing.com"
could lead anywhere. Every domain name ends with a top-level domain,
such as.com,.org,.edu, or a country-specific TLD such as.cn
(China),.uk (United Kingdom), or.ru (Russia). The word just to the
left of this TLD, together with the TLD portion, spells out the actual
domain name: "citibank.com", for example, is all it takes to get to
Citibank's site. When a phisher modifies a domain name slightly, or
inserts a word to the left of the TLD, the link changes. Phishers hope
that you won't know or notice the difference between "pcworld.com" and
"pcworld-gotcha.com" or "pcworld.phishing.com."

E-mail attacks can also use the HTML formatting to conceal the true
destination of links. If a message is composed using HTML, the
underlined link text may not be the same as the actual embedded
link. This was true of the e-mail I received from Toshiba and was one
reason I became suspicious of its origin. Most e-mail programs display
an embedded link's destination URL in the bottom status bar or in a
pop-up window when you hover the mouse pointer over it.

I needed to find out whether the message from Toshiba was genuine; if
it was, I would have to test my beloved laptop for a faulty memory
module. First I entered a likely Toshiba site URL -- "toshiba.com" --
into my browser's address bar; this move transported me to a global
Toshiba site.</p>

After rummaging around awhile, I finally stumbled upon a Web page
describing the same issues noted in the Toshiba e-mail, and using the
same URLs. Voil?! I had my confirmation -- the Toshiba e-mail was truly
legitimate. But I still never clicked the message's embedded link,
going instead through the link on the company's Web site. You can
never be too careful.</p>

Scott Spanbauer is a contributing editor for PC World He writes the
monthly Internet Tips column.

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 Tech Tuesday, PC-World.

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


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I wonder if most netizens realize the
serious way in which phishing has proliferated. I must get a dozen or
more of these daily in my account here at massis. Since massis is an
old-fashioned style mail service (uses 'sendmail' with text copy) it
is very easy for me to tell where I would be sent to if I clicked on
something by just reading through the html looking at the links which 
would appear if I had been using html and had clicked. It is really
pretty disgusting, the volume of it. It is literally all over the
place. I get them all the time pertaining to 'errors found in my
PayPal account' or 'fraud discovered in my Citibank account' etc. I
don't even have a Citibank account, and my PayPal account does not 
go through massis.  PAT]

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

Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 12:44:15 EST
From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA <usta@dailylead.com>
Subject: Ebbers Convicted of $11 Billion Fraud


http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=20104&l=2017006

TODAY'S HEADLINES

NEWS OF THE DAY
* Ebbers convicted of $11 billion fraud
BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH
* Qwest to raise MCI bid
* RIM settles patent lawsuit
* TiVo shares soar 75% after deal with Comcast
* Differences between Motorola, Apple forced iTunes phone delay
USTA SPOTLIGHT 
* In the Telecom Bookstore: Broadband Facts
EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES
* SureWest jumps into TV game
REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE
* SEC charges former Qwest CEO and other former executives

Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others.
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=20104&l=2017006

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Situations like this are the main
reason I could _care less_ if people happen to rip off the 'telephone
company' a little now and then. I hope old man Ebbers never gets out
of jail; considering what MCI has done rather routinely to the
telephone network since back in the late 1960's.    PAT]

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

From: Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@withheld on request>
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 11:39:07 -0500
Subject: VoIP's Next Step: Hearings On The Hill
Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com


http://www.telecomweb.com/news/1110908201.htm

Voice-over-Internet Protocol (VoIP) technology and carriage is
starting to get additional attention in light of potential rewrites of
the 1996 Telecom Act during the 109th session of Congress, with the
House Rural Caucus Telecommunications Task Force feeling out the
business last week and the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on
Telecommunications and the Internet scheduling on open hearing on the
subject tomorrow.

The Rural Caucus' broadband-oriented Telecom Task Force, co-chaired
by Rep. Gil Gutknect (R-Minn.) and Bart Stupak (D-Mich.), followed up
last year's briefings on future telecom challenges facing the rural
United States and universal service fund (USF) issues with a March 9
hearing on VoIP during which carriers and lobbying groups outlined
their positions surrounding VoIP in rural America.

BellSouth Chief Technology Officer Bill Smith underscored VoIP's rural
importance to his company by saying "BellSouth provides service to
more rural customers than all of the independent companies
combined," including in three states via the high cost portion of
the USF program and in six states where it receives no such
support. "With continued broadband deployment, there are now
broadband service applications that can provide people who live in
rural America with a competitive alternative to conventional voice
phone service that is comparable in both quality and functionally and
generally lower in price," he said. "Given the changes in
technology and the right economic incentives, providers will target
more and more areas to provide both broadband and VoIP services to
compete for the consumer's business."

Full story at:


http://www.telecomweb.com/news/1110908201.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: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Subject: Lifespan of a Desktop PC?
Date: 16 Mar 2005 08:24:27 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


Would anyone know what is the average/typical physical lifespan of a
desktop PC?  That is, how many years do they run before components
start failing?

When buying a new PC, how do people typically transfer the contents
from the old PC hard drive to the new PC?  At work, people move stuff
out onto the LAN server or move the old drive into the new box; but
others say old drives are not compatible with new technology.  How do
home users without a LAN handle it?

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have here a Toshiba Satellite 220-CDS
sine 1995. It started life as Win 95, has since been converted to Win-98
(which I am sorry I did, really, it seems to be running a little
slower than it did as a 95). But it _never_ freezes up, _never_ locks
out; just sits there all day long as part of my network doing its
thing, the same as it did as a 95. Is ten years a rather good life
span? PAT]

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

From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Subject: The Lost Lessons of the 1920s and 1930s
Date: 16 Mar 2005 10:56:15 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


In the 1920s there was a terrific economic boom.  Underneath there was
some dark clouds, like that much of the boom was based on 'nothing',
that is stocks that had no real value under them bought on margin
without any real coverage.  But everyone was having such a good time
the naysayers were ignored.

The boom burst.  The securities markets collapsed.  Since so much was
based on nothing, underlying loans and margin accounts collapsed as
well, causing a nasty domino effect throughout the financial world.
Nobody could pay any of their debts in a long chain.  Without any
money, the economy of the world ground to a halt.

In the 1930s reformers of the New Deal attempted to save the system.
The industrialists and financiers were terribly upset since until now
they had done as they pleased and answered to no one.  But without
reform they would end up with nothing.

Sadly, today the descendants of those industrialists and financiers
are pulling the same crimes as was done in the 1920s.

But what is worse is that the regulators and laws that were supposed
to prevent this sort of thing have been forgotten.  We need to be more
"competitive" they tell us as an excuse to allow big monopolies and
concentrated power.  "This will create economic development" they tell
us while laying off thousands of employees with no other place to go.

Had the SEC and auditors been doing their job properly Enron, MCI, and
other fisascos would've been stopped early or not started at all.

But they told us "everyone is having such a good time", so we
shouldn't interfere.

Years ago the power utilities were caught in a scandal with lots of
watered stock in the form of layered "holding companies".  We're going
right back to that today.

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

From: Justin Time <a_user2000@yahoo.com>
Subject: FTC Goes After Spyware Firm
Date: 16 Mar 2005 06:46:23 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


FTC Goes After 'Phony' Spyware Assassin

Elizabeth Millard, www.enterprise-security-today.com

The Federal Trade Commission has asked a U.S. District Court to bar
Spyware Assassin and its affiliates from offering consumers free
spyware detection scans and from selling antispyware software.

The FTC also is seeking a permanent halt to the alleged "marketing
scam," as well as redress for consumers.

"The defendants' free remote scan is phony, and the defendants'
representations that they have detected spyware on the consumer's
computer are deceptive," the FTC charges.

Bogus Claims About Spyware

In papers filed with the court, the FTC alleges that Spyware Assassin
and its affiliates use Web sites, e-mail, banner ads and pop-ups to
draw users to the company's site.

After dire warnings about spyware, users are offered a free scanning
tool, which inevitably finds "dangerous spyware virus infections,"
according to the company's post-scan pop-up message.

The message advises users to pay for and download Spyware Assassin
software, which does not remove all, or substantially all, spyware, the
FTC alleges. This violates the FTC Act, which bars deceptive claims.

Fraudulent E-Mail on the Rise

As the FTC was conducting its investigation, security firms also were
noticing the rise in Spyware Assassin's antispyware e-mail activity.

Reston, Virgina-based iDefense, a threat-intelligence firm, noticed
the fraudulent e-mails increasing over the past couple of months.

"There's been a dramatic increase in the number of messages from
Spyware Assassin," said iDefense director of malicious code research
Ken Dunham. "We checked it out and found they were bogus."

Unlike prescription drug scams, antispyware protection appeals to a
larger group of people, Dunham noted, because many users have heard of
spyware, but most are unaware of how to remove it.

Larger Spyware Issues

Although Spyware Assassin could be shut down permanently, that does
not solve the deeper issue of user naivete, according to Dunham.

"The larger problem that this highlights is that users are far too
trusting [of] junk e-mail and spam," he said. "There is an issue here
much bigger than this one fraudulent site, and that's user education,"
Dunham added.

Without reliable information being disseminated to users about what is
safe and what is fraud, bogus e-mail claims are likely to proliferate,
noted Dunham.

Rodgers Platt


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, Enterprise Security Today.

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

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

From: garethmorrissey@yahoo.com (Gareth Morrissey)
Subject: Hosting Content on Zombie Computer Networks
Date: 16 Mar 2005 10:44:17 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


Would it be possible to host content on zombie computer networks (like
those used to send out spam)?

Is anybody doing this currently?

The next wave of p2p program? Solves the free rider problem??

Just curious.

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

Subject: Re: What Happened To Channel 1
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 11:25:21 -0500
From: Michael Quinn <quinnm@bah.com>


Along this line, and at the risk of perhaps being slightly OT, if anyone
knows why television uses channels while radio uses frequencies (for the
most part, that is,  the 88 channel) FM Marine Band in the 156 MHz range
being an exception), I would be interested in hearing about it.

Regards,

Mike

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: On radio, there are also 'channels', as
you point out for example in the FM Marine Band, also the Citizens
Band has 'channels'. I think the difference is where 'frequencies' 
refers to a general range of spaces in the spectrum for general
categories of service (radio or television), 'channels' further
divides that group of frequencies into into specific allocations. For
example, we say the 'eleven meter band' (of frequencies) is divided
into forty channels. PAT]

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

From: Justin Time <a_user2000@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: 3 Verizon Phones - Throw Away or What?
Date: 16 Mar 2005 06:59:21 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


I believe that you will be able to cancel the service contract with
the return of the phones as you are leaving the country.  You need to
go in to your local VZW store - not an "authorized dealer" and explain
the situation.

Rodgers Platt

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

From: Joseph <JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: 3 Verizon Phones - Throw Away or What?
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 08:21:29 -0800
Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com


On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 16:04:03 -0800, Paintblot <sssssssssssff@ef.com>
wrote:

> I'm permanently leaving the USA in a few weeks. I have a Verizon
> account with 3 telephones, 2 of which are almost new. These phones
> have 2 year contracts. When we leave, what should I do? I cannot take
> them back to Verizon, because all they'll want is the big dollar
> contract buyout, which I won't pay (let them attack my credit, who
> cares, I'm not coming back here). Sell the phones? Aren't they banned
> from continuing to work on the Verizon network, and locked into the
> Verizon network?  Just destroy them and throw them away?

If the contract was not fulfilled or you have not paid the account the
ESNs on the phones will be shown to be in default and no one will be
able to use them.  I'm not sure how contract terms will have any
effect on it though.

On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 16:04:03 -0800, Telecom digest editor wrote:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: My personal advice, for whatever it is
> worth, is sell them for a few dollars each and get what you can out of
> them. If you know anyone you can generally trust, sell them a phone
> (for ten or twenty dollars?) with the understanding that _they_ can
> continue to pay the bill for the remainder of the contract (or until
> they get tired of paying the bill and/or the phone gets turned off, 
> whichever comes first. PAT]

If you mean pay the charges as if he was someone else that would work.
If you meant taking over the account Verizon would likely require a
credit check.

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

Date: 16 Mar 2005 18:33:08 -0000
From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
Subject: Re: 3 Verizon Phones - Throw Away or What?
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


> I'm permanently leaving the USA in a few weeks. I have a Verizon
> account with 3 telephones, 2 of which are almost new. These phones
> have 2 year contracts. When we leave, what should I do?

You can sell them on ebay, or you may be able to donate them to a
local charity.  They're locked to Verizon's network, but VZ shouldn't
care if someone else wants to use them on a different VZ account.

Ebay has a page with estimates of how much they're worth:

     http://pages.ebay.com/rethink/cpsz/howmuch.html

I gather that womens' shelters and the like can use old phones even
without service since they can still dial 911. See
http://www.wirelessfoundation.org/CalltoProtect/index.cfm

Regards,

John Levine johnl@iecc.com Primary Perpetrator of The Internet for Dummies,
Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://www.johnlevine.com, Mayor
"More Wiener schnitzel, please", said Tom, revealingly.

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

From: Dean <cjmebox-telecomdigest@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Cell Phone Reception
Date: 16 Mar 2005 09:36:39 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: On my personal cell phone, which is on
> Cingular Wireless, my latest contract is about to run out, and when
> I was downtown Friday, I went in the Cingular Wireless store and
> talked to the lady about getting a new phone in exchange for renewing
> my contract. There were several hangups, IMO: the newer phones are
> a bit smaller and (a) they would not work with my existing Cell Socket
> device; I use a Nokia 5165, which is an older phone, but it works
> quite well (and, it also works quite well when tied into my PBXtra
> through the Cell Socket) ... (b) the picture quality on the newer
> phones, while it has gotten better, _still_ has a way to go before the
> picture quality is as good as an inexpensive digital PC camera, and
> (c) the lady told me unlike Cingular Wireless text messages, to send
> a picture costs more money, around 40 cents per transmission. If there
> was a way to avoid that transmission charge (for example by somehow
> transferring the picture directly to my computer, then using my own
> email to move the picture around, I might be inclined to get a new
> phone and try it. PAT]

Pat,

Getting pics from the cell phone to the PC generally depends on the
device. If you don't take too many pics, I've found the cheapest way to
be to use a cell phone with an infrared port. Then all you need to do
is send the images to the laptop via its infrared port. Costs nothing,
but can only be done one image at a time. There are fancier ways
(bluetooth, special cables and special software etc) but this is the
cheapest I've found. 

Regards,

Dean

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

Date: 16 Mar 2005 18:22:12 -0000
From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
Subject: Re: Cell Phone Reception
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


>> Go visit the forums over on http://www.howardforums.com/, the
>> phone hackers there ...

> I really don't think those who contribute to Howardforums would
> appreciate you calling them *hackers!* Would you like someone to call
> you a hacker?

Sure.  Among people old enough to understand, it's a term of respect.

Perhaps you're confusing it with "cracker" or "script kiddie".

R's,

John

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

From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Subject: Re: Los Angeles Times: Low-Tech Methods Used in Data Theft
Date: 16 Mar 2005 10:44:50 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


Marcus Didius Falco wrote:

> Low-Tech Methods Used in Data Theft
> By David Colker
> Times Staff Writer

> Executives at besieged information broker ChoicePoint Inc. have said
> they had no idea how vulnerable the company was to the identity thieves
> who recently tapped into personal data on 145,000 Americans, igniting a
> national furor over privacy.

The network news showed the congressional hearings.  The CEO appeared
before Congress and came off as a total boob.

These companies were greedy, collecting extremely sensitive and
personal information for corporate use -- use that would seriously hurt
many of us every day people in our jobs and business dealings.
Corporations use the information -- true or not -- to justify price
increases or lower salaries on the grounds the person is a "bad risk".

I was shocked to learn that bad credit history can prevent someone
from getting a job and making them pay more for insurance.  So someone
in bad straits is pushed down by their system even lower -- someone
unemployed can't even get a job and has to pay more for vital
services!

There apparently is virtually no regulation of the collection or
dissemination of the information.  If something is inaccurate, I can't
help but wonder that the private person has a really tough time
demonstrating otherwise, especially when they don't learn about it
until years later.

On top of it all, they are sloppy with their security and let stuff
get stolen.

If it were up to me:

1) Their own credit report would be free to consumers.
2) When any time seriously adverse information is posted
   to a person's file, the credit company would be required
   to notify the person and allow time for a response.  The
   consumer should be able to challenge such adverse information
   and the burden of proof to be on the reporter, without any risk
   or penalty or cost to the individual person.
3) Any time a business requests credit info the consumer is to be
   notified.

("Credit info" to all personal info about a person, not just
financial.)

Obviously these companies would howl in protest.  The news said they
spent millions lobbying against any regulation in the past.  But I
suspect these companies are quite profitable and the costs of
accomplishing the above would be modest.  It would also cause credit
reporters to be more careful and have better internal procedures and
controls (which are sorely lacking today) and they'll protest that as
well.

But it is not up to me since I'm not a yuppie nor have access to
million dollar lobbyists.

Is anyone out there on the side of these info bank companies?

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

From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Subject: Re: Former WorldCom CEO Guilty on All Counts
Date: 16 Mar 2005 09:51:35 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


Lisa Minter wrote:

> A federal jury in Manhattan returned guilty verdicts on all nine
> counts, including securities fraud, conspiracy and lying to
> regulators; a decision that could send Ebbers, 63, to prison for the
> rest of his life. Sentencing was set for June 13.

He clearly deserves prison.  As CEO, understanding the overall
finances of his company was a very basic legal responsibility.

I don't know where that guy went to school, but my basic
accounting classes they made it quite clear that falsifying
the books was a serious crime, that managers had a responsibility
to understand their records, and how to understand a financial
statement.

Does anybody out there think he -- or others convicted in stock fraud
 -- got a raw deal?

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

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 #117
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Mar 17 11:13:38 2005
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j2HGDcq14058;
	Thu, 17 Mar 2005 11:13:38 -0500 (EST)
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 11:13:38 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200503171613.j2HGDcq14058@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 #118

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 17 Mar 2005 11:14:00 EST    Volume 24 : Issue 118

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Vonage Number Portability (John Schmerold)
    WQN, Inc. Announces the Introduction of RocketVoIP, an (Jack Decker)
    Rep. Fred Upton Apparently Sold Out to Incumbent Telcos (Jack Decker)
    My Apologies to Rep. Upton, I Misunderstood!!! (Jack Decker)
    Bush Chooses Martin as Next FCC Chairman; Jeff Pulver's (Jack Decker)
    Sending Ringtones via a Web Service (absolutemcv)
    Re: E-Mail Paranoia  (Wesrock@aol.com)
    Re: E-Mail Paranoia (Thomas A. Horsley)
    Re: E-Mail Paranoia (hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com)
    Re: Iridium II: Is Satellite Radio Doomed? (J Kelly)
    Re: Iridium II: Is Satellite Radio Doomed? (Gene S. Berkowitz)
    Re: What Happened To Channel 1 (Paul Coxwell)
    Re: What Happened To Channel 1 (Robert Bonomi)
    Re: What Happened To Channel 1 (Tim@Backhome.org)
    Re: 3 Verizon Phones - Throw Away or What? (Mark Crispin)
    Re: 3 Verizon Phones - Throw Away or What? (Steve Sobol)
    Re: Lifespan of a Desktop PC? (David)
    Re: Lifespan of a Desktop PC? (Robert Bonomi)
    Re: Lifespan of a Desktop PC? (Peter R Cook)

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 Mar 2005 16:48:09 -0600
From: John Schmerold <john@katy.com>
Subject: Vonage Number Portability


We had problems with Vonage, so I thought "Let's give Callvantage a
shot".

I put in our order, a week later, I get a note from ATT stating that
they could not port my number, so I phone ATT. They tell me they
cannot use number portability to transfer a number from Vonage, if I
want to move my number to Callvantage, I'll need to port it back to
SBC, then move it to ATT from SBC.

Hmmm, now I've heard everything. Anyone know of a way around this BS ?

If the VOIP can transfer numbers from SBC, it seems to me that fairness 
would dictate that they must transfer the number to any wireless, 
landline or VOIP carrier I choose.


John Schmerold
Katy Computer & Wireless
20 Meramec Station Rd
Valley Park MO 63088
636-861-6900 v
775-227-6947 f 

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But, by the terms of this 'fairness'
you speak about, according to AT&T, Vonage will port the number back
to SBC on your request. What I have heard, but will not vouch for, is
that there is some technical hangup at present involved with porting
a number between two VOIP services. Its not that they will not, but
that for some technical reason they _cannot_ move the number directly.
Any other comments on this?   PAT]

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

From: Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@withheld on request>
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 14:35:26 -0500
Subject: WQN, Inc. Announces the Introduction of RocketVoIP


[Comment: I have looked over this company's web site a little bit and
while they are so new that I can't find any customer reviews of their
service, I can say that even if they do give decent service they don't
have as many features as some of their longer-established competitors,
and they only have Michigan numbers in some ratecenters in the Detroit
LATA.  In my personal opinion, the only reason I would ever consider
this company would be if I made a lot of international calls to the
locations covered by their unlimited plan -- otherwise, as someone who
generally only makes calls within the United States, I'd be much more
attracted to a company with more features, a record of good customer
service, and numbers in or near my ratecenter.]

http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/03-16-2005/0003201139&STORY&EDATE=

WQN, Inc. Announces the Introduction of RocketVoIP, an Expanded
Broadband Phone Service   http://www.wqn.com http://www.rocketvoip.com

The First to Offer Broadband Users Unlimited International Calling
                            From a Mobile Phone

    DALLAS, March 16 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- WQN, Inc. (Nasdaq:
WQNI), a leading provider of international long distance telephony
services utilizing Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP), today
announced the introduction of its next generation VoIP technology
service, RocketVoIP.

    With RocketVoIP, subscribers can use their broadband service to
make and receive unlimited domestic and international calls using a
home phone, mobile phone or personal computer.  This service is being
introduced to WQN's current customer base and other ethnic groups.
RocketVoIP has unique features and advantages over competing products:

     *  Unlimited local, long distance and international calling to
        50 countries, for a low monthly fee of $24.95 a month
     *  The ability to use a mobile phone to access RocketVoIP's network for
        high quality unlimited international calls
     *  Free RocketVoIP in-network calling
     *  Free features including Caller-ID, Call-Waiting, Call-Forwarding,
        3-Way Calling, Voice Mail, and more
     * A total calling solution enabling travelers to make and receive
       phone calls from anywhere in the world using a personal
       computer and high- speed internet access, including Wi-Fi
       hotspots

    "Over the last four years we have invested a significant amount of
time, energy and resources in both research and development to create
an international VoIP network which currently services over 300,000
retail customers," said Mike Adler, WQN's President and Chief
Executive Officer.  "RocketVoIP allows us to leverage this existing
infrastructure to provide a next generation converged broadband phone
service that we believe will save customers 70 percent on their total
calling needs."

"A significant number of our customers already use their mobile phones
to access our VoIP network and make international calls," said Victor
E.  Grijalva, WQN's Vice President and Chief Financial Officer.  "We
believe many of these customers will prefer RocketVoIP, as it is the
first service to offer unlimited international calling from a mobile
phone."

For more information on RocketVoIP, please visit
http://www.rocketvoip.com .

About WQN, Inc.

WQN, Inc. is a Voice Over Internet Protocol (VoIP) telephony
company providing international long distance services.  WQN's
customers utilize the company's enhanced VoIP services platform to
make and receive calls using their home phone, business phone,
personal computer and mobile phone.  The Company is headquartered in
Dallas, Texas and has offices in Los Angeles, California, and New
Delhi, India.  For more information about WQN Inc., please visit the
company's Web site at http://www.wqn.com .

SOURCE WQN, Inc.
Web Site: http://www.wqn.com http://www.rocketvoip.com 

How to Distribute VoIP Throughout a Home:
http://michigantelephone.mi.org/distribute.html

If you live in Michigan, subscribe to the MI-Telecom group:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MI-Telecom/

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

From: Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@withheld on request>
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 21:09:52 -0500
Subject: Rep. Fred Upton apparently sold out to incumbent telcos


A disturbing final paragraph in this article, which starts out telling
the oft-told story of how a Houston family apparently didn't
understand that their VoIP service doesn't come with 911 service
(probably didn't bother to read the numerous warnings most VoIP
companies give when you sign up), but then progresses to say this:

[Begin quote:]

Since then, the FCC has ruled that VoIP is an interstate service not
subject to state rules and regulations, and that companies providing
Internet telephony must comply with federal wiretap requirements. The
agency is still studying the 911 obligations of VoIP carriers and the
potential contributions carriers might be required to make to the
Universal Service Fund.

"VoIP is still in its infancy and the regulatory ground upon which
VoIP stands is not as firm as I think it needs to be in order that it
reaches its projected potential," Rep. Fred Upton (R-Mich.), chairman
of the subcommittee, said. "I would note that only seven individuals
 -- five FCC commissioners and two federal district court judges --
stood in the way of VoIP potentially being regulated by 51 state
public utility commissions."  [End quote from end of article at
http://www.internetnews.com/bus-news/article.php/3490701 ]

The fortunate thing is that Rep. Upton's views are probably in the
minority, but I fear that the incumbent telco lobbyists are working
furiously behind the scenes to try and get VoIP hobbled by state
regulations.  That would kill many of the smaller VoIP companies, and
maybe all of them that don't have a presence in every state.  We do
NOT need regulation by state public utility regulators, and given the
way the Michigan Public Service Commission has f***ed up expanded
local calling, there is no way in hell I want them regulating VoIP.
As far as I am concerned, the FCC is absolutely on the right track in
exercising federal oversight of VoIP and pre-empting the states - it
would be a disaster to VoIP to be subjected to individual state
regulation.

Those of you who live Rep. Upton's district in southwest Michigan
(basically the Kalamazoo area and southwest) might want to write him
or e-mail him and ask him to stop selling out to the incumbent
telcos. Let him know that you don't want additional regulation and
costs added to VoIP.  His contact info is on this page:

http://www.house.gov/upton/contact.html

The issue of 911 is important but it will not be resolved immediately
 -- it took the cellular telephone industry a couple of decades to get
the kinks worked out (some cell phone companies still don't offer
"enhanced" 911), and since talks are already in progress between the
major VoIP companies and the organization representing 911 centers, I
am sure that most VoIP companies will offer 911 sooner rather than
later.  The FCC can facilitate this by putting its blessing on one
nationwide scheme for VoIP connecting to 911, whereas if every state
commission tries to regulate this, a VoIP company located in Nerw
Jersey or California may be told they have to deal with over 50
different 911 connection mandates.

So I believe that Rep. Upton's comments have nothing to do with 911
and everything with who is pumping money into his election campaign.

According to
http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/contrib.asp?CID=N00004133&cycle=2004
both SBC and Verizon were among his top contributors (SBC was his top
contributor, while Verizon tied for the #6 slot.  Also, Comcast
Corp. and the National Cable & Telecommunications Assn. both tied for
the #3 slot, and even when cable operators offer VoIP they often
register as CLEC's and have a local presence in each state, and
therefore might not oppose regulation that impedes independent VoIP,
which does not have facilities in every state in the union).

One other thing, I have been warning that attempts at individual state
regulation could backfire, since VoIP companies can move offshore and
out of reach of any U.S. regulation.  For example, a VoIP company
located in Canada or England could probably still buy U.S. numbers for
incoming calls from CLEC's, and still complete calls to the U.S. at
wholesale rates about the same as what they are paying now.  If you
don't think this is true, consider that when the instant messaging
program ICQ first started out, its servers were in Israel, and had the
U.S. attempted to impose excessive regulation or taxation on instant
messaging it's quite likely that the servers (and the company) would
have stayed there.

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

From: Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@withheld on request>
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 23:58:46 -0500
Subject: My Apologies to Rep. Upton, I Misunderstood!!!


At 10:12 PM 3/16/2005 -0600, R Collinge wrote [in the VoIP News list]:

> Hi Jack,

> Are you reading Rep Upton's comments correctly?  I had interpreted
> his quote as something like, "It is scary that we were so close to
> disaster, which could easily have happened if not for a few brave
> commissioners and judges."  I read his thought as being that we need
> federal regulation to keep the hungry states permanently at bay.

> Also, I certainly agree with your point about international
> competition holding the power of regulators in check.  FWIW, I
> commented to the FCC on the Vonage petition back in November '03,
> and think I mentioned it then, too.

> Bob

Bob and everyone,

Oh, boy, when I blow it I really blow it. I had of course interpreted
it as, "these seven individuals stopped the states from doing what
they ought to be able to do", but when Bob sent the above comment, I
did a Google search to see if Rep. Upton had made any other remarks on
VoIP, and came up with this:

http://www.vonage-forum.com/printout1009.html

"We will never know VoIP's tremendous potential if we saddle it with
unwarranted government regulation," Rep. Fred Upton, R-Mich., said in
his opening remarks at one of the first hearings to address VoIP
regulation. Upton, who chairs the House telecommunications
subcommittee, warned that "VoIP providers should not be regulated like
common carriers."

So, I apologize to Rep. Upton and to the readers of the MI-Telecom and
VoIP News groups -- apparently he gets it.  Actually, I guess I should
have realized that SBC, Verizon, and Comcast would not necessarily
favor regulation of VoIP because they all are getting into it.  It's
the smaller rural companies (the second- and third-tier companies)
that really feel threatened by VoIP.  What I think misled me was the
fact that the article started out as kind of an anti-VoIP hit piece
(in effect saying that someone could have died because they tried to
use a VoIP line to call 911) and when Rep. Upton's remarks were
included in that type of article, I took them in a negative light.

In fact, I almost have to wonder if the writer of that article
deliberately took that quote out of context in such a way that some
people (like me) might think that Rep. Upton was anti-VoIP.  Still, I
feel like an idiot right now -- what was obvious to Bob and probably to
many of you totally went right past me.  Mea culpa and all that!

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

From: Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@withheld on request>
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 00:35:49 -0500
Subject: Bush Chooses Martin as Next FCC Chairman 


http://news.com.com/Bush+chooses+Martin+as+next+FCC+chairman/2100-1036_3-5620520.html

Bush chooses Martin as next FCC chairman
Published: March 16, 2005, 12:43 PM PST
By Declan McCullagh
Staff Writer, CNET News.com

Update The Federal Communications Commission has a new chairman: Kevin
Martin, who is expected to wield considerable influence during a
period of radical change in the telecommunications and Internet
business.

Martin, an FCC commissioner who was appointed chairman by President
Bush on Wednesday afternoon, will be responsible for shepherding the
agency through a major revision to U.S. telecommunications laws and an
upswing in telephone calling over the Internet.

"I am deeply honored to have been designated as the next chairman of
the Federal Communications Commission, and I thank President Bush for
this distinct privilege," Martin said. Bush's choice of Martin, a
38-year-old lawyer who once worked for the Bush-Cheney campaign, was
expected.

While Martin occasionally clashed with fellow Republican Michael
Powell, the outgoing chairman, observers said the FCC's general
approach toward broadband regulation and voice over Internet Protocol
(VoIP) is likely to follow the same broad principles.

Full story at:
http://news.com.com/Bush+chooses+Martin+as+next+FCC+chairman/2100-1036_3-5620520.html
Press release from Jeff Pulver:
http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=109&STORY=/www/story/03-16-2005/0003201686&EDATE=

VoIP Thought Leader and Industry Pioneer, Jeff Pulver, Comments on
Today's Appointment of Kevin Martin as FCC Chairman
http://www.pulver.com

MELVILLE, N.Y., March 16 /PRNewswire/ -- The following may be
attributed to Jeff Pulver, CEO of pulver.com regarding today's
announcement appointing Kevin Martin as FCC Chairman:

"The new era at the FCC is dawning (alongside the new era in
Communications).  Chairman Martin will not exactly be a wild card to
our industry.  As a Commissioner for several years he has demonstrated
a keen intellect and savvy political instincts and skills.  We're
looking forward to working with him to advance the cause of IP-based
communications and to enable IP-based entrepreneurs and innovators to
continue to transform the ways in which people communicate.  Our
experience has been that Martin has an uncanny ability to put all the
pieces together and to bring parties to common ground for mutual
benefit.  While Chairman requires a different skill set than
Commissioner, we're confident that, Kevin Martin will prove to be a
savvy, politically astute Chairman with the ability to hammer out
difference and find common ground."

About Pulver.com

Jeff Pulver is the President and CEO of pulver.com, and one of the
true pioneers of the Internet telephony/VoIP industry.  Mr. Pulver is
a globally renowned thought leader, author and entrepreneur.  He is
the publisher of The Pulver Report and VON magazine, and creator of
the industry standard Voice on the Net (VON) conferences.
Additionally, Mr. Pulver is the founder of Free World Dialup (FWD),
the VON coalition, LibreTel, WHP Wireless, pulverinnovations, Digisip,
and is the co-founder of VoIP provider, Vonage.

Recently, Mr. Pulver's petition for clarification declaring Free World
Dialup as an unregulated information service was granted by the
Federal Communications Commission (FCC).  This landmark decision by
the FCC, now referred to as "the Pulver decision," was the first
decision made by the FCC on IP communications, and provides important
clarification that computer-to- computer VoIP service is not a
telecommunications service.  For more information, please visit
http://www.pulver.com

Reader Contact Information

Pulver.com Enterprises, 115 Broadhollow Road, Suite 225; Melville, NY
11747; Tel: 631-961-8950, Fax: 631-293-3996, http://www.pulver.com .

     Company Contact:              PR Agency Contact:
     Jonathan Askin                Alan Weinkrantz
     General Counsel               210-820-3070 ext. 103
     631-748-8236                  alan@weinkrantz.com
     jaskin@pulver.com

SOURCE pulver.com
Web Site: http://www.pulver.com 

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

From: absolutemcv <absolutemcvicar@hotmail.co.uk>
Subject: Sending Ringtones via a Web Service
Date: 17 Mar 2005 03:53:24 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


Does anyone know the process involved in sending ringtone's to mobile
phoned via either a web service or other server based system?

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

From: Wesrock@aol.com
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 20:28:21 EST
Subject: Re: E-Mail Paranoia 


In a message dated 3/16/05 3:56:05 PM Central Standard Time, Pat writes:

> I don't even have a Citibank account, and my PayPal account does not
> go through massis.  PAT]

You don't have any credit cards?  Citibank is the largest issuer of
credit cards in the country, including retail cards, gasoline credit
cards, and many others.  However, they usually have a brand-specific
domain name, such as "www.searscard.com"

      I don't have a PayPal account, but I get those messages two or three 
times a week.
       

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

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Of course I have a couple credit cards,
and a couple of debit cards, but they are all handled under their own
individual names, and not as Citibank, and they all have their own
web sites under their own names.   PAT]

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

Subject: Re: E-Mail Paranoia
From: tom.horsley@att.net (Thomas A. Horsley)
Organization: AT&T Worldnet
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 02:22:24 GMT


Actually, there is a much simpler way to deal with this: Never click on
any links mailed to you :-).

For something like the Toshiba laptop, if I had gotten that mail I
would have gone to the Toshiba web site and searched for information
about the laptop model involved, and if I found a link starting from
Toshiba's official web site, I'd be much more likely to click on it
(although if the problem description also had serial numbers and
wot-not I could check manually, I'd still be more likely to do that
than to run their program).

>>==>> The *Best* political site <URL:http://www.vote-smart.org/> >>==+
      email: Tom.Horsley@worldnet.att.net icbm: Delray Beach, FL      |
<URL:http://home.att.net/~Tom.Horsley> Free Software and Politics <<==+

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

From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Subject: Re: E-Mail Paranoia
Date: 16 Mar 2005 14:07:20 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


Lisa Minter quoted a newspaper article:

> But just as I was about to click that button, a doubt bubbled up from
> the depths of my digital credulity. Could the whole thing be a scam?
> Was I about to download and install a Trojan horse, backdoor program,
> or worm? ...

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I wonder if most netizens realize the
> serious way in which phishing has proliferated. I must get a dozen or
> more of these daily in my account here at massis.

Many companies I deal with want me to use the 'net to access my bills
or account on-line.  Doing so obviously saves them money from having a
real person answer my questions over the phone.

I guess I'm a Luddite, but I shy away from using e-mail or the
Internet for personal business transactions.  I feel there aren't
enough protections -- both technical and legal -- to protect consumers.

First, often the Internet does NOT answer questions I have.  Sending
emails to a company is often a failure -- either they never answer or
don't answer the question properly (often they refer you back to the
'net page, but if the info was there in the first place I wouldn't
need to ask).  Even big companies forget to update their web pages
with the latest information.  Other companies change terms and
offerings so rapidly and make them so complex a person is needed to
sort it all out.

Secondly, email is notoriously unreliable.  Servers break down and
messages in transit are lost.  Messages are accidently deleted along
with the spam.  Lastly is the security problem -- emails are easily
forged.

It has long been against the law to use the US Mail for fraud,
and I presume there are still U.S. Postal Inspectors who
investigate and prosecute violations.  But does anyone really
know the law as it stands with fraud done by email?  Who is
responsible for enforcement and prosecution?  My guess is only
the most blatant and biggest violators are prosecuted (and not
necessarily thrown in prison as they deserve) while the vast
majority go unscathed.  "Spam" is not just a nuisance, it is
fraud and a host of other law violations, but nothing seems to
be done.

The fact that Congress can't pass an enforceable anti-spam law means
to me the whole email system is just not safe.  Too many legal
loopholes, too little enforcement, too many criminals.

The Internet is based upon protocols never intended or designed for
use in public commerce.  Remember the 'net was developed as a private
link between users of a very small community and designed to share
information.  As such, there was little need for protection since
there was little to be gained by fraud.  That became obsolete the
minute the 'net became public.  So today we have people at home
hooking their PCs up to broadband networks, blissfully unaware that
criminals are hacking into their PCs searching for weaknesses to
exploit.  The network protocols should never permit this kind of
random searching in the first place.

A growing problem with using the 'net is its high powered automation.
When I had my 286 DOS machine, I knew what it was doing because
(normally) only I could start up a program.  (Obviously if I took
someone else's program I was at risk).  Email attachments back then
didn't automatically start up macros in applications.  But today
everything is so automated and fancy most users have no idea what's
going on in their machine.  Hard drives spin along, things open and
close on their own.  Things intended to be a shortcut and easy for us
make it easier for saboteurs to screw up our machines.

(Shouldn't  we call  viruses "sabotage"?   The word  "virus"  makes it
sound like  it came from mother  nature, not an  intentional effort to
harm.)

The technocrats out there are partly to blame.  They never can sit
still long enough to let a software release settle in before demanding
new features.  This constant revisions allows bugs and fraud to creep
in.  Stable functionality would get sturdier over time.

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: If I understand the law correctly, if
you make a false/fraudulent communication by _any_ means -- email, or
web site, or telephone, etc -- in an effort to induce someone
else to deposit something in the US Mail, then you have committed
postal fraud. Example: you apply for a credit card using a web site or
email in someone else's name and with their credentials; this in turn
induces the credit card company to send you a card in the postal mail,
then it is as good as if you had originally corresponded by mail, you
still committed postal fraud.  Or maybe at some point they send you a
bill or a notice in the US mail. In other words, _they_ would not have
used the US Mail had _you_ not encouraged them to do so. PAT]

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

From: J Kelly <jkelly@*newsguy.com>
Subject: Re: Iridium II: Is Satellite Radio Doomed?
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 17:22:04 -0600
Organization: http://newsguy.com
Reply-To: jkelly@*newsguy.com


On 16 Mar 2005 05:27:14 GMT, Walter Dnes (delete the
'z')<wzaltdnes@waltdnes.org>  wrote:

> I'm sure that satellite radio went through much the same number
> crunching under the eyes of watchful accountants 10 years ago.  Back
> then, we had reached the extreme limit of regular modems at 33.6
> kbits/sec.  FM-mono yes, but nowhere near good enough for FM-stereo
> quality, let alone CD quality.  Besides, if someone really wanted to
> listen to it a lot, you'd need a second phone line, another $30/month.

I think satellite radio is maily target to a mobile audience that
travels.  I do 99% of my music listening while in my vehicle.

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

From: Gene S. Berkowitz <first.last@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Iridium II: Is Satellite Radio Doomed?
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 19:15:10 -0500


In article <telecom24.116.6@telecom-digest.org>, Walter Dnes (delete the 
'z')<wzaltdnes@waltdnes.org>  says:

> I was originally going to post this in answer to another posting, but
> this goes off on its own tangent, so I'm giving it a separate thread.

> When the original Iridium was being drawn up on the planning boards,
> the accountants went over the numbers very meticulously.  They
> compared the cost of of an inconvenient bulky Iridium receiver with
> the cost of an inconvenient bulky mobile-telephone receiver
> (break-even).  They compared the projected worldwide coverage of
> Iridium with the miniscule footprints of mobile-telephone
> transmitters, which were almost all located in a few major city
> centres (advantage Iridium).  They compared the horrendously high
> cost-per-minute of Iridium usage with the horrendously high
> cost-per-minute of international long distance (break even).  Etc,
> etc.  After going through the entire business plan, Iridium looked
> like a winner.

> But the telecom industry changed between the drawing board and launch
> pad.  Inconvenient bulky mobile-telephone receivers were replaced by
> dinky little cellphones.  Cellphone companies built out their coverage
> area to include almost all potential customers in the 1st world.  And
> cellphone and long distance rates plummeted due to competition.
> Iridium was doomed even if it launched on budget and on spec.  The
> only major customers now are mineral exploration companies and US DOD
> in really isolated places with no telecom infrastructure.

> I'm sure that satellite radio went through much the same number
> crunching under the eyes of watchful accountants 10 years ago.  Back
> then, we had reached the extreme limit of regular modems at 33.6
> kbits/sec.  FM-mono yes, but nowhere near good enough for FM-stereo
> quality, let alone CD quality.  Besides, if someone really wanted to
> listen to it a lot, you'd need a second phone line, another $30/month.

> Things change.  A lot of satellite radio's target households have
> broadband and can get "internet radio" now.  Both satellite and
> internet radio have to pay royalties.  But internet radio only pays
> incremental bandwidth costs over the net, while satellite radio has to
> pay for a network of satellites to be launched and maintained in
> orbit.  Satellite radio requires an antenna or dish of some sort,
> while internet radio is simply another item in your browser's bookmark
> list.  The car was supposed to be the last refuge of satellite radio
> that internet radio couldn't touch.  But 3G, WiFi, and WiMax are
> showing that it can be done.

> I think that satellite radio will be another "Pola-Vision".
> Interesting technology that was rendered obsolete by other
> developments as it came out.

> Walter Dnes; my email address is *ALMOST* like wzaltdnes@waltdnes.org
> Delete the "z" to get my real address.  If that gets blocked, follow
> the instructions at the end of the 550 message.

You have your bandwidth calculations all wrong.  The satellites (and
the US domestic "networks" only have two and three birds,
respectively) are continuously streaming all ~100 channels.  When you
make a net connection, you are consuming a large portion of you
available network bandwidth.  Should everyone on your neighborhood
subnet attempt this, you'll reach saturation.  The satellite broadcast
doesn't care if there's 1 or 1 billion receivers.

Then there's reach.  Sure, an automotive WiFi connection might work in 
an urban setting, but what about on an interstate, through the New
Mexico desert?

--Gene

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

From: Paul Coxwell <paulcoxwell@tiscali.co.uk>
Subject: Re: What Happened To Channel 1
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 22:16:01 -0000


> Along this line, and at the risk of perhaps being slightly OT, if anyone
> knows why television uses channels while radio uses frequencies (for the
> most part, that is,  the 88 channel) FM Marine Band in the 156 MHz range
> being an exception), I would be interested in hearing about it.

I seem to recall reading somewhere that the FCC does actually have
official channel numbers for each allocation in the AM and FM
broadcast bands, even though they're rarely used.

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

From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi)
Subject: Re: What Happened To Channel 1
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 22:35:09 -0000
Organization: Widgets, Inc.


In article <telecom24.117.9@telecom-digest.org>, Michael Quinn
<quinnm@bah.com> wrote:

> Along this line, and at the risk of perhaps being slightly OT, if anyone
> knows why television uses channels while radio uses frequencies (for the
> most part, that is,  the 88 channel) FM Marine Band in the 156 MHz range
> being an exception), I would be interested in hearing about it.

There's no intrinsic reason for using one form of naming over another.

However, note that _if_ you assign "channel numbers" to specific
frequency allocations, you are *permanently* fixing the utilization of
that chunk of RF spectrum.  e.g. in going from 15khz deviation to 5khz
deviation on FM, you'd have to either completely 're-number'
everything, or you have non- consecutive "channel numbers" as you go
up the band.

When you (the regulatory authority) "haven't decided" what the minimum
allowable spacing between frequency assignments is, or even _if_ the
spacing between assignments will always be a multiple of that minimum
 -- it is *really* difficult to come up with a channel 'number'.

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This is an example of how someone
screwed up when the Citizens Band radio channels were numbered. CB is 
allocated the space between 26.965 kc and (originally) 27.255 kc. The
'channels' were 10 kc apart, and there were (originally) 23 channels. 
(Well, not originally, when there were 8 channels, but in later
years.) If you look at the difference between 27.255 and 26.965 as
divided in 10 kc increments you get more than 23. That's because the
FCC took three spaces in the middle and reserved them for use on 
garage door openers. So we had channel 22 as 27.225 and channel 23
a full 30 kc later, on 27.255. Then the FCC said they would expand the
CB area all the way up to 27.405, or 40 channels, although common
sense would imply actually 43 channels if you take 27.405 minus 26.965
at 10 kc increments. What the FCC did, in an effort to 'tidy up' that
discrepany was run the channels slightly out of order. After channel
22 (27.225) they created channel _24_ at 27.235, channel _25_ at 27.245,
then they had the (already existing) channel _23_ at 27.255 where it 
had always been, and then by 10 kc up to channel 40 at 27.405. Having
those two channels out of order in the frequency allocations did make
for some tricky programming of the 'gang switches' (revolving knobs
which select the channels).   PAT]

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

From: Tim@Backhome.org
Subject: Re: What Happened To Channel 1
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 05:37:38 -0800
Organization: Cox Communications


An NTSC analog "channel" is called such because it is allocated to AM video
and FM audio.

These channels will soon be just a part of television history as they are
phased out and replaced by the digital "channels."

Michael Quinn wrote:

> Along this line, and at the risk of perhaps being slightly OT, if anyone
> knows why television uses channels while radio uses frequencies (for the
> most part, that is,  the 88 channel) FM Marine Band in the 156 MHz range
> being an exception), I would be interested in hearing about it.

> Regards,

> Mike

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: On radio, there are also 'channels', as
> you point out for example in the FM Marine Band, also the Citizens
> Band has 'channels'. I think the difference is where 'frequencies'
> refers to a general range of spaces in the spectrum for general
> categories of service (radio or television), 'channels' further
> divides that group of frequencies into into specific allocations. For
> example, we say the 'eleven meter band' (of frequencies) is divided
> into forty channels. PAT]

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

From: Mark Crispin <MRC@CAC.Washington.EDU>
Subject: Re: 3 Verizon Phones - Throw Away or What?
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 14:21:37 -0800
Organization: Networks & Distributed Computing


On Wed, 16 Mar 2005, John Levine wrote:

> They're locked to Verizon's network, but VZ shouldn't
> care if someone else wants to use them on a different VZ account.

Verizon phones are not locked, and can be re-programmed for any CDMA 
network if that network will accept an "outside" phone (Sprint PCS, for 
example, will not).

If your Verizon phone requires a password to get into the 
programming/service menu, the password is 000000.

-- Mark --

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

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

From: Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net>
Subject: Re: 3 Verizon Phones - Throw Away or What?
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 20:49:44 -0800
Organization: Glorb Internet Services, http://www.glorb.com


Paintblot wrote:

> I'm permanently leaving the USA in a few weeks. I have a Verizon
> account with 3 telephones, 2 of which are almost new. These phones
> have 2 year contracts. When we leave, what should I do? I cannot take
> them back to Verizon, because all they'll want is the big dollar
> contract buyout, which I won't pay (let them attack my credit, who
> cares, I'm not coming back here). Sell the phones? Aren't they banned
> from continuing to work on the Verizon network, and locked into the
> Verizon network?  Just destroy them and throw them away?

Not locked to Verizon, unless they're prepay phones, but they may be
blacklisted from use on Verizon's network if you have no intention of
paying the bill.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: My personal advice, for whatever it is
> worth, is sell them for a few dollars each and get what you can out of
> them. If you know anyone you can generally trust, sell them a phone
> (for ten or twenty dollars?) with the understanding that _they_ can
> continue to pay the bill for the remainder of the contract (or until
> they get tired of paying the bill and/or the phone gets turned off, 
> whichever comes first. PAT]

The buyer has to be willing to take financial responsibility for the
account and has to pass Verizon's credit checks, etc., and fill out a
form accepting financial responsibility for that to happen.

What *I* am curious about is why Paintblot is refusing to pay the early 
termination fees.


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"

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The buyer of the phone sends in his
payment each month under Paintblot's name. Then, no credit check, etc
because at that point all the carrier cares about is getting the
money. Paintblot already passed their credit check, and as he noted,
he does not care what happens to his credit standing.  PAT]

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

From: David <FlyLikeAnEagle@United.Com>
Reply-To: FlyLikeAnEagle@United.Com
Subject: Re: Lifespan of a Desktop PC?
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 01:02:13 GMT


On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 16:24:27 UTC, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:

> Would anyone know what is the average/typical physical lifespan of a
> desktop PC?  That is, how many years do they run before components
> start failing?

I've seen batteries go bad after 5-10 years.  That takes very little
to fix.  Hard drives might fail after a few years if you buy the
common, cheap machines.  At work the monitors probably go next as they
can fade out.  You might then have a power supply problem.  The
motherboards and cards don't fail all that often.

All of my machines are still working.  I have an Apple ][ with
floppies and hard drives, a 286 24Mhz PC, 486 DX2-66Mhz PC, and a PIII
Xeon 500Mhz PC.  The PIII with its non-Windows GUI will outrun my 2Ghz
Windows 2000 machine at work.  I prefer to move drives to new machines
and copy the drives, or just leave them in the new machine.  I also
leave my machines on, but they have drives that are made for
continuous use.

My car mechanic has several Best Buy PCs at his shop and they are fine
after several years.  He usually runs out of space on his HD first.  A
UPS is also very helpful in keeping a PC physically healthy.
 
> When buying a new PC, how do people typically transfer the contents
> from the old PC hard drive to the new PC?  At work, people move stuff
> out onto the LAN server or move the old drive into the new box; but
> others say old drives are not compatible with new technology.  How do
> home users without a LAN handle it?

Buy your new PC.  If the new PC can't handle your old drives, just add
a card for that.  Install the old drive(s) in your new machine and
copy the data over.  When you're done just put the old PC back
together and erase it if you plan to get rid of it.

Another modern solution to the need for a LAN is just a CDR/W and
a pack of disks.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have here a Toshiba Satellite 220-CDS
> sine 1995. It started life as Win 95, has since been converted to Win-98
> (which I am sorry I did, really, it seems to be running a little
> slower than it did as a 95). But it _never_ freezes up, _never_ locks
> out; just sits there all day long as part of my network doing its
> thing, the same as it did as a 95. Is ten years a rather good life
> span? PAT]

David

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

From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi)
Subject: Re: Lifespan of a Desktop PC?
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 01:22:54 -0000
Organization: Widgets, Inc.


In article <telecom24.117.5@telecom-digest.org>,
<hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:

> Would anyone know what is the average/typical physical lifespan of a
> desktop PC?  That is, how many years do they run before components
> start failing?

"Way back when", disk drives were the most frequent point of failure.
They had expected lifetimes equivalent to a few years of continuous
operation.  For today's hard drives, the expected lifetimes are on the
order of 20-40 years.

Floppy drives are prone to go 'out of alignment' after a number of
years. This matters *only* if you are using floppies to transfer stuff
_between_ different machines.  An out-of-alignment drive can read
material written on _that_ drive w/o problems, although trying to read
those disks on a different machine, or reading disks from a different
machine _on_ the out- of-alignment drive, results in 'data error'
failure messages. How long it takes a drive to go out of alignment
depends on the quality of the drive construction, and the physical
abuse that the system containing it is subjected to.  It's usually
_much_ cheaper to replace the drive, than pay for the labor to have it
're-aligned'.

The 'electronics', assuming they make it past the 'infant mortality'
stage (the first 100 hours or so, of operation) are easily good for 20
years, and probably _much_ more.

> When buying a new PC, how do people typically transfer the contents
> from the old PC hard drive to the new PC?  At work, people move stuff
> out onto the LAN server or move the old drive into the new box; but
> others say old drives are not compatible with new technology.  How do
> home users without a LAN handle it?

If they can't do it themselves, they _pay_ somebody to do it.  <grin>

There are software tools that let you transfer via a serial port, or
parallel port, or even USB or Firewire, between two computers.

Drive 'compatibility' is pretty much a "non-issue".  *Very* old PCs
used, primarily, what were called MFM drives, Or sometimes a cousin
thereof, called RLL.  Newer generations -- meaning most 386/486 class
machines, and everything past that -- use what is called IDE.  IDE has
gone through a number of changes, adding higher-performance options to
the base technology.

You cannot use a MFM or RLL drive in a machine that has support only
for IDE drives.  HOWEVER, the earliest IDE drive _will_ work in the
most modern IDE machine.  And, if one is sufficiently determined to
use the 'antique' drive, it is usually possible to drop an appropriate
'controller' card into the newer machine to run it -- this approach
may not be viable if you have a machine with *only* PCI expansion
slots.

Then there is the issue of any software installed on the old drive.
If that drive was in a machine running a MS operating system that
includes the "Registry", most software will _not_ be usable if the
disk is simply installed in a new machine, nor if the software is
'copied' from the old machine to the new one.  Because the required
"Registry" settings are not propagated to the Registry on the new
system.  General practice is to 'reinstall software from the original
distribution media', then copy any _data_ files over.  It's a real
time-waster, but Microsoft doesn't think user's time has any
value. *snarl*

I've got _twenty-year-old_ PC equipment that's still running today.
One example being a "TI Business PRO 286" box.  I still use it because
I haven't found anything that can replace it, at an affordable price.
Notably because it has *fourteen*(!!) usable expansion slots in it.
And I've got them _all_ full with various specialized goodies.  It
would take at least 3 'semi-modern' machines to provide the same
number of 'usable' expansion slots.

Well, maybe not.  I just saw an ad for an odds-and-ends dealer, that
has a 14 slot rack-mount box, with a 486 processor card, for about
$300.  That's a *LOT* of money for a 486 box, though.  <grin>

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

Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 22:28:50 +0000
From: Peter R Cook <PCook@wisty.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Lifespan of a Desktop PC?
Organization: Personal


In message <telecom24.117.5@telecom-digest.org>, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com 
writes:

> Would anyone know what is the average/typical physical lifespan of a
> desktop PC?  That is, how many years do they run before components
> start failing?

> When buying a new PC, how do people typically transfer the contents
> from the old PC hard drive to the new PC?  At work, people move stuff
> out onto the LAN server or move the old drive into the new box; but
> others say old drives are not compatible with new technology.  How do
> home users without a LAN handle it?

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have here a Toshiba Satellite 220-CDS
> since 1995. It started life as Win 95, has since been converted to Win-98
> (which I am sorry I did, really, it seems to be running a little
> slower than it did as a 95). But it _never_ freezes up, _never_ locks
> out; just sits there all day long as part of my network doing its
> thing, the same as it did as a 95. Is ten years a rather good life
> span? PAT]

Define a desktop PC. Which bits count? My machines evolve rather than
get replaced.

I am typing this on a machine that I put together at the end of 1999
The case, memory and display were new, the motherboard was second-hand
(so probably started life in 1997/8). The processors were upgraded (to
a set of second-hand 1Ghz units) at the end of 2001. The disks have
been regularly upgraded and added to . The latest upgrade (this month)
is a USB2 card (see off-line backup below) for speed.

When transferring "stuff" from one machine to another I have always used 
as "crossover LAN cable" to connect one to the other -- its a long time 
since I saw a machine without an ethernet port!

Easiest way to do the transfer is probably to "restore" your off-line
backup to the new machine - you do _have_ a backup of all the stuff
you might want to transfer (i.e. not loose) don't you?

Best bet today is probably to get a USB hard drive enclosure (US$35?), 
pull the old drive and drop it into the box. Two benefits.
      You can transfer the stuff easily.
      You now have an off-line backup that you can keep up to date.

Peter R Cook


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have two older IBM Think Pad 770 
machines. One with a working CD Drive, the other without. I wanted to 
put them both on Win 98. What I did was get the one machine up and
running with Win 98, then I swapped hard drives (put the one with no
associated CD drive into the machine that did have a CD drive.) Then
I used the Win 98 update CD to load Win 98 on the other hard drive.
Once Win 98 was working on that hard drive as well, then I swapped 
the hard drive back to the other machine. Now I have Win 98  on both
machines.  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 #118
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Mar 17 13:01:54 2005
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j2HI1rc16085;
	Thu, 17 Mar 2005 13:01:54 -0500 (EST)
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 13:01:54 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200503171801.j2HI1rc16085@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 #119

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 17 Mar 2005 13:02:00 EST    Volume 24 : Issue 119

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Does AOL Treat Trillian Messages Differently? (sreelatha@hotmail.com)   
    Re: Hosting Content on Zombie Computer Networks (Robert Bonomi)
    Re: Hosting Content on Zombie Computer Networks (John Levine)
    Re: Lifespan of a Desktop PC? (Justin Time)
    Re: Lifespan of a Desktop PC? (Al Dykes)
    Re: Los Angeles Times: Low-Tech Methods Used in Data Theft (D. Garland)
    Re: Los Angeles Times: Low-Tech Methods Used in Data Theft (C Griswold)
    Re: Former WorldCom CEO Guilty on All Counts (Dean)
    Re: The Lost Lessons of the 1920s and 1930s (Jim Haynes)
    Re: Iridium II: Is Satellite Radio Doomed? (John Levine)
    Re: Rep. Fred Upton Apparently Sold Out to Incumbent Telcos (R Collinge)
    Re: Attacked by a Dog Which was Playing (Fred Atkinson)
    Re: Attacked by a Dog Which was Playing (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.  

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

From: nagu <sreelatha@hotmail.com>
Subject: Does AOL Treat Trillian Messages Differently?
Date: 17 Mar 2005 08:21:11 -0800


This is weird.  AOL client pops up a new message window to the
foreground when a new message arrives. But if it is a new message from
a Trillian client, the new msg window is created but not brought to
the foreground.

My colleague had term-serv'ed into another machine and was using it in
full screen mode. A msg from a trillian user wasn't pushed to the
foreground. But a msg from a AIM client was pushed to the foreground.
He uses AOL client. Has anyone seen this behavior?

All the reference is to a new msg-new window. Not a new msg in an older
window.

Sreelatha

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

From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi)
Subject: Re: Hosting Content on Zombie Computer Networks
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 22:46:00 -0000
Organization: Widgets, Inc.


In article <telecom24.117.8@telecom-digest.org>, Gareth Morrissey
<garethmorrissey@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Would it be possible to host content on zombie computer networks (like
> those used to send out spam)?

> Is anybody doing this currently?

Yes, and yes.   Sometimes actual 'hosting' is on the zombie, sometimes just
a 'transparent proxy' that forwards to the "real" content holder.

You can even find nameservers running on zombied machines.

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

Date: 16 Mar 2005 22:58:57 -0000
From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
Subject: Re: Hosting Content on Zombie Computer Networks
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


> Would it be possible to host content on zombie computer networks (like
> those used to send out spam)?

Yes.

> Is anybody doing this currently?

Yes.

> The next wave of p2p program? Solves the free rider problem??

I doubt it.  The next wave of online fraud, perhaps.

R's,

John

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

From: Justin Time <a_user2000@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Lifespan of a Desktop PC?
Date: 17 Mar 2005 08:12:08 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


The lifespan of the average PC is almost impossible to measure.  Our
moderator states he has one that has been in use for the past 10
years.  In our office here are some that are between 6 and 7 years old
with some about 2 years old.

But the question also asked about when you could expect the components
to start failing.  That is a more difficult question to answer.  The
two things that are most likely to fail first are the CRT monitor and
the hard drive.  The monitor because the phosphor will become etched
or the electron gun will become less able to provide enough excitation
to drive the screen to its desired brightness.

The hard drive will fail because of mechanical motion, either the
actuator that moves the heads across the surface of the disk or the
motor that spins the disk.  Those are two of the most common failures.
The other common failure would be one of the electronic components
such as an integrated circuit or driver transistor.  These usually
fail because of heat.  If the case fan fails, then the operating
temperature climbs and for every 10 degrees Celcius (about 18 degrees
F) the junction temperature rises in a transistor, its life is cut in
half.  If an IC is spec'd to run say 40,000 hours at 30 degrees C (86
F), then if the temperature climbs to 40 C (104 F), the life span is
now 20,000 hours.

This also assumes the IC is powered on for the full time and the
operating temperature can be maintained.  What is not counted is
thermal shock, the almost instantaneous heating when electricity
begins to flow.  The buildup of dust and dirt in a computer case also
adds to thermal stress as the dust and dirt inhibit the flow of
cooling air and act as insulation to keep the heat in the unit.
Opening the case at least yearly and running a vacuum inside is one
method of reducing this problem.  You may also want to use compressed
air, or even the exhaust of the vacuum cleaner to blow out any dust or
dirt the suction misses.

So, how long will a computer last before it fails mechanically?  It
depends on the environment.  Used for only a couple of hours a day and
properly maintained, almost indefinitely.  I'd worry more about my
software.  But if a computer is turned on and left running behind the
closed door of a cabinent and not checked and cleaned regularly, then
maybe 8 or 9 years if you are fortunate.

Rodgers Platt

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

From: adykes@panix.com (Al Dykes)
Subject: Re: Lifespan of a Desktop PC?
Date: 17 Mar 2005 11:12:16 -0500
Organization: PANIX -- Public Access Networks Corp.


In article <telecom24.118.19@telecom-digest.org>, Peter R Cook
<PCook@wisty.demon.co.uk> wrote:

> In message <telecom24.117.5@telecom-digest.org>, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com 
> writes:

>> Would anyone know what is the average/typical physical lifespan of a
>> desktop PC?  That is, how many years do they run before components
>> start failing?

>> When buying a new PC, how do people typically transfer the contents
>> from the old PC hard drive to the new PC?  At work, people move stuff
>> out onto the LAN server or move the old drive into the new box; but
>> others say old drives are not compatible with new technology.  How do
>> home users without a LAN handle it?

>> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have here a Toshiba Satellite 220-CDS
>> since 1995. It started life as Win 95, has since been converted to Win-98
>> (which I am sorry I did, really, it seems to be running a little
>> slower than it did as a 95). But it _never_ freezes up, _never_ locks
>> out; just sits there all day long as part of my network doing its
>> thing, the same as it did as a 95. Is ten years a rather good life
>> span? PAT]

> Define a desktop PC. Which bits count? My machines evolve rather than
> get replaced.

> I am typing this on a machine that I put together at the end of 1999
> The case, memory and display were new, the motherboard was second-hand
> (so probably started life in 1997/8). The processors were upgraded (to
> a set of second-hand 1Ghz units) at the end of 2001. The disks have
> been regularly upgraded and added to . The latest upgrade (this month)
> is a USB2 card (see off-line backup below) for speed.

> When transferring "stuff" from one machine to another I have always used 
> as "crossover LAN cable" to connect one to the other -- its a long time 
> since I saw a machine without an ethernet port!

> Easiest way to do the transfer is probably to "restore" your off-line
> backup to the new machine - you do _have_ a backup of all the stuff
> you might want to transfer (i.e. not loose) don't you?

> Best bet today is probably to get a USB hard drive enclosure (US$35?), 
> pull the old drive and drop it into the box. Two benefits.
>      You can transfer the stuff easily.
>      You now have an off-line backup that you can keep up to date.

> Peter R Cook

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have two older IBM Think Pad 770 
> machines. One with a working CD Drive, the other without. I wanted to 
> put them both on Win 98. What I did was get the one machine up and
> running with Win 98, then I swapped hard drives (put the one with no
> associated CD drive into the machine that did have a CD drive.) Then
> I used the Win 98 update CD to load Win 98 on the other hard drive.
> Once Win 98 was working on that hard drive as well, then I swapped 
> the hard drive back to the other machine. Now I have Win 98  on both
> machines.  PAT]

IME the upgrade decision is forced when a Windows98 machine catches a
virus or spyware that can't be removed, or could be only if the owner
had the W/98 distro CD. The hardware is fine.  The system needs a
fresh install and patches and it will be amazing who much better the
machine will work.  This can happen to perfectly usable mid-range
hardware. Depending on the type of advice the user is getting, it
could mean just buying a w/98 CD, somewhere and doing a fresh
installation (a new big disk and a memory chip as upgrade should cost
less than $100) or opening up the wallet to Dell and buying much more
machine than the user really needs.

I've seen donated P-III 700 machines.

Users lose the CDs and registration information.  

For recent (XP) machines I predict the same thing will happen but XP
is much more robust so it will take disk crash or killer virus to
force a new purchase.


a d y k e s @ p a n i x . c o m 

Don't blame me. I voted for Gore.

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

From: Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com>
Subject: Re: Los Angeles Times: Low-Tech Methods Used in Data Theft
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 17:20:36 -0600
Organization: Wizard Information


It was a dark and stormy night when hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:

> If it were up to me:

> 1) Their own credit report would be free to consumers.

In the US, this part is already true, sort of, partially.  If you are
turned down for credit, the place that turned you down must tell you
the company that issued the report, and the credit bureau must give
you a free copy.

You are entitled to a free report annually from each of the "big 3"
agencies (TransUnion, Experian, Equifax) by going to
http://www.annualcreditreport.com/.  You can get them all at the same
time, but you don't have to (usually it would be a better idea to
space them out throughout the year).  This isn't entirely in place
yet, it's being rolled out geographically, it works for people in the
West and Midwest now, the South will be added in June, the East in
September.

The reports do indicate when companies got reports on you.  It's a lot
more frequent than most people would think.  But it's (maybe a long
time) after the fact that you find out.  It's still very easy for
unscrupulous individuals to get access to these reports.  And this law
doesn't cover sleaze like ChoicePoint.

Of course, that's just a start.  They still claim they aren't
responsible for damages to you that might be caused by their sale of
incorrect or untrue information.  Judging by ChoicePoint's case, there
doesn't seem to be any penalty (except bad publicity, if it becomes
public) for negligent handling of your data.  And going by reports, it
is still very difficult for the consumer to get corrections made.

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

From: Clark W. Griswold, Jr. <spamtrap100@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Los Angeles Times: Low-Tech Methods Used in Data Theft
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 17:45:28 -0700
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com


hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:

> 1) Their own credit report would be free to consumers.

It is. www.annualcreditreport.com From all three major agencies.

> 2) When any time seriously adverse information is posted
> to a person's file, the credit company would be required
> to notify the person and allow time for a response.  The
> consumer should be able to challenge such adverse information
> and the burden of proof to be on the reporter, without any risk
> or penalty or cost to the individual person.

Consumers have been able to challenge adverse entries in their reports
for years. Reporting companies are required to investigate and remove
said item if it can't be substantiated. Furthermore, the consumer is
required to be told when a credit report was used to as a basis of an
adverse decision and is entitled to request a copy of that report,
even if they have their free annual report allowance used already.

> 3) Any time a business requests credit info the consumer is to be
>    notified.

Its already recorded and shows up the free annual report. 

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

From: Dean <cjmebox-telecomdigest@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Former WorldCom CEO Guilty on All Counts
Date: 16 Mar 2005 14:32:32 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:

> Lisa Minter wrote:

>> A federal jury in Manhattan returned guilty verdicts on all nine
>> counts, including securities fraud, conspiracy and lying to
>> regulators; a decision that could send Ebbers, 63, to prison for the
>> rest of his life. Sentencing was set for June 13.

> Does anybody out there think he -- or others convicted in stock fraud
>  -- got a raw deal?

You're kidding right? This _is_ a rhetorical question isn't it?

-Dean

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think, technically, his prison
sentence could be for 85 years, if the court decided to give him
(what shall I say?) full value for his dollar. Obviously he would 
not live long enough to fulfill his obligation. I think in actual
practice the court will probably give him 5-10 years, and considering
his health -- not that great -- that may be all he 'needs'. I know
that in this column yesterday, or day before, I said something about
him getting the essence of a life sentence, but as I think about it 
now, I think almost all prison sentences are far, far too long. I 
think an 'ideal' -- if that is a good term -- prison sentence would be
one or two years, max. After all, if a person does not know what
prison is about the day he enters one, I doubt he will know any more
about it ten or fifteen years later. And if people are _serious_ about
rehabilitation efforts, then the prisoner has to be discharged while
there is still some time to engage him in rehabilitation. The speed
with which our society and technical world is changing, a person 
getting out of prison after ten or twenty years is never going to be
able to catch up. And if a person commits a crime which is *that*
atrocious as to deserve a fifty or seventy year prison sentence, my
suggestion would be to offer the person the option of a death penalty
instead; his choice. PAT]

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

Subject: Re: The Lost Lessons of the 1920s and 1930s
Reply-To: jhaynes@alumni.uark.edu
Organization: University of Arkansas Alumni
From: haynes@alumni.uark.edu (Jim Haynes)
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 00:11:47 GMT


Yes, and people like to ignore the fact that the regulated industries
we had got regulated because of the misdeeds of the operators before
they were regulated.


jhhaynes at earthlink dot net

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

Date: 17 Mar 2005 04:11:54 -0000
From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
Subject: Re: Iridium II: Is Satellite Radio Doomed?
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


> When the original Iridium was being drawn up on the planning boards,
> the accountants went over the numbers very meticulously. ...

> But the telecom industry changed between the drawing board and launch
> pad.  Inconvenient bulky mobile-telephone receivers were replaced by
> dinky little cellphones.  Cellphone companies built out their coverage
> area to include almost all potential customers in the 1st world.  And
> cellphone and long distance rates plummeted due to competition.

Part of their mistake was to underestimate how fast cellular would
develop, which suprised just about everyone, but an equally big part
was to disregard what pricing was due to technology and what to
politics.

Actually, long distance rates plummeted more due to regulatory changes
and fiber optics than to competition.  For the past century long
distance had been deliberately overpriced to subsidize local service
and (in places with PTTs) other bits of government bureaucracy.  The
mistake there was not to realize that with a stroke of a pen those
subsidies could be and were removed, which is the main reason that a
call from the US to the UK or Hong Kong now costs 2 cpm rather than a
dollar.

> Things change.  A lot of satellite radio's target households have
> broadband and can get "internet radio" now.

True, but unlike Iridium vs. cellular, satellite vs. internet radio is
not an apples to apples comparison.  With telephony, the question is
how you get a 3 KHz low-latency full duplex channel (not exactly, but
close enough) from one point to another.  Satellite really broadcasts,
but internet radio fakes it with a separate connection to each
recipient.  (There is real Internet multicasting but it's a pain to
set up and is only used in the geek community to broadcast IETF
meetings and the like.)  With broad, the question is how you get the
same one-way signal to lots of recipients.

This means that it's a question of scale.  With the current low
numbers of listeners, Internet has the edge as you note due to its
parasitic carriage.

> The car was supposed to be the last refuge of satellite radio that
> internet radio couldn't touch.  But 3G, WiFi, and WiMax are showing
> that it can be done.

Two-way radio spectrum is far from free.  3G definitely works, WiFi is
OK for short distances, WiMax is grossly oversold for other than fixed
point to point service.  They're swell for telephone and individual
data service but they're way too expensive for broadcast.  Back around
the turn of the century, there was what you might call telephone
radio, with concerts and the like sent over phone wires to large
numbers of listeners.  (It was really popular in Hungary for some
reason.)  As radio developed, radio blew it away because there was no
incremental cost per listener, and the phone wires could be used more
profitably for telephony.  If you use any Internet technology for
radio, you're in the same situation, using point-to-point bandwidth
for simulated broadcast.

If the total number of listeners to your station is small, in the
thousands, point-to-point looks good because of the low cost of entry.
But if satellite radio does what its backers hope, and has millions of
listeners per station, which is not implausible considering how many
listen to Howard Stern on normal broadcast, satellite wins big.

I think the real outcome will depend on questions like whether the
satellite radio stations are able to bribe car makers to install
receivers as standard equipment in cars so users need only call up and
subscribe, no installation or visible startup cost involved.  It'd be
like cell phones are now, using the equipment as a loss leader made up
from subscription revenue.  It looks to me like the incremental cost
of a Sirius or XM receiver and antenna would be about $100 which is
well within the range that cell plans subsidize.

R's,

John

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

From: R Collinge <rcollinge@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 22:12:27 -0600
Subject: Re: Rep. Fred Upton apparently sold out to incumbent telcos


Hi Jack,

Are you reading Rep Upton's comments correctly?  I had interpreted his
quote as something like, "It is scary that we were so close to
disaster, which could easily have happened if not for a few brave
commissioners and judges."  I read his thought as being that we need
federal regulation to keep the hungry states permanently at bay.

Also, I certainly agree with your point about international
competition holding the power of regulators in check.  FWIW, I
commented to the FCC on the Vonage petition back in November '03, and
think I mentioned it then, too.

Bob

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Jack Decker 
  To: MI-Telecom Mailing List ; VoIP News Mailing List 
  Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2005 8:09 PM
  Subject: [VoIP News] Rep. Fred Upton apparently sold out to
  incumbent  telcos
 

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Jack Decker *did say* in a later
message the same day (both original message and retraction were
printed here in the last issue) that there was a misunderstanding
in the way he interpreted the message.  PAT] 

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

From: Fred Atkinson <fatkinson@mishmash.com>
Subject: Re: Attacked by a Dog Which was Playing
Reply-To: fatkinson@mishmash.com
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 20:32:05 GMT
Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net


Pat, 

When I was a teenager, my family had an enormous German Shepherd.  Her
name was Heidi, she was approximately 125 pounds, all lean, strong as
a bull, and very protective of the family.  She grew to be so big that
we couldn't get a harness big enough to fit her from the local pet
store.  As my father was a director for the department of corrections,
we were able to ask the D.O.C. guard dog people who their supplier was
so we could special order a harness that would fit her.  Heidi was
huge.  Her father was a national tracking champion.

We had a couple of minor incidents with her, but we were patient and
taught her better.  When she was still a pup, I was scratching her
behind her ears while she was eating her dinner.  She turned and bit
at my arm (fortunately I drew back fast enough that she didn't bite
me).  I swatted her pretty good for that and took her dinner away.
After that, I could take the bowl away from her and she'd just beg
nicely to get it back.  Any of our family members could take the bowl
away from her (or take the food t of her mouth, for that matter) and
she'd not become aggressive with any of us.

When she was full grown, I came in late one night.  She apparently
didn't realize it was me and came running at me at the speed of a
rocket.  She reared on her hind legs and suddenly realized it was me.
She tried to stop, but 125 pounds of all lean dog coming at that speed
with her front paws five feet in the air wasn't going to be able to
stop in a few short feet.

Her nose hit me on the nose of my wire rim glasses.  The cut across my
nose was in a perfect line parallel to the nose bridge of my frames
(she didn't bite me, the glasses cut into my nose).  I had to go to
the hospital and have three stitches put in.  When I got home, she
followed me everywhere trying to make up with me.  I let her think she
was still in the 'dog house' with me for quite a while after that.
Hopefully, it would make her more careful in the future.

When she bounced off me, she turned and took off because she knew she
was in trouble.  She thought she'd lose me under the kitchen table,
but she thought wrong.  I was hopping mad at her.  I caught her and
gently swatted her nose to let her know she had really fouled up.

Years later, my sister brought my two then tiny little nieces over to
my parents' house when I was visiting there.  Melissa (my oldest
niece) had a strange idea about 'patting' dogs.  It was more like
hitting them.

I saw Melissa 'pat' Heidi out of the corner of my eye and saw
Heidi coming up to her feet.  I rushed towards the corner intending to
push Melissa out of the way and let Heidi bite me instead.  But I knew
I wasn't going to be able to get there quick enough.  

But the dog never growled, snapped, or even showed her teeth.  She
just got up, walked away, and as she walked away she let out a gentle
'woof' of protest.  She knew Melissa was family and it was not kosher
for her to harm Melissa in any way.  In fact, the behavior she always
exhibited around those two nieces of mine was always one of
protectiveness.  We subsequently gave Melissa 'patting' lessons.

Show the dog some patience and treat her with some love.  A big dog
like that is going to be clumsy.  But they are good protection.

When Heidi was still a pup, we were all asleep one night.  She was in
the front room barking.  My parents thought she was just exhibiting
normal behavior of a young pup and didn't even get out of bed to
check.

The next day, our across the street neighbor reported that burglars
had come through the neighborhood the night before.  The only houses
that weren't hit were ours, that neighbors, and the neighbors on
either side of our house.  Heidi was on the job, that was clear.  The
noise she made caused the burglars to bypass us altogether.

She had become a very loving animal when it came to our family.  She
was by far one of the best pets we ever had in spite of her size and
potential.

Good luck with the dog.  


Fred 

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thanks for your good words. Very oddly
(at least to me) Buffy very seldom barks. Now it is quite rare that we
have any burglars or other malfeasants in this area, however, Buffy
was always letting me know when the the garbage collection truck came
through the alley every Monday and Thursday morning. But now today,
she only jumped around a little -- because I was sitting on my back
porch when they came through. But she has never barked even once at
the Meals on Wheels guy when he brings in my dinner, or at the 
housekeeper nor my friends. She seems to understand that is okay, but
she sure was giving hell to the garbage collectors and the postman
each day. PAT]

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

From: SELLCOM Tech support <support@sellcom.com>
Subject: Re: Attacked by a Dog Which was Playing
Organization: www.sellcom.com
Reply-To: support@sellcom.com
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 05:56:22 GMT


ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick Townson) posted on that vast
internet thingie:

> Buffy was all excited and in trying to get out the door with me in
> it she knocked me down. I fell, banged up my own face pretty well,
> and chipped a tooth which was about gone anyway. Remember, she _is_
> a very big dog, weighing close to a hundred pounds

Well, I have read and found that it is a good idea to train a dog to
"stay" until you have gone out (or in) and then tell them to come.
You are the leader of the pack.

A puppy is a puppy and your puppy did not intend to harm you and
apparently was trying to please/obey you.

I am sorry to hear of your hurt and wish you a speedy recovery.  It
sounds like you have a loyal canine friend for many years.

You may wish to solicit a favor or two from any local dog trainer
(those people AMAZE me though I have had dogs for many years).

Regards,

Steve

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.  New www.electrictrains.biz

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: And thanks for your encouraging words
also. I am going to speak to Dr. Epp (veternarian) or the lady who
grooms pets (Buffy was taken to get a bath a couple days after she
first got here) and see if either of them can recommend a good dog
trainer. Maybe the animal shelter will know of someone.  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 #119
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Mar 18 06:26:26 2005
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j2IBQPw24732;
	Fri, 18 Mar 2005 06:26:26 -0500 (EST)
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 06:26:26 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200503181126.j2IBQPw24732@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 #120

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 18 Mar 2005 06:26:00 EST    Volume 24 : Issue 120

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Mobile Phone Porn Set for Sales Spike - Survey (Lisa Minter)
    Web Design Hampers Mobile Internet, Pioneer Says (Lisa Minter)
    EBay May Face Injunction in MercExchange Case (Lisa Minter)
    GAO Questions FCC Management of E-Rate Program (Lisa Minter)
    BC Warns its Alumni of Possible ID Theft After Computer Hack (M Solomon)
    Debit Card Fraud a Growing Problem (Monty Solomon)
    Can Somebody Please Explain CSD to Me? (bob@jfcl.com)
    Blackberry Enterprise Server Calendar Sharing (sollento)
    Kevin Martin Picked for FCC Chief (Telecom dailyLead from USTA)
    Third Time's No Charm (Eric Friedebach)
    FCC May Allow VOIP Access Charges (Jack Decker)
    AT&T Net Phone Disappoints (Jack Decker)
    Toll-free Number Service for Europe - I Need Information (Michael Av)
    Re: What Happened To Channel 1 (Paul Coxwell)
    Re: What Happened To Channel 1 (Tony P.)
    Re: What Happened To Channel 1 (Neal McLain)
    Re: Vonage Number Portability (John Levine)
    Re: Vonage Number Portability (Randal Hayes)
    Re: E-Mail Paranoia (Henry)
    Re: Lifespan of a Desktop PC? (Lisa Hancock)
    Re: Los Angeles Times: Low-Tech Methods Used in Data Theft (L Hancock)
    Re: Sending Ringtones via a Web Service (Joseph)
    Re: Iridium II: Is Satellite Radio Doomed? (delete the 'z' for address)
    Re: Attacked by a Dog Which was Playing (Hudson Leighton)
    Re: Attacked by a Dog Which was Playing (John McHarry)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Date: 17 Mar 2005 16:19:48 -0800
From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: Mobile Phone Porn Set for Sales Spike - Survey


AMSTERDAM (Reuters) - Mobile phone users around the world spent $400
million on pornographic pictures and video in 2004, an amount that is
expected to rise to $5 billion by 2010, despite the tiny screen sizes,
a survey found on Thursday.

The adult entertainment sector was one of the first media industries
to take advantage of the World Wide Web, and its customers were the
among the first to get high-speed Internet access for downloading
X-rated films.

In mobile communications, however, pornography might not do as well as
on the fixed-line Internet, because the screens are small and download
prices charged by telecoms operators are high, research group Strategy
Analytics said in a report.

"In 2010 we estimate that expenditure on mobile adult content will
represent just 5 percent of total end-user spend on mobile content
services," said analyst Nitesh Patel.

"We expect services that are built around sports, music and media to
perform better, because they appeal to a wider audience of users," he
added. In addition, there is value in offering news bulletins or a
recently scored goal on a mobile screen.

Still, the $5 billion in porn revenues by 2010 is $4 billion more than
Strategy Analytics had forecast until recently. It has upgraded its
estimates, because adult entertainment businesses are aggressively
building services, and customers are buying.  

Playboy and rival Private Media Group have geared up their offerings,
and many mobile phone makers are busy implementing strategies to make
sure no subscribers aged under 18 years will be able to access x-rated
services.

In addition, one in every two phones sold in 2005 had bright color
screens, which will rise to four out of five by 2010.

In the meantime, anecdotal evidence from countries that have a
technological edge shows interest from consumers. South Korea 's SK
Telecom (017670.KS) said in late 2003 that 23 percent of the traffic
over its higher speed mobile network was adult content.
 
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/Tech Tuesday.

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

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Who was it once who said here that the
internet of the 21st century consists of porn stuff and TELECOM Digest
mostly?  I know I get _so tired_ of zapping porn each day from my 
computers I am almost becoming numb from it. And I still say if you
actually want porn, you don't need to bother paying for it, just use 
the Porn Worm program I have announced here a couple times, start it
running, go off to bed, and when you wake up in the morning your
computer will be over run by it  ( http://porn-worm.us.tf ). The worm
never quits finding it until/unless you stop it. PAT]

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

Date: 17 Mar 2005 16:22:22 -0800
From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: Web Design Hampers Mobile Internet, Pioneer Says


By Daniel Frykholm

TAMPERE, Finland (Reuters) - A mass market exists for the mobile
Internet, but it will remain untapped until designers make simpler Web
pages that can be viewed properly on handsets, the inventor of the
World Wide Web said.

"(The mobile Internet) will be a huge enabler for the industry ... and
for big profits," Tim Berners-Lee told a seminar on Thursday on the
future of the Web.

"Web designers have learned to design for the visually impaired and
for other people. They will learn in a few years how to make Web sites
available for people with mobile devices too," he said.

Berners-Lee invented the Web in 1990 while working at European
particle-physics lab CERN in Geneva, trying to make it easier for
fellow scientists to share information and collaborate over the
Internet.

While his invention has revolutionized the way people across the globe
work and communicate, repeated attempts by mobile device makers and
operators to lure users with mobile Internet access have failed.

"Everyone was supposed to be browsing the Web with their mobile phone,
but the problem is that it has not happened," Berners-Lee said, adding
later this was not a question of weak demand.

"It is a chicken or egg thing, just like originally when the Web
became the Web. Nobody asked for Web clients or Web servers ... you
have to get enough people to understand the potential returns," he
told Reuters on the sidelines of the seminar.

Berners-Lee's original vision of the Web was as a resource for
collaboration. He said that so far it had been "a big disappointment"
in this respect, although exceptions such as "wikis" -- essentially
interactive online note pads -- showed its potential.

"Wikis in general are great examples of how people want to be creative
and not just suck in information," he told the seminar, pointing to
the online encyclopedia Wikipedia as the most advanced development in
this area.

Information on the Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org) can be edited
by the site's users. The Web page currently shows around 500,000
items.

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/Tech Tuesday.

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

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

Date: 17 Mar 2005 16:24:38 -0800
From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: EBay May Face Injunction in MercExchange Case


In a wide-ranging, 30-page ruling on Wednesday, the U.S.  Court of
Appeals for the Federal Circuit found one MercExchange patent invalid
but reversed a lower court's rejection of MercExchange's motion for a
permanent injunction.

A federal judge in 2003 ordered eBay to pay Virginia-based
MercExchange $29.5 million for infringing a trio of e-commerce patents
that MercExchange charged were key to eBay's "Buy it Now" feature that
handles fixed-price sales.

Such sales accounted for about 31 percent of the total value of goods
sold on eBay in the fourth quarter of last year.

That lower court also denied MercExchange's request for a permanent
injunction against eBay.

EBay had appealed the initial judgment and was allowed to suspend
payment to MercExchange during appeal.

"Each side can claim partial victory in the appeal," Dennis nCrouch, a
patent attorney at McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff in Chicago,
wrote in an e-mail to Reuters.

Attorneys for MercExchange said the judgment on the invalidated patent
was equal to $4.5 million, meaning that $25 million of the earlier
judgment was affirmed.

"In this case, the district court did not provide any persuasive
reason to believe this case is sufficiently exceptional to justify the
denial of a permanent injunction," the appeals court said in its
ruling.

"We're going to go back the district court and ask for the permanent
injunction and ask for an additional two years of damages,"
MercExchange lawyer Scott Robertson, a partner at Hunton & Williams,
told Reuters.

"We believe that any injunction that might be issued by the district
court with respect to the other patent will not have an impact on our
business because of changes we have made following the District
Court's original verdict," eBay said in a statement.

The Web marketplace said it was pleased with the appeals court's
decision to invalidate one of MercExchange's patent, and as a result,
the related damages.

"We are confident in our position against MercExchange and do not
believe that these matters will have any impact on our business," said
eBay, which in 2003 booked a &#36;30 million charge related to the
lawsuit.

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office is reexamining the validity of
MercExchange's patents upon eBay's request, the company said. 

Crouch said the legal battle is far from over since the two other
patents in the suit will require more litigation in district court.

"There is only a small likelihood that eBay will allow its servers to
be shut-down rather than settle the case," Crouch said.

Shares of eBay, which finished down 59 cents to $36.48 on
the Nasdaq, slipped to $36.40 in after-hours trade.

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: 17 Mar 2005 16:26:48 -0800
From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: GAO Questions FCC Management of E-Rate Program


WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. communications regulators are not
effectively managing a $2.25 billion program to link schools and
libraries to the Internet, congressional investigators said on
Wednesday said in a new report.

The Government Accountability Office said the Federal Communications
Commission has been slow to respond to problems uncovered by auditors,
has not tracked the effectiveness of the program, and a backlog of
cases has been growing.

"We remain concerned that FCC has not done enough to proactively
manage and provide a framework of government accountability for the
multi-billion-dollar E-rate program," the new report said.

The FCC, Congress and prosecutors have been investigating waste, fraud
and abuse in the E-rate program, which subsidizes telecommunications
equipment and services for schools and libraries. Telephone carriers
fund the program by paying a percentage of their long-distance service
revenues.

The findings by the GAO prompted U.S. House Energy and Commerce
Committee Chairman Rep. Joe Barton to say he plans to push legislation
to overhaul the program.

"This committee has no choice but to develop legislation to scrap the
status quo and apply some common sense to the E-rate program," the
Texas Republican said in a statement. He did not elaborate on what the
legislation would include.

Barton pointed to $101.2 million in funds that were disbursed between
1998 and 2001 to provide schools in Puerto Rico with high-speed
Internet access, but a warehouse full of unopened boxes of equipment
was discovered and few schools connected.

"We look forward to continuing to work with GAO to improve our
processes," Jeffrey Carlisle, head of the FCC's wireline bureau, said
in testimony to Barton's committee. "We are continuing existing and
have initiated new measures to address issues identified by the GAO."

The GAO urged the FCC to establish performance goals and measures,
take steps to reduce the backlog of appeals and determine all of the
federal accounting requirements that apply to the program.

Last year the FCC froze new commitments for a few months while it
determined how to account for funds it obligated to schools and
libraries on the government's balance sheets.
           
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: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 21:02:04 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: BC Warns its Alumni of Possible ID Theft After Computer is Hacked


By Hiawatha Bray, Globe Staff  |  March 17, 2005

Boston College has sent warning letters to 120,000 of its alumni,
after a computer containing their addresses and Social Security
numbers was hacked by an unknown intruder.

College officials say they have no reason to believe the intruder was
looking for personal information to steal; instead, the attacker
planted a program that would enable him to use the computer to launch
attacks on other machines. But the school is taking no chances,
because of the sensitive information stored on the computer.

http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2005/03/17/bc_warns_its_alumni_of_possible_id_theft_after_computer_is_hacked/

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

Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 22:16:08 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Debit Card Fraud a Growing Problem


By Beverley Wang, Associated Press Writer  |  March 17, 2005

CONCORD, N.H. -- The recent theft of thousands of dollars from people
who used their debit cards at a Manchester ATM is one type of identity
theft becoming more common as consumers increasingly rely on
electronic transactions.

The crime known as "card skimming" takes three steps:

Using scanners placed over ATM card slots, thieves steal account
information stored on a debit card's magnetic strip. A dummy number
pad, camera or stealthy glance over a customer's shoulder captures the
PIN. Those who know where to look can easily find Web sites that sell
blank magnetic cards and card-printing machines.

"It's a very popular type of crime these days," said Connie Stratton,
a senior assistant attorney general in New Hampshire's consumer
protection bureau. "Cards are simple to make," she said. "You can buy
bundles of cards on the Internet -- you can buy them with the
electronic strip on them, you can buy them with the strip not on them
-- there are a number of varieties."

In the most recent cases, two women who used a Bank of America ATM at
the T.J. Maxx plaza on Monday reported having money withdrawn without
their knowledge at a Saugus, Mass., ATM on Tuesday. One woman said
$4,500 was taken from her account, another said $1,900 was taken.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/new_hampshire/articles/2005/03/17/customer_account_info_stolen_from_atm_machine/

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

From: bob@jfcl.com
Subject: Can Somebody Please Explain CSD to Me?
Date: 17 Mar 2005 20:18:38 -0800


I live in San Jose (San Francisco Bay Area) and have Cingular GSM
service with a Nokia 6620 phone.  I'm told that with CSD I can use my
phone as a modem for my laptop and place a point-to-point data call to
my ISP.  Is that right?  Does my ISP need any special equipment to
receive this call, or does any regular dial up line suffice for the
destination?

What do I tell the Cingular sales people on the phone that I want to
buy?  They've never heard of CSD and want to sell me either Laptop
Connect or Media Net.  Media net is certainly not what I want, and
Laptop Connect is a) expensive and b) doesn't seem to work with my
VPN.

I know CSD is only 9600bps and not as fast as EDGE, but I can live
with that to save money.

Is this going to work when I travel around the US, or is this setup
unique to each little Cingular area?

Thanks in advance for the help.  I won't have any trouble setting up a
dialup connection on my PC, but I'm afraid I don't know very much
about cell phone technology.  Sadly, all the Cingular sales people
seem to know even less about it than I do!

Bob Armstrong

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

From: sollento <hani_ar@hotmail.com>
Subject: Blackberry Enterprise Server Calendar Sharing
Date: 17 Mar 2005 23:26:28 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


Hi,

I am looking for a solution / configuratuon to synchronise two BB
(version 4) devices with a blackberry enterprise server. The backend
email system is Lotus notes. The solution should work as a priority
over the air, and as a second priority with the cradle.

Basically, it's like having two devices synchronised with the same
calendar which will allow a secretary to view her boss' calendar on
the move, view any changes he's made, and vice versa.

Help would be greatly appreciated (Lotus notices replication, BES
feature, or third party product).

Thank you in advance.

H

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

Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 12:54:01 EST
From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA <usta@dailylead.com>
Subject: Kevin Martin Picked For FCC Chief


Telecom dailyLead from USTA
March 17, 2005
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=20137&l=2017006

TODAY'S HEADLINES

NEWS OF THE DAY
* Kevin Martin picked for FCC chief
BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH
* Qwest raises offer for MCI
* Sprint affiliates join forces
* Wireless companies see gold in home networking
* Adelphia picks Level 3 for VoIP
* Wireless execs discuss current, future trends in industry
USTA SPOTLIGHT 
* CenturyTel Executive Urges Congress to Update the Nation's Telecom Laws
* USTA Small Company Summit is Right Around the Corner! April 6 and 7 in Minneapolis
EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES
* NTL tests 18 mbps broadband lines
REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE
* Ebbers' lawyers plan appeal
* GAO: Overhaul E-rate program to stop fraud and abuse

Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others.
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=20137&l=2017006

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

From: Eric Friedebach <friedebach@yahoo.com>
Subject: Third Time's No Charm
Date: 17 Mar 2005 11:25:22 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


David M. Ewalt, 03.17.05, Forbes.com

NEW YORK - Benjamin Franklin once remarked that the definition of
insanity is repeating the same action over and over and expecting
different results. If that's true, then someone needs to fit Qwest
Communications International Chief Executive Richard Notebaert for a
straightjacket.

Wednesday night, Qwest submitted yet another bid to purchase MCI,
upping its offer to $8.45 billion in cash and stock, or about $26 per
share. The new offer is up significantly from the $8 billion Qwest
offered just over two weeks ago. The cash part of the deal was
increased to $10.50 a share from $9.10, with the stock terms unchanged
at $15.50.

This is the third offer Qwest has made, and it's likely to be the
third offer MCI will ignore. Last month, the company accepted an offer
from Verizon Communnications for $6.75 billion, or about $20.75 a
share, even though MCI CEO Michael Capellas and his board were well
aware that Qwest was willing to pony up more cash.

http://www.forbes.com/wireless/2005/03/17/cx_de_0317qwest.html


{Hey Pat, looks like you could use one of those pallets of dog food I
see at Sam's Club!}


Eric Friedebach
/An Apollo Sandwich from Corky & Lenny's/


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yes, I could use one, Eric. Right now
the monster is in _my_ bedroom, on _my_ bed, sound asleep. PAT]
   
------------------------------

From: Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@withheld on request>
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 14:42:46 -0500
Subject: FCC May Allow VOIP Access Charges


http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?doc_id=70369&site=lightreading

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is expected to deny a
forbearance petition that has kept VOIP providers from paying PSTN
access charges, just days before the Commission's March 22 deadline,
sources close to the Commission say.

When this happens, VOIP providers will be subject to access charges
for terminating their calls on other carrier networks. But all is not
lost for the VOIP crowd.

The FCC is expected to deny the forbearance request before Tuesday,
rather than let the deadline pass, sources say. But soon after, the
FCC may also order a rule change further exempting the VOIP carriers
from access charges. Either way, the resolution of the situation will
have very serious implications for the fledgling VOIP industry.

"I know there will be order of denial on the forbearance," says Staci
Pies, vice president of governmental and regulatory affairs at VOIP
provider PointOne Telecommunications.

"But because of the way they will deny it, following that will be an
additional order that will change the rules in such a way that Level 3
and others like them will be afforded relief," says Pies, who
worked at Level 3 when the petition was filed, and before that held an
office at the FCC in Washington.

"The commissioners understand that it doesn't make any sense to deny
the forbearance because the rules are substandard, and then not change
the rules," Pies says.

Background: The forbearance petition was filed a year ago by VOIP
provider Level 3 Communications Inc., and since then the VOIP industry
has watched for the Commission to grant or deny it, hoping all the
while that it would do neither as the deadline approached. If the
Commission did let the deadline pass, it would mean that VOIP carriers
would continue to be exempt from the access charges.

Outgoing chairman Michael Powell, in one of the last actions of his
term, has reportedly floated two possible responses to the Level 3
petition, sources close to the situation say. The first is an outright
denial of the forbearance petition, and the second is an 'interim'
rule change that would further protect Level 3 and others from the
access charges.

Telecom carriers, on the other hand, believe that the FCC will deny
the petition -- period.

Full story at:
http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?doc_id=70369&site=lightreading


How to Distribute VoIP Throughout a Home:
http://michigantelephone.mi.org/distribute.html

If you live in Michigan, subscribe to the MI-Telecom group:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MI-Telecom/

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

From: Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@withheld on request>
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 18:10:53 -0500
Subject: AT&T Net Phone Disappoints
Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com


http://news.com.com/ATT+Net+phone+disappoints/2100-7352_3-5623538.html

Published: March 17, 2005, 12:04 PM PST
By Ben Charny
Staff Writer, CNET News.com

AT&T's Internet phone service, CallVantage, had a paltry 53,000
subscribers at the end of 2004 -- a lesson in how millions of dollars in
marketing and a well-known brand name don't always guarantee success.

Full story at:
http://news.com.com/ATT+Net+phone+disappoints/2100-7352_3-5623538.html

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

From: Mikeavian@go2.pl (Michael Av)
Subject: Toll-Free Number Service For Europe - I Need Information
Date: 17 Mar 2005 12:58:20 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


I need to set up a toll-free number service for Europe which would
redirect calls to my cell phone in a Eastern European country -- can
somebody recommend me a company offering such services or a place for
further search?  (google.com is't too helpful)


Mikeavian

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

From: Paul Coxwell <paulcoxwell@tiscali.co.uk>
Subject: Re: What Happened To Channel 1
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 18:27:42 -0000


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This is an example of how someone
> screwed up when the Citizens Band radio channels were numbered. CB is
> allocated the space between 26.965 kc and (originally) 27.255 kc. The
> 'channels' were 10 kc apart, and there were (originally) 23 channels.
> (Well, not originally, when there were 8 channels, but in later
> years.) If you look at the difference between 27.255 and 26.965 as
> divided in 10 kc increments you get more than 23. That's because the
> FCC took three spaces in the middle and reserved them for use on
> garage door openers. So we had channel 22 as 27.225 and channel 23
> a full 30 kc later, on 27.255. Then the FCC said they would expand the
> CB area all the way up to 27.405, or 40 channels, although common
> sense would imply actually 43 channels if you take 27.405 minus 26.965
> at 10 kc increments. What the FCC did, in an effort to 'tidy up' that
> discrepany was run the channels slightly out of order. After channel
> 22 (27.225) they created channel _24_ at 27.235, channel _25_ at 27.245,
> then they had the (already existing) channel _23_ at 27.255 where it
> had always been, and then by 10 kc up to channel 40 at 27.405.

There were more than three gaps left in the channels for radio-control.
They are at:

26.995 (between channels 3 / 4)
27.045  (7 / 8)
27.095  (11/ 12)
27.145  (15 / 16)
27.195  (19 / 20)

then 27.235 and 27.245 as you say, which were later filled by channels
24 and 25.  In addition, 27.255 was shared between CB channel 23 and
the "blue" radio-control channel.

> Having those two channels out of order in the frequency allocations
> did make for some tricky programming of the 'gang switches'
> (revolving knobs which select the channels).  PAT]

It also resulted in some interesting switching modifications over here in
Britain as well, as when we finally got a legal CB allocation in the early
1980s it was just 40 channels running in straight 10kHz steps all the way
(27.60125 through 27.99125).   

I did quite a lot of EPROM burning to provide UK bands on export sets
20-odd years ago.

- Paul

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

From: Tony P. <kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net>
Subject: Re: What Happened To Channel 1
Organization: ATCC
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 21:31:50 -0500


In article <telecom24.118.13@telecom-digest.org>, bonomi@host122.r-
bonomi.com says:

> In article <telecom24.117.9@telecom-digest.org>, Michael Quinn
> <quinnm@bah.com> wrote:

>> Along this line, and at the risk of perhaps being slightly OT, if anyone
>> knows why television uses channels while radio uses frequencies (for the
>> most part, that is,  the 88 channel) FM Marine Band in the 156 MHz range
>> being an exception), I would be interested in hearing about it.

> There's no intrinsic reason for using one form of naming over another.

> However, note that _if_ you assign "channel numbers" to specific
> frequency allocations, you are *permanently* fixing the utilization of
> that chunk of RF spectrum.  e.g. in going from 15khz deviation to 5khz
> deviation on FM, you'd have to either completely 're-number'
> everything, or you have non- consecutive "channel numbers" as you go
> up the band.

> When you (the regulatory authority) "haven't decided" what the minimum
> allowable spacing between frequency assignments is, or even _if_ the
> spacing between assignments will always be a multiple of that minimum
>  -- it is *really* difficult to come up with a channel 'number'.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This is an example of how someone
> screwed up when the Citizens Band radio channels were numbered. CB is 
> allocated the space between 26.965 kc and (originally) 27.255 kc. The
> 'channels' were 10 kc apart, and there were (originally) 23 channels. 
> (Well, not originally, when there were 8 channels, but in later
> years.) If you look at the difference between 27.255 and 26.965 as
> divided in 10 kc increments you get more than 23. That's because the
> FCC took three spaces in the middle and reserved them for use on 
> garage door openers. So we had channel 22 as 27.225 and channel 23
> a full 30 kc later, on 27.255. Then the FCC said they would expand the
> CB area all the way up to 27.405, or 40 channels, although common
> sense would imply actually 43 channels if you take 27.405 minus 26.965
> at 10 kc increments. What the FCC did, in an effort to 'tidy up' that
> discrepany was run the channels slightly out of order. After channel
> 22 (27.225) they created channel _24_ at 27.235, channel _25_ at 27.245,
> then they had the (already existing) channel _23_ at 27.255 where it 
> had always been, and then by 10 kc up to channel 40 at 27.405. Having
> those two channels out of order in the frequency allocations did make
> for some tricky programming of the 'gang switches' (revolving knobs
> which select the channels).   PAT]

LOL - and then there were those who had the Siltronics sets. They used 
to be on 27.415 or Channel 41 as we called it. This was in the days 
before I got my amateur license. 

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

Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 22:17:54 -0600
From: Neal McLain <nmclain@annsgarden.com>
Subject: Re: What Happened To Channel 1?


davisdynasty83 <davisdynasty83@yahoo.com> asked [TD V24#116]:

> I've always wondered what happened to Channel 1 as a viable
> television channel. Is there a substantial reason behind this?
> I am very interested in this particular issue and if anyone
> could provide me with any information pertaining to this
> subject I would greatly apprecaite it.

An excellent narrative on this subject is "Whatever Happened To
Channel 1" by David A. Ferre (Radio-Electronics, March 1982,
43-46,89).  http://www.tvhistory.tv/1946%20RCA%20630TS%20TV.htm

PAT added the following comment:

> Now cable-ready television sets and channel one is a totally
> different matter.

Indeed.  Except for channels 2-13, cable TV channel-number assignments 
differ in frequency from same-number broadcast channel assignments.  A CATV 
Frequency Assignment chart is posted at 
http://www.annsgarden.com/telecom/CATV.html.  My previous post about Cable 
Channel 1 is at http://tinyurl.com/5uljg.

Michael Quinn <quinnm@bah.com> wrote [TD V24 #117]:

> Along this line, and at the risk of perhaps being slightly OT,
> if anyone knows why television uses channels while radio uses
> frequencies  (for the most part, that is,  the 88 channel) FM
> Marine Band in the 156 MHz range being an exception), I would
> be interested in hearing about it.

Historical accident, cultural inertia, administrative convenience, and 
commercial branding.

Back in the early days of radio (before Congress enacted the Radio Act
of 1927), broadcasting was a free-for-all.  Domestic frequency
assignments were made by the Department of Commerce on a more or less
first-come-first-served basis.  Many foreign governments didn't even
have a mechanism for assigning frequencies; some stations, operating
without (or ignoring) governmental authority, simply picked their own
frequencies.  Even the boundaries of specific "bands" (as we use the
term today) weren't uniformly defined.  Given the chaotic nature of
things, it's not surprising that the Commerce Department didn't assign
channel numbers.

The legacy of this chaos lives on to this day: we still use frequency
designations in the domestic AM broadcast band and the international
shortwave bands.

In order to impose some sort of order on the situation, Congress
enacted the Radio Act of 1927, creating the Federal Radio Commission.
A few years later, it enacted the Communications Act of 1934, which
created the Federal Communications Commission to replace the FRC.
Both commissions were charged with responsibility for managing the
radio spectrum.

Over the years, the FCC's frequency-assignment policies have evolved
into three patterns:

====== ASSIGNMENT by BAND ======

In some bands, the FCC simply assigns the entire band to a specific 
service, and leaves it up to licensees to assign specific frequencies 
within the band.  Examples of this policy include the amateur radio bands, 
the common-carrier satellite C- and Ku-bands, and the DBS bands.

====== ASSIGNMENT by FREQUENCY AS CHANNEL NUMBER ======

In some bands, the FCC assigns "channel" numbers to specific frequency 
blocks, but uses the center frequency of the block as the channel 
number.  Examples:

   Radio Control (R/C) Radio Service (47 CFR 95.207):
   http://kauko.hallikainen.org/FCC/FccRules/2005/95/207/

   Paging operation (47 CFR 22.531):
   http://kauko.hallikainen.org/FCC/FccRules/2005/22/531/

   And even domestic AM Broadcasting: many FCC rules now
   refer to AM "channels" instead of frequencies, even
   though the channel number and the center frequency are
   the same (47 CFR 73.25, -.26, and -.27).
   http://kauko.hallikainen.org/FCC/FccRules/2005/73/25/
   http://kauko.hallikainen.org/FCC/FccRules/2005/73/26/
   http://kauko.hallikainen.org/FCC/FccRules/2005/73/27/

====== ASSIGNMENT by ARBITRARY CHANNEL NUMBER ======

In some bands -- notably FM and TV broadcasting -- the FCC assigns 
arbitrary channel numbers.  These assignments are tabulated in the FCC 
Rules as follows:

   TV broadcasting (47 CFR 73.603):
   http://kauko.hallikainen.org/FCC/FccRules/2005/73/603/

   FM broadcasting (47 CFR 73.501):
   http://kauko.hallikainen.org/FCC/FccRules/2005/73/201/

One additional FM Channel (200, at 87.9 MHz) has been assigned since
the original assignments were made.  It overlaps TV Channel 6;
consequently, its use is limited to certain types of stations (see
footnote \1\ at 47 CFR 73.501).

Once the FCC finally established television channel assignments, the 
broadcast and receiver-manufacturing industries adopted them.

But these industries didn't adopt the FM channel assignments.  Why
not?  There's no single reason, but I suspect that it was largely a
matter of cultural inertia: broadcasters had been using AM frequency
designations for years, and they simply continued the practice with
FM.

Furthermore, even by the late 1940s, there was still a lot of
confusion about channel assignments (as the aforementioned article by
David Ferre makes clear).  Receiver manufacturers who had been
building FM radios (before channel assignments were finalized) had
been using frequency designations by default.  Apparently they just
continued doing so.

This legacy too lives on to this day: we still use channel numbers for
TV and frequency designations (albeit in megahertz rather than
megacycles) for FM.

Broadcast stations take these designations very seriously: they've
become commercial brand names.  AM and FM broadcast stations brand
their frequency designations, often with superficial (and
not-necessarily-accurate) descriptions: "Nifty Ninety" (really 900);
"Super 101" (really 101.3); etc.

Television stations brand their channel numbers: "Local 2";
"Virginia's 13"; "CBS-19"; etc.  As brand names, these numbers are so
important that many television stations don't even use their actual
call signs.  Stations even demand that CATV and DBS companies identify
them by their channel numbers, even though the actual RF frequencies
may be different.

Carrying this branding game to extreme, most television stations plan to 
continue using their old analog channel numbers as their DTV "channels," 
even if they move to new channels for DTV.  Receiver manufacturers have 
included mapping logic to display the old numbers.  Thus, for example, 
WISC-TV Channel 3 will become WISC-DT Channel 50, but receivers will 
display 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, etc. to identify the various video streams.

The FCC also assigns (or accepts ITU assignment of) arbitrary channel 
designations for certain non-broadcast services.  Examples:

   Citizens Band Radio Service (47 CFR 95.407):
   http://kauko.hallikainen.org/FCC/FccRules/2005/95/407/

   Television Broadcast Auxiliary Service [point-to-point
   microwave] (47 CFR 74.602): http://tinyurl.com/2k9d9

   Cable Television Relay Service [point-to-point
   microwave] (47 CFR 78.18):
   http://kauko.hallikainen.org/FCC/FccRules/2005/78/18/

   VHF Marine Channels (ITU RR Appendix S18):
   http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/marcomms/vhf.htm

Note that the VHF Marine Channels (as mentioned in Michael Quinn's post 
quoted above) were assigned by the ITU, not the FCC.  The FCC incorporates 
these assignments by reference.


Neal McLain

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

Date: 17 Mar 2005 20:59:01 -0000
From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
Subject: Re: Vonage Number Portability
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


> I put in our order, a week later, I get a note from ATT stating that
> they could not port my number, so I phone ATT. They tell me they
> cannot use number portability to transfer a number from Vonage, if I
> want to move my number to Callvantage, I'll need to port it back to
> SBC, then move it to ATT from SBC.

> Hmmm, now I've heard everything. Anyone know of a way around this BS ?

Try a different VoIP carrier.  I ported my number from Vonage to Lingo
last month with no trouble at all.

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

Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 12:09:28 -0600
From: Randal Hayes <randal.hayes@uni.edu>
Subject: Re: Vonage Number Portability


My guess is that very simply none of the VOIP providers have the
systems installed or capability to perform number portability, so it
has to be done in concert with an ILEC or CLEC which does have the
system and capability in place.

ILECs and CLECs put systems in place to be able to perform number
porting, and the FCC allowed them to recover their costs of doing so
via the Local Number Portability surcharge (which I believe is also
being used to produce some additional revenue, but that's another
discussion).  To my knowledge, none of the strictly VOIP providers
have these systems in place or plan to do so in the reasonable
future.

This brings-up a question for me regarding the efforts to have VOIP
providers be able to receive telephone numbers directly from the
NANPA, rather than having to get them from an ILEC or CLEC. I'm
presuming this would simply complicate the porting process, but then
again maybe it's just a matter of the procedure for porting numbers
from a VOIP provider requiring more steps in the process..

Randy Hayes
University of Northern Iowa

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

From: henry999@eircom.net (Henry)
Subject: Re: E-Mail Paranoia
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 21:57:52 +0200
Organization: Elisa Internet customer


Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com> wrote:

> I love the Toshiba laptop I bought last year. I keep just about
> everything related to work, school, and my finances on it. So when I
> received an e-mail from Toshiba etc.

Except _Lisa Minter_ didn't 'write' this, did she?

I got into this article and after a while started to think that it
wasn't really anything like the comments Lisa has written here before.
Then, at the end, I found

> Scott Spanbauer is a contributing editor for PC World He writes the
> monthly Internet Tips column.

which suggests that the entire article in fact is from PC World,
written by this Scott Spanbauer.

Looks like there was a (big?) lapse in attribution here.

I of course believe in Fair Use, etc., etc. I'm just saying that
perhaps we should have been notified of the source of this article at
the beginning, rather than at the end.

Cheers,

Henry


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, when the _original_ article
appeared, the attribution and fair use quotes were given.  But, when
the first response by a reader was printed, the problem so common 
occurred, which was that the person given in the header as 'From:'
(in this case and many others, Lisa Minter), the software did not
read the actual article and instead attributed it to Lisa Minter. 
Often times I catch that in the final editing and add a line at the
very top of the article saying 'TELECOM Digest Editor noted in
response to an article by X' since as often as not that happens to
my editor's notes. The responder wants to talk about what I said
rather than what the 'original writer' said. I probably should have 
been more careful to catch that. I've commented a couple times that I
am probably the only person to actually read every word in the Digest
each day, and that is only because I _have_ to; I am the editor. I
frankly only expect people to read the articles of especial interest
to them; not the other stuff. If I were not the editor here, I would
not read every word of it either. Anyway, please excuse the slipshod
editing.  PAT]

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

From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Subject: Re: Lifespan of a Desktop PC?
Date: 17 Mar 2005 12:53:27 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


Robert Bonomi wrote:

> Drive 'compatibility' is pretty much a "non-issue".  *Very* old PCs
> used, primarily, what were called MFM drives, Or sometimes a cousin
> thereof, called RLL.  Newer generations -- meaning most 386/486 class
> machines, and everything past that -- use what is called IDE.  IDE has
> gone through a number of changes, adding higher-performance options to
> the base technology.

My machine, a Pentium 120 (by HP) is from 1996, so I'm hopeful I could
just transfer over the hard-drive.  It would be easiest for me.

> Then there is the issue of any software installed on the old drive.
> If that drive was in a machine running a MS operating system that
> includes the "Registry", most software will _not_ be usable if the
> disk is simply installed in a new machine, nor if the software is
> 'copied' from the old machine to the new one.  Because the required
> "Registry" settings are not propagated to the Registry on the new
> system.

Hmmm.  My present machine is early Win95.  I don't think any of my
software would've used the registry when installed since they were for
either Windows 3.1 or plain DOS.  The DOS stuff was loaded by merely
copying the file off of a diskette.

I have some manufacturer's original source diskettes, but I really
don't want to load from scratch because I've made so many setting
changes and customization to various products.  For instance, I have
Word 6.0, and I want to continue using exactly as I have it.

Thanks for your help!

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: And don't, for one minute, buy into 
that Microsoft BS about how "this installation of (for example) Win 98
or Win 2000 will take about 45 minutes to an hour to install."  I have
never yet installed a new Microsoft OS in '45 minutes to an
hour'. Most of the time I start one evening, and several hours later,
completely nervous and upset set the thing aside until the next day
and then go back to continue my work after a good night's sleep. Of
course I have to install the networking components, etc as well.  PAT]

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

From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Subject: Re: Los Angeles Times: Low-Tech Methods Used in Data Theft
Date: 17 Mar 2005 13:05:01 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


Clark wrote:

> Consumers have been able to challenge adverse entries in their reports
> for years. Reporting companies are required to investigate and remove
> said item if it can't be substantiated. Furthermore, the consumer is
> required to be told when a credit report was used to as a basis of an
> adverse decision and is entitled to request a copy of that report,
> even if they have their free annual report allowance used already.

 From what I read in the newspapers, that protection doesn't
work very well in practice.  In other words, the consumer ends
up with the burden of proof to show the errors were indeed errors.

In real life, there can be gray areas.  For instance, suppose you have
an obligation but the company screws up your address and you never get
a bill.  They never get paid.  (This has happened to me.)  Since they
never were paid, they blackmark you.  I had a heck of a time proving
it was their error (they left my apt # off the address and the post
office returned it); further, they claimed it was still my
responsibility to get them payment no matter what.  I got it cleared
up, but it was very aggravating.

For victims of identity theft or outright fraud, it seems the
companies take their time investigating the problem, in the mean time,
the blackmarks are on your record.  It seems victims have to hire a
lawyer to push the companies to correct theft/fraud errors.  (I can
understand a credit company not wanting to writeoff thousands of
dollars of fraud charges, but that's shouldn't be the consumer's
problem.)


When I got my credit report, I discovered a lot of junk in it -- long
closed accounts listed as active or not responsive, stores long out of
business, bad addresses, etc.  For instance, I had a card with a store
that closed.  Unbeknowst to me, the successor store opened a new
account for me, but had my address badly wrong so I never knew an
account was out there.  There were no charges, but still lots of
bookeeping activity.  This was frightening since it showed how easily
errors can creep in or valid cards mailed to wrong places.

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

From: Joseph <JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Sending Ringtones via a Web Service
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 13:20:07 -0800
Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com


On 17 Mar 2005 03:53:24 -0800, absolutemcv
<absolutemcvicar@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:

> Does anyone know the process involved in sending ringtone's to mobile
> phoned via either a web service or other server based system?

Are you talking regular monophonic ring tones or polyphonic ring
tones?  In either case you go to a site that sends ring tones and
usually there's some sign up procedure.  They'll send the ring tone to
you (usually for a fee) and you'll receive it as an SMS.  When the
tone comes into your phone you'll have the opportunity to play the
tone and if you like it you'll then have the opportunity to save it.
There are also PC programs that will allow you to compose your own
ring tones and send them to your phone through either a cable or sent
over the air to your phone through your computer. 

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

From: Walter Dnes (delete 'z' to get my address) <wzaltdnes@waltdnes.org>
Subject: Re: Iridium II: Is Satellite Radio Doomed?
Date: 18 Mar 2005 02:44:20 GMT
Reply-To: see_my_sig_at_bottom_of_message@waltdnes.org


On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 19:15:10 -0500, Gene S Berkowitz,
<first.last@comcast.net> wrote:

>  In article <telecom24.116.6@telecom-digest.org>, Walter Dnes (delete the 
>  'z')<wzaltdnes@waltdnes.org>  says:

>  You have your bandwidth calculations all wrong.  The satellites (and
>  the US domestic "networks" only have two and three birds,
>  respectively) are continuously streaming all ~100 channels.  When you
>  make a net connection, you are consuming a large portion of you
>  available network bandwidth.  Should everyone on your neighborhood
>  subnet attempt this, you'll reach saturation.  The satellite broadcast
>  doesn't care if there's 1 or 1 billion receivers.

Internet multi-casting is the next step.  It isn't being used because
it isn't needed right now.  I can see it being adopted if/when
"regular" internet radio (and especially TV) starts straining the
system.  As it is, Bit-Torrent and other file-sharing programs are the
number 1 bandwidth user.

On 17 Mar 2005 04:11:54 -0000, John Levine, <johnl@iecc.com> wrote:

> Actually, long distance rates plummeted more due to regulatory
> changes and fiber optics than to competition.  For the past
> century long distance had been deliberately overpriced to subsidize
> local service and (in places with PTTs) other bits of government
> bureaucracy.  The mistake there was not to realize that with a
> stroke of a pen those subsidies could be and were removed, which
> is the main reason that a call from the US to the UK or Hong Kong
> now costs 2 cpm rather than a dollar.

Actually, satellites helped cut long distance rates in two ways:

   1) being cheaper than land (actually under the ocean) lines.

   2) you mentioned the subsidy factor.  Years ago, before deregulation,
      big companies would lease dedicated channels via satellite to
      carry internal phone traffic between widely separated offices
      (e.g. New York to LA).  This was cheaper than calling long
      distance during business hours.

> Satellite really broadcasts, but internet radio fakes it with a
> separate connection to each recipient.  (There is real Internet
> multicasting but it's a pain to set up and is only used in the geek
> community to broadcast IETF meetings and the like.)  With broad,
> the question is how you get the same one-way signal to lots of
> recipients.

> This means that it's a question of scale.  With the current low
> numbers of listeners, Internet has the edge as you note due to its
> parasitic carriage.

Once internet radio (and especially TV) becomes more than a minor
traffic blip, and overtakes Bit-Torrent and friends as the number 1
bandwidth user, multicasting will become more widespread.  As for
being a pain to set up, Windows is a pain to install.  Joe Sixpack may
not be able to do so, but his PC comes with Windows pre-installed.
Once PCs start coming with multi-cast reception enabled
out-of-the-box, it'll take off.

> I think the real outcome will depend on questions like whether the
> satellite radio stations are able to bribe car makers to install
> receivers as standard equipment in cars so users need only call up
> and subscribe, no installation or visible startup cost involved.
> It'd be like cell phones are now, using the equipment as a loss
> leader made up from subscription revenue.  It looks to me like the
> incremental cost of a Sirius or XM receiver and antenna would be
> about $100 which is well within the range that cell plans subsidize.

I don't think the subsidized-cellphone analogy is valid.  Verizon
etal, "subsidize" cellphones *ONLY FOR CUSTOMERS WHO ENTER A CELLPHONE
SERVICE CONTRACT*.  Subsidizing satellite-radio receivers on *ALL
CARS* in order to get subscribers from only a small percentage, is not
an economically viable business plan.

All it takes is for one car producer to not make it standard, and
they can undercut their competitors, who won't dare end up looking like
they're trying to ram it down customers' throats.  Look at FM radio.  It
had to be legislatively mandated into all car radios in many countries.
This is not going to happen with satellite radio.  There aren't any
"free" satellite radio stations and there isn't a generic satellite
radio reciever that will work with Sirius, XM, and all other competing
services.  I don't see governments mandating any one specific service in
all cars.


Walter Dnes; my email address is *ALMOST* like wzaltdnes@waltdnes.org
Delete the "z" to get my real address.  If that gets blocked, follow
the instructions at the end of the 550 message.

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

Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 14:08:16 -0600
From: hudsonl@skypoint.com (Hudson Leighton)
Subject: Re: Attacked by a Dog Which was Playing
Organization: MRRP


In article <telecom24.119.12@telecom-digest.org>,
fatkinson@mishmash.com wrote:

> Pat, 

> When I was a teenager, my family had an enormous German Shepherd.  Her
> name was Heidi, she was approximately 125 pounds, all lean, strong as
> a bull, and very protective of the family.  She grew to be so big that
> we couldn't get a harness big enough to fit her from the local pet
> store. 

A friend had a German Shepard who could have been Heidi's brother, He
was a great dog, on of my favorite memories was him laying on the
floor being mauled by a crawling baby, pulling, pooking, tugging
anything he could get his hands on, the only time the dog moved was
when a hand reached for a eye.

The same dog put a burglar in the hospital.


http://www.skypoint.com/~hudsonl

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

From: John McHarry <jmcharry@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Attacked by a Dog Which was Playing
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 00:31:11 GMT
Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thanks for your good words. Very oddly
> (at least to me) Buffy very seldom barks. Now it is quite rare that we
> have any burglars or other malfeasants in this area, however, Buffy
> was always letting me know when the the garbage collection truck came
> through the alley every Monday and Thursday morning.

Some wag remarked awhile back that, to a dog, garbage men are burglars
stealing all your best stuff. 

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

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 #120
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Mar 18 20:09:37 2005
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j2J19aJ01075;
	Fri, 18 Mar 2005 20:09:37 -0500 (EST)
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 20:09:37 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200503190109.j2J19aJ01075@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 #121

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 18 Mar 2005 20:07:00 EST    Volume 24 : Issue 121

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Cell Annoyance Calls (How to Handle?) (AES)
    Survey: SMS Takes Hold in U.S. (Telecom dailyLead from USTA ")
    After Years In The Dark, Utilities See The Light (Eric Friedebach)
    New FCC Chief Not So VoIP-Friendly (Jack Decker)
    Pressure Builds Over FCC's Level 3 VoIP Issue (Jack Decker)
    Inbound CAMA Capabable PC Card? (Tom Johnson)
    WTS NEC NEAX 2000 IVS (Adam)
    Re: Iridium II: Is Satellite Radio Doomed? (John Levine)
    Re: Iridium II: Is Satellite Radio Doomed? (J Kelly)
    Re: Toll-Free Number Service For Europe - I Need Information (Joseph)
    Re: What Happened To Channel 1 (Fred Atkinson)
    Re: Attacked by a Dog Which was Playing (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: AES <siegman@stanford.edu>
Subject: Cell Annoyance Calls (How to Handle?)
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 09:23:16 -0800
Organization: Stanford University


Been getting intermittent calls to my cellphone (Verizon 650 Area
Code) for some time now, once every few days, 2 rings, then
terminates.  Caller ID in most recent case shows 916-235-4999; earlier
ones were 916-???-?888.

If I try to call back on our SBC land line a voice says

   "This call cannot be completed:  Code NTI-20"

and then it turns into a busy signal.  So:

1)  What might this be?

2)  If I want to pursue it further, is there anyone or any organization 
I can query or hassle who will actually respond/potentially supply 
information or actually do something?  

In particular, any way (Internet or otherwise) to discover who is
associated with that number?

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

Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 12:55:05 EST
From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA <usta@dailylead.com>
Subject: March 18, 2005 - Survey: SMS takes hold in U.S.


Telecom dailyLead from USTA
March 18, 2005
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=20174&l=2017006

TODAY'S HEADLINES

NEWS OF THE DAY
* Survey: SMS takes hold in U.S.
BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH
* Qwest puts heat on MCI shareholders with raised offer
* Churn slowing for mobile phone companies
* Cox makes data, phone gains
USTA SPOTLIGHT 
* Telecom Engineering Conference at SUPERCOMM: Registration is Open
EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES
* Paris calling
VOIP DOWNLOAD
* Is VoIP mainstream?
* Spammers jump on VoIP bandwagon
* U.K. security guru warns of massive attack on enterprise VoIP networks
REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE
* Wireless industry may be headed for clash with states

Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others.
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=20174&l=2017006

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

From: Eric Friedebach <friedebach@yahoo.com>
Subject: After Years In The Dark, Utilities See The Light
Date: 18 Mar 2005 10:56:01 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


Lisa DiCarlo, 03.18.05, Forbes.com

NEW YORK - In February the New Millennium Research Council, a
Washington, D.C., policy group, pronounced that 2005 could be the
breakthrough year for a technology called broadband over power line,
or BPL, where utility companies use standard power lines to deliver
broadband connections to anyone with a power outlet.

It is compelling technology that could provide meaningful competition
to cable and to broadband service providers for digital subscriber
lines. But that might not even be the most interesting thing about
BPL.  What's groundbreaking is that utility companies are, for the
first time, using modern technology like BPL to automate critical
functions and manage their networks.

In most cases, there is little or no "intelligence" between an
electric substation and a power outlet. That means that utility
companies provide electric power pretty much the same way they did a
century ago.

But that's changing.

Several municipal and investor-owned utilities are deploying BPL
services to consumers to leverage their valuable infrastructure and
drive new revenue, but also to manage their networks. The result will
be better customer service, faster response to problems, lower costs
and better profit margins.

nIn Manassas, Va., the municipal utility is using BPL for tracking
power outages in real time, automated meter reading and remote
switching, even turning on Wi-Fi hot spots.

"We can use the [BPL] infrastructure to serve multiple purposes," says
John Hewa, director of utilities for the city of Manassas.

Those purposes could also include automated customer service, remote
monitoring and remote control of substations.

http://www.forbes.com/intelligentinfrastructure/2005/03/16/cx_ld_0317bpl.html

Eric Friedebach
/An Apollo Sandwich from Corky & Lenny's/

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

From: Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@withheld on request>
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 14:11:08 -0500
Subject: New FCC Chief Not So VoIP-Friendly


http://voxilla.com/voxstory151.html

New FCC Chief Not So VoIP-Friendly

Regulation

By CAROLYN SCHUK
for VOXILLA.COM

Kevin J. Martin, President Bush's appointee as Chair of the Federal
Communications Commission may not be as friendly to Voice over IP
service provider as Michael Powell, whom Martin replaces this week.

Martin, a 38-year-old attorney and FCC boardmember, clashed over
regulatory issues with Powell in the past, advocating, for example,
even greater government regulation in areas such as television
broadcast program content than his predecessor.

Unlike Powell, who espoused a 'hands-off' approach to government
regulation of the fledgling VoIP industry, Martin has said that all
providers using the public switched telephone network -- including
VoIP providers -- should contribute to the Universal Service Fund
(USF), an FCC-managed program to subsidize basic telephone services in
areas where the costs of offering such services are high, primarily
sparsely populated rural areas, and to provide telephone service
discounts to low-income consumers.

USF funds are not used for new technology or wider bandwidth, which
are needed for VoIP services. Instead, they finance only the most
basic twisted pair telephony. Critics suggest that if wireline
carriers were not subsidized they would be more likely to develop
alternative wireless services for their rural customers; something
they currently have no incentive to provide.

VoIP service providers do not directly contribute to the USF. And some
believe that requiring them to make such contributions, is in effect,
forcing new technology to subsidize old technology, or forcing new
providers to subsidize their legacy competition.

"We support the general principles behind the USF," said Ravi Sakaria,
CEO of VoIP service provider VoicePulse. "However, the bulk of USF
dollars go to traditional telecom infrastructure. It doesn't go in
fair share for broadband access. Because broadband is a requirement
for our services, we view this as funding competitive technology."

Martin made public his views on expanded USF contributions on at least
two separate occassions.

Full story at:
http://voxilla.com/voxstory151.html

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: As to whether or not Martin, as a 'Bush
appointee' will be friendly to VOIP, my observations to date have been
that Bush or his appointments are usually not very friendly to most of
us, for various reasons. I don't know why the FCC in its governance of 
VOIP should be any exception.   PAT]

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

From: Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@withheld on request>
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 17:32:17 -0500
Subject: Pressure Builds Over FCC's Level 3 VoIP Issue
Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com


COMMENT: For those that don't want to read the full story below, here'
a quick summary, seasoned with perhaps a hint of sarcasm:


Dear FCC:

[Whine] Please preserve our monopolies and let us continue to gouge
our customers, since there is almost no competition and we really love
being able to extract every last penny we can from them.  

[Whine] Please don't look at our filings with the SEC, or our
financial statements, or you might get the wrong idea and think we're
doing a whole lot better than we're telling you. 

[Whine] Please continue to give us all those subsidies we've grown so
accustomed to, after all we are corporations and the law says
corporations are like people in the eyes of the law, and if people can
get welfare from the government then we should get it too. 

[Whine] And please kill the evil VoIP companies, who are stealing our
slaves, er, customers, after all we have a God-given right to squeeze
them because their families have lived in our turf for ages and they
are too stupid to move out of our area.

Signed,
The rural (not necessarily small) telephone companies of the United States

P.S. And please, while you are at it, we want MORE.  [Whine]

End of admittedly snarky comment (hey, it's Friday), now here's the real story.

http://www.telecomweb.com/news/1111169709.htm

Pressure Builds Over FCC's Level 3 VoIP Issue

The House Rural Caucus and several trade organizations are making a
last ditch effort to get the Federal Communications Commission to deny
a Level 3 Communications request to exempt certain VoIP calls from
access charges. Under commission rules, Level 3's forbearance
petition not to apply access charges would require FCC action by this
Tuesday, March 22, otherwise by default the petition is considered
granted.

Since the matter is being cut this close, the House group recently
sent a letter to outgoing FCC chairman Michael Powell urging the Level
3 petition be denied, not only because of concerns for rural telco
revenues from access charges, but also the Rural Caucus maintained
that segments of VoIP, the broader proceeding on intercarrier
compensation (ICC) and many other related issues should be treated
comprehensively as a whole and not a in a piecemeal fashion.. A
central Level 3 question is whether VoIP calls should be subject to
reciprocal compensation or access charges.

The Rural Caucus move drew support from the Independent Telephone &
Telecommunications Alliance (ITTA), the National Telecommunications
Cooperative Association (NTCA), the Organization for the Promotion and
Advancement of Small Telecommunications Companies (OPASTCO), and the
Western Telecommunications Alliance (WTA). They lauded the Rural
Caucus for recognizing that a granting of Level 3's petition“
'would prejudge' many of the issues.

Full story at:
http://www.telecomweb.com/news/1111169709.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: Tom Johnson <Arkenor@gmail.com>
Subject: Inbound CAMA Capabable PC Card?
Date: 18 Mar 2005 12:09:34 -0800


I am looking for a card that supports analog CAMA trunks from a CO.
My understanding is that the card needs to support reverse battery for
wink-start and MF tone detection for CAMA compliance.  A PCI card
would be preferred, but at this point, might take anything that can be
hooked into a PC.

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

From: Adam <adamatcdr@yahoo.com>
Subject: WTS NEC NEAX 2000 IVS
Date: 18 Mar 2005 12:48:00 -0800


Hello, I have the NEC NEAX 2000 IVS phone system and I am looking for
offers.  This unit has these cards in it:

*PN-8DLCJ
*PN-8LCS
*PN-4COTB
*PN-2DATA
*PN-CP03
Also have these phones availible:

1x DTP-8D-1 (BK) TEL - used

1X DTP-32D-1 (BK) TEL - used

1X DTP-8-1 (BK) TEL - used

12X DTP-8-1 (BK) TEL - new in box

Please email me at Adamatcdr@yahoo.com if you have any questions or
are interested.

Thank you.

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

Date: 18 Mar 2005 17:05:33 -0000
From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
Subject: Re: Iridium II: Is Satellite Radio Doomed?
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


>>  doesn't care if there's 1 or 1 billion receivers.

> Internet multi-casting is the next step.  It isn't being used because
> it isn't needed right now. ...

and it never will be used.  More below.

>> Actually, long distance rates plummeted more due to regulatory
>> changes and fiber optics than to competition. ...

> Actually, satellites helped cut long distance rates in two ways:
>   1) being cheaper than land (actually under the ocean) lines.

That might have been true at the dawn of the satellite era when cables
were still coax.  These days, the TAT-14 cable has more capacity
across the Atlantic than all satellites combined, and that's not even
the fastest cable.

>   2) you mentioned the subsidy factor.  Years ago, before deregulation,
>      big companies would lease dedicated channels via satellite to
>      carry internal phone traffic between widely separated offices
>      (e.g. New York to LA).  This was cheaper than calling long
>      distance during business hours.

Well, sure, it was an arbitrage play since leased lines of any sort,
not just satellite, didn't pay into the access scheme.  This has
nothing to do with satellite, and just reinforces my point that the
high price was due to politics, not technology.

> Once internet radio (and especially TV) becomes more than a minor
> traffic blip, and overtakes Bit-Torrent and friends as the number 1
> bandwidth user, multicasting will become more widespread.  As for
> being a pain to set up, Windows is a pain to install.

Setting up multicast on a PC is not the problem; you can install a
program and be done with it.  The painful part of multicast is that
every router between the program source and each listener has to be
set up to pass on multicast traffic, perhaps with some IP-in-IP
tunnels between areas where multicast works, but the multicast must be
supported on the end user networks or there's no point.  If you think
that Comcast and Cox and Road Runner are going to provide multicast
for free to subsidize parasitic competition with their own cable radio
offerings, or Verizon or SBC are going to add anything that will make
it easier for people to compete with the always present chimera of
ADSL video-on-demand, I would like some of whatever you're smoking.  I
can see it in WiFi cybercafes, but that'll never be more than a tiny
niche market.

>> I think the real outcome will depend on questions like whether the
>> satellite radio stations are able to bribe car makers to install
>> receivers as standard equipment in cars ...

> etal, "subsidize" cellphones *ONLY FOR CUSTOMERS WHO ENTER A CELLPHONE
> SERVICE CONTRACT*.  Subsidizing satellite-radio receivers on *ALL
> CARS* in order to get subscribers from only a small percentage, is not
> an economically viable business plan.

> All it takes is for one car producer to not make it standard, and
> they can undercut their competitors, who won't dare end up looking like
> they're trying to ram it down customers' throats.

I realize that car companies have done stupid things in the past, but
why in the world would they want to provide satellite radios that
don't worj the satellite broadcasters?  XM or Sirius or maybe both
would pay car makers to put in receivers that can receive their stuff.
I suppose that in theory GM could try to invent their own proprietary
sat rad network (don't they still own Hughes satellite?) but I don't
see them heading down that rat hole.

It doesn't have to happen to every car right away.  I would expect
them to start with high-end brands whose owners would be more likely
to subscribe, and to provide a few months for free to get them used to
it.

R's,

John

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

From: J Kelly <jkelly@*newsguy.com>
Subject: Re: Iridium II: Is Satellite Radio Doomed?
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 15:34:42 -0600
Organization: http://newsguy.com
Reply-To: jkelly@*newsguy.com


On 18 Mar 2005 02:44:20 GMT, Walter Dnes (delete 'z' to get my
address) <wzaltdnes@waltdnes.org> wrote:

> I don't think the subsidized-cellphone analogy is valid.  Verizon
> etal, "subsidize" cellphones *ONLY FOR CUSTOMERS WHO ENTER A CELLPHONE
> SERVICE CONTRACT*.  Subsidizing satellite-radio receivers on *ALL
> CARS* in order to get subscribers from only a small percentage, is not
> an economically viable business plan.

> All it takes is for one car producer to not make it standard, and
> they can undercut their competitors, who won't dare end up looking like
> they're trying to ram it down customers' throats.  

Many GM cars already come standard with XM Radio.  

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

From: Joseph <JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Toll-Free Number Service For Europe - I Need Information
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 06:00:57 -0800
Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com


On 17 Mar 2005 12:58:20 -0800, Mikeavian@go2.pl (Michael Av) wrote:

> I need to set up a toll-free number service for Europe which would
> redirect calls to my cell phone in a Eastern European country -- can
> somebody recommend me a company offering such services or a place for
> further search?  (google.com is't too helpful)

Try Kall8

http://www.kall8.com/international_tollfree.html 

Freephone numbers in the UK, France, the Netherlands, Spain and
Germany.  

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

From: Fred Atkinson <fatkinson@mishmash.com>
Subject: Re: What Happened To Channel 1
Reply-To: fatkinson@mishmash.com
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 15:11:26 GMT
Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net


> LOL - and then there were those who had the Siltronics sets. They used 
> to be on 27.415 or Channel 41 as we called it. This was in the days 
> before I got my amateur license. 

When the FCC was preparing to open the additional seventeen channels
for CB, the CBers were already using the new channels with those
Siltronics sets and other illegal units.  In fact, I had one of those
folks confront me at work and brag about how he used his 'slider' (CB
slang for a VFO) to go outside the bands allocated for CB.  He said
they were even thinking of going up on the 10 meter amateur radio
band.  It was disgusting to see someone who cared absolutely nothing
about encroaching on other services and breaking radio laws and
treaties.

When I was out doing radio maintenance for the company two-way
radio system, a CBer asked my working buddy (Jerry) to use our watt
meter to check the power output on his radio.  I generally refused
such requests because if we did it for everyone, it would encroach on
company time and make it more difficult for us to meet our objectives.
But, Jerry said he would loan our wattmeter to the guy.  He told him
to use the reverse scale on the wattmeter because that was the only
way our wattmeter was going to read something as low as four watts.

The guy came back and talked Jerry into coming over and doing it for
him as he said the meter was full scale.  When Jerry did this, he
discovered that the CB radio in this guy's truck was putting out
nearly two hundred watts.  That was the last time Jerry ever
volunteered our equipment or agreed to help someone with Citizen's
band equipment.  

There was such a huge amount of misinformation running around
among the CBers.  I couldn't believe some of the things they would say
and I can't imagine where they were getting information like that.  

For example, another one of our radio technicians (Ed) saw a
fellow at a truck stop installing a power mike on his CB.  He claimed
that with the additional audio power in, that there would be more
radio power out.  When Ed told him that this was not true, he told Ed
(our experienced, FCC licensed radio technician) that he was wrong.
He said that all of the CBers were doing it and they were getting a
lot more power out.  Ed didn't try to argue with him any further.  

One fellow asked me to help him figure out why the antennas on
his car weren't working properly.  I told him I couldn't do it on
company time (to be polite), but he told me about it, anyway.  He had
the truckers antennas mounted on a Volkswagon fastback.  He told me
that what the truckers antennas were for was to keep from 'messing up
your SWR' when you had a 'huge metallic load' behind you.  I had
learned never to try to correct CBers on their information because
they would usually tell you you are wrong.  So I didn't correct him.
But there was no way he was going to get enough separation between
those two antennas for them to work properly on a Volkswagon fastback.
He also told me that you had to keep your power mike turned down or
'Uncle Charlie' (an old expression used to refer to the FCC) would get
you for running too much power.  I knew it was an effort in futility,
but I explained to him why that was not true and how cranking up the
audio too much would corrupt your signal, not increase the radio
power.  He looked at me kind of baffled.  I was very surprised he
didn't tell me I was wrong.  

A ham radio operator friend of mine (Ross) had a two meter rig in his
car.  Ross would periodically have some CBer pull up next to him on
the road and show what channel they were on by holding up the correct
amount of fingers.  My friend made the mistake of holding up two
fingers (intending to tell them that he wasn't on CB but rather was on
two meters).  The CBer turned his set over to channel 2.  Ross told me
he had since given up on trying to explain to CBers the difference
between ham radio and CB.

Another fellow I knew (Jim) was in Florence, SC.  Jim was parked in
front of a beauty salon waiting for his wife to come out.  He was
having a good, long conversation with another ham who was in
Fayetteville, NC on his two meter set while he waited.  A CBer pulled
up behind him and parked.  He saw Jim talking on his radio and he
dialed through all the CB channels trying to pick him up.  After a
while, he got out of his car and walked up to Jim telling him 'Good
buddy, your CB isn't modulating'.  Jim responded by telling the ham in
Fayetteville to about this CBer and asking him to tell the guy where
he was located.  He responded that he was in Fayetteville, NC.  The
CBer's eyes almost popped out when he heard that come over Jim's
radio.  He went back to his car, pulled his CB out, set it on the
sidewalk, and took it apart to work on it.  When Jim's wife returned
to the car, Jim got out and spoke to the guy explaining that that CB
would never pick up his signals.  The guy insisted that his radio
would pick up any CB.  Jim informed him that his radio was not a CB
then got in his car and drove off leaving the poor guy sitting on the
sidewalk with his CB completely disassembled.  While funny, I think it
was also a little mean.

The Citizen's Band radio service spawned the biggest pool of
misinformation I've ever heard of.  And certainly it led to complete
chaos on a number of radio bands.  It was very poorly planned and the
FCC never had the manpower for enforcement.

Also, I believe that this thread was started by wondering what
happened to television channel one.  The six meter amateur band is
from fifty to fifty-four megahertz.  That should explain much of it.

Regards, 

Fred, WB4AEJ  
http://www.wb4aej.com 


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: And that was the main conflict with
television 'channel one' I think. A conflict with other services in
the 50-54 megs area. CB radio operators did have a lot of ignorance. 
It was almost impossible to explain to them about the relationship of
carrier power and modulation, for example, or height of the antenna,
or how radio waves can 'skip' across bodies of water, such as Lake
Michigan, and how using 3.5 watts with 90-95 percent modulation with
an antenna on the top of an eight story apartment building on the edge
of Lake Michigan (north side of Chicago) could _easily_ get you a nice
clean signal in Benton Harbor, Michigan or Michigan City, Indiana. I
often-times had people curse me out, tell me to 'quiet down out there'
when I was operating totally legally. I would tell those people, "take
your cheap, toy radio back to Walmart where you got it, and ask them
to please refund your welfare check for last month." They could not
understand a four watt radio (assuming it was legal) could only put
out _four watts_ distributed between the carrier and the modulation.
Too much carrier you could not be heard; too much modulation you would
splash all over the band. They would 'peak up' their radio for closer
to five watts, and then complain when you said you could not hear
them. They did not understand the relationship between watts of power
and decibels either, and when I would take the time to explain it all
to them, they would tell me I was 'full of xxxx' and cuss me out. The
analogy I would often times use was to tell the person, take an empty,
sort of small, glass, put it in the sink and turn the water on full
blast. Come back in a few minutes and see how much water is in the
glass. Very little, most of it splashed into the sink or on the floor.
Now, turn the water down to a slow, steady stream, and watch the glass
fill up nicely with cold, fresh water. Some would listen, some would 
cuss me out even more. PAT]
------------------------------

From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Subject: Re: Attacked by a Dog Which was Playing
Date: 18 Mar 2005 10:01:00 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


Patrick Townson wrote:

> Buffy is  _huge_ dog of the Australian Cattle Dog variety.

Best wishes to recover quickly from your wounds.  Unfortunately with
pets even attempts to show love and affection can result in human
injury if they come at the wrong time or are unexpected.

Trying to adopt an animal, especially one that was mistreated, is a
very noble and honorable thing.  But it is not an easy task to break
old habits and earn a new trust.  Good luck, it sounds like you've
made great progress.

We have some feral cats in the neighborhood I want to adopt and have
tried over the years to lure them with food and kindness.  They always
kept their distance (although they would eagerly take the food if I
stayed far away).  I described their behavior to my vet and he said
they were feral and that they could not be domesticated.  One has been
around for seven years, which isn't bad for feral.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Try each day to move their food closer
to where you are sitting, then just sit there quietly; they'll
eventually decide to come closer for their food. They will never come
to you if you keep chasing after them. But each day, make sure they
can see/smell the food, but have it a bit closer and closer until it
is eventually only a few feet away. 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 #121
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat Mar 19 17:12:42 2005
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j2JMCgx11038;
	Sat, 19 Mar 2005 17:12:42 -0500 (EST)
Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2005 17:12:42 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200503192212.j2JMCgx11038@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 #122

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 19 Mar 2005 17:09:00 EST    Volume 24 : Issue 122

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Bank Regulator Says Banks Must Warn of ID Theft (Lisa Minter)
    Piracy Row Widens After Swedish Internet Firm Raid (Lisa Minter)
    What to Expect of 'Spamalot'? A Lot of Spam (Monty Solomon)
    Growth of Wireless Internet Opens New Path for Thieves (Monty Solomon)
    Dangling Broadband From the Phone Stick (Monty Solomon)
    Colleges on Their Guard Against ID Security Threats (Monty Solomon)
    Feds: Criminals Luuuuv Those Open 802.11 Networks (Danny Burstein)
    Re: Iridium II: Is Satellite Radio Doomed? (Isaiah Beard)
    Re: What Happened To Channel 1 (Marcus Didius Falco)
    Re: What Happened To Channel 1? (Michael D. Sullivan)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Date: 18 Mar 2005 17:31:57 -0800
From: Lisa Minter<lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: Bank Regulator Says Banks Must Warn of ID Theft


The 5-0 vote by the agency's board of directors come in the wake of a
flurry of announcements of the theft of personal data affecting
hundreds of thousands of consumers.

The changes have won approval from the Office of the Comptroller of
the Currency and Office of Thrift Supervision, and still require
Federal Reserve Board approval. Fed spokesman Andrew Williams said the
board is considering the matter.

Banks will be required to notify customers when they learn of
unauthorized access to sensitive customer information and, after a
reasonable investigation, determine the information was misused or
there is a "reasonable possibility" of misuse.

The notices must describe the incidents, detail measures taken to
protect customers, provide phone numbers for further information,
remind customers to be vigilant and describe how customers may put
fraud alerts in their credit reports.

Sensitive customer information is defined as a customer's name,
address or phone number, in conjunction with his or her Social
Security or driver's license numbers; account, credit or debit card
numbers; or an identification number or password that would permit
access to an account.

It also includes any combination of data that would allow a thief to
access an account.

Obtaining Social Security numbers is often considered a key to
identity theft scams involving banks, which regularly use the numbers
as a unique way to identify customers.

Identity theft cost businesses $47.6 billion and consumers $5 billion
in 2002, Federal Trade Commission estimates show.

Financial institutions regularly targeted by scammers include
Citibank, Wells Fargo, Washington Mutual, U.S. Bank, SunTrust, and
Capital One.

A common form of identity theft involving banks is "phishing," derived
from the act of computer thieves who "fish" for private data.

Phishers typically tell prospective victims in e-mails that there is a
problem with their accounts, and ask them to verify personal
information through a link to a real-looking Web site.  They e-mail
either known customers of a particular bank, or many people with the
hope of reaching actual bank customers.

Many phishing e-mails contain return addresses at sites such as
Yahoo.com, or typographical or grammatical errors.

Among companies to have reported thefts of customer data this year are
data brokers ChoicePoint Inc.  and LexisNexis, a unit of Anglo-Dutch
Reed Elsevier (ELSN.AS) (REL.L), as well as DSW Shoe Warehouse, a unit
of Retail Ventures Inc.

Meanwhile, Bank of America Corp.  the No. 3 U.S.  bank, last month
said computer tapes with credit card records of more than 1 million
U.S. government employees were lost.

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, Associated Press. 

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

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

Date: 18 Mar 2005 17:33:14 -0800
From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: Piracy Row Widens After Swedish Internet Firm Raid


By Patrick Lannin

STOCKHOLM (Reuters) - A raid on a Swedish internet firm last week,
hailed by the entertainment industry as a blow against piracy of songs
and movies, has sparked a debate in the high-tech country over
confidentiality rights and file sharing.

Bailiffs and police raided Internet firm Bahnhof seeking pirate files
on servers. The Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA),
representing major Hollywood studios, said digital film and music was
seized which would take 3-1/2 years to watch and listen to.

The raid was initiated by a group called the Antipirate Bureau, which
represents the music and film industry.

But now the investigators are being investigated. The government-owned
Data Inspection Office and the telecoms sector supervisor want to see
whether the Bureau broke confidentiality rules by obtaining the
Internet Protocol (IP) addresses of people it suspects of illegal file
sharing.

An IP address, which is given to computers for identification and data
traffic regulation on the Internet, enables investigators to identify
a computer and hence an individual.

But under Swedish law, access to IP addresses is strictly regulated.

"We are likely to open an investigation after Easter," said a
spokeswoman for the Data Inspection.

The National Post and Telecom agency said it would investigate whether
the IP addresses were obtained from telecoms operators, in which case
it would be the operators that would have to be investigated further.

The Antipirate Bureau, whose Web Site has been hacked, was not
available to comment.

One of its managers, lawyer Henrik Ponten, told newspaper Svenska
Dagbladet this week that the industry could not stand by "with its
arms folded while the sector is robbed."

MORE COUNTER ATTACKS

But high-profile figures from Sweden's tech world have also come
forward to attack the tactics of raiding Bahnhof.

Jonas Birgersson, who founded one of Sweden's most successful dotcom
consultancies and is still involved in the Internet via his Labs2
business, said the raid was heavyhanded and smacked of "1984" methods,
referring to the George Orwell novel about an imaginary police state.

He said the music business should go the other way, and offer films
and music at affordable prices to download.

"Why do we start using these risky methods? We think people would like
to pay if it was cheap enough," he told Reuters.

A group called the Pirate Bureau, which supports file sharing and
scaled-down copyright laws, said it estimated that around 100 million
downloads of movies are made a year.

The incident has sparked a wider debate about the legality of file
sharing.

In Sweden, it is legal to download copyrighted movie and music files,
but making them available for sharing is illegal.  The legal loophole,
however, is about to be closed.

The Justice Ministry has just proposed a law to make both illegal,
bringing Sweden into line with the rest of the EU.

Still, without power to identify IP addresses, that new law may not
help the entertainment industry.

The MPAA says the film industry loses $3.5 billion a year to
videotapes and DVDs sold on the black market, but it has no estimate
for how much Internet piracy costs the industry.

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: Sat, 19 Mar 2005 09:52:01 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: What to Expect of 'Spamalot'? A Lot of Spam


By DAVID F. GALLAGHER

"Spamalot" fans who signed up for a newsletter on the Broadway 
musical's official Web site may end up getting, well, spammed a lot. 
"Movin' Out" devotees may have the same problem. A security glitch -- 
now fixed -- exposed the names and postal and e-mail addresses of more 
than 31,000 people to savvy computer users.

Up until Thursday evening, when a reporter from The New York Times 
pointed out the problem to the Web sites' developer, visiting a 
specific address on the shows' sites produced a long page with 
mailing-list data. The security hole was not obvious to casual Web 
surfers because the address was buried in the site's code. But it 
could have been discovered by someone deliberately seeking the list 
data, or by a kind of program used by spammers to scour the Web for 
new e-mail addresses to bombard.

http://theater2.nytimes.com/2005/03/12/theater/newsandfeatures/12hack.html

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

Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2005 09:57:52 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Growth of Wireless Internet Opens New Path for Thieves


By SETH SCHIESEL
March 19, 2005

The spread of the wireless data technology known as Wi-Fi has reshaped
the way millions of Americans go online, letting them tap into
high-speed Internet connections effortlessly at home and in many
public places.

But every convenience has its cost. Federal and state law enforcement
officials say sophisticated criminals have begun to use the unsecured
Wi-Fi networks of unsuspecting consumers and businesses to help cover
their tracks in cyberspace.

In the wired world, it was often difficult for lawbreakers to make 
themselves untraceable on the Internet. In the wireless world, with 
scores of open Wi-Fi networks in some neighborhoods, it could hardly 
be easier.

Law enforcement officials warn that such connections are being 
commandeered for child pornography, fraud, death threats and identity 
and credit card theft.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/19/technology/19wifi.html?ex=1268888400&en=51d90e7518bba5d6&ei=5090

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: To read the full New York Times on line
each day with no login or registration requirements, please login to
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra/nytimes.html where several
publications -- in addition to nytimes -- are updated continually
around the clock, 24/7.    PAT]

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

Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2005 10:53:06 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Dangling Broadband From the Phone Stick


By MATT RICHTEL

SAN FRANCISCO, March 18 - To gauge the potential consumer impact of
the consolidation sweeping the telephone industry, look no further
than the silver-toned plastic phone gathering dust on the desk in
Justin Martikovic's studio apartment.

Mr. Martikovic, 30, a junior architect who relies on a cellphone for
his normal calling, says he never uses the desk phone -- but he pays
$360 a year to keep it hooked up.

"I have to pay for a service I'm never using," he said.

He has no choice. His telephone company, SBC Communications, will not
sell him high-speed Internet access unless he buys the phone service,
too. That puts him in the same bind as many people around the country
who want high-speed, or broadband, Internet access but no longer need
a conventional telephone. Right now, their phone companies tend to
have a "take it or leave it" attitude.

Consumers "are not forced to go with SBC," said Michael Coe, a company
spokesman. "If they just want a broadband connection, I'd recommend
they look around for people who can provide just a broadband
connection."

The nation's other two largest phone companies, Verizon Communications
and BellSouth, have similar policies: broadband service is available
only as a bundle with phone service.


http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/19/technology/19phone.html?ex=1268888400&en=b8329ca7e98c5ee3&ei=5090

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: And so it is here in Independence, KS
also. SBC's attitude is "take us as is ... no phone service, then no
high speed internet." The reason that backfired on them around here is
due to services like Cable One, we get high speed internet anyway.  To
show you how sleazy SBC has gotten, the latest offer in the US Mail to
get me back now offers monthly service (full service package) for
_$2.95_ per month (that's two dollars, ninety five cents) per month
for one year. It has been said that in long ago times, the Bell tactic
for getting rid of their competitors -- who could not afford such
things -- was if neccessary, *give away their service* until the
competitors gave up and went away. Are they going to start that again
in places like Kansas, where Prairie Stream is fully licensed to do
business state-wide, and gradually getting weaned off of Southwestern
Bell?  SBC for a long time was threatening to get rid of UNE-P but its
not at all certain that will work either. So, they fall back on the
old 'give it away until we don't have any competition' routine when
they have to.  PAT]

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

Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2005 01:20:26 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Colleges on Their Guard Against ID Security Threats


Computer breach prompts BC to limit Social Security data

By Hiawatha Bray, Globe Staff  |  March 18, 2005

While Boston College warns 120,000 alumni that their Social Security
numbers may have been stolen by Internet thieves, computer
administrators at other Boston-area colleges say they long ago took
steps to reduce the threat.

James Stone, director of consulting services for the Office of
Information Technology at Boston University, said his school and many
others throughout the United States once routinely used Social
Security numbers for identification on internal files and documents.
But by the late 1990s, BU officials began to doubt the wisdom of this
approach.

http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2005/03/18/colleges_on_their_guard_against_id_security_threats/

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

From: Danny Burstein <dannyb@panix.com>
Subject: Feds: Criminals Luuuuv Those Open 802.11 Networks
Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2005 04:24:34 -0500
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC


"... Of those suspects, half regularly used the open Wi-Fi connections
of unsuspecting neighbors. Four suspects, in Canada, California and
Florida, were logged in to neighbors' Wi-fi networks at the moment law
enforcement agents, having tracked them by other means, entered their
homes and arrested them, Secret Service agents involved in the case
said.  ...

" 'We had this whole network set up to identify these (suspects) but
the one thing we had to take into consideration was Wi-fi', (former
Secret Service agent) Mr. Gilhooly said. 'If I get to an Internet
address and I send a subpoena to the Internet provider and it gets me
a name and physical address, how do I know that that person isn't
actually bouncing in from next door?'

(rest at: )

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/19/technology/19wifi.html

_____________________________________________________
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
 		     dannyb@panix.com
[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]

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

From: Isaiah Beard <sacredpoet@sacredpoet.com>
Subject: Re: Iridium II: Is Satellite Radio Doomed?
Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2005 14:20:36 -0500
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com


John Levine wrote:

> I suppose that in theory GM could try to invent their own proprietary
> sat rad network (don't they still own Hughes satellite?) but I don't
> see them heading down that rat hole.

Actually, they don't HAVE to.  GM owns a significant stake in XM, and I 
beleive they have one or two people on their board.

And the current status quo is doing quite well. With GM, Honda and a
few other car manufacturers, a satellite radio option exists for a
number of models as an option package.  If someone wants it, they can
add the option in, and not only do they get a radio, but the first
year of service is built in to the purchase price of the car (exactly
the same model as OnStar).  Once the subscriber is "hooked," they're
likely (as has proven true in previous SEC filings) to pay for the
service once the first year is up.

Not everyone opts for this though.  Personally, I think GM needs to
reduce the size and improve the appearance of their satellite radio
antenna.  It currently looks like a big ugly black wart on the roof of
the car, regardless of the car's paint color, and usually the
placement isn't even centered, so anyone who is interested in
preserving the lines and look of the vehicle will have issue with it.
On the other hand, the aftermarket satellite radio systems have a tiny
magnet mount antenna no larger than a postage stamp, and you can get
creative as to where you place it.  I opted for aftermarket, placed
the antenna on the trunk lid where it's not too distracting, and got
the added bonus of having a removable unit that can be taken and used
indoors as well.


E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.

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

Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 22:41:00 -0500
From: Marcus Didius Falco <falco_marcus_didius@yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: Re: What Happened To Channel 1


Fred Atkinson <fatkinson@mishmash.com> responded to What Happened To
Channel 1 on 18 Mar 2005 15:11:26 GMT>

> Another fellow I knew (Jim) was in Florence, SC.  Jim was parked in
> front of a beauty salon waiting for his wife to come out.  He was
> having a good, long conversation with another ham who was in
> Fayetteville, NC on his two meter set while he waited.  A CBer pulled
> up behind him and parked.  He saw Jim talking on his radio and he
> dialed through all the CB channels trying to pick him up.  After a
> while, he got out of his car and walked up to Jim telling him 'Good
> buddy, your CB isn't modulating'.  Jim responded by telling the ham in
> Fayetteville to about this CBer and asking him to tell the guy where
> he was located.  He responded that he was in Fayetteville, NC.  The
> CBer's eyes almost popped out when he heard that come over Jim's
> radio.  He went back to his car, pulled his CB out, set it on the
> sidewalk, and took it apart to work on it.  When Jim's wife returned
> to the car, Jim got out and spoke to the guy explaining that that CB
> would never pick up his signals.  The guy insisted that his radio
> would pick up any CB.  Jim informed him that his radio was not a CB
> then got in his car and drove off leaving the poor guy sitting on the
> sidewalk with his CB completely disassembled.  While funny, I think it
> was also a little mean.

This may have been another reason the FCC dropped Channel 1: too much 
interference. Back in the 50s, during the sunspot peak, there were a LOT of 
instances of some Channel 2 in Texas wiping out Channel 2 in NY. It 
happened, IIRC, mostly on Channel 2, and rarely on Channel 4. Channel 1 
would have been worse.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: And that was the main conflict with
> television 'channel one' I think. A conflict with other services in
> the 50-54 megs area.

The very high power of TV stations, however well filtered, would have
caused problems. Nearbly broadcast towers can cause serious problems
far outside their band, even for good receivers.

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

From: Michael D. Sullivan <userid@camsul.example.invalid>
Subject: Re: What Happened To Channel 1?
Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2005 08:02:17 GMT


A simpler explanation for the use of channel numbers for TV and
frequencies for FM and AM radio is that (1) AM radio operated in a
contiguous band covered by an analog variable tuning capacitor and
never had separate channel numbers, so (2) people were used to tuning
in radio stations by frequency on a dial, and (3) FM radio likewise
was in a contiguous band covered by a an analog variable tuning
capacitor, so people were comfortable tuning in the station by
frequency.

Television, on tho other hand, started out in two discontiguous VHF 
bands, with somewhat variable spacing between channels and a need for 
precise tuning, and tuning in on a single band by twiddling an analog 
variable tuning capacitor to the right frequency would have been 
difficult.  This tuning method was used on some early TVs; I don't know 
whether they were tuned by numeric frequency or by channel number, but 
it would not have been very convenient.  The TV industry instead 
standardized on TV tuners that had 12 discrete fixed settings, pre-tuned 
to channels 2-13, with a fine tuning control that allowed one to tune 
the frequency higher or lower to account for offsets.  Later on, tuners 
had separate fine-tuners for each channel so one wouldn't need to retune 
when switching from station to station.  Given the move to fixed-
position tuning, the use of "digital" numbering of channels instead of 
analog-like frequency designations was an obvious simplification.  

When UHF was added, it used a single contiguous band, and most sets 
initially required a separate converter box, which had an analog-style 
variable tuning capacitor that required careful attention to get the 
station one wanted (the pointer is between 30 and 40, is that channel 33 
or 36?), but the tradition of using channel numbers instead of 
frequencies prevailed due to the established TV tradition.  Eventually, 
TVs incorporated the analog-style continuously variable UHF tuner and 
later adopted a fixed-position tuner for UHF.  Modern technologies, 
including Phase Locked Loop tuning and digital input and display, have 
relegated the dual-dial tuner and the fine tuning control to the dustbin 
of history.


Michael D. Sullivan
Bethesda, MD, USA
Replace "example.invalid" with ".com".

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This is true, however if you look at
some FCC documents on FM radio frequency allocations (for example,
documents on which frequencies are available on which places for
'low power' FM). All those documents show both 'frequency' and
'channel number' for the spaces between 87.6 FM and 108.1 FM. I 
think they have the 'channels' beginning at 201 and numbering
upward.  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 #122
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun Mar 20 18:59:36 2005
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j2KNxa720818;
	Sun, 20 Mar 2005 18:59:36 -0500 (EST)
Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2005 18:59:36 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200503202359.j2KNxa720818@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 #123

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 20 Mar 2005 19:00:00 EST    Volume 24 : Issue 123

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Wireless E-Mail: Attack of the BlackBerry Killers? (Marcus Didius Falco)
    Cell Phone ATT (absmith3@hotmail.com)
    VoIP and Bell DSL: Is it Ready For Prime Time? (Thumper)
    Cell Phone "Caller ID" Needed (Ray Burns)
    Re: What Happened To Channel 1 (Paul Coxwell)
    Re: What Happened To Channel 1 (Marcus Didius Falco)
    Re: What Happened To Channel 1 (Robert Bonomi)
    Re: Question re: Vonage E-Coupon (Jeff Miller)
    Re: Attacked by a Dog Which was Playing (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: Sat, 19 Mar 2005 22:57:29 -0500
From: Marcus Didius Falco <falco_marcus_didius@yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: Wireless E-Mail: Attack of the BlackBerry Killers?


http://economist.com/printedition/displayStory.cfm?Story_ID=3D3775141

 From The Economist print edition

The seemingly ubiquitous e-mail device faces growing competition.

WHAT Apple's iPod music-player is to teenagers, the BlackBerry e-mail
hand-held is to executives: the gizmo they cannot be seen without, and
often cannot live without. But you probably knew that already: readers of
The Economist are smack in the middle of the BlackBerry demographic. At
conferences, in boardrooms and on commuter planes and trains, they are
everywhere. The BlackBerry has spawned designer accessories; earned a
nickname ( CrackBerry ) that reflects its addictive nature; and even has a
malady ( BlackBerry Thumb ) associated with over-use. But its success means
that the Canadian firm that makes it, Research in Motion (RIM), now faces a
growing throng of competitors.

Most complex technologies start out in industry, then hit mass
scale. We've crossed over now, says Mike Lazaridis, who founded RIM in
1984 while a student at the University of Waterloo in Ontario. RIM
hopes to benefit as wireless e-mail, like the mobile phone before it,
goes from being an executive toy to a technology with mass appeal. But
so do its many rivals.

As a result, warns Brian Modoff, an analyst at Deutsche Bank, RIM has
reached a turning point, as the potential reward of a far wider market
is balanced with the risk of much greater competition.

At the moment, 70% of RIM's revenue comes from the sale of BlackBerry
devices, and the rest from software and services. To broaden its
reach, RIM has licensed the BlackBerry software to big handset-makers
such as Nokia, Motorola and Samsung, while continuing to sell its own
devices. It is therefore both co-operating and competing with some
much larger companies, as it navigates the transition to a more
software-and services-based business. Business-model transitions are
always fraught with challenges, says Mr Modoff.

Other firms sense an opportunity to offer handset-makers their own
BlackBerry-like software instead. This segment is switching from
proprietary innovation to standards-based mainstream growth, says
Danny Shader of Good Technology, a maker of wireless e-mail software
that runs on a wide range of hand-held computers and
smartphones. Without a hardware business, Good is not competing with
the handset-makers (such as Nokia) that license its programs. Its
software, running on Treo and PocketPC hand-helds, is already in use
at nearly 5,000 companies, including seven of America's top ten firms.

Brian Bogosian of Visto, another software firm that hopes to dethrone RIM,
claims that mobile operators, like handset-makers, are also ambivalent
about the BlackBerry. Many operators that resell the BlackBerry co-branded
with their own logos would prefer not to dilute their own brands, he says.

Visto offers white label software that runs on almost any device, and
can be offered by operators under their own brands. So far, Visto has
signed up ten operators, and will announce a deal with one of the
world's biggest operators next month, says Mr Bogosian. Other firms
pursuing a similar strategy include Intellisync, Seven and
Smartner. Patent-infringement claims abound, underlining the intensity
of competition. This week RIM paid $450m to settle a long-running suit
with NTP, based in Virginia. Visto has filed suits against Seven and
Smartner.

If all this were not enough, another threat looms on the horizon:
Microsoft, the world's largest software company. These guys exist
because Microsoft is bad at mobile e-mail, says Mr Modoff. But the
next versions of Microsoft's mail-server and PocketPC software, due in
a few months, will include support for BlackBerry-style push e-mail,
whereby new messages simply appear in the in-box. Anyone who ignores
Microsoft needs to take a history lesson, says Mr Shader, who once
worked at Netscape, a software-maker crushed by Microsoft because its
web browser posed a competitive threat. RIM is risking the same fate,
says Mr Shader, by promoting the BlackBerry as a platform.

Mr Lazaridis is unfazed. Getting mobile e-mail to work is far harder than
it looks, he says, and RIM has over a decade of experience. The complexity
is masked by this very simple, user-friendly device, he says of the
BlackBerry. This is a solution that has evolved and developed, and gone
through trial by fire. Any competitor is going to have to go through that.

We've done it right, we have the brand, we know how to make these
devices.  It's a very high standard to try to match. RIM continues to
improve its hardware and software to maintain its lead, he says.

Yet while RIM will continue to grow at an impressive rate, it will
probably do so more slowly than the overall market as competitors
start to muscle in. One possible outcome is that RIM and Good will end
up fighting over the lucrative corporate market, while the
less-demanding consumer market becomes commoditised. But with hundreds
of millions of e-mail users worldwide and, despite their apparent
ubiquity, only 2.5m BlackBerry devices in circulation, it is still
early days for the mobile e-mail business.

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

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

From: absmith3@hotmail.com
Subject: Cell Phone ATT
Date: 19 Mar 2005 19:03:34 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


I have an ATT contract dated in Oct- 2004- before Cingular bought ATT.
Now Cingular is saying that I owe it $170 for cancellation fee if I
tranfer service to Verizon.

My contract was with ATT and I never signed anything with
Cingular. So, looks like the ATT contract is shakey at best.  Does
anybody have any experience similar to mine and didn't pay for
cancellation fees?


Thanks,
 
Abby

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

From: ThumperStrauss@hotmail.com (Thumper)
Subject: VoIP and Bell DSL: Is it Ready For Prime Time?
Date: 19 Mar 2005 17:10:58 -0800


I've read some of the articles here about VoIP (Internet telephony)
and I'm very intested in signing up. I pay almost $50 for my local
phone line with Bell (with voice mail and caller ID) and I'd like to
not have to. Vonage, Primus and the others shows rates of $20 + tax
for a service that seems to provide much more than Bell.

I know the issues with VoIP (no 911 service, dependent on power), but
I'd still like to try it. The ability to check you voice mail from the
Web is neat.

I also read the article about Sympatico offering naked DLS at the end
of March 2005. This means you will be able to get a DSL service
without also having a regular phone line.

Does anyone have any news about this? There was talk that Bell might
only offer naked DSL to users who bought the (not yet released?) Bell
VoIP service.

Also, Vonage told me that I can't keep my local Bell number. Anyone
know if the new Bell VoIP service will let me keep my local Bell
number?

Thanks.

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: A couple things you have described as
'issues' are actually non-issues if you handle them correctly. For
example, take 911. Vonage at least, maybe other VOIP carriers as well,
take pains to advise you when signing up to _make absolutely certain
to activatw your 911 service -- as a separate thing, not done
automatically -- before you start using it._ When I signed up with
Vonage a couple years ago, I also completed the PSAP form telling them
where I could be physically located. I submited the form in email, got
back an auto-ack from Vonage saying they would register it. Two or
three days later I got two pieces of mail: one was email from Vonage
saying I had been registered with the Montgomery County, Kansas
Sheriff. The other piece of mail came like regular mail, from the City
of Independence Police Department saying I had also been registered.
At the time, Vonage had no POPs in the Kansas area, so I signed up
(for Vonage) with an area 415 number. Then when Vonage expanded their
service to Kansas area 316 and 620 numbers, I took a _local_ 620
number and dumped entirely the 415 number, and I also took a virtual
area 773 number for my friends in the Chicago area who wanted to reach
me easily. The Vonage PSAP department paperwork went through on that
okay, but that same day or the next I got a phone call from the
Sheriff's office who called me on my local landline 620-331-xxxx
number sort of confused. "Did you move over to Winfield?" asked the
lady. The new order from Vonage for a local number in 620 was actually
a Winfield, Kansas number. No hassle, Winfield is a few miles west of
here and the best that Vonage had at the moment. I explained to her
that I was at the same old place, my mother's old house on East Poplar
Street by Second Street. That seemed to satisfy her also. "Yeah, we
know who you are and where to find you," she said. We did a test where
I called her back on 911 using Vonage. She said the screen display
'looked different' but was 'understandable'. Granted, I live in a very
small town, population 8800, one phone exchange for the entire town,
the police dispatcher responds for the sheriff also, and the city
offices and they receive 'two or three 911 calls per day'. So your
milage may vary, but it does seem to work. And in our tiny little
town, the police dispatchers know *everything* and *everybody*. They
seem to know every address in town.   

You also raised an 'issue' with power. If you use a battery backup
unit you get around any problems with power. I have heard people ask,
but what about the DSL/cable line; their power could go out also. Yes,
but there is a chance power could be out at the phone exchange also. I
guess nothing is perfect.  

You also said 'Vonage told you they could not port your number' but
that is only true if they do not have immediate local service in your
telephone exchange. If they have a POP in your town or in your central
office then they can and will be glad to port your number. 

Regards naked DSL, for most parts of the Bell System it is unlikely as
they do business now. SBC, for example has stated they would not do it
and they don't do it except where courts have ordered them to do
so. You would be better off looking at high speed cable internet or
satellite internet if it is possible in your community, as it is here.
PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2005 14:07:12 -0500
From: Ray Burns <ray@nanswi.com>
Subject: Cell Phone "Caller ID" Needed



Dear Patrick Townson,

Pat,

I am writing software that communicates from one network-connected
computer to another controlled by a cell phone (XHTML-M). The user
logs in with just a password. Passwords are not guaranteed to be
unique, so I need some sort of phone serial number or other similar
number to append to the password to make it unique. Do you know of
such a phone id number/string that I could access via HTTP/HTTPS?

Thanks,

Ray Burns            Nantasket Software, Inc
617.964.4084(w)      ray@igsw.com
617.966-7439(c)      970 Commonwealth Avenue, Newton Center MA 02459
617.965-5081(f)    

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

From: Paul Coxwell <paulcoxwell@tiscali.co.uk>
Subject: Re: What Happened To Channel 1
Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2005 23:52:03 -0000


> This may have been another reason the FCC dropped Channel 1: too
> much interference. Back in the 50s, during the sunspot peak, there
> were a LOT of instances of some Channel 2 in Texas wiping out
> Channel 2 in NY. It happened, IIRC, mostly on Channel 2, and rarely
> on Channel 4. Channel 1 would have been worse.

Here in the U.K. we had a TV channel 1 right up until the closure of
our old 405-line service in 1985.  The main transmitters on ch. 1 were
Crystal Palace (London), Redruth (far southwest of England), and Divis
(Northern Ireland), although many other low-power relays (transposers)
also used it in other parts of the country.

Channel 1 was still using the same frequencies as the original pre-war
BBC service: Video carrier on 45.0MHz, sound on 41.5MHz.  It was
certainly much more susceptible to interference, although all the VHF
"Band I" channels (1 through 5, extending up to about 67MHz) could get
hit by signals from Continental Europe when conditions were right.
The hot summer of 1976 provided many instances of such interference
during the long summer evenings.

It was quite common during the 1970s for the BBC to put up
announcements between programs telling people "Do not adjust your
sets."  As Independent TV used only the "Band III" channels (starting
at ch. 6 from about 174Mhz upward), it was generally less affected
than the BBC.

> There was such a huge amount of misinformation running around among
> the CBers.  I couldn't believe some of the things they would say and
> I can't imagine where they were getting information like that.

It was the same over here.  I took in CB repairs for several years,
but one of the reasons I dropped CB work in the end was that I was
getting more and more fed up with (a) getting nowhere trying to
correct the horrendous misconceptions that were around, and (b) having
to put right sets in which every darned preset and coil had been
interfered with before somebody decided it needed repair and brought
it to me.

One incident sticks in my mind of a guy who had me fit a crystal
I.F. filter in his set.  It improved the receiver's selectivity no
end, but unfortunately, he wasn't at all happy.  Apparently all his
buddies had the modulation on their transmitters cranked up so far
that with his improved receiver they now sounded terrible (and keep in
mind that the British CB service uses FM).  There was just no way I
could convince him that the filter was doing its job exactly as
intended and that he should tell his friends who were splattering over
about three channels either side to get their deviation with limits.

I wouldn't even like to guess at how many sets came in with the
calibration pot on the meter turned up to maximum by somebody who
actually thought he had increased his RF output that way.  Even when a
transmitter did have the output tuned up a little higher, you were on
a losing battle trying to convince most of them that going from 4 to 5
watts carrier power isn't going to make a huge difference and that
raising the antenna or replacing the coax with something less lossly
would have a far greater effect, not to mention improving reception as
well.

-Paul

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

Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2005 21:10:46 -0500
From: Marcus Didius Falco <falco_marcus_didius@yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: Re: What Happened To Channel 1


Michael D. Sullivan <userid@camsul.example.invalid> wrote about
Re: What Happened To Channel 1? on Sat, 19 Mar 2005 08:02:17 GMT

> Television, on tho other hand, started out in two discontiguous VHF
> bands, with somewhat variable spacing between channels and a need for
> precise tuning, and tuning in on a single band by twiddling an analog
> variable tuning capacitor to the right frequency would have been
> difficult.  This tuning method was used on some early TVs; I don't know
> whether they were tuned by numeric frequency or by channel number, but
> it would not have been very convenient.  The TV industry instead
> standardized on TV tuners that had 12 discrete fixed settings, pre-tuned
> to channels 2-13, with a fine tuning control that allowed one to tune
> the frequency higher or lower to account for offsets.  Later on, tuners
> had separate fine-tuners for each channel so one wouldn't need to retune
> when switching from station to station.  Given the move to fixed-
> position tuning, the use of "digital" numbering of channels instead of
> analog-like frequency designations was an obvious simplification.

I had such a set in the early 50s. Tuning was analog, with detents
and, IIRC, a fine-tuning wheel on the back of the main wheel. Band
switching was done by turning the whole assembly of the main wheel. It
worked.

> When UHF was added, it used a single contiguous band, and most sets
> initially required a separate converter box, which had an analog-style
> variable tuning capacitor that required careful attention to get the
> station one wanted (the pointer is between 30 and 40, is that channel 33
> or 36?), but the tradition of using channel numbers instead of
> frequencies prevailed due to the established TV tradition.  Eventually,
> TVs incorporated the analog-style continuously variable UHF tuner and
> later adopted a fixed-position tuner for UHF.

This was required by the FCC: they required parity in tuning (on all
but the cheapest sets -- under 12 inches IIRC) between UHF and VHF to
promote UHF.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This is true, however if you look at
> some FCC documents on FM radio frequency allocations (for example,
> documents on which frequencies are available on which places for
> 'low power' FM). All those documents show both 'frequency' and
> 'channel number' for the spaces between 87.6 FM and 108.1 FM. I
> think they have the 'channels' beginning at 201 and numbering
> upward.  PAT]

If you look at a digital "world band" radio, you will find somewhere a
"europe-america" switch. It's often well hidden. I have one where it's
in the battery compartment. In the Americas the channels on the AM
band are spaced 10 kHz apart. In Europe they are spaced 9 kHz apart,
allowing them to squeeze in a few extra stations. This is significant
only in digital tuning, especially in digital search.

There is something similar in FM. I've forgotten the exact details,
but in US we use only the "odd" frequencies: 88.1, 88.3, 88.5, 88.7,
88.9 MHz. I think in some parts of the world they use the even
frequencies: 88.2, 88.4 etc. This is to get the necessary spacing
between the broadcasts.

One other peculiarity: in most countries, FM is about 88 to 108
MHz. In Japan it's about 78 to 98 MHz. There are a few radios that
will receive the entire band, 78 to 108, but most, including Japanese
brands sold outside Japan, miss the low end of the Japanese band.

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

From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi)
Subject: Re: What Happened To Channel 1
Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2005 10:02:02 -0000
Organization: Widgets, Inc.


In article <telecom24.122.10@telecom-digest.org>,
Michael D. Sullivan  <userid@camsul.example.invalid> wrote:

> A simpler explanation for the use of channel numbers for TV and
> frequencies for FM and AM radio is that (1) AM radio operated in a
> contiguous band covered by an analog variable tuning capacitor and
> never had separate channel numbers, so (2) people were used to tuning
> in radio stations by frequency on a dial, and (3) FM radio likewise
> was in a contiguous band covered by a an analog variable tuning
> capacitor, so people were comfortable tuning in the station by
> frequency.

> Television, on tho other hand, started out in two discontiguous VHF 
> bands, with somewhat variable spacing between channels and a need for 
> precise tuning, and tuning in on a single band by twiddling an analog 
> variable tuning capacitor to the right frequency would have been 
> difficult.  This tuning method was used on some early TVs; I don't know 
> whether they were tuned by numeric frequency or by channel number, but 
> it would not have been very convenient.  The TV industry instead 
> standardized on TV tuners that had 12 discrete fixed settings, pre-tuned 
> to channels 2-13, with a fine tuning control that allowed one to tune 
> the frequency higher or lower to account for offsets.  Later on, tuners 
> had separate fine-tuners for each channel so one wouldn't need to retune 
> when switching from station to station.  Given the move to fixed-
> position tuning, the use of "digital" numbering of channels instead of 
> analog-like frequency designations was an obvious simplification.  

Plausable,  just 'false to fact'.  <wry grin>

In the early days of TV receivers, they were equipped with continuous-
tuning knobs/dials, just like an AM radio receiver.  For the TV band,
however the indicator assembly was marked by "channel", *not* by
frequency.

I used to have a 1930's Crosley TV that had that kind of continuous
tuner.  *BIG* gap on the dial, between channel 6 and 7, It actually
tuned across that entire 'midband' space -- with all kinds of
interesting results.  You could "see" aircraft band transmissions, and
hear stuff on broadcast FM, 2m Ham, and business-band.

[[..  munch  ..]]

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This is true, however if you look at
> some FCC documents on FM radio frequency allocations (for example,
> documents on which frequencies are available on which places for
> 'low power' FM). All those documents show both 'frequency' and
> 'channel number' for the spaces between 87.6 FM and 108.1 FM. I 
> think they have the 'channels' beginning at 201 and numbering
> upward.  PAT]

Originally, 199 channels, 100kc spacing, numbered 1-199, corresponding
to frequencies from 88.1 through 107.9 megacycles.  Since then, even
the name of the unit-of-measurement has changed. :) and a few
additional channels have managed to sneak in.  I believe 200 is 108.0,
201 is 88.0, and I'm not sure how they numbered the space below 88.0.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I seem to recall about 1960 or so there
was a 'christian' radio station in Hammond, Indiana which belonged to
Crawford Broadcasting Company (WYCA perhaps?) which was horribly over-
modulated most of the time and located somewhere in the 89-90 megs
territory on the FM band. Many people did not have FM radios in those
days, but the standing joke was you did not need to purchase an FM
radio to listen to it; all you had to do was tune your television set
to channel 6 (no such channel then or now around Chicago) and tweak
the dial slightly in order to pick up WYCA clearly. About 1989, I 
wrote a piece here in the Digest about that horrible station and all 
the interference they caused in the North Hammond/Burnham, Illinois
area; the FCC finally required the station to work with Illinois Bell
to install filters free of charge on people's phones and other types
of amplifier equipment on request. PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2005 14:41:18 -0500
From: Jeff Miller <jeffhambone@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Question re: Vonage E-coupon


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The other day, I received one of my all
too freqeuent questions asking if it was possible to 'double-dip' with
the Vonage e-coupon I offer. I gave my usual answer, no it is
not. Either *I* sell you the telephone adapter (actually, it is drop
shipped from Vonage) and give you the 'rebate' in the form of a month
of free service, or *someone else* -- CompUSA or Best Buy for example --
sells you the adapter and *they* give the rebate; but you don't get it
twice. He then replied as follows, below:   PAT]


PAT --

Thanks for your reply.  That's what I expected, didn't think there'd
be a way to double dip.

Here's the deal I'm getting through CompUSA, which apparently is no
longer being offered:

$60 purchase price for PAP-2
-$50 rebate from Vonage once I have the service for 90 days (with a gotcha 
that says "not combinable with other Vonage offers", should have looked at 
that before asking the question, I suppose)
-$10 rebate from CompUSA (already received)
=$0 (except for sales tax) cost for adapter

Plus, I received a $25 gift card from CompUSA so eventually I'm money 
ahead, looking solely at the acquisition end of things.

However, when I disconnect there will be a $40 disconnect fee
according to the TOS.  There's some information out there indicating
that current Vonage policy is to waive disconnect fees for accounts
using retail adapters; of course, that policy is subject to change at
any time.

OTOH, if I went with the Vonage-provided adapter then the disconnect
fee would be waived (if I returned the adapter) and I could get the
free month, but there's a $30 activation fee and a $10 shipping fee
according to the Vonage website.

Either way, looks like they'd ding me for about $40 coming or going on
top of the monthly service charges -- proving once again TANSTAAFL.

Feel free to any part of the above in the Digest as you see fit.

Jeff

At 02:52 PM 3/19/2005, you wrote:

>         Saw your post on the Telecom Digest about an e-coupon for
>         Vonage service.  Is that e-coupon only applicable to direct
>         activation through Vonage, or can it be applied to activations
>         of equipment purchased through a third-party vendor?

PAT replied:

> I am in essence the 'third party vendor'; although Vonage does the
> drop shipping of the adapter box for me.

>         I purchased my adapter through CompUSA and am ready to
>         activate service, just thought I'd ask before starting out.

PAT replied:

> I believe Comp USA also gives a premium in the form of a month of
> service or perhaps an instant rebate on the cost of the adapter that
> you purchased. You cannot get *two* rebates, sorry.  Either you get
> the rebate Comp USA gives (which in effect comes from Vonage) _or_
> you get the month of service I give for free which also in effect
> comes from Vonage. You cannot get both.

> The way Vonage verifies who gets what is that if you get my e-coupon
> the link enclosed in it walks you through the sign up process, and
> gives you your new phone number, etc. **It requires a credit card
> number from you in the process**

> I think you have two choices at this point:

> 1) if CompUSA did _not_ give you some premium in the process of
> purchasing your adapter (free month of service or rebate on the
> adapter) then ask them for it now.

> 2) return the adapter to them, and use my e-coupon to get an adapter
> through mail order and use the rebate I give (a month of free
> service).

> Sorry.

>         Thanks,
>         Jeff Miller
>         Columbia, MD
>         (Off and on reader of Telecom Digest since 1992)

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: So, if you have not yet signed up with
any VOIP service, or you have signed up with others but were not 
satisfied and want to try Vonage, then let me know if you want to try
Vonage with an 'e-coupon'. You click on the link in the email I send
you; it takes you to a sign up page for Vonage. It arranges to ship
you a Vonage adapter, gives you your number assigment, etc. You pay
with your credit/debit card. They ship it out same day and you have
it a couple days later. Whatever kind of service plan you sign up for
(_and use your credit/debit card to pay for_) then the e-coupon kicks
in and you get a _second month_ of the very same service plan for
free. That's how the plan I offer works.   PAT]
 
------------------------------

From: SELLCOM Tech support <support@sellcom.com>
Subject: Re: Attacked by a Dog Which was Playing
Organization: www.sellcom.com
Reply-To: support@sellcom.com
Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2005 00:11:12 GMT


SELLCOM Tech support <support@sellcom.com> posted on that vast
internet thingie:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: And thanks for your encouraging words
> also. I am going to speak to Dr. Epp (veternarian) or the lady who
> grooms pets (Buffy was taken to get a bath a couple days after she
> first got here) and see if either of them can recommend a good dog
> trainer. Maybe the animal shelter will know of someone.  PAT] 

I still can't help but be in awe of some of those trainers.  I gotta
tell another dog story ... We had one live through the woods from us
and he would help us with our pups from time to time.  One day we were
over at his house in the street and he was doing some training.  One
of his big Rottweiller dogs was chained up at the top of his driveway
just watching. There was a neighbor dog going crazy and he spent about
an hour going through different stuff with our dog and I believe one
other one.

After all the "training" was finished he called his Rottweiller from
the top of the driveway.  It was not chained after all but just lying
up there commanded to "down" or "stay".  I couldn't believe my eyes.

Pretty amazing what these guys can do.

Steve

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.  New www.electrictrains.biz

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I need to find someone who can handle
this monster before my entire house gets torn up!  This morning I was
on my way out the door about 10:30 AM when Buffy got loose when the
fence gate was opened; she took off at a gallop all around the neigh-
borhood. The more I called and chased after her, the more she ran up
and down the alley and the street. To her it was just more play, but
I was late for where I was going. I walked over to Eric and Justin,
and got them to help me catch her, which they did, and got her in the
fenced in back yard. When I got back home around 12:30 she had 
systematically taken all my things off the table in the back yard area
and scattered them all around. I need to find someone to help me with
her or else get her a good home somewhere.   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 #123
******************************



    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Mar 21 15:13:22 2005
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j2LKDMG00527;
	Mon, 21 Mar 2005 15:13:22 -0500 (EST)
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 15:13:22 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200503212013.j2LKDMG00527@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 #124

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 21 Mar 2005 15:13:00 EST    Volume 24 : Issue 124

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Senator Asks FCC to Probe Gov't Videos (Lisa Minter)
    Newspapers Battle Web Sites for Classified Ads (Lisa Minter)
    Scam Artists Dial for Dollars on Internet Phones (Lisa Minter)
    Regional Cable TV Outfit Pulls Big Approval (Jack Decker)
    Free From State Regulation - FCC Decision on DSL (Jack Decker)
    Growth of Wireless Internet Opens New Path (Marcus Didius Falco)
    Re: What Happened To Channel 1 (Tony P.)
    Re: What Happened To Channel 1 (Neal McLain)
    Re: What Happened To Channel 1 (Garrett Wollman)
    Re: What Happened To Channel 1 (Paul Coxwell)

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 Mar 2005 07:37:19 -0800
From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: Senator Asks FCC to Probe Gov't Videos


By GENARO C. ARMAS, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - A Senate Democrat influential on telecommunications
issues has asked federal regulators to investigate whether any laws
were broken by broadcasters who aired video news releases produced by
the government.

Stations may have violated the law if they used the video releases
without disclosing that the government was the source of the
information, Sen. Daniel Inouye, D-Hawaii, wrote in a letter to the
Federal Communications Commission.

The FCC should "take any remedial measures necessary to prevent
station owners from misleading their viewers", said Inouye, adding
that any lack of disclosure also represents "a serious breach of
journalistic ethics."

Inouye, ranking Democrat on the Senate Commerce, Science and
Transportation Committee, said the FCC should also scrutinize whether
stations violated prohibitions against accepting "money, service or
other valuable consideration for the airing of content."

The commission will "take the letter very seriously and will look into
it," FCC spokesman David Fiske said Thursday. Generally, the FCC
reviews letters and complaints before determining if there should be
an investigation.

The Republican White House has for some time been preparing and
distributing 'press releases' without any attribution to the source,
and many people who have read these 'press releases' have said they
amounted only to government propoganda.

The White House has defended the video releases, which are distributed
to television stations across the country. The videos are frequently
used without any disclosure of the government's role in their
production by claiming they are 'truthful accounts'. 

President Bush at a news conference Wednesday pointed to a Justice
Department memo issued last week that concluded the practice was
appropriate so long as the videos presented factual information about
government activities.

"Now I also think it would be helpful if local stations then disclosed
to their viewers that this was based upon a factual report and they
chose to use it," Bush said. "But evidently in some cases that's not
the case."

The Justice guidelines conflicted with an opinion from the Government
Accountability Office, the investigative arm of Congress. The videos
could amount to illegal "covert propaganda" if stations did not
clearly state the source of the information, the GAO said.

There has been increased scrutiny on government media practices since
the revelation in January that conservative columnists were paid to
plug the administration's agenda and did not tell their audiences that
they had received money. Bush, after the practice was disclosed, said
it was wrong and ordered that it stop, then in February, a gay male
prostitute who operated gay pornographic websites was found to be 
operating daily from the Press Room at the White House doing 'cut and
paste' Republican press releases for 'Talon', an alleged web site with
political news.

The FCC is investigating at least one of those cases, involving
commentator Armstrong Williams and his deal with the Education
Department to promote the No Child Left Behind Act.

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 . 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, Associated Press.

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

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

Date: 20 Mar 2005 16:05:03 -0800
From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: Newspapers Battle Web Sites for Classified Ads


By Lisa Baertlein

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Not so long ago, the classified ad section
of the local newspaper was the best place to sell a car, rent an
apartment or post a job opening. Now the Internet is shaking up this
once-staid and lucrative business.

Newspaper publishers that once enjoyed a virtual monopoly
on the classified market are facing increasing competition,
including from Web sites like eBay Inc.

Experts wonder if free online ads and innovations that allow sellers
of everything from exotic cars to Pez candy dispensers to reach a
massive audience via the Web will expand the business for all or
inflict serious damage on incumbents.

EBay, best known for its auction site, has spent more than $850
million to buy three online classified companies in the United States
and abroad. Last summer, the Web marketplace took a 25 percent stake
in mostly free, San Francisco-based Craigslist.org
(http://www.craigslist.org), an online classified shop that covers
about 100 cities worldwide.

EBay recently launched free classified Web sites in seven
international markets including Germany, China and Japan. Those new
Kijiji-branded sites (http://kijiji.com) mimic Craigslist.

Moves like these are causing havoc with newspapers, many of which have
fought back with online versions of their publications -- complete
with classifieds.

"It's a free-for-all," said Peter Zollman, founding principal of
consulting firm Classified Intelligence. "I think the threat (to
newspapers) is very real because classified advertising is so
lucrative."

The Newspaper Association of America expects the market for print
newspaper classified advertising to grow 5.2 percent to $17.4 billion
this year.

But newspaper market share is falling amid intense competition from a
range of players, including Web sites and Internet search companies,
as well as radio and television, niche publications and Yellow Pages
providers, Zollman said.

Newspapers remain the dominant medium for listing jobs and selling
cars and homes in most local markets, but Zollman warned they must
work to keep that hold.

"I don't think they'll go out of business, but the business is being
transformed very fast," he said.

Analysts who focus on the Web also point to the success of companies
like Yahoo Inc.  and MSN Web unit, which have seen their banner and
branded ad revenue grow as big advertisers follow audiences from
television to the Internet.

ROOM FOR ALL?

Still, some analysts see the changing classified ad market resulting
in a larger sea that can float all boats.

"It's a case of one and one equaling 2 1/2," said Ed Atorino, a
publishing analyst at Fulcrum Global Partners. "It doesn't seem to be
taking away a lot of dollars from the traditional media; it just seems
to be a new market."

Print newspaper classified revenue declined from 2001 to 2003, when
the broader ad market was soft, but has risen in every other year
since the Web went mainstream in 1995.

The Kelsey Group estimates that total revenue from U.S. Web
classifieds was $1.95 billion in 2004, excluding eBay, but
including sites operated by newspapers.

Auto sales typically constitute the biggest chunk of classified ad
spending at newspapers, followed by help-wanted and real-estate
listings, while Web classifieds are dominated by jobs, followed by
dating and autos.

The help-wanted market may be a harbinger for the future push and pull
between the online and offline worlds.

Newspaper job listings were the first to feel the heat from
Internet rivals like Monster.com.

Most newspaper chains during 2004 continued to lose online recruitment
market share to rivals, based on the number of job postings, according
to Corzen, a New York market research firm.  Help-wanted revenue
growth at newspapers also lags that of online job posting sites.

But there were some bright spots. Online recruiting site Careerbuilder
jointly owned by newspaper publishers Gannett Co. Inc., Knight Ridder
Inc. and Tribune Co.  gained market share, as did Hollinger
International and Pulitzer Inc.

Newspapers are also fighting back on other fronts. For example, Hearst
Corp.'s San Francisco Chronicle is giving extended listings to
unsuccessful sellers, while Miami Herald and San Jose Mercury News
publisher Knight Ridder lets people buy online-only ads, with or
without pictures. Still others allow their news items to be used
freely in exchange for advertising revenue earned through online sources.
Reuters Limited is one such example. 

Kelsey analyst Greg Sterling said the jury is still out, but
newspapers appear to be worse off than before the arrival of online
rivals.

"It's very hard to know what kind of dollars have been lost from
newspapers," he said. "I think it's substantial."


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: 20 Mar 2005 16:08:11 -0800
From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: Scam Artists Dial for Dollars on Internet Phones


By Andy Sullivan

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Internet phone services have drawn millions of
users looking for rock-bottom rates. Now they're also attracting
identity thieves looking to turn stolen credit cards into cash.

Some Internet phone services allow scam artists to make it appear that
they are calling from another phone number -- a useful trick that
enables them to drain credit accounts and pose as banks or other
trusted authorities, online fraud experts say.

"It's like you've handed people an entire phone network," said Lance
James, who as chief technology officer of Secure Science Corp. sees
such scams on a daily basis.

The emerging scams underline the lower level of security protecting
Voice Over Internet Protocol, or VOIP, the Internet-calling standard
that has upended the telecommunications industry over the past several
years.

Traditional phone networks operate over dedicated equipment that is
difficult for outsiders to penetrate. Because VOIP calls travel over
the Internet, they cost much less but are vulnerable to the same
security problems that plague e-mail and the Web.

Internet worms that snarl online networks can render VOIP lines
unusable, and experts at AT&T say VOIP conversations can be monitored
or altered by outsiders.

Federal Trade Commission Chairman Deborah Platt Majoras recently
warned that unscrupulous telemarketers could use VOIP to blast huge
numbers of voice messages to consumers, a technique known as SPIT, for
"spam over Internet telephony."

All of these threats remain largely in the realm of theory.  Caller ID
spoofing, on the other hand, has emerged over the past six months as a
useful tool for identity thieves and other scam artists, according to
fraud experts.

PRESIDENT BUSH ON THE LINE

Any reporter would scramble for a ringing phone that reads "White
House media line" on its caller ID display.

But it's not the Bush administration on the line -- it's security
instructor Ralph Echemendia, calling from a mobile phone on a remote
Georgia highway.

"You can see how this sort of thing could be used in a very malicious
way," said Echemendia, a security instructor at the Intense School, a
technology training company.

Caller ID spoofing is not prohibited by law, but the Federal
Communications Commission requires telemarketers to identify
themselves accurately, a spokeswoman said.

Echemendia built his own system to spoof calls, but several free or
low-cost services allow even technical novices to falsify caller ID
information as well.

Debt collectors and private investigators use Camophone.com's
5-cents-per-call service to trick people into answering the phone,
according to messages posted on a discussion board.

Traveling salesmen say the service comes in handy when they want
clients to return calls to the main office, rather than their motel
room.

James said criminal uses of caller-ID spoofing have become common over
the last six months.

Wire-transfer services like Western Union require customers to call
from their home phone when they want to transfer money in an effort to
deter fraud -- a barrier easily sidestepped by any identity thief
using a caller-ID spoofing service.

Fraud rings can now transfer money directly out of stolen credit-card
accounts, rather than buying merchandise and reselling it, he said.

Western Union spokeswoman Danielle Periera said the company has no
other way to verify that transfer requests are valid.

"We try hard to stay one step ahead of them and recognize that scam
artists are sophisticated and often change their schemes," she said.

Criminals can use caller-ID spoofing to listen to other people's voice
mail, James said, especially when those accounts are not protected by
passwords.

They also have begun to use the technology to make it appear that they
are calling from a bank or other financial institution, said Dave
Jevans, who chairs the Anti-Phishing Working Group, a banking-industry
task force.

That helps them convince consumers to divulge account numbers,
passwords and other sensitive information in a scam that echoes the
"phishing" e-mails that have become common, he said.

VOIP industry pioneer Jeff Pulver, whose Free World Dialup service can
be used to spoof calls, said he couldn't prevent abuse of his system.

The problem will likely recede as companies like VeriSign Inc. and
NeuStar Inc. develop ways to verify online identities, he said: "We're
not there yet, but we're going to get there."

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 <jack-yahoogroups@withheld on request>
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 11:43:33 -0500
Subject: Regional Cable TV Outfit Pulls Big Approval


http://www.freep.com/money/tech/mwendland21e_20050321.htm

BY MIKE WENDLAND
FREE PRESS COLUMNIST

It may be the Detroit area's No. 2 cable company, but it's No. 1 in
customer satisfaction.

In fact, says Mark Dineen, the general manager and a corporate vice
president of WOW Internet Cable and Phone, the biggest complaint he
gets is from people outside the service areas of 42 Detroit-area
communities who want WOW but can't get it.

Dineen's company was just rated No. 1 by cable TV subscribers in a
nationwide J.D. Power and Associates survey that measured customer
satisfaction. Comcast, the area's dominant cable provider, ranked
seventh.  [.....]

WOW was founded in Colorado in 1999 and then moved to the Midwest in
2001 when it acquired the cable assets of Ameritech New Media. The
Colorado operation broke off from the main corporation and is operated
separately.  [.....]  

Two weeks ago, WOW rolled out one of the industry's most aggressive
bundled packages that includes digital telephone service. For $89.99 a
month, customers get cable television, basic Internet and unlimited
local and long distance telephone calls.

The system, which allows customers to keep their existing phone
numbers, uses Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) to patch two-way
phone calls through the WOW network to the Sprint land-based network.

"This really is the future," says Dineen, 40, a resident of
Troy. "People get digital quality and all the caller ID and call
forwarding and 911 features they expect, but never have to pay long
distance fees."

Full story at:
http://www.freep.com/money/tech/mwendland21e_20050321.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: Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@withheld on request>
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 12:20:15 -0500
Subject: Free From State Regulation - FCC Decision on DSL


http://www.broadbandreports.com/shownews/61574

Free From State Regulation  Will FCC decision on DSL carry a larger
impact?

The Federal Communications Commission has ruled, in a 3-2 vote yet to
be announced, that states no longer had authority to regulate digital
subscriber lines offered by BellSouth and other providers, as reported
in the Los Angeles Times this decision, companies such as BellSouth
would no longer be required to sell high-speed Internet service to
voice customers of rival firms. "The larger impact is that it would
put the commission on record saying that there should be a national
broadband policy and not one any state could opt out of," said
BellSouth spokesman Bill McCloskey.

Article + reader comments at:
http://www.broadbandreports.com/shownews/61574

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

Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2005 22:09:00 -0500
From: Marcus Didius Falco <falco_marcus_didius@yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: Growth of Wireless Internet Opens New Path


Sorry I don't have the original URL for this. It's from the NY Times.

Note the risk to the innocent individual user, which is explained in
the last paragraph.

* Original: From..... Bill Craig


March 19, 2005

Growth of Wireless Internet Opens New Path for Thieves

By SETH SCHIESEL <http://query.nytimes.com/search/query?ppds=bylL&v1=SETH
SCHIESEL&fdq=19960101&td=sysdate&sort=newest&ac=SETH
SCHIESEL&inline=nyt-per>

The spread of the wireless data technology known as Wi-Fi has reshaped
the way millions of Americans go online, letting them tap into
high-speed Internet connections effortlessly at home and in many
public places.

But every convenience has its cost. Federal and state law enforcement
officials say sophisticated criminals have begun to use the unsecured
Wi-Fi networks of unsuspecting consumers and businesses to help cover
their tracks in cyberspace.

In the wired world, it was often difficult for lawbreakers to make
themselves untraceable on the Internet. In the wireless world, with
scores of open Wi-Fi networks in some neighborhoods, it could hardly
be easier.

Law enforcement officials warn that such connections are being
commandeered for child pornography, fraud, death threats and identity
and credit card theft.

"We have known for a long time that the criminal use of the Internet
was progressing at a greater rate than law enforcement had the
knowledge or ability to catch up," said Jan H. Gilhooly, who retired
last month as special agent in charge of the Secret Service field
office in Newark and now helps coordinate New Jersey operations for
the Department of Homeland Security. "Now it's the same with the
wireless technologies."

In 2003, the Secret Service office in Newark began an investigation
that infiltrated the Web sites and computer networks of suspected
professional data thieves. Since October, more than 30 people around
the world have been arrested in connection with the operation and
accused of trafficking in hundreds of thousands of stolen credit card
numbers online.

Of those suspects, half regularly used the open Wi-Fi connections of
unsuspecting neighbors. Four suspects, in Canada, California and
Florida, were logged in to neighbors' Wi-Fi networks at the moment law
enforcement agents, having tracked them by other means, entered their
homes and arrested them, Secret Service agents involved in the case
said.

More than 10 million homes in the United States now have a Wi-Fi base
station providing a wireless Internet connection, according to ABI, a
technology research firm in Oyster Bay, N.Y. There were essentially
none as recently as 2000, the firm said. Those base stations, or
routers, allow several computers to share a high-speed Internet
connection and let users maintain that connection as they move about
with laptops or other mobile devices. The routers are also used to
connect computers with printers and other devices.

Experts say most of those households never turn on any of the
features, available in almost all Wi-Fi routers, that change the
system's default settings, conceal the connection from others and
encrypt the data sent over it. Failure to secure the network in those
ways can allow anyone with a Wi-Fi-enabled computer within about 200
feet to tap into the base station's Internet connection, typically a
digital subscriber line or a cable modem.

Wi-Fi connections are also popping up in retail locations across the
country. But while national chains like Starbucks take steps to
protect their networks, independent coffee shops that offer Wi-Fi
often leave their connections wide open, law enforcement officials
say.

In addition, many universities are now blanketing campuses with open
Wi-Fi networks, and dozens of cities and towns are creating wireless
grids. While some locations charge a fee or otherwise force users to
register, others leave the network open. All that is needed to tap in
is a Wi-Fi card, typically costing $30 or less, for the user's PC or
laptop. (Wi-Fi cards contain an identification code that is
potentially traceable, but that information is not retained by most
consumer routers, and the cards can in any case be readily removed and
thrown away.)

When criminals operate online through a Wi-Fi network, law enforcement
agents can track their activity to the numeric Internet Protocol
address corresponding to that connection. But from there the trail may
go cold, in the case of a public network, or lead to an innocent owner
of a wireless home network.

"We had this whole network set up to identify these guys, but the one
thing we had to take into consideration was Wi-Fi," Mr. Gilhooly
said. "If I get to an Internet address and I send a subpoena to the
Internet provider and it gets me a name and physical address, how do I
know that that person isn't actually bouncing in from next door?"

Mr. Gilhooly said the possibility of crashing into an innocent
person's home forced his team to spend additional time conducting
in-person surveillance before making arrests. He said the suspects
tracked in his investigation would regularly advise one another on the
best ways to gain access to unsecured Wi-Fi systems.

"We intercepted their private conversations, and they would talk and
brag about, 'Oh yeah, I just got a new amplifier and a new antenna and
I can reach a quarter of a mile,' " he said. "Hotels are wide
open. Universities, wide open."

Sometimes, suspected criminals using Wi-Fi do not get out of their
car. At 5 a.m. one day in November 2003, the Toronto police spotted a
wrong-way driver "with a laptop on the passenger seat showing a child
pornography movie that he had downloaded using the wireless connection
in a nearby house," said Detective Sgt. Paul Gillespie, an officer in
the police sex crimes unit.

The suspect was charged with child pornography violations in addition
to theft of telecommunications services; the case is pending. "The
No. 1 challenge is that people are committing all sorts of criminal
activity over the Internet using wireless, and it could trace back to
somebody else," Sergeant Gillespie said.

Holly L. Hubert, the supervisory special agent in charge of the Cyber
Task Force at the F.B.I. field office in Buffalo, said the use of
Wi-Fi was making it much more difficult to track down online
criminals.

"This happens all the time, and it's definitely a challenge for us,"
she said. "We'll track something to a particular Internet Protocol
address and it could be an unsuspecting business or home network
that's been invaded.  Oftentimes these are a dead end for us."

Ms. Hubert says one group of hackers she has been tracking has
regularly frequented a local chain of Wi-Fi-equipped tea and coffee
shops to help cover its tracks.

Many times the suspects can find a choice of unsecured wireless
networks right from home. Special Agent Bob Breeden, supervisor of the
computer crime division for the Florida Department of Law Enforcement,
said a fraud investigation led in December to the arrest of a
Tallahassee man who had used two Wi-Fi networks set up by residents in
his apartment complex.

Over those Internet connections, the suspect used the electronic
routing information for a local college's bank account to pay for
online pornography and to order sex-related products, Mr. Breeden
said. The man was caught because he had the products delivered to his
actual address, Mr.  Breeden said. When officers went to arrest him,
they found his computer set up to connect to a neighbor's wireless
network. Mr. Breeden said the suspect, Abdul G. Wattley, pleaded
guilty to charges of theft and unauthorized use of a communications
network and was sentenced to two years' probation.

In another recent case, the principal of a Tallahassee high school had
received death threats by e-mail, Mr. Breeden said. When authorities
traced the messages to a certain Internet Protocol address and went to
the household it corresponded to, Mr. Breeden said, "Dad has his
laptop sitting on a table and Mom has another laptop, and of course
they have Wi-Fi, and they clearly didn't know anything about the
threats."

Cybercrime has been known to flourish even without Wi-Fi's cloak of
anonymity; no such link has been found, for example, in recent data
thefts from ChoicePoint, Lexis/Nexis and other database companies.

But unsecured wireless networks are nonetheless being looked at by the
authorities as a potential tool for furtive activities of many sorts,
including terrorism. Two federal law enforcement officials said on
condition of anonymity that while they were not aware of specific
cases, they believed that sophisticated terrorists might also be
starting to exploit unsecured Wi-Fi connections.

In the end, prevention is largely in the hands of the buyers and
sellers of Wi-Fi equipment. Michael Coe, a spokesman for SBC, the
nation's No. 1 provider of digital subscriber line connections, said
the company had provided about one million Wi-Fi routers to its
customers with encryption turned on by default. But experts say most
consumers who spend the $60 to $80 for a Wi-Fi router are just happy
to make it work at all, and never turn on encryption.

"To some degree, most consumers are intimidated by the technology,"
said Roberta Wiggins, a wireless analyst at the Yankee Group, a
technology research firm in Boston. "There is a behavior that they
don't want to further complicate their options."

That attitude makes life easier for tech-savvy criminals and tougher
for those who pursue them. "The public needs to realize that all
they're doing is making it harder on me to go find the bad guys," said
Mr. Gilhooly, the former Secret Service agent. "How would you feel if
you're sitting at home and meanwhile someone is using your Wi-Fi to
hack a bank or hack a company and downloads a million credit card
numbers, which happens all the time? I come to you and knock on your
door, and all you can say is, 'Oops.' "

Copyright 2005 The New York Times 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.
Also check telecom-digest.org/td-extra/nytimes.html


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

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

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

From: Tony P. <kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net>
Subject: Re: What Happened To Channel 1
Organization: ATCC
Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2005 22:35:21 -0500


In article <telecom24.123.5@telecom-digest.org>, 
paulcoxwell@tiscali.co.uk says:

> It was the same over here.  I took in CB repairs for several years,
> but one of the reasons I dropped CB work in the end was that I was
> getting more and more fed up with (a) getting nowhere trying to
> correct the horrendous misconceptions that were around, and (b) having
> to put right sets in which every darned preset and coil had been
> interfered with before somebody decided it needed repair and brought
> it to me.

> One incident sticks in my mind of a guy who had me fit a crystal
> I.F. filter in his set.  It improved the receiver's selectivity no
> end, but unfortunately, he wasn't at all happy.  Apparently all his
> buddies had the modulation on their transmitters cranked up so far
> that with his improved receiver they now sounded terrible (and keep in
> mind that the British CB service uses FM).  There was just no way I
> could convince him that the filter was doing its job exactly as
> intended and that he should tell his friends who were splattering over
> about three channels either side to get their deviation with limits.

> I wouldn't even like to guess at how many sets came in with the
> calibration pot on the meter turned up to maximum by somebody who
> actually thought he had increased his RF output that way.  Even when a
> transmitter did have the output tuned up a little higher, you were on
> a losing battle trying to convince most of them that going from 4 to 5
> watts carrier power isn't going to make a huge difference and that
> raising the antenna or replacing the coax with something less lossly
> would have a far greater effect, not to mention improving reception as
> well.

Interestingly I was in with a group that understood the importance of
good feed line and good antenna's. Never did hop up a set and that's
what actually channeled me into amateur radio.

One of the fellows in the group was an EE - actually designed a tube 
based 1KW amp for the 11m band. Now if he'd gotten his amateur ticket 
and moved it up to the 10m band he would have been pretty much legal. 

Of the entire bunch of us that were on during that period, three of us 
ended up getting our amateur licenses. 

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

Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2005 21:40:01 -0600
From: Neal McLain <nmclain@annsgarden.com>
Subject: Re: What Happened To Channel 1


Michael D. Sullivan  <userid@camsul.example.invalid> wrote:

> Television, on tho other hand, started out in two discontiguous
> VHF bands, with somewhat variable spacing between channels and
> a need for precise tuning, and tuning in on a single band by
> twiddling an analog variable tuning capacitor to the right
> frequency would have been difficult.  This tuning method was
> used on some early TVs; I don't know  whether they were tuned
> by numeric frequency or by channel number, but
> it would not have been very convenient.  The TV industry
> instead standardized on TV tuners that had 12 discrete fixed
> settings, pre-tuned to channels 2-13, with a fine tuning
> control that allowed one to tune  the frequency higher or lower
> to account for offsets....

Whereupon Robert Bonomi (bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com) wrote:

> Plausable,  just 'false to fact'.  <wry grin>

> In the early days of TV receivers, they were equipped with
> continuous-tuning knobs/dials, just like an AM radio receiver.
> For the TV band, however the indicator assembly was marked by
> "channel", *not* by frequency.

> I used to have a 1930's Crosley TV that had that kind of
> continuous tuner.  *BIG* gap on the dial, between channel 6 and
> 7, It actually tuned across that entire 'midband' space -- with
> all kinds of interesting results.  You could "see" aircraft
> band transmissions, and hear stuff on broadcast FM, 2m Ham, and
> business-band.

Sullivan is correct.

As Sullivan acknowledged, some old TV sets did work like Bonomi's
1930s Crosley: they required "tuning in on a single band by twiddling
an analog variable tuning capacitor to the right frequency [which]
would have been difficult."

But by the 1950s, TV set manufacturers were installing "turret tuners"
to simplify VHF tuning.  A single knob rotated a cylindrical mechanism
fitted with twelve little hand-wired circuit boards, one for each
channel.  Each circuit board had a bunch of capacitors, some
hand-wound coils, and a row of metal contacts that mated with metal
springs.  As each circuit board was brought into position by the
rotating mechanism, the springs mated with the contacts on the board,
placing that board in the circuit.

After the introduction of UHF, turret tuners were manufactured with 13
circuit boards, one for each VHF channel + one that switched to a
separate UHF tuner.  The UHF tuner was tuned in one continuous-tuning
dial.

Sullivan continued:

> Later on, [turret] tuners had separate fine- tuners for each channel
> so one wouldn't need to retune when switching from station to
> station.

On each channel, the fine-tuning control engaged a tuning slug inside
one of the little hand-wound coils.

Here's a link to a picture showing a turret VHF tuner (left) and what 
appears to be a continuous-tuning UHF tuner (right).  This particular photo 
happens to be on a British website, but the basic structure of the turret 
mechanism is the same in the USA.

http://www.thevalvepage.com/valvetek/guidgrid/GGRID2.JPG

Back in my cable TV days during the 70s, turret tuners used to drive
us nuts.  There was only one VHF TV station in the market (Channel 3),
so if a viewer wasn't hooked to cable, the only exercise the tuner got
was from getting flipped back and forth between UHF and 3.  This kept
the contacts on UHF, 2, and 3 clean, but the rest of the contacts got
pretty dusty and/or corroded.  If this viewer then connected to cable
(just 12 channels in those days), suddenly, all 12 VHF circuit boards
were needed.  We spent a lot of time explaining, "I'm sorry, sir, your
TV set's tuner needs to be cleaned ... please take it to the TV repair
shop of your choice ... no we do not repair television sets ... our
franchise agreement specifically prohibits it."

Things got even worse when we introduced our first pay service (HBO) in 
1978.  We "hid" it in the midband on cable channel 17, "in the clear" (not 
scrambled, not trapped).  We provided each HBO sub with a primitive 
converter: a little box with a single two-position switch:

   - One position converted channel 17 to channel 2 for HBO.

   - One position passed the incoming cable signal through
     unaltered for channels 2-13.

It wasn't very good security, but the powers-that-were considered it to be 
good enough, since turret tuners couldn't tune it.

Well, it wasn't long before local TV shops discovered a new line of 
business: retuning one of the lesser-used turret circuit boards (like 
public access) to channel 17.

Of course, Bonomi's old Crosley would have tuned to it.  But by the
1970s, virtually all TV sets used turret VHF tuners.  Varactor tuners
with digital displays were just coming on the market, and the old
continuous-tuning models had just about disappeared.

A few years later, we moved HBO to channel 2 (so we could sell HBO to
hotels and motels), installed negative traps to secure it, and
abandoned all those old two-position-switch converters.  But some
people never figured it out: for years thereafter, those old boxes
kept appearing at garage sales and flea markets, sometimes accompanied
by "get HBO free" signs.

As for the folks who paid some TV shop to illicitly retune a circuit
board to channel 17 ... well, they got what they paid for.

Neal McLain

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

From: wollman@lcs.mit.edu (Garrett Wollman)
Subject: Re: What Happened To Channel 1
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 04:31:38 UTC
Organization: MIT Laboratory for Computer Science


In article <telecom24.123.7@telecom-digest.org>, Robert Bonomi
<bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com> responded to TELECOM Digest Editor:

> Originally, 199 channels, 100kc spacing, numbered 1-199, corresponding
> to frequencies from 88.1 through 107.9 megacycles.  Since then, even
> the name of the unit-of-measurement has changed. :) and a few
> additional channels have managed to sneak in.  I believe 200 is 108.0,
> 201 is 88.0, and I'm not sure how they numbered the space below 88.0.

Channel 200 is 87.9; 201 is 88.1, and so on up to 300 which is 107.9.

There are two stations in the entire U.S. on channel 200: KSFH, a
high-school station in Mountain View, Calif., and K200AA, a Calvary
satellator in Sun Valley, Nev.  In addition, Federal Signal Corp. has
an experimental license for WA2XNX in Brazos, Tex., but I have no idea
if this station is operating.

Channel 200 is reserved for non-commercial, class-D stations which
have been "bumped" by a primary station from their previous channel,
and for which no other FM channel would be technically permissible.  I
suspect this rule was made specifically for KSFH, which was for many
years the only station on the channel; K200AA was just recently built.


-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: Paul Coxwell <paulcoxwell@tiscali.co.uk>
Subject: Re: What Happened To Channel 1
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 12:46:11 -0000


> If you look at a digital "world band" radio, you will find somewhere a
> "europe-america" switch. It's often well hidden. I have one where it's
> in the battery compartment. In the Americas the channels on the AM
> band are spaced 10 kHz apart. In Europe they are spaced 9 kHz apart,
> allowing them to squeeze in a few extra stations. This is significant
> only in digital tuning, especially in digital search.

The allocations here were also all shifted upward by 1kHz following a
WARC conference in 1978, so 899, 908, 917kHz became 900, 909, 918 etc.

> There is something similar in FM. I've forgotten the exact details,
> but in US we use only the "odd" frequencies: 88.1, 88.3, 88.5, 88.7,
> 88.9 MHz. I think in some parts of the world they use the even
> frequencies: 88.2, 88.4 etc. This is to get the necessary spacing
> between the broadcasts.

Yes, FM broadcasts in Europe use both even and odd slots, and in
Britain there have even been some stations given a 50kHz allocation,
i.e. xx.x5 MHz.

> One other peculiarity: in most countries, FM is about 88 to 108
> MHz. In Japan it's about 78 to 98 MHz. There are a few radios that
> will receive the entire band, 78 to 108, but most, including Japanese
> brands sold outside Japan, miss the low end of the Japanese band.

The former Soviet Bloc countries in eastern Europe also had their own
FM band.  I can't remember the details, but I think it was somewhere
around the 60 to 70MHz region.

In Britain, the original FM broadcast band ran only from 88 to 100MHz.
The band above 100MHz was used for two-way radio, a fact soon
discovered by even the casual listener when imported radios covering
right up to 108MHz started to appear in the country.  The broadcast
band was extended right up to 108MHz after the other services had been
moved to different frequencies in the 1980s.

Another minor technical variation here is that we use a different
pre-emphasis curve on FM broadcasts: 50uS vs. 75uS.

- Paul.

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

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 #124
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Mar 21 18:08:09 2005
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j2LN88k03025;
	Mon, 21 Mar 2005 18:08:09 -0500 (EST)
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 18:08:09 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200503212308.j2LN88k03025@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 #125

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 21 Mar 2005 18:08:00 EST    Volume 24 : Issue 125

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Back From Bankruptcy, Telecom is in For a Fight (Monty Solomon)
    Phishing by Phone - VoIP Raises Security Concerns (Jack Decker)
    Tracking Down a Harassing Caller Number? (AES)
    Former WorldCom Executives Settle for $55.25 Mln (Telecom dailyLead)
    Dialpad.com Dpphone 211 (nselewa@gmail.com)
    Re: Cell Phone ATT (David B. Horvath, CCP)
    Re: Cell Phone ATT (John Levine)
    Re: Cell Phone ATT (Joseph)
    Re: Cell Phone ATT (Robert Bonomi)
    Re: Cell Phone ATT (Scott)
    Re: Cell Phone ATT (Isaiah Beard)
    Re: Cell Phone "Caller ID" Needed (LB@notmine.com)
    Re: VoIP and Bell DSL: Is it Ready For Prime Time? (John Levine)
    Re: VoIP and Bell DSL: Is it Ready For Prime Time? (Robert Bonomi)
    Re: VoIP and Bell DSL: Is it Ready For Prime Time? (Philip R. Mann)
    Re: VOIP and Bell DSL: Is it Ready For Prime Time? (Lisa Hancock)
    What Happened to FM Channels 1-199 (Bob Goudreau) 
    Re: What Happened to Channel 1 (Alan Burkitt Gray)
    Re: What Happened to Channel 1 (Paul Coxwell)
    Re: What Happened To Channel 1 (Joe Morris)
    Re: Feds: Criminals Luuuuv Those Open 802.11 Networks (Tim@Backhome.org)
    Re: Attacked by a Dog Which Was Playing (Ben Schilling)

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, 20 Mar 2005 23:51:00 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Back From Bankruptcy, Telecom is in For a Fight


PETER D. AQUINO - CHIEF EXECUTIVE, RCN CORP. | ON THE HOT SEAT

March 20, 2005

Peter D. Aquino took over in late December as chief executive of
telecommunications upstart RCN Corp., which provides cable television,
Internet, and phone service in parts of the Boston region and six
other US metropolitan areas. RCN had just emerged from a $2 billion,
eight-month bankruptcy reorganization, and within days giant Verizon
Communications Inc. -- taking dead aim at RCN and Comcast Corp. --
unveiled plans to build a powerful new fiber-optic network that can
deliver cable TV in the Boston area. Aquino, 43, a former Bell
Atlantic executive and broadband entrepreneur in Venezuela, spoke with
Globe reporter Peter J. Howe.

http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2005/03/20/back_from_bankruptcy_telecom_is_in_for_a_fight/

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

From: Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@workbench.net>
Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2005 23:40:24 -0500
Subject: Phishing by Phone -- VoIP Raises Security Concerns
Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com


http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1009_22-5627631.html

Reuters
Published on ZDNet News: March 20, 2005, 6:11 PM PT

Internet phone services have drawn millions of users looking for
rock-bottom rates. Now they're also attracting identity thieves
looking to turn stolen credit cards into cash.

Some Internet phone services let scam artists make it appear that
they're calling from another phone number -- a useful trick that enables
them to drain credit accounts and pose as banks or other trusted
authorities, online fraud experts say.

"It's like you've handed people an entire phone network," said Lance
James, who as chief technology officer of Secure Science sees such
scams on a daily basis.  [.....]  Debt collectors and private
investigators use Camophone.com's 5-cents-per-call service to trick
people into answering the phone, according to messages posted on a
discussion board.

Traveling salesmen say the service comes in handy when they want
clients to return calls to the main office, rather than their motel
room.

Full story at:
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1009_22-5627631.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: AES <siegman@stanford.edu>
Subject: Tracking Down a Harassing Caller Number?
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 08:57:42 -0800
Organization: Stanford University


Are there any official procedures or unofficial ways of tracking down
the source of repeated harassing calls coming from a set of apparently
related numbers in a distant area code?

[Calls may or may not be legally harassing but are certainly unwanted.
Callbacks to the Caller ID numbers get a "Your call can not be
completed" message followed by a code number.  It's most probably some
kind of commercial call, rather than a personal harassment.]

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

Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 12:42:16 EST
From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA <usta@dailylead.com>
Subject: Former WorldCom Executives Settle Lawsuits for $55.25 Million


Telecom dailyLead from USTA
March 21, 2005
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=20207&l=2017006

TODAY'S HEADLINES

NEWS OF THE DAY
* Former WorldCom executives settle lawsuits for $55.25 million
BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH
* PHS phones for the masses
* Identity thieves take advantage of VoIP's security holes
* Nortel reports earnings
USTA SPOTLIGHT 
* Learn about the "Wireless Triple Play": USTA Small Company Summit, Apr 6 and 7
EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES
* Company trials 10 Gigabit Ethernet chip
REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE
* FCC poised to rule on "naked" DSL
* Brand X appeal could alter broadband landscape

Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others.
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=20207&l=2017006

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

From: nselewa@gmail.com <nselewa@gmail.com>
Subject: dialpad.com dpphone 211
Date: 21 Mar 2005 10:14:26 -0800


You get what you pay for.  If your lucky enough not to get a busy
signal, you can actually make a U.S. call.

But wait; if you forget to dial 1 for U.S. coutry code and you dial a
10 digit number that belongs to an international country, it's going
through.  Ex. 847 xxx-xxxx goes to Vietnam.

It conveniently masks the 011 for you.  No thanks.  And there's no way
to set the dpphone 211 to require the 011.  This is from their tech
support.

I've had Dialpad for almost a month.  Way to many problems.  Dropping
them ASAP.

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

Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2005 19:56:08 -0500
From: David B. Horvath, CCP <dhorvath@withheld on request>
Subject: Re: Cell Phone ATT


PAT: Please remove my email address, too much SPAM.

Technically, the AT&T Wireless and Cingular companies merged, so your
contract with AT&T Wireless still survives. Just because the final
company happens to have a different name doesn't change anything.

In addition, I bet if you read the contract closely, it allows AT&T
Wireless to assign the contract to someone else (i.e., they could
"sell" you).

- David

On 19 Mar 2005 19:03:34 -0800, absmith3@hotmail.com wrote:

> I have an ATT contract dated in Oct- 2004- before Cingular bought ATT.
> Now Cingular is saying that I owe it $170 for cancellation fee if I
> transfer service to Verizon.

> My contract was with ATT and I never signed anything with
> Cingular. So, looks like the ATT contract is shakey at best.  Does
> anybody have any experience similar to mine and didn't pay for
> cancellation fees?

> Thanks,

> Abby

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

Date: 21 Mar 2005 01:23:13 -0000
From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
Subject: Re: Cell Phone ATT
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


> I have an ATT contract dated in Oct- 2004- before Cingular bought ATT.
> Now Cingular is saying that I owe it $170 for cancellation fee if I
> transfer service to Verizon.

> My contract was with ATT and I never signed anything with
> Cingular. So, looks like the ATT contract is shakey at best.  Does
> anybody have any experience similar to mine and didn't pay for
> cancellation fees?

AT&T Wireless merged with Cingular and the combined company calls
itself Cingular.  Merely changing the name of the company doesn't void
the contracts, any more than all your contracts would be voided if you
got married and changed your name.

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

From: Joseph <JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Cell Phone ATT
Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2005 18:24:41 -0800
Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com


On 19 Mar 2005 19:03:34 -0800, absmith3@hotmail.com wrote:

> I have an ATT contract dated in Oct- 2004- before Cingular bought ATT.
> Now Cingular is saying that I owe it $170 for cancellation fee if I
> tranfer service to Verizon.

If you had a one year contract your contract would be fulfilled in
October 2005.

> My contract was with ATT and I never signed anything with
> Cingular. So, looks like the ATT contract is shakey at best.  Does
> anybody have any experience similar to mine and didn't pay for
> cancellation fees?

When Cingular assumed AT&T Wireless' assets they also assumed all of
its agreements which would include any contract you had with AT&T
Wireless.  If you had a year's contract with AT&T Wireless your
contract did not end when Cingular purchased AT&T Wireless.  I'm
pretty sure that if you had failed to meet the terms of your contract
with AT&T Wireless they would have charged you an early termination
fee.  Bottom line is that you are responsible for your contract til
the end of your contract term.  There is no get out of jail free pass
by your being absorbed by Cingular.

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

From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi)
Subject: Re: Cell Phone ATT
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 04:02:39 -0000
Organization: Widgets, Inc.


In article <telecom24.123.2@telecom-digest.org>,
<absmith3@hotmail.com> wrote:

> I have an ATT contract dated in Oct- 2004- before Cingular bought ATT.
> Now Cingular is saying that I owe it $170 for cancellation fee if I
> tranfer service to Verizon.

> My contract was with ATT and I never signed anything with
> Cingular. So, looks like the ATT contract is shakey at best. 

*READ* the contract.  Dollars to donuts, it expressly says that they
_can_ "assign" it, without affecting _your_ liabilities.  If the
contract is silent on the issue, then by long-standing principle,
either party can assign their interest to 'somebody else'.  The only
time that is disallowed is if the contract explicitly states that (a)
no assignment is allowed, or (b) that assignment is allowed *only*
with the consent of the opposite party in the contract.

Thus, _unless_ the contract specifically states that they cannot
assign it without your consent, you =are= liable for the termination
fee in the contract you signed.

A question -- putting the shoe on the other foot -- what would your
attitude have been if Cingular had just turned off your phone, without
any notice or warning, on the day their purchase became effective?
I'll _bet_ that you would have been screaming "breach of contract",
threatening lawsuits, etc., etc.

Well, contract commitments work _both_ ways.  If they're compelled to
provide you service under that contract, you are required to pay the
early termination fee, if you cancel before the full term.

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

From: Scott <witheld@giganews.com>
Subject: Re: Cell Phone ATT
Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2005 23:04:01 -0500


Cingular is successor-in-interest to ATTWS, and as such, your contract
is automatically assigned to Cingular.  Contract law states that
unless the contract specifically does not allow assignment, it is
assignable.


<absmith3@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:telecom24.123.2@telecom-digest.org:

> I have an ATT contract dated in Oct- 2004- before Cingular bought ATT.
> Now Cingular is saying that I owe it $170 for cancellation fee if I
> transfer service to Verizon.

> My contract was with ATT and I never signed anything with
> Cingular. So, looks like the ATT contract is shakey at best.  Does
> anybody have any experience similar to mine and didn't pay for
> cancellation fees?

> Thanks,

> Abby

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

From: Isaiah Beard <sacredpoet@sacredpoet.com>
Subject: Re: Cell Phone ATT
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 15:03:58 -0500
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com


absmith3@hotmail.com wrote:

> I have an ATT contract dated in Oct- 2004- before Cingular bought ATT.
> Now Cingular is saying that I owe it $170 for cancellation fee if I
> transfer service to Verizon.

> My contract was with ATT and I never signed anything with
> Cingular. So, looks like the ATT contract is shakey at best.

No, it's quite solid actually, as long as Cingular has honored the
terms of the contract and have not made any changes that you never
agreed to.

If they have, then you have a case.  But if only the name at the top
of the bill has changed, then you're still in for the length of the
contract.

E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.

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

From: LB@notmine.com
Subject: Re: Cell Phone "Caller ID" Needed
Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2005 19:16:20 -0500
Organization: Optimum Online


Ray Burns wrote:

> Dear Patrick Townson,

> Pat,

> I am writing software that communicates from one network-connected
> computer to another controlled by a cell phone (XHTML-M). The user
> logs in with just a password. Passwords are not guaranteed to be
> unique, so I need some sort of phone serial number or other similar
> number to append to the password to make it unique. Do you know of
> such a phone id number/string that I could access via HTTP/HTTPS?

> Thanks,

> Ray Burns            Nantasket Software, Inc
> 617.964.4084(w)      ray@igsw.com
> 617.966-7439(c)      970 Commonwealth Avenue, Newton Center MA 02459
> 617.965-5081(f)

If such a thing is possible, and with all due respect to the OP I would
suggest two two things:

1. Be damn sure you know who this person is.
2  Do NOT post in a newsgroup!

LB

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

Date: 21 Mar 2005 01:20:37 -0000
From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
Subject: Re: VoIP and Bell DSL: Is it Ready For Prime Time?
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


> Does anyone have any news about this? There was talk that Bell might
> only offer naked DSL to users who bought the (not yet released?) Bell
> VoIP service.

> Also, Vonage told me that I can't keep my local Bell number. Anyone
> know if the new Bell VoIP service will let me keep my local Bell
> number?

Since you're in Canada, I don't think you have landline portability at
all.  Bell will probably let you keep your number since you'd just be
moving it from a POTS line to VoIP on the same pair of wires, so it'd
end up being switched in the same switch.

Having just managed to cancel my Vonage "service" this evening after
trying for more than a month, I'd stay away from them.  Now I'm using
Primus Lingo which seems OK.

Regards,

John Levine johnl@iecc.com Primary Perpetrator of The Internet for Dummies,
Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://www.johnlevine.com, Mayor
"More Wiener schnitzel, please", said Tom, revealingly.

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

From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi)
Subject: Re: VoIP and Bell DSL: Is it Ready For Prime Time?
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 03:44:40 -0000
Organization: Widgets, Inc.


In article <telecom24.123.3@telecom-digest.org>,

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: 

> Regards naked DSL, for most parts of the Bell System it is unlikely as
> they do business now. SBC, for example has stated they would not do it
> and they don't do it except where courts have ordered them to do
> so. You would be better off looking at high speed cable internet or
> satellite internet if it is possible in your community, as it is here.
> PAT]

Note: The playing field on this *is* changing.  Generally for the better.

While it's true that in a lot of territory the ILEC won't sell you DSL
unless you have phone service from them as well, It _is_ possible to
get 'naked DSL' from competing providers.  It costs a little bit more,
typically $10/month, but _is_ available in large parts of the country.

Verizon has announced plans to offer naked directly to customers, but
the release date has slipped.

Qwest, as of this month is offering it in their entire service area,
at a premium of $5 over their shared-line pricing.

In a significant part of at least the former Ameritech part of SBC,
naked DSL has been available through the likes of COVAD, and MCI, for
_years_  even though you could _not_ get it through Ameritech/SBC.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What do you mean when you say 'the
playing field is changing, generally for the better?'  Is it 'better'
that people will now in many areas (but not SBC of course!) be able
to grovel and beg to get DSL without a phone line and have service
reps get ignorant and give them a hard time and maybe not even know
how to write the order? Is it 'better' that telco will try all its
usual sleazy tricks with this new fertile area for them (naked DSL)?
What makes that 'better'?  When I got a letter last week from SBC
telling me I could have the whole works for just =$2.95= per month for
one year _if I would please just come back to them_ and get away from
Prairie Stream, I knew they were up to their old tricks once again.

Why is naked DSL direct from telco 'better' than to give cablecos a
crack at it, and their friends in the ILEC side of the business?  PAT]

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

From: Philip R. Mann <prmlaw@NOSPAMnyc.rr.com>
Subject: Re: VoIP and Bell DSL: Is it Ready For Prime Time?
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 00:47:38 EST
Reply-To: Philip R. Mann <prmlaw@NOSPAMnyc.rr.com>


On 19 Mar 2005 17:10:58 -0800, TELECOM Digest Editor noted in 
response to Thumper:

> Regards naked DSL, for most parts of the Bell System it is unlikely as
> they do business now. SBC, for example has stated they would not do it
> and they don't do it except where courts have ordered them to do
> so.

And if they ever offer naked DSL (whether by Court order or
otherwise), expect two tiered pricing similar to what Time-Warner
Cable (at least in NYC) does for high speed online access: $X for
cable customers with a certain minimum level of service and $[X+15]
for non-cable (and basic cable) customers.

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I personally say telco has had their
chance at DSL (or rather, high speed internet) and they have blown it.
I suggest just letting the cable companies handle it henceforth if
they wish to provide it, and the various third party vendors.  PAT]

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

From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Subject: Re: VoIP and Bell DSL: Is it Ready For Prime Time?
Date: 21 Mar 2005 13:29:43 -0800


Editor wrote:

> Granted, I live in a very small town, population 8800, one phone
> exchange for the entire town, the police dispatcher responds for the
> sheriff also, and the city offices and they receive 'two or three
> 911 calls per day'.

But what happens if you're in a county of 880,000 where there are a
lot more 911 calls per day and they don't know everyone?

I don't know about the rest of the country, but in our region
telephone exchanges, municipal boundaries, and post office names are
totally separate.  Some fire/rescue/police units are merged between
municipalities, others are separate.

In our county, if the local town is busy, help is dispatched from the
next town that is available.  The problem is that a distant town may
not be familiar with new streets in ever expanding suburban
developments and cul-de-sacs.

> You also raised an 'issue' with power. If you use a battery backup
> unit you get around any problems with power. I have heard people ask,
> but what about the DSL/cable line; their power could go out also.

Yes,

> but there is a chance power could be out at the phone exchange also.
> I guess nothing is perfect.

When we have a commercial power failure, our cable TV system goes out
as well.  It takes longer for that to be restored than commercial
power.  They tell us the fibre optic cable has many sensitive
amplifiers and needs more care than the prior analog coax.

As to landline phone reliability, in my many years at this
location, commercial power went out a lot, but never phone
service.  I only remember when unavailable dial tone, which
was during an unexpected extremely severe storm that drove up
phone usage.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well Lisa, what do you do in a case
like Brooklyn, New York where by the dispatcher's own admission, 
"we do not answer this phone after 10 PM"? I guess VOIP would never 
work there, would it? I would have been sort of ashamed to admit to
a member of the public that a police department (especially in New
York City!) closes down its phone line at 10 PM, but I guess being
brazen is what makes some public 'servants' good at their job. If a
small town can arrange its police department to serve the public
efficiently, without a lot of sass-back to the public they are expected
to serve, then why can't your so-called county of 880,000? I think it
is about time our public servants get told "either learn to do the job
right and do it right -- or we will get people who can". Maybe you, or
one of the other Bell System apologists in our readership can tell me
why it is that VOIP carriers are expected to be the ones to have to
do the twisting and turning and maneuvering to get their ways in line
to make it easier for the public servants?  Why do the public servants
simply refuse to accept the fact that as times change, *their procedures*  
have to change as well?  What the hell did any of those people do
back in the 1960's when our nation was crossbar with no immediate ID
on calls?  You want a job as a police dispatcher? Then you, by-God,
either get an encyclopedic knowledge of streets and intersections and
addresses in your town or don't get in the way of the people who do;
if your worker's "union" insists you have to have a job you are
probably not qualified for anyway, is that the public or VOIP carriers
at fault?   PAT]
   
------------------------------

From: BobGoudreau@withheld at request>
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 15:39:24 -0500
Subject: What Happened to FM Channels 1-199?


[Please remove my email address from both this message and the Table of
Contents.  Thanks.]

Garrett Wollman wrote:

> Channel 200 is 87.9; 201 is 88.1, and so on up to 300 which is 107.9

Now that we've covered the history of VHF Channel 1, can anyone
explain why the official FM channel numbers are in the range 200-300
instead of 1-101?


Bob Goudreau
Cary, NC

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

From: Alan Burkitt-Gray <ABurkitt@EUROMONEYPLC.COM>
Subject: Re: What Happened To Channel 1
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 20:39:58 -0000


Paul Coxwell paulcoxwell@tiscali.co.uk wrote:

> In Britain, the original FM broadcast band ran only from 88 to
> 100MHz. The band above 100MHz was used for two-way radio, a fact
> soon discovered by even the casual listener when imported radios
> covering right up to 108MHz started to appear in the country.

Even better, it was used by the police. I remember around 1969
listening to a car chase through the territory of various police
forces in northern England, where I then lived -- picking up
transmissions from different forces on different channels. The police
had to move off -- I think it was done in two stages -- before
broadcasters could take over the band. Earlier on, many FM radios
designed by UK manufacturers such as Roberts wouldn't go higher than
100 MHz.
 

Alan Burkitt-Gray, Editor, Global Telecoms Business
 
 <http://www.globaltelecomsbusiness.com/>
http://www.globaltelecomsbusiness.com 
email  <mailto:aburkitt@euromoneyplc.com> aburkitt@euromoneyplc.com; 
Global Telecoms Business Top 5 Daily: email me to get on the distribution
list for this free newsletter.

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

From: Paul Coxwell <paulcoxwell@tiscali.co.uk>
Subject: Re: What Happened To Channel 1
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 21:34:43 -0000


> But by the 1950s, TV set manufacturers were installing "turret tuners"
> to simplify VHF tuning.  A single knob rotated a cylindrical mechanism
> fitted with twelve little hand-wired circuit boards, one for each
> channel.  Each circuit board had a bunch of capacitors, some
> hand-wound coils, and a row of metal contacts that mated with metal
> springs.  As each circuit board was brought into position by the
> rotating mechanism, the springs mated with the contacts on the board,
> placing that board in the circuit.

> After the introduction of UHF, turret tuners were manufactured with 13
> circuit boards, one for each VHF channel  one that switched to a
> separate UHF tuner.  The UHF tuner was tuned in one continuous-tuning
> dial.

As you linked to a picture of typical British VHF and UHF tuners,
allow me to add a few more comments from this side of the pond.

In early times, many British sets had no outside channel selection,
just a fine tuning adjustment.  As we had only one TV service then,
this wasn't much of a problem, unless somebody moved to a different
area, in which case he would need to have the set retuned.  Only
channels 1 through 5 -- our low VHF band I -- were in use.

By 1955 Independent Television arrived and the turret tuner had became
standard.  All ITV transmissions were on high VHF band III, channels 6
through 12, later 13.  External converter units were also sold to
frequency convert band III signals down to band I for those using
older sets.

There were also some sets in the later 1950s and 1960s which included
an FM radio option (FM radio itself being a relatively new
introduction, having started in Britain in 1955).  There were only
three BBC networks in those days, and some sets added three extra
turret positions to tune the "band II" FM broadcast range (a separate
cam and switch arrangement on the turret mechanism was generally
employed to blank the screen during radio reception).  These positions
were sometimes labeled H, L, and T on the selector for the names of
the BBC services (Home, Light, and Third).

The plan for UHF was ready by the early 1960s, so sets incorporating a
UHF tuner started to appear.  The complication was that existing VHF
transmissions were still 405-line (system A) but the new UHF
transmitters were to be 625-line (system I).  The dual-standard sets
had a *monster* changeover switch which had to not only switch from
VHF to UHF but also reroute signals to different I.F. stages, switch
the horizontal scan from 10.125 to 15.625kHz, change from AM to FM
sound, invert video polarity, and so on.  The switch was often a
custom-made unit for the set which ran the full length of the chassis
so that each pole was close to the required section of the circuitry.

Two switching approaches were used: One left the VHF turret positions
as normal and used a completely separate rotary or push-button/rocker
control to operate the changeover switch.

The other put a "U" position on the turret tuner to select UHF, with a
cam and link rod on the mechanism to operate the changeover.  The VHF
tuner was then used as an "high I.F." for UHF reception.  There were
even some designs which used an auxiliary contact on the "U" position
to apply power to a solenoid to operate the switch, presumably on the
basis that a wire between tuner and main board was easier to maintain
than a mechanical link which would need to be removed, reconnected,
and adjusted if anything was taken out for servicing.

The UHF tuners came in two flavors: One was the continuously variable
type as described, the other being a mechanical preset arrangement.
The UHF band-plan was designed to allow an eventual four networks
(BBC1, BBC2, ITV, plus a yet-to-be-determined fourth station), so many
of these UHF tuners had four buttons.

These mechanical UHF tuners operated with permeability tuning (i.e. the
slugs were moved in and out of the coils), with each button being turnable
to set the preset to any channel across the UHF bands (bands IV and V,
channels 21 through 69).   This is similar to the arrangement which was
employed on the mechanical presets of car radios at the time.

For several years, people needed both VHF and UHF in order to receive
the full range of programs.  The second BBC service, BBC2 went on air
on 625/UHF in 1964.  BBC1 and ITV started their 625/UHF broadcasts
around 1968/69, but it would be several more years before UHF coverage
was extended to most of the country.  The fourth button on mechanical
UHF tuners (sometimes marked "*" or "ITV2" in anticipation of a second
independent network) was often used by those living on the boundaries
of service areas to select an ITV broadcast from an adjacent region
(BBC was networked most of the time, while in those days the ITV
regions were far more autonomous and often had alternate programming).

Gradually, UHF covered most areas, and in the 1970s we started to see
single-standard sets once again, only this time they were 625-line and
came with only a UHF tuner.  Small portables of the era tended to come
with a continuously variable UHF tuner, while by the end of the 1970s
varicap tuning and 6 or more preset positions was becoming the norm
for larger sets.

Just to finish the story, that planned-for fourth network finally went
on-air in 1982, and the 405/VHF transmitters -- still radiating just
BBC1 and ITV in monochrome only -- were eventually closed down in
1985.

- Paul.

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

From: Joe Morris <jcmorris@mitre.org>
Subject: Re: What Happened To Channel 1?
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 13:57:19 UTC
Organization: The MITRE Organization


Michael D. Sullivan <userid@camsul.example.invalid> writes:

> Television, on tho other hand, started out in two discontiguous VHF 
> bands, with somewhat variable spacing between channels and a need for 
> precise tuning, and tuning in on a single band by twiddling an analog 
> variable tuning capacitor to the right frequency would have been 
> difficult.  This tuning method was used on some early TVs; I don't know 
> whether they were tuned by numeric frequency or by channel number, but 
> it would not have been very convenient.  

I'm not sure when the manufacturing of TV sets with a single analog
tuner was finally discontinued in the US, but I recall my family
having a very early duMont (?) receiver (maybe 5" diameter circular
screen?) with an analog tuning knob which drove the tuning capacitor
through a reducing gear.  This would have been in the early 1950s when
WDSU-TV [*] went on the air in New Orleans.  And no, I can't recall
the brand we got to replace this receiver, but my (non-parity-checked)
memory says that it had a "revolutionary" drum tuner with detents and
tuning settings for each of the channels.

[*] I get a number of questions at the office when my wallpaper changer
pops up with the original WDSU-TV test pattern.  It makes me feel old when
I turn out to be the only person there who remembers when test patterns
were routinely incorporated into the station ID slides ...


Joe Morris

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I seem to recall when I was about five
years old my parents had a television set with a tiny little screen
which was maybe two or three inches round. And it had a _huge_
magnifying glass attached to the front of it.  PAT]

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

From: Tim@Backhome.org
Subject: Re: Feds: Criminals Luuuuv Those Open 802.11 Networks
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 06:23:36 -0800
Organization: Cox Communications


It is so easy to secure WiFi, at least against most intruders.  I can
receive four other home WiFi signals in my condo.  Like mine, all the
others are secured.  So, I guess me and my neighbors are smarter than
some of these dummies. ;-)

Danny Burstein wrote:

> "... Of those suspects, half regularly used the open Wi-Fi connections
> of unsuspecting neighbors. Four suspects, in Canada, California and
> Florida, were logged in to neighbors' Wi-fi networks at the moment law
> enforcement agents, having tracked them by other means, entered their
> homes and arrested them, Secret Service agents involved in the case
> said.  ...

> " 'We had this whole network set up to identify these (suspects) but
> the one thing we had to take into consideration was Wi-fi', (former
> Secret Service agent) Mr. Gilhooly said. 'If I get to an Internet
> address and I send a subpoena to the Internet provider and it gets me
> a name and physical address, how do I know that that person isn't
> actually bouncing in from next door?'

> (rest at: )

> http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/19/technology/19wifi.html>

> _____________________________________________________
> Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
>                      dannyb@panix.com
> [to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]

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

From: Ben Schilling <Ben.Schilling@oci.state.wi.us>
Subject: Re: Attacked by a Dog Which was Playing
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 10:01:39 -0600


hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:

> We have some feral cats in the neighborhood I want to adopt and have
> tried over the years to lure them with food and kindness.  They always
> kept their distance (although they would eagerly take the food if I
> stayed far away).  I described their behavior to my vet and he said
> they were feral and that they could not be domesticated.  One has been
> around for seven years, which isn't bad for feral.

You might see if your area has a "Friends of Ferals" or similar
organization.  They catch, spay, neuter, vaccinate, and release feral cats.
This keeps the population down and prevents them from spreading diseases to
pets.

Ben Schilling

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

End of TELECOM Digest V24 #125
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Mar 22 14:53:02 2005
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j2MJr2w12018;
	Tue, 22 Mar 2005 14:53:02 -0500 (EST)
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 14:53:02 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200503221953.j2MJr2w12018@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 #126

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 22 Mar 2005 14:53:00 EST    Volume 24 : Issue 126

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Website Rouses Informants' Fear, Investigators' Ire (Monty Solomon)
    Is it Net Assistance ... or Cyberstalking? (Monty Solomon)
    Let's Focus on the Theft, Not the Identity (Monty Solomon)
    iPod-Like Cellphone Music Still Evolving (Monty Solomon)
    Some Concerned About Privacy Implications of E-ZPass (Monty Solomon)
    Source: FCC to Dress 'Naked' DSL (Jack Decker)
    Vonage Says Its Calls Are Still Being Blocked (Jack Decker)
    Level 3 Withdraws Request for VoIP Fee Ruling (Jack Decker)
    Who's the Owner of the Dim-and-Burst Signaling? (Hilbert)
    New Long Range Cordless Phones? (Dave)
    Re: What Happened To Channel 1 (Robert Bonomi)
    Re: What Happened to FM Channels 1-199? (Garrett Wollman)
    Re: What Happened To Channel 1 (Paul Coxwell)
    Re: Walkie Talkie (Steve Watt)
    Re: Hackers Target U.S. Power Grid (Daniel J McDonald)
    Re: Feds: Criminals Luuuuv Those Open 802.11 Networks (Steve Sobol)
    Re: VoIP and Bell DSL: Is it Ready For Prime Time? (Lisa Hancock)
    Re: Cell Phone ATT (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: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 21:27:08 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Website Rouses Informants' Fear, Investigators' Ire


By Kathleen Burge, Globe Staff  |  March 21, 2005

When a team of police, federal agents, and a drug-sniffing dog burst
through the front door and scoured every corner of the house, the
woman and her boyfriend figured they knew who had turned them in. So
she struck back: In the shadowy realms of cyberspace, she publicly
identified the informant who she suspected had ratted on her
boyfriend, landing him in court on drug possession charges.

On a website launched seven months ago from the North Shore, the woman
posted a note saying her alleged informant, a 27-year-old man from the
Tewksbury area, was a 'narc' who made a practice of snitching on
others to minimize his own legal problems.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2005/03/21/website_rouses_informants_fear_investigators_ire/

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

Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 21:37:30 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Is it Net Assistance ... or Cyberstalking?


By Associated Press  |  March 21, 2005

A Cambridge start-up is offering a service it says gives a measure of
control over the personal data the Internet disgorges, giving new
meaning to a practice commonly termed 'ego surfing' or 'Googling
yourself.'

The practice of typing your name into an Internet search engine and
seeing what pops up is now common, but the results can be
unpredictable. The Internet holds surprising amounts of personal
information, and some of it may be outdated, inaccurate, or
embarrassing.

ZoomInfo's computers have compiled individual Web profiles of 25
million people, summarizing what the Web publicly says about each
person. The service, launched today, allows Web surfers to search for
their profile, then change it for free.

http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2005/03/21/is_it_net_assistance____or_cyberstalking/ 

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

Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 21:55:36 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Let's Focus on the Theft, Not the Identity


By Hiawatha Bray  |  March 21, 2005

Identity theft is a nasty crime with a catchy name -- too catchy for
our own good. Identity theft, though important, isn't the root
problem, and focusing on it may distract us from real solutions.

And we need solutions badly. For a month or so, we've fretted over the
news that careless database companies had sold crooks a couple hundred
thousand Social Security numbers. Meanwhile, Boston College warns
about 120,000 graduates that a computer hacker may have gained access
to their personal information by raiding a computer that contained the
alumni database.

It's bad enough that crooks can steal our personal data, or even
purchase it. But it gets worse: They can often find the same stuff
with Google. At least they can if they're as smart as Latanya Sweeney,
an associate professor of computer science at Carnegie Mellon
University.

In a paper she will present this week in California, Sweeney describes
a program of hers that scans Google search results for files
containing names and Social Security numbers. In her test of the
software, Sweeney tracked down 140 job hunters who had posted resumes
on the Web. For some odd reason, they included their Social Security
numbers -- easy pickings.

Sweeney's motives are pure; she wrote another program to e-mail the
140 people and warn them of the threat. Nearly all cleaned up their
resumes. Sweeney has proposed a service called Internet Angel that
would automatically scour the Net and alert people if their Social
Security numbers are online.

http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2005/03/21/lets_focus_on_the_theft_not_the_identity/

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

Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 22:01:39 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: iPod-Like Cellphone Music Still Evolving


Carriers' profits said to be a crucial issue

By Peter J. Howe, Globe Staff  |  March 21, 2005

With more than 8 million sold last year and a popular buzz to die for,
Apple Computer Inc.'s iPod has proven there's a big appetite for a
portable, battery-powered, Internet-connected digital device that
makes sound.

And that's drawing plenty of attention from the businesses behind
another kind of portable, battery-powered, Internet-connected digital
device that makes sound: cellphone companies.

The save-a-pocket logic of offering consumers iPod-like music
capability built into a wireless handset seems obvious. But industry
insiders warn that it could be a long wait for true iPod-rivaling
devices to hit the market -- unless they come with some clear way for
carriers like Cingular Wireless, Verizon Wireless, and Sprint PCS to
get a cut of the profits.

Sprint this month began offering a $280 Sanyo MM-5600 camera phone
with enough memory to store about one hour's worth of MP3-format
music. For another $75, Sprint subscribers can buy a 512-megabyte
memory disk for the phone that can store roughly 400 songs, a far cry
from the 5,000 that can be stored on the $300 iPod. Sprint customers
buying the Sanyo device get a cable to transfer songs from their
computer into the phone, which also comes with stereo earphones.

Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications is also rolling out a line of
music-playing cellphones this year that sport the Sony Walkman name,
which dates back to the original portable music players of the late
1970s.

But a more ambitious effort by phone maker Motorola Inc. has
apparently been slowed down. This month, Motorola was set to unveil at
a big industry trade show in Hanover, Germany, a phone that downloads
music from Apple's iTunes service. Trade reporters had been briefed on
the phone's capabilities just days before Motorola canceled the
announcement.

http://www.boston.com/business/personaltech/articles/2005/03/21/ipod_like_cellphone_music_still_evolving/ 

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

Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 22:06:56 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Some Concerned About Privacy Implications of E-ZPass System


CONCORD, N.H. --The E-ZPass system that will soon make it easier to
pay tolls in New Hampshire will make it easier to track people's
movements, privacy advocates warn.

State officials say strict policies are in place to prevent that, and
stress that E-ZPass will be voluntary. They also say the system will
reduce traffic congestion and put off the need to expand the current
toll plazas.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/new_hampshire/articles/2005/03/21/some_concerned_about_privacy_implications_of_e_zpass_system/

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

From: Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@withheld on request>
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 15:09:53 -0500
Subject: Source: FCC to Dress 'Naked' DSL
Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com


http://news.com.com/Source+FCC+to+dress+naked+DSL/2100-1037_3-5627726.html

By Ben Charny
Staff Writer, CNET News.com

U.S. regulators are expected to up-end state public utility rules that
force BellSouth to let customers buy its high-speed Internet service
without having to also sign up for its local phone offering.

As early as Monday, said a source familiar with the situation, the
Federal Communications Commission could suspend public utility
commission regulations in California, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky and
Louisiana that forced BellSouth to sell DSL, or digital subscriber
line, service separate from its local phone service. In the past, the
two services had been inextricably linked.
	
Such a decision would send a strong message to other state utility
commissions that might be considering similar rules, the source said.

The expected FCC decision would have a profound effect on the few
thousand people in the four states who now get "naked" DSL from
BellSouth. It would also affect the millions of homeowners who would
go with a separate DSL offering given the chance, insiders
believe. The possible precedent for the Bells -- BellSouth and the
nation's three other top phone and DSL providers -- could even affect
cable operators that sell broadband and telephony on fiber-optic
networks, services that are much faster than the Bells' DSL.

Full story at:
http://news.com.com/Source+FCC+to+dress+naked+DSL/2100-1037_3-5627726.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: Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@withheld on request>
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 18:30:32 -0500
Subject: Vonage Says its Calls are Still Being Blocked


http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1035_22-5628564.html

By Ben Charny, CNET News.com
Published on ZDNet News: March 21, 2005, 11:24 AM PT

Two broadband providers are causing problems for Vonage's Internet
phone traffic, a spokeswoman said Monday, suggesting that a recent
federal fine for blocking Vonage calls may not have had its intended
impact.

A cable operator and what Vonage spokeswoman Brooke Schulz would only
describe as a "wireless broadband provider" are the two alleged
culprits. The problems include Vonage calls not getting through and
Vonage home phone adapters not working, she said.

The complaints surface about three weeks after a Mebane, N.C.,
telecommunications provider, Madison River Communication, said it
would "refrain from blocking" voice over Internet Protocol calls and
pay a $15,000 fine to the government. Vonage, a VoIP provider, brought
Madison River to the Federal Communications Commission's attention,
and may do so with providers involved in these latest problems.

Full story at:
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1035_22-5628564.html

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

From: Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@withheld on request>
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 01:54:54 -0500
Subject: Level 3 Withdraws Request for VoIP Fee Ruling


http://news.com.com/Level+3+withdraws+request+for+VoIP+fee+ruling/2100-7352_3-5629045.html

By Declan McCullagh
Staff Writer, CNET News.com

One of the most important Internet telephony rulings of the year was
expected from federal regulators Tuesday, but now it won't happen.

In a surprise move, an Internet telephony company that had asked the
Federal Communications Commission for the ruling said late Monday that
it was withdrawing its request.

Level 3 Communications had been telling the FCC that the company
should be able to pay lower fees to local telephone companies to begin
or end voice calls on their networks. The decision from the FCC was
expected to have a far-reaching impact on the voice over Internet
Protocol, or VoIP, industry. If Level 3 had lost, the prices for some
VoIP calls could have jumped.

But because FCC Chairman Michael Powell had left last week, the timing
was no longer right for a ruling, Level 3 CEO James Crowe said in a
statement. "The appointment of new leadership only three business days
before the statutory deadline for ruling on the petition" made it
"inappropriate to ask the agency to resolve this important issue in
the timeframe required by law," Crowe said.

Full story at:
http://news.com.com/Level+3+withdraws+request+for+VoIP+fee+ruling/2100-7352_3-5629045.html

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

From: geunbsong@yahoo.com (Hilbert)
Subject: Who's the Owner of the Dim-and-Burst Signaling?
Date: 21 Mar 2005 16:20:39 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


Hello,

I'm a graduate student in Korea.

Now  I'm wondering  who's  the owner  of  the dim-and-burst  signaling
method in IS-95?  Qualcomm or Motorola  or else?  Or could you give me
a good hint for finding the answer?

Thanks.

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

From: Dave <newsgroups@dave!!!christense!!n.o!!!r!!!g>
Subject: New Long Range Cordless Phones?
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 18:46:17 -0900


I saw a link earlier for this on Slash Dot.  Its a cordless phone that
supposedly works 100km from the base station (under ideal conditions).

http://www.goodbyelongdistance.com/catalog/item/1441280/975984.htm

Other then the obvious potential for grief from the FCC, anyone else 
have any thoughts?

I'm living in a rural Alaskan town and traditional cell service is 
spotty to none, even with an old bag phone and roof antenna so I was 
thinking that this could be an interesting approach to local mobile 
phone service.

Thanks,

-Dave

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

From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi)
Subject: Re: What Happened To Channel 1
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 04:30:18 -0000
Organization: Widgets, Inc.


In article <telecom24.124.8@telecom-digest.org>, Neal McLain
<nmclain@annsgarden.com> wrote:

> Michael D. Sullivan  <userid@camsul.example.invalid> wrote:

>> Television, on tho other hand, started out in two discontiguous
>> VHF bands, with somewhat variable spacing between channels and
>> a need for precise tuning, and tuning in on a single band by
>> twiddling an analog variable tuning capacitor to the right
>> frequency would have been difficult.  This tuning method was
>> used on some early TVs; I don't know  whether they were tuned
>> by numeric frequency or by channel number, but
>> it would not have been very convenient.  The TV industry
>> instead standardized on TV tuners that had 12 discrete fixed
>> settings, pre-tuned to channels 2-13, with a fine tuning
>> control that allowed one to tune  the frequency higher or lower
>> to account for offsets....

> Whereupon Robert Bonomi (bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com) wrote:

>> Plausable,  just 'false to fact'.  <wry grin>

>> In the early days of TV receivers, they were equipped with
>> continuous-tuning knobs/dials, just like an AM radio receiver.
>> For the TV band, however the indicator assembly was marked by
>> "channel", *not* by frequency.

>> I used to have a 1930's Crosley TV that had that kind of
>> continuous tuner.  *BIG* gap on the dial, between channel 6 and
>> 7, It actually tuned across that entire 'midband' space -- with
>> all kinds of interesting results.  You could "see" aircraft
>> band transmissions, and hear stuff on broadcast FM, 2m Ham, and
>> business-band.

> Sullivan is correct.

His recitation of history is factual.

He is *NOT* accurate with regard to 'cause and effect' of 'detent'
tuners leading to "channel number" common-usage.  Detent tuners were
at least 'second generation'; the prior generation (analog
continuous-tune) sets all used _numbered_ channels,

Crosley, in those days, was a "high end" manufacturer.  If a
high-tech, 'detent' tuner design had been available, they *would* have
been using it.

Thus we've got numbered channels (_without_ frequency numbers) in
"common use" well before any 'detent' (turret switching, or other)
tuners were in vogue.

In the -very- early days stations _were_ identified by the frequency/
frequencies they transmitted on, There wasn't any option on the
matter, since it was being done under experimental provisions of
_amateur_radio_ licenses, and where they were broadcasting could
change from day to day. :) But this is WW-I era.

> As Sullivan acknowledged, some old TV sets did work like Bonomi's
> 1930s Crosley: they required "tuning in on a single band by twiddling
> an analog variable tuning capacitor to the right frequency [which]
> would have been difficult."

Actually it was surprisingly easy.  Not even as hard as tuning an AM
receiver. Or use the markings on the dial to get 'close', then you
ignore the markings and tweak for maximum clarity.  All it takes is
"reasonable" gearing. :)

Add in two-stage gearing -- the first few revolutions in either
direction were moved the frequency in small increments, once the
'limit' in either direction was reached, things went much faster.
Thus, when you overshot a "little bit" on the first attempt, you had
"automatic" fine-tuning as you started going in the other direction.
Somewhat complex mechanically, but amazingly easy to _use_.

> But by the 1950s, TV set manufacturers were installing "turret tuners"
> to simplify VHF tuning.  A single knob rotated a cylindrical mechanism
> fitted with twelve little hand-wired circuit boards, one for each
> channel.  Each circuit board had a bunch of capacitors, some
> hand-wound coils, and a row of metal contacts that mated with metal
> springs.  As each circuit board was brought into position by the
> rotating mechanism, the springs mated with the contacts on the board,
> placing that board in the circuit.

> After the introduction of UHF, turret tuners were manufactured with 13
> circuit boards, one for each VHF channel + one that switched to a
> separate UHF tuner.  The UHF tuner was tuned in one continuous-tuning
> dial.

Yuppers.  'Practicality' strikes again.  70 UHF channels would have
meant a detent roughly every 5 degrees of rotation.  A 70-sided
turret, with circuit strips that were only 1/2" wide, would have had
to be nearly a _foot_ in diameter.  Gotta wait for a better
technology. :)

> Sullivan continued:

>> Later on, [turret] tuners had separate fine- tuners for each channel
>> so one wouldn't need to retune when switching from station to
>> station.

> On each channel, the fine-tuning control engaged a tuning slug inside
> one of the little hand-wound coils.

Sometimes a tuning slug in a coil, often a trimmer capacitor.
Either way, it provides a frequency adjustment over a limited range,
with relatively high precision and stability.

Sets with this kind of fine tuning could _almost_always_ be identified
by the fact you had to 'push in' the fine-tuning knob/ring to engage
the adjustment mechanism on the 'active" turret segment.

> Here's a link to a picture showing a turret VHF tuner (left) and
> what appears to be a continuous-tuning UHF tuner (right).  This
> particular photo happens to be on a British website, but the basic
> structure of the turret mechanism is the same in the USA.

> http://www.thevalvepage.com/valvetek/guidgrid/GGRID2.JPG

> Back in my cable TV days during the 70s, turret tuners used to drive
> us nuts.  There was only one VHF TV station in the market (Channel 3),
> so if a viewer wasn't hooked to cable, the only exercise the tuner got
> was from getting flipped back and forth between UHF and 3.  This kept
> the contacts on UHF, 2, and 3 clean, but the rest of the contacts got
> pretty dusty and/or corroded.  If this viewer then connected to cable
> (just 12 channels in those days), suddenly, all 12 VHF circuit boards
> were needed.  We spent a lot of time explaining, "I'm sorry, sir, your
> TV set's tuner needs to be cleaned ... please take it to the TV repair
> shop of your choice ... no we do not repair television sets ... our
> franchise agreement specifically prohibits it."

> Things got even worse when we introduced our first pay service (HBO)
> in 1978.  We "hid" it in the midband on cable channel 17, "in the
> clear" (not scrambled, not trapped).  We provided each HBO sub with
> a primitive converter: a little box with a single two-position
> switch:

>   - One position converted channel 17 to channel 2 for HBO.

>   - One position passed the incoming cable signal through
>     unaltered for channels 2-13.

> It wasn't very good security, but the powers-that-were considered it
> to be good enough, since turret tuners couldn't tune it.

> Well, it wasn't long before local TV shops discovered a new line of 
> business: retuning one of the lesser-used turret circuit boards (like 
> public access) to channel 17.
> Of course, Bonomi's old Crosley would have tuned to it. 

B&W only, a roughly 11" _round_ tube, medium-lousy contrast range,
moderately long-persistence phosphor, and a few other drawbacks --
hardly worth the trouble. :)

And, of course, no 75-ohm coax input.  Would have had to use a balun
on the twin-lead screw terminals.  ;)

*nice* audio, though.

> 1970s, virtually all TV sets used turret VHF tuners.  Varactor tuners
> with digital displays were just coming on the market, and the old
> continuous-tuning models had just about disappeared.

I don't think anybody selling into the U.S. market at the end of WW-II
was making a continuous-tuning model.  Turret tuners were
simpler/easier/ cheaper to manufacture, once you worked out the right
combinations of resonant frequencies and band-pass filters.

And *much* more "user-friendly".

> A few years later, we moved HBO to channel 2 (so we could sell HBO to
> hotels and motels), installed negative traps to secure it, .....

What science can take away, science can put back.  Those traps did _not_
*completely* eliminate the signal getting into the customer premises, they
just made it so weak that a conventional TV set couldn't amplify it enough
to make a decent picture.   A decent high-gain single-channel pre-amp, on
the other hand, installed 'in front of' the TV receiver, could do a 
surprisingly good job of resurrecting the 'killed' signal.  <grin>

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

From: wollman@lcs.mit.edu (Garrett Wollman)
Subject: Re: What Happened to FM Channels 1-199?
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 23:21:21 UTC
Organization: MIT Laboratory for Computer Science


In article <telecom24.125.17@telecom-digest.org>,
<BobGoudreau@withheld at request> wrote:

> Now that we've covered the history of VHF Channel 1, can anyone
> explain why the official FM channel numbers are in the range 200-300
> instead of 1-101?

I believe it was simply to avoid confusion with the TV channels 2-83.

-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: Paul Coxwell <paulcoxwell@tiscali.co.uk>
Subject: Re: What Happened To Channel 1
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 10:50:02 -0000


Joe Morris <jcmorris@mitre.org> wrote:

> [*] I get a number of questions at the office when my wallpaper changer
> pops up with the original WDSU-TV test pattern.  It makes me feel old when
> I turn out to be the only person there who remembers when test patterns
> were routinely incorporated into the station ID slides ...

Any chance of a copy of that?  It would be interesting to see.

You can find many examples of old (and not-so-old) test patterns and
idents for British TV here:

http://www.meldrum.co.uk/mhp/


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I seem to recall when I was about five
> years old my parents had a television set with a tiny little screen
> which was maybe two or three inches round. And it had a _huge_
> magnifying glass attached to the front of it.  PAT]

I never saw it, but my father built a set in the late 1940s/early 1950s
using a VCR97 tube, which, if I recall correctly, was about 5 inches.

The VCR97 had been a very common CRT in radar sets and was available
cheaply as government surplus at the time.  Of course, the resulting
monochrome picture would have been green!

- Paul.

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

From: steve@Watt.COM (Steve Watt)
Subject: Re: Walkie Talkie
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 00:28:58 UTC
Organization: Watt Consultants


In article <telecom24.103.8@telecom-digest.org>,
jason  <cheanglong@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hello all,

> I need to know more about walkie talkie and how the frequency range
> work.  Let'say a walkie talkie with frequency range work from 2400 to
> 2500 Mhz, while the IF is 5 Mhz.

> So how will the channels be allocated for transmitting and receiving
> if it is a single duplex type?

The IF doesn't have anything to do with the channel spacing at all;
many older handheld transceivers have IFs of 455KHz, and that has no
impact on the channel spacing.

In simplified terms, minimum channel spacing is determined by the
modulation bandwidth.  If you've got FDMA (i.e. normal AM, SSB or FM
modulation) then the channels are slightly more than the modulation
bandwidth apart.  So if you have a 3KHz modulation bandwidth, the
channel center frequencies would be 5KHz apart.

If your modulation scheme is based on spread-spectrum techniques, then
basically everything changes, and everyone shares the same frequency
band with separation of signals provided by receive correlation.

Now, to your other question of how the channels will be allocated?
That's only barely a technical issue.  The regulators in the
particular country you intend to operate that transmitter in have
regulations and band plans that say what can be transmitted where.
They usually specify bandwidths and center frequencies for FDMA, add
slot timing to TDMA, and specific spreading codes or classes of
spreading codes for CDMA.

So, in the US, the FCC controls channel spacing for duplexing, and I
don't remember (and don't have at hand) the spacing in that frequency
band in the US.  -- Steve Watt KD6GGD PP-ASEL-IA ICBM: 121W 56' 57.8"
/ 37N 20' 14.9" Internet: steve @ Watt.COM Whois: SW32 Free time?
There's no such thing.  It just comes in varying prices...

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

Subject: Re: Hackers Target U.S. Power Grid
From: djmcdona@fnord.io.com (Daniel J McDonald)
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 19:35:58 -0600


In article <telecom24.114.13@telecom-digest.org>,
<hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:

> Power grids existed long before networked-computers came out.  Why
> would the grid be so vulnerable now?

Because it is more efficient to control a grid froma central location,
rather than sending men out to substations to throw breakers.

> Shouldn't those critical networks be isolated from outside access
> altogether?

Information sharing can be gathered for non-control systems from the
intelligent devices at grid control points.  Meters are not only
useful for determining load and deciding when to switch to a different
circuit, but for billing as well.  information about voltage and
frequency support is used to demonstrate "more stability" and thus
gain a higher retail price, in addition to giving the control board
operators information on what they need to do to support the grid.

Also, the grid has become more complicated, with "distributed
generation".  With people looking for alternative sources of power,
there are many additional complexities.  For example, in my city,
Austin Texas, there are solar, fuel-cell, and small-package combined
chiller/generators distributed around the city that feed into the
grid, along with a couple of methane burners at the dumps.
Coordinating all of those small generators takes extensive
instrumentation that wasn't necessary 20 years ago, and wouldn't be
possible without networks.

> Secondly, they should be more worried about grid overloads from all the 
> power source shifting done today.  The grids were not designed to 
> handle that kind of loads and problems like the recent NYC-NE blackout 
> will occur again. 

Yup.  The real solution, assuming we can't upgrade the grid, is to
build more powerplants closer to the load (that is, closer to
population centers).  Of course, that is very popular and people are
overjoyed to welcome new jobs into their neighborhoods. ;-)

Daniel J McDonald CCIE # 2495, CNX
Visit my website: http://www.austinnetworkdesign.com

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

From: Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net>
Subject: Re: Feds: Criminals Luuuuv Those Open 802.11 Networks
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 21:56:27 -0800
Organization: Glorb Internet Services, http://www.glorb.com


Tim@Backhome.org wrote:

> It is so easy to secure WiFi, at least against most intruders.  I can
> receive four other home WiFi signals in my condo.  Like mine, all the
> others are secured.  So, I guess me and my neighbors are smarter than
> some of these dummies. ;-)

Are you using 802.11b or g? g, with WPA, is far better than WEP, due
to the way WPA handles encryption keys.


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: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Subject: Re: VoIP and Bell DSL: Is it Ready For Prime Time?
Date: 22 Mar 2005 07:18:14 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well Lisa, what do you do in a case
> like Brooklyn, New York where by the dispatcher's own admission,
> "we do not answer this phone after 10 PM"?

I don't understand the context of your statement.  You mean they say
in NYC they don't answer 911 calls after 10PM?  I don't know the story,
but I suspect perhaps the call was routed to a business office instead
of an emergency line where such calls wouldn't be answered after hours.

> ... If a small town can arrange its police department to serve the
> public efficiently, without a lot of sass-back to the public they
> are expected to serve, then why can't your so-called county of
> 880,000?

That is a good question.  But we are speaking of two separate
issues:  (1) what exists now and how we consumers are best to deal
with it and (2) what we'd like to exist.

As to (1) -- what exists now: public safety dispatching has become
more centralized, covering a wider area and multiple jurisdictions.
This is in part due to making 911 service available in suburban areas.
The modern 911 services lock onto your line, provide your number, and
access a database showing your address and other information.  The
problem is that VOIP, being a "floating" kind of service, doesn't
necessarily input into these databases (does it charge for this as
regular phones do -- we pay a "911 surcharge" of $1/month?)

You seem to be upset than the existing 911 infrastructure doesn't
support newcomer VOIP.  As the newcomer, shouldn't VOIP have the
obligation to make itself support the existing infrastructure and pay
for the costs thereof?

For 2 -- in an ideal world each local town would have on duty a 24/7
dispatcher even though overnight they'd handle very few calls.  But
even this has limitations because the central dispatch knows where all
police/fire/rescue units are and their availability and in case of a
big problem, neighboring units are immediately dispatched.  There's no
need to relay phone calls from one jurisdiction to another.  We had an
unexpected bad flood and the response was quick and efficient.

There are always tradeoffs between local specialized service and
reginal mass-market service.  Each has pros and cons.

> Maybe you, or one of the other Bell System apologists in our
> readership can tell me why it is that VOIP carriers are expected to
> be the ones to have to do the twisting and turning and maneuvering
> to get their ways in line to make it easier for the public servants?

Because in the last two decades considerable infrastructure has been
invested in an E911 structure based on wireline service.  Suddenly
this new technology comes along and they want everyone to conform to
it.  Why can't the new technology confirm to the existing?  It's not
like E911 has been a secret.  The govt and telephone subscribers have
foot the bill for these enhancements.  Why should some newcomer get a
free ride?

The cable TV industry grew up by laying its own cable at its own
expense and building its own receiver buildings.  Then they upgraded
on their own replacing with coaxial with fibre-optic and now they're
free to do as they wish.  But if they wish to mix in with existing
networks, they have to conform to existing networks.  Part of that
conformity requirement is E911 service.

In other words, suppose we invent a cheap and easy to fly helicopter.
Now we're upset that supermarkets and housing developments don't have
landing platforms on their roofs to accomodate us.

> What the hell did any of those people do back in the 1960's when our
> nation was crossbar with no immediate ID on calls?

In big cities you dialed zero and the operator gave you the police
dept.  In rural areas it was rather cumbersome and took extra time.
Don't forget, not too long ago suburbanites had to know the specific
numbers for fire/police/rescue for their town.  In rural areas, these
changed years since you called the home of the police or fire chief
(and the phone books of rural areas said this).  Phone CO service
boundaries and town boundaries do not always mesh in suburban areas.

> You want a job as a police dispatcher? Then you, by-God, either get
> an encyclopedic knowledge of streets and intersections and addresses
> in your town or don't get in the way of the people who do; if your
> worker's "union" insists you have to have a job you are probably not
> qualified for anyway, is that the public or VOIP carriers at fault?
> PAT]

Having that "encyclopedic knowledge" of a wide suburban region is not
so easy.  Unlike a city with its grid streets, a suburban county has
much more land area and crazy patchwork developments with overlapping
names and towns and jurisdictions.

The police officials years back decided that computerized reference
would be superior.  If someone wasn't able to talk or a call got cut
off, they could still send help which they couldn't before.  They
supposedly can send help faster.  They supposedly have up-to-date
information about new construction or changed situations.

Again, like it or not, this is the present system, and it's up to the
VOIP carriers to make it work for them, not for the existing system to
assume costs to make it work for VOIP.

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

From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Subject: Re: Cell Phone ATT
Date: 22 Mar 2005 09:31:20 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


absmith3@hotmail.com wrote:

> I have an ATT contract dated in Oct- 2004- before Cingular bought
> ATT. Now Cingular is saying that I owe it $170 for cancellation fee
> if I transfer service to Verizon.

As all the others mentioned, you are still liable to fulfill
the contract.

My question is:  why do you want to switch?  Were you dissatisfied
with AT&T service before the merger?  Has the merger caused your
service quality to deteriorate?

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

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 #126
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Mar 22 18:28:50 2005
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j2MNSoK13865;
	Tue, 22 Mar 2005 18:28:50 -0500 (EST)
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 18:28:50 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200503222328.j2MNSoK13865@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 #127

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 22 Mar 2005 18:28:00 EST    Volume 24 : Issue 127

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Find Routes to Get Free Directory Assistance Help (Jack Decker)
    Level 3 CEO Comments on Withdrawal of VoIP Forbearance Petition (Decker)
    Forbes Article on VoIP vs. Incumbent Telcos (Jack Decker)
    Dangling Broadband From the Phone Stick (Jack Decker)
    Texas Sues Vonage Over 911 Problem (Jack Decker)
    Level 3 Withdraws Request For VoIP Ruling (Telecom dailyLead from USTA)
    Intertel Eclipse Telephone Programming (marcsanders2003@yahoo.com)
    New Long Range Cordless Phones (Michael Quinn)
    Re: Mobile IP Networks (Rick Lenhart)
    Our Telephonic Primacy (Monty Solomon)
    Re: Level 3 Withdraws Request For VOIP Programming (Devils PGD)
    Re: What Happened To Channel 1 (Dave VanHorn)
    Re: Tracking Down a Harassing Caller Number? (Lisa Hancock)
    Re: Hackers Target U.S. Power Grid (Al Dykes)
    Re: VoIP and Bell DSL: Is it Ready For Prime Time? (Steve Sobol)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

From: Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@withheld on request>
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 12:52:25 -0500
Subject: Find Routes to Get Free Directory Assistance Help


http://www.sun-sentinel.com/business/sns-yourmoney-0320spending,0,7646233.story?coll=sfla-business3

By Gregory Karp
Of The Morning Call

Convenience costs Americans big-time, from bagged salad at the grocery
store to automatic carwashes to house-cleaning services.

Another convenience is dialing directory assistance whenever you need
a phone number. It can be incredibly expensive for what you get. Some
directory-assistance services cost nearly $2.50 per request.

And many Americans are using the services, according to research firm
TNS Telecoms. A survey showed 41 percent of customers used some kind
of directory assistance on their home or wireless phone over the past
month. And, clearly, many of those lookups were not free.

The good news is that spending on directory assistance can be
virtually eliminated because there are so many other ways -- some old,
some very new -- to get phone numbers.

Here's the 411 on reducing directory-assistance calls on your home and
wireless phones:

[Comment: This article makes a number of good suggestions including a
few I didn't know about, and I can honestly say that in my entire
lifetime I have never once paid for a directory assistance call, so I
thought I already knew most of the ways to get free telephone number
lookups.  At the same time, they do miss a fairly obvious way to get a
number when you are calling a company -- go to the company's web site
and look for a "Contact" or "About us" type of link.  Very often there
will be one or more contact telephones posted right on the company's
web site.  And if you don't need to make the call right away and have
an e-mail address for the person you want to call (or a friend or
business associate), using e-mail to request the number is another
option.]

Full story at:
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/business/sns-yourmoney-0320spending,0,7646233.story?coll=sfla-business3

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: One very inexpensive directory service
is a sponsor here at this Digest: 

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 !

After you sign up with them, then your telephone number (or a few
different numbers under your control go on their records. Then you
dial an 800 number for directory assistance. ANI allows them to charge
that phone number for your call; after a few dollars in calls or at
least once per month, your credit card is charged at 65 cents per
one or two inquiries. No set up charges of any kind, and the 65 cent
rate is the least expensive rate for directory assistance
anywhere. Plus which, a portion of that 65 cents comes back to this
Digest as a donation. Please consider signing up; no set up fees and
no minimum use requirements.  PAT]

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

From: Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@withheld on request>
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 12:37:19 -0500
Subject: Level 3 CEO Comments on Withdrawal of VoIP Forbearance Petition


http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/03-21-2005/0003236950&STORY&EDATE=

James Crowe Comments on Withdrawal of Level 3 VoIP Forbearance Petition
http://www.level3.com

BROOMFIELD, Colo., March 21 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- The following
statement can be attributed to James Q. Crowe, chief executive officer
of Level 3 Communications, Inc. (Nasdaq: LVLT):

"Today, Level 3 withdrew a forbearance petition the company had filed
in December 2003 with the Federal Communications Commission seeking to
clarify the regulatory status of Voice over IP.  "In the petition, we
asked the FCC to reaffirm that legacy interconnection fees called
'access charges' do not apply to a certain class of VoIP traffic.  By
statute, the agency was required to issue a decision in the matter by
March 22, 2005.  "Level 3 has withdrawn the petition in deference to
the Commission.  Given the appointment of new leadership only three
business days before the statutory deadline for ruling on the
petition, we determined it was inappropriate to ask the agency to
resolve this important issue in the timeframe required by law.
However, there remains a pressing need in the industry for clarity in
this area, and Level 3 may elect to refile the petition or take other
appropriate regulatory actions in the future.  "Our decision to
withdraw the petition was made in consultation with industry
participants that share our views, including the VON Coalition and
CompTel/Ascent.  

"Level 3 is committed to offering the industry's broadest suite of
wholesale VoIP services, and our decision, which in effect maintains
the regulatory status quo, will not have any material financial impact
on the company.  Level 3 and other VoIP service providers continue to
maintain that voice calls between the legacy telephone network and the
Internet should be exchanged using reciprocal compensation rates,
which are lower than access charges and far closer to the network
provider's true cost.  "We believe that VoIP stands to deliver
enormous benefits to business and residential end-users, and will help
drive broadband adoption nationwide.  In our view, and in the view of
many of the companies who supported this petition, creating regulatory
clarity is the best way for the government to encourage investment in
this promising new technology.  "The Commission's record is one of
strong support for Voice over IP, and we're confident it will resolve
these important issues in an appropriate and timely manner.  There are
number of other avenues by which the Commission can address the issue
of VoIP and intercarrier compensation, and our hope is that it does so
quickly in order to provide the industry with clear ground rules.  We
look forward to continuing to work with the FCC as it formulates
policies that will foster VoIP's continued development."

About Level 3 Communications

Level 3 (Nasdaq: LVLT) is an international communications and
information services company. The company operates one of the largest
Internet backbones in the world, is one of the largest providers of
wholesale dial-up service to ISPs in North America and is the primary
provider of Internet connectivity for millions of broadband
subscribers, through its cable and DSL partners.  The company offers a
wide range of communications services over its 23,000-mile broadband
fiber optic network including Internet Protocol (IP) services,
broadband transport and infrastructure services, colocation services,
and patented softswitch managed modem and voice services.  Its Web
address is http://www.Level3.com.  The company offers information
services through its subsidiaries, Software Spectrum and (i)Structure.
For additional information, visit their respective Web sites at
http://www.softwarespectrum.com and http://www.i-structure.com.  The
Level 3 logo is a registered service mark of Level 3 Communications,
Inc. in the United States and/or other countries.

SOURCE Level 3 Communications, Inc.
Web Site: http://www.level3.com 

How to Distribute VoIP Throughout a Home:
http://michigantelephone.mi.org/distribute.html

If you live in Michigan, subscribe to the MI-Telecom group:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MI-Telecom/

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

From: Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@withheld on request>
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 12:32:47 -0500
Subject: Forbes Article on VoIP vs. Incumbent Telcos


http://www.forbes.com/home/free_forbes/2005/0328/066.html

OutFront
Threatening Calls
Scott Woolley, 03.28.05

Never friendly, the battle between the Internet calling companies and
the incumbent telcos has gotten downright ugly. Vonage, the biggest
Internet phone company, has taken 500,000 customers from giants such
as Verizon and SBC. Those customers had been worth $100 million in
annual operating income to the Bells. And the stakes are rising;
Vonage Chief Jeffrey Citron expects to double his customer base again
this year.

[.....]

So far Peter John's case is the only 911 snafu to draw much public
attention. And while John is now out of the hospital and on the way to
a full recovery, Citron, trying to keep the heat on the Bells, warns
that until the 911 systems are connected, there is the possibility of
a real tragedy: "If something really bad happens, I'd hate to be a
[Bell] chief executive testifying before Congress about why there have
been delays."

Full story at:
http://www.forbes.com/home/free_forbes/2005/0328/066.html

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

From: Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@withheld on request>
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 14:08:26 -0500
Subject: Dangling Broadband From the Phone Stick


http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/19/technology/19phone.html

By MATT RICHTEL

SAN FRANCISCO, March 18 - To gauge the potential consumer impact of
the consolidation sweeping the telephone industry, look no further
than the silver-toned plastic phone gathering dust on the desk in
Justin Martikovic's studio apartment.

Mr. Martikovic, 30, a junior architect who relies on a cellphone for
his normal calling, says he never uses the desk phone -- but he pays
$360 a year to keep it hooked up.

"I have to pay for a service I'm never using," he said.

He has no choice. His telephone company, SBC Communications, will not
sell him high-speed Internet access unless he buys the phone service,
too. That puts him in the same bind as many people around the country
who want high-speed, or broadband, Internet access but no longer need
a conventional telephone. Right now, their phone companies tend to
have a "take it or leave it" attitude.

Consumers "are not forced to go with SBC," said Michael Coe, a company
spokesman. "If they just want a broadband connection, I'd recommend
they look around for people who can provide just a broadband
connection."

The nation's other two largest phone companies, Verizon Communications
and BellSouth, have similar policies: broadband service is available
only as a bundle with phone service.

That means, even as high-speed Internet service has become one of the
most quickly adopted technologies of the computer era, there are few
options for the tens of millions of Americans trying to upgrade their
dial-up connections.

Some lawmakers and consumer advocates say the issue should be on the
agenda as the government considers the market impact of two proposed
big telecommunications deals: SBC's planned $16 billion acquisition of
AT&T, and Verizon's $6.75 billion offer for MCI, which is being
challenged by a rival offer from Qwest Communications.

For many consumers, the main alternative to broadband from the phone
company is the local cable company. But cable broadband prices tend to
be higher - as much as $60 a month for access, compared typically with
$40 or less for phone company broadband. And the cable companies
prefer to sell the service as a package with television that can
easily exceed $100 a month.

That is assuming cable is even available, which it is not in
Mr. Martikovic's apartment in the Nob Hill section of San Francisco -
or in 10 percent of the nation's households, for that matter.  [.....]
Consumer advocacy groups, including Consumers Union, say they plan to
ask the F.C.C. to address the lack of "à la carte" broadband when the
agency reviews the proposed takeovers.  [.....]  Verizon has said it
is working to develop a stand-alone broadband offering that could be
available as soon as the end of the year.  [.....]  But the smallest
of the Bells, Qwest, which operates primarily in the Rocky Mountain
states and is struggling to grow, has been willing to offer à la carte
broadband for more than a year.

[Comment: As those of you who have been on this list for a while know,
it has long been my position that a customer should never be forced to
buy a service he doesn't want in order to get a service he does want.
My usual example would be a gas station that would not sell you gas
unless you also bought a case of pop, or vise versa.  Gas stations
can't get away with that, not only because it's probably illegal in
most areas, but also because in most places there's another gas
station just down the street.  Since phone companies don't have that
kind of competitive pressure, they tend to try to screw their
customers in ways that a normal business could never get away with.

I will always remember a time when I lived in a city in Michigan's
Upper Peninsula and my car stalled in the downtown area.  I knew I
needed to pour some gasoline directly into the carburetor to get it
started, but fortunately (or so I thought) there was a gas station a
block away.  The first problem was I didn't have a container to put
any gasoline in, but I only needed a little gas, and when I got to the
station I happened to look in the trash container and found where
someone had discarded a clean but empty plastic container of gas line
antifreeze.  So, I thought, no problem, I'll get a dime's worth of gas
in this.  Only problem then was, how to get the gas into the
container, which had a much smaller neck than the pump nozzle.  I went
inside, explained my situation to the man inside, and asked if he
might have a funnel or even a piece of stiff paper I could make into a
cone.

And his reply was, "I won't sell you the gas unless you put it
directly into that container." I could not believe my ears.  It was
obvious he wanted to sell more gas than just 10 or 20 cents worth, but in
doing so I would have wound up spilling a considerable amount of
gasoline on the ground deliberately (which, the last I heard, is
considered an environmental hazard) AND since I would have had to hold
the bottle while filling it, I would have very likely got gasoline all
over my hand as well.  Bear in mind, this bottle wasn't an "approved"
container to begin with (it was not painted red or anything) so if his
concern has been about legalities he would have refused to sell me the
gas at all, but that wasn't his issue -- he just didn't want to be
bothered with selling such a small amount of gas, but would have sold
it to me had I been willing to spill enough on the pavement to make it
worth his while.

After some discussion with the man, who  refused to budge on his
position, I told him I would never buy another drop of gasoline or
anything else at his station as long as I lived (and I never did!),
and walked six more blocks in below-freezing temperatures to the next
nearest station, which had no problem with offering me a funnel to get
the small amount of gas I needed to get the car started.

(The funny part about is was that the first gas station was in the
same block as, and almost next door to an insurance agency that I had
the misfortune of having some dealings with, and the guy who ran that
was in my opinion also a nutcase - now that I think back on it I
wonder if the gas station guy and the insurance agent were using the
same drugs, since they both shared the same customer-be-damned
attitude.  I have to say, the Upper Peninsula has some of the
friendliest people in Michigan, but when they go into business there
is a small percentage of them that seem to turn into morons with bad
attitudes.  I suppose that happens in lower Michigan also, but up
there people talk and compare notes more, I think, so when a person in
business is a real jerk, word tends to get around.  But I digress.)

It seems to me that the phone companies are just like that gas station
owner when they refuse to sell unbundled DSL.  They know there are
situations where the customer doesn't need their service, where the
traditional phone service will never be used, yet they require the
customer to take it anyway.  It's just pure greed, just as it was with
that gas station owner.  But since the phone companies are monopolies,
you don't have the option of walking six blocks down the road to the
next nearest DSL provider.  That's why I've been in favor of any and
all alternative broadband technologies, including wireless and even
BPL if they can work out the interference problems.

At the same time, I think these proposed mergers do represent a golden
opportunity to get the SBC and Verizon to drop the forced bundling
requirement.  That won't help the people served by companies like
CenturyTel, Alltel, BellSouth, etc. but it would make a big difference
here in Michigan where the vast majority of lines are owned by SBC or
Verizon.  So, I hope Consumers Union is successful in their efforts in
that regard.]

Full story at:
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/19/technology/19phone.html
[New York Times - free registration required]

TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: 
Also see http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra/nytimes.html for the
story.  PAT]

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

From: Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@withheld on request>
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 14:15:06 -0500
Subject: Texas Sues Vonage Over 911 Problem
Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com


[Comment: Since this originates in Texas, I cannot help but wonder if
SBC had any involvement in this, even if only maybe by putting a bug
in someone's ear at the AG's office. We will probably never know, but
when I hear about something anti-VoIP coming out of Texas, that's just
the way my mind wanders.]

http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1035_22-5630118.html?tag=zdfd.newsfeed

By Ben Charny, CNET News.com

The attorney general of Texas is suing Internet phone provider Vonage,
charging that the company isn't clear to its customers about
deficiencies in its 911 service.

Vonage 911 calls aren't routed in the traditional manner. Rather, most
end up at the administrative offices of the 6,000 emergency calls
centers rather than dispatchers. According to Abbott, the dangers of
the circuitous route were exposed in early March when a 17-year-old
Houston girl was unable to get through to police after dialing 911 on
a Vonage phone after both her parents were shot by intruders.

In the U.S. District Court suit, announced Tuesday, Attorney General
Greg Abbott alleges that Vonage doesn't "clearly disclose the lack of
traditional 911 access" nor adequately inform its customers they must
first sign up for the free 911 service. Such an omission violates
state law dealing with deceptive trade practices, the state attorney
general alleges. The state is asking for civil penalties of more than
$20,000 and an injunction requiring more conspicuous disclosure.

A Vonage spokeswoman said the company was surprised to hear of the
litigation and pointed out there are numerous references, both on the
Internet and material mailed to customers, explaining the 911
service's limitations and its proactive nature. Abbott's office
contacted New Jersey-based Vonage about a week ago asking for
marketing materials and other information; the company hadn't heard
anything since it replied with the materials two days ago, the
spokeswoman said.

Full story at:
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1035_22-5630118.html?tag=zdfd.newsfeed


http://blogs.zdnet.com/ip-telephony/index.php?p=307

Texas sues Vonage for lack of 911 call deficiency disclosure
-Posted by Russell Shaw @ 10:17 am 

Earlier today, we reported that Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott
said he's sued Vonage for not being clear about the limitations of
its 911 service.

[.....]

A somewhat different circumstance prompted the lawsuit, however. Early
this month, a 17 year-old Houston girl was unable to get through to
the police on the family's Vonage line to inform them that her
parents had been shot in a break-in.

Full story at:
http://blogs.zdnet.com/ip-telephony/index.php?p=307

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

Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 13:22:32 EST
From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA <usta@dailylead.com>
Subject: Level 3 Withdraws Request For VoIP Ruling


Telecom dailyLead from USTA
March 22, 2005
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=20236&l=2017006

TODAY'S HEADLINES

NEWS OF THE DAY
* Level 3 withdraws request for VoIP ruling
BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH
* Texas to sue Vonage over 911 call
* Verizon, Qwest exchange barbs via letters
* Symbian, Microsoft team up
* Wireless security a challenge for companies
USTA SPOTLIGHT 
* USTA Applauds Withdrawal of Level 3 Petition
* Announcing Phone Facts Plus 2005
EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES
* EarthLink announces VPN plans
REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE
* Former WorldCom chairman settles shareholder lawsuits

Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others.
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=20236&l=2017006

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

From: marcsanders2003@yahoo.com
Subject: Intertel Eclipse Telephone Programming
Date: 22 Mar 2005 12:04:33 -0800


Anybody with technical knowledge of the InterTel Eclipse telephone
system?  Here's what I'm trying to do:

I'm trying to set up a shared mailbox.  In other words, I've added a
new extension, 262, and I want it to use the voice mailbox of 214.  So
both extensions will be using mailbox 214.  I would also like
notification of messages to go to 262.

It seems fairly simple, but so far nothing seems to work.

Any help would be appreciated.

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

Subject: New Long Range Cordless Phones
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 15:10:07 -0500
From: Michael Quinn <quinnm@bah.com>


Dave,

I'm pretty sure these are illegal in the US&P(ossessions).  One of the
issues was interference with Air Traffic Control communications
systems, as I recall.  Someone on the list may be able to cite chapter
and verse from US Code, or FCC regs. I may have saved a Navy
Department spectrum management brief on the subject; if so, I'll
forward off net.

Regards,

Mike

  From: Dave <newsgroups@dave!!!christense!!n.o!!!r!!!g>
  Subject: New Long Range Cordless Phones?
  Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 18:46:17 -0900

I saw a link earlier for this on Slash Dot.  Its a cordless phone that
supposedly works 100km from the base station (under ideal conditions).

http://www.goodbyelongdistance.com/catalog/item/1441280/975984.htm

Other then the obvious potential for grief from the FCC, anyone else
have any thoughts?

I found a link to the Navy brief of which I was thinking, from about
three years ago.

Mike

http://www.see.asso.fr/ICTSR1Newsletter/No007/LONG%20DISTANCES%20Garmisc
h.pdf

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

From: Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com>
Subject: Re: New Long Range Cordless Phones?
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 15:27:58 -0600
Organization: Wizard Information


It was a dark and stormy night when Dave
<newsgroups@dave!!!christense!!n.o!!!r!!!g> wrote:

> a cordless phone that supposedly works 100km from the base station
> (under ideal conditions).

> http://www.goodbyelongdistance.com/catalog/item/1441280/975984.htm

> Other then the obvious potential for grief from the FCC, anyone else 
> have any thoughts?

It is true that highly directional antennas (which none of those
pictured in the ad are) can provide ranges such as they describe.
Think satellite dishes and clear line-of-sight paths (or even better,
put one side in orbit).  But highly directional antennas are not going
to let you "walk or drive around for a radius of around 30 miles"
without stopping to carefully align *both* antennas every time you
want to use the phone.  With the antennas shown, even 30 miles over
unimpeded water seems like it would be pushing it.

They offer only manufacturer's warranty (and it's not even clear what
country the vendor is in).  I don't know what Samsung model that is,
but I'd bet that Samsung doesn't specify performance anything like
that described.  Don't do it without a full money-back guarantee.

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

From: rick.lenhart@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Mobile IP Networks
Date: 22 Mar 2005 13:47:33 -0800


I can help, I have a great Cisco based solution for you.
rlenhart@icinetworks.net     www.miptac.com

007 wrote:

> I need to investigate some solutions for a true mobile wireless
> networks and I'm looking for anyone's input.

> The situation is as follows: I need to design a network that will
> supporting IP traffic on a public bus transport system. Wireless
> terminals on each bus will communicate through a router onboard each
> bus (ie each bus is a mobile wireless LAN). At the bus depot there is
> a gateway for internet and telephony. The range of each LAN on each
> bus is limited to no more than 3km and there are no more than 10
> busses within the network.

> What are some considerations for the planning, design and architecture
> of such a network?

> Thanks.

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

Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 17:13:41 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Our Telephonic Primacy


By William F. S. Miles  |  March 21, 2005

"WE'RE NUMBER One!"

Americans often make this jingoistic boast in bouts of competitive
patriotism. But on what basis? When it comes to the standard
international ranking of countries in terms of human development (life
expectancy, literacy, and purchasing power, as compiled by the United
Nations Development Program), the United States comes in a
respectable, but hardly chest thumping, number 7 (bested by Belgium,
for goodness sake!) Even when it comes to the kind of measure with
which UN-suspicious free marketeers are more comfortable --
straightforward GDP per capita -- we're still outdone by the likes of
Norway and, Lord help us, Luxembourg.

There is one incontrovertible standard by which we are first, though:
international telephone ranking. I am not referring to cellphone use:
In this respect we are laggards, trailing 34 other countries
(including Estonia). I don't even mean the extent of regular
landlines, where we are again 7th, squeaking ahead of those loquacious
Icelanders.

No, the one measure by which we are literally Number 1 is our
International Country Code. When you call home from overseas, you need
merely hit (after dialing the international circuit) the number 1.

Disappointed? Don't be. There is much we can learn about the world,
and America's place in it, by examining the international telephone
code chart.


http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2005/03/21/our_telephonic_primacy/

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

From: DevilsPGD <ihatespam@crazyhat.net>
Subject: Re: Level 3 Withdraws Request for VoIP Fee Ruling
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 15:34:30 -0700


In message <telecom24.126.8@telecom-digest.org> Jack Decker
<jack-yahoogroups@withheld on request> wrote:

> But because FCC Chairman Michael Powell had left last week, the timing
> was no longer right for a ruling, Level 3 CEO James Crowe said in a
> statement. "The appointment of new leadership only three business days
> before the statutory deadline for ruling on the petition" made it
> "inappropriate to ask the agency to resolve this important issue in
> the timeframe required by law," Crowe said.

To translate from PR-speak to English, they didn't think that the new
overlords would give a favourable ruling.

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

Reply-To: Dave VanHorn <dvanhorn@dvanhorn.org>
From: Dave VanHorn <dvanhorn@dvanhorn.org>
Subject: Re: What Happened To Channel 1
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 14:18:08 -0500


> There was such a huge amount of misinformation running around
> among the CBers.  I couldn't believe some of the things they would say
> and I can't imagine where they were getting information like that.

Whenever I need some comic releif, I check out the CB section of the
local truck stop.

BTW: Did anyone notice the latest trend in antennas?  You angle them
forward about 45 degrees.  These are the rigid ones that might bend
back five degrees in the wind, if that much.

I haven't yet figured out what they think they are accomplishing.

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, I have heard that horizonal
polarization (that is, when an antenna is at a 90 degree angle) offers
better transmission and reception. The stuff transmitted 'vertically'
(which is how most antennas are mounted) does not get in the way as
'interference' that much. I think there is a difference if you are
radiating a 'full wave' or a 'half-wave' also. It has been a _long time_
since I studied much about citizen's band radio, but I do know that
the exact length and placement of a _transmitting_ antenna is very 
critical in getting out a good signal. I do know that radio waves
travel at approximatly the speed of light (186,000 miles per second)
and the antenna has to be 'cut' in such a way as to accomodate that
formula. An 'eleven meter' band transmission (CB radio) therefore has
to have ideally an antenna about 14 feet long for a 'full wave' or 
about 8 feet long for a 5/8 wave, which is considered acceptable. When
the amount of space is not sufficient, then the radio can be 'tricked'
by loading the antenna with coils.  I have forgotten so much of that
stuff, it really pains me. Anyway, horizonal polarization is supposed
to have its good points.   PAT]

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

From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Subject: Re: Tracking Down a Harassing Caller Number?
Date: 22 Mar 2005 11:21:23 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


AES wrote:

> Are there any official procedures or unofficial ways of tracking
> down the source of repeated harassing calls coming from a set of
> apparently related numbers in a distant area code?

Call your telephone company business office.

You didn't describe the call content  -- if there is no one there,
it may be from a fax machine.  Your business might help with that.

There is a call trace feature available in some areas that can trace
most calls, even blocked.  There is usually a fee.  The number is
given to the phone company's investigative unit.  Check your telephone
directory if Call Trace (*70) is available and its terms and
procedures.

I don't know why they don't publicize Call Trace, though it is
in the phone book.


{TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think *57 is call trace and *70
is 'suspend call waiting for the remainder of this call'. *57 is
not publicized, maybe because of the huge fees they charge for what
they used to do for free (investigate people causing trouble for
others on the phone.) Telco does not like to admit that subscribers
are entitled to the peaceful, unmolested use of their phones. As 
often as not, using *57 gets you a ten or fifteen dollar charge on
your phone bill and a letter in the mail a couple days later saying
they cannot do anything to help you. PAT]

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

From: adykes@panix.com (Al Dykes)
Subject: Re: Hackers Target U.S. Power Grid
Date: 22 Mar 2005 14:44:55 -0500
Organization: PANIX -- Public Access Networks Corp.


In article <telecom24.126.15@telecom-digest.org>,
Daniel J McDonald <djmcdona@fnord.io.com> wrote:

> In article <telecom24.114.13@telecom-digest.org>,
> <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:

>> Power grids existed long before networked-computers came out.  Why
>> would the grid be so vulnerable now?

> Because it is more efficient to control a grid froma central location,
> rather than sending men out to substations to throw breakers.

>> Shouldn't those critical networks be isolated from outside access
>> altogether?

> Information sharing can be gathered for non-control systems from the
> intelligent devices at grid control points.  Meters are not only
> useful for determining load and deciding when to switch to a different
> circuit, but for billing as well.  information about voltage and
> frequency support is used to demonstrate "more stability" and thus
> gain a higher retail price, in addition to giving the control board
> operators information on what they need to do to support the grid.

> Also, the grid has become more complicated, with "distributed
> generation".  With people looking for alternative sources of power,
> there are many additional complexities.  For example, in my city,
> Austin Texas, there are solar, fuel-cell, and small-package combined
> chiller/generators distributed around the city that feed into the
> grid, along with a couple of methane burners at the dumps.
> Coordinating all of those small generators takes extensive
> instrumentation that wasn't necessary 20 years ago, and wouldn't be
> possible without networks.

>> Secondly, they should be more worried about grid overloads from all the 
>> power source shifting done today.  The grids were not designed to 
>> handle that kind of loads and problems like the recent NYC-NE blackout 
>> will occur again. 

> Yup.  The real solution, assuming we can't upgrade the grid, is to
> build more powerplants closer to the load (that is, closer to
> population centers).  Of course, that is very popular and people are
> overjoyed to welcome new jobs into their neighborhoods. ;-)

> Daniel J McDonald CCIE # 2495, CNX
> Visit my website: http://www.austinnetworkdesign.com

These little gas-fired plants (100MW ?) seem to be solving the problem
for the NYC area.  They take about an acre and generate no perceptable
smells/noise/etc and pass zoning review if the proposed location isn't
a residential area.

The downside it seems is that we may have "overcomitted" our supply of
natural gas. Greenspan made a statement to this effect a year or so
ago.

-- 

a d y k e s @ p a n i x . c o m 

Don't blame me. I voted for Gore.

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

From: Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net>
Subject: Re: VoIP and Bell DSL: Is it Ready For Prime Time?
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 12:16:13 -0800
Organization: Glorb Internet Services, http://www.glorb.com


hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:

>> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well Lisa, what do you do in a case
>> like Brooklyn, New York where by the dispatcher's own admission,
>> "we do not answer this phone after 10 PM"?

> I don't understand the context of your statement.  You mean they say
> in NYC they don't answer 911 calls after 10PM?  I don't know the story,
> but I suspect perhaps the call was routed to a business office instead
> of an emergency line where such calls wouldn't be answered after hours.

Or, in a case like we have out here ...

There are 300,000 people in the Victor Valley region of San Bernardino
County, California, spread out over a significantly large chunk of
desert.

There are no municipal police departments in this particular area; the
patrol cars say Apple Valley Police, Hesperia Police, Adelanto Police,
etc., but the police officers are all actually county sherriff's
deputies. There is an outpost in each incorporated city.

You can call the Apple Valley police department number after hours,
but your call won't go to Apple Valley; it'll get routed to the
sherriff's outpost in Victorville. I am not sure whether the other
numbers get routed to Victorville after hours, but they probably do.

(When I say "call the Apple Valley number", I mean the local number,
not 911.  Again, I'm not sure how things work out here but 911 is
probably routed to a regional PSAP.)

-- 
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"

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: We have a similar situation here. The
town of Cherryvale, Kansas (population about two thousand) has a
police department, but during overnight hours, the *single* police
officer on duty is dispatched from here in Independence, and I 
think their 911 lines overnight are routed here.   PAT]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Copyright 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 #127
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Mar 23 16:20:42 2005
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j2NLKgn23729;
	Wed, 23 Mar 2005 16:20:42 -0500 (EST)
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 16:20:42 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200503232120.j2NLKgn23729@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 #128

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 23 Mar 2005 16:21:00 EST    Volume 24 : Issue 128

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    More 'Tweens' Going Mobile; Long-Term Health Remains Unclear (M Solomon)
    Symantec Internet Security Threat Report Volume VII (Monty Solomon)
    News Corporation Completes Acquisition of Fox (Monty Solomon)
    Phoning 0870 and 0844 UK Numbers Out of Free Minutes (polinaskulski@aol)
    SS7 vs SIP (Michal_km)
    Texas Files Lawsuit Against Vonage (Telecom dailyLead from USTA)
    Cell Phone Jammer For Sale MONIX MGB-1S (donestuardo@yahoo.com)
    GSM900 (jason)
    Re: Some Concerned About Privacy Implications of E-ZPass (Wesrock@aol)
    Re: Some Concerned About Privacy Implications of E-ZPass (Lisa Hancock)
    Re: New Long Range Cordless Phones? (Tony P.)
    Re: New Long Range Cordless Phones (John Bartley)
    Re: What happened to Channel 1 (Neal McLain)
    Re: What Happened To Channel 1 (Tony P.)
    Re: What Happened to Channel 1 (Brad Houser)    
    Re: Dangling Broadband From the Phone Stick (Lisa Hancock)
    Re: Our Telephonic Primacy (Lisa Hancock)
    Re: Intertel Eclipse Telephone Programming (T. Sean Weintz)
    Re: Texas Sues Vonage Over 911 Problem (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: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 18:42:02 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: More 'Tweens' Going Mobile; Long-Term Health Risks Remain Unclear


By Associated Press  |  March 21, 2005

CHICAGO -- There were two things 11-year-old Patty Wiegner really,
really, really wanted for Christmas. One was a furry, playful dog
that's now filling her parents' home with the sound of barking. The
other gift makes a different kind of noise -- it has a ring tone that
mimics rapper 50 Cent's hit song 'Candy Shop.'

While some might question why someone so young might need one, and
some scientists have expressed health concerns, Patty is one of many
kids her age who are asking their parents for cellphones. And
increasingly, they're getting them.

http://www.boston.com/business/personaltech/articles/2005/03/21/more_tweens_going_mobile/


Long-term health risks remain unclear
By Associated Press  |  March 21, 2005

SEATTLE -- Parents should think twice before giving in to a
middle-schooler's demands for a cellphone, some scientists say,
because potential long-term health risks remain unclear.

Researchers have speculated for more than 10 years that the
electromagnetic radiation emitted from cellphones may damage DNA and
cause benign brain tumors, said Henry Lai, a bioengineering professor
at the University of Washington.

http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2005/03/21/long_term_health_risks_remain_unclear/

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

Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 19:12:17 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Symantec Internet Security Threat Report Volume VII


Symantec Offers Webcast On Findings Of Latest Internet Security Threat
Report

CUPERTINO, Calif. - March 21, 2005 - Symantec Corp. (Nasdaq: SYMC),
the global leader in information security, today announced it will
host a webcast discussing the findings of its seventh bi-annual
Internet Security Threat Report. The webcast will be held on Wed.,
March 23, 2005 at 9 a.m. PST. The webcast and report are invaluable
for security IT management who are responsible for strategic security
decisions, policy setting, and learning about how security issues
affect business. Attendees can register at
http://enterprisesecurity.symantec.com/content/webcastinfo.cfm?webcastid=145

http://www.symantec.com/press/2005/n050321a.html

Symantec Internet Security Threat Report Volume VII
Presented by: Dean Turner, Executive Editor, Symantec Internet 
Security Threat Report
Date: Wednesday, March 23, 2005
Time: 9am PST
http://ses.symantec.com/content/webcastinfo.cfm?webcastid=145

Internet Security Threat Report
http://ses.symantec.com/ITR
https://ses.symantec.com/content.cfm?articleid=1539&EID=0

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

Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 21:21:13 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: News Corporation Completes Acquisition of Fox


NEW YORK--(BUSINESS WIRE)--March 21, 2005--News Corporation (NYSE:
NWS, NWS.A; ASX: NWS, NWSLV) announced today that it has completed its
previously announced acquisition of Fox Entertainment Group, Inc.'s
Class A common stock (NYSE:FOX) that News Corporation did not already
own.

In a short-form merger of Fox Entertainment Group, Inc. with and into
News Corporation's wholly owned subsidiary, Fox Acquisition Corp, that
was effected earlier today, each share of Fox Class A common stock,
other than those owned by News Corporation or its subsidiaries, was
converted into 2.04 shares of News Corporation Class A common stock,
subject to the rights of stockholders to seek appraisal under Delaware
law.

     - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=47820386

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

From: polinaskulski@aol.com
Subject: Phoning 0870 and 0844 UK Numbers Out of Free Minutes
Date: 23 Mar 2005 06:16:40 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


Does anyone know of any UK mobile phones companies/plans which allow
to phone 0870 and 0844 numbers out of the free minutes.

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

From: Michal_km <michalkm@013.net>
Subject: SS7 vs SIP
Date: 23 Mar 2005 01:55:58 -0800


Hi,

I'm looking for the equivelant terms in SIP to SS7 terms: OPC, DPC,
CIC, SLS.

Is it possible to compare between the two technologies?  I am working
with a monitoring program that monitors SS7 equipment (such as STP,
SSP, SCP) and messages and the plan is to extend it to monitor IP
messages and equipment on a VoIP network.

Thanks,

M~

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

Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 12:43:09 EST
From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA <usta@dailylead.com>
Subject: Texas Files Lawsuit Against Vonage


Telecom dailyLead from USTA
March 23, 2005
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=20270&l=2017006

TODAY'S HEADLINES

NEWS OF THE DAY
* Texas files lawsuit against Vonage
BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH
* Microsoft, Symbian target RIM
* SBC taps five execs for IPTV service
* MCI beefs up Wi-Fi coverage
* BellSouth pitches directories to Hispanic market
* AOL's new content plan
* MCI board to discuss Qwest offer
USTA SPOTLIGHT 
* Register Today!  VoIP 101 Webinar: Tomorrow at 1 p.m. ET
EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES
* BT sets aggressive timeline for 21CN project
* AT&T conducts WiMax tests
REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE
* Texas city hires private company to build, operate Wi-Fi network

Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others.
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=20270&l=2017006

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

From: donestuardo@yahoo.com
Subject: Cell Phone Jammer For Sale MONIX MGB-1S
Date: 22 Mar 2005 17:12:24 -0800


I have a nearly new cell phone jammer for sale -- range is
approximately 30 metres in radius. Model MONIX MGB-1S cellular Jammer.

Used only one week (and then the tenant was gone! - hint great for
getting rid of loser tenants who depend on their cell phones for
calls).

Includes unit, plus 2 attennas, and a power cable and transformer for
North American Standard power.

Asking price $395 plus shipping.

I am located in Canada.

Please email me at donestuardo (AT Sign) yahoo.com or call me on my
cell at (416) 458-0012 and I will be happy to go over details with you.

Thanks,

Stew

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Why is a person who relies on a cell
phone for their communications a 'loser'?  Good luck finding someone
willing to buy this evil device.  :(    PAT]

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

From: jason <cheanglong@gmail.com>
Subject: GSM-900
Date: 22 Mar 2005 17:16:09 -0800


Hello All,

May I know why do we need the number 900 to make GSM900 meaningful?
Is it because the rf signal is in 900 MHz? or the local oscillator
used for GSM900 system is at 900 MHz?  Kindly enlighthen.

rgds and thanks,

jason

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

From: Wesrock@aol.com
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 20:28:47 EST
Subject: Some Concerned About Privacy Implications of E-ZPass System


In a message dated Mon, 21 Mar 2005 22:06:56 -0500, Monty Solomon
<monty@roscom.com> writes:

> CONCORD, N.H. --The E-ZPass system that will soon make it easier to
> pay tolls in New Hampshire will make it easier to track people's
> movements, privacy advocates warn.

> State officials say strict policies are in place to prevent that, and
> stress that E-ZPass will be voluntary. They also say the system will
> reduce traffic congestion and put off the need to expand the current
> toll plazas.

> http://www.boston.com/news/local/new_hampshire/articles/2005/03/21/some_concerned_about_privacy_implications_of_e_zpass_system/

      NH is just now getting E-Z Pass or some similar system?

Oklahoma, with more turnpikes than any other state, has had them
for 15 years or more.  In Texas, where most of the toll roads are
urban, there has been a similar system (made by the same company) for
years.  Kansas put in a similar system a few years ago.

Those privacy concerns have been raised in each of those states, and
come up again every so often.  As far as I know, no problems have been
reported in any of the three states with privacy problems.

As the story says, you can choose not to participate.  It's a real
pain once you've gotten used to driving on the turnpikes without
stopping -- newer toll plazas are being built with 75 mph lanes for
holders of the devices.  Older toll plazas are being replaced or
remodeled to provide high speed lanes for those who have the devices.

You can still pay in cash if you want to carry proper change and
thread your way across several lanes to wait for your turn.  If you
have to make change (some remote entrances/exits do not have manned
toll booths) the line will be even longer.


Wes Leatherock
wesrock@aol.com

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

From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Subject: Re: Some Concerned About Privacy Implications of E-ZPass System
Date: 23 Mar 2005 06:59:50 -0800


Monty Solomon wrote:

> CONCORD, N.H. --The E-ZPass system that will soon make it easier to
> pay tolls in New Hampshire will make it easier to track people's
> movements, privacy advocates warn.

> State officials say strict policies are in place to prevent that, and
> stress that E-ZPass will be voluntary. They also say the system will
> reduce traffic congestion and put off the need to expand the current
> toll plazas.

Yes and No.

Some tollways give a big discount to EZPASS users and provide faster
lanes, making cash users pay more and wait longer.  (Other tollways
actually charge more for EZPASS than cash users, which seems to defeat
the whole purpose of the program which is to encourage widespread
use.)

I'm sure each and every one of the organizations hit with big identity
data theft/loss cases recently would've also told us they had "strict
policies in place" what turned out to still happened, strict policies
or not.

I myself use EZPASS to get a toll discount and save time; it's also
convenient when I travel on other roads.  But I don't like the loss of
privacy.  My toll bridge doesn't handle it, some service contractor
down in DC does.  The tollgates also have recording cameras to catch
toll skippers.  Anyone who gets my account number and pin number can
go online and access my EZP driving history, and that's frightening.

There's also the concern if my car with its transponder unit is stolen.

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

From: Tony P. <kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net>
Subject: Re: New Long Range Cordless Phones?
Organization: ATCC
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 22:40:06 -0500


In article <telecom24.126.10@telecom-digest.org>, newsgroups@dave!!!
christense!!n.o!!!r!!!g says:

> I saw a link earlier for this on Slash Dot.  Its a cordless phone that
> supposedly works 100km from the base station (under ideal conditions).

> http://www.goodbyelongdistance.com/catalog/item/1441280/975984.htm

> Other then the obvious potential for grief from the FCC, anyone else 
> have any thoughts?

> I'm living in a rural Alaskan town and traditional cell service is 
> spotty to none, even with an old bag phone and roof antenna so I was 
> thinking that this could be an interesting approach to local mobile 
> phone service.

I highly doubt that it is legal in the U.S. However, modifying your
802.11 gear and using say a PalmOS type machine with an 802.11 card
you could probably cobble together a VoIP solution that has a linear
range of 11 miles or so, depending on what type and pattern of
radiator you decide to use.

 From what I've read about these units they operate in the amateur
radio band so I take sort of strong offense to that.

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

From: John Bartley <johnbartley@email.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 11:31:58 -0800
Subject: Re: New Long Range Cordless Phones


>  From: Dave <newsgroups@dave!!!christense!!n.o!!!r!!!g>
>  Subject: New Long Range Cordless Phones?
>  Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 18:46:17 -0900

> I saw a link earlier for this on Slash Dot.  Its a cordless phone that
> supposedly works 100km from the base station (under ideal conditions).

> http://www.goodbyelongdistance.com/catalog/item/1441280/975984.htm

> Other then the obvious potential for grief from the FCC, anyone else
> have any thoughts?

On Tue, 22 Mar 2005 15:10:07 -0500, Michael Quinn replied:

> Dave,

> I'm pretty sure these are illegal in the US&P(ossessions).  One of the
> issues was interference with Air Traffic Control communications
> systems, as I recall.  Someone on the list may be able to cite chapter
> and verse from US Code, or FCC regs. I may have saved a Navy
> Department spectrum management brief on the subject; if so, I'll
> forward off net.

> Regards,

> Mike

 From the Amateur Radio Newsline report #1399 last year:

ENFORCEMENT: EATERY FINED $10,000 FOR USING 2 METERS Rem ember the
case of Best Wok?  The New Jersey restaraunt that was warned b y the
FCC to stop using an illegal high power 2 meter cordless telephone to
coordinate deliveries but which continued to do so anyhow?  Well, that
decision by the store manager is going to cost the company $10,0 00.
Thats the amount of the fine that the FCC has levvied against Best Wor
k for transmitting on 145.8376 MHz without Commission authorization.
The r esteraunt was given the customary 30 days to pay up or to file
an appeal.  (FCC)

And, from , a Miami dealer was fined $7,000 for selling those kinds of
 cordless phones.

Some hams ('observers') volunteer to track misuse, triangulate where
it's from, and report it to the local FCC field office or field
engineer.  It's a well-respected role within the amateur radio
community.

So, just because it's on Slashdot don't mean you can sell it
Stateside.

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

Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 21:09:02 -0600
From: Neal McLain <nmclain@annsgarden.com>
Subject: Re: What happened to Channel 1?


I wrote:

> A few years later, we moved HBO to channel 2 (so we could sell
> HBO to hotels and motels), installed negative traps to secure
> it, .....

Whereupon Robert Bonomi <bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com> wrote:

> What science can take away, science can put back.  Those traps
> did _not_ *completely* eliminate the signal getting into the
> customer premises, they just made it so weak that a
> conventional TV set couldn't amplify it enough to make a decent
> picture.   A decent high-gain single-channel pre-amp, on
> the other hand, installed 'in front of' the TV receiver, could
> do a surprisingly good job of resurrecting the 'killed' signal.
> <grin>

Except that the relevant parameter is noise figure, not gain.  To the
extent that the preamp has a better (i.e., lower) noise figure than
the TV set's own tuner (and holding all other variables constant),
you'll get a decibel-for-decibel improvement.

But even a relatively low-gain preamp (say, ca 20 dB) will show
similar improvement if it has a similarly lower noise figure.

http://www.broadband-pbimedia.com/ct/archives/0500/0500col2.htm

Neal McLain

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

From: Tony P. <kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net>
Subject: Re: What Happened To Channel 1
Organization: ATCC
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 22:43:33 -0500


In article <telecom24.126.11@telecom-digest.org>, bonomi@host122.r-
bonomi.com says:

> What science can take away, science can put back.  Those traps did _not_
> *completely* eliminate the signal getting into the customer premises, they
> just made it so weak that a conventional TV set couldn't amplify it enough
> to make a decent picture.   A decent high-gain single-channel pre-amp, on
> the other hand, installed 'in front of' the TV receiver, could do a 
> surprisingly good job of resurrecting the 'killed' signal.  <grin>

Sort of how the FCC has pretty much admitted that anyone with a
modicum of technical knowledge will be able to defeat the broadcast
flag.

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

From: Brad Houser <bradDOThouser@intel.com>
Subject: Re: What Happened To Channel 1
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 12:22:48 -0800
Organization: Intel
Reply-To: Brad Houser <bradDOThouser@intel.com>


The channel is the range of frequencies allocated to that broadcast
station.  NTSC (analog TV) and ATSC (digital TV) still use the same
channels. Most of the new DTV channels are UHF, and the broadcasters
are allowed to continue to use the older analog channels (the best
ones being VHF) during the transition. Once the FCC tells them to shut
off the analog broadcasts, the original channels will be put up for
auction.

Brad H

<Tim@Backhome.org> wrote in message 
news:telecom24.118.14@telecom-digest.org:

> An NTSC analog "channel" is called such because it is allocated to
> AM video and FM audio.

> These channels will soon be just a part of television history as they are
> phased out and replaced by the digital "channels."

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

From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Subject: Re: Dangling Broadband From the Phone Stick
Date: 23 Mar 2005 06:52:05 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


Jack Decker wrote:

> For many consumers, the main alternative to broadband from the phone
> company is the local cable company. But cable broadband prices tend to
> be higher -- as much as $60 a month for access, compared typically with
> $40 or less for phone company broadband. And the cable companies 
> prefer to sell the service as a package with television that can
> easily exceed $100 a month.

> ... It seems to me that the phone companies are just like that gas station
> owner when they refuse to sell unbundled DSL.  ...
> ... But since the phone companies are monopolies, you don't have the 
> option of walking six blocks down the road to the next nearest 
> DSL provider.

It seems to me you contradicted your own post and have a double
standard.

Your clipping stated that cable companies offer broadband as an
alternative.  So consumers DO have an alternative and don't have
to walk six blocks in bad weather to get it.

You also want the phone companies to be forced to drop their
bundling requirement.  But your clipping says cable companies
do the same thing and charge even more.   Why should the cable
companies be allowed to bundle and charge more when you want
the phone company controlled?

It seems from your article that the phone company, bundled or not, is
giving the consumer a better deal.

Remember, the phone company doesn't have to offer broadband at all
and you could get it only from the cable company and pay their
prices.

BTW, a lot of consumer goods are "bundled" whether you like it or
not.  Sometimes it's for marketing convenience as a la carte
pricing and selling would be too cumbersome.  But other times it's
to add profit to the mfr.

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

From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Subject: Re: Our Telephonic Primacy
Date: 23 Mar 2005 07:37:52 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


Monty Solomon wrote:

> By William F. S. Miles  |  March 21, 2005

> Americans often make this jingoistic boast in bouts of competitive
> patriotism. But on what basis? When it comes to the standard
> international ranking of countries in terms of human development (life
> expectancy, literacy, and purchasing power, as compiled by the United
> Nations Development Program), the United States comes in a
> respectable, but hardly chest thumping, number 7 (bested by Belgium,
> for goodness sake!)

I wonder how accurate these international rankings are.  Recently
someone claimed that infant mortality was worse in the U.S. than in
Cuba, something I find difficult to believe without additional
explanation.

Anyway, in the case of the United States, the national averages,
rankings, and indexes really don't mean very much.  The U.S. is a very
big country with great economic diversity.  Real estate costs more in
NYC, but salaries are higher, for example.  Crime and disease are
often much higher in ghetto areas than most suburban areas.

Advocates of public policy on both sides of the aisle love to throw
out statistics.  Newspapers like them as well -- they "authenticate" a
story.  But the key component of all statistics is the base sample.
When we say 25% percent of such-and-such, we need to understand
exactly what 'such and such' _includes_ AND _excludes_, as well as
exactly the definition of the subset percentage.  Further, it is
critical that statistics be compared in context to other yardsticks of
other equivalent areas and situations of past time.  Often the full
story is not told.

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

From: T. Sean Weintz <strap@hanh-ct.org>
Subject: Re: Intertel Eclipse Telephone Programming
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 12:50:42 -0500
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com


marcsanders2003@yahoo.com wrote:

> Anybody with technical knowledge of the InterTel Eclipse telephone
> system?  Here's what I'm trying to do:

> I'm trying to set up a shared mailbox.  In other words, I've added a
> new extension, 262, and I want it to use the voice mailbox of 214.  So
> both extensions will be using mailbox 214.  I would also like
> notification of messages to go to 262.

> It seems fairly simple, but so far nothing seems to work.

> Any help would be appreciated.

I don't think that can be done.

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Quite a few years ago, I had two lines
in Skokie, IL -- ORchard 7 9510 and ORchard 7 9511. Both had Voicemail
on them from Ameritech; both were handled from 9511. I think what 
Ameritech told me was there was only one voicemail box in reality,
probably on 9511 (which was a roll-over line from 9510) and that the
voicemail on 9510 was 'aliased' to 9511. When someone dialed into 9510
and the voicemail was to pick up, the alias pointed at 9511; not
only for the storage of messages, but also notification in the form
of a flashing red LED on the phone.  PAT]

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

From: DevilsPGD <ihatespam@crazyhat.net>
Subject: Re: Texas Sues Vonage Over 911 Problem
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 16:24:32 -0700
Organization: Disorganized


In message <telecom24.127.5@telecom-digest.org> Jack Decker
<jack-yahoogroups@withheld on request> wrote:

> A Vonage spokeswoman said the company was surprised to hear of the
> litigation and pointed out there are numerous references, both on the
> Internet and material mailed to customers, explaining the 911
> service's limitations and its proactive nature. Abbott's office
> contacted New Jersey-based Vonage about a week ago asking for
> marketing materials and other information; the company hadn't heard
> anything since it replied with the materials two days ago, the
> spokeswoman said.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: Vonage should not be
offering 911 at all, rather, they should be highlighting the fact that
emergency call centers do not allow Vonage to route emergency calls to
the right place (so their only option is to dump the call to an
administrative number.)

Personally, I'd rather have attempts to dial 911 get the "Stop, this
phone does not have 911 service" then get through to someone who can't
or won't help.

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But wouldn't the ideal arrangement be
like here? A number designated for 'emergency but not 911' phone is
terminated on the consoles of the persons who respond for police, etc,
and they are tipped off "if this line, with its unusual cadence in 
ringing goes off, it is to be treated like any other emergency call".

Our dispatchers answer not only the occassional 911 call, but they
also answer for the city hall offices. The PSAP people (at Vonage, and
elsewhere) are told to connect with them as needed _using one of the
back lines_ on the city hall group; a line which would almost never
get calls on its own. Now, if _that phone_ rings/flashes, treat it as
a priority emergency call. The same woman sitting there taking calls
for the city hall centrex/switchboard sees that one phone give out a
continuous (never pausing) ring with the light on the wall flashing at
a furious pace says 'ah, it is an emergency call from a system which
cannot (for whatever reason) use 911. She answers it and makes
dispatch as needed. Does not seem like that major of problem. That
single phone, by the way, also has a caller-ID device on it, and a
rather detailed map on the wall as well, so the dispatcher gets the
essence of the desired information, even if not every single bit of
it. Ah, but that would involve _training_ the dispatchers in possibly
a new procedure. Do you think their Civil Servants Union would allow
that sort of a requirement?

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

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 #128
******************************

    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Mar 23 21:54:36 2005
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j2O2sZd26119;
	Wed, 23 Mar 2005 21:54:36 -0500 (EST)
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 21:54:36 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200503240254.j2O2sZd26119@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 #129

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 23 Mar 2005 21:55:00 EST    Volume 24 : Issue 129

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Macintosh Hacker Attacks Are on the Rise -Symantec (Lisa Minter)
    AOL LatAm Running Out of Cash, May Cease Operations (Lisa Minter)
    Yahoo Ups Free E-Mail Storage to 1 GB (Lisa Minter)
    Re: Texas Sues Vonage Over 911 Problem (Thor Lancelot Simon)
    Re: Texas Sues Vonage Over 911 Problem (DevilsPGD)
    Re: What Happened To Channel 1 (Garrett Wollman)
    Re: What Happened To Channel 1 (Dan Lanciani)
    Re: Our Telephonic Primacy (Justin Time)
    Re: Some Concerned About Privacy Implications of E-ZPass (John Levine)
    Re: SS7 vs SIP (VOIP SS7 Softswitch specialists)

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 Mar 2005 14:17:05 -0800
From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: Macintosh Hacker Attacks Are on the Rise - Symantec


SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Hacker attacks on Apple Computer Inc.'s OS X
operating system, thought by many who use the Mac to be virtually
immune to attack, are on the rise, according to a report from
anti-virus software vendor Symantec Corp.

"Contrary to popular belief, the Macintosh operating system has not
always been a safe haven from malicious code," said the report, which
was issued on Monday.

"It is now clear that the Mac OS is increasingly becoming a target for
the malicious activity that is more commonly associated with Microsoft
and various Unix-based operating systems."

An Apple spokesman said the Cupertino, California-based company would
have no comment on the report.

Many in the Macintosh computer community have long claimed that the
Mac platform has been virtually immune to attack -- unlike Microsoft
Corp.'s Windows operating system, which runs on more than 90 percent
of the world's personal computers.

The Macintosh operating system, the current version of which is based
on the Unix operating system, has less than 5 percent of the global
market for computer operating systems.

"All these platforms have vulnerabilities - it's a fact of life," said
Gartner analyst Martin Reynolds. "The truth of the matter is that Mac
is only a couple percentage points of (computer) shipments so it's not
an interesting target."

Apple's recent introduction of the Mac mini, a $500 computer sold
without a display, keyboard or mouse, could actually increase the
likelihood of more malicious software computer code targeting the Mac
platform, Symantec said.

"The market penetration of Macintosh platforms will be accelerated by
the much lower priced Mac mini, which may be purchased by less
security-savvy users," the report said. "As a result, the number of
vulnerabilities can be expected to increase, as will malicious
activity that targets them."

Symantec said that over the past year, it had documented 37
high-vulnerabilities -- weaknesses that leave the system open to
malicious software attacks -- in Mac OS X They "have been confirmed by
the vendor, which, in the Apple case, almost always means that the
company has released a patch."

A patch is a small piece of software designed to shore up a
vulnerability or to fix other software glitches.

At the same time, the report said that while those vulnerabilities in
the Mac operating system will increase, "they will likely be
outnumbered in other operating systems for some time to come."

Shares of Apple fell 87 cents, or 2 percent, to close at $42.83 on
Nasdaq.

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: 23 Mar 2005 14:18:30 -0800
From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: AOL LatAm Running Out of Cash, May Cease Operations


SEATTLE (Reuters) - America Online Latin America Inc.  South America,
said on Tuesday that it was running out of cash and may shut down or
file for bankruptcy protection.

Unless AOL Latin America finds a buyer for its assets, it
will have to close down operations, the Fort Lauderdale,
Florida-based company said in a regulatory filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission. 

AOL Latin America, founded as a joint venture between America Online
Inc. and the Cisneros Group at the start of the Internet bubble in
1998, has since struggled to become profitable.

The loss-making company, which provides Internet dial-up service
mainly in Brazil, Mexico and Argentina, stopped counting non-paying
subscribers in 2003 as the SEC investigated the company's methods in
counting subscribers.

Although AOL Latin America has enough cash to stay in business through
the third quarter of this year, it said it may have fallen into
default with Time Warner Inc.  which holds $160 million of senior
convertible notes in the company.

"We do not believe that our common stock has, or will have, any
value," the company said in the filing.

AOL Latin America said it is no longer pursuing any financing.

"We are not currently expending resources to obtain financing from any
source because we believe that any efforts to obtain financing would
be futile based on past experience," the company said.

Other Internet service providers have also struggled to stay in
business in Latin America. StarMedia Network Inc., Terra Lycos and
Yahoo's efforts to build an access provider have fallen flat.

AOL Latin America went public on the Nasdaq in 2000 at the low end of
the expected range, with investors expressing concern over its growth
prospects.

The shares fell to 22 cents in after-hours trading, less
than half of their closing price of 47 cents. It peaked above
$8 shortly after its initial public offering.

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 . 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: 23 Mar 2005 14:20:21 -0800
From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: Yahoo Ups Free E-Mail Storage to 1 GB


SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Yahoo Inc. said on Wednesday it will soon
begin giving users of its free Web e-mail service 1 gigabyte of
storage, four times more than it now offers, amid intense competition.

Consumers are increasingly using their Web e-mail inboxes as a
repository for e-mail as well as digital photos and documents. Web
e-mail providers have been responding with offers of ever more free
storage.

Yahoo, which Nielsen/NetRatings said in February boasted the most
unique users among e-mail providers in the United States ahead of Time
Warner Inc.'s Corp.'s MSN Hotmail, said the global storage upgrade
will begin in late April and take about two weeks to complete.

The Internet media company also said it is beefing up antivirus
protection for free e-mail users, giving them the ability to remove
viruses from attachments -- a feature that had only been available to
paying users.

Yahoo Mail is available in 15 languages in almost two dozen countries
around the world.

Google Inc.  last spring was the first email provider to offer 1
gigabyte of free storage to users of its invitation-only test Gmail
service, setting off me-too moves from rivals.

Gmail, a distant fourth in the rankings of top e-mail destinations, is
now available only as an English-language service.

Microsoft currently limits free storage on its free MSN Hotmail
accounts to 250 megabytes.

Yahoo and Microsoft each offer 2 gigabytes of storage to users who pay
about $20 per year for the service.

Yahoo shares edged up 10 cents to $31.08 on Nasdaq early Wednesday
afternoon.

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,in this instance, Reuters Limited/Tech Tuesday. 

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

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

From: tls@panix.com (Thor Lancelot Simon)
Subject: Re: Texas Sues Vonage Over 911 Problem
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 21:18:27 UTC
Organization: Public Access Networks Corp.
Reply-To: tls@rek.tjls.com


In article <telecom24.128.19@telecom-digest.org>, DevilsPGD
<ihatespam@crazyhat.net> wrote:

> In message <telecom24.127.5@telecom-digest.org> Jack Decker
> <jack-yahoogroups@withheld on request> wrote:

>> A Vonage spokeswoman said the company was surprised to hear of the
>> litigation and pointed out there are numerous references, both on the
>> Internet and material mailed to customers, explaining the 911
>> service's limitations and its proactive nature. Abbott's office
>> contacted New Jersey-based Vonage about a week ago asking for
>> marketing materials and other information; the company hadn't heard
>> anything since it replied with the materials two days ago, the
>> spokeswoman said.

> I've said it before, and I'll say it again: Vonage should not be
> offering 911 at all, rather, they should be highlighting the fact that
> emergency call centers do not allow Vonage to route emergency calls to
> the right place (so their only option is to dump the call to an
> administrative number.)

Your claim above "emergency call centers do not allow..." is false; in
fact, it's a key element of Vonage's public-relations effort on this
issue.

*If* Vonage were willing to pay the same fees other local exchange
carriers pay for 911 connectivity *in each LATA*, *then* Vonage could
route 911 calls correctly.  Avoiding this *cost* has been a major
competitive win for Vonage all along and it is hard to not see it as
a major reason, if not _the_ reason, why Vonage has fought state
regulation as a local exchange carrier: by avoiding regulatory mandates
like 911 service standards Vonage avoids the cost of compliance.

What is truly irresponsible is to offer a "911" service that does not
have the same user experience that Americans have been trained to expect
from 911 for several decades.  In a just world, Vonage would pay and pay
indeed for their decision to make the provision of such a service part
of their public-relations effort aimed at avoiding service quality
regulation.  This is a choice they made, not one they had forced on
them; there are VoIP providers out there that did the right thing.

People's safety in emergency situations should be quite simply out of
bounds for this kind of political maneuvering.  Of course, it's not,
but darn it, it ought to be.

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: DevilsPGD <ihatespam@crazyhat.net>
Subject: Re: Texas Sues Vonage Over 911 Problem
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 16:50:15 -0700
Organization: Disorganized


In message <telecom24.128.19@telecom-digest.org> DevilsPGD
<ihatespam@crazyhat.net> wrote:

> In message <telecom24.127.5@telecom-digest.org> Jack Decker
> <jack-yahoogroups@withheld on request> wrote:

>> A Vonage spokeswoman said the company was surprised to hear of the
>> litigation and pointed out there are numerous references, both on the
>> Internet and material mailed to customers, explaining the 911
>> service's limitations and its proactive nature. Abbott's office
>> contacted New Jersey-based Vonage about a week ago asking for
>> marketing materials and other information; the company hadn't heard
>> anything since it replied with the materials two days ago, the
>> spokeswoman said.

> I've said it before, and I'll say it again: Vonage should not be
> offering 911 at all, rather, they should be highlighting the fact that
> emergency call centers do not allow Vonage to route emergency calls to
> the right place (so their only option is to dump the call to an
> administrative number.)

> Personally, I'd rather have attempts to dial 911 get the "Stop, this
> phone does not have 911 service" then get through to someone who can't
> or won't help.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But wouldn't the ideal arrangement be
> like here? A number designated for 'emergency but not 911' phone is
> terminated on the consoles of the persons who respond for police, etc,
> and they are tipped off "if this line, with its unusual cadence in 
> ringing goes off, it is to be treated like any other emergency call".

> Our dispatchers answer not only the occassional 911 call, but they
> also answer for the city hall offices. The PSAP people (at Vonage, and
> elsewhere) are told to connect with them as needed _using one of the
> back lines_ on the city hall group; a line which would almost never
> get calls on its own. Now, if _that phone_ rings/flashes, treat it as
> a priority emergency call. The same woman sitting there taking calls
> for the city hall centrex/switchboard sees that one phone give out a
> continuous (never pausing) ring with the light on the wall flashing at
> a furious pace says 'ah, it is an emergency call from a system which
> cannot (for whatever reason) use 911. She answers it and makes
> dispatch as needed. Does not seem like that major of problem. That
> single phone, by the way, also has a caller-ID device on it, and a
> rather detailed map on the wall as well, so the dispatcher gets the
> essence of the desired information, even if not every single bit of
> it. Ah, but that would involve _training_ the dispatchers in possibly
> a new procedure. Do you think their Civil Servants Union would allow
> that sort of a requirement?

No, the ideal solution is to route the calls to the same place as 911
calls.  They should enter the 911 call center just like every other
911-addressed call center comes in.

Like with a cell phone there is no confirmed address, but that didn't
stop cell phones from offering 911.

The only reason cell phones get 911 service and VoIP gets screwed
around is that cell phones were initially only deployed by telcos and
weren't seen as a threat to telcos.

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Very true, but given the inability to
immediatly provide the location until there are some changes in the
way the 'system' operates, shouldn't there be some 'make do' solution
used in the interim? If some combination of dedicated phone lines and
caller ID can be employed, why not use those?  And we know it is
possible to force caller-ID to say whatever we want it to say, so why
can't Vonage (or other VOIP carriers offering 911 service) dummy up
their PSAP databases with the desired information to be sent to the
'caller ID' devices attached to these 'special' phones?  Or, in your
opinion is it better to do without since it cannot be done perfectly
right from the start?  

We've had that discussion about spam a few times haven't we?  No one
simple solution, everything has pitfalls, so wring our hands and do
nothing. 911 has politics involved, just like spam, its easier to
claim it is  'very complex problem', and do nothing about it, and
when our public servants get on a tangent about it, bow and grovel and
twist to meet their desires instead.   PAT] 

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

From: wollman@lcs.mit.edu (Garrett Wollman)
Subject: Re: What Happened To Channel 1
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 23:00:55 UTC
Organization: MIT Laboratory for Computer Science


In article <telecom24.128.15@telecom-digest.org>, Brad Houser
<bradDOThouser@intel.com> wrote:

> The channel is the range of frequencies allocated to that broadcast
> station.  NTSC (analog TV) and ATSC (digital TV) still use the same
> channels. Most of the new DTV channels are UHF, and the broadcasters
> are allowed to continue to use the older analog channels (the best
> ones being VHF) during the transition. Once the FCC tells them to shut
> off the analog broadcasts, the original channels will be put up for
> auction.

Not entirely correct ...

1) Digital television has "virtual channels".  Stations which have an
existing brand identity based on their analog channel in most cases
have chosen to PSIP with that channel rather than their new digital
channel (even when the analog channel is going away permanently).

2) Stations have the opportunity to choose which of their two channels
they will use for their "permanent" DTV operation.  The cost
advantages to being in VHF-high are so significant that almost every
station which has had the opportunity so far to make that choice has
chosen the VHF channel.  Most stations on VHF-low have chosen to leave
the band (particularly if the channel in question is the very
undesirable channel 6).  Stations with analog channels 52 and higher
do not get a choice, unless their DTV channel is also above 51, in
which case they get their pick of technically feasible channels after
the stations that had a choice have chosen.

3) It's not clear to me whether the FCC will seriously auction
channels below 52 for new services, or simply open them up to the
usual competitive process for new TV applications, or do both and have
TV and other services competing in the same auction.

-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)

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

Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 18:51:11 EST
From: Dan Lanciani <ddl@danlan.com>
Subject: Re: What Happened To Channel 1


kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net (Tony P.) wrote:

> Sort of how the FCC has pretty much admitted that anyone with a
> modicum of technical knowledge will be able to defeat the broadcast
> flag.

I think you've mentioned this before, but what does it mean?  The
system as originally conceived requires the digital representation of
flagged content to be protected by encryption on bus and media.  I
have more than a modicum of technical knowledge and I don't see an
easy way around the proposed system in concept.  Has the original
system been abandoned?  Or are you aware of some implementation flaw?

Now of course (so far) the over-the-air ATSC broadcasts are to remain
in the clear.  But again, building a practical ATSC receiver takes
(IMHO) more than a modicum of technical knowledge--at least until
there is a GNUradio cookbook and good canned DSP software.

So what exactly is going on with the broadcast flag?  There seems to
be a lot of misinformation floating around, including the absurd
proposition that the copy management can never be expanded to include
more than two states because of a lack of bits!


Dan Lanciani
ddl@danlan.*com

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

From: Justin Time <a_user2000@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Our Telephonic Primacy
Date: 23 Mar 2005 13:16:01 -0800


Advocates of public policy on both sides of the aisle love to throw
out statistics.  Newspapers like them as well -- they "authenticate" a
story.  But the key component of all statistics is the base sample.
When we say 25% percent of such-and-such, we need to understand
exactly what 'such and such' _includes_ AND _excludes_, as well as
exactly the definition of the subset percentage.  Further, it is
critical that statistics be compared in context to other yardsticks of
other equivalent areas and situations of past time.  Often the full
story is not told.

I believe it was George Carlin who stated something like, "40% of all
statistics are made up."

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

Date: 23 Mar 2005 23:13:47 -0000
From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
Subject: Re: Some Concerned About Privacy Implications of E-ZPass System
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


> NH is just now getting E-Z Pass or some similar system?

E-ZPass started on the NY Thruway in 1993 and has been expanding over
the past decade to most of the toll facilites from Washington DC
northward.  (The system in Massachusetts is called FastLane but it's
the same technology and it's part of the E-ZPass system.)  NH is just
getting around to it.

The potential for privacy problems is severe, but to their credit I
don't think I've ever heard reports of abuses.  Besides the
possibility of tracking people by tag use, there's the violation
tracking issue.  If you drive through an E-ZPAss booth in NY with no
tag or an invalid tag, a camera takes a picture of your car and they
will ask the state DMV to look up the license plate number so they can
send you a ticket.

This actually happens, not just for NY violations but for nearby
states and provinces as well.  In Toronto the 407 toll road has fully
automated toll collection, and if you don't have a tag, they send you
a bill based on your plate number.  (The toll is much lower if you
have a tag, so regular users all have tags.)  We've gotten bills for
our NY car that way, so NY is providing the info to Ontario as well.

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.

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: VOIP SS7 Softswitch Specialists <DWBVEGAS@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: SS7 vs SIP
Date: 23 Mar 2005 17:06:13 -0800


VOIP & SS7/C7 engineering

My name is Donald Bonner and I am with Blue Rock Solutions, the leading
Cisco reseller in VOIP and SS7/C7 engineering.  I would like introduce
Blue Rock Solutions and offer our services.
 
donb@bluerockdata.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 #129
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Mar 24 15:42:22 2005
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j2OKgMj05198;
	Thu, 24 Mar 2005 15:42:22 -0500 (EST)
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 15:42:22 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200503242042.j2OKgMj05198@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 #130

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 24 Mar 2005 15:42:00 EST    Volume 24 : Issue 130

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Internet Phone Service Creating Chatty Network (Marcus Didius Falco)
    Citron: Some Bills Are 'Weirdly Weird' (Jack Decker)
    Texas: Vonage 911 Is a Joke (Jack Decker)
    Re: Texas Sues Vonage Over 911 Problem (telcotech)
    Re: Texas Sues Vonage Over 911 Problem (John Levine)
    Re: Texas Sues Vonage Over 911 Problem (Lisa Hancock)
    Huawei Seeks Deals With Nortel, Lucent (Telecom dailyLead from USTA)
    Re: Our Telephonic Primacy (Dave Garland)
    Re: More 'Tweens' Going Mobile; Long-Term Health Risks Unclear (Hancock)
    Re: Cell Phone Jammer For Sale MONIX MGB-1S (Isaiah Beard)
    Re: Cell Phone Jammer For Sale MONIX MGB-1S (Joseph)
    Re: GSM-900 (Joseph)
    Re: GSM-900 (Robert Bonomi)
    Re: New Long Range Cordless Phones (Marcus Didius Falco)
    Re: New Long Range Cordless Phones? (Michael Quinn)
    Re: Phoning 0870 and 0844 UK Numbers Out of Free Minutes (Rob)
    Re: Mobile IP Networks (Jon Gauthier)
    Re: Some Concerned About Privacy Implications of E-ZPass (Lisa Hancock)
    Re: Dangling Broadband From the Phone Stick (jmeissen@aracnet.com)
    Re: What Happened To Channel 1 (Robert Bonomi)
    From the Past: Craft Access Article from '93 (Patrick Moore)
    From the Past: My First Post (Neil McClain)

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: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 03:41:07 -0500
From: Marcus Didius Falco <falco_marcus_didius@yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: Internet Phone Service Creating Chatty Network


 From the New York Times --
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/24/technology/circuits/24skyp.html?8dpc

Internet Phone Service Creating Chatty Network
By ETHAN TODRAS-WHITEHILL

JOHN PERRY BARLOW is pretty free and open, but he's no simpleton. So
when he signed on to Skype, a free Internet phone service, and a woman
identifying herself as Kitty messaged him, saying, "I need a friend,"
he was skeptical. He figured she was "looking for 'friends' to come
watch her 'relax' in her Webcam-equipped 'bedroom.' "

Nevertheless, he took the call. "Will you talk to me?" she said. "I
want to practice my English."

Kitty turned out to be Dzung Vu My, 22, a worker at an oil company in
Hanoi, Vietnam. They spoke for a long time, exchanging text,
photographs and Web addresses, and discussing everything from the
state of Vietnam's economy to Ms. My's father's time in the army.

"One doesn't get random phone calls from Vietnam," Mr. Barlow, 57, the
former Grateful Dead lyricist and co-founder of the Electronic
Frontier Foundation, a nonprofit advocacy organization for an
unfettered Internet, wrote on his blog.  "At least, one never could
before."

Mr. Barlow's experience is not unique. Skype users report unsolicited
contacts every day, and contrary to such experiences with phone and
e-mail, the calls are often welcomed.

Skype was founded by Niklas Zennstrom and Janus Friis, the creators of
Kazaa, a peer-to-peer file-sharing service. Skype is one of a few
hundred companies in the United States that let people talk to one
another over the Internet using just their computers and a headset, a
microphone or a conventional phone.

The technology, known as Voice Over Internet Protocol (VoIP), is
offered by phone and cable companies like AT&T and Comcast as well as
instant-messaging services like Yahoo's and MSN's.  Skype says that it
has over 2.8 million users in the United States and 30.6 million
worldwide and that it is adding users at a rate of 155,000 a
day. Skype's biggest competitor, Vonage, a paid VoIP service, has
about 550,000 customers.

A reason Skype is so popular is that it is free. Another is that it
works. That may not seem like much, but it matters when calls with
other free VoIP programs sound more like walkie-talkie conversations
than phone calls. Skype also has unusual features: users can search
the database of Skype users by such fields as age, language and
nationality.

When Skype began, in August 2003, this search feature resulted in
unwanted calls for some people. In response, Skype added the Skype Me
feature in 2004. Users can now set their user status to Skype Me if
they are interested in receiving calls from strangers and search for
other users in the same mode.

A preponderance of the random calls involve people "Skyping" one
another to practice a certain language (as with Mr.  Barlow's
experience), but other people seem to be calling simply because they
can.

In February 2004, John Andersen, 57, a software engineer in Juneau,
Alaska, was contacted out of the blue by two retired couples in
Sydney, Australia, planning a cruise through Alaska's Inside Passage
region that summer. They wanted to know the best helicopter glacier
tours and fishing excursions in Juneau, and Mr. Andersen was happy to
send them links through Skype.

They made plans to meet, but Mr. Andersen was away when the couples
visited. "I did get a very nice e-mail from them saying the trip had
gone off without a hitch," Mr. Andersen said. "It's like ham radio for
the Internet."

This was something I had to try. I picked up a $25 headset and
microphone combination, downloaded the free software from the Web site
(skype.com), put a few personal details in my user profile (male, New
York, favorite color green) and set my user status to Skype
Me. Despite what I had heard, I wasn't convinced that I would get any
calls.

Within 15 minutes, I had more callers than I could handle. In the five
days I was in Skype Me mode, I received more than 30 calls and
messages from Morocco, Russia, China, Poland, Argentina, Israel and
several other countries.

One of my most interesting chats was with Billy Einkamerer, 27, a
freelance Web developer in Johannesburg. I messaged him first, the
Skype equivalent of knocking on the door before barging in. He taught
me a little Afrikaans, and we commiserated over our mutual inability
to multitask.

I do some Web design myself, so through Skype's instant-messaging
feature we traded links to sites we had done; he found an error on one
of mine, which I quickly corrected. It was a pretty afternoon in
Brooklyn, so I took a snapshot out the window and sent it to him.

Near the end of our conversation, Mr. Einkamerer got a call from his
friend Gerhard Jacobs, also 27 and from Johannesburg.  Mr. Jacobs runs
an information technology company. Mr.  Einkamerer conferenced him
into the call, and the three of us made jokes about our accents.

It felt like the early days of AOL, another environment in which
people contacted others randomly. But voice brings to life the other
person in a way that typing cannot, like hearing Mr. Einkamerer laugh
at my jokes. The instant-messaging environment is anonymous; with
voice, you cannot hide from the other person.

Moreover, the voice quality over Skype is actually superior to
traditional phone service. Standard telecommunications are restricted
to the 0 to 3.4 kilohertz range to limit the bandwidth consumed; Skype
transmits at 0.5 to 8 kilohertz, according to a Columbia University
study in 2004. It feels intimate because it is; more of the users'
voices reach each other.

There are problems with Skype Me mode. Skype Me users are subject to
the undesirable solicitors familiar to e-mail and phone users:
spammers, scammers and perverts. Skype is starting to see its fair
share of all these groups: one user who contacted me was a Nigerian
"model" who requested my help depositing $4,000 in an American bank
account -- a classic scheme.

In addition, the blogging community is reporting scattered Skype
telemarketers, and women who identify themselves as such in their
profile report a bombardment of unwelcome advances when they enter
Skype Me mode. These problems appear to be growing.

Skype users can limit callers to people on their contact list, so if
the nuisance calls become substantial, the number of users who choose
Skype Me mode -- already only a tiny fraction of users, according to
Kelly Larabee, a Skype spokeswoman - could disappear entirely.

Government intervention is not a likely fix. In February 2004, the
Federal Communications Commission issued the Pulver Order, named after
the VoIP pioneer Jeff Pulver, which states that "pure"
computer-to-computer VoIP services like Skype and Mr.  Pulver's Free
World Dialup are no different from the unregulated instant-messaging
programs and are not subject to the traditional phone service taxes
and regulations.

The Pulver Order is viewed as a victory by many in the VoIP community,
including Skype, but it has potentially negative implications for the
Skype Me callers: no regulation means no do-not-call list, which means
Skype Me users, particularly women, will continue to receive unwanted
and unfriendly calls.

Even without government intervention, however, random Skyping appears
likely to continue in some form. The next phase may be more formalized
Skype-enabled social networks like www.jyve.com, which connects people
with similar interests and desire to practice a certain language, and
www.someonenew.com, which connects people for romantic purposes. Only
a few English-language social networking sites currently use Skype,
but such sites in Asia have been very successful.

Jyve, according to Charles Carleton, a co-founder, will be introducing
a feature in the next few months that Mr. Carleton hopes will protect
the medium's social capabilities: an eBay-like feedback system to help
users reject callers with a track record of inappropriate
conversation. Skype is happy to leave these functions to other
companies. "We're probably never going to run a dating service or
language seminars," Ms.  Larabee said of Skype. "Our business is the
technology, not the networks."

Mr. Barlow, who has been inviting people to Skype him for three
months, with 20 takers, believes that Skype's intimate feel will be
sufficient to keep the Skype Me phenomenon alive.

"There's something confessional about this space," Mr. Barlow said
about Skype. He was in Madrid for a conference, and I was in New
York. "It's like a long over-the-ocean flight where the other guy
starts telling you stuff that you're astonished to hear and you start
talking about stuff you're astonished to say. The combination of
anonymity and intimacy creates a special kind of environment."

Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company

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

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


                            John F. McMullen

                    http://www.westnet.com/~observer
                   BLOG: http://johnmacrants.blogspot.com/

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

From: Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@withheld on request>
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 12:11:01 -0500
Subject: Citron: Some Bills Are 'Weirdly Weird'


http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?site=lightreading&doc_id=70767

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC)'Vonage order'
exempting VOIP providers from state-level regulation is perhaps the
VOIP industry's biggest regulatory win to date. But state
regulatory agencies are trying to reverse it, and Vonage Holdings
Corp. CEO Jeffrey Citron sees that movement as a huge threat to VOIP
companies (see FCC Shields VOIP From States ).

"If that order gets reversed there will be very serious consequences
for the industry -- it could kill it," Citron tells Light Reading.

That order, issued November 9, preempted an order by the Minnesota
Public Utilities Commission applying to Vonage VOIP service the
state's own long list of 'telephone company' regulations,
which include rules on everything from E911 services to billing
practices.

The California and Minnesota state utilities commissions have now
filed separate appeals in circuit courts, while New York and Ohio are
reportedly considering following suit.

Representatives from the state commissions claim the FCC's Vonage
ruling leaves many regulatory questions unanswered, and opens the door
for traditional carriers to begin VOIP offerings just to skirt state
regulations.

Citron claims Minnesota PUC's regulations were written for wireline
carriers and do not fit the way VOIP providers conduct business. For
instance, the state's rules on billing practices apply only to
after-the-fact payment, Citron says, while Vonage service is all
pre-paid.

The Minnesota regulations also require phone numbers to be closely
associated with physical addresses (for E911 purposes), while Vonage
service can be used anywhere a broadband connection is
available. "They wanted our users to stay in one place," Citron says.

Full story at:
http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?site=lightreading&doc_id=70767

How to Distribute VoIP Throughout a Home:
http://michigantelephone.mi.org/distribute.html

If you live in Michigan, subscribe to the MI-Telecom group:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MI-Telecom/

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

From: Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@withheld on request>
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 12:36:40 -0500
Subject: Texas: Vonage 911 Is a Joke


http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?site=lightreading&doc_id=70779

Vonage Holdings Corp. says it intends to quickly settle its legal
tangle with the State of Texas and its Attorney General, Greg Abbott.

Or maybe it will fight back.

"Yes, we are going to try to settle it," says Brooke Schulz, Vonage's
VP of corporate relations. "We are going to sit down with them and try
to reach an agreement that is favorable for everybody. Whether we
settle or defend, they are both ways of settling."

Background: The Texas Attorney General announced this week that it is
suing Vonage, claiming that the VOIP provider is misrepresenting its
service as a real phone service -- allegedly Vonage implies that
dialing 911 from one of its lines would yield the same results as
would using a phone connected to the PSTN.

The lawsuit stems from an incident in Houston when a teenage girl had
to run to a neighbor's house to call 911 while her parents were
assaulted and shot during a robbery. The family were Vonage customers,
but their phone was useless as they didn't properly activate Vonage's
911 service.

But it's not as if they weren't warned, Vonage says.

"There are a lot of disclosures we make to our customers about E911,"
Schulz says. "During the subscription process there are several
reminders that our 911 service is different and that there is a need
for the customer to activate it."

Full story at:
http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?site=lightreading&doc_id=70779

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

From: telcotech <telcotech@verizon.net>
Subject: Re: Texas Sues Vonage Over 911 Problem
Date: 23 Mar 2005 20:11:03 -0800


Thor Lancelot Simon wrote:

> In article <telecom24.128.19@telecom-digest.org>, DevilsPGD
> wrote:

> *If* Vonage were willing to pay the same fees other local exchange
> carriers pay for 911 connectivity *in each LATA*, *then* Vonage could
> route 911 calls correctly.  Avoiding this *cost* has been a major
> competitive win for Vonage all along and it is hard to not see it as
> a major reason, if not _the_ reason, why Vonage has fought state
> regulation as a local exchange carrier: by avoiding regulatory mandates
> like 911 service standards Vonage avoids the cost of compliance.

> What is truly irresponsible is to offer a "911" service that does
> not have the same user experience that Americans have been trained
> to expect from 911 for several decades.  In a just world, Vonage
> would pay and pay indeed for their decision to make the provision of
> such a service part of their public-relations effort aimed at
> avoiding service quality regulation.  This is a choice they made,
> not one they had forced on them; there are VoIP providers out there
> that did the right thing.

> People's safety in emergency situations should be quite simply out of
> bounds for this kind of political maneuvering.  Of course, it's not,
> but darn it, it ought to be.

> Thor Lancelot Simon	                         tls@rek.tjls.com

Thanks for the clarification. That's how I remember it.

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

Date: 24 Mar 2005 05:51:42 -0000
From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
Subject: Re: Texas Sues Vonage Over 911 Problem
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


> No, the ideal solution is to route the calls to the same place as 911
> calls.  They should enter the 911 call center just like every other
> 911-addressed call center comes in.

Indeed, and that is what Packet8 is offering to a large and growing
fraction of their customers.

I can't help but ask why, if Packet8 can do it, why can't Vonage?

Of course, Packet8's E911 costs more.  Surely Vonage wouldn't put
their customers' lives at risk merely to save a few bucks.

R's,

John

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

From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Subject: Re: Texas Sues Vonage Over 911 Problem
Date: 24 Mar 2005 10:15:15 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


Thor Lancelot Simon wrote:

> *If* Vonage were willing to pay the same fees other local exchange
> carriers pay for 911 connectivity *in each LATA*, *then* Vonage could
> route 911 calls correctly.  Avoiding this *cost* has been a major
> competitive win for Vonage all along and it is hard to not see it as
> a major reason, if not _the_ reason, why Vonage has fought state
> regulation as a local exchange carrier: by avoiding regulatory mandates
> like 911 service standards Vonage avoids the cost of compliance.

Excellent points.

The states in my area allow a 911 fee to be tacked on to phone
bills.  The money goes to the run the 911 call centers.

I presume VOIP don't have this charge.  As you say, not having
this (and other charges) give VOIP a cost advantage over traditional
services.  But they want it all -- full connectivity to special services
without paying for it.

IIRC, it was previously discussed here the VOIP fails to send the
calling number for Caller ID displays, so the recipient gets a
meaningless 111-111-1111 display.

As to the editor's comments, there are conventional phone numbers that
will reach the emergency center and will be answered (at least in my
area).  But how would a VOIP know what number to use, esp when the
caller can "float" and be anywhere?  Further, such numbers change when
area codes change or for other reasons; that was a factor in
establishing "911" as a unified constant emergency number in the first
place.

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: If the caller wishes to travel around,
as for example with a cellular phone, that certainly is not the VOIP
carrier's fault. But Vonage, as far as I know, deliberatly takes two
or three days *after* receiving an email request from someone asking
to be included in the PSAP database to detirmine _where_ to route the
call which gets _aliased_ in dialing to '911'. In larger metropolitan
areas, of course, most everyone gets redirected to the same number. In
smaller, more rural areas like mine, Vonage has to inquire of the
local authorities _exactly where_ the call is to be routed. They found
in their own research that the 'county seat' for Montgomery County,
Kansas is Independence; that the jail and courthouse are here, and
that in fact, Independence has its own police department as well, so
it was easy enough to inquire of local authorities, "which phone
number should calls aliased to our 911 be funneled through?" And Lisa,
they do _not_ get all ones or zeros or some other flaky number on
their caller ID display, they get an actual number, although as the
lady told me, "at first glance, the screen display looks odd; it is 
not what we usually see for an Independence or Independence Rural
location."  When Vonage wrote me email to say it was 'now turned on'
they did include a cautionary note: "this only works correctly if
you are stationary in location. If you travel around or move to
another location it may not be the best way to reach emergency res-
ponders."  PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 12:38:37 EST
From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA <usta@dailylead.com>
Subject: Huawei Seeks Deals With Nortel, Lucent


Telecom dailyLead from USTA
March 24, 2005
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=20312&l=2017006

TODAY'S HEADLINES

NEWS OF THE DAY
* Huawei seeks deals with Nortel, Lucent
BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH
* MCI, Qwest resume merger talks
* Plans for iTunes phone hit a snag
* Adelphia close to $725 million settlement with SEC, Justice Dept.
USTA SPOTLIGHT 
* SUPERCOMM: TIA's and USTA's Premiere Event
EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES
* The phone tree on steroids
* Survey finds growing appetite for on-demand services
REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE
* USTA's South rallies incumbent carriers in speech

Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others.
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=20312&l=2017006

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

From: Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com>
Subject: Re: Our Telephonic Primacy
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 20:59:12 -0600
Organization: Wizard Information


It was a dark and stormy night when hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:

> Recently someone claimed that infant mortality was worse in the
> U.S. than in Cuba, something I find difficult to believe without
> additional explanation.

It's true, but the US has far more heroic interventions among extremely
low birth weight and extremely premature infants than Cuba.  Which, of
course, are far more likely to die than normal births.  I suspect that
in Cuba, those get counted as miscarriages, not infants.

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

From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Subject: Re: More 'Tweens' Going Mobile; Long-Term Health Risks Unclear
Date: 24 Mar 2005 10:26:57 -0800


Monty Solomon wrote:

> By Associated Press  |  March 21, 2005

> CHICAGO -- There were two things 11-year-old Patty Wiegner really,
> really, really wanted for Christmas. One was a furry, playful dog
> that's now filling her parents' home with the sound of barking. The
> other gift makes a different kind of noise -- it has a ring tone that
> mimics rapper 50 Cent's hit song 'Candy Shop.'

My initial knee-jerk reaction would be to object to kids having cell
phones.  But then I remember my teenage days and it seemed the phone
was attached to my ear.  And in my parents' day, the phones in the
corner candy stores were quite busy.

However, this was when I was in high school, not elementary school.

I'm not so thrilled about the idea of "tweens" or younger kids having
cell phones.  (A friend gave his 9-year-old one last Christmas.)

Of course, these days kids are far more isolated than we were.  We
were in the city or more built-up suburbs where there were plenty of
friends within walking distance.  Today kids have to be driven to
practically any kind of activity otherwise they're isolated.  (Also
parents want more control over their kids than ours did.)

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

From: Isaiah Beard <sacredpoet@sacredpoet.com>
Subject: Re: Cell Phone Jammer For Sale MONIX MGB-1S
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 13:54:02 -0500
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com


donestuardo@yahoo.com wrote:

> Please email me at donestuardo (AT Sign) yahoo.com or call me on my
> cell at (416) 458-0012 and I will be happy to go over details with you.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Why is a person who relies on a cell
> phone for their communications a 'loser'? 

Especially considering that he's asking people to call him ... on his
cell. :)

One last note to anyone in the US: yes, it's illegal to buy/import/use
this thing in the US.


E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.

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

From: Joseph <JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Cell Phone Jammer For Sale MONIX MGB-1S
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 21:01:05 -0800
Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com


On 22 Mar 2005 17:12:24 -0800, donestuardo@yahoo.com wrote:

> I have a nearly new cell phone jammer for sale -- range is
> approximately 30 metres in radius. Model MONIX MGB-1S cellular Jammer.

Are we really down to this?  As far as I know it's very illegal to use
a cell phone jammer in the US.  Maybe it's OK in Canada but I think
advertising such a thing on a legitimate telecom group cheapens the
group and I'm wondering why the moderator even approved it for posting
to CDT/Telecom Digest.

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

From: Joseph <JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: GSM-900
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 21:05:30 -0800
Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com


On 22 Mar 2005 17:16:09 -0800, jason <cheanglong@gmail.com> wrote:

> May I know why do we need the number 900 to make GSM900 meaningful?
> Is it because the rf signal is in 900 MHz? or the local oscillator
> used for GSM900 system is at 900 MHz?  Kindly enlighthen.

GSM 900 is basically "shorthand" for the frequency used.  It's the
same way with GSM 1800, GSM 850 and GSM 1900.  Different frequencies
are used to transmit and receive.  The frequencies are *around* those
frequencies i.e. to say GSM 900 has different offsets for transmitting
and receiving as do the other standards.  Matter of fact for some odd
reason it was decided that when GSM was overlayed on "cellular"
frequencies in the US and Canada cellular was always called "800" (as
opposed to PCS at 1900.)  For some reason they decided to call GSM at
cellular frequencies GSM 850.  Reality is that it's the same band of
frequency used for TDMA (IS-136) and CDMA (IS-95.)

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

From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi)
Subject: Re: GSM-900
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 11:19:52 -0000
Organization: Widgets, Inc.


In article <telecom24.128.8@telecom-digest.org>,
jason  <cheanglong@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hello All,

> May I know why do we need the number 900 to make GSM900 meaningful?

Because GSM is used on other frequency bands as well.   <grin>

> Is it because the rf signal is in 900 MHz? or the local oscillator
> used for GSM900 system is at 900 MHz?  Kindly enlighthen.

'900' is a nominal figure.  neither the carrier or the LO are on
exactly 900MHz.

_Where_ the _receive_ LO is, depends on the particular set design.  it
may be 'above' the desired carrier frequency, or 'below' it.  it will
be offset from that desired frequency by "whatever" the IF (or 1st IF,
if multiple-state superhet) frequency is.  an offset of 10.7 MHz is
common,

Of course, the _transmit_ LO will generally be on the carrier
frequency, (in _rare_ cases, the xmit LO may run on a sub-multiple,
and then be 'frequency doubled', or 'frequency tripled', before
transmission.  This complicates the design, and for that reason is
"unusual", at best.)

Essentially, the number was picked because it is a "convenient"
round-number _name_, that is "approximately" accurate.

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

Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 21:40:27 -0500
From: Marcus Didius Falco <falco_marcus_didius@yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: Re: New Long Range Cordless Phones


Michael Quinn <quinnm@bah.com> commented on this topic:

> Dave,

> I'm pretty sure these are illegal in the US&P(ossessions).

They are illegal in the US and many other countries. They are in use
in mining, logging, and oil drilling in rural parts of Canada and by
the oil industry in the middle east and elsewhere.

> One of the issues was interference with Air Traffic Control
> communications systems, as I recall.  Someone on the list may be
> able to cite chapter and verse from US Code, or FCC regs. I may have
> saved a Navy Department spectrum management brief on the subject; if
> so, I'll forward off net.

> Regards,

> Mike

>   From: Dave <newsgroups@dave!!!christense!!n.o!!!r!!!g>
>   Subject: New Long Range Cordless Phones?
>   Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 18:46:17 -0900

> I saw a link earlier for this on Slash Dot.  Its a cordless phone that
> supposedly works 100km from the base station (under ideal conditions).

> http://www.goodbyelongdistance.com/catalog/item/1441280/975984.htm

Not 100 Km. I think they claim 50 Km, which is 30 miles. And there's 
another with a claimed range of 5.5 miles (9 KM)

Try one of these URLs:

http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/rciautomation/p32.htm
http://www.sellcom.com/main.htm
https://www.provantage.com/

> Other then the obvious potential for grief from the FCC, anyone else
> have any thoughts?

> I found a link to the Navy brief of which I was thinking, from about
> three years ago.

> Mike

> http://www.see.asso.fr/ICTSR1Newsletter/No007/LONG%20DISTANCES%20Garmisch.pdf

> From: Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com>
> Subject: Re: New Long Range Cordless Phones?
> Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 15:27:58 -0600
> Organization: Wizard Information

> It was a dark and stormy night when Dave
> <newsgroups@dave!!!christense!!n.o!!!r!!!g> wrote:

>> a cordless phone that supposedly works 100km from the base station
>> (under ideal conditions).

>> http://www.goodbyelongdistance.com/catalog/item/1441280/975984.htm

>> Other then the obvious potential for grief from the FCC, anyone else
>> have any thoughts?

> It is true that highly directional antennas (which none of those
> pictured in the ad are) can provide ranges such as they describe.
> Think satellite dishes and clear line-of-sight paths (or even better,
> put one side in orbit).  But highly directional antennas are not going
> to let you "walk or drive around for a radius of around 30 miles"
> without stopping to carefully align *both* antennas every time you
> want to use the phone.  With the antennas shown, even 30 miles over
> unimpeded water seems like it would be pushing it.

> They offer only manufacturer's warranty (and it's not even clear what
> country the vendor is in).  I don't know what Samsung model that is,
> but I'd bet that Samsung doesn't specify performance anything like
> that described.  Don't do it without a full money-back guarantee.

Now if you search around you will find things like linear amplifiers
for cell phones. These could be probably be used by cordless phones in
in the 900 MHz band. Not legally, of course, but that doesn't stop
them from being offered on the internet. Google can often find stuff
like this, but Ask Sam has been getting a lot of publicity lately.

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

Subject: Re: New Long Range Cordless Phones?
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 07:05:43 -0500
From: Michael Quinn <quinnm@bah.com>


These are reported to be the bands where these phones operate -- no
wonder they're illegal in the US, and probably elsewhere as well.

130 - 136 MHz: Commercial Air Traffic Control.
138 - 174 MHz: Primary Land Mobile/2 Meter Ham Band/Civil/Marine, etc.
225 - 400 MHz: US Military, NATO/Air Traffic Control, Comm/Data Links,
SATCOM, Telemetry, etc.

Tony P. <kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net> also noted:

> From what I've read about these units they operate in the amateur radio
> band so I take sort of strong offense to that.

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

From: Rob <r.a.sutton@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Phoning 0870 and 0844 UK Numbers Out of Free Minutes
Date: 24 Mar 2005 05:36:22 -0800


polinaskulski@aol.com wrote:

> Does anyone know of any UK mobile phones companies/plans which allow
> to phone 0870 and 0844 numbers out of the free minutes.

I believe Orange allow non-geographic numbers to be called out of
their free minute allowance, but try uk.telecom.mobile for more, and
better, advice.

HTH!

Rob

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

From: Jon Gauthier <jon.gauthier@ieee.deletethis.org>
Subject: Re: Mobile IP Networks
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 09:44:07 -0500
Organization: The MITRE Organization


Rick,

Can you describe what standard is used to change the IP address of the
mobile router's rf link back to the bus depot? I have a similar
problem involving a mobile LAN, not just a single mobile node, which
is what Mobile IP.

(http://www.cse.ohio-state.edu/~jain/refs/wir_refs.htm#mobileip-rfcs)
was designed for. Moving a whole LAN around means your gateway router
external interface's IP address is always changing.

For our solution, our developers hacked the Linux Mobile IP to support
IPSec for registration (of course, the advertisements are still
broadcast in the clear). What I'm not clear on is how they maintain
routing updates and integrity (I haven't seen that part of the code
yet). And my talks with Cisco indicate they're toying with different
methods of doing mobile adhoc routing, but this scenario is really
mobile infrastructure routing where the "access point" moves around
from cell to cell.

Any pointers on how you implement it would be appreciated!

rick.lenhart@gmail.com wrote:

> I can help, I have a great Cisco based solution for you.
> rlenhart@icinetworks.net www.miptac.com

> 007 wrote:

>> I need to investigate some solutions for a true mobile wireless
>> networks and I'm looking for anyone's input.

>> The situation is as follows: I need to design a network that will
>> supporting IP traffic on a public bus transport system. Wireless
>> terminals on each bus will communicate through a router onboard each
>> bus (ie each bus is a mobile wireless LAN). At the bus depot there is
>> a gateway for internet and telephony. The range of each LAN on each
>> bus is limited to no more than 3km and there are no more than 10
>> busses within the network.

>> What are some considerations for the planning, design and architecture
>> of such a network?

>> Thanks.

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

From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Subject: Re: Some Concerned About Privacy Implications of E-ZPass System
Date: 24 Mar 2005 10:02:28 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


John Levine wrote:

> The potential for privacy problems is severe, but to their credit I
> don't think I've ever heard reports of abuses.  Besides the
> possibility of tracking people by tag use, there's the violation
> tracking issue.  If you drive through an E-ZPAss booth in NY with no
> tag or an invalid tag, a camera takes a picture of your car and they
> will ask the state DMV to look up the license plate number so they can
> send you a ticket.

The original private contractor for the NJ EZP system was notoriously,
sending out many violation notices that weren't deserved.  That
strongly discouraged motorists from adopting EZP.  Of course, now the
NJTpk intends to eliminate the EZP discount, which is a stupid move
since it removes the incentive for motorists to use EZP, esp
occassional drivers.  Result is more overcrowding in cash lanes.

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

From: jmeissen@aracnet.com
Subject: Re: Dangling Broadband From the Phone Stick
Date: 24 Mar 2005 08:27:16 GMT
Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com


In article <telecom24.128.16@telecom-digest.org>,
<hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:

> It seems to me you contradicted your own post and have a double
> standard.

> Your clipping stated that cable companies offer broadband as an
> alternative.  So consumers DO have an alternative and don't have
> to walk six blocks in bad weather to get it.

Not true. There are many places where cable Internet access is not
available. Also, there are many situations where cable isn't
appropriate. For instance, I need a DSL circuit to connect to a local
independent ISP. I can't use Comcast for that. I shouldn't have to
also have incumbent telco service, too, just to get that circuit.

john-

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

From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi)
Subject: Re: What Happened To Channel 1
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 11:07:58 -0000
Organization: Widgets, Inc.


In article <telecom24.129.7@telecom-digest.org>,
Dan Lanciani  <ddl@danlan.com> wrote:

> kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net (Tony P.) wrote:

>> Sort of how the FCC has pretty much admitted that anyone with a
>> modicum of technical knowledge will be able to defeat the broadcast
>> flag.

> I think you've mentioned this before, but what does it mean?  The
> system as originally conceived requires the digital representation of
> flagged content to be protected by encryption on bus and media.  I
> have more than a modicum of technical knowledge and I don't see an
> easy way around the proposed system in concept.  Has the original
> system been abandoned?  Or are you aware of some implementation flaw?

*Somewhere*  in the TV set, the signal has to get decrypted, before it
can be presented to the CRT, or other actual 'display'.

Thus there *is* a "cleartext" signal running around inside the box.

Thus, someone with a reasonable amount of skill can 'tap' the cleartext
signal, and "voila!"

And there's always the "idiot method" -- just point a camcorder at the TV.

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

Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 18:46:50 PST
From: Patrick M. <staplesdcc@yahoo.com>
Subject: Craft Access article from '93


Hi, I'm very interested in the Craft Access System and came across an
old article in Telecom Digest, Tue 9 Nov '93.
http://www.phreak.org/archives/The_Hacker_Chronicles_II/td/td13_748.txt
It says you moderated, is this accurate?
	 
If I do have the right person, would you have any information
on the article by "Eric Kiser" regarding the old Craft Access
Terminals?
	 
Thanks a million, 

Patrick Moore

Yes, I was and am the editor of Telecom Digest. I think the article
you are referring to is the one printed below. I'll reprint it again
in the Digest on Thursday morning and we will see if any of the 
current readers have any information. Who knows, Eric Kiser may still 
be around and may have information. 

  Date: Tue, 9 Nov 1993 00:06:01 -0600
  From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
  To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
  Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #748

  TELECOM Digest     Tue, 9 Nov 93 00:06:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 748

  Inside This Issue:                       Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Computer CNID Solution Summary Sought (Scott Coleman)
    Apple Newtons Recalled in Australia (Mark Cheeseman)
    Signaling System #7 Cost/Performance Information (Dave Munsinger)
    Re: Caller ID-Blocking Unblocking (Mark Steiger)
    Cordless Phone Systems (Delavar K. Khomarlou)
    Information on Mobile Data Systems/Technologies (Peter Chan)
    Landline Telegraph Service (Gabe M Wiener)
    Tech Job Available (Ian Eisenberg)
 ===> AT&T Craft Access Butt-Sets (Eric Kiser) <===
    Re: Analog Telephone Interfaces For Computers (Andy Behrens)
    Re: Nationwide GTE 800 Outage? (Brian Nunes)
    Re: Brush Fires in Southern California (Stephen Friedl)
    Re: Preparing My Case Against Sprint (Chris Labatt-Simon)
    Re: Busy Signal Strangeness (John Desmond)
    Re: My Meeting With the Commish (Christopher Zguris)

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

  Date: Mon, 8 Nov 93 22:14:12 EST
  From: kiser@tecnet1.jcte.jcs.mil
  Subject: AT&T Craft Access Butt-Sets

I'm sure you've all seen them advertised recently, surplus. The
safety-yellow AT&T craft-access butt sets are available new, in the
box with two batteries, charger and manual for $60 (how's that for
pennies on the dollar, AT&T?). Well ... I broke down and bought one
(ok -- I bought three).

Even the standard TALK and MONITOR are swanky on this thing. The
entire thing is menu driven on a 3"x3" LCD, with user input through a
four-way plus button joystick and the standard 3x4 DTMF keypad. (Alpha
input is via the keypad -- press 1 once for 1, twice for Q, thrice for
Z, etc.)  The dialed number is menu driven, or you can do it manually.
MONITOR and TALK modes have digital volume access, and MONITOR has a
QUIET mode for extra sensitive noise hunting. I got all that working ...

The trick is these were used by AT&T folk to access the work
scheduling computer system, and they have a 1200 baud Bell 212 modem
and terminal program built in. But I can't seem to figure out the
protocol used by the terminal program. On CONNECT, the butt-set sends
tildes (~) until the remote system sends ACK, and then some five-digit
something that I can't figure out; every time I enter the fifth digit,
it goes back to tildes. I took the thing apart (a real trick, since it
had #10 TORX screws with the security restriction post in place all
the way around) and yanked the uP program EPROM. It disassembled to
more than 20000 lines of 8031 (Intel MCS-51 series) assembly language.
I've been able to wade througha lot of it, but isn't there an easier
way?

Does anyone have access to / references on the protocol used by these
things? I'd hate to reprogram it from scratch; I'd like to write a
small BBS for my PC that would interact with the screen, joystick and
keypad using the current protocol, if I could find out what it is.


Thanks,

Eric Kiser 
74007.303@compuserve.com 
kiser@tecnet1.jcte.jcs.mil

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

  End of TELECOM Digest V13 #748
  ******************************

You are welcome. Anyone with any up to date information to share
with Mr. Moore?   

Patrick Townson
ptownson@telecom-digest.org   PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 00:15:44 EST
From: Neal McLain <nmclain@annsgarden.com>
Subject: My First Post


As of this year, I've been a reader and intermittent contributor to
this list for ten years.  I guess I'm still a newbie compared to many
of the other readers, but I've learned a lot from this list during the
past decade.  Thanks to all of you readers for the information you've
contributed, and a special thanks to PAT for his efforts!

My first post, dated March 24, 1995, is at http://tinyurl.com/6ar7l.
In re-reading it now, I find it interesting to note how things have
changed -- especially my statement that "an area code and a central
office code can't be the same."  I guess 847-847-XXXX proves that
wrong, even though it may be confusing to non-Chicagoans.

Neal McLain


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: As long as I am digging up old postings
for today's issue, I decided to get yours out and review it also. It
is reprinted below. And thank you also, Neal, for your many
contributions over the years. You have been a good friend over the
past decade also. Your kind words very much appreciated. 

  Date: Fri, 24 Mar 95 23:16:21 CST
  From: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
  To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
  Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #169

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 24 Mar 95 23:16:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 169

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Book Review: "The Information Superhighway: Beyond the Internet" (R Slade)
    800 Numbers, and FLOWERS Again (Judith Oppenheimer)
    Outsourcing of International Telecom Services (Victor Prochnik)
    Re: Your 500 Number and International Access (Tony Harminc)
    Re: X.25/ISDN Prices: Global Information Wanted (Andy Lochridge)
    Re: Interesting Telemarketing, Sad Actually (William Wood)
    Re: Keypad Letter Pattern (was Re: U.S. 800 Users Alert) (Mark Brader)
    Re: Recommendations Wanted on Voice Mail Systems (Paul Hanson)
  ===>    New Area Code Assignments (Neal McLain) <===
    800 Service Costs and ISDN Rates (Arthur Greenwald)

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

  Date: Fri, 24 Mar 95 22:30 CST
  From: Neal McLain <NMCLAIN@macc.wisc.edu>
  Subject: New Area Code Assignments


A recent issue of TELECOM Digest raised a question about how "new" (since
1/1/95) area codes are assigned.
 
A partial answer certainly has to be this: an area code and a central
office code can't be the same.  And, if at all possible, an area code
shouldn't be the same as any nearby central office code in any adjacent 
area code.
 
Consider how these requirements affect the selection of the new area
code when an existing area code is split:
 
 -  Avoiding a conflict with any existing central office code means that the
    new area code must be selected from the list of presently-unused central
    office codes.  That list is likely to be fairly short: if an area code
    needs to be split, it's already running out of central office codes.
 
 -  Avoiding a conflict with any existing central office code in any nearby
    community in adjacent area codes makes that short list even shorter.
 
A case in point: the 205/334 split in Alabama:
 
 -  334 is not used as a central office code anywhere in Alabama.  Thus,
    there will be no 205-334 or 334-334.
 
 -  With one exception, 334 is not used as a central office code in any
    nearby city in any adjacent area code: 404-334 doesn't exist;
    601-334 is in Greenville; 615-334 is in Decatur; 706-334 is in
    Ranger; and 904-334 is in Tallahassee.
 
 -  The one exception which proves the rule: 912-334 is in Georgetown,
    Georgia, right across the Chattahoochee River from Eufaula,
    Alabama.  This will no doubt cause some confusion for the 900 or
    so residents of Georgetown.
 
That confusion notwithstanding, it seems obvious that Bellcore and the
local telephone companies went to considerable effort to select the
code which would cause the least amount of confusion.
 

Neal McLain     nmclain@macc.wisc.edu

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #169
******************************

You are correct: 847-847 is a situation none of us ever thought in
those days would be possible. Of course, none of from those days
ever thought there would be a 708 code to split up 312 either, and
certainly not a 773 to further divide it all, nor a 630. The times,
they are a changing ... and in case you did not know it, one's skin 
has to be very thick to stay in this racket for a long time, 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 #130
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Mar 25 16:52:02 2005
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j2PLq1J16592;
	Fri, 25 Mar 2005 16:52:02 -0500 (EST)
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 16:52:02 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200503252152.j2PLq1J16592@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 #131

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 25 Mar 2005 16:52:00 EST    Volume 24 : Issue 131

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Symantec's Self Serving Warnings - 2 Comments (Marcus Didius Falco)
    What's Historic? (Wesrock@aol.com)
    CDR Collection (Matt)
    Telecom Reform: Here Come the States (Jack Decker)
    Clearwire May Block VoIP Competitors (Jack Decker)
    Adelphia Offers Feds $725 Million to Settle Fraud (Telecom dailyLead)
    Packet8 Number Portability (kwyet)
    911,Taxes,Fees, was: Texas Sues Vonage Over 911 Problem (Danny Burstein)
    PSAP Locations, was: Texas Sues Vonage Over 911 Problem (Danny Burstein)
    Re: Texas Sues Vonage Over 911 Problem (Thor Lancelot Simon)
    Re: Texas Sues Vonage Over 911 Problem (Justin Time)
    Re: New Long Range Cordless Phones? (Dave)
    Re: Intertel Eclipse Telephone Programming (T. Sean Weintz)
    Re: What Happened To Channel 1 (Dan Lanciani)
    Re: Our Telephonic Primacy (John Smith)
    Re: Some Concerned About Privacy Implications of E-ZPass (Isaiah Beard)
    Re: Some Concerned About Privacy Implications of E-ZPass (B Margolin)

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: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 21:30:35 -0500
From: Marcus Didius Falco <falco_marcus_didius@yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: Symantec's Self Serving Warnings - 2 Comments


http://comment.zdnet.co.uk/other/0,39020682,39192261,00.htm

This story was printed from ZDNet UK, located at http://comment.zdnet.co.uk/
Story URL: http://comment.zdnet.co.uk/other/0,39020682,39192261,00.htm

Symantec's self serving warnings
Fran Foo
ZDNet Australia
March 22, 2005, 13:10 GMT

Apple has apparently become a victim of its own success since Mac OS X
is gaining in popularity, Symantec expects it to become a target for
more attacks and intense vulnerability scrutiny.

This trend was published in Symantec's Internet Security Threat Report
for July to December 2004.

To back its claim, Symantec cited several reasons ranging from Mac OS
X's heredity to attacking the intelligence of loyal Mac fans.

"With a newly designed operating system based on a BSD-Unix lineage,
Mac OS X has begun to not only capture the attention of users but of
vulnerability researchers as well."

"Contrary to popular belief, the Macintosh operating system has not
always been a safe haven from malicious code," the report said. Sure,
Microsoft's attempts at security are often scoffed at but to infer
that Mac users (or those of Unix, Linux etc.) are living in a bubble
is ignorance on Symantec's part.

Another point of contention was Apple's new products. Increased
adoption of the Mac mini the company's low-priced computer will
escalate malicious activity since it could be purchased by less
security-savvy users, the report stated.

I can understand how non-IT literate users at large struggle to
understand the difference between a virus and a worm but is Symantec
saying only technologically-competent people purchase Windows
machines? Rebooting a machine multiple times a day can't be that hard
(I should know).

It's difficult to grasp the reasoning behind these statements. 
Symantec's only piece of solid evidence is reference to 37 previous
high-impact vulnerabilities in Mac OS X all of which have been
patched. Juxtaposed against the 17,500 Windows-based viruses and
threats, it's clearly an uneven contest.

One telling finding in the report was the decline in bot-scanning
activity during the second half of 2004 Symantec recorded a dip from
30,000 per day to 5,000 on a daily basis. The company concluded that
the decrease corresponded with the availability of Windows XP Service
Pack 2.

"Ports 445 and 135 are common paths for bot networks to spread onto
computer systems, either through unpatched vulnerabilities or bad user
name and password choices.

"Many common bot network applications, including Gaobot, target
vulnerabilities that are accessible through these Windows ports as a
method of infecting new systems. The sudden drop in bot network
scanning indicates that Service Pack 2, in addition to cumulative
patches, may have been successful at reducing the number
vulnerabilities in Windows XP systems that are subject to remote
compromise," Symantec said.

If Microsoft does a stellar job at improving the security of its
products coupled with the availability of proprietary anti-spyware and
antivirus solutions which platform will be Symantec's new engine for
growth?

Copyright 2005 CNET Networks, Inc. 

Mac Threats: Is Symantec Crying Wolf?
March 23, 2005
By David Coursey

In a perfect would, people might pay for security software based on
the number of attacks prevented and the severity of those threats. The
bigger the threat, the harder the software works and the more it
protects, the more you pay. Seems fair enough.

In the case of Mac OS X, if you paid for what you got, the price for
security software would be zero. The price would thus equal the number
of virus and malware threats that target Apple's Unix-based operating
system.

RELATED LINKS

     * Mac OS X Patch Includes IDN Browser Fix
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1778335,00.asp
     * Mac OS X Will Become a Target, Symantec Warns
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1777982,00.asp
     * Mac OS X: Virus-free=97For Now
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1777202,00.asp

So why do Mac users pay so much often as much at $70 for anti-virus alone
and as much as $150 for a security "suite." Using the same math, Windows
anti-virus software would probably cost $1,000 a desktop, yet it's easy to
find software for as little as $20 in the stores.

Mac OS X users pay significantly more for protection than Windows
users, protection so far they have needed only in theory or "just in
case" a big new threat appears. People are getting wise to this. So is
it any wonder that Symantec, in the eternal search for the next
dollar, is out with a report that seems to predict dire consequences
for future Mac users? It's like a teacher once told me, "Sell the
sizzle, not the steak. Especially when you don't have any steak."

I suppose it's to the anti-virus industry's credit that some bored
anti-virus developer hasn't launched an OS X threat merely to justify his
or her continued employment. Still, with no threats, it's not like the
software really requires much dev time.

It was not my plan to return to Macintosh security so soon, having
just written about it last week.

Click here to read David Coursey's column "Mac OS X: Virus-Free For Now."

But my friend and co-worker Ryan Naraine wrote a story this week in
which Symantec talks about the growing threat viruses and malware pose
to Mac OS X users, mentioned earlier. This claim is based on an
internal assessment conducted for the company's "Security Threat
Report," issued twice yearly.

Ryan's story quotes the company as predicting that with the
"introduction and popularity of OS X Apple has become a target for new
attacks and vulnerabilities."

Click here to read "Mac OS X Will Become a Target, Symantec Warns."

Indeed, a Morgan Stanley report out this week predicts Apple could
nearly double its share of the worldwide PC sales this year, thanks to
iPod users buying a Mac as well. Going from 3 percent to 5 percent
will be dramatic for Apple, but hardly noticeable in the broad
marketplace. Given OS X's small global installed base, even this
projected doubling of sales may not be enough to attract too much
unwanted attention.

"Contrary to popular belief," the Symantec Threat Report continues,
"the Macintosh operating system has not always been a safe haven from
malicious code. Out of the public eye for some time, it is now clear
that the Mac OS is increasingly becoming a target for the malicious
activity that is more commonly associated with Microsoft and various
Unix-based operating systems."

Next Page: Threats will grow.

Having recently spoken to Symantec's Mac product manager, I got a
sense that the threat to Mac OS X is likely to grow over time, but not
into something we should stay up nights worrying about. But this
Symantec Threat Report sounds like the Mac has never been secure and
is only going to get worse over time. The comparison to Microsoft
sounds downright ominous.  Ryan's story includes more quotes from the
report that are equally frightening or more so.

Is it any surprise that Symantec would beat the drums of fear as
loudly as possible? This is, after all, a company that has for years
persuaded Mac users to pay $70 for software "necessary" to protect
their computers against nonexistent threats.

This makes me wonder whether the real threat that concerns Symantec
isn't from Mac OS X viruses and malware. Rather, it's customers
noticing that they've paid a lot of money for Norton anti-virus
software that they didn't really need.

For more insights from David Coursey, check out his Weblog.

How can Symantec keep those customers in line and writing checks? By
scaring the living daylights out of them, that's how. They even invoke
the "M" word as a warning of what could be in store!

It's prudent to protect yourself. But what you pay for the protection
ought to have some relationship to the threat.

While my "value pricing" concept will never fly, there really should
be some relationship between what we pay and the protection we
get. Compared with what Windows users pay, $70 is more protection than
any Mac requires.  Yet that's what Symantec and some competitors
charge.

Mac users deserve a break.

Contributing Editor David Coursey has spent two decades writing about
hardware, software and communications for business customers. A full
bio and contact information may be found on his Web site,
www.coursey.com.

Check out eWEEK.com's Macintosh Center for the latest news, reviews and
analysis on Apple in the enterprise.
Copyright (c) 2005 Ziff Davis Media 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 . 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, 

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

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

From: Wesrock@aol.com
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 20:14:58 EST
Subject: What's Historic?


    This item forwarded from another list (and which apparently
originated in a newspaper) calls Basking Ridge "historic."

     To many of us 195 Broadway would be historic.  Basking Ridge was
a johnny-come-lately and I remember the panic among Manhattan workers
and how AT&T held driving lessons for employees from NYC.


Wes Leatherock
wesrock@aol.com
 
Verizon to pay $125M for AT&T's 'Pagoda' Offspring to buy former
telecom giant's HQ

Tuesday, March 22, 2005
BY GEORGE E. JORDAN 
Star-Ledger Staff 

Verizon has agreed to pay about $125 million for the sprawling Basking
Ridge campus that once served as the historic headquarters of AT&T,
according to five people with knowledge of the transaction.

Verizon, the nation's biggest telephone company, eventually could move
its operations center and up to 1,000 employees from Manhattan to the
10 interconnecting buildings in Somerset County, said the sources.

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

From: Matt <mattmorgan64@msn.com>
Subject: CDR Collection
Date: 25 Mar 2005 09:28:45 -0800


I have a NItsuka PBX (Not sure of mod # yet); from which I would like
to pull incoming CDR records, for the purposes of parsing the phone
number and bringing the customer up automatically in our customer
system.

The PBX has a PC attached to it, which I believe is used for voice
mail.

None of the phones have any sort of data port.

Any idea where the most likely place for a port to obtain this data
would be? Given the age of the thing, If there is a port at all, I'm
guessing it will be a DB9 or 25 serial port.

Thanks,

Matt

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

From: Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@withheld on request>
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 11:48:53 -0500
Subject: Telecom Reform: Here Come the States


Those of you on the MI-Telecom list can pretty much skip this
commentary (it's a condensed version of my earlier commentary in the
previous message) and scroll right down to the excerpt.  For those of
you on the VoIP News list, here's a little preliminary commentary:

I am passing along this item not because I agree with it -- for the
most part, I do NOT -- but because for some reason the libertarian
think tanks seem to have more influence with legislators than they
should.  Since there are no libertarian legislators elected by the
people (in most states), one wonders why libertarian think tanks are
even paid any attention.  Further, I wish someone with the
investigative skills would follow the money trail on these
organizations -- they have to get their funding from somewhere, and I'm
very suspicious that some of their funding may be coming from Some Big
Company in Texas.

But more to the point, these people are lobbying for deregulation of
the telephone industry. It seems to me that competition is a good
thing, and deregulation is a bad thing when one company (the ILEC)
still has effective bottleneck control over an industry.  What I see
happening here may be nothing less than a sneaky way to re-establish
the Bell monopoly.

The attack is as follows: Paint VoIP as a formidable competitor.  Get
state legislators to agree that VoIP offers significant and ubiquitous
competition, even though less than 1% of the public uses VoIP and VoIP
currently has significant shortcomings (such as lack of "enhanced"
911).  Then when the phone companies are deregulated, they will put
the screws to VoIP, by first refusing to sell broadband connectivity
(DSL) unless the customer also buys dial tone, and should the customer
agree to that, they will then play games with packet routing and
traffic shaping to degrade the service of VoIP companies.

Well, except of course for their own deregulated VoIP offerings, which
(unless the customer subscribes to a "premium" service at a very high
price) will look a lot more like traditional phone service (limited
calling areas and per-minute billing).  That traffic will ride the
expressway, while competitors' VoIP traffic may be relegated to the
gravel roads, so to speak.  And without regulation, they will be able
to raise rates at will.

End of my commentary, here's an excerpt of the article that inspired
it (note the date -- one could hope this is just an April Fool's joke,
but I suspect it is deadly serious).


http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=16648

Telecom Reform: Here Come the States
Alabama leads the way
Written By: Steven Titch
Published In: IT&T News
Publication Date: April 1, 2005
Publisher: The Heartland Institute

In February, Alabama became the latest state to place telecom reform
on its legislative agenda.

Senate Bill 114 and its House counterpart, House Bill 112, call for
deregulation of wireline dial-tone services. The law would still allow
the Alabama Public Service Commission (PSC) to field complaints and
adjudicate disputes between consumers and local phone companies, but
the PSC would no longer set rates or dictate the way companies bundle
their services. Similar reform bills are on the docket, or headed for
it, in Illinois, Indiana, Texas, Wisconsin, and other states.

The Alabama bill recognizes the reality of intermodal competition from
wireless and voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) services. It affirms
that telecommunications is becoming increasingly competitive as
service platforms shift away from proprietary, closed narrowband
networks to broadband connections based on open standards that support
diverse, customizable multimedia services.

Telecom reform advocates recognize that telephone service offered on
broadband platforms simply cannot be regulated as it was in the
past. Reform is necessary. The only question is what form it should
take. Many opponents of reform refuse to acknowledge that the current
scheme, even as it keeps rates low for some, is unsustainable.

Full story at:
http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=16648

How to Distribute VoIP Throughout a Home:
http://michigantelephone.mi.org/distribute.html

If you live in Michigan, subscribe to the MI-Telecom group:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MI-Telecom/

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

From: Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@withheld on request>
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 12:20:55 -0500
Subject: Clearwire May Block VoIP Competitors


http://www.crn.com/sections/breakingnews/dailyarchives.jhtml?articleId=159905955

Clearwire May Block VoIP Competitors

Vonage says it's been blocked; Company's terms of service "prohibits"
use of certain high-bandwidth applications.  

By Paul Kapustka,
Advanced IP Pipeline 2:32 AM EST Fri. Mar. 25, 2005

Someday, customers of wireless broadband provider Clearwire Corp. may
be able to use Voice over IP services. But right now, Craig McCaw's
newest company is giving its customers the silent treatment by
apparently blocking outside VoIP providers from its network.

In what the company claims is an effort to preserve the performance of
its pre-standard WiMAX network, Clearwire says it reserves the right
to prohibit the use of a wide range of bandwidth-hungry applications,
a list that apparently includes VoIP as well as the uploading or
downloading of streaming video or audio, and high-traffic Web site
hosting. According to the company's terms of service, Clearwire
reserves the right to restrict access or terminate service to
customers who don't comply with its rules.

While a company executive claimed the restrictions were necessary to
ensure network performance reliability, Clearwire could not explain
how that issue would be resolved when it offers its own VoIP services
in the near future. Earlier this month, Clearwire signed an agreement
with Bell Canada under which Bell Canada will provide VoIP systems and
services for Clearwire, at a date and price yet to be announced.

Full story at:
http://www.crn.com/sections/breakingnews/dailyarchives.jhtml?articleId=159905955


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Aren't there, in most communities a
choice of other highspeed data services, such as AOL?   PAT] 

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

Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 13:06:53 EST
From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA <usta@dailylead.com>
Subject: Adelphia Offers Feds $725 Million to Settle Fraud Charges


Telecom dailyLead from USTA
March 25, 2005
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=20348&l=2017006

TODAY'S HEADLINES

NEWS OF THE DAY
* Adelphia offers feds $725 million to settle fraud charges
BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH
* Supreme Court set to consider Brand X
* Debate emerges over mobile phone virus threat
* Report: Price key for telcos in broadband sales
USTA SPOTLIGHT 
* Timberwolves? and Wireless Business Opportunities
EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES
* TiVo's deal with Comcast cements DVR service's future
VOIP DOWNLOAD
* Equipment makers battle for share of VoIP market
* VoIP brings new opportunities for test industry
* Huawei tops worldwide VoIP media gateway shipments
REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE
* West Virginia lawmakers lay out broadband plans

Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others.
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=20348&l=2017006

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

From: kwyet <kwyet80@msn.com>
Subject: Packet8 Number Portability
Date: 24 Mar 2005 14:07:55 -0800


Packet8 has been ok for me. Just one thing thats been irritating. The
claims on their website at times don't jive with reality.  For one,
they claimed that virtual numbers were available for Canadian area
codes. That was simply a lie. They were aware of this contradiction but
chose to ignore it for a very long time. Finally they removed the
claim.

Secondly, they claim that it takes up to six weeks to have your number
ported. That may be true for some, but it hasn't been true for me. It
has been 9 weeks for me and still no "status updates" on my account.
Their standard reply when called on this matter is, "I'll pass this to
the LNP department".

On one call to support, I was led to believe it was stalled because of
my phone company. I entered a complaint with my States's PSC only to
receive a call from my phone company saying all they need is a PON and
that Packet8 would know exactly what that is.  Well ... I called
support again. Same response as quoted above. Oh ...  and he also said
that the website is incorrect ... that it hasn't been updated yet to
reflect that they are backed up and the time is actually more than 6
weeks. Support told me that 10 days ago.  Does it take 10 days to
update a sentence on a website? Naw it dutton.

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

From: Danny Burstein <dannyb@panix.com>
Subject: 911, Taxes, and Fees, was: Texas Sues Vonage Over 911 Problem
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 23:09:40 UTC
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC


Thor Lancelot Simon wrote:

> *If* Vonage were willing to pay the same fees other local exchange
> carriers pay for 911 connectivity *in each LATA*, *then* Vonage could
> route 911 calls correctly.  Avoiding this *cost* has been a major
> competitive win for Vonage all along and it is hard to not see it as
> a major reason, if not _the_ reason, why Vonage has fought state
> regulation as a local exchange carrier: by avoiding regulatory mandates
> like 911 service standards Vonage avoids the cost of compliance.

So let me get this straight. Local (and state) gov'ts pretend that a
911 PSAP (Public Safety Answering Position) isn't part of the standard
functions of government, and therefore they get the telcos to pass
through a separate "911 fee" (read tax).

Oh, for good measure, if you look at umptity audits you'll find that
the amount of the "911 fee" has next to nothing to do with how much
money is acually put into the PSAP. To the government, it's all one
big pot of money.

What's next? Perhaps the county will claim that libraries are special,
so there needs to be a separate tax, excuse me, fee, on all book
sales? Oh, and just think how much money they could kick over to the
library if they extended that tax, excuse me, fee, onto all blank
paper and pens and copying supplies?

> People's safety in emergency situations should be quite simply out of
> bounds for this kind of political maneuvering.  Of course, it's not,
> but darn it, it ought to be.

Absolutely. And 911 issues shouldn't be used as a tag for governments
to extract more money from the working folk.

How's about instead of attacking Vonage for this we directed some ire
against the politicians that do everything they can to hide the level
of taxation they're hitting us with?

_____________________________________________________
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
		     dannyb@panix.com 
[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]

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

From: Danny Burstein <dannyb@panix.com>
Subject: PSAP Locations, was: Texas Sues Vonage Over 911 Problem
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 23:26:32 UTC
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC


( PSAP = Public Safety Answering Point = the 911 centers )

In <telecom24.130.6@telecom-digest.org> hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com writes:

> The states in my area allow a 911 fee to be tacked on to phone
> bills.  The money goes to the run the 911 call centers.

And there's a Santa Clause. 

> IIRC, it was previously discussed here the VOIP fails to send the
> calling number for Caller ID displays, so the recipient gets a
> meaningless 111-111-1111 display.

Many, and soon just about all, VOIP phones send across the Caller ID
string associated with the account. The fact that (many) PSAPs can't
use regular consumer CNID and do a comparison/sanity check against
both the ANI string and the "911" caller info is due to their own
equipment limitations.

(This is separate from the very real issue of the small number of folk
who'd get a VOIP account in Lenexa, Ks, and then take the adapter with
them and make calls that are physically coming from Uzbekistan)

> As to the editor's comments, there are conventional phone numbers that
> will reach the emergency center and will be answered (at least in my
> area).  But how would a VOIP know what number to use, esp when the
> caller can "float" and be anywhere?  Further, such numbers change when
> area codes change or for other reasons; that was a factor in
> establishing "911" as a unified constant emergency number in the first
> place.

Conveniently enough, the FCC maintains a list of PSAPs:

        "Information regarding PSAP ID, PSAP Name, and PSAP County can be 
	obtained from the FCC's Master PSAP Registry. The following 
	state listings have been updated: Arizona, Arkansas, California, 
	(etc., etc., and so forth)."	

	http://www.fcc.gov/911/enhanced/reports/psapregistry.html

So it would be trivial for the VOIP folk to do a translation of all
calls placed to "911" and route them to the PSAP serving the
registered "home" of the customer.

Now in regards to figuring out the exact boundaries, well, isn't it
about time the local gov'ts got their acts together? In many parts of
the country you'll find little or no coterminality between, oh,
sanitation services, postal zip codes, water supply, fire protection,
school districts, and police coverage. Now whose fault is that?

As a side note, wouldn't it be nice if the Feds got together and had a
_central_, national, number for help? One that got a little office in,
say, Cheyenne and had tie lines to every 911 PSAP?

Right now, for example, if I'm in East Cupcake, NY and on the phone
with a friend of mine in Walla Walla and he collapses onto the floor,
how am I supposed to get him help? Watcha wanna bet that if I called
my local PSAP they wouldn't have a clue?

With a central office (at least available to the PSAPs, but really should 
be open to all) life would be much simpler.

_____________________________________________________
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
		     dannyb@panix.com 
[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]

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

From: tls@panix.com (Thor Lancelot Simon)
Subject: Re: Texas Sues Vonage Over 911 Problem
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 21:19:45 UTC
Organization: Public Access Networks Corp.
Reply-To: tls@rek.tjls.com


In article <telecom24.130.6@telecom-digest.org>,
<hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:

> Thor Lancelot Simon wrote:

>> *If* Vonage were willing to pay the same fees other local exchange
>> carriers pay for 911 connectivity *in each LATA*, *then* Vonage could
>> route 911 calls correctly.  Avoiding this *cost* has been a major
>> competitive win for Vonage all along and it is hard to not see it as
>> a major reason, if not _the_ reason, why Vonage has fought state
>> regulation as a local exchange carrier: by avoiding regulatory mandates
>> like 911 service standards Vonage avoids the cost of compliance.

> Excellent points.

> The states in my area allow a 911 fee to be tacked on to phone
> bills.  The money goes to the run the 911 call centers.

It's not just that.  To actually do the interconnection, Vonage would
need to build some infrastructure: they'd need trunks into every LATA
in which they offered 911.  A responsible telco would, it seems to me,
see this as an unavoidable part of the cost of offering a service for
emergencies reachable by dialing 9-1-1, because you basically can't
give callers the same user interaction they expect in an emergency if
you *don't* have those trunks.  Packet8 is an example of a VoIP telco
that is responsible and does the right thing: they *don't* offer a
service that works in an unexpected and dangerous way when the user
dials 9-1-1; they *do* offer genuine 911 service -- enhanced 911,
even, though I have to question whether this is desirable, because
of the low quality of the location information for VoIP -- everywhere
they have managed to run trunks to.  They charge their users separately
for this service; we can argue about whether it should be a mandated
service or not but it certainly seems equitable to charge for it if it
is not mandated, and that's what they do.

What Vonage does is provice fake 911 service that may be adequate for
many callers much of the time, but emergencies by defintion are not
"many/much" situations: they are emergencies; they are exceptions.
And for callers in some areas, the service is worse than inadequate,
it actually makes emergencies worse, by wasting the caller's and the
emergency personnel's time by sending the calls somewhere that cannot
handle them at all.


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: Justin Time <a_user2000@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Texas Sues Vonage Over 911 Problem
Date: 25 Mar 2005 11:23:48 -0800


 From two different responses by our editor:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But wouldn't the ideal arrangement be
> like here? A number designated for 'emergency but not 911' phone is
> terminated on the consoles of the persons who respond for police, etc,
> and they are tipped off "if this line, with its unusual cadence in
> ringing goes off, it is to be treated like any other emergency call".

> Our dispatchers answer not only the occassional 911 call, but they
> also answer for the city hall offices. The PSAP people (at Vonage, and
> elsewhere) are told to connect with them as needed _using one of the
> back lines_ on the city hall group; a line which would almost never
> get calls on its own. Now, if _that phone_ rings/flashes, treat it as
> a priority emergency call. The same woman sitting there taking calls
> for the city hall centrex/switchboard sees that one phone give out a
> continuous (never pausing) ring with the light on the wall flashing at
> a furious pace says 'ah, it is an emergency call from a system which
> cannot (for whatever reason) use 911. She answers it and makes
> dispatch as needed. Does not seem like that major of problem. That
> single phone, by the way, also has a caller-ID device on it, and a
> rather detailed map on the wall as well, so the dispatcher gets the
> essence of the desired information, even if not every single bit of
> it. Ah, but that would involve _training_ the dispatchers in possibly
> a new procedure. Do you think their Civil Servants Union would allow
> that sort of a requirement?

A couple of misconceptions need to be addressed here Pat.  First of
all not everywhere is "like here" meaning Independence, Kansas.  Let's
move your scenario out of the rural area and into a major city.  The
PSAP operators in this major city on the Eastern Seaboard only answer
two types of calls, they are either 9-1-1 or 3-1-1.  The PSAP, with
its equipment and 20 operators per shift is funded through the fees
collected on telephone numbers terminating within its service area.
The cellular companies pay a fee for each of their trunks that
terminate in their cell sites within the service area.  The local
cable companies which provide telephone service bundled with their
television and data services pay a fee to help support the PSAP.  It
seems everyone pays a fee to support the PSAP except the VOIP people
who claim their having to pay the fee would be anti-competitive
"because they are not a phone company."  If it walks like a duck,
looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, the obvious conclusion would be
that it is what it puports to be - unless it is a VOIP provider.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: If the caller wishes to travel around,
> as for example with a cellular phone, that certainly is not the VOIP
> carrier's fault. But Vonage, as far as I know, deliberatly takes two
> or three days *after* receiving an email request from someone asking
> to be included in the PSAP database to detirmine _where_ to route the
> call which gets _aliased_ in dialing to '911'. In larger metropolitan
> areas, of course, most everyone gets redirected to the same number. In
> smaller, more rural areas like mine, Vonage has to inquire of the
> local authorities _exactly where_ the call is to be routed. They found
> in their own research that the 'county seat' for Montgomery County,
> Kansas is Independence; that the jail and courthouse are here, and
> that in fact, Independence has its own police department as well, so
> it was easy enough to inquire of local authorities, "which phone
> number should calls aliased to our 911 be funneled through?" And Lisa,
> they do _not_ get all ones or zeros or some other flaky number on
> their caller ID display, they get an actual number, although as the
> lady told me, "at first glance, the screen display looks odd; it is
> not what we usually see for an Independence or Independence Rural
> location."  When Vonage wrote me email to say it was 'now turned on'
> they did include a cautionary note: "this only works correctly if
> you are stationary in location. If you travel around or move to
> another location it may not be the best way to reach emergency res-
> ponders."  PAT]

Now your example of "If the caller wishes to travel around,
as for example with a cellular phone, that certainly is not the VOIP
carrier's fault." is rather rife with flaws.  If I travel to
Independence, Kansas with my cell phone, which has an eastern city's
identification, the PSAP in Independence would know the 9-1-1 call was
local because it would ring in from the cellular switiching site based
on the tower I was using.  My call from my cellular phone wouldn't be
routed to the PSAP that handles the NPA-NXX on the phone, but the PSAP
that handles emergency services where the TOWER is located.  Now, are
you beginning to see the problems with being able to take your VOIP
phone traveling and use the service wherever you have a broadband
connection?

The VOIP carriers are using the telephone number assigned to the
adapter for routing to the PSAP rather than the location of the
router/gateway or whatever is the first unit to handle the call.
Until some method is determined to associate a physical address with a
connection, the problem will remain.  People who think that VOIP is
the answer to their telephone needs are being left hanging
high-and-dry when it comes to emergency services.

Oh, those 3-1-1 non-emergency calls are just that, a non-emergency in
the training of the PSAP operators.  A 3-1-1 call will go unanswered
should an active call on 9-1-1 be in process.  The busiest hour for
calls in this PSAP just happen to be the two hours before and after
the bars close.

One other point about the difference between a 9-1-1 call and a 3-1-1
call.  All 9-1-1 calls are delivered with ANI and perform a "data dip"
to provide the ALI or location of the caller.  3-1-1 calls, by FCC
mandate will only deliver Caller ID - if provided.

Rodgers Platt


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Aside for a minute the fact that I do
not approve of 311 or the idea of police acting as the Answering
Service for the entire government, which is what they would like,
let's just talk about your cellular comparison. Yes, if you came here
to visit from wherever, your cellular call to 911 would get routed as
you say.  But you have had a stroke, or for some other reason are
unable/unwilling to speak, what _display_ will the 911 person _here_
receive? Your east coast address/phone number ID will be useless ... 
will it give the outgoing phone number of the local tower? What good
will that do?  By using GSM, I suppose _your_ phone could transmit to
_our_ tower some string to be used as your 'temporary location' to be
passed along as the 'ID' to _our_ dispatcher ... that might work.

Maybe VOIP could do something similar: A call on a VOIP phone to 911
would be intercepted by the broadband carrier handling your traffic
and routed _from that point_ over a phone line to the local 911 spot.
I do not honestly know _how_ Vonage handles it; only that they warn
you repeatedly prior to getting the adapter turned on that "if you
wish to use 911 from this adapter, you _must_ tell us the main address
(house number, apartment number, etc) where the police or firemen or
doctor or whoever is to go to find you and your distress.  We need
that information to make 911 work. It is _not_ optional." Then two or
three days later they advise you the work is finished.

I should also point out that a 911 call is a rarity here; there are
one or two per _day_ between the various places they respond for, 
including Independence PD, 'Independence Rural', Montomgery County
Sheriff, Cherryvale, KS PD (overnight, when the one officer on duty
there is the only staff person on duty in the town of 2000 people).
And, she answers the City Hall centrex, and is the receptionist for
the Police Department which is in the basement of our City Hall. 
And, on the occassion of a 911 call arriving, she _immediatly_ says
on the radio 'nine one one call, stand by ... ' which means all the
officers on the street, etc who may be chattering on the radio know
to shut up and wait and listen. Using my scanner, I will hear her
sometimes 'patching in her headset line' and a one-way conversation
while she questions the caller: 'which way did you see them go? what
kind of car was it, etc' and she will repeat back to the caller (and
over the air of course) whatever the caller told her; officers all
over southeast Kansas listening in and ready to move out if it
involves their area. The overwhelming majority of our 'crime' around
here involves teenagers and other young guys who are rowdy and very
possibly had been drinking. They (police) also claim there is a 
'terrible problem with drugs' here; my local attorney just laughs
and says "that is the usual police BS; they find some kid with a bunch
of old cola bottles and the powder that _could_ be used to make
meth so police claim the kid has a 'meth lab' going on". The usual
give and take you find between police and defense lawyers everywhere.
PAT]
 
------------------------------

From: Dave <newsgroups@dave!!!christense!!n.o!!!r!!!g>
Subject: Re: New Long Range Cordless Phones?
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 10:43:14 -0900


If I set up another computer with Asterix running, this kludge isnt
going to be terribly cost effective.  The rate for the additional
electricity (38-43 cents per KWH) will negate the advantages.

The other problems with sourcing VOIP from a provider in Alaska is
that a) all high speed connections are metered and b) no VOIP carriers
offer TN's in the 907 NPA, and being in a small rate center the odds
of having a local TN are even less.

Other then costs and time involved in getting a tech class ham
license, can someone estimate what the costs and legalities involved
in setting up a mobile radio system with a (pseudo-encrypted) PSTN
gateway?  Then I could 'legally' do what these devices do.  The
terrain is pretty open and flat and I have a barn that I could mount
my equipment on which is above the treeline.  At least if i'm going to
burn additional dead dinosaurs I can have a higher 'gee-whiz' factor.

Or should I just say forget this idea and go back to Iridium?

Thanks in advance.

Tony P. wrote:

>> I'm living in a rural Alaskan town and traditional cell service is 
>> spotty to none, even with an old bag phone and roof antenna so I was 
>> thinking that this could be an interesting approach to local mobile 
>> phone service.

> I highly doubt that it is legal in the U.S. However, modifying your
> 802.11 gear and using say a PalmOS type machine with an 802.11 card
> you could probably cobble together a VoIP solution that has a linear
> range of 11 miles or so, depending on what type and pattern of
> radiator you decide to use.

>  From what I've read about these units they operate in the amateur
> radio band so I take sort of strong offense to that.

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

From: T. Sean Weintz <strap@hanh-ct.org>
Subject: Re: Intertel Eclipse Telephone Programming
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 15:46:33 -0500
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com


T. Sean Weintz wrote:

> marcsanders2003@yahoo.com wrote:

>> Anybody with technical knowledge of the InterTel Eclipse telephone
>> system?  Here's what I'm trying to do:

>> I'm trying to set up a shared mailbox.  In other words, I've added a
>> new extension, 262, and I want it to use the voice mailbox of 214.  So
>> both extensions will be using mailbox 214.  I would also like
>> notification of messages to go to 262.

>> It seems fairly simple, but so far nothing seems to work.

>> Any help would be appreciated.

> I don't think that can be done.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Quite a few years ago, I had two lines
> in Skokie, IL -- ORchard 7 9510 and ORchard 7 9511. Both had Voicemail
> on them from Ameritech; both were handled from 9511. I think what 
> Ameritech told me was there was only one voicemail box in reality,
> probably on 9511 (which was a roll-over line from 9510) and that the
> voicemail on 9510 was 'aliased' to 9511. When someone dialed into 9510
> and the voicemail was to pick up, the alias pointed at 9511; not
> only for the storage of messages, but also notification in the form
> of a flashing red LED on the phone.  PAT]

Yeah ... Ok, they could do it in a similar way ... what I describe below 
works intertel Axxes and probably Eclipse systems with very recent 
firmware, since they are basically the same as AXXESS from what I hear. 
Older eclipse systems may be a different story..

1) Create a call routing announcement that plays nothing and immediately 
times out to mailbox 214.

2) For the forwarding path for ext 262, instead of having it go to 
voicemail (default ext for that is usually 2500, dunno what it is on 
your system), have it forward to the call routing announcement. That 
call routing announcement will immediately forward them to the 214 mailbox.

-Sean

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

Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 22:46:05 -0500 (EST)
From: Dan Lanciani <ddl@danlan.com>
Subject: Re: What Happened To Channel 1


bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) wrote:

> In article <telecom24.129.7@telecom-digest.org>,
> Dan Lanciani  <ddl@danlan.com> wrote:

>> kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net (Tony P.) wrote:

>>> Sort of how the FCC has pretty much admitted that anyone with a
>>> modicum of technical knowledge will be able to defeat the broadcast
>>> flag.

>> I think you've mentioned this before, but what does it mean?  The
>> system as originally conceived requires the digital representation of
>> flagged content to be protected by encryption on bus and media.  I
>> have more than a modicum of technical knowledge and I don't see an
>> easy way around the proposed system in concept.  Has the original
>> system been abandoned?  Or are you aware of some implementation flaw?

> *Somewhere*  in the TV set, the signal has to get decrypted, before it
> can be presented to the CRT, or other actual 'display'.

> Thus there *is* a "cleartext" signal running around inside the box.

> Thus, someone with a reasonable amount of skill can 'tap' the cleartext
> signal, and "voila!"

The original proposal required that the undegraded digital
representation of flagged content never appear on a bus (even the LCD
driver bus) in the clear, specifically to thwart such an attack.
(CRTs do not present the same kind of problem as LCDs because the
video can be converted to analog before it ever leaves the final
driver circuits.  Of course, even if you could access the LCD driver
bus you would be getting a decompressed and possibly otherwise
manipulated version and not the original stream.)

Thus, there would be no clear text version of the signal "running
around inside the box" to tap.  You would have to probe the dies of
the appropriate integrated circuits themselves.  Although this is
certainly not impossible, it requires more than a modicum of technical
knowledge and also requires some specialized and rather expensive
equipment.  Anyone willing to go to those lengths would be better
served by building an ATSC receiver from scratch.

This brings me back to my question: has the original approach been
abandoned?  If not, I'm having a hard time understanding some of the
comments I've read that tend to minimize the impact of the broadcast
flag implementation.  The only explanation I can think of is that
people have become so accustom to Macrovision, SCMS, and similar
stupidity that they don't understand that this time it's for real...

> And there's always the "idiot method" -- just point a camcorder at the TV.

The purpose of the broadcast flag (and all the associated DRM) is to
protect the undegraded digital representation of flagged content.
Your approach of creating a degraded analog rendition of the content
does not defeat that intent.  In fact, as of now, we will supposedly
still be allowed to access the analog output of receivers, perhaps
even at HD resolution.  If a copy to analog and back is what the FCC
(or anybody else) is considering a defeat of the broadcast flag then
I'm afraid they have really missed the point.

Dan Lanciani
ddl@danlan.*com

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

From: John Smith <user@example.net>
Subject: Re: Our Telephonic Primacy
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 15:21:19 GMT


Dave Garland wrote (about infant mortality in Cuba):

> It's true, but the US has far more heroic interventions among extremely
> low birth weight and extremely premature infants than Cuba.  Which, of
> course, are far more likely to die than normal births.  I suspect that
> in Cuba, those get counted as miscarriages, not infants.

Is this just a guess, or do you have reason to suspect that the
medical definition of "birth" is different in Cuba?  Or perhaps it's
the definition of "death"?  It seems to me, considering an equal
number of premature births, that heroic intervention should produce a
benefit in the statistics.  If it doesn't, then why do it?  Or is
there a higher percentage of premature births in the U.S.?

I know that Cuba has more doctors per capita than (I believe) any
country in the hemisphere, and a major commitment to disease
prevention and public health. Maybe it just pays off.  Wouldn't that
be a shock.

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

From: Isaiah Beard <sacredpoet@sacredpoet.com>
Subject: Re: Some Concerned About Privacy Implications of E-ZPass System
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 14:09:59 -0500
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com


John Levine wrote:

> The potential for privacy problems is severe, but to their credit I
> don't think I've ever heard reports of abuses.  Besides the
> possibility of tracking people by tag use, there's the violation
> tracking issue.  If you drive through an E-ZPAss booth in NY with no
> tag or an invalid tag, a camera takes a picture of your car and they
> will ask the state DMV to look up the license plate number so they can
> send you a ticket.

There's also that nagging problem where the system isn't perfect, and
sometimes the RFID tags that are used don't work, or you have a
malfunctioning toll lane.  I just recently got hit with one of those.
I'm an EZ Pass user, and my work ended up taking me to a remote podunk
little rural area in southern NJ.  When I got ON the turnpike at a
major, heavily travelled and manned toll plaza, I passed through the
EZ Pass lane and my tag registered just fine.  Getting out to the
sticks, I exited in a remote, unmanned and probably barely used toll
plaza.  Bzzzt!  My transponder wasn't picked up and I was flashed a
"GO: TOLL UNPAID" warning on way my off the turnpike.  Lovely.

Later that day I called up the EZ Pass customer service number and
told them what happened. "No problem," came the response.  "As long as
your license plate is resgistered on your EZ pass acount, we'll make
the correction and everything should be fine."

Fast forward to yesterday.  Assurances notwithstanding, I received a
toll violation notice from the NJ Turnpike authority.  Attached was
that oh-so-incriminating photo of my car "skipping the toll," and a
bill for $25.70 ... 70 cents for the actual toll, and $25.00 in
"administrative fees," along with one of those typical scary-language
legal threats that if I don't pay up within 10 days, I could be hit
with additional fines "in excess of" $200.  Clearly, they knew where
my car got ON the turnpike in order to charge the correct toll amount,
otherwise they would have assesed the maximum toll amount (which I
believe is around $2.00).  So you'd think they'd figure it out that my
tag was successfully scanned there and obtain the correct billing data
that way.

Grrr.

So now, I have to fill out a "dispute form," and indicate in writing why 
I feel I SHOULDN'T be hit with the fine.  I've explained that I am an ex 
pass customer and had my tag in the car, and attached supporting 
documentation (tag serial number, account #, etc.).  We'll see what kind 
of response I get.

E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.

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

From: Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: Some Concerned About Privacy Implications of E-ZPass System
Organization: Symantec
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 21:33:31 -0500


In article <telecom24.130.18@telecom-digest.org>, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com 
wrote:

> John Levine wrote:

>> The potential for privacy problems is severe, but to their credit I
>> don't think I've ever heard reports of abuses.  Besides the
>> possibility of tracking people by tag use, there's the violation
>> tracking issue.  If you drive through an E-ZPAss booth in NY with no
>> tag or an invalid tag, a camera takes a picture of your car and they
>> will ask the state DMV to look up the license plate number so they can
>> send you a ticket.

> The original private contractor for the NJ EZP system was notoriously,
> sending out many violation notices that weren't deserved.  That
> strongly discouraged motorists from adopting EZP.  Of course, now the
> NJTpk intends to eliminate the EZP discount, which is a stupid move
> since it removes the incentive for motorists to use EZP, esp
> occassional drivers.  Result is more overcrowding in cash lanes.

Massachusetts doesn't give a discount for FastLane, but last year they
instituted a tax deduction if you use it enough to be considered a
commuter (I think $150 or $250).


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

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

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 #131
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat Mar 26 17:52:36 2005
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j2QMqZm29705;
	Sat, 26 Mar 2005 17:52:36 -0500 (EST)
Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 17:52:36 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200503262252.j2QMqZm29705@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 #132

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 26 Mar 2005 17:51:00 EST    Volume 24 : Issue 132

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Amazon.com Knows, Predicts Shopping Habits (Monty Solomon)
    Writer of Retracted Stories Faces Review (Monty Solomon)
    As File Sharing Nears High Court, Net Specialists Worry (Monty Solomon)
    Purloined Lives (Monty Solomon)
    FCC Extends 'Truth in Billing' Guidelines to Cellphones (Monty Solomon)
    Announcing EEPI - Electronic Entertainment Policy Initiative (M Solomon)
    TSA Work Sloppy, but Not Illegal (Monty Solomon)
    EFFector 18.7: Hearing Friday Could Determine Future (Monty Solomon)
    EFFector 18.8: Action Alert Best E-voting Bill Reintroduced (M Solomon)
    EFFector 18.9: Action Alert Stop the Trademark Act (Monty Solomon)
    EPIC Alert 12.06 (Monty Solomon)
    VOIP or PBX? (Smokey)
    Verizon FiOS Blocking Ports? (andyrankin@gmail.com)
    FCC: We Don't Need no Steenkin Line Sharing (Danny Burstein)
    Dealing With Vonage (David B. Horvath, CCP)
    Re: Our Telephonic Primacy (BobGoudreau)
    Re: Our Telephonic Primacy (AES)
    Re: Our Telephonic Primacy (Dave Garland)
    Re: What's Historic? (LB@notmine.com)
    Re: Texas Sues Vonage Over 911 Problem (John Levine)
    Re: Some Concerned About Privacy Implications of E-ZPass (G Wollman)
    Re: New Long Range Cordless Phones? (Robert Bonomi)
    Re: CDR Collection (Carl Navarro)
    If You Work at RCN, Read This (Anonymous)

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, 26 Mar 2005 09:19:59 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Amazon.com Knows, Predicts Shopping Habits


By ALLISON LINN AP Business Writer

SEATTLE (AP) -- Amazon.com Inc. has one potentially big advantage 
over its rival online retailers: It knows things about you that you 
may not know yourself.

Though plenty of companies have detailed systems for tracking customer
habits, critics and boosters alike say Amazon is the trailblazer,
having collected information longer and used it more proactively. It
even received a patent recently on technology aimed at tracking
information about the people for whom its customers buy gifts.

Amazon sees such data-gathering as the best way to keep customers
happy and loyal, a relationship-building technique that analysts
consider potentially crucial to besting other online competitors.

      - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=47926794

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

Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 09:21:24 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Writer of Retracted Stories Faces Review


By MARK JEWELL AP Business Writer

BOSTON (AP) -- A freelance journalist who authored two online news
articles that Technology Review magazine retracted over questions of
veracity is also facing review of stories she wrote for other
publications.

The journalist, Michelle Delio, is a 37-year-old New York City
freelance writer specializing in technology.

Delio said Friday that Technology Review's online version was correct 
in retracting the two stories because they were based on an anonymous 
source who misrepresented himself to her.

But she defended the rest of the work she has written over her 
15-year career as truthful.

WiredNews.com, for whom Delio has long been a contributor, published 
a note to readers citing this month's retractions by 
TechnologyReview.com and saying it had assigned a journalism 
professor to review articles written by Delio.

The online publication has not, however, removed any of the hundreds
of stories Delio has written for it, said Wired News' managing editor
Marty Cortinas.

Adam Penenberg, a New York University professor who also writes a 
media column for Wired News, was to do the review.

      - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=47925733

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

Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 09:40:17 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: As File Sharing Nears High Court, Net Specialists Worry


By JOHN MARKOFF

SAN DIEGO, March 16 - As the bitter debate over computer file sharing
heads toward the Supreme Court, the pro-technology camp is growing
increasingly anxious.

Some technologists warn that if the court decides in favor of the
music and recording industries after hearing arguments in the MGM
v. Grokster case on March 29, the ruling could also stifle a
proliferating set of new Internet-based services that have nothing to
do with the sharing of copyrighted music and movies at issue in the
court case.

Some of those innovations were on display here at the Emerging
Technologies Conference, attended by about 750 hardware and software
designers. The demonstrations included Flickr, a Canadian service that
has made it possible for Web loggers and surfers to easily share and
catalog millions of digital photographs.

And Jeff Bezos, the founder and chief of executive of Amazon.com,
demonstrated a set of new features in the company's A9 search engine
designed to make it extremely simple for Web users to share searches
specially tailored to mine everything from newspapers to yellow pages
to catalogs of electronics parts.

Software designers from iFabricate, a small company in Emeryville,
Calif., displayed a new Web service intended to make it simple for
home inventors to share instructions for complex do-it-yourself garage
construction projects.  Projects can be documented and shared with a
mixture of images, text, ingredient lists, computer-animated design
files and digital videos.

There was also a demonstration of Wikipedia, a volunteer-run online
encyclopedia effort that now has generated 1.5 million entries in 200
languages.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/17/technology/17soft.html?ex=1268715600&en=542d867283a2fb4c&ei=5090

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: To read NY Times on line each day with
no login or registration requirements please check out our section
here  http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra/nytimes.html   PAT]

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

Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 09:43:16 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Purloined Lives


By GARY RIVLIN
March 17, 2005

SAN FRANCISCO, March 16 - The phone lines are seldom quiet for long at
the nonprofit Identity Theft Resource Center.  But lately they have
been ringing almost continually.

The calls come from people like Warren Lambert, who phoned on Feb. 18,
the same day he received a letter conveying alarming news from
ChoicePoint, a company that compiles data on millions of citizens. It
was only one of more than 140,000 such letters ChoicePoint has mailed
in recent weeks, informing people like Mr. Lambert that computer files
containing their names, addresses and Social Security numbers, among
other critical personal data, had been inadvertently sold to "several
individuals, posing as legitimate business customers."

Mr. Lambert, a 67-year-old retiree living in San Francisco, called the
identity theft hotline to ask not only what immediate steps he should
take but, more important, "what I'm going to be exposed to."

The immediate steps were clear, according to Jay Foley, who with his
wife, Linda, runs the ID theft counseling center from their home in
San Diego. Mr. Lambert needed to phone the three major credit
reporting agencies to find out if any credit cards or other accounts
had been opened in his name -- none had, so far -- and then place a
"fraud alert" on his accounts, to warn potential creditors not to open
additional accounts in Mr. Lambert's name without fuller verification.

But Mr. Lambert also needed to understand that the privacy breach
meant he now had something similar to an incurable virus -- a chronic
condition he would need to monitor for the rest of his life.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/17/business/17private.html?ex=1268715600&en=ed495f886c4621c7&ei=5090

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

Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 09:59:42 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: F.C.C. Extends 'Truth in Billing' Guidelines to Cellphones


By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
March 11, 2005

WASHINGTON, Jan. 10 (AP) - Regulators voted Thursday to extend "truth
in billing" guidelines to cellphone bills in hopes of promoting
clearer, shorter statements devoid of confusing add-on fees.

All five members of the Federal Communications Commission gave their
support to a measure requiring cellphone bills to be "brief, clear,
nonmisleading and in plain language."  The guidelines already cover
bills for traditional phone service.

The F.C.C. said it was misleading to suggest that any fees in addition
to the base rate for cellphone service were caused by taxes or
government-mandated charges.


http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/11/business/11phone.html?ex=1268283600&en=42d7faeec224862d&ei=5090

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: To read NY Times, USA Today and other
national news publications on line each day with no registration or
login requirements, go to http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra   PAT]

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

Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 10:21:08 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Announcing EEPI - Electronic Entertainment Policy Initiative


                          Lauren Weinstein 
                         lauren@vortex.com
                           March 25, 2005

I'm pleased to announce "EEPI" ( http://www.eepi.org ), a new
initiative aimed at fostering cooperation in the areas of electronic
entertainment and its many related issues, problems, and impacts.

I've teamed with 30+ year recording industry veteran Thane Tierney in
this effort to find cooperative solutions to technical, legal, policy,
and other issues relating to the vast and growing range of electronic
technologies that are crucial to the entertainment industry, but that
also impact other industries, interest groups, individuals, and
society in major ways.

There are many interested parties, including record labels, film
studios, the RIAA, the MPAA, artists, consumers, intellectual freedom
advocates, broadcasters, manufacturers, legislators, regulators, and a
multitude of others.

The issues cover an enormous gamut from DVDs, CDs, and piracy issues
to multimedia cell phones, from digital video recorders to Internet
file sharing/P2P, from digital TV and the "broadcast flag" to the
Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) and "fair use" controversies.

Working together, rather than fighting each other, perhaps we can all
find some broadly acceptable paths that will be of benefit to
everyone.

For more information, please see the EEPI Web site at:

   http://www.eepi.org


A moderated public discussion list and an EEPI announcement list 
are now available at the site.

Public participation is cordially invited.  Thank you very much.


--Lauren--
Lauren Weinstein

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Lauren Weinstein was a charter
subscriber to TELECOM Digest, back in 1981, and was a regular
participant here for many years.   PAT]

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

Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 10:27:36 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: TSA Work Sloppy, but Not Illegal


By Ryan Singel
02:00 AM Mar. 26, 2005 PT

Homeland Security officials failed to keep millions of airline
passenger records secure and repeatedly made false denials of their
involvement in data transfers to the media and Congress, but they did
not violate federal law, according to a report released Friday.

The report (.pdf) by acting Department of Homeland Security Inspector
General Richard Skinner found that the Transportation Security
Administration was involved in 14 different data transfers totaling
more than 20 million records in 2002 and 2003.

The report describes an array of data dumps from airlines to TSA
contractors and paints a picture of an agency unable to keep track of
its own operations, leading to false denials of data transfers to the
media and inaccurate sworn testimony to the Senate.

However, the department did not violate the Privacy Act, which 
prohibits secret databases on Americans, since the agency used the 
records in bulk and did not look up individuals by name, according to 
the report.

Delta Air Lines, JetBlue Airways and American, Frontier, Continental
and America West airlines -- along with three airline record
processing firms, all secretly turned over data directly to the TSA
and government contractors.

The data included names, addresses, dates of birth, itineraries and
credit card numbers.

http://www.wired.com/news/privacy/0,1848,67031,00.html

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

Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 09:13:37 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: EFFector 18.7: Hearing Friday Could Determine Future


EFFector  Vol. 18, No. 7  March 3, 2005  donna@eff.org

A Publication of the Electronic Frontier Foundation
ISSN 1062-9424

In the 323rd Issue of EFFector:

 * Hearing Friday Could Determine the Future of Online 
   Journalists' Rights
 * Press Conference on Supreme Court File Sharing Case 
   Now Online
 * Keep RFIDs Out of California IDs
 * Support EFF - Bid on "Freedom to Connect" Pass on eBay!
 * CFP 2005: Panopticon - April 12-15
 * MiniLinks (14): European Commission Ignores Opposition 
   to Software Patents
 * Administrivia


http://www.eff.org/effector/18/07.php

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

Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 09:15:48 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: EFFector 18.8: Action Alert - Best E-voting Bill Reintroduced


EFFector  Vol. 18, No. 8  March 11, 2005  donna@eff.org

A Publication of the Electronic Frontier Foundation
ISSN 1062-9424

In the 324th Issue of EFFector:

 
 * Action Alert: Best E-voting Bill Reintroduced - Lend
   Your Support!
 * EFF Giving and Activism Pages Improved
 * Court Crushes Online Journalists' Rights
 * WIPO Shutting Out Public Interest Organizations 
 * EFF to ITU: DRM Is Dangerous for Developing Countries
 * Slowly, Sunshine Creeping Into Texas E-voting Process
 * Grokster Send-off Party - You're Invited!
 * IP Attorneys: EFF Wants You
 * Staff Calendar: 03.16.05 - Fred von Lohmann speaks at
   "IP and Creativity: Redefining the Issue," Washington,
   DC
 * MiniLinks (16): Discontent in the Cult of Mac
 * Administrivia

http://www.eff.org/effector/18/08.php

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

Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 09:14:52 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: EFFector 18.9: Action Alert - Stop the Trademark Act from


EFFector  Vol. 18, No. 9  March 17, 2005  donna@eff.org

A Publication of the Electronic Frontier Foundation
ISSN 1062-9424

In the 325th Issue of EFFector:

 * Action Alert: Stop the Trademark Act from Diluting Free 
   Speech!
 * Counting Down to Grokster with EFF
 * Grokster Send-off Party - March 24
 * CopyNight.org: Meet-up for Copyfighters - March 29
 * EFF Advises US Army on Soldiers' Email Legacy 
 * CFP 2005: Panopticon - April 12-15
 * MiniLinks (14): Apple Tightens DRM Noose
 * Administrivia

http://www.eff.org/effector/18/09.php

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

Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 09:17:45 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: EPIC Alert 12.06



========================================================================
                             E P I C  A l e r t
========================================================================
Volume 12.06                                              March 24, 2005
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                             Published by the
                Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC)
                             Washington, D.C.

              http://www.epic.org/alert/EPIC_Alert_12.06.html

========================================================================
Table of Contents
========================================================================

[1] EPIC Calls for Regulation of Choicepoint; Coalition Demands Action
[2] Madrid Summit Urges Democratic Response to Threats of Terrorism
[3] Google's Gmail Subject of EPIC West Testimony in California Senate
[4] Transportation Biometric ID Raises Privacy Concerns; Review Urged
[5] EPIC Introduces EPIC FOIA Notes, 2005 FOIA Gallery
[6] News in Brief
[7] EPIC Bookstore: J.J. Luna's "How to Be Invisible"
[8] Upcoming Conferences and Events

http://www.epic.org/alert/EPIC_Alert_12.06.html

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

From: Smokey <mummy@gummy.com>
Subject: VOIP or PBX?
Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 06:20:17 -0800
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com


Looks like we will be moving our company soon and growing a lot so I
have a need for a new system.

We currently have an old key (Meridian) system and a Call Pilot.  I
anticipate we will have some remote offices around the country and we
make heavy use of phones.

I would like something that will work well in this scenario and not
take rocket scientist to manage. Adds, removes, moves, should be
easy. We have a robust network with all Cisco switches, etc.  So any
ideas?

Thanks.

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

From: andyrankin@gmail.com
Subject: Verizon FiOS Blocking Ports?
Date: 26 Mar 2005 08:08:12 -0800


I'm very lucky to be in an area where Verizon's FiOS fiber to the
premises service is available.  I have the 15/2 Mbps service and it
works great.

I'm wondering if anyone knows if Verizon blocks are inbound ports (80,
etc.)?

Also, I'm using the Verizon provided DLink DI-604 router.  I'm not
having any luck getting the router to forward WAN traffic through to
specific machines on the LAN.  For example, I've tried passing traffic
on port 8080 to a linux box running Apache on that port and I think I
have the router configured properly but it doesn't seem to be letting
the traffic through.  I'm a bit of a novice so I'm not sure how to
determine if this is something Verizon's blocking before it gets to my
router or if I just haven't figured the router out yet.

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

From: Danny Burstein <dannyb@panix.com>
Subject: FCC: W Don't Need no Steenkin Line Sharing
Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 13:53:18 -0500
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC


"The Commission has before it a petition for declaratory ruling filed
by BellSouth Telecommunications, Inc.  (BellSouth) regarding issues
stemming from the Triennial Review Order. As explained below, because
the Commission's national unbundling rules in the Triennial Review
Order directly address the primary issue raised by BellSouth, we grant
BellSouth's petition to the extent described in this Order.

"Specifically, applying section 251(d)(3) of the Communications Act of
1934, as amended (the Act), we find that a state commission may not
require an incumbent local exchange carrier (LEC) to provide digital
subscriber line (DSL) service to an end user customer over the same
unbundled network element (UNE) loop facility that a competitive LEC
uses to provide voice services to that end user.

"For the reasons set forth below, we conclude that state decisions
that impose such an obligation are inconsistent with and substantially
prevent the implementation of the Act and the Commissions federal
unbundling rules and policies set forth in the Triennial Review Order
that implement sections 251(c) .....

rest at:

http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-78A1.txt [a]
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-78A1.doc [b]
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-78A1.pdf [c]

[a] messy ascii
[b] Word Doc
[c] PDF

(most FCC material is available in all three forms. URLs are identical
except for the trailing extension).

Further info on the main FCC page: http://www.fcc.gov

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

Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 20:05:29 -0500
From: David B. Horvath, CCP <dhorvath@withheld on request>
Subject: Dealing with Vonage


PAT - please remove my email address -- too much SPAM.

I signed up with Vonage a while ago (taking advantage of PAT's offer).
I decided that I wasn't using it enough (plenty of minutes with free
LD on my cell) and tried to cancel.

I called on 3/18, sat on call for at least half an hour, got
transferred to regular customer service who could not take the
cancelation order. I was given a tracking ticket and a promise that
I'd get a call back in a day or two.  At the same time I also
requested cancellation using their web page.

I finally called again on 3/24, sat on hold for a while and finally
was connected to the "retention department".  It took about 5 minutes
(mostly on hold) to handle the actual cancellation. The clerk was very
helpful.  When I mentioned my 3/18 call, she told me that they had
over 3,000 tickets in queue waiting for calls back and that it was "a
staffing issue" (they need more people).

- David

David B. Horvath, CCP
Consultant, Author, International Lecturer, Adjunct Professor
Member: ICCP Educational Foundation Board and ICCP Test Council; Chair of 
LPR&GC CMP 

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

From: BobGoudreau@withheld on request
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 18:34:16 -0500
Subject: Re: Our Telephonic Primacy 


[As always, please block my email address=2E]

John Smith wrote:

>Dave Garland wrote (about infant mortality in Cuba):

>> It's true, but the US has far more heroic interventions among extremely
>> low birth weight and extremely premature infants than Cuba=2E  Which, of
>> course, are far more likely to die than normal births.  I suspect that
>> in Cuba, those get counted as miscarriages, not infants.

> Is this just a guess, or do you have reason to suspect that the
> medical definition of "birth" is different in Cuba?  Or perhaps it'
> the definition of "death"?

Actually, yes, he does have reason.  Many (perhaps most) other countries,
even developed ones, use a different standard than the US does in
distinguishing between live births and stillbirths.  Infant mortality
figures apply only to live births which subsequently die, so stillbirths
don't count. See http://www.opinionjournal.com/best/?id=110006161 for
more info.  For example, almost one-third of US infant deaths happened
to very premature babies (less than 1 kg) who wouldn't have even been
counted as live births in Switzerland.

> It seems to me, considering an equal number of premature births, that
> heroic intervention should produce a benefit in the statistics.

Only if they're counted as live births, not stillbirths.

Bob Goudreau
Cary, NC

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

From: AES <siegman@stanford.edu>
Subject: Re: Our Telephonic Primacy
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 20:10:34 -0800
Organization: Stanford University


In article <telecom24.131.15@telecom-digest.org>, John Smith
<user@example.net> wrote:

> Dave Garland wrote (about infant mortality in Cuba):

>> It's true, but the US has far more heroic interventions among extremely
>> low birth weight and extremely premature infants than Cuba.  Which, of
>> course, are far more likely to die than normal births.  I suspect that
>> in Cuba, those get counted as miscarriages, not infants.

> Is this just a guess, or do you have reason to suspect that the
> medical definition of "birth" is different in Cuba?  Or perhaps it's
> the definition of "death"?  It seems to me, considering an equal
> number of premature births, that heroic intervention should produce a
> benefit in the statistics.  If it doesn't, then why do it?  Or is
> there a higher percentage of premature births in the U.S.?

Demographics, specifically distribution of ages at which women
conceive and deliver, could be significantly different in the two
societies, and have an impact on the resulting statistics.  (But don't
ask me for specifics; I don't know them.)

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

From: Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com>
Subject: Re: Our Telephonic Primacy
Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 00:19:46 -0600
Organization: Wizard Information


It was a dark and stormy night when John Smith <user@example.net> wrote:

> Is this just a guess, or do you have reason to suspect that the
> medical definition of "birth" is different in Cuba?

Yes, I suspect the definitions are different.  Shoulda given my source:

http://www.overpopulation.com/articles/2002/000019.html

None of which diminishes Cuba's tremendous successes in infant health.
But the statistics for the two countries are not directly comparable.
Which I think was Lisa's point, that you need to know all the details
in order to be able to judge statistical comparisons.

And, alas, none of which actually has much to do with telecom.  So
this will be my last post on the subject.

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

From: LB@notmine.com
Subject: Re: What's Historic?
Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 07:29:52 -0500
Organization: Optimum Online


Wesrock@aol.com wrote:

>     This item forwarded from another list (and which apparently
> originated in a newspaper) calls Basking Ridge "historic."

>      To many of us 195 Broadway would be historic.  Basking Ridge was
> a johnny-come-lately and I remember the panic among Manhattan workers
> and how AT&T held driving lessons for employees from NYC.

> Wes Leatherock
> wesrock@aol.com

> Verizon to pay $125M for AT&T's 'Pagoda' Offspring to buy former
> telecom giant's HQ

> Tuesday, March 22, 2005
> BY GEORGE E. JORDAN
> Star-Ledger Staff

> Verizon has agreed to pay about $125 million for the sprawling Basking
> Ridge campus that once served as the historic headquarters of AT&T,
> according to five people with knowledge of the transaction.

> Verizon, the nation's biggest telephone company, eventually could move
> its operations center and up to 1,000 employees from Manhattan to the
> 10 interconnecting buildings in Somerset County, said the sources.

I think the "historic" appellation comes from the design.  It is a pretty
spectacular set of buildings.

LB

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

Date: 25 Mar 2005 23:59:50 -0000
From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
Subject: Re: Texas Sues Vonage Over 911 Problem
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


> It's not just that.  To actually do the interconnection, Vonage would
> need to build some infrastructure: they'd need trunks into every LATA
> in which they offered 911.

But they already do.  The phone numbers they offer are all from
facility based CLECs.  I know that my number was on the Paetec switch
in Syracuse, in the same building with all the other CLEC switches and
probably the cell switches, too.

> It seems everyone pays a fee to support the PSAP except the VOIP
> people who claim their having to pay the fee would be
> anti-competitive "because they are not a phone company."  If it walks
> like a duck, looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, the obvious
> conclusion would be that it is what it puports to be - unless it is a
> VOIP provider. ...

Agreed.

> The VOIP carriers are using the telephone number assigned to the
> adapter for routing to the PSAP rather than the location of the
> router/gateway or whatever is the first unit to handle the call.

I see you've never tried VoIP service.  When I signed up for Vonage,
they told me fairly clearly that they needed to know my physical
address for 911 service, so I gave it to them.  Didn't ever try it,
and I'm not sure how informative a test would have been since the PSAP
for my house is the same one for the phone's rate center.  Same for
Lingo, where part of my account profile is my physical address,
separate from the billing address (my po box) and the address where
they shipped the adapter.

Collecting the address is a minor problem compared to the real
problem, most VoIP carriers, with the notable exception of Packet8,
won't pay for a real E911 connection to the PSAP.

> So let me get this straight. Local (and state) gov'ts pretend that a
> 911 PSAP (Public Safety Answering Position) isn't part of the standard
> functions of government, and therefore they get the telcos to pass
> through a separate "911 fee" (read tax).

Don't be silly.  Governments tax all sorts of stuff.  Since PSAPs are
uniquely useful to people who use phones, there's some logic in taxing
phones to support them.  I agree that the amount of 911 tax could be
better matched to the cost of the PSAPs.

> What's next? Perhaps the county will claim that libraries are
> special, so there needs to be a separate tax, excuse me, fee, on all
> book sales?

Don't be silly.  We have library districts for that.

R's,

John

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

From: wollman@lcs.mit.edu (Garrett Wollman)
Subject: Re: Some Concerned About Privacy Implications of E-ZPass System
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 21:48:44 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: MIT Laboratory for Computer Science


In article <telecom24.131.17@telecom-digest.org>,
Barry Margolin  <barmar@alum.mit.edu> wrote:

> Massachusetts doesn't give a discount for FastLane,

Actually, the Turnpike does.  The resident discounts on the harbor
tunnels now require Fast Lane (and have since it was introduced,
IIRC), and the two toll barriers on the Extension give a 25-cent
discount for Fast Lane customers.

> but last year they instituted a tax deduction if you use it enough to
> be considered a commuter (I think $150 or $250).

I believe it's actually written such that you don't have to use Fast
Lane, but you're unlikely to have saved all those receipts in any
other form.

-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: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi)
Subject: Re: New Long Range Cordless Phones?
Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 14:13:49 -0000
Organization: Widgets, Inc.


In article <telecom24.131.12@telecom-digest.org>, Dave
<newsgroups@dave!!!christense!!n.o!!!r!!!g> wrote:

> If I set up another computer with Asterix running, this kludge isnt
> going to be terribly cost effective.  The rate for the additional
> electricity (38-43 cents per KWH) will negate the advantages.

> The other problems with sourcing VOIP from a provider in Alaska is
> that a) all high speed connections are metered and b) no VOIP carriers
> offer TN's in the 907 NPA, and being in a small rate center the odds
> of having a local TN are even less.

> Other then costs and time involved in getting a tech class ham
> license, can someone estimate what the costs and legalities involved
> in setting up a mobile radio system with a (pseudo-encrypted) PSTN
> gateway?  Then I could 'legally' do what these devices do.  The
> terrain is pretty open and flat and I have a barn that I could mount
> my equipment on which is above the treeline.  At least if i'm going to
> burn additional dead dinosaurs I can have a higher 'gee-whiz' factor.

There's a matter of finding an "available", legal, radio channel to
operate on.  Given that you're out in the boonies, this may not be a
problem.

You've got some recurring costs for license fees, etc. to the FCC.
There's an annual "regulatory" fee that will be maybe a couple of
bucks; might be as low as $0.40 or so.  (looks like between $.08 and
$0.26 per radio per year)

Then there's the license fee, itself; Looks like $55-$155. "depending"

I think that's good for 5 years.  "Renewals", for like period, same cost.

Then, there's the equipment cost.

Buying new, you'll spend beaucoup thousands.  On the used/surplus
market, you can probably find equipment in the low hundreds.

Transistorized gear uses a few tens of watts on standby. Maybe a couple 
of hundred when actually transmitting.

Good antennas make a *BIG* difference in range. They, cost, too.

The higher in the air you can get them, the better, of course.
Depending on _how_far_ up in the air, you may have to worry about
legal requirements for lighting, at night.  Those requirements are
*no* fun.  Aim for "just under" that 'lighting required' height.

The interconnect to the PSTN is fairly simple -- In the ham radio
community, it's called an "autopatch".  There are various kinds of
'access controls' possible, so that you, and nobody else, can enable
the telephone interface.

Generally, they let you *originate* calls from your radio, only.
Except for 'mobile phone' service, there are legal issues with a
transmitter going on because the phone rings.

"Pseudo encryption" is problematic.  The law requires you to announce
the station call-sign "in the clear" at the beginning/end of any
period of activity, and at stated intervals during activity.

Technically, minimal 'speech scrambling' is relatively trivial.  I'm
*NOT* sure about the legal issues.

Going the 'ham radio' route has its problems, too.  It's, legally,
*strictly* 'recreational'/'hobby' usage.  Something like calling a
pizza joint, to place a pick-up order, is technically illegal.  'In
the clear' transmission is required at all times.

> Or should I just say forget this idea and go back to Iridium?

I'd suggest trying a "better" roof antenna on the cell-phone.

Speculating -- you've got an 'omnidirectional' antenna, like a 'mag
mount' one for a car.  just mounted way up in the air.

A directional "beam" antenna, pointed at the cell tower, can make a *lot*
of difference.

> Tony P. wrote:

>>> I'm living in a rural Alaskan town and traditional cell service is 
>>> spotty to none, even with an old bag phone and roof antenna so I was 
>>> thinking that this could be an interesting approach to local mobile 
>>> phone service.

>> I highly doubt that it is legal in the U.S. However, modifying your
>> 802.11 gear and using say a PalmOS type machine with an 802.11 card
>> you could probably cobble together a VoIP solution that has a linear
>> range of 11 miles or so, depending on what type and pattern of
>> radiator you decide to use.

>> From what I've read about these units they operate in the amateur
>> radio band so I take sort of strong offense to that.

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

From: Carl Navarro <cnavarro@wcnet.org>
Subject: Re: CDR Collection
Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 14:47:46 GMT
Organization: Road Runner High Speed Online http://www.rr.com


On 25 Mar 2005 09:28:45 -0800, Matt <mattmorgan64@msn.com> wrote:

> I have a NItsuka PBX (Not sure of mod # yet); from which I would like
> to pull incoming CDR records, for the purposes of parsing the phone
> number and bringing the customer up automatically in our customer
> system.

> The PBX has a PC attached to it, which I believe is used for voice
> mail.

> None of the phones have any sort of data port.

> Any idea where the most likely place for a port to obtain this data
> would be? Given the age of the thing, If there is a port at all, I'm
> guessing it will be a DB9 or 25 serial port.

You sort of answered your own question.  Pretending that you have an
Onyx, (black plastic cabinet, modular plugs for lines and amphenol for
stations), you ought to find a serial port on the AUX board ... if you
have one.

Carl Navarro

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

From: someone@netscape.net
Subject: If You Work at RCN Read This
Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 17:00:00 EST


Mr. Townson, please remove my name.

I have been in this business for almost forty years, but yesterday
took the cake. I didn't think the bullshit could get any deeper than
it's been lately, but I was wrong.

If you work at RCN, and I hope you do and I hope you are high up, I've
got a bone to pick with you.

I work for a small clec -- never mind which one -- and we've been
doing ports to and from RCN for years. Used to be it was no big deal:
I could do it, my mates could do it, we all work together and it's a
small outfit but we do a good job.

But yesterday, I got handed the biggest blivot in the world. I called
up the guy we used to deal with at RCN and said we're porting a couple
of numbers out, they want it for next week, I guess you know the
routine. Like I said, it used to be no big deal -- you get customers
porting in, you got customers porting out, it's just business and no
big fuss, especially with it being mud season and lots of summer folks
getting ready to come back.

The guy I called said they got a new central department that handles
this now, and I have to call an 800 number. OK, I figure, they just
got out of bankrupcy so they probably contracted out some LNP stuff. I
figure they went to a gooey like Verizon has, which is a pain but it
works, and I make the call.

I get switched to someone who's name I won't say, but he tells me I
have to fill out a form and send it back and can he have my email to
send it to me. Sure, no problem, I give the email address and a few
minutes later I get the shock of my life.

When I get the email, it has a form attached to it that opens up in
Microsoft Excel. The first page is instructions, and I nearly crapped
my pants when I read this. Here's what it says:

"Put one letter in each box. YOU MUST HIT TAB AFTER EVERY LETTER"

Now, like I said, I have been in this business since the panel days,
and I have seen some stupid things, but four hours and forty minites
later I know that this takes the prize. Whoever set up this form used
ONE SPREADSHEET SQUARE for EACH LETTER OR NUMBER. Every goddamm time I
type two letters one after the other, I have to go back and erase, and
half the time I had about twenty things typed before I remembered to
look.

It took the best part of the afternoon, and my boss said we got to get
it down today and I had to type a letter and hit tab and type a number
and hit tab and type a letter and type a letter and oh shit goddamm it
again!

I had a plan for yesterday afternoon, and you screwed it up, RCN. I
was gonna pop a few and watch the wwf with my grandchild, but instead
I wound up halfway up a roof trying like hell not to slip and finding
my way with a flashlite because I was stuck in the office all damm day
and I have a guy out of service and it's that kind of a job.

RCN, you used to know what kind of job it is. You used to be pros. You
just went through a bankrupcy, so I can understand how you got a lot
of fresh faces in there, but this takes the prize.

Tell me RCN, since when does a company that just got out of bankrupcy
court have time to use a five thousand dollar computer to make a
carbon copy of a form that looks like it came out of my typewriter
while I was in the Navy? Hell, I learned to type on a Smith-Corona,
and I'm pretty good at it still, and I passed the po3 test four months
early because of it, but your form wasted my whole day.

Tell me, please, that whoever wasted my day and a lot of other guy's
days is getting called on the carpet.

I won't sign this. Just act like it came from all your old customers
who are calling me now.

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

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 #132
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun Mar 27 22:41:46 2005
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j2S3fkP12673;
	Sun, 27 Mar 2005 22:41:46 -0500 (EST)
Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 22:41:46 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200503280341.j2S3fkP12673@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 #133

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 27 Mar 2005 22:42:00 EST    Volume 24 : Issue 133

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Cell Phone Songs Prompt Control Questions (Monty Solomon)
    Cyberlaw in the Supreme Court (Monty Solomon)
    Time for the Recording Industry to Face the Music (Monty Solomon)
    Lingo Referral (akubird@gmail.com)
    OT/Tangent (was Re: We Don't Need no Steenkin Line Sharing) (Henry)
    FCC: We Don't Need no Steenkin Line Sharing (Marcus Didius Falco)
    Grounding a Vonage System (Alex Batson)
    Re: What's Historic?  (Marcus Didius Falco)
    Re: Dealing with Vonage (Isaiah Beard)
    Re: Some Concerned About Privacy Implications of E-ZPass (S Barkley)
    Re: Texas Sues Vonage Over 911 Problem (Tony P.)
    Re: What Happened To Channel 1 (Tony P.)
    Re: New Long Range Cordless Phones (Tony P.)
    Re: More 'Tweens' Going Mobile; Long-Term Health Risks Unclear (Tony P)
    Re: Cell Phone Jammer For Sale MONIX MGB-1S (Tony P.)
    Re: 911, Taxes, and Fees, was: Texas Sues Vonage Over 911 Problem (Tony)
    Last Laugh! Field Guide to experts - Oxman et al. (Marcus Didius Falco)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 20:12:21 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Cell Phone Songs Prompt Control Questions


By BRUCE MEYERSON AP Business Writer

NEW YORK (AP) -- It's been the great "Whodunit?" of two big technology
shows: Who put the gag in Motorola Corp.'s mouth just as it was going
to unveil a new cell phone featuring the iTunes music download service
from Apple Computer Inc.?

Motorola initially said it acted alone, then quickly pointed to Apple,
citing the computer company's long practice of never unveiling new
products until they're actually available to buy.

Many industry players, however, suspect that a wireless service
provider intervened, essentially telling Motorola that, `I'll be
darned if I'll sell your phones to my customers if it means they can
buy songs through Apple and Motorola without giving me a piece of the
pie.'

Or, some surmise, perhaps a wireless carrier who planned to offer the
iTunes phone balked at the last minute?

This mystery, which played prominently this month at both the CeBit
show in Germany where the phone was to be unveiled and then the CTIA
Wireless show in New Orleans, drives right to the heart of an uneasy
dynamic simmering in the cellular industry.

The rush is on to deliver music and video to mobile phones, with
wireless providers and device makers jockeying for position to grab
their share of the payday, all parties mindful of the surprising
billions being spent on musical ringtones.

At the same time, the media companies who produce the entertainment,
which also includes video games, are approaching cautiously,
determined to avert any Napster-like, file-sharing bonanza among cell
phone users.

In fact, Motorola also plays a role in a second drama involving these 
choppy uncharted waters.

Earlier this year, a class-action lawsuit was filed in three states
involving a Motorola phone sold by Verizon Wireless. The v710 handset
was equipped with a short-range wireless technology called Bluetooth
and was configured to work with cordless headsets. Only one problem:
Its file-transfer capabilities had been disabled.

The suit insinuates that Verizon Wireless is obliging subscribers to
use its cell network if they wish, for example, to send a photo taken
on a camera phone to a computer or another cell phone.

      - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=47934972

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

Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 20:56:31 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Cyberlaw in the Supreme Court


Stanford Law School
http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/supreme/

On March 29, 2005, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments in two
cases that together will greatly determine how government can and will
regulate the Internet in the future, and the impact that the public
interest will have on the development of cyberlaw over the next
decade.

In MGM v. Grokster, the Court will decide whether copyright holders
can veto consumer electronics and computing innovations that upset the
content industries' prevailing business models, even where the
technology's non-infringing uses provide substantial benefits to
consumers.  The question is whether consumer demand for new and better
products will drive technological development, or copyright owners'
demand for control will retard it.

In Brand X v. FCC, the Court will decide whether the FCC should retain
the option to regulate cable modem services to promote open access to
broadband lines, universal service and network neutrality, as it did
in the early days of the Internet when most people connected over
common-carrier telephone lines.  The question is whether tomorrow's
communications services will be defined by citizen choices or by the
business interests of a handful of cable broadband companies.

At Cyberlaw in the Supreme Court, the Stanford Law School Center for
Internet and Society will convene a discussion of these cases, their
broader implications, and what effect the pending Supreme Court
decisions could have on the public interest.  Panels of attorneys
litigating and arguing these cases, the parties affected by them, the
policy advocates whose work will begin once the Judges rule, and the
people thinking about what the legal landscape will look like for the
next ten years will discuss both cases and the impact the decisions
will have on the future.

http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/supreme/

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

Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 20:57:21 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Time for the Recording Industry to Face the Music


http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/blogs/cooper/archives/BENEFITSofPEERtoPEER.pdf

TIME FOR THE RECORDING INDUSTRY TO FACE THE MUSIC: THE POLITICAL,
SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC BENEFITS OF PEER-TO-PEER COMMUNICATIONS NETWORKS

Mark Cooper
Director of Research, Consumer Federation of America
Fellow, Stanford Law School Center for Internet and Society
March 2005

ISSUE BRIEF

PIRACY PANICS V. THE PUBLIC INTEREST

A critical debate over a technological revolution is underway in the
U.S. that will have far reaching implications for economic growth and
global competitiveness, technological innovation and creativity, and
the capacity of an open, democratic society to adapt to breakthroughs
in the way we communicate. This debate is over advances in peer-to-
peer technologies and whether their growth will be driven by the
capacity of human innovation or hindered by special interests
reluctant to embrace change. This debate is unfolding in the U.S.
court system, the halls of Congress at universities and research
organizations, and among entrepreneurs everywhere from corporate
boardrooms to the lone innovators looking for next great invention.

If vested interests in the recording and movie industries have their
way, innovation and progress will be the victim of a public relations
campaign intended to paint file sharing as "piracy." Big movie studios
and recording companies are attempting to squelch peer-to-peer
networks just as their potential to deliver economic growth and
technological progress is only beginning to be exploited. However,
contrary to the copyright holder claims that peer-to-peer
communications networks are copyright infringement schemes,
decentralized peer-to-peer networks have become the dominant form of
Internet communications because they are vastly more efficient.
Peer-to-peer technologies eliminate the congestion and cost of central
servers and distribute bandwidth requirements throughout the
network. In so doing they become a powerful force to expand freedom of
expression and the flow of information, stimulate innovation, and
promote the economic interests of consumer and creative artists alike
(see Exhibit EX-1).

This report explains why public policy should embrace peer-to-peer
technologies. It examines the history of technological innovation in
communications and the "piracy panics" they cause among entrenched
incumbents. For three centuries, in battles over the printing press,
telegraphy, mechanical pianos, cinematography, radio, cable
television, photocopying, video and audio recorders, and the current
generation of digital technologies, public policy has favored
technological innovation by refusing to allow copyright to regulate
technology. The paper reminds policymakers of the historic lesson that
technological innovation promotes political, cultural, and social
development, and economic growth. The analysis demonstrates the social
and economic harms of the "tyranny of copyright" that recording
companies and movie studios seek to impose on peer-to-peer
technologies, as well as the legal and public policy grounds for
rejecting this tyranny.

http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/blogs/cooper/archives/BENEFITSofPEERtoPEER.pdf

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

From: akubird@gmail.com
Subject: Lingo Referral
Date: 26 Mar 2005 18:27:23 -0800


I recently signed up with Lingo and am very pleased with service. I'm
saving a lot of money. I frequently make long distance calls from the
East Coast to Australia and the sound quality is very clear.

If anyone is interested in more information or a referral I can give
one.

akubird at gmail (dot) com

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

From: henry999@eircom.net (Henry)
Subject: OT/Tangent (was Re: We Don't Need no Steenkin Line Sharing)
Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 13:17:29 +0200
Organization: Elisa Internet customer


Greetings. With his title 'We Don't Need no Steenkin Line Sharing',
Danny Burstein is of course playing on the popular quote 'We Don't Need
no Steenkin Badges'. This line is supposedly from the classic Bogart
film _The Treasure of the Sierra Madre_ -- but it's not. Or, not quite.
:-)

When Woody Allen's _Play It Again, Sam_ came out, everybody thought
that this title was also a quote. But in _Casablanca_, Rick (Bogart's
character) never actually says these precise words. He says something
similar, but not this exact phrase.

It is similar with _Sierra Madre_. I watched this picture on video a
year or so ago, and when the steenkin badges scene came I stopped the
tape and carefully transcribed the dialogue. Here is what they really
said.

Fred C. Dobbs: If you're the police, where are your badges?

Bandito leader: Badges? We ain't got no badges. We don't need no
badges!  I don't have to show you any steenkin badges!


Cheers,

Henry

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

Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 18:52:01 -0500
From: Marcus Didius Falco <falco_marcus_didius@yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: FCC: We Don't Need no Steenkin Line Sharing


Well, this certainly looks like something close to the deathknell for 
competition.

* Original: FROM..... Dave Farber's list

  ------ Forwarded Message
  From: d berns
  Reply-To: Telecom Regulation & the Internet
  Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 13:22:57 -0500
  Subject: FCC: we don't need no steenkin line sharing

"The Commission has before it a petition for declaratory ruling filed
by BellSouth Telecommunications, Inc.  (BellSouth) regarding issues
stemming from the Triennial Review Order. As explained below, because
the Commissions national unbundling rules in the Triennial Review
Order directly address the primary issue raised by BellSouth, we grant
BellSouths petition to the extent described in this Order.

"Specifically, applying section 251(d)(3) of the Communications Act of
1934, as amended (the Act), we find that a state commission may not
require an incumbent local exchange carrier (LEC) to provide digital
subscriber line (DSL) service to an end user customer over the same
unbundled network element (UNE) loop facility that a competitive LEC
uses to provide voice services to that end user.

"For the reasons set forth below, we conclude that state decisions
that impose such an obligation are inconsistent with and substantially
prevent the implementation of the Act and the Commissions federal
unbundling rules and policies set forth in the Triennial Review Order
that implement sections 251(c) .....

rest at:

http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-78A1.txt [a]
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-78A1.doc [b]
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-78A1.pdf [c]

[a] messy ascii
[b] Word Doc
[c] PDF

(most FCC material is available in all three forms. URLs are identical
except for the trailing extension).

Further info on the main FCC page: http://www.fcc.gov

  --- End of Forwarded Message

  --- Forwarded Message

  From: Bob Frankston
  Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 17:26:37 -0500
  To: <dave farber.net>
  Subject: Re: [IP] FCC: we don't need no steenkin line sharing

Am I missing something or is this indeed a battle over whether a given
copper line has to support two over-specified protocols? (No pun, as
in voice-over-data, this is over as in over-the-top).

If so, then wouldn't it make more sense to focus on naked DSL with
voice telephony being provided over IP? There are plenty of faux
telephony providers, including the carriers themselves, who will give
the illusion of line sharing for those who want it.

This is an example of where an "IP-only" policy makes sense rather
than fighting legacy skirmishes. I don't want to oversimplify the
problem but it seems better than continuing to fight the old battles.

It reminds me of the two back-to-back panel discussions on the
triennial review -- the first was arguing over how it affected the
purchase of switches. The second, with most of the same participants,
was on VoIP because no one was buying those switches anymore. And I
thought lawyers were taught not to argue moot cases outside of class
and what is the Regulatorium if not moot?

  --- End of Forwarded Message

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

From: Alex Batson <batsona@comcast.net>
Subject: Grounding a Vonage System
Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 15:50:24 -0500


Greetings:

I've just subscribed to Vonage and just hooked everything up.  When I
press a key to clear the dial-tone, the empty line has a bit of snowy,
white-noise in the background.  This isn't anything that sounds like
electrical interference, and there's no 'hum' in the line actually.
It's not 99% silent like my Verizon land-line is, but then again, that
demarc is grounded, and my Vonage isn't.

Question: 1.)How can I tell which lead is Tip, and which is Ring, and
which one, if either, can I connect to a good earth-ground?

If I'm still off in left field, can someone give me a pointer or two,
on how to lessen the snowy white-noise on a empty line?

Alex

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

Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 18:53:37 -0500
From: Marcus Didius Falco <falco_marcus_didius@yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: Re: What's Historic?


It took a bit of searching, but the URL of the full story is:

http://www.nj.com/news/ledger/index.ssf?/base/news-21/1111472186300180.xml

>     This item forwarded from another list (and which apparently
> originated in a newspaper) calls Basking Ridge "historic."

>      To many of us 195 Broadway would be historic.  Basking Ridge was
> a johnny-come-lately and I remember the panic among Manhattan workers
> and how AT&T held driving lessons for employees from NYC.

> Wes Leatherock
> wesrock@aol.com

> Verizon to pay $125M for AT&T's 'Pagoda' Offspring to buy former
> telecom giant's HQ

> Tuesday, March 22, 2005
> BY GEORGE E. JORDAN
> Star-Ledger Staff

> Verizon has agreed to pay about $125 million for the sprawling Basking
> Ridge campus that once served as the historic headquarters of AT&T,
> according to five people with knowledge of the transaction.

> Verizon, the nation's biggest telephone company, eventually could move
> its operations center and up to 1,000 employees from Manhattan to the
> 10 interconnecting buildings in Somerset County, said the sources.

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

From: Isaiah Beard <sacredpoet@sacredpoet.com>
Subject: Re: Dealing with Vonage
Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 18:28:35 -0500
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com


David B. Horvath wrote:

> I finally called again on 3/24, sat on hold for a while and finally
> was connected to the "retention department".  It took about 5 minutes
> (mostly on hold) to handle the actual cancellation. The clerk was very
> helpful.  When I mentioned my 3/18 call, she told me that they had
> over 3,000 tickets in queue waiting for calls back and that it was "a
> staffing issue" (they need more people).

Oh, you think Vonage is bad?  Have a gander at cancelling through Packet8:

http://www.scaredpoet.com/packet8sucks

In short: I cancel, but they change the TOS so conviently I owe them 
more money to cancel.  They they put me on the wringer because they 
can't process my credit card for strange reason, then won't take another 
credit card to charge the fee, yet threatened to send a collection 
agency after me.  Why?  Not for security reasons, not becuase they 
thought I was a deadbeat.  Simply because no one was in the mood to 
actually operate their credit card payment system when I called.

After that, I dusted off my old Vonage ATA from a while back,
swallowed my pride and had it reactivated, and have not look back.
All because I was a cheapskate and wanted to save an extra $5 a month
for unlimited calls.  I've got a cell phone with free LD too and it
does have plenty of extra minutes at the end of every month, but
frankly, I prefer the sound quality of a VoIP call (which at its most
minimal takes up around 15-30kpbs of bandwidth) to a cell call (which
tops out at 13kbps in rare instances, but you're typically lucky to
get around 8kbps and tyou can HEAR the difference).  I don't think
I'll ever dump my cell phone, and am glad to have it when I'm out and
about, but if a VoIP or landline phone is nearby, then I'll still use
it.

E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.

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

Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 14:12:14 -0500
From: Stuart Barkley <stuartb@4gh.net>
Subject: Re: Some Concerned About Privacy Implications of E-ZPass System


The article and discussion here both miss what I consider a more
important issue with the EZ-pass system:

There is no way to know who else is tracking the EZ-pass transponders.

The transponder should have a audio and/or visual indicator whenever
it is read.  How else can you know that Big Brother is only reading
the transponder for its intended use and instead isn't reading it in
other locations for other purposes.

There should also be an off switch on the unit although I can see that
causing more problems with people forgetting to turn it back on before
traveling through EZ-pass lanes.

I've never been lost; I was once bewildered for three days, but never
lost!  -- Daniel Boone

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

From: Tony P. <kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net>
Subject: Re: Texas Sues Vonage Over 911 Problem
Organization: ATCC
Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 17:49:47 -0500


In article <telecom24.127.5@telecom-digest.org>, jack-
yahoogroups@withheld says:

> [Comment: Since this originates in Texas, I cannot help but wonder if
> SBC had any involvement in this, even if only maybe by putting a bug
> in someone's ear at the AG's office. We will probably never know, but
> when I hear about something anti-VoIP coming out of Texas, that's just
> the way my mind wanders.]

> http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1035_22-5630118.html?tag=zdfd.newsfeed

> By Ben Charny, CNET News.com

> The attorney general of Texas is suing Internet phone provider Vonage,
> charging that the company isn't clear to its customers about
> deficiencies in its 911 service.

> Vonage 911 calls aren't routed in the traditional manner. Rather, most
> end up at the administrative offices of the 6,000 emergency calls
> centers rather than dispatchers. According to Abbott, the dangers of
> the circuitous route were exposed in early March when a 17-year-old
> Houston girl was unable to get through to police after dialing 911 on
> a Vonage phone after both her parents were shot by intruders.

> In the U.S. District Court suit, announced Tuesday, Attorney General
> Greg Abbott alleges that Vonage doesn't "clearly disclose the lack of
> traditional 911 access" nor adequately inform its customers they must
> first sign up for the free 911 service. Such an omission violates
> state law dealing with deceptive trade practices, the state attorney
> general alleges. The state is asking for civil penalties of more than
> $20,000 and an injunction requiring more conspicuous disclosure.

> A Vonage spokeswoman said the company was surprised to hear of the
> litigation and pointed out there are numerous references, both on the
> Internet and material mailed to customers, explaining the 911
> service's limitations and its proactive nature. Abbott's office
> contacted New Jersey-based Vonage about a week ago asking for
> marketing materials and other information; the company hadn't heard
> anything since it replied with the materials two days ago, the
> spokeswoman said.

> Full story at:
> http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1035_22-5630118.html?tag=zdfd.newsfeed

> http://blogs.zdnet.com/ip-telephony/index.php?p=307

> Texas sues Vonage for lack of 911 call deficiency disclosure
> -Posted by Russell Shaw @ 10:17 am 

> Earlier today, we reported that Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott
> said he's sued Vonage for not being clear about the limitations of
> its 911 service.

> [.....]

> A somewhat different circumstance prompted the lawsuit, however. Early
> this month, a 17 year-old Houston girl was unable to get through to
> the police on the family's Vonage line to inform them that her
> parents had been shot in a break-in.

> Full story at:
> http://blogs.zdnet.com/ip-telephony/index.php?p=307

This is ridiculous. Vonage makes it abundantly clear that the 911
service they provide isn't E-911 service unless:

a) You live in Rhode Island where E-911 with VoIP works. 

and

b) You provide the address information in the on-line control panel. 

I'm not certain when Vonage posted this, but it clearly states that:

Your Call Will Go To A General Access Line at the Public Safety
Answering Point (PSAP). This is different from the 911 Emergency
Response Center where traditional 911 calls go.

    * This means your call goes to a different phone number than
traditional 911 calls. Also, you will need to state the nature of your
emergency promptly and clearly, including your location and telephone
number, as Public Safety Answering Point (PSAP) personnel will NOT
have this information on hand.

Service Outages Can Prevent 911 Dialing.

    * 911 Dialing and Vonage Service DO NOT function during an 
electrical power or broadband provider outage.

http://www.vonage.com/features.php?feature=911&refer_id=visa

 From the article I found this rather amusing:

'The Bells say they want to fix the problem but that the integration
with the Internet is technically complex. They flatly deny dragging
their feet. "Safety and security have to be the primary concern," says
Verizon's vice president of regulatory affairs.'

Huh? Every switch built in the last twenty years has had upgrades to
let the CLAN cards talk to the net. And Internet routing isn't exactly
rocket science. Securing it gets a little more complex but nothing
more than an LEC can handle.

In article <telecom24.128.19@telecom-digest.org>, ihatespam@crazyhat.net 
says:

> In message <telecom24.127.5@telecom-digest.org> Jack Decker
> <jack-yahoogroups@withheld on request> wrote:

>> A Vonage spokeswoman said the company was surprised to hear of the
>> litigation and pointed out there are numerous references, both on the
>> Internet and material mailed to customers, explaining the 911
>> service's limitations and its proactive nature. Abbott's office
>> contacted New Jersey-based Vonage about a week ago asking for
>> marketing materials and other information; the company hadn't heard
>> anything since it replied with the materials two days ago, the
>> spokeswoman said.

> I've said it before, and I'll say it again: Vonage should not be
> offering 911 at all, rather, they should be highlighting the fact that
> emergency call centers do not allow Vonage to route emergency calls to
> the right place (so their only option is to dump the call to an
> administrative number.)

> Personally, I'd rather have attempts to dial 911 get the "Stop, this
> phone does not have 911 service" then get through to someone who can't
> or won't help.

Or be aware of what Vonage can connect to and what it can't.
Interestingly by setting up our E-911 system to play nicely with
alternative carriers our state PUC actually got something right. Rhode
Island is an interesting place, extremely business hostile but
extremely savvy when it comes to telecom.

How else would you explain our being the first state with an E-911 PSAP 
that could get GPS data, and the first and only state currently able to 
offer E-911 to VoIP customers. 

This whole thing reeks of anti-competive behavior on the part of the 
incumbent carriers. I would hope whatever flavor of the PUC is available 
in Texas steps up to the AG and tells him not to make an ass of himself 
because Vonage clearly states that E-911 may or may not work and that 
the technical issues are only monopoly games. 

In article <telecom24.129.4@telecom-digest.org>, tls@panix.com says:

> In article <telecom24.128.19@telecom-digest.org>, DevilsPGD
> <ihatespam@crazyhat.net> wrote:

>> In message <telecom24.127.5@telecom-digest.org> Jack Decker
>> <jack-yahoogroups@withheld on request> wrote:

> Your claim above "emergency call centers do not allow..." is false; in
> fact, it's a key element of Vonage's public-relations effort on this
> issue.

> *If* Vonage were willing to pay the same fees other local exchange
> carriers pay for 911 connectivity *in each LATA*, *then* Vonage could
> route 911 calls correctly.  Avoiding this *cost* has been a major
> competitive win for Vonage all along and it is hard to not see it as
> a major reason, if not _the_ reason, why Vonage has fought state
> regulation as a local exchange carrier: by avoiding regulatory mandates
> like 911 service standards Vonage avoids the cost of compliance.

> What is truly irresponsible is to offer a "911" service that does not
> have the same user experience that Americans have been trained to expect
> from 911 for several decades.  In a just world, Vonage would pay and pay
> indeed for their decision to make the provision of such a service part
> of their public-relations effort aimed at avoiding service quality
> regulation.  This is a choice they made, not one they had forced on
> them; there are VoIP providers out there that did the right thing.
> People's safety in emergency situations should be quite simply out of
> bounds for this kind of political maneuvering.  Of course, it's not,
> but darn it, it ought to be.

Interestingly the costs for E-911 staff and facilities in RI is paid for 
by the state, not Verizon. Verizons only cost is the database. 

I like that fact that our system is set up to stick it to Verizon. 

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

From: Tony P. <kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net>
Subject: Re: What Happened To Channel 1
Organization: ATCC
Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 18:04:06 -0500


In article <telecom24.130.20@telecom-digest.org>, bonomi@host122.r-
bonomi.com says:

> In article <telecom24.129.7@telecom-digest.org>,
> Dan Lanciani  <ddl@danlan.com> wrote:

>> kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net (Tony P.) wrote:

>>> Sort of how the FCC has pretty much admitted that anyone with a
>>> modicum of technical knowledge will be able to defeat the broadcast
>>> flag.

>> I think you've mentioned this before, but what does it mean?  The
>> system as originally conceived requires the digital representation of
>> flagged content to be protected by encryption on bus and media.  I
>> have more than a modicum of technical knowledge and I don't see an
>> easy way around the proposed system in concept.  Has the original
>> system been abandoned?  Or are you aware of some implementation flaw?

> *Somewhere*  in the TV set, the signal has to get decrypted, before it
> can be presented to the CRT, or other actual 'display'.

> Thus there *is* a "cleartext" signal running around inside the box.

> Thus, someone with a reasonable amount of skill can 'tap' the cleartext
> signal, and "voila!"

> And there's always the "idiot method" -- just point a camcorder at the TV.

Thank you for that. Of course it runs clear somewhere in the set -- all 
you need to do is tap that signal. 

Funny you mention the camcorder. A coworker and I are geeks to the nth 
and considered that the only thing they can never stop. 

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

From: Tony P. <kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net>
Subject: Re: New Long Range Cordless Phones
Organization: ATCC
Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 18:06:53 -0500


In article <telecom24.127.8@telecom-digest.org>, quinnm@bah.com says:

> Dave,

> I'm pretty sure these are illegal in the US&P(ossessions).  One of the
> issues was interference with Air Traffic Control communications
> systems, as I recall.  Someone on the list may be able to cite chapter
> and verse from US Code, or FCC regs. I may have saved a Navy
> Department spectrum management brief on the subject; if so, I'll
> forward off net.

Many of these units are smack dab in the middle of the amateur 2m
band.  Interestingly I as a licensed amateur could possess and use
one, so long as I kept to Part 97 rules, which include identifying
with my call sign at regular periods. It's pretty much an auto-patch
to be precise.

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

From: Tony P. <kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net>
Subject: Re: More 'Tweens' Going Mobile; Long-Term Health Risks Unclear
Organization: ATCC
Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 18:14:09 -0500


In article <telecom24.128.1@telecom-digest.org>, monty@roscom.com 
says:

> By Associated Press  |  March 21, 2005

> CHICAGO -- There were two things 11-year-old Patty Wiegner really,
> really, really wanted for Christmas. One was a furry, playful dog
> that's now filling her parents' home with the sound of barking. The
> other gift makes a different kind of noise -- it has a ring tone that
> mimics rapper 50 Cent's hit song 'Candy Shop.'

I'm not sure what I'd be more concerned about. Should it be the RF 
exposure to tender young brain tissue, or the fact that said eleven year 
old knows what "Candy Shop" is referring to or has actually listened to 
the lyrics of the song. 

In article <telecom24.130.9@telecom-digest.org>, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com 
says:

> Monty Solomon wrote:

>> By Associated Press  |  March 21, 2005

>> CHICAGO -- There were two things 11-year-old Patty Wiegner really,
>> really, really wanted for Christmas. One was a furry, playful dog
>> that's now filling her parents' home with the sound of barking. The
>> other gift makes a different kind of noise -- it has a ring tone that
>> mimics rapper 50 Cent's hit song 'Candy Shop.'

> My initial knee-jerk reaction would be to object to kids having cell
> phones.  But then I remember my teenage days and it seemed the phone
> was attached to my ear.  And in my parents' day, the phones in the
> corner candy stores were quite busy.

> However, this was when I was in high school, not elementary school.

> I'm not so thrilled about the idea of "tweens" or younger kids having
> cell phones.  (A friend gave his 9-year-old one last Christmas.)

> Of course, these days kids are far more isolated than we were.  We
> were in the city or more built-up suburbs where there were plenty of
> friends within walking distance.  Today kids have to be driven to
> practically any kind of activity otherwise they're isolated.  (Also
> parents want more control over their kids than ours did.)

That is what we get for fleeing the urban core cities. The costs of that 
are coming back in spades. 

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There are lots of things wrong with the
urban core, inner city. I am sorry you feel that those of us who
wanted something better in life did what you call 'fleeing'. I know
you would _never_ get me back to Chicago for example.  PAT]

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

From: Tony P. <kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net>
Subject: Re: Cell Phone Jammer For Sale MONIX MGB-1S
Organization: ATCC
Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 18:28:02 -0500


In article <telecom24.128.7@telecom-digest.org>, donestuardo@yahoo.com 
says:

> I have a nearly new cell phone jammer for sale -- range is
> approximately 30 metres in radius. Model MONIX MGB-1S cellular Jammer.

> Used only one week (and then the tenant was gone! - hint great for
> getting rid of loser tenants who depend on their cell phones for
> calls).

> Includes unit, plus 2 attennas, and a power cable and transformer for
> North American Standard power.

> Asking price $395 plus shipping.

> I am located in Canada.

> Please email me at donestuardo (AT Sign) yahoo.com or call me on my
> cell at (416) 458-0012 and I will be happy to go over details with you.

> Thanks,

> Stew

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Why is a person who relies on a cell
> phone for their communications a 'loser'?  Good luck finding someone
> willing to buy this evil device.  :(    PAT]

To add to your comments, this is also a serious no-no in the eyes of
the FCC.

I'm waiting for the first emergency to take place and a cell phone 
jammer is incorporated. 

Seems that we get less confrontational as time goes on. Instead of 
posting notice that offenders will be violated, we go out and buy cell 
phone jammers. 

But cell phones are a curse to some degree. A local University that 
shall remain nameless instituted a no cell phone policy for students. 
That quickly went downhill when professors cell phones would ring during 
class time, etc. 

For those of us in continuing education, that was even more
interesting.  For example, at the time I was working for the state AG,
I HAD to keep my cell phone on. But at least I had the common sense to
put it on vibrate. One professor told me he always knew when my phone
went off because I'd jolt up a bit. Beepilepsy indeed.

What is really amusing about this is that Stew has posted a Bell 
Mobility cell number. 

Anyone know if Bell Mobility charges the subscriber for incoming calls? 
Hmmmm ... we could give this the same treatment we give to those who post 
their 800 numbers trying to sell wares that are offensive to us. 

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

From: Tony P. <kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net>
Subject: Re: 911, Taxes, and Fees, was: Texas Sues Vonage Over 911 Problem
Organization: ATCC
Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 18:40:17 -0500


In article <telecom24.131.8@telecom-digest.org>, dannyb@panix.com 
says:

> Thor Lancelot Simon wrote:

>> *If* Vonage were willing to pay the same fees other local exchange
>> carriers pay for 911 connectivity *in each LATA*, *then* Vonage could
>> route 911 calls correctly.  Avoiding this *cost* has been a major
>> competitive win for Vonage all along and it is hard to not see it as
>> a major reason, if not _the_ reason, why Vonage has fought state
>> regulation as a local exchange carrier: by avoiding regulatory mandates
>> like 911 service standards Vonage avoids the cost of compliance.

> So let me get this straight. Local (and state) gov'ts pretend that a
> 911 PSAP (Public Safety Answering Position) isn't part of the standard
> functions of government, and therefore they get the telcos to pass
> through a separate "911 fee" (read tax).

> Oh, for good measure, if you look at umptity audits you'll find that
> the amount of the "911 fee" has next to nothing to do with how much
> money is acually put into the PSAP. To the government, it's all one
> big pot of money.

Indeed -- here in Rhode Island all receipts go into a thing called the 
General Fund. Bad, bad, bad, bad. 

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

Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 21:22:45 -0500
From: Marcus Didius Falco <falco_marcus_didius@yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: Last Laugh! A Field Guide to Experts - Oxman et al. 329 (7480):


If you want the whole article, which is very funny, let me know. It is long
(23K in stripped form)

Unfortunately the illustrations did not come with this copy. To get them,
see the original file, or download the PDF.

http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/bmj;329/7480/1460


BMJ  2004;329:1460-1463 (18 December), doi:10.1136/bmj.329.7480.1460
This article
PDF http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/reprint/329/7480/1460

Experts' eye view

A field guide to experts

Andrew D Oxman, researcher1, Iain Chalmers, editor2, Alessandro Liberati,
researcher3 on behalf of the World Artifexology Group

1 Informed Choice Research Department, Norwegian Health Services Research
Centre, PO Box 0130, Oslo, Norway, 2 James Lind Library, Oxford, 3
University of Modena and Reggio Emilia and Agenzia Sanitaria Regionale,
Bologna, Italy

Correspondence to: A D Oxman oxman{at}online.no

Experts are common but not well understood. This guide introduces novice
expert spotters to the essentials of artifexology the study of experts

A field guide to experts

An expert is a man who has stopped thinking he knows!

Frank Lloyd Wright

Experts are a little understood family within the phylum
Chordata. Many people mistakenly believe them to have well developed
egos, winged words, and dull plumage. In fact, they typically have
immature egos (which explains their incessant self flattery),
rudimentary wings (which is why they fly first class), and exotic
plumage (to detract from their vulnerability). Despite their
deficiencies, experts can be dangerous. Our brief field guide to
artifexology (the study of experts) should help people to protect
themselves from the insidious influence of experts.

Apologia

An expert is one who knows more and more about less and less.

Nicholas Murray Butler

Who are we to write a field guide to experts? By its very nature,
artifexology is a non-expert field of study. As soon as one becomes an
expert in artifexology one becomes the subject of one's own studies,
thus arriving at a sticky end up one's own cloaca. Unsurprisingly, we
insist that this guide has been written by amateurs for amateurs.


Deeply tanned experts top the pecking order

Credit: MARTIN ECCLES


<<<snip>>

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

End of TELECOM Digest V24 #133
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Mar 28 19:48:34 2005
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j2T0mYH24207;
	Mon, 28 Mar 2005 19:48:34 -0500 (EST)
Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 19:48:34 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200503290048.j2T0mYH24207@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 #134

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 28 Mar 2005 19:49:00 EST    Volume 24 : Issue 134

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Major Hangups Over the iPod Phone (Monty Solomon)
    This Shark Is Missing Some Teeth (Monty Solomon)
    Comcast Does Digital Video Recording (Monty Solomon)
    'Mommy, I'm Losing You. Pick Me Up at Brownies' (Monty Solomon)
    FCC: Phone Companies Don't Have to Sell DSL Stand-Alone (Jack Decker)
    Communications Companies Form Security Alliance (Telecom dailyLead USTA)
    Re: Cell Phone Jammer For Sale MONIX MGB-1S (Fred Atkinson)
    Re: Cell Phone Jammer For Sale MONIX MGB-1S (Joseph)
    Re: Cell Phone Jammer For Sale MONIX MGB-1S (Isaiah Beard)
    Re: Grounding a Vonage System (Isaiah Beard)
    Re: Grounding a Vonage System (Scott Dorsey)
    Re: What Happened To Channel 1 (Dan Lanciani)
    Re: OT/Tangent (was Re: We Don't Need no Steenkin Line Sharing) (P Lee)
    Re: Some Concerned About Privacy Implications of E-ZPass (Isaiah Beard)
    Re: Time for the Recording Industry to Face the Music (Lisa Hancock)
    Re: Texas Sues Vonage Over 911 Problem (Lisa Hancock)
    Re: Texas Sues Vonage Over 911 Problem (Justin Time)
    Re: New Long Range Cordless Phones? (John Bartley)
    Re: Lingo Referral (John Levine)
    Employment Opportunity or Scam Opportunity? (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: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 23:08:28 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Major Hangups Over the iPod Phone


NEWS ANALYSIS :TECH
By Roger O. Crockett

Cellular carriers such as Verizon and Cingular are hesitant to sell
the Apple-Motorola gizmo. Here's why:

It seemed like a sure thing: the iPod mobile phone. What could be more
irresistible than a device combining the digital-music prowess of
Apple Computer (AAPL ) with the wireless expertise of Motorola (MOT )?
Motorola sent its buzz machinery into overdrive in January when it
leaked word that the product would debut at a cellular-industry
conference in New Orleans in mid-March.

Well, hold the phone. At the New Orleans confab, a frustrated Edward
Zander, Motorola's chief executive, stood before a roomful of analysts
and reporters and said the handset's debut would have to wait.

Why? Zander said Motorola and Apple want to hold off until the phone
is closer to hitting store shelves. But three industry sources say a
lack of support from such giant cellular operators as Verizon Wireless
and Cingular Wireless was instrumental in delaying the unveiling. So
far, the wireless companies are reluctant to promote the
Motorola-Apple phone.

Behind the clash are two very different views of the future of music
on mobile phones. Motorola and Apple would let customers put any
digital tune they already own on their phones for free. That would
help Motorola sell more phones, and it would help Apple expand its
dominance of digital music.

    http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/mar2005/tc20050324_7462_tc024.htm

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

Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 23:15:51 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: This Shark Is Missing Some Teeth


PRODUCT REVIEW
By Stephen Baker

Griffin's gizmo records and downloads audio broadcasts. But it can't
handle Internet radio, so you're limited to local fare.

The Good Like TiVo for radio, it records favorite shows The Bad
Reception can be iffy, and program slows the computer The Bottom Line
Improvements are needed before it's ready for mainstream listeners

A sleek white fin rises from the clutter on my desk. Salsa music pours
out of the computer speakers. Only five minutes after unpacking
Griffin Technology's RadioSHARK -- a TiVo-like service for radio --
it's up and running. Great start.

RadioSHARK, which retails for $69.95, promises just the type of
time-shifting service that radio-lovers have been clamoring for. It
captures radio signals the old-fashioned way, through that fin-like
antenna, and its software puts a radio tuner right on the computer
screen, whether it's a PC or Macintosh. It records programming on a
hard drive and even dumps it into iPod and MP3 music players. In this,
RadioSHARK mimics podcasting. That's the current rage in audio, in
which listeners download programming from the Internet and listen to
it on the go.

What's not to like? Unfortunately, a few things. The biggest problem
is that RadioSHARK relies on over-the-air signals for its feed. This
means that reception is only as good as it is on a normal transistor
radio. On our 43rd floor office in Manhattan, the FM signal is strong,
AM picks up nothing. No Yankee broadcasts for me.


   http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/mar2005/tc20050328_5522_tc117.htm

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

Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 23:25:51 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Comcast Does Digital Video Recording


Cable company offers a TiVo alternative -- but can this device compete?

Liane Cassavoy, PC World
Friday, March 18, 2005

If you can't stand to leave home knowing you might miss an episode of 
Lost or 24, you need a digital video recorder. Gone are the days of 
the VCR -- today's DVRs let you schedule recordings of your favorite 
shows and replay them at your convenience. And you don't have to 
shell out big bucks to get one.

Several big-name cable companies, including Comcast, are offering DVRs
to subscribers for a monthly fee. So how do these "rental" DVRs stack
up to ReplayTV and TiVo? I put Comcast's DVR to the test and found
that, while the price may be right, the device is certainly not
perfect.

http://www.pcworld.com/reviews/article/0,aid,120090,00.asp

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

Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 13:56:31 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: 'Mommy, I'm Losing You. Pick Me Up at Brownies'


By WALTER S. MOSSBERG

If you think there are already way too many people talking way too
much, in way too many places, on mobile phones, brace yourself: a
whole new demographic is about to join the mobile phone-toting army.

Apparently, some parents think it's a good idea to give a cellphone 
to their preteen children. And, ever anxious to please, the 
technology industry is ready with just such a gadget.

A new company, Firefly Mobile Inc., has introduced a small, colorful, 
cellphone that fits comfortably into the hands of kids aged 8 through 
12, and is greatly simplified so kids can easily use it. But the 
phone is also designed to strictly limit what the kids can do with it 
and to give parents control.

For instance, there is no key pad for dialing; out of the box, the 
phone can dial only numbers programmed into its phone book and large 
direct-dial buttons, presumably by parents.

My assistant Katie Boehret and I have been testing this mini phone, 
and we liked its kid-oriented features. Among other things, Firefly 
has a 911 button on its side for emergencies and its battery isn't 
removable because, according to the company's CEO, kids put their 
tongues on batteries.

http://ptech.wsj.com/archive/solution-20050323.html

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

From: Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@withheld on request>
Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 11:10:56 -0500
Subject: FCC: Phone Companies Don't Have to Sell DSL as a Stand-Alone
Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com


http://www.detnews.com/2005/technology/0503/27/tech-129887.htm

By Yuki Noguchi / The Washington Post

WASHINGTON -- The Federal Communications Commission announced Friday
that states cannot require regional phone companies to sell high-speed
Internet service as a stand-alone product.

The 3 to 2 decision along party lines, voted on last week and released
Friday, was a victory for BellSouth Corp., which had asked the
commission for a ruling in 2003.

The ruling effectively gives BellSouth and other regional giants an
advantage over competitors trying to sell alternative phone service.

Democratic Commissioners Jonathan Adelstein and Michael Copps
dissented, calling the practice of "tying" phone service to high-speed
Internet service anti-competitive.

In doing so, Copps and Adelstein echoed the concerns of smaller
carriers and Internet phone providers such as Vonage Holdings Corp.,
which have argued that requiring customers to buy Internet access and
phone service from a single provider limits consumers' choices.

"If it is permissible to deny consumers DSL if they do not also order
 ... voice service, what stops a carrier from denying broadband
service to an end-user who has cut the cord and uses only a wireless
phone?"  the Democrats wrote in a joint statement.

Full story at:
http://www.detnews.com/2005/technology/0503/27/tech-129887.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/

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have said before that the best
thing to do, IMO, is go with cable internet _whenever possible_ and
try to avoid Bell and its DSL completely, for just these same
reasons. Bell has a long, sordid history of being very tricky and
difficult to deal with.  If cable internet is not available, then of
course take Bell service and its DSL, but watch for any possible
opportunity -- such as cable being installed or expanded in your area --
to break away to a competitive CLEC and cable internet, such as I 
have done, now two years ago with Prairie Stream and Cable One.  PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 13:31:23 EST
From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA <usta@dailylead.com>
Subject: Communications Companies Form Network Security Alliance


Telecom dailyLead from USTA
March 28, 2005
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=20388&l=2017006

TODAY'S HEADLINES

NEWS OF THE DAY
* Communications companies form network security alliance
BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH
* It's decision time for MCI
* Huawei seeks to clarify report
* WiMAX startup raises Vonage's ire
* NTP pursues wireless e-mail patent disputes
USTA SPOTLIGHT 
* Announcing Phone Facts Plus 2005
EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES
* Network DVRs could alter business in a heartbeat, study says
REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE
* FCC backs BellSouth in stand-alone DSL ruling
* File-sharing case goes before U.S. Supreme Court this week

Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others.
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=20388&l=2017006

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

From: Fred Atkinson <fatkinson@mishmash.com>
Subject: Re: Cell Phone Jammer For Sale MONIX MGB-1S
Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 23:52:56 -0500


> But cell phones are a curse to some degree. A local University that
> shall remain nameless instituted a no cell phone policy for students.
> That quickly went downhill when professors cell phones would ring during
> class time, etc.

That's nothing.  Trevecca Nazarene University in Nashville, Tennessee
has an interesting policy to allow interconnect to the campus network.

When my first niece went off to school, several family members gave me
money to purchase the parts needed for me to put a nice computer
together for her to take off to school with her.  In addition to a
number of other pieces of hardware, I put a dial up modem and a NIC
card in it.  It was a fairly common one (in fact my PC has the same
model in it).

When she got there, she called me and said that the folks at TNU said
her NIC card was no good and they wanted to charge her ninety dollars to
install a 3Com card in it.

I didn't believe it was defective and told her not to pay them to
install that card.  After a couple of days, she called me again and
told me that they wouldn't hook her up until a 3Com card was
installed.

I called the I.T. department at TNU and asked what was going on.  I
was told that the school policy said that only 3Com NIC cards could be
used to connect to the campus network.  Needless to say I was a little
upset that they were going to make me drop another ninety dollars into
that computer.

But, I wasn't going to let them get the money.  I called around and
found a deal on a 3Com card and had them ship it to her at school.
Fortunately, she had a classmate that was a Saturday afternoon PC
tech.  He installed it for her and got her connected to the network.

I spoke to the dean at the school where I was taking computer
networking classes.  He told me that while this was completely
unorthodox, that TNU was far from being the only school doing
something so ridiculous.  His own daughter went to a school that
required a specific brand (and I don't remember what he said it was
except that it wasn't a 3Com card).  She had to fork out fifty dollars
for the card and sold it to another student when she graduated.

I wish someone in a position to do so would blow the whistle on this
practice of soaking the students for the money for these cards.  It's
unethical at best.


Fred


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Other than the fact that she apparently
was not able to hook herself up to the network, I wonder how the 
school would know what was or wasn't there. In other words, if she now
were to open the computer and install the original card in there
instead, how would the school ever find out, or do they search dorm
rooms looking for contraband hardware, etc?   PAT]

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

From: Joseph <JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Cell Phone Jammer For Sale MONIX MGB-1S
Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 08:09:25 -0800
Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com


On Sun, 27 Mar 2005 18:28:02 -0500, Tony P.
<kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net> wrote:

> Anyone know if Bell Mobility charges the subscriber for incoming calls? 
> Hmmmm ... we could give this the same treatment we give to those who post 
> their 800 numbers trying to sell wares that are offensive to us. 

All North American mobile providers charge for incoming as well as
outgoing calls except for some Nextel and Fido plans.  It's been that
way for the last twenty years.

The same thing will happen to you if you call from your phone.  The
subscriber who you called files a complaint with his provider and they
come after you and slap the law on you for harrassment.

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

From: Isaiah Beard <sacredpoet@sacredpoet.com>
Subject: Re: Cell Phone Jammer For Sale MONIX MGB-1S
Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 11:42:38 -0500
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com


Tony P. wrote:

> In article <telecom24.128.7@telecom-digest.org>, donestuardo@yahoo.com 
> says:

>> I have a nearly new cell phone jammer for sale -- range is
>> approximately 30 metres in radius. Model MONIX MGB-1S cellular Jammer.

 ...

>> Please email me at donestuardo (AT Sign) yahoo.com or call me on my
>> cell at (416) 458-0012 and I will be happy to go over details with you.

> What is really amusing about this is that Stew has posted a Bell 
> Mobility cell number. 

> Anyone know if Bell Mobility charges the subscriber for incoming calls? 

 From their website, Bell Mobility in Ontario appears to use "bucket"
minute plans, with a limited peak bucket of minutes that are used for
incoming and outgoing calls, similar to the US, and a per minute
charge for incoming and outgoing calls once you exceed that limit.
The bucket is VERY limited though, on the order of 30 to 200 minutes
depending on how much you want to spend.  On the other hand, nights
and weekends are free and unlimited.

E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.

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

From: Isaiah Beard <sacredpoet@sacredpoet.com>
Subject: Re: Grounding a Vonage System
Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 11:45:20 -0500
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com


Alex Batson wrote:

> Greetings:

> I've just subscribed to Vonage and just hooked everything up.  When I
> press a key to clear the dial-tone, the empty line has a bit of snowy,
> white-noise in the background.  This isn't anything that sounds like
> electrical interference, and there's no 'hum' in the line actually.
> It's not 99% silent like my Verizon land-line is, but then again, that
> demarc is grounded, and my Vonage isn't.

Actually, it *should* be grounded in a sense, through the electrical 
connection it requires.

Are you using a Linksys PAP2?  There is a known issue with some of these 
units where background "static" is heavy.  You should call either Vonage 
or Linksys and complain, or if you bought the unit retail and are still 
within your return period, go back and exchange the unit.  Other users 
have gotten their PAP2s replaced for this same problem.

E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.

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

From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey)
Subject: Re: Grounding a Vonage System
Date: 28 Mar 2005 14:05:32 -0500
Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000)


Alex Batson  <batsona@comcast.net> wrote:

> I've just subscribed to Vonage and just hooked everything up.  When I
> press a key to clear the dial-tone, the empty line has a bit of snowy,
> white-noise in the background.  This isn't anything that sounds like
> electrical interference, and there's no 'hum' in the line actually.
> It's not 99% silent like my Verizon land-line is, but then again, that
> demarc is grounded, and my Vonage isn't.

Yes, this is there so that you know something is connected up.

> Question: 1.)How can I tell which lead is Tip, and which is Ring, and
> which one, if either, can I connect to a good earth-ground?

DO NOT DO THIS.  The phone line is balanced.  If you connect either leg
to ground, you will screw the balancing up.

What is grounded in the demarc is a surge suppression device, NOT the line.

> If I'm still off in left field, can someone give me a pointer or two,
> on how to lessen the snowy white-noise on a empty line?

Don't use the Cisco VoIP boxes.

--scott

"C'est un Nagra.  C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

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

Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 01:21:17 EST
From: Dan Lanciani <ddl@danlan.com>
Subject: Re: What Happened To Channel 1


kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net (Tony P.) wrote:

> In article <telecom24.130.20@telecom-digest.org>, bonomi@host122.r-
> bonomi.com says:

>> In article <telecom24.129.7@telecom-digest.org>,
>> Dan Lanciani  <ddl@danlan.com> wrote:

>>> kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net (Tony P.) wrote:

>>>> Sort of how the FCC has pretty much admitted that anyone with a
>>>> modicum of technical knowledge will be able to defeat the broadcast
>>>> flag.

>>> I think you've mentioned this before, but what does it mean?  The
>>> system as originally conceived requires the digital representation of
>>> flagged content to be protected by encryption on bus and media.  I
>>> have more than a modicum of technical knowledge and I don't see an
>>> easy way around the proposed system in concept.  Has the original
>>> system been abandoned?  Or are you aware of some implementation flaw?

>> *Somewhere*  in the TV set, the signal has to get decrypted, before it
>> can be presented to the CRT, or other actual 'display'.

>> Thus there *is* a "cleartext" signal running around inside the box.

>> Thus, someone with a reasonable amount of skill can 'tap' the cleartext
>> signal, and "voila!"

>> And there's always the "idiot method"-just point a camcorder at the TV.

> Thank you for that. Of course it runs clear somewhere in the set -- all 
> you need to do is tap that signal. 

Except that (according to the original proposal) it won't run in the
clear anywhere you can "tap" without relatively sophisticated die
probing equipment.  Are you aware of some change in the approach or
are you just assuming that the manufacturers will screw up the
implementation?  If the latter, remember that the original proposal
also incorporates key revocation for compromised device families.

> Funny you mention the camcorder. A coworker and I are geeks to the nth 
> and considered that the only thing they can never stop. 

Except that that has nothing to do with defeating the broadcast flag.

Dan Lanciani
ddl@danlan.*com

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

From: Paul A Lee <palee@riteaid.com>
Subject: Re: OT/Tangent (was Re: We Don't Need no Steenkin Line Sharing)
Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 10:49:22 -0500
Organization: Rite Aid Corporation


In TELECOM Digest V24 #133, henry999@eircom.net (Henry) wrote (in part):

> Greetings. With his title 'We Don't Need no Steenkin Line
> Sharing', Danny Burstein is of course playing on the popular
> quote 'We Don't Need no Steenkin Badges'. This line is
> supposedly from the classic Bogart film _The Treasure of the
> Sierra Madre_ -- but it's not. Or, not quite.

> I watched this picture on video a year or so ago, and when the
> steenkin badges scene came I stopped the tape and carefully
> transcribed the dialogue. Here is what they really said.

> Fred C. Dobbs: If you're the police, where are your badges?

> Bandito leader: Badges? We ain't got no badges. We don't need
> no badges!  I don't have to show you any steenkin badges!

The actual "Badges? We don't need no steenking badges!" line came from
Mel Brooks' classic, "Blazing Saddles", and was perhaps an homage to
the "Sierra Madre" dialog.

As Hedley Lamarr (Harvey Korman) interviewed and "deputized" an array of
villains, he offered deputy's badges to a group of
stereotypical Mexican banditos. The bandito leader's response was,
"Badges...!? We don' need no steenking badges! manos!"


Paul A Lee			Sr Telecom Engineer	<palee@riteaid.com>
Rite Aid Corporation	HL-IS-COM (Telecomm)	V: +1 717 730-8355
30 Hunter Lane, Camp Hill, PA 17011-2410		F: +1 717 975-3789
P.O. Box 3165, Harrisburg, PA 17105-3165		W: +1 717 805-6208

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

From: Isaiah Beard <sacredpoet@sacredpoet.com>
Subject: Re: Some Concerned About Privacy Implications of E-ZPass System
Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 11:36:18 -0500
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com


Stuart Barkley wrote:

> other purposes.
> There should also be an off switch on the unit although I can see that
> causing more problems with people forgetting to turn it back on before
> traveling through EZ-pass lanes.

There actually is a rather low-tech measure that works very well:
there's a plastic container bag that comes with every ez-pass
transponder, and is coated with RF-blocking material.  It looks a lot
like very sturdy, semi-trasparent foil.  The EZ-pass instruction
booklets tell users that if they are concerned for any reason that
their transponder might be read in an instance where they don't want
it to be, they can remove the transponder from its windshield mount
and place it in the bag, ensuring that the transponder will not be
read.

Not as convenient as an off switch, but it does solve the problem of
people not being aware of the unit being "off" when they in fact want
it "on."  If it's in the bag, it's off.  If it's on the windshield,
then it's on.

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: Time for the Recording Industry to Face the Music
Date: 28 Mar 2005 10:00:52 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


Monty Solomon wrote:

http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/blogs/cooper/archives/BENEFITSofPEERtoPEER.pdf

> TIME FOR THE RECORDING INDUSTRY TO FACE THE MUSIC: THE POLITICAL,
> SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC BENEFITS OF PEER-TO-PEER COMMUNICATIONS NETWORKS

The popular view of this issue seems to be "screw the recording
companies".  I don't agree.

People have a Constitutional right (and a moral one too) to be
compensated for their creative efforts.  Like it or not, the recording
industry provides a conduit for artists to distribute their works to a
widespread general public and be compensated accordingly.  Any system
that would lead to so much free copying that would crimp that
compensation is wrong and some sort of control is needed.

So, the issue isn't whether there should be controls, but what kind of
controls are appropriate.

I, for example, copy music from a CD or phonograph record onto a tape
cassette that is easier for me to listen to.  I wouldn't want to be
prohibited from making such copies since I properly paid for the music
in the first place.

The challenge of the Internet is that the technology makes it really
easy to make perfect copies and distribute them widely.  Sure, in the
past one could borrow a record and tape it and plenty of people did
just that.  But that still took some effort and quality suffered;
often it was easier just to buy your own record.  Today it's no effort
at all and quality is perfect.

The recording industry isn't blameless either.  In the past, one could
buy inexpensive 45s of a single song they liked, that's hard and more
expensive today.  The cost of CDs seem to be much more than records
were even allowing for inflation.  Given that it's easy and cheap to
make CDs today, they should sell singles just like 45s of the old
days.

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

From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Subject: Re: Texas Sues Vonage Over 911 Problem
Date: 28 Mar 2005 10:38:28 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


Tony P. wrote:

> 'The Bells say they want to fix the problem but that the integration
> with the Internet is technically complex. They flatly deny dragging
> their feet. "Safety and security have to be the primary concern," says
> Verizon's vice president of regulatory affairs.'

I am not a technical expert, but I do agree that security is a much
more serious issue today than in years past.

The fact is we have hackers and saboteurs (virus writers) out for
harm.  They spend hours of time trying to penetrate networks, to gain
any foothold they can and worm their way as far inside as they can.
This isn't anything new, but the potential for damage has increased as
society is more dependent than ever on open networks that are
penetrable.

To give one example, there was an Internet scam that secretly had a
user's modem turn off sound and dial very expensive foreign countries
to generate huge phone receipts.  We don't want VOIP to be used for
scams.

> This whole thing reeks of anti-competive behavior on the part of the
> incumbent carriers. ... and that the technical issues are only
> monopoly games.

I have strong doubts whether this charge is true.

During the 1970s I heard this charge filed many times against the old
Bell System about competing long distance service and customer owned
equipment.  But at the same time, I also saw many situations where the
competing long distance failed or the customer equipment failed and
the Bell System got the blame or was expected to somehow make it
right.  I saw many naive computer users get angry at Bell for refusing
to fix their broken terminal because it was a non-Bell modem on it --
people certainly should not have expected Bell to fix someone else's
product!  Yet they did.  Likewise when MCI failed to complete a call
(as it did often) Bell got wrongly blamed.  After divesture many
people bought cheapo phones that broke easily and had lousy sound
quality, making communiation impossible.  (I finally told some friends
I wouldn't talk to them over their cheapo phone and they agreed).

Anyway, today the cable companies lay their own fibre cable and has
their own broadband infrastructure fully independent of Bell.  They
offer phone service.  So today there is no need to hook up with the
old Bell company at all.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: And something else I thought was a
pretty bad abuse was MCI and Sprint getting companies to sign up on
*their* networks and then the companies would encourage people to use
MCI/Sprint, ... "but for directory assistance, just use Bell and dial
555-1212 since it is 'free'; Sprint/MCI will charge us for their
network." so people were to get free directory from Bell but use the
cheaper carriers to place the actual calls. And people wonder why Bell
started charging for calls to D.A. !   PAT]

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

From: Justin Time <a_user2000@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Texas Sues Vonage Over 911 Problem
Date: 28 Mar 2005 12:02:03 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Aside for a minute the fact that I do
> not approve of 311 or the idea of police acting as the Answering
> Service for the entire government, which is what they would like,
> let's just talk about your cellular comparison. Yes, if you came here
> to visit from wherever, your cellular call to 911 would get routed as
> you say.  But you have had a stroke, or for some other reason are
> unable/unwilling to speak, what _display_ will the 911 person _here_
> receive? Your east coast address/phone number ID will be useless ...
> will it give the outgoing phone number of the local tower? What good
> will that do?

To answer the question about what number is shown at the PSAP.  I
would have to say it depends on what the PSAP is capable of receiving.
Now, before you say that is a cop-out, in this city all cellular calls
come in on dedicated trunk groups.  So immediately the operator knows
it is a cellular call.  The location given, and this is from memory
from working with it a couple of years ago is that of the cell tower.
As far as locating a cell phone from a cell tower, it takes a while
but it can be done through triangulation.  One has to assume the
signal is being seen by multiple towers, but the tower having the best
reception will be the primary tower for handling the call.

> By using GSM, I suppose _your_ phone could transmit to
> _our_ tower some string to be used as your 'temporary location' to be
> passed along as the 'ID' to _our_ dispatcher ... that might work.

As far as GSM, or CDMA or IDEN transmitting your location by using
GPS, this is possible.  But not all phones are GPS enabled nor have
all cellular carriers upgraded all their equipment to handle reporting
of GPS data and not all PSAPs have been upgraded to receive the data.
This is a technology that is very much in progress and is being
deployed.  The deployment isn't as quick as some would like, but it is
being rolled out.  In fact I am currently testing one of the latest
converged devices from a major manufacturer and it is not GPS enabled
even though it was released within the past 90 days.

> Maybe VOIP could do something similar: A call on a VOIP phone to 911
> would be intercepted by the broadband carrier handling your traffic
> and routed _from that point_ over a phone line to the local 911 spot.
> I do not honestly know _how_ Vonage handles it; only that they warn
> you repeatedly prior to getting the adapter turned on that "if you
> wish to use 911 from this adapter, you _must_ tell us the main address
> (house number, apartment number, etc) where the police or firemen or
> doctor or whoever is to go to find you and your distress.  We need
> that information to make 911 work. It is _not_ optional." Then two or
> three days later they advise you the work is finished.

Yes, the issue with getting 911 turned on with VOIP, whether it be
Vonage or one of the other carriers is something that has to be worked
out.  With your statement above you are beginning to see some of the
technical issues with attempting to tie everything back to a telephone
number.  If you take your Vonage adapter and a telephone from
Independence to Tulsa and make a 9-1-1 call, what PSAP is going to get
the call?  From the description you have provided it will be the one
tied to the location information given when you enabled the service.
This isn't much help in Tulsa.  If you had the boundary router or some
other device route the call based on where it was first received, how
would you track it back to the physical location?  Unlike a cell phone
you aren't hitting different points with different signal strengths
that can be triangulated, and the last time I checked, GPS doesn't
work indoors.

> I should also point out that a 911 call is a rarity here; there are
> one or two per _day_ between the various places they respond for,
> including Independence PD, 'Independence Rural', Montomgery County
> Sheriff, Cherryvale, KS PD (overnight, when the one officer on duty
> there is the only staff person on duty in the town of 2000 people).
> And, she answers the City Hall centrex, and is the receptionist for
> the Police Department which is in the basement of our City Hall.
> And, on the occassion of a 911 call arriving, she _immediatly_ says
> on the radio 'nine one one call, stand by ... ' which means all the
> officers on the street, etc who may be chattering on the radio know
> to shut up and wait and listen. Using my scanner, I will hear her
> sometimes 'patching in her headset line' and a one-way conversation
> while she questions the caller: 'which way did you see them go? what
> kind of car was it, etc' and she will repeat back to the caller (and
> over the air of course) whatever the caller told her; officers all
> over southeast Kansas listening in and ready to move out if it
> involves their area. The overwhelming majority of our 'crime' around
> here involves teenagers and other young guys who are rowdy and very
> possibly had been drinking. They (police) also claim there is a
> 'terrible problem with drugs' here; my local attorney just laughs
> and says "that is the usual police BS; they find some kid with a bunch
> of old cola bottles and the powder that _could_ be used to make
> meth so police claim the kid has a 'meth lab' going on". The usual
> give and take you find between police and defense lawyers everywhere.
> PAT]

While Independence handles 1 or 2 emergency calls per day, this city
handles between 20 and 40 an hour with more, up to 200, during peak
periods.  This includes the true emergencies where a police or fire &
EMS response is needed to the calls about potholes, trash, illegally
parked cars, and time-of-day requests.  With 20 operators on duty and
over 100 calls in an hour means a call is coming in about every 100
seconds.  Now, add a mix of numbers coming in on the administrative
lines, like 3-1-1, and you have a good chance the emergency on the
non-emergency line is not going to be answered, sometimes for several
minutes.  You can imagine the hew and cry that would be raised because
their emergency, however legitimate, wasn't answered immediately.

Now to give you an idea of call flow, the call is taken by a trained
operator.  The operator asks the diagnostic questions to determine the
type of emergency, takes necessary data to fill in the Computer Aided
Dispatch (CAD) entries and the computer sends the call to the
appropriate dispatcher.  The dispatcher, based on the CAD data selects
the closest unit for response and assigns the call a priority.  If the
call is for medical services or the fire department, once the call
data is logged it is transferred to Fire / EMS for dispatch.  The call
taker remains on the line to be certain a police response is not
required before disconnecting (like an auto accident with injuries).
If police response is also required, the CAD data is then sent to the
police dispatcher for action as well.  If police response is not
required the call taker is then available to take the next call in
queue, 9-1-1 calls first.

While it is the responsibility of the government to protect its
citizens and visitors, the costs of the equipment and personnel
handling emergency calls are _partially_ offset by the fees collected.
This is where the VOIP callers end up on the wrong queue.  As they
refuse to collect and pay the fees, their calls are not priority but
administrative.


Rodgers Platt

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

Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 13:07:28 -0800 (PST)
From: John Bartley <johnbartley3@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: New Long Range Cordless Phones?


First poster:

>>> I'm living in a rural Alaskan town and traditional cell service is 
>>> spotty to none, even with an old bag phone and roof antenna so I was 
>>> thinking that this could be an interesting approach to local mobile
>>> phone service.

Sorry, if it uses frequencies illegal for use in the US, its use is
illegal. Indiscriminate use of the "230-450MHz" band described for
that device elsewhere:
http://www2.dslreports.com/forum/remark,12419431~mode=flat~days=9999~start
could trash a lot of navigation devices.  How well received would you
be if you trashed a nav beacon, in AK where bush pilots are a
necesssity?

I would be *very* specific with anyone selling such a device that you
want to know what frequencies *specifically* are used, and have them
show you in the FCC regs how they are exempt. Ask them for the 'FCC ID'
number for the equipment.  Then, check with the FCC field office, or
confirm at the FCC website: 
https://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/oet/cf/eas/reports/GenericSearch.cfm

>> I highly doubt that it is legal in the U.S. However, modifying your
>> 802.11 gear and using say a PalmOS type machine with an 802.11 card
>> you could probably cobble together a VoIP solution that has a linear
>> range of 11 miles or so, depending on what type and pattern of
>> radiator you decide to use.

However, again, if the modifications exceed what's permissible under
Part 15 rules, you're again violating FCC regs.  Adding a high-gain
antenna can, under some circumstances, require reducing power on your
wireless access point.  A complex formula determins what's
permissible.

http://www.wi-fiplanet.com/tutorials/article.php/1428941

On Thu, 24 Mar 2005, Dave <newsgroups@dave!!!christense!!n.o!!!r!!!g>
wrote:

<snip>

> Other then costs and time involved in getting a tech class ham
> license, can someone estimate what the costs and legalities involved
> in setting up a mobile radio system with a (pseudo-encrypted) PSTN
> gateway?  

Encryption or pseudo-encryption is not allowed under FCC regs for the
amateur bands.  Although inverted-modulation is permitted in GPRS
devices, phone patches for them are not.

> Then I could 'legally' do what these devices do.  The
> terrain is pretty open and flat and I have a barn that I could mount
> my equipment on which is above the treeline.  At least if i'm going to
> burn additional dead dinosaurs I can have a higher 'gee-whiz' factor.

> Or should I just say forget this idea and go back to Iridium?

There's another possibility which would be cheaper and more reliable
than anything else mentioned so far; better antennas for your bag
phone.  Just because the antenna's on the roof does not mean it's got
adequate gain for what you need.  Here's one high gain store-bought
antenna:

http://www.antennaworld.com/eshop/Default.ASP?WCI=ItemDetails&WCE=CLR-83514Y
http://www.arcelect.com/High_gain_Yagi_and_High_gain_antenna.htm

And, if there's a mountain in the way, set up a passive repeater in a
location which can see both your home and the cell tower you're trying
to hit.  A passive antenna is just two antennas, attached to each
other, with no electronics; one aimed at your home QTH and another at
the cell tower you are trying to hit.  Then, aim the home antenna at
the passive repeater.

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Mike Sandman has a similar antenna
device in his catalog   http://sandman.com and I have one of them but
never much need it these days. Its an indoor antenna mounted on a
tripod which you set next to a window then plug it into the external
antenna jack on your cellular phone. Back in my early days this time
around here in Independence, when I was using the AT&T phone which 
always seemed to look for a Tulsa-based tower whenever it could, that
external antenna on a tripod helped quite a bit. Mike also has a 
device which is mounted outdoors somewhere with a good clear line of
sight to the base, then it 'repeats' its signal all around your home
or office. PAT]

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

Date: 28 Mar 2005 03:27:06 -0000
From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
Subject: Re: Lingo Referral
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


> I recently signed up with Lingo and am very pleased with
> service. I'm saving a lot of money. I frequently make long distance
> calls from the East Coast to Australia and the sound quality is very
> clear.

> If anyone is interested in more information or a referral I can give
> one.

I like Lingo too, and I'm equally happy to give referrals.


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: John, how does their referral plan
work? Is it anything like Vonage?  I am _still_ living off those
'next month free' coupons I accumulated.   PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 19:34:27 +0000
From: Mayra TABOR <descaling@pormexico.com>
Subject: Job Opportunity


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Readers, perhaps you can tell me if
this is a _legitimate_ employment opportunity or just another scam
intended to get you to do a quick shuffle of money outbound before 
the excrement hits the propeller blades?

In my limited examination of this company I note a few things:
(1) They are looking for licensees to help them in their 
'shipping and freight forwarding' business. 
(2) They seem quite eager to find people with a USA bank account; in
fact a question on their online employment application asks about
your USA bank routing number.
(3) Their 'home office' (of which they show lots of pictures of happy
industrious employees) is in St. Petersburg, _Russian Federation_. I
do not intend to besmirch their character and accuse them of being a
bunch of crooks, however I do recall reading somewhere of two Russian
'hackers' who were from St. Petersburg, Russia who the United States
FBI wanted very badly but could not get them extradited. 

Anyway, I pass this along in the event any one or more of you feel
like applying for the job, and are quick witted enough to hang onto 
your purse (and only provide accurate ABA routing numbers, etc) in the
event you absolutely must. Here is the message I got a few days ago,
and you can check out the corresponding web page. PAT]

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

Hi,

Would you like to earn some extra money working from home? We offer
you a great opportunity!

Our company Ship & Pay International is looking for reliable and
trustworthy people to be our representatives in your country!

This is not a sales gimmick requiring you to pay setup fees or sign up
to a mailing list. You will need no money and no special skills to
start. Anyone can work with us!

If you are interested, don't hesitate to visit our website:

http://www.shipandpay.com/jobs.html

Requirements:

1. A computer with access to the Internet, e-mail
2. 3-5 hours free during the week (mainly in the non-business hours)
3. Check your e-mail several times a day (each hour is welcome)
4. Be able to repeatedly lift 5-20 pound boxes.
5. Reply to e-mails immediately
6. We don't work with persons under 21 
7. Bank account to receive payments
8. Account in: PayPal, E-gold (if possible)
9. Be able to answer phone calls
10. Be responsible, hard working and communicable

If you would like to join our team please visit
http://www.shipandpay.com/jobs.html and fill in the online application
form.

Thank you.

Best regards,

Ship & Pay International


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Now, it all appears to be an honest
company trying to get started with a worldwide presence. But something
leaves me feeling a bit queasy, even with those nice pictures on their
web site, and happy, smiling employees; the picture of their office
building, etc. What is going on?    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 #134
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Mar 29 16:30:33 2005
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j2TLUWG04852;
	Tue, 29 Mar 2005 16:30:33 -0500 (EST)
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 16:30:33 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200503292130.j2TLUWG04852@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 #135

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 29 Mar 2005 16:30:00 EST    Volume 24 : Issue 135

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Plan to Merge MCI, Qwest Has A Sour Ring (Marcus Didius Falco)
    Anatomy of a Techno-Myth -- Economist.com (Marcus Didius Falco)
    Divide Grows on Treatment of Students in Online Breach (Monty Solomon)
    As Verizon Hikes 411 Cost, Rival Offers a Free Tryout (Monty Solomon)
    Sony in Dispute Over Digital Projectors (Monty Solomon)
    Vonage Move a Jobs Bonanza (Ankur Shah)
    Horrible Voice Quality on Skypeout (John Levine)
    MCI Takes Revised Verizon Offer (Telecom dailyLead from USTA)
    SecuPress; a Good Source of Security News (Sandra)
    Internet Telephony - Please Help My Dissertation (MJBarlow@gmail.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: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 01:06:02 -0500
From: Marcus Didius Falco <falco_marcus_didius@yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: Plan to Merge MCI, Qwest Has A Sour Ring


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A5750-2005Mar27.html

By Jerry Knight

Monday, March 28, 2005; Page E01

As a long-time advocate for investors, it pains me to say it, but
MCI Inc.'s board of directors ought to tell shareholders who oppose
merging with Verizon Communications Inc. to take a hike.

It's true that Qwest Communications International Inc. is offering
stockholders more money for MCI than Verizon -- $8.45 billion
vs. $6.75 billion -- but merging with Qwest would be one of the
dumbest deals in the history of Washington investing.

MCI already is co-champion in the D.C.'s Dumbest Deals competition.

Merging with Qwest could turn out to be an even bigger mistake than
MCI's decision to sell out to WorldCom Inc., a blunder matched only by
Time Warner Inc. selling itself to Dulles-based America Online Inc.

The same "take the money" mentality that produced those two disastrous
mega-mergers is behind the support by many of MCI's biggest
stockholders for combining with Qwest.

Unless the bids are raised -- and they may well be -- investors would
get stock and cash worth $26 a share if MCI hooks up with Qwest and
$20.75 if MCI goes with Verizon.

While the higher price might arguably be in the best interest of
shareholders, this is one of the rare instances when the interest of
the shareholders and the interest of the company are not the
same. It's doubtful that a merger with Qwest would be in the best
interest of MCI, its customers, its employees or the Washington region
 -- even if it is good for the shareholders.

There are shareholders and then there are shareholders.

The vast majority of the investors who own MCI stock are not
individual investors. Nor are they the mutual funds, insurance
companies or pension funds that make investments on behalf of ordinary
Americans.

Most of those folks were wiped out by the bankruptcy reorganization
that was necessary when the WorldCom/MCI merger was turned into a
train wreck by accounting fraud, flawed business strategies and
incompetent management.  Those former shareholders are going to get a
small part of their money back, thanks to a series of lawsuits (more
about that later.)

Today's MCI stockholders are mostly hedge funds -- private pools of
money, managed for the ultrawealthy by the ultrawealthy with the goal
of making as much money as possible as fast as possible, damn the risk
or the consequences.

"By our estimation, hedge funds make up two-thirds to 70 percent of
the ownership of MCI," Friedman, Billings, Ramsey Group Inc., the
Arlington investment firm, said in a recent report on the MCI
maneuvering. "It is quite reasonable," the FBR report noted, "that the
majority of hedge-fund investors would prefer to cash out quickly in a
Qwest-MCI deal rather than wait for potential upside from a
Verizon-MCI combination."

Reasonable for hedge funds, perhaps, but not for anyone else with a stake
in MCI.

Most independent evaluations of the competing offers agree with the
implicit premise of the FBR report: There is more long-term potential
for the company that would be created by merging MCI and Verizon than
for the one that would be produced by combining MCI and Qwest.

Verizon is the biggest and strongest of the regional Bell companies, Qwest
the smallest and weakest -- burdened by $16.7 billion in long-term debt and
so fragile that it may not be able to survive unless it finds a partner.

Qwest is willing to pay more than Verizon for MCI because it needs MCI
more.

Qwest, of course, doesn't put it that way. Its executives argue that
they can pay more because Qwest makes a better partner for MCI than
Verizon, because they can fire more MCI employees than Verizon and
because their deal is more likely to be approved by government
regulators and approved quickly.

That last claim is challenged by Blair Levin, a Washington-watcher for
Legg Mason Wood Walker Inc., the Baltimore investment company. Levin,
a former chief of staff of the Federal Communications Commission, says
either transaction could win regulatory approval. As for the timing,
neither is likely to be cleared until after regulators make a decision
on AT&T Corp.'s plan to merge with SBC Communications Inc., a bigger
and more precedent-laden merger.

"It's probably going to be true that they are going to look at both
deals together and when one [decision] comes out, the other will come
out at the same time or shortly after," he said. Neither Verizon nor
Qwest has gained much traction arguing that its offer is better from a
regulatory standpoint, he added. "I don't think policy is going to tip
the MCI decision one way or the other."

Levin approaches the merger from a regulatory and policy point of
view, but analysis based on business fundamentals generally comes down
on the side of Verizon. It is a financially stronger company with a
stock market value of $96.28 billion compared with Qwest's market
capitalization of $6.87 billion.

A $96 billion business that makes a $6.75 billion acquisition is making a
modest investment. A $7 billion company that makes an $8.45 billion deal is
betting the ranch.

To make that bet pay off, Qwest plans to slash expenses at MCI. Many
telecom analysts are skeptical of Qwest's claim that it can cut as
many as 16,000 jobs -- and do so without hurting the quality of
service to customers. That "promise" alone argues that the interests
of the employees and the public would better be served by a merger
with Verizon, which claims fewer than half as many job cuts will be
needed.

Absolutists on the issue of shareholder rights argue that neither the
employees nor the customers matter. Nor does the risk that the
combined company will founder down the road. If one offer gives
stockholders more money today, then it should be accepted, they argue
in support of Qwest (and in support of the hedge funds that are
pressing MCI to take the money.)

MCI board members so far have taken a broader view of the
choice. After all, they got their jobs because their predecessors were
ousted during the bankruptcy and ultimately forced to pay millions in
damages out of their own pockets for not stopping the accounting
fraud.

But a merger decision must be ratified by stockholders, and with
two-thirds of MCI's stock in the hands of quick-buck artists, that
could be difficult.  The worst thing that could happen -- and it's a
real possibility -- is that the hedge fund stockholders hook up with
Qwest and a stage a hostile takeover by voting out MCI's management.

While the future of MCI hangs in the balance, the final act of its
tragic marriage to WorldCom is playing out.

Today, court proceedings are scheduled to begin in lawsuits filed on
behalf of stock and bond holders against the accounting firm of Arthur
Andersen LLP, which signed off on the fraudulent bookkeeping that
ultimately destroyed WorldCom.

All the other defendants in the cases have settled, including the
investment banks that sold WorldCom stocks and bonds based on phony
financial records and the former WorldCom board members who allowed
the fraud to occur. Together, they have agreed to pay $6 billion in
damages, $4.8 billion to bondholders and $1.2 billion to shareholders.

Add the $433 million in restitution wrung out of Wall Street by the
Securities and Exchange Commission in another case, part of which goes
to WorldCom investors, and shareholders stand to get back more money
than the victims of any other corporate fraud ever.

The deadline for claiming a piece of the settlement was March 4, but
the courts have the authority to sweep in investors who file belated
claims, said a spokesman for New York State Comptroller Alan
G. Hevesi, who is supervising the cases because the state's employee
pension fund was the biggest loser in the debacle. Anyone who bought
WorldCom stock or bonds between April 29, 1999, and June 25, 2002 is
potentially eligible to get some money back. Details on eligibility
and how to file a claim can by found at www.worldcomlitigation.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 . 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: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 01:06:27 -0500
From: Marcus Didius Falco <falco_marcus_didius@yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: Science and Society: Anatomy of a Techno-Myth -- Economist.com


http://economist.com/printedition/displayStory.cfm?Story_ID=3D3786384

The debate over the safety of mobile phones has little to do with
science.

DO MOBILE phones cause explosions at petrol stations? That question
has just been exhaustively answered by Adam Burgess, a researcher at
the University of Kent, in England. Oddly, however, Dr Burgess is not
a physicist, but a sociologist. For the concern rests not on
scientific evidence of any danger, but is instead the result of
sociological factors: it is an urban myth, supported and propagated by
official sources, but no less a myth for that. Dr Burgess presented
his findings this week at the annual conference of the British
Sociological Association.

Mobile phones started to become widespread in the late 1980s, when the
oil industry was in the middle of a concerted safety drive, Dr Burgess
notes.  This was, in large part, a response to the Piper Alpha
disaster in 1988, when 167 people died in an explosion on an oil
platform off the Scottish coast. The safety drive did not apply merely
to offshore operations: employees at some British oil-company offices
are now required to use handrails while walking up and down stairs,
for example. So nobody questioned the precautionary ban on the use of
mobile phones at petrol stations. The worry was that an electrical
spark might ignite explosive fumes.

By the late 1990s, however, phonemakers having conducted their own
research realised that there was no danger of phones causing
explosions since they could not generate the required sparks. But it
was too late. The myth had taken hold.

One problem, says Dr Burgess, is that the number of petrol-station
fires increased in the late 1990s, just as mobile phones were
proliferating.  Richard Coates, BP's fire-safety adviser, investigated
many of the 243 such fires that occurred around the world between 1993
and 2004. He concluded that most were indeed caused by sparks igniting
petrol vapour, but the sparks themselves were the result of static
electricity, not electrical equipment. Most drivers will have
experienced a mild electric shock when climbing out of their
vehicles. It is caused by friction between driver and seat, with the
result that both end up electrically charged. When the driver touches
the metal frame of the vehicle, the result is sometimes a spark. This
seems to have become more common as plastic car interiors, synthetic
garments and rubber-soled shoes have proliferated.

A further complication was the rise of the internet, where hoax memos,
many claiming to originate from oil companies, warned of the danger of
using mobile phones in petrol stations. One e-mail contained
fictitious examples of such explosions said to have happened in
Indonesia and Australia.  Another, supposedly sent out by Shell, found
its way on to an internal website at Exxon, says Dr. Burgess, where it
was treated as authoritative by employees. Such memos generally
explain static fires quite accurately, but mistakenly attribute them
to mobile phones. Official denials, says Dr Burgess, simply inflame
the suspicions of conspiracy theorists.

Despite the lack of evidence that mobile phones can cause explosions,
bans remain in place around the world, though the rules vary
widely. Warning signs abound in Britain, America, Canada and
Australia. The city of Sao Paulo, in Brazil, introduced a ban last
year. And, earlier this month, a member of Connecticut's senate
proposed making the use of mobile phones in petrol stations in that
state punishable by a $250 fine.

For Dr Burgess, such concerns are part of a broader pattern of unease
about mobile phones. There is a curious discrepancy, he notes, between
the way that such phones have become indispensable, and the fact that
they are also vaguely considered to be dangerous. This is particularly
noticeable in Britain. The country that led the way in banning mobile
phones at petrol stations is also the country that has taken the
strongest line on the safety of mobile-phone use by children. In
January, Sir William Stewart, the government's expert on the subject,
warned that while there is no evidence that mobile phones are unsafe,
as a precautionary measure children should use them only when
absolutely necessary. The safety of mobile phones would appear to be
not so much the province of the hard science of physics, as of the
soft science of sociology.


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 Newspaper.

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

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

Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 20:27:21 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Divide Grows on Treatment of Students in Online Breach


By Robert Weisman, Globe Staff

A small backlash has formed against the business schools of Harvard
and some of the nation's other most prestigious universities for
denying admission to more than 200 applicants who used a loophole
devised by a computer hacker to peek at their admission files.

Last week, Dartmouth's Tuck School of Business, dissenting from
Harvard's stern reaction to the digital trespassing, said it had
accepted at least a few of the electronic intruders.

For administrators at Harvard, MIT, Duke, and Carnegie Mellon, the
attempts to view confidential data this month were the electronic
equivalent of breaking and entering, wholly unworthy of the future
captains of American commerce. But others see the online breaches as a
victimless crime by overeager young people accustomed to copying and
pasting links onto websites. The contrasting reactions may expose not
only a generational divide in Internet etiquette but also increasingly
divergent mores in the physical and virtual worlds at a time when free
downloading of music and open-source software is commonplace.

http://www.boston.com/news/education/higher/articles/2005/03/28/divide_grows_on_treatment_of_students_in_online_breach/

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

Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 20:29:24 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: As Verizon Hikes 411 Cost, Rival Offers a Free Tryout


By Peter J. Howe, Globe Staff  |  March 28, 2005

As Verizon prepares to nearly quadruple the price for calling 411
Friday, to $1.25, a North Carolina company that sells a discount
directory-assistance alternative plans a big promotion: free calls for
everyone in Massachusetts for the day.

Starting Friday, barring a highly unlikely last-minute intervention by
state regulators, Verizon is raising the price for calling 411 to
$1.25 from 34 cents. Customers will, however, continue to get 10 free
calls a month before they start paying the fee.

In response, 411Saver,  a company based in Maggie  Valley, N.C., plans
to  offer  unlimited free  directory  assistance  calls  to Bay  State
residents between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. Friday. It is setting up a special
number for the day: 1-866-MASS-411 (1-866-627-7411).


http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2005/03/28/as_verizon_hikes_411_cost_rival_offers_a_free_tryout/

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Here at the Digest, we offer a
directory assistance alternative which is quite affordable and easy
to use. Plus which, the Digest benefits from your use of the service.

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 !

Just as an example of how it works, at the above link, you register
the telephone number or numbers you normally call from. Then ANI is
used to capture that number each time you use the toll free number.
It is a real, live, up to date service bureau, meaning changes and new
additions are updated at least once per day. To hear a sample
directory assistance call, listen to
http://www.easy411.com/Easy411_call.wav. You just dial the 800 number
(maybe assign it to a speed dial position) then give your one or two
requests. Your credit card (based on the information you give them
when you register for the service) gets billed 65 cents each time
around, in reasonable billing increments with no minimum charges of
any kind. Instead of dialing '411' for directory, you use our 800
number.  And, the Digest gets a few cents 'commission' on each call
you make. No equipment or any changes needed to your phone system,
except you may with to put it on a speed dial entry. Let me know how
it works for you if you choose to use it.  PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 09:19:15 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Sony in Dispute Over Digital Projectors


VANCOUVER, Wash. (AP) -- There's a showdown brewing at the local 
movie theater, but it's not playing on the screen. It's in the 
projection booth.

Sony Electronics Inc., a unit of Sony Corp., last week demonstrated a 
projection technology for digital cinema that displays images at 
twice the resolution of existing digital projectors.

Sony plans to begin shipping the system in July, setting up a race 
with Texas Instruments Inc., whose technology is at the heart of 
digital projectors already on the market.

The competition is emerging at the same time Hollywood is looking to 
work out a fair way to roll out digital cinema nationwide to replace 
the ubiquitous 35mm film projectors.

Critics question how well the eye can distinguish between the 2,000
lines of resolution that current digital projectors have and the 4,000
lines Sony's new projector promises (by comparison, high-definition TV
sets show up to 1,080 lines). They also question whether color
separation and contrast are any better with a higher line count.

Regardless, Landmark Theaters, owned by entrepreneur Mark Cuban,
announced it would be the first to use the projectors, giving Sony a
high-profile partner in the quality debate.

      - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=47961533

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

Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 17:20:46 -0500
From: Ankur Shah <voipuser@withheld on request>
Subject: Vonage Move a Jobs Bonanza


[Pat, please remove my email address from all postings]

http://www.app.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050325/NEWS/503250331/1001/NEWS01

Published in the Asbury Park Press 03/25/05 By DAVID P. WILLIS
BUSINESS WRITER

Vonage Holdings Corp., the nation's largest Internet telephone
company, expects to move its offices to Holmdel, where it hopes to
employ about 2,000 workers by the end of the year, a company spokesman
said.

The move would make Vonage one of the Shore's largest employers.

The company, which now has 1,000 employees, has outgrown its offices on 
Route 27 in Edison, Vonage spokesman Jamie Serino said. "We are working 
right on top of each other," he said.

The company is "close" to signing a lease for an office building in
Holmdel, Serino said. He would not identify the location, but he said
it would have space for another 1,000 employees the company expects to
hire this year.

Joseph Sarno, senior director at Cushman & Wakefield of New Jersey,
believes Vonage will move into the former Prudential Property &
Casualty Insurance Co. building, a two-story 358,932-square-foot
office building on 88 acres on Route 520.

"This is a big shot in the arm for the Monmouth County office market
and also for the businesses and community of Holmdel to say the
least," said Sarno, a Holmdel resident. "That building was looming as
another big empty building in the Monmouth County market."

Charlie Morrison, a Holmdel resident who worked for Bell Laboratories
for more than 40 years, agreed.

"Well, I'm sure that some of the people that are unemployed these days
would be happy to hear" about the move, said Morrison, 83.

*550,000 customers*

Formed in January 2001, Vonage jump-started a hot new market that,
while still small, is providing an alternative to traditional
telephone service.

Co-founded by Brielle resident Jeffrey Citron, the company offers
local and long-distance telephone service over the Internet using a
new technology called Voice over Internet Protocol, or VoIP for
short. The technology gives customers who have a high-speed Internet
connection a less expensive way to make telephone calls.

Now telecommunications giants, such as AT&T Corp., Verizon
Communications and Cablevision Systems, are offering their own
service.

Vonage, which has run ads on television and the Internet, has grown to
more than 550,000 lines in the United States, Canada and the United
Kingdom, up from about 130,000 as of March 31, 2004. "The company is
growing very, very quickly. We are signing up over 15,000 customers a
week," Serino said. The company estimates it will have 1 million
customers by the end of the year.

"As that number grows, we are going to have to have more people to
serve that customer base," he said. "Every single week, we are
bringing more and more people on. We are looking forward to recruiting
in the area."

The jobs will include customer care, technical support, and software
development positions, Serino said.

The new location in Holmdel will encompass the company's corporate
offices, call center, network operations, research and operations and
other functions, Serino said. "By the end of the summer, the majority
of the company, if not the whole company, will move over," he said.

Holmdel Mayor Larry Fink said it is good to see vacant office space
used.

"It should be especially exciting for residents of Holmdel and
Monmouth County municipalities who formerly worked for AT&T, Lucent,
Agere and Avaya, many of who are still looking for employment in the
telecom industry," Fink said. "That might bode well for them."

*Prospective employee*

Mark P. Horvath, an electrical engineer who lives in Holmdel, said he
was thrilled by news of the Vonage relocation.

He's been looking for work since his former employer, Lucent spin-off
Agere Systems, closed its area offices last year. He hopes maybe he'll
be one of the local people the company hires when it moves here.

"I'm glad to have them as a neighbor," said Horvath, 49. "It's nice
when a company moves in; something sizable with a new direction like
Vonage.  It makes it a very impressive draw for other companies, as
well."

Sam Shramko, who moved to Holmdel in the early 1960s when his
employer, Bell Laboratories, opened offices there, said the move would
be a win-win situation for employers and employees alike.

"I think (Holmdel) is the ideal place for a company, a technical
company, because of the past communications and facilities that are
around here," Shramko, 70, said. "They'd have a good labor force."

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

Date: 29 Mar 2005 15:19:30 -0000
From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
Subject: Horrible voice quality on skypeout
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


My new USB handset showed up so I tried a couple of Skypeout calls to
regular phone numbers.  Ewww.  It sounded really awful.

Is this the USB handset, Skypeout, or am I just unlucky?

R's,

John

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

Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 12:49:30 EST
From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA <usta@dailylead.com>
Subject: MCI Takes Revised Verizon Offer


Telecom dailyLead from USTA
March 29, 2005
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=20418&l=2017006

TODAY'S HEADLINES

NEWS OF THE DAY
* MCI takes revised Verizon offer
BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH
* Cablevision may join investment firms in bid for Adelphia
* Kuwaiti telco enters fast-growing African market with buy
* Alltel launches EV-DO in three new markets
* Comcast looks to telephony, VOD to power growth
* VeriSign likely to maintain .net domain control
USTA SPOTLIGHT 
* VoIP 101: How to Rapidly Roll Out VoIP, March 31, 1:00 p.m. EST
EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES
* New chip merges electronics, fiber optics
REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE
* Public comments as regulators consider lifting cell phone ban

Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others.
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=20418&l=2017006

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

From: Sandra <contact@secupress.com>
Subject: SecuPress: A Good Daily Source of Security News
Date: 29 Mar 2005 04:39:07 -0800


SecuPress is a daily updated hacking and security relatedwebsite.  We
provide news and headlines from thousands of news sources worldwide.

Visit us : http://www.secupress.com - Hacking & Security News

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

From: MJBarlow@gmail.com
Subject: Internet Telephony - My Dissertation
Date: 29 Mar 2005 08:36:09 -0800


Hi,

I am in the final year of my MSc Computer Science at APU in Cambridge.
I have designed an online questionnaire which examines the call habits
of those that use software phones:

www.mayshack.com

Please complete the questionnaire it only takes 5 mins and will really
help my dissertation.

Matt Barlow

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

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 #135
******************************


    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Mar 29 19:53:01 2005
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j2U0r0D07342;
	Tue, 29 Mar 2005 19:53:01 -0500 (EST)
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 19:53:01 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200503300053.j2U0r0D07342@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 #136

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 29 Mar 2005 19:53:00 EST    Volume 24 : Issue 136

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Stolen UC Berkeley Laptop Exposes Data of 100,000 (Marcus Didius Falco)
    MetLife Plans Free ID Theft Aid for Clients (Marcus Didius Falco)
    Internet Connectivity Assistance for Italy (MoGold)
    Fax Station ID (John Schmerold)
    Verizon, Voicewing and Portability (zftcg@yahoo.com)
    LNP Transfer From McLeod to Vonage (wondering)   
    Re: Cell Phone Jammer For Sale MONIX MGB-1S (T. Sean Weintz)
    Re: Cell Phone Jammer For Sale MONIX MGB-1S (Tony P.)
    Re: Cell Phone Jammer For Sale MONIX MGB-1S (Doug Krause)
    Re: Cell Phone Jammer For Sale MONIX MGB-1S (Robert Bonomi)
    Re: Cell Phone Jammer For Sale MONIX MGB-1S (Fred Atkinson)
    Re: Lingo Referral (John Levine)
    Re: Time for the Recording Industry to Face the Music (Joseph)
    Re: Some Concerned About Privacy Implications of E-ZPass (Lisa Hancock)
    Re: Some Concerned About Privacy Implications of E-ZPass (A User)
    Re: Some Concerned About Privacy Implications of E-ZPass (Chris Farrar)
    Re: What Happened To Channel 1 (DevilsPGD)
    Re: New Long Range Cordless Phones (Marcus Didius Falco)
    Re: Job Opportunity (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: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 15:45:45 -0500
From: Marcus Didius Falco <falco_marcus_didius@yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: Stolen UC Berkeley Laptop Exposes Personal Data of 100,000


  --- Forwarded Message
  From: Ari Ollikainen < >
  Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 15:57:17 -0800
  To: David Farber < t>
  Subject: Stolen UC Berkeley laptop exposes personal data of nearly 100,000

  For IP ...

  WHEN will they ever learn? [WHEN THEY CAN BE HELD LIABLE DJF] WHY was
  personal information other than a name and a NON-SSN ID on a laptop?

Stolen UC Berkeley laptop exposes personal data of nearly 100,000

- By MICHAEL LIEDTKE, AP Business Writer
  Monday, March 28, 2005

(03-28) 15:11 PST San Francisco (AP) --

A thief has stolen a computer laptop containing personal information
about nearly 100,000 University of California, Berkeley alumni,
graduate students and past applicants, continuing a recent outbreak of
security breakdowns that has illustrated society's growing
vulnerability to identity theft.

University officials announced the March 11 theft on Monday under a
state law requiring that consumers be notified whenever their Social
Security numbers or other sensitive information has been breached.

Notifying all of the 98,369 people affected by the UC Berkeley laptop
theft could prove difficult because some of the students received
their doctorate degrees nearly 30 years ago, university officials
said.

The stolen laptop contained the Social Security numbers of UC
Berkeley students who received their doctorates from 1976 through
1999, graduate students enrolled at the university between fall 1989
and fall 2003 and graduate school applicants between fall 2001 and
spring 2004. Some graduate students in other years also were affected.

The stolen computer files also included the birth dates and addresses
of about one-third of the affected people.

University police suspect the thief was more interested in swiping a
computer than people's identities, UC Berkeley spokeswoman Maria
Felde said. She said there been no evidence so far that the stolen
information has been used for identify theft. Scam artists often use
the data to borrow money by posing as someone else.

The UC Berkeley theft follows several other high profile instances in
which businesses and colleges have lost control of personal
information that they kept in computer databases.

Recent breaches have occurred at ChoicePoint Inc., a consumer data
firm duped into distributing personal information about 145,000
people; Lexis-Nexis, where computer hackers obtained access to the
personal information of 32,000 people; and Chico State University,
where a computer hacking job exposed 59,000 people to potential
identity theft.


URL:
    http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/n/a/2005/03/28/financial/f151143S80.DTL


     Sometimes I wonder whether the world is being run by smart people
     who are putting us on or by imbeciles who really mean it.
                                                  --Mark Twain

   --- End of Forwarded Message

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

Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 01:17:36 -0500
From: Marcus Didius Falco <falco_marcus_didius@yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: MetLife Plans Free ID Theft Aid for Clients


Quite likely most other insurance companies will match this within a
year.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A5805-2005Mar27.html

washingtonpost.com
MetLife Plans Free ID Theft Aid for Clients

By Eileen Alt Powell
Associated Press

NEW YORK, March 27 -- MetLife Inc., one of the nation's largest
insurers, is rolling out a new program this week to provide free help
in resolving cases of identity theft for all of its homeowner
insurance policyholders.

Noel Edsall, director of MetLife Auto & Home product development, said
the ID theft resolution service would be launched first in New York
and Florida, then expand nationwide.

While several insurance companies sell ID theft coverage, mainly to
reimburse consumers for their costs in dealing with misuse of credit
cards or other accounts, MetLife would be the first that works with
consumers to resolve their problems at no cost.

The program, which will be available to the nearly 1 million MetLife
homeowners and renters policyholders, comes at a time of heightened
concern over ID theft. In recent weeks, several data collection
companies have disclosed that thousands of their records were tapped
by thieves. ID theft tops the list of frauds reported to the Federal
Trade Commission, which coordinates federal fraud prevention efforts.

Edsall said that the program will help consumers with identity theft,
which can involve a fraudster taking over someone's identity and
opening new accounts or buying cars, as well as account takeovers,
which often involves the theft of a credit card.

Matt Cullina, manager of the MetLife team that developed the new
service, said that MetLife policyholders who are victimized by ID
thieves will be urged to call the MetLife call center listed on their
policies. From there they will be directed to specialists at Identity
Theft 911 LLC of Scottsdale, Ariz., which provides ID theft resolution
services.

Sheryl Cox Christenson, the company's chief executive, said Identity
Theft 911 "serves as an advocate," providing services that include
preparing affidavits, contacting police and notifying credit bureaus
on a consumer's behalf.

Several major banks, including Citigroup Inc. and Washington Mutual
Inc., offer free identity theft services for customers, but they
generally focus on the most onerous cases. There are also a number of
nonprofit groups that provide advice to ID theft victims, including
the Identity Theft Resource Center in San Diego, which operates the
site www.idtheftcenter.org.

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: MoGold <mogold@gmail.com>
Subject: Internet Connectivity Assistance for Italy
Date: 29 Mar 2005 13:51:52 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


Hello All,

I am trying to assist my local Junior College's Semester Abroad
program.  They will be staying in a hotel in Orvieto, Italy.  The
proprietor is a 70+ year old man who knows very little about
computers, but I am told a "broadband" line was installed in the hotel
this year.

I also know that any technology installed came from Perugia, the
nearest large city.  Since the hotel is VERY old, running cables is
out of the question, so I plan on creating a wireless setup.

Any insight anyone can give me on Italian ISP's, protocols (PPP,
PPPoE,etc) network configutation, or anything else would be greatly
appreciated.


=============================================
Mona Goldstein, A+, MCSE NT4, MCSE W2K
Systems Design Engineer
Services Infrastructure & Deployment
Verizon Architecture and eServices
=============================================

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

Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 15:03:25 -0600
From: John Schmerold <john@katy.com>
Subject: Fax Station ID


Anyone know if it's a law or regulation that requires faxes to include
station identification at top of every page sent ?

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

From: zftcg@yahoo.com
Subject: Verizon, Voicewing and Portability
Date: 29 Mar 2005 14:29:30 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


Please tell me if this makes sense:

I live in Manhattan and currently have Verizon local and DSL. I would
like to switch my local service to VoiceWing 500 (same as regular
VoiceWing with 500 minutes of outgoing calls/month, for $19.95). I
just got off the phone with multiple Verizon customer service people;
they all told me varying things, but the basic upshot is that because
I'm a DSL customer, I can't get VoiceWing on the same line, since DSL
requires a regular land line. That seems to me to be completely
backwards -- after all, wouldn't the most obvious customers for
VoiceWing be current DSL customers? Yet they're telling me those are
the exact people who are ineligible for the service (unless I'm
willing to sign up for an entirely new phone line, which would be
completely pointless and cost me an additional $20/month). What's
more, while at least one person had told me this situation could
change in the near future, the last guy I spoke to said it was a
structural problem that could never be rectified.

Now, as I said, I got different answers from different people, and in
general, people seemed to be a little confused about how VoiceWing
works, most likely because it's still relatively new. Can anyone out
there shed any light on this riddle? Does anyone currently have both
VoiceWing and Verizon DSL, with no additional phone lines?

Thanks!

Zorro for the Common Good


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You will need to do the very same thing
as I did. You will need to, in this order, (1) install cable internet
to replace DSL; then once the cable internet is installed in order to
avoid any network downtime, (2) tell Verizon to get their DSL off of 
your line, ASAP, immediatly, etc. (3) Once the DSL has been removed,
_then and only then_ can you tell VoiceWing to port your existing number
(I assume you prefer to keep your number) to their service. In my
instance, it was SBC's DSL and the local telco I wished to use called
'Prairie Stream'). (4) Once VoiceWing ports your number to them, then 
Verizon will die off naturally on their own. To avoid being without
either internet for a few days (while waiting for cable to get 
installed) or without telco (while Verizon has a hissy fit and keeps
sending VoiceWing on an endless looping run-around), you will need to
do it in the order I specified above. In other words, it is _your_
problem if there is any duplication on your premises between DSL and
cable) for a few days. 

Oh, and be prepared for Verizon to suddenly get very busy and decide
'it may take two or three weeks to get the disconnect order written'
both on the DSL and also on the phone itself. You cannot, by Bell
System fiat, have _their_ DSL and _someone else's_ phone service. They
have chosen to take that gamble thinking that because they are *so*
special, and *so* precious, anyone who knows anything about anything
would realize Bell is the best deal around and want to stay with them
until forever ... 

You may want first of all (before you begin too much sass and
talk-back with Verizon) to find out all you can about VoiceWing. I've
never heard of the company, and assume they are like most CLECs 
offering residential service; that is, they take over your billing and
your service out of their cage at the Verizon central office, and
Verizon will continue to carry the last mile or whatever to your door
step. (At one point, I seriously entertained keeping Bell's DSL here
with Prairie Stream as the telco [same phone number, just LNP'd over
to them from SBC] until, IMO [and look, no /H/ in the middle there;
that's because I do not give 'humble' opinions] SBC got very arrogant
and rude, midst all their lies to me, etc and left me with the option,
'take us entirely, or not at all.' Calling their bluff, I said, "okay,
I will take none of you". They were shocked to hear that, of course,
and have pestered me ever since to return to the fold. At first, the
'return to us' offers were reasonable, but as time went on, they got
more and more outrageous; their latest 'please come back' offer to me
is unlimited service, all custom calling features, and long distance
for $2.95 (_two dollars, ninety five cents_) per month for one year. 
But you know, the way SBC lies about so much stuff, how can I trust
them on the $2.95 per month for a year deal, especially when along
with that offer was two pages of terms and conditions in very small
print that I did not bother reading. 

I expect your mailbox will soon be loaded with their premium offers
and cut rate prices on service starting soon after you ditch them
also, if you decide to go with VoiceWing, or Gage, or one of the other
CLECs licensed in your area.  And you _can_ use LNP to keep your
number as long as you get the DSL off your line, although Bell is fond
of telling the CLECs "customer does not qualify for transfer" (because
he has our DSL, although they do not say why 'not qualified' unless 
they are pressed for an answer). I hope this helps you a little, and
good luck as you break away from Bell, as more and more people are
doing.   PAT]

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

From: wondering <annulring@comcast.net>
Subject: LNP Transfer From McLeodUSA to Vonage
Date: 29 Mar 2005 14:40:43 -0800


I am wondering is anyone has successfully ported their home number out of
McLeodUSA to Vonage.  I have been trying for eight months.  I am
beginning to believe it is impossible.

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

From: T. Sean Weintz <strap@hanh-ct.org>
Subject: Re: Cell Phone Jammer For Sale MONIX MGB-1S
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 14:16:25 -0500
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com


TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to Fred Atkinson:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Other than the fact that she apparently
> was not able to hook herself up to the network, I wonder how the 
> school would know what was or wasn't there. In other words, if she now
> were to open the computer and install the original card in there
> instead, how would the school ever find out, or do they search dorm
> rooms looking for contraband hardware, etc?   PAT]

Since the beginning octects of the MAC address of an ethernet card 
identify who the manufacturer of the card is, and all ethernet switches 
maintain a database of what mac addresses are plugged in to what ports; 
if one is using manages switches it is a trivial task to locate where 
network cards of a particular brand are plugged into the network.

It's also quite easy on some switches to specify a range of MAC 
addresses that are allowed to use particular ports. So you can set that 
range to be only cards whose MAC address identify them as being made by 
3com, and lock out everything else.

Of course most network card drivers will allow you to overide the 
factory coded mac address on your card, which could be used by an 
ethernet saavy personm to overide the security methods I describe
above ...

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

From: Tony P. <kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net>
Subject: Re: Cell Phone Jammer For Sale MONIX MGB-1S
Organization: ATCC
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 12:29:13 -0500


In article <telecom24.134.7@telecom-digest.org>, fatkinson@mishmash.com 
says:

>> But cell phones are a curse to some degree. A local University that
>> shall remain nameless instituted a no cell phone policy for students.
>> That quickly went downhill when professors cell phones would ring during
>> class time, etc.

> That's nothing.  Trevecca Nazarene University in Nashville, Tennessee
> has an interesting policy to allow interconnect to the campus network.

> When my first niece went off to school, several family members gave me
> money to purchase the parts needed for me to put a nice computer
> together for her to take off to school with her.  In addition to a
> number of other pieces of hardware, I put a dial up modem and a NIC
> card in it.  It was a fairly common one (in fact my PC has the same
> model in it).

> When she got there, she called me and said that the folks at TNU said
> her NIC card was no good and they wanted to charge her ninety dollars to
> install a 3Com card in it.

> I didn't believe it was defective and told her not to pay them to
> install that card.  After a couple of days, she called me again and
> told me that they wouldn't hook her up until a 3Com card was
> installed.

> I called the I.T. department at TNU and asked what was going on.  I
> was told that the school policy said that only 3Com NIC cards could be
> used to connect to the campus network.  Needless to say I was a little
> upset that they were going to make me drop another ninety dollars into
> that computer.

> But, I wasn't going to let them get the money.  I called around and
> found a deal on a 3Com card and had them ship it to her at school.
> Fortunately, she had a classmate that was a Saturday afternoon PC
> tech.  He installed it for her and got her connected to the network.

> I spoke to the dean at the school where I was taking computer
> networking classes.  He told me that while this was completely
> unorthodox, that TNU was far from being the only school doing
> something so ridiculous.  His own daughter went to a school that
> required a specific brand (and I don't remember what he said it was
> except that it wasn't a 3Com card).  She had to fork out fifty dollars
> for the card and sold it to another student when she graduated.
> 
> I wish someone in a position to do so would blow the whistle on this
> practice of soaking the students for the money for these cards.  It's
> unethical at best.

> Fred

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Other than the fact that she apparently
> was not able to hook herself up to the network, I wonder how the 
> school would know what was or wasn't there. In other words, if she now
> were to open the computer and install the original card in there
> instead, how would the school ever find out, or do they search dorm
> rooms looking for contraband hardware, etc?   PAT]

MAC addresses contain a manufacturers code that takes up the first
couple of bytes. It would be fairly trivial to set a router up to
refuse any MAC not containing said bytes. But then, it would be just
as trivial to reprogram a MAC on a NIC to look like a 3Com even though
it's a $10 D-Link.

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

Subject: Re: Cell Phone Jammer For Sale MONIX MGB-1S
From: dkrause@ratcage.com (Doug Krause)
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 07:49:04 GMT


In article <telecom24.134.7@telecom-digest.org>,
TELECOM Digest Editor responded to Fred Atkinson <fatkinson@mishmash.com>:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Other than the fact that she apparently
> was not able to hook herself up to the network, I wonder how the 
> school would know what was or wasn't there. In other words, if she now
> were to open the computer and install the original card in there
> instead, how would the school ever find out, or do they search dorm
> rooms looking for contraband hardware, etc?   PAT]

If they are being proactive, just check the MAC address of all systems
on the network.

http://standards.ieee.org/regauth/oui/index.shtml

Or if she ever has connection issues and opens a trouble ticket, the
person responding to it would find the non-approved card.


Doug Krause
dijon@ratcage.com

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

From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi)
Subject: Re: Cell Phone Jammer For Sale MONIX MGB-1S
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 14:02:30 -0000
Organization: Widgets, Inc.


In article <telecom24.134.7@telecom-digest.org>, TELECOM Digest
Editor noted:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Other than the fact that she apparently
> was not able to hook herself up to the network, I wonder how the 
> school would know what was or wasn't there. In other words, if she now
> were to open the computer and install the original card in there
> instead, how would the school ever find out, or do they search dorm
> rooms looking for contraband hardware, etc?   PAT]

Ignorance in action.  Specific ranges of Ethernet addresses are
assigned to given manufacturers.  Which manufacturer "owns" which
range is _public_data_.

Any device residing on the same LAN segment that can "see" Ethernet
packets from a given machine can tell which brand of NIC is in that
box.

All Ethernet cards on a LAN are required to have a _unique_ Ethernet
address.  So, manufacturers "build in" the uniqueness.

On some systems, with some cards, you can over-ride the built-in
Ethernet address, and tell it to use an Ethernet address you specify.
This is not an option under MS-Windows.

A _lot_ of schools require you to 'register' your computer (actually
the NIC) with the institution before you can use it on the school
network.  And even then it will work *only* from your dorm room.  The
network infrastructure is built around 'secure' switches, and only
accepts packets from a "known" Ethernet address on any given port.

This does wonders for being able to track down the perpetrator when,
for example, one student tries hacking other student machines.

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

From: Fred Atkinson <fatkinson@mishmash.com>
Subject: Re: Cell Phone Jammer For Sale MONIX MGB-1S
Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 21:18:59 -0500


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Other than the fact that she apparently
> was not able to hook herself up to the network, I wonder how the
> school would know what was or wasn't there. In other words, if she now
> were to open the computer and install the original card in there
> instead, how would the school ever find out, or do they search dorm
> rooms looking for contraband hardware, etc?   PAT]

Because they don't make the jack in her dorm room hot until they had
verified it.  That's how.

Truthfully, though, it wouldn't be hard to set up access lists to
reject all MAC addresses except those with OUIs that reflect 3Com.

Fred

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

Date: 29 Mar 2005 15:18:25 -0000
From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
Subject: Re: Lingo Referral
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


> I like Lingo too, and I'm equally happy to give referrals.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: John, how does their referral plan
> work? Is it anything like Vonage?  I am _still_ living off those
> 'next month free' coupons I accumulated.   PAT]

It's a normal affiliate deal run through Linkshare which runs hundreds
of other affilate programs.  If someone signs up via your affiliate
link, they pay you $25, paid monthly by check.  I haven't gotten any
Lingo signups yet, but I get lots of small checks from Linkshare's
other programs via my site at http://airinfo.aero.


R's,

John

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

From: Joseph <JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Time for the Recording Industry to Face the Music
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 06:09:36 -0800
Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com


On 28 Mar 2005 10:00:52 -0800, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:

> People have a Constitutional right (and a moral one too) to be
> compensated for their creative efforts.  Like it or not, the recording
> industry provides a conduit for artists to distribute their works to a
> widespread general public and be compensated accordingly.

The only problem with that is that the artists *aren't* generally
accorded much compensation for their work.  The majority of the monies
taken in for recordings, video etc. does not go to artists but rather
goes to the recording companies, distributors and others.  Of that $18
you're paying for that CD the artists are getting literally *pennies*
of that pie.  You'll pardon me if I don't shed crocodile tears for the
"poor old" recording industry.  Rather than to try and embrace the new
technology they (as they've done before) fight it tooth and nail.
They believe going on as they have for the last 100 years is the way
to go.  Hell no we won't go is their mantra when called to get with
the times and adjust their product model.  They'd rather go after
people for their (recording companies) perceived loss of revenue.
Perhaps if the recording companies weren't so greedy charging $18 for
a disc of music and perhaps if the recording companies shared a bigger
portion of profits from CDs people would see it differently.

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

From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock)
Subject: Re: Some Concerned About Privacy Implications of E-ZPass System
Date: 28 Mar 2005 13:46:23 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


Isaiah Beard wrote:

> Fast forward to yesterday.  Assurances notwithstanding, I received a
> toll violation notice from the NJ Turnpike authority.

Very disturbing.  These kinds of problems were supposed to be fixed on
the NJ Tpk.

There have been reports of database abuse by the Phila Parking
Authority.  Seems that people who've never been to Phila are receiving
legal dunning letters for unpaid parking tickets issued years ago (per
newspaper reports).  It appears the PPA is using a commercial database
to look up names of violators to track them down and issuing letters,
even if that person isn't the one who originally got the ticket.

In other words, a car with a license ABC123 gets a ticket.  But a
notice sent to the registered address is returned.  So they use the
database to try to find the name somewhere else.  The problem is that
they're getting people in different cities with the same name.

Big brother is watching -- no -- going after you.

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That was also a big stink in Chicago 
at one point, maybe still is. People who have never been to Chicago
in their life get parking tickets _based on their license plates_
sent from City of Chicago with warrants issued for their arrest unless
they drop everything here and now and drive all the way to Chicago to
defend themselves, or preferably to the city's point of view, just
pay up and shut up. PAT]

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

From: A User <serge-newnew2715@mailblocks.com>
Subject: Re: Some Concerned About Privacy Implications of E-ZPass System
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 07:54:33 +1000


On Sun, 27 Mar 2005 14:12:14 -0500, Stuart Barkley <stuartb@4gh.net>
wrote:

> The article and discussion here both miss what I consider a more
> important issue with the EZ-pass system:

> There is no way to know who else is tracking the EZ-pass transponders.

> The transponder should have a audio and/or visual indicator whenever
> it is read.  How else can you know that Big Brother is only reading
> the transponder for its intended use and instead isn't reading it in
> other locations for other purposes.

> There should also be an off switch on the unit although I can see that
> causing more problems with people forgetting to turn it back on before
> traveling through EZ-pass lanes.

> I've never been lost; I was once bewildered for three days, but never
> lost!  -- Daniel Boone

Big brother doesn't need your transponder, they just use off the shelf
OCR licence plate readers ...

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

Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 21:12:35 -0500
From: Chris Farrar <cfarrar1307@rogers.com>
Subject: Re: Some Concerned About Privacy Implications of E-ZPass System

> Stuart Barkley wrote:

>> other purposes.
>> There should also be an off switch on the unit although I can see that
>> causing more problems with people forgetting to turn it back on before
>> traveling through EZ-pass lanes.

> There actually is a rather low-tech measure that works very well:
> there's a plastic container bag that comes with every ez-pass
> transponder, and is coated with RF-blocking material.  It looks a lot
> like very sturdy, semi-trasparent foil.  The EZ-pass instruction
> booklets tell users that if they are concerned for any reason that
> their transponder might be read in an instance where they don't want
> it to be, they can remove the transponder from its windshield mount
> and place it in the bag, ensuring that the transponder will not be
> read.

> Not as convenient as an off switch, but it does solve the problem of
> people not being aware of the unit being "off" when they in fact want
> it "on."  If it's in the bag, it's off.  If it's on the windshield,
> then it's on.

Of course, this doesn't work so well for those of us who have cars
with metallic windshields, and have to use the licence plate mounted
EZPass.  Its a little time consuming to mount and unmount it all the
time.

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

From: DevilsPGD <ihatespam@crazyhat.net>
Subject: Re: What Happened To Channel 1
Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 19:17:50 -0700
Organization: Disorganized


In message <telecom24.134.12@telecom-digest.org> Dan Lanciani
<ddl@danlan.com> wrote:

> Except that (according to the original proposal) it won't run in the
> clear anywhere you can "tap" without relatively sophisticated die
> probing equipment.  Are you aware of some change in the approach or
> are you just assuming that the manufacturers will screw up the
> implementation?  If the latter, remember that the original proposal
> also incorporates key revocation for compromised device families.

Sure, but imagine the legal backlash if suddenly Sony's TVs no longer
work.

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

Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 20:28:16 -0500
From: Marcus Didius Falco <falco_marcus_didius@yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: Re: New Long Range Cordless Phones?


> First poster:

>>>> I'm living in a rural Alaskan town and traditional cell service is
>>>> spotty to none, even with an old bag phone and roof antenna so I was
>>>> thinking that this could be an interesting approach to local mobile
>>>> phone service.

> Sorry, if it uses frequencies illegal for use in the US, its use is
> illegal. Indiscriminate use of the "230-450MHz" band described for
> that device elsewhere:
> http://www2.dslreports.com/forum/remark,12419431~mode=flat~days=9999~start
> could trash a lot of navigation devices.  How well received would you
> be if you trashed a nav beacon, in AK where bush pilots are a
> necesssity?

> I would be *very* specific with anyone selling such a device that you
> want to know what frequencies *specifically* are used, and have them
> show you in the FCC regs how they are exempt. Ask them for the 'FCC ID'
> number for the equipment.  Then, check with the FCC field office, or
> confirm at the FCC website:
> https://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/oet/cf/eas/reports/GenericSearch.cfm

An old bag-type AMPS phone (analog cellular) is legal for another few
years. These have a power of 5 Watts, IIRC, and a nominal range of
about 25 or 30 miles. You can get upgraded antennae for them from
Wilson (Sorry, no URL, and there are two companies named Wilson: you
can check any truck stop).

The old mobile non-cellular phones are car-mount only, and are 
grandfathered in, but are being phased out.

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

From: LB@notmine.com
Subject: Last Laugh! was Re: Job Opportunity
Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 21:27:21 -0500
Organization: Optimum Online


TELECOM Digest Editor responded to a message sent by Mayra TABOR:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Readers, perhaps you can tell me if
> this is a _legitimate_ employment opportunity or just another scam
> intended to get you to do a quick shuffle of money outbound before
> the excrement hits the propeller blades?

> In my limited examination of this company I note a few things:
> (1) They are looking for licensees to help them in their
> 'shipping and freight forwarding' business.
> (2) They seem quite eager to find people with a USA bank account; in
> fact a question on their online employment application asks about
> your USA bank routing number.
> (3) Their 'home office' (of which they show lots of pictures of happy
> industrious employees) is in St. Petersburg, _Russian Federation_. I
> do not intend to besmirch their character and accuse them of being a
> bunch of crooks, however I do recall reading somewhere of two Russian
> 'hackers' who were from St. Petersburg, Russia who the United States
> FBI wanted very badly but could not get them extradited.

> Anyway, I pass this along in the event any one or more of you feel
> like applying for the job, and are quick witted enough to hang onto
> your purse (and only provide accurate ABA routing numbers, etc) in the
> event you absolutely must. Here is the message I got a few days ago,
> and you can check out the corresponding web page. PAT]

>                 ===========================

> Hi,

> Would you like to earn some extra money working from home? We offer
> you a great opportunity!

> Our company Ship & Pay International is looking for reliable and
> trustworthy people to be our representatives in your country!

> This is not a sales gimmick requiring you to pay setup fees or sign up
> to a mailing list. You will need no money and no special skills to
> start. Anyone can work with us!

> If you are interested, don't hesitate to visit our website:

> http://www.shipandpay.com/jobs.html

> Requirements:

> 1. A computer with access to the Internet, e-mail
> 2. 3-5 hours free during the week (mainly in the non-business hours)
> 3. Check your e-mail several times a day (each hour is welcome)
> 4. Be able to repeatedly lift 5-20 pound boxes.
> 5. Reply to e-mails immediately
> 6. We don't work with persons under 21
> 7. Bank account to receive payments
> 8. Account in: PayPal, E-gold (if possible)
> 9. Be able to answer phone calls
> 10. Be responsible, hard working and communicable

> If you would like to join our team please visit
> http://www.shipandpay.com/jobs.html and fill in the online application
> form.

> Thank you.

> Best regards,

> Ship & Pay International

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Now, it all appears to be an honest
> company trying to get started with a worldwide presence. But something
> leaves me feeling a bit queasy, even with those nice pictures on their
> web site, and happy, smiling employees; the picture of their office
> building, etc. What is going on?    PAT]

If it smells even mildly bad avoid it.  Trying to pet a skunk is always
high risk.

LB

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: And that, it seems, is the story of the
whole internet in the past few years; if it smells even a little, best
to avoid it. Very sad, really. I mean, there _are_ honest people in
Russia; just as there _are_ honest people in Nigeria. Can you imagine 
the hassles _honest_ netizens in Nigeria must have in trying to 
communicate with potential business associates in the United States?
Now, some people would probably say 'honest netizen in Nigeria' is an
oxymoron. Still others would probably say 'honest netizen' in and of
itself is an oxymoron. Do you remember the infamous cartoon several
years ago -- long, long before any of the nonsense in recent years was
even dreamed of -- called "Honesty on the Internet"? I think I will 
get it and put it on our web page to give people a laugh.   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 #136
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Mar 30 16:29:17 2005
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j2ULTHG17741;
	Wed, 30 Mar 2005 16:29:17 -0500 (EST)
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 16:29:17 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200503302129.j2ULTHG17741@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 #137

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 30 Mar 2005 16:30:00 EST    Volume 24 : Issue 137

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Secret Service DNA - "Distributed Networking Attack" (Monty Solomon)
    Re: Fax Station ID (Gary Breuckman)
    Re: Fax Station ID (Steve Sobol)
    Re: Fax Station ID (Dave Garland)
    Re: Fax Station ID (Robert Bonomi)
    Re: Fax Station ID (NOTvalid@surplus4actors.INFO)
    Re: Fax Station ID (jmeissen@aracnet.com)
    Arguments in 'Brand X' Case (Daily Lead from USTA)
    Re: Verizon, VoiceWing and Portability (Zorro)
    Re: FCC: Telcos do not Have to Sell DSL as Stand Alone (Lisa Hancock)
    Re: More 'Tweens' Going Mobile - Health Risks (Lisa Hancock) 
    Blackboards vrs. Whiteboards (Lisa Hancock)
    Re: Verizon, Voicewing and Portability (Robert Bonomi)
    Re: Verizon, Voicewing and Portability (John Levine)
    Re: Verizon, Voicewing and Portability (jmeissen@aracnet.com)
    Re: LNP Transfer From McLeodUSA to Vonage (Steve Sobol)
    Re: Time for the Recording Industry to Face the Music (John Smith)
    Re: Time for the Recording Industry to Face the Music (Lisa Hancock)
    Re: Last Laugh! was Re: Job Opportunity (NOTvalid@surplus4actors.INFO)
    Re: Horrible Voice Quality on skypeout (Koos van den Hout)
    Re: GSM-900 (Jason)
    Re: Science and Society: Anatomy of a Techno-Myth (Lisa Hancock)
    Re: Last Laugh! was Re: Job Opportunity (NOTvalid@surplus4actors.INFO)

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, 30 Mar 2005 09:07:19 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Secret Service DNA - "Distributed Networking Attack"


DNA Key to Decoding Human Factor
Secret Service's Distributed Computing Project Aimed at Decoding 
Encrypted Evidence

By Brian Krebs
washingtonpost.com Staff Writer

For law enforcement officials charged with busting sophisticated
financial crime and hacker rings, making arrests and seizing computers
used in the criminal activity is often the easy part.

More difficult can be making the case in court, where getting a
conviction often hinges on whether investigators can glean evidence
off of the seized computer equipment and connect that information to
specific crimes.

The wide availability of powerful encryption software has made
evidence gathering a significant challenge for investigators.
Criminals can use the software to scramble evidence of their
activities so thoroughly that even the most powerful supercomputers in
the world would never be able to break into their codes. But the
U.S. Secret Service believes that combining computing power with
gumshoe detective skills can help crack criminals' encrypted data
caches.

Taking a cue from scientists searching for signs of extraterrestrial
life and mathematicians trying to identify very large prime numbers,
the agency best known for protecting presidents and other high
officials is tying together its employees' desktop computers in a
network designed to crack passwords that alleged criminals have used
to scramble evidence of their crimes -- everything from lists of
stolen credit card numbers and Social Security numbers to records of
bank transfers and e-mail communications with victims and accomplices.

To date, the Secret Service has linked 4,000 of its employees' 
computers into the "Distributed Networking Attack" program. The 
effort started nearly three years ago to battle a surge in the number 
of cases in which savvy computer criminals have used commercial or 
free encryption software to safeguard stolen financial information, 
according to DNA program manager Al Lewis.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A6098-2005Mar28.html

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

From: Gary Breuckman <puma@catbox.com>
Subject: Re: Fax Station ID
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 20:55:03 -0600
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com
Reply-To: puma@catbox.com


John Schmerold wrote:

> Anyone know if it's a law or regulation that requires faxes to include
> station identification at top of every page sent ?

It's part of 47 U.S.C. 227. Put that in Google and you'll find lots of
references.  That section also covers unsolicited calls made by
recording systems, etc.

-- Gary Breuckman

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

From: Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net>
Subject: Re: Fax Station ID
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 20:19:40 -0800
Organization: Glorb Internet Services, http://www.glorb.com


John Schmerold wrote:

> Anyone know if it's a law or regulation that requires faxes to include
> station identification at top of every page sent ?

I believe it's part of the TCPA, which would make it a law. (47 USC
227 IIRC, someone correct me if I'm wrong about this rule being part
of the TCPA.)

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: Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com>
Subject: Re: Fax Station ID
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 23:43:35 -0600
Organization: Wizard Information


It was a dark and stormy night when John Schmerold <john@katy.com>
wrote:

> Anyone know if it's a law or regulation that requires faxes to include
> station identification at top of every page sent ?

I haven't tracked down the original rule, but according to a law
firm's website at http://tinyurl.com/6l4h7 (the very first hit from
googling on "fax number header") in the US the FCC:

rules ... require every fax (not just unsolicited advertisements) to
identify in the top or bottom margin on each page or on the first
page the date and time it is sent, the sender's identity (the
originator of the fax, not the name of the broadcast fax service), and
the fax number of the machine sending the transmission or the
telephone number of the sender.  If a broadcast fax service (which
likely includes an outside marketing firm retained for such purposes)
is used and the fax broadcaster is responsible for the content of the
fax or for supplying the fax numbers to which the faxes are sent, then
the fax broadcaster's name also must be identified in the header.

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

From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi)
Subject: Re: Fax Station ID
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 11:40:25 -0000
Organization: Widgets, Inc.


In article <telecom24.136.4@telecom-digest.org>, John Schmerold
<john@katy.com> wrote:

> Anyone know if it's a law or regulation that requires faxes to include
> station identification at top of every page sent ?

United States Federal statute requires:

   1) sender ID on the top of every page
*or*
   1) sender ID on the _first_ page 

See <http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/47/227.html>   47 USC 227

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

From: NOTvalid@surplus4actors.INFO
Subject: Re: Fax Station ID
Date: 30 Mar 2005 07:11:46 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


John Schmerold wrote:

> Anyone know if it's a law or regulation that requires faxes to include
> station identification at top of every page sent ?

Yes ... but

Only if made after a certain year.

My 4800bps fax card from my XT which I still use is exempt.

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

From: jmeissen@aracnet.com
Subject: Re: Fax Station ID
Date: 30 Mar 2005 17:05:06 GMT
Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com


In article <telecom24.136.4@telecom-digest.org>, John Schmerold
<john@katy.com> wrote:

> Anyone know if it's a law or regulation that requires faxes to include
> station identification at top of every page sent ?

US Code Title 47 Chapter 5 Subchapter II Part I Section 227.d.2:

Telephone facsimile machines:

The Commission shall revise the regulations setting technical and
procedural standards for telephone facsimile machines to require that
any such machine which is manufactured after one year after December
20, 1991, clearly marks, in a margin at the top or bottom of each
transmitted page or on the first page of each transmission, the date
and time sent, an identification of the business, other entity, or
individual sending the message, and the telephone number of the
sending machine or of such business, other entity, or individual.


John Meissen                                     jmeissen@aracnet.com

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

Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 12:31:13 EST
From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA <usta@dailylead.com>
Subject: Arguments in Brand X Case Focus on Information vs. Telecom Rules


Telecom dailyLead from USTA
March 30, 2005
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=20451&l=2017006


TODAY'S HEADLINES

NEWS OF THE DAY
* Arguments in Brand X case focus on information vs. telecom rules
BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH
* Verizon wins MCI; Qwest may up ante
* Juniper buys Kagoor
* Cisco's acquisition of Airespace puts heat on rival gear makers
* Tellabs, Occam strike a deal
* Cablevision's Charles Dolan pledges $400M for Voom
USTA SPOTLIGHT 
* Tomorrow!  VoIP 101:  How to Rapidly Roll Out VoIP, 1:00 p.m. EST
EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES
* Extreme unveils new family of Gigabit Ethernet switches
REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE
* Supreme Court mulls impact on innovation in Grokster case

Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others.
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=20451&l=2017006

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

From: Zorro for the Common Good <zftcg@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Verizon, Voicewing and Portability
Date: 30 Mar 2005 11:25:14 -0800


Pat,

Thanks for the reply. VoiceWing is not a separate company, but rather
Verizon's own VOIP product. That's why it makes such little sense that
current Verizon DSL customers would be unable to sign up. Also, I just
re-upped with VDSL for another year in order to get the $30 rate, so
switching to a cable modem isn't an option.

ZftCG


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Ah yes, the cheaper rate if you agree
to go for one year. When SBC sensed I was getting unhappy and about to
toss them out, they tried that on me also. Re-up for one year on DSL,
get it for thirty dollars per month. When I reminded them that they
had earlier promised (and lied) about having a cheaper rate on DSL as
long as I also subscribed to Cingular Wireless [which I do] -- then
they later claimed that would not apply in my case and would not honor
the rate; and when I reminded them they had earlier also promised a
thirty dollar rate if I subscribed to a whole truckload of unwanted
and sometimes useless 'custom calling features' including
voicemail,[which at the time they said they would turn on, then a day
or two later a technician told me they could not do on this exchange]
and they later told me they had not promised any such thing; then you
have to forgive me if I did not want to take any more chances on
them. I am on a very fixed income and cannot afford something as
expensive as Southwestern Bell DSL when a bunch of hollow, bogus lies
come as part of the package. Maybe you will have better luck getting
Verizon to honor a promise of a thirty dollar rate. Watch and see how
the bill slowly starts to creep up with invoices of a dozen or more
pages written in hierogliphics arrives. You call them each month to
complain about the increase and what they promised you in the re-up,
they say 'so sorry, our mistake we will re-rate you next month and
pro-rate the credit you have due.' Then the next month your bill 
arrives, two or three times as many hierogliphics as the month before
and if you wade through all the re-rates and pro-rates you see they
actually did the same thing again. For that, you get to wait in their
voicemail hell 'as a valued customer' for 30-45 minutes each time.  

Anyway, if you did not actually _sign anything_ as part of the re-up,
don't worry about it. Just tell them, as I did, "well, I lied about
it, I never promised, etc." They'll never be able to get their act
together well enough to produce any paperwork anyway. I'd suggest that
unless there is paperwork to the contrary, you just back out of the
deal and go with cable and some CLEC. It will work out cheaper for 
you in the long run. My cable internet, Prairie Stream telephone line
 -and- my VOIP phone line turn out to be less each month than SBC 
was costing.  PAT]

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

From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Subject: Re: FCC: Phone Companies Don't Have to Sell DSL as a Stand-Alone
Date: 30 Mar 2005 10:15:10 -0800


TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to Jack Decker:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have said before that the best
> thing to do, IMO, is go with cable internet _whenever possible_ and
> try to avoid Bell and its DSL completely, for just these same
> reasons. Bell has a long, sordid history of being very tricky and
> difficult to deal with.  If cable internet is not available, then of
> course take Bell service and its DSL, but watch for any possible
> opportunity -- such as cable being installed or expanded in your area
> to break away to a competitive CLEC and cable internet, such as I
> have done, now two years ago with Prairie Stream and Cable One.  PAT]

But many cable broadband carriers won't give you that unless you buy
their TV service as well (which is a lot more expensive than a basic
POTS wireline.)

Seems to me there's a double standard when it comes to expectations
from the telephone companies vs. the cable companies.  My own
cable company keeps jacking up its rates -- a few years ago I paid
$35/month and now pay $55.  They added some Spanish language channels
which is curious since very few Spanish speaking people live in this
particular service territory.

As soon as Bell finishes their high speed fibre work I plan to
switch to them for TV as well.

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: True, some won't see it stand alone,
but many will, and anyway, people may want television as well.  PAT]

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

From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Subject: Re: More 'Tweens' Going Mobile; Long-Term Health Risks Unclear
Date: 30 Mar 2005 10:21:00 -0800


Tony P. wrote:

> That is what we get for fleeing the urban core cities. The costs of that
> are coming back in spades.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There are lots of things wrong with the
> urban core, inner city. I am sorry you feel that those of us who
> wanted something better in life did what you call 'fleeing'. I know
> you would _never_ get me back to Chicago for example.  PAT]

When once-nice city neighborhoods decayed and the people were forced
to leave their homes, nobody (govt, politicians) cared and did
anything.  Indeed, those people themselves got blamed for "fleeing"
even though their wants -- decent schools, safe streets, no vandalism
 -- were perfectly acceptable and met elsewhere.

If anyone challenged the anti-social behavior of the new people moving
into the neighborhoods and causing trouble, they were accused of being
a snob or worse (esp if there were ethnic differences).

Yet when the opposite happens -- when affluent people move back into
the city and fix up a decayed neighborhood -- rebuilding rotted
buildings, chasing drug dealers away, opening new stoers in empty
shells -- everyone worries about the people who previously lived there
(the ones who failed to keep up the neighborhood).  Seems to me the
ones already there are benefiting -- at no cost to them -- of a nicer
living area.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, one thing I really appreciate
about living here in Independence is that this is a very integrated
community, which is how I would want it. We are not a rich community
(although there is a 'rich part of town' [north of Taylor Road near
the country club]) and there are areas which tend to have more
minority residents than others, but we all seem to get along okay.
PAT]

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

From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Subject: Blackboards vs. Whiteboards
Date: 30 Mar 2005 10:25:59 -0800


I heard my school district will modernize and replace the classic
"blackboard" (or greenboard) with modern 'whiteboards'.  I can't help
but wonder if this is a dumb idea.

AFAIK, blackboards last forever.  Lots of old schools still have their
original ones.  In contrast, whiteboards seem sensitve to nicks and
scrapes.

I believe black/greenboards cost less than whiteboards.

But most significantly is the chalk vs. marker.

Chalk is much cheaper than markers.  Markers always run out quickly.
Someone forgets and uses the wrong kind permanently staining the
whiteboard.

Lastly, markers have that weird chemical smell.

Seems to me there's nothing wrong with blackboards and nothing to be
gained by whiteboards.

Thoughts anyone?

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

From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi)
Subject: Re: Verizon, Voicewing and Portability
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 13:06:27 -0000
Organization: Widgets, Inc.


In article <telecom24.136.5@telecom-digest.org>,  <zftcg@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Please tell me if this makes sense:

> I live in Manhattan and currently have Verizon local and DSL. I would
> like to switch my local service to VoiceWing 500 (same as regular
> VoiceWing with 500 minutes of outgoing calls/month, for $19.95). I
> just got off the phone with multiple Verizon customer service people;
> they all told me varying things, but the basic upshot is that because
> I'm a DSL customer, I can't get VoiceWing on the same line, since DSL
> requires a regular land line. That seems to me to be completely
> backwards -- after all, wouldn't the most obvious customers for
> VoiceWing be current DSL customers? Yet they're telling me those are
> the exact people who are ineligible for the service (unless I'm
> willing to sign up for an entirely new phone line, which would be
> completely pointless and cost me an additional $20/month). What's
> more, while at least one person had told me this situation could
> change in the near future, the last guy I spoke to said it was a
> structural problem that could never be rectified.

> Now, as I said, I got different answers from different people, and in
> general, people seemed to be a little confused about how VoiceWing
> works, most likely because it's still relatively new. Can anyone out
> there shed any light on this riddle? Does anyone currently have both
> VoiceWing and Verizon DSL, with no additional phone lines?

The current regulatory environment *requires* that the ILEC (Verizon,
in your case) transfer the _exclusive) use of that wire-pair to the 
CLEC, when you go with a CLEC as the dial-tone provider.

IF the _CLEC_ does not offer line-shared DSL -- either their own
offering, or access for third-party providers -- you are SOL as far as
getting DSL on _that_ wire-pair.

In those situations where the CLEC does not offer line-shared DSL, you
simply have to get another wire-pair for your DSL service.  Covad and
MCI, at least, in your area, can do this.  It costs a little more
($5-10/mo) than line-sharing.

_AT_THIS_TIME_, Verizon does not have any 'non-line-shared' DSL
offering, They did, last year, announce their intention to offer
'naked' DSL -- DSL on it's own wire-pair, without voice service on it;
*BUT* the projected roll-out of the service (originally scheduled for
'early 2005') has been pushed back, and no firm availability date has
been set.

In theory, *IF* the CLEC offered the functionality, Verizon could
piggy- back their service on the CLEC-controlled wire-pair.  Verizon
_would_, in that situation, however, have to *pay* the CLEC for the
privilege of using the CLEC-controlled wire-pair to provide your DSL.
Methinks Verizon would be loathe to do so, _if_ it were technically
viable.

_Very__Few_ CLECs have the installed equipment to support shared-line
DSL.  Those that do, do not make it available for 3rd-party use --
rather they use it for _their_own_ shared-line offering.

Verizon apparently restricts their DSL offerings to situations where
_they_ "own" the wire-pair.  And, at this time, do =not= offer
"non-shared" line service.

Thus, _IF_ you change dial-tone providers, you *will* have to change
Internet access providers as well.  This is not necessarily a bad
thing.  Check out panix.com, and world.std.com, a couple of _good_
providers in your area.

*IF* you have a _reliable_ cable TV provider, they may offer Internet 
access, and could be worth checking out.  If, like many places, the cable
TV service is subject to frequent short-duration outages, you should take 
into consideration what effect similar outages will have on your Internet
use.

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: In the nearly two years since I decided
to ditch Southwestern Bell (for everything) and go with CableOne for
my high speed internet, I do not think there has been five minutes of
downtime. Well, there was one time I decided to move a television set
into my computer room so I could watch television while working on the
Digest, and in the process of hooking up a splitter to the cable line
and attaching a television/radio combination to the cable which (at
that point in my system) had just been the internet, I got a splitter
installed incorrectly. I had that same day installed a Cisco router
for the computers, and between the ill-advised television/radio on the
cable line in my computer room and the Cisco router, the Motorola SB-4220
Surfboard Cable Modem (supplied by CableOne) somehow lost track of what
it was doing. But the tech guy at CableOne very graciously got me back
on line in about 10 minutes once I decided to call them and ask for help.
Cable only rarely goes off line, I have found. PAT]

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

Date: 30 Mar 2005 05:52:18 -0000
From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
Subject: Re: Verizon, Voicewing and Portability
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


> they all told me varying things, but the basic upshot is that because
> I'm a DSL customer, I can't get VoiceWing on the same line, since DSL
> requires a regular land line.

Does it make sense? No.  Is it true? Unfortunately, yes.

Just this week the FCC ruled that it has jurisdiction over DSL, not
the states, and it affirmed its ill-considered finding that telcos do
not have to provide "naked" DSL.

I agree that you're probably better off with a cable modem.


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: And have you noticed, as I have, how 
cable internet is usually _much faster_ than DSL? Both downloads and
uploads go amazingly fast. And our local CableOne office gave me a
choice of either a 'full T-1' or 'half-speed' which is apparently a
smaller 'pipeline', but in either event, quite enough for most 
residential use. Anyway, our original correspondent should enjoy 
reading all the outrageous offers Verizon starts making to him once he
does a 'Terri Shivo' on them and pulls the plu.  PAT]

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

From: jmeissen@aracnet.com
Subject: Re: Verizon, Voicewing and Portability
Date: 30 Mar 2005 17:11:59 GMT
Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com


In article <telecom24.136.5@telecom-digest.org>, <zftcg@yahoo.com>
wrote:

> Please tell me if this makes sense:

> I live in Manhattan and currently have Verizon local and DSL. I would
> like to switch my local service to VoiceWing 500 (same as regular
> VoiceWing with 500 minutes of outgoing calls/month, for $19.95). I
> just got off the phone with multiple Verizon customer service people;
> they all told me varying things, but the basic upshot is that because
> I'm a DSL customer, I can't get VoiceWing on the same line, since DSL
> requires a regular land line. 

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You will need to do the very same thing
> as I did. You will need to, in this order, (1) install cable internet
> to replace DSL; then once the cable internet is installed in order to
> avoid any network downtime, (2) tell Verizon to get their DSL off of 
> your line, ASAP, immediatly, etc. (3) Once the DSL has been removed,
> _then and only then_ can you tell VoiceWing to port your existing number

VoiceWing is Verizon's VoIP offering. The ironic part of all of this
is that because of Verizon's policy of only providing DSL over a line
that also has regular Verizon phone service, if you live in a Verizon
DSL territory you can't get their VoIP service unless you ALSO have
regular Verizon phone service.

And thanks to the FCC decision this week, that's not about to change.


John

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The same thing is true in Southwestern
Bell territory. TerraWorld (our local ISP here in southeastern Kansas)
also brokers Bell's  DSL on their ISP lines, but Bell will not let
Duane Shaub (TerraWorld owner) install DSL on any of his Prairie
Stream lines. Makes no sense at all to me or Duane; he says it would
be a win-win situation for everyone, including Bell and Prairie
Stream's puny little slice of business they have taken away from Bell.
But Prairie Stream/TerraWorld's attitude on this is very pragmatic:
"Just go up the street to Mike Flood (local CableOne manager) and ask
him to turn on cable internet timed with when Bell disconnects their
DSL. Prairie Stream and CableOne -- two local business places -- start
making the money that Bell loses out on. What a terrible loss for
Bell!  hahahahahaha." But you see, Bell is so tied up with regulations
and rules -- mostly of their own making -- they cannot begin to think
out of the box, in a creative way. PAT]

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

From: Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net>
Subject: Re: LNP Transfer From McLeodUSA to Vonage
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 20:09:56 -0800
Organization: Glorb Internet Services, http://www.glorb.com


wondering wrote:

> I am wondering is anyone has successfully ported their home number out of
> McLeodUSA to Vonage.  I have been trying for eight months.  I am
> beginning to believe it is impossible.

I would have filed a complaint with my state PUC long ago. Vonage
isn't a regulated LEC, but McLeod most certainly is.

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: John Smith <user@example.net>
Subject: Re: Time for the Recording Industry to Face the Music
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 04:26:08 GMT


hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:

> People have a Constitutional right (and a moral one too) to be
> compensated for their creative efforts. 

Wow!  That's a wild interpretation of the Constitution.

You know, by writing this message, I have just made a creative effort.
Where the hell's my check!?

In fact, nobody has a Constitutional right to be compensated just
because they wrote a song.  If they did, there would be a lot fewer
out-of-work song writers in the world.

What the Constitution /really/ says is that Congress has the power "[t]o 
promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited 
times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective 
writings and discoveries".

Authors certainly don't have the right to get compensated; they only 
have the right to prevent OTHER people from publishing or using their 
work.  And they only have that right for a limited time, and only if 
Congress grants it to them, which it has the power to, but is under no 
Constitutional obligation to do.  In fact, Congress only has that power 
if it finds that doing so will promote the "useful arts".

That's a far cry from "everyone has a right to get paid".

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

From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Subject: Re: Time for the Recording Industry to Face the Music
Date: 30 Mar 2005 10:10:03 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


Joseph wrote:

> Perhaps if the recording companies weren't so greedy charging $18 for
> a disc of music and perhaps if the recording companies shared a bigger
> portion of profits from CDs people would see it differently.

Well then, what would be an appropriate royalty for musicians and
price for CDs?  Well-known recording artists seem to be living quite
well.  Stuff by the Beatles done 40 years ago is still selling new at
full price.  ['course then there's people like me who buy that stuff
used for 50c at yard sales.]

Actually, in thinking about it, the price of album when I was a kid is
lower today considering inflation.  (The cost of a 'single', if you
can even find one, is much more.)

While I can't help but suspect CD prices should be lower, in fairness
to the record companies, they have their unseen costs as well.  They
go to plenty of expense to select new talent and market and distribute
it.  Often times a CD doesn't sell and that expense is wasted.  They
also have to deal with tempermental artists, fickle consumer tastes,
normal distribution channel issues, investors, and basic business
issues.

There's a hopeful singer Analise van der Pol.  She did a pop song
"Over It" that got repeated play, but she was not signed for a record
deal.  I think she's very talented, but the mass market obviously
didn't think so.  So it goes.

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Not only are the Beatles still doing
okay on their work from forty years ago, but lots of the very old
classical music stuff -- from the 78 rpm era and the very early 33 rpm
era is now getting re-issued on CD and selling pretty well. I had some
ancient 78 rpm and 33 rpm 'long playing' records of Virgil Fox which
were lost in the tragic fire Bill Pfieffer endured in the mid
1990's. I just assumed I would never see them again. They dated back
to the early 1950's and late 1940's, when LP records were very heavy
in the old fashioned cardboard sleeves. Well, you can imagine my
surprise when I received a very small box of CDs the other day
including all those ancient recordings now on Compact Disk, re-issued,
including a newer DVD-style disk which had a bunch of other old things
of Fox on it, including a thirty minute 'Quick Time' movie file of Fox
from his 1964 visit to the Wanamaker store in Philadelphia and one of
his performances there. Lisa H, you said you have visited Lord and
Taylor in recent years. Would you like a copy of that DVD of Fox from
when it was Wanamaker's?  PAT]

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

From: Koos van den Hout <koos+newsposting@kzdoos.xs4all.nl>
Subject: Re: Horrible Voice Quality on Skypeout
Date: 30 Mar 2005 07:31:11 GMT
Organization: http://idefix.net/~koos/


John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> wrote:

> My new USB handset showed up so I tried a couple of Skypeout calls to
> regular phone numbers.  Ewww.  It sounded really awful.

> Is this the USB handset, Skypeout, or am I just unlucky?

Have you tried calling the 'echo test' number (search for 'echo test'
in Skype)? This eliminates the 'skypeout' and 'other phone networks' part
of the callpath.

And the USB handset is supposed to be a normal audio device to what
you are using on the computer (my guess). Have you tried recording a
bit of audio from the handset and playing it back?

I have just started playing with Skype and I noticed I need to find a
good microphone. Which may explain the sudden interest in microphones
at work ;)

Greetings,

Koos van den Hout

Koos van den Hout,           PGP keyid RSA/1024 0xCA845CB5 via keyservers
koos@kzdoos.xs4all.nl              or DSS/1024 0xF0D7C263              -?)
Fax +31-30-2817051          Visit the site about books with reviews    /\\
http://idefix.net/~koos/            http://www.virtualbookcase.com/   _\_V

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

From: Jason <cheanglong@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: GSM-900
Date: 30 Mar 2005 05:04:16 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


Thank you all for the explanation. It really helps.

But may I know for a trasnmitter and a receiver, will the trasnmitting
frequency be different than the receiving frequency?  I know there are
such cases. But why they make it this way?  

Kindly help.

Thank you,

Jason

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

From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Subject: Re: Science and Society: Anatomy of a Techno-Myth -- Economist.com
Date: 30 Mar 2005 09:57:11 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


Marcus Didius Falco wrote:

> http://economist.com/printedition/displayStory.cfm?Story_ID=3D3786384

> The debate over the safety of mobile phones has little to do with
> science.

I don't think the scare of using cell phones while pumping gas ever
got too far.  It'd be a very easy thing to check -- what were the
causes of gas station fires and technically could a cell phone cause
that?  As an all-electronic device, cell phones normally don't
generate sparks.

One does wonder why so many gas station attendants smoke a cigarette
while pumping.

Many of these 'scares' come from grandstanding politicians who want to
come off as being concerned about their constituents' well being.
Cheap, non-attackable, tasteful free publicity.

Another source is the news media, particularly local TV and cable TV
news.  My local TV stations regularly run teaser ads 'A NEW DANGER
ABOUT APPLES, FIND OUT AT EYEWITNESS AT 11!", or, 'WHAT YOUR DOCTOR
ISN'T TELLING YOU!" or 'IS YOUR CHILD AT RISK?'  and then they tell
you about something that's a 1 in 634 trillion chance to happen.  Many
news shows about have medical segments that are pure quackery.

You don't need to be a scientist to see through this crap, only some
common sense and some careful thinking is needed.

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

From: NOTvalid@surplus4actors.INFO
Subject: Re: Last Laugh! was Re: Job Opportunity
Date: 30 Mar 2005 07:35:28 -0800


Probably this is to tranship cameras, VCRs etc bought with stolen
credit cards.

When the sh*t hits the fan ...  all merchandise was shipped to you
 ... all payments were made to you.

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Please don't have ugly thoughts like
that!  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 #137
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Mar 31 20:50:02 2005
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j311o1e02726;
	Thu, 31 Mar 2005 20:50:02 -0500 (EST)
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 20:50:02 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200504010150.j311o1e02726@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 #138

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 31 Mar 2005 20:50:00 EST    Volume 24 : Issue 138

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    SBC Rejects Vonage Bid to Work On Joint 911 System for VoIP (J Decker)
    Vonage May Route 911 Call to Congress, FCC (Jack Decker)
    Blocking VoIP, Other Apps - Clearwire Blockade Finds Industry (J Decker)
    New Technology Brings Back Old Problem For 911 (Jack Decker)
    Supreme Court to Hear High-Speed Internet Case - Cable (Jack Decker)
    The Real Reason SBC Won't Work With Vonage on E-911 (Jack Decker)
    Sprint PCS Vision Added to Open Relay DataBase (Eric Friedebach)
    Cell Phone Compatibility (SmarSquid)
    Classic Telephone Call on PC (Gerhard Nowak)
    Microsoft Launches Downloadable TV For Handheld (Telecom dailyLead USTA)
    EU Needs More Time For Biometric Passports (Marcus Didius Falco)
    Microsoft Files 117 Suits That Target 'Phishing' (Lisa Minter)
    Every Ten Days (Choreboy)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

From: Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@withheld on request>
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 19:56:12 -0500
Subject: SBC Rejects Vonage Bid to Work on Joint 911 System For VoIP


http://www.redherring.com/Article.aspx?a=11637&hed=Vonage%E2%80%99s+emergency+call+to+SBC&sector=Capital&subsector=EconomyAndPolicy

Vonage's Emergency Call to SBC
March 30, 2005

SBC has turned down overtures from Vonage to work together on
developing 911-style emergency services for the VoIP company's
customers.

Vonage approached SBC with an offer 'to test and deploy a joint VoIP
E-911 service' in a February 18 letter from CEO Jeffrey Citron to SBC
CEO Edward Whitacre. "We cannot resolve fundamental issues associated
with providing a native E-911 service to VoIP users without your
assistance," he said.

Mr. Citron received a response on March 25 from Christopher Rice,
SBC's Executive Vice President of Network Planning & Engineering. "SBC
would welcome the opportunity to have its 911 expert meet with Vonage
to explain SBC's current 911 offerings," said Mr. Rice. "We cannot
agree, however, to participate in a separate, proprietary trial with
Vonage."

Mr. Rice also pointed to Telcordia as a carrier with which SBC has
been working to deliver 911 calls, and cited SBC's own 911 solution
available to VoIP providers, called the Switched IP Service.

SBC's decision didn't sit well with Mr. Citron. "I write to express my
concern  and disappointment  at SBC's  refusal to  work  directly with
Vonage," Mr. Citron wrote in  a March 28 letter. "Vonage renews its
request  to  jointly  test and  deploy  a  VoIP  solution as  soon  as
possible."

Full story at:
http://www.redherring.com/Article.aspx?a=11637&hed=Vonage%E2%80%99s+emergency+call+to+SBC&sector=Capital&subsector=EconomyAndPolicy

How to Distribute VoIP Throughout a Home:
http://michigantelephone.mi.org/distribute.html

If you live in Michigan, subscribe to the MI-Telecom group:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MI-Telecom/

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

From: Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@withheld on request>
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 22:40:03 -0500
Subject: Vonage May Route 911 Call to Congress, FCC


http://news.com.com/Vonage+may+route+911+call+to+Congress,+FCC/2100-7352_3-5647706.html

By Ben Charny
Staff Writer, CNET News.com

Internet phone provider Vonage may ask Congress and the Federal
Communications Commission to help it solve problems with SBC over
subscriber access to the 911 emergency call network.

SBC's decision not to work more closely with Vonage, made public
Wednesday, may delay efforts to fix the problem that keeps a majority
of U.S. Net phone providers from successfully routing 911 calls to the
right emergency calling center. Many of those 911 calls are instead
sent to non-emergency operators, with no guarantee the calls will
reach dispatch centers close enough to provide the most effective
help.

In mid-February, Vonage asked SBC, BellSouth, Qwest and Verizon, the
nation's largest local phone companies collectively known as the
Bells, to provide access to their 911 infrastructure within the next
60 days. At first, it appeared the logjam had been broken: SBC met
with Vonage to work out the logistics; Verizon, the largest Bell, also
committed to testing just such a system; and Qwest, the smallest of
the Bells, began considering its options.

While Verizon and BellSouth are now cooperating, SBC has refused to do
so, telling the FCC that Vonage and other Net phone providers need to
develop a standard way to route the 911 calls appropriately. What
Vonage was asking to test, SBC claimed, was a proprietary fix. "SBC
can not agree to engage in numerous individual tests with each and
every VoIP provider," it recently told the FCC, referring to the Net
phone technology also known as voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP). A
spokesman wasn't immediately available for comment.

Vonage spokeswoman Brooke Schulz said Vonage is considering asking
Congress and the FCC to demand SBC open up its 911 infrastructure to
Vonage and other Net phone operators. In rebuking SBC's proprietary
claim, Schulz said operators Packet8, AT&T's CallVantage and Verizon
Communications VoiceWing Net phone service all use the same 911
products, "so how can SBC call what we're doing proprietary?"

Full story at:
http://news.com.com/Vonage+may+route+911+call+to+Congress,+FCC/2100-7352_3-5647706.html

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

From: Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@withheld on request>
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 22:37:09 -0500
Subject: Blocking VoIP, Other Apps - Clearwire Blockade Finds Industry
Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com


Jack Decker notes: My comment follows the (very short) article ...

http://www.broadbandreports.com/shownews/61935

Blocking VoIP, Other Apps
Clearwire blockade finds industry support?

As mentioned last week
<http://www.broadbandreports.com/shownews/61784>, Clearwire faces
criticism for blocking a number "high bandwidth" applications,
including some Vonage customers; their TOS says they may "without
limitation, block and allow traffic types as we see fit at any time."

Light Reading

<http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?site=lightreading&doc_id=71020>
has a number of curious quotes from ISPs who support Clearwire, and
features U.S. Internet Industry Association president David McClure
*mocking* Vonage for complaining about service blockades.

[Jack Decker Comment: The basic issue here is much larger than VoIP -
the fact is that most people who pay a monthly fee for broadband
expect to be able to connect to "the Internet" and all the
applications available there.  For some strange reason a few ISP's
seem to have the attitude that it's not sufficient that their
customers are paying for an Internet connection, but instead they feel
that if they offer an add-on service such as VoIP, they should be able
to block competitive services.  Now, I want you to think about the
Internet services you use and the web pages you visit, because let me
tell you, if they make this stick, NOTHING on the Internet is
guaranteed accessible to you.

Let's suppose, for example, that you use AIM or ICQ, and all your
friends are on the same instant messaging service.  And let's say you
get your broadband from SBC, which as it happens, has a partnership
with Yahoo.  And, of course, Yahoo has its own instant messaging
service.  So let's suppose that suddenly one day you find that your
AIM or ICQ no longer works, because it can't connect to their server,
because SBC is blocking access to force you to use Yahoo's Instant
Messaging program.  So, okay, you e-mail your friends and ask them to
download the Yahoo program, only maybe some of them find it won't work
because they have cable broadband and their cable company has struck a
deal with Microsoft and they are only allowed to use the MSN instant
messaging program.  See the problem?

Or let's say your a politician, and you're running for re-election,
and you have put up a blog to communicate with voters.  Only your blog
site is blocked by some ISP's because they have an exclusive agreement
with a particular blog syndicator and your blog isn't part of that
syndicate.  Or, what the heck, maybe they just happen to like your
opponent, so on a whim the company president decided to block access
to everything you -- your web site, your blog site, whatever.  Maybe,
just to make it more legit, they asked your opponent to pay them $1,
for which he receives exclusive access from customers of that ISP.

My point is this: Up until now, Internet providers have pretty much
acted like common carriers -- in fact, they have evaded prosecution on
copyright infringement charges by explicitly stating that they were
common carriers and do not monitor the traffic that their customers
send back and forth.  Now, all of a sudden, a few of them seem to want
to go the other way.  Well if that be the case, and they no longer
claim to be common carriers but in fact are actively blocking certain
kinds of traffic, then watch the lawsuits begin for the traffic they
DON'T block -- and they have brought it all on themselves by their
greed.

For those of you who read this and are connected with an Internet
Service Provider, and if your ISP belongs to the "U.S. Internet
Industry Association", may I respectfully suggest that you think long
and hard about David McClure's comments in Light Reading, and whether
that is the type of organization you wish to belong to.  I say that
because in my opinion, with comments of the type he is making in this
article, he is inviting both government regulation and potential
lawsuits on Internet Service Providers such as yours.  The RIAA and
the MPAA and similar groups would probably be absolutely ecstatic if
you were to renounce your defacto common carrier status, because you
have much deeper pockets than most of the people using your ISP.
Remember that sometimes there are unintended consequences to actions,
and in my opinion Mr. McClure is not thinking clearly about the
possible consequences of his attitude.

End of commentary.]

Article + reader comments at:
http://www.broadbandreports.com/shownews/61935
Original article from Light Reading:
http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?site=lightreading&doc_id=71020

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

From: Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@withheld on request>
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 14:18:02 -0500
Subject: New Technology Brings Back Old Problem For 911


http://www.sooeveningnews.com/articles/2005/03/31/news/news582.txt

By SCOTT BRAND/The Evening News

EASTERN UPPER PENINSULA - New technology threatens to bring old
problems back to local residents as Voice Over Internet Phone service
(VOIP) may be unable to connect residents with their local central
dispatch systems in times of emergency.

"What we want to make people aware of is they are not able to access
911 like you can on a traditional phone," said Mackinac County 911
Coordinator Pam Matelski. "The dispatch center will not get your
information."

In Chippewa County, callers should not have difficulty reaching 911
while utilizing the new system.

"It's an issue and we are on top of it," said Chippewa County Central
Dispatch Director Tim McKee. "We have done what we need to do to
insure VOIP calls are directed to the appropriate administrative
line."

Unlike Luce and Mackinac counties, which go through the Regional 911
Dispatch Center in Negaunee, Chippewa County has the advantage of
housing its emergency and administrative offices inside the same
building. As a result, 911 calls over the VOIP boxes can be directed
to the county's administrative line and, from there, quickly channeled
on to the dispatchers in the next room.

To date, Vonage is the only company that appears to be offering this
new phone service in the Eastern Upper Peninsula. [COMMENT: Actually,
that is not true.  Viewed one way, any major VoIP provider can be used
from anywhere broadband service is available, including the Eastern
Upper Peninsula.  However, at the present time, only VoicePulse and
Broadvoice offer numbers in the Upper Peninsula - in contrast, if you
go to Vonage's site and do a search on the 906 area code, it returns
"No Area Codes Available" (which probably really means no ratecenters
are available).]

Full story at:
http://www.sooeveningnews.com/articles/2005/03/31/news/news582.txt

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

From: Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@withheld on request>
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 14:30:39 -0500
Subject: Supreme Court to Hear High-Speed Internet Case - Cable


http://www.baltimoresun.com/technology/bal-te.bz.brandx29mar29,1,166907.story?ctrack=1&cset=true

Supreme Court to hear high-speed Internet case
Cable companies may have to open networks
By William Patalon III
Sun Staff

In a debate that will shape the future of high-speed Internet service,
the Supreme Court will hear arguments today to determine whether cable
companies must open their networks to competitors.

The court could decide, in effect, how companies can compete to
deliver high-speed Internet access to a rapidly growing market and how
much choice consumers will have. The case pits the Federal
Communications Commission and National Cable & Telecommunications
Association, representing cable companies including Comcast Corp. and
Time Warner Inc., against Internet service providers such as EarthLink
Inc. and consumer groups.

At stake are billions of dollars expected from the emerging new
markets such as Internet-based phone service and digital entertainment
that high-speed service -- or broadband -- makes possible.

"What I think that this case will decide is just who's going to get
the money," said Eric Easton, a telecommunications expert and
associate professor of law at the University of Baltimore School of
Law.

Full story at:
http://www.baltimoresun.com/technology/bal-te.bz.brandx29mar29,1,166907.story?ctrack=1&cset=true

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

From: Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@withheld on request>
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 11:54:05 -0500
Subject: The Real Reason Why SBC Won't Work With Vonage on E-911


It's probably no secret that I don't have a lot of love for SBC,
mainly because it seems as though any time they have a choice between
doing something that would be beneficial to their customers or the
general public, or making a profit, they always seem to choose to make
a profit. This seems to be the way of most large corporations, I fear
 -- it seems that people in a pack will conspire to do evil that none
of the members of that group would think of doing individually.  In
this case it's a pretty clear cut distinction -- SBC would rather see
people's lives endangered than lift a finger to help what they
perceive as a competitor gain acess to 911.  The thing is, this
doesn't even surprise me anymore, in fact it's exactly the sort of
action I'd expect SBC to take.

http://blogs.zdnet.com/ip-telephony/index.php?p=324

3/31/2005

The Real Reason Why SBC Won't Work With Vonage on E-911
-Posted by Russell Shaw @ 5:49 am 

I am not surprised that SBC is declining to work with Vonage on a way
to allow Vonage subscribers access to the E-911 emergency network.

SBC's public reason for not being all that eager to do so is that
well, Vonage hasn't figured out all the tech stuff on their end and
we, SBC, don't have time to help them with it. Or, as the giant
ILEC recently told the FCC, "SBC can not agree to engage in numerous
individual tests with each and every VoIP provider."

But why then, are Verizon and BellSouth cooperating with Vonage on a
way to make 911 access work?

First of all,the "it would be a pain in the neck" issue doesn't hold
water with me. Since most VoIP service providers use similar
equipment, getting in the lab with Vonage could result in a template
for E-911 solutions that could be deployed by many, if not most, of
the 400 or so VoIP access companies in the U.S.

Full story at:
http://blogs.zdnet.com/ip-telephony/index.php?p=324

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Can't you just see SBC chomping at the
bit to get the old 'Bell System' out of cold storage and back into
service with all its old ways, albiet modernized somewhat?  Put this
thing down -- refusal to work on 911 with VOIP carriers as one more
thing to negotiate when the FCC is asked to approve the AT&T/SBC
merger.  PAT]

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

From: Eric Friedebach <friedebach@yahoo.com>
Subject: Sprint PCS Vision Added to Open Relay DataBase
Date: 30 Mar 2005 16:17:51 -0800


First thing Monday morning I started noticing a lot of email I was
sending to my customers was bouncing back. I use a PCMCIA card with
the PCS Vision service from Sprint <http://tinyurl.com/4ggj7>.

It seems that Sprint has been added to the Open Relay DataBase
<www.ordb.org> by mistake somehow. Sprint has no idea how this
happened, and they can't tell me when this will be resolved.

Has anyone here had this happen to their ISP? How long did it take to
get it resolved?


Eric Friedebach
/An Apollo Sandwich from Corky & Lenny's/

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Was it truly 'by mistake' or has Sprint
been entertaining some spammers?  PAT]

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

From: SmarSquid <smarsquid@hotmail.com>
Subject: Cell Phone Compatibility
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 08:26:26 -0700


I have a couple of inactive cell phones (Motorola 120e and Samsung
GS-x426) that are lying around because I have taken phone
upgrades. They are blanked out and ready for service, and I want to
sell them on E-Bay. Howver, prospective buyers will want to know what
cellular service providers the equipment will work with. How can I
learn this? The Motorola was originally used in the Verizon Wireless
network, and the Samsung was used in the AT&T Wireless network, but I
have a feeling other providers could work with these phones. More
network compatibility means a higher number of potential buyers.

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

From: Gerhard Nowak <nonspam@gmx.net>
Subject: Classic Telephone Call on PC
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 20:07:37 +0400
Organization: Arcor


Hi there,

Since 3 months I try to get any proggy and tried out everything starting 
from Hyperterminal to make a phonecall on my laptop!

Its just not possible!  It's amazing, how all related programs guide
into the wrong direction.

Please help, if there is anybody out there to do so. Maybe I got
something wrong, or else.  I don`t know:

If I use hyperterminal of windows -- and all other proggies are
derived from this - I can call a party, of course; and I also hear the
voice, but there is never a conversation and I can never answer, I can
not even "lift" the phone of the hook!

What to do?

Thanks in advance,

Gerry

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

Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 13:08:32 EST
From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA <usta@dailylead.com>
Subject: Microsoft Launches Downloadable TV for Handhelds


Telecom dailyLead from USTA
March 31, 2005
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=20487&l=2017006


TODAY'S HEADLINES

NEWS OF THE DAY
* Microsoft launches downloadable TV for handhelds
BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH
* Qwest mulls another bid for MCI
* Cisco scraps poison pill defense
* Cablevision COO says MSO would acquire given right opportunity
* Relationship between satellite radio providers may thaw
* Real estate developers, not consumers, increasingly choose TV providers
USTA SPOTLIGHT 
* Learn about the "Wireless Triple Play": USTA Small Company Summit, April 6 to 7
EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES
* Qualcomm looks to bring push-mobile e-mail to masses
REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE
* Nortel wins Defense Department contract

Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others.
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=20487&l=2017006

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

Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 22:29:33 -0500
From: Marcus Didius Falco <falco_marcus_didius@yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: EU Needs More Time for Biometric Passports


So much for the US government's big rush to get them done this year,
to the extent that they haven't thought out the implications of the
RFID chip (although they realize they should call it anything but
RFID, because the acronym RFID is a magnet for animosity).

http://www.usatoday.com/travel/news/2005-03-30-eu-passports_x.htm?POE=3DTRVI
SVA

<http://usatoday.printthis.clickability.com/pt/cpt?action=3Dcpt&title=3DUSAT
ODAY.com+-+EU+needs+more+time+for+biometric+passports&expire=3D&urlID=3D13726909&fb=3DY&url=3Dhttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.usatoday.com%2Ftravel%2Fnews%2F2005-03-30
-eu-passports_x.htm%3FPOE%3DTRVISVA&partnerID=3D1664&showBibliography=3DY>

EU needs more time for biometric passports BRUSSELS, Belgium (AP) The
European Union on Wednesday told the U.S.  Congress the bloc needed
another year to implement new U.S. rules on secure biometric
passports, which include a computer chip with data such as a digital
photo of the passport holder.

EU justice and interior ministers had said last year they would meet
this year's Oct. 26 deadline. But only six of the 25 EU countries
Belgium, Finland, Luxembourg, Germany, Austria, and Sweden will be
ready to issue biometric passports by that date.

After Oct. 26, citizens from 27 visa-exempt countries will have to
apply for a visa or have a biometric passport.

The EU's Justice and Home Affairs Commissioner Franco Frattini wrote
on Wednesday to James Sensenbrenner, head of the U.S. House of
Representative's Judiciary Committee that although the bloc had made
substantial progress, it would require more time, until Aug. 28, 2006,
to introduce the new passports.

"Despite all the progress ... we would urge the Congress to consider a
second extension of the deadline," Frattini said in the letter. The
United States had already extended the original Oct. 26, 2004,
deadline by a year.

Frattini said the issuing of similar U.S. passports was also
experiencing "a certain slippage" due to problems in adapting the new
technology to passports. Japan also will be unable to meet the
U.S. deadline, officials said.

So-called biometric features can reduce patterns of fingerprints,
irises, voices and faces to mathematical algorithms that can be stored
on a chip or machine-readable strip. EU countries also want to include
a fingerprint on the chip.

"Despite all the progress made ... in reinforcing the security of
passports you are surely aware that critical aspects of the biometric
technology, such as data security and interoperability of reading
devices, are still being finalized," wrote Frattini.

Frattini said the EU "shares the view of the United States that more
secure travel documents are an important tool in the fight against
international crime and terrorism."

The United States is urging European countries to have new biometric
travel documents in place as part of its tighter border security
checks following the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

All new U.S. passports issued by the end of 2005 are expected to have
a chip containing the holders' name, birth date and issuing office, as
well as a a photo of the holders' face. The photo is the international
standard for biometrics, but countries are free to add other
biometrics, such as fingerprints, for greater accuracy.

Also Wednesday, the EU head office released a report on the impact of
using biometrics, which said more large-scale field trials were needed
to ensure the new technology worked properly. It also urged
governments to ensure safeguards for privacy and data protection in
the use of biometric data.

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 . 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 Associated Press.

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

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

Date: 31 Mar 2005 12:03:32 -0800
From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: Microsoft Files 117 Suits That Target 'Phishing'


WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Microsoft Corp. on Thursday said it was filing
117 lawsuits against unknown Internet site operators it charged were
engaged in "phishing" schemes to obtain personal and financial
information from unsuspecting consumers.

Often scam artists pose as banks or other legitimate businesses,
sending out millions of e-mails or pop-up Web advertisements with
requests that the recipient update their account information but
instead direct them to fake sites.

The world's biggest software company said it was filing "John Doe"
defendant lawsuits in U.S. District Court in Washington state in an
attempt to establish connections between worldwide phishers and
discover the largest-volume operators.

"We must work together to stop these con artists from misusing the
Internet as a tool for fraud," Aaron Kornblum, Internet safety
enforcement attorney at Microsoft, said in a statement.

He was joined by officials from the Federal Trade Commission and the
National Consumers League who used the lawsuits and Friday's April
Fool's Day to encourage consumers to beware of these online schemes.

"Phishing is more than a dirty trick played on unsuspecting consumers
 -- it's a serious identity theft problem," said Susan Grant, director
of the National Consumers League's National Fraud Information Center
and Internet Fraud Watch program.

Some scams are getting more and more sophisticated, some by including
what looks like a legitimate Internet address link but once clicked on
by the user, they are instead directed to a different, fraudulent site
asking for personal information.

The officials encouraged consumers to be suspicious of unexpected
e-mails seeking personal data, to not click on links in those e-mails,
and verify contacts from institutions that claim a person is a victim
of identity theft.

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: Choreboy <choreboyREMOVE@localnet.com>
Subject: Every Ten Days
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 18:08:04 -0500
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com


March 9, somebody from 877 467 3277 called.  I answered on the second
ring and they hung up.  They did it again March 19 and March 29.

A search engine turned up a coed 3,000 miles from here whose blog
reported the same thing in November: 

" ... omg someone called me and then hung up ... here I got their
number it's 1-877-467-3277 lol so if you wanna call and bitch at them
do so."

If she was annoyed that somebody didn't apologize for misdialing, it's
hard to imagine that instead of dialing back immediately, she would
have thought it over and asked those who saw her blog to harass the
caller.  It's easier to believe that because she has a blog, the
company offered her a commission for anyone who called in her name.

I suspect that people all over the country are receiving these hang-up
so some will call back to bitch because if these calls are logged,
their names can be sold on a list of people who, according to
somebody's interpretation of the law, are fair game for telemarketers.

I hesitate to call the toll-free number, but I don't want to keep
running to answer the phone for a company that intends to hang up on
me.  What should I do?

Choreboy


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That telephone number 1-877-467-3277
belongs to 'Sears Home Improvement Products'.    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 #138
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Mar 31 22:21:04 2005
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j313L3904219;
	Thu, 31 Mar 2005 22:21:04 -0500 (EST)
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 22:21:04 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200504010321.j313L3904219@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 #139

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 31 Mar 2005 22:20:00 EST    Volume 24 : Issue 139

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Obituary: Schiavo Dies After Feeding Tube Removed (Lisa Minter)
    Re: Cell Phone Jammer For Sale MONIX MGB-1S (T. Sean Weintz)
    Re: Blackboards vs. Whiteboards (Chris Farrar)
    Re: Blackboards vs. Whiteboards (Dale Farmer)
    Re: Blackboards vs. Whiteboards (DevilsPGD)
    Re: Blackboards vs. Whiteboards (Barry Margolin)
    Re: Blackboards vs. Whiteboards (T. Sean Weintz)
    Re: Blackboards vs. Whiteboards (Mark Atwood)
    Re: Blackboards vs. Whiteboards (John Hines)
    Re: Fax Station ID (Rich Greenberg)
    Re: Fax Station ID (Robert Bonomi)
    Re: GSM-900 (Robert Bonomi)
    Re: GSM-900 (Joseph)
    Re: Time for the Recording Industry to Face the Music (Dave Garland)
    Re: Science and Society: Anatomy of a Techno-Myth (Thomas A. Horsley)
    Re: Science and Society: Anatomy of a Techno-Myth (T. Sean Weintz)
    Re: Verizon, Voicewing and Portability (Robert Bonomi)
    Re: Secret Service DNA - "Distributed Networking Attack" (John McHarry)
    New Sponsor on Board at Digest Web Site (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: 31 Mar 2005 11:54:41 -0800
From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: Obituary: Schiavo Dies After Feeding Tube Removed


By MIKE SCHNEIDER, Associated Press Writer

PINELLAS PARK, Fla. - Terri Schiavo, the severely brain-damaged woman
who spent 15 years connected to a feeding tube in an epic legal and
medical battle that went all the way to the White House and Congress,
died Thursday, 13 days after the tube was removed. She was 41.

Schiavo died at 9:05 a.m. at the Pinellas Park hospice where she lay
for years while her husband and her parents fought over her in what
was easily the longest, most bitter and most heavily litigated
right-to-die dispute in U.S. history.

The feud between the parents, Bob and Mary Schindler, and their
son-in-law continued even after her death: The Schindlers' advisers
complained that Schiavo's brother and sister had been at her bedside a
few minutes before the end came, but were not there at the moment of
her death because Michael Schiavo would not let them in the room.

"And so his heartless cruelty continues until this very last moment,"
said the Rev. Frank Pavone, a Roman Catholic priest. He added: "This
is not only a death, with all the sadness that brings, but this is a
killing, and for that we not only grieve that Terri has passed but we
grieve that our nation has allowed such an atrocity as this and we
pray that it will never happen again."

Michael Schiavo's attorney, George Felos, announced the death but had
no immediate comment beyond that. Michael Schiavo's whereabouts were
not immediately known.

"She's got all of her dignity back. She's now in heaven, she's now
with God, and she's walking with grace," Michael Schiavo's brother,
Scott Schiavo, said at his Levittown, Pa., home.

Outside the hospice, a small group of activists sang hymns, raising
their hands to the sky and closing their eyes. After the tube that
supplied a nutrient solution was disconnected, protesters had streamed
into Pinellas Park to keep vigil outside her hospice, with many
arrested as they tried to bring her food and water.

Dawn Kozsey, 47, a musician who was among those outside Schiavo's
hospice, wept. "Words cannot express the rage I feel," she said. "Is
my heart broken for this? Yes."

Schiavo suffered severe brain damage in 1990 after her heart stopped
because of a chemical imbalance that was believed to have been brought
on by an eating disorder. Court-appointed doctors ruled she was in a
persistent vegetative state, with no real consciousness or chance of
recovery.

She left no written instructions, but her husband argued that his wife
told him long ago she would not want to be kept alive
artificially. His in-laws disputed that, saying that would have gone
against her Roman Catholic faith, and they contended she could get
better with treatment. They said she laughed, cried, responded to them
and tried to talk.

Over and over, Pinellas County Circuit Judge George W. Greer said that
Michael Schiavo had convinced him that Terri Schiavo would not have
wanted to be kept alive under such conditions. The feeding tube was
removed with the judge's approval March 18 the third time food
and water were cut off during the seven-year legal battle.

Florida lawmakers, Congress, President Bush and his brother Gov. Jeb
Bush tried to intervene on behalf of her parents, but state and
federal courts at all levels repeatedly ruled in favor of her husband.

The case focused national attention on living wills, prompting perhaps
thousands of Americans to discuss their end-of-life wishes with their
loved ones and put their instructions in writing. The dispute also
stirred a furious debate over the proper role of government in such
life-and-death decisions. And it led to allegations that Republicans
in Congress were pandering to the religious right and violating their
own political principles of limited government and states' rights.

In Washington, the president said he was saddened by the death.

"The essence of civilization is that the strong have a duty to protect
the weak," Bush said. "In cases where there are serious doubts and
questions, the presumption should be in favor of life."

In Rome, Cardinal Jose Saraiva Martins, head of the Vatican office for
sainthood, called the removal of the feeding tube "an attack against
God."

An autopsy is planned, with both sides hoping it will shed more light
on the extent of her brain injuries and whether she was abused by her
husband, as the Schindlers have argued. In what was the source of yet
another dispute between the husband and his in-laws, Michael Schiavo
will get custody of the body and plans to have her cremated and bury
the ashes in the Schiavo family plot in Pennsylvania.

A funeral Mass, sought by the Schindlers, was tentatively scheduled
for Tuesday or Wednesday.

Gov. Jeb Bush said that millions of people around the world will be
"deeply grieved" by her death but that the debate over her fate could
help others grapple with end-of-life issues.

"After an extraordinarily difficult and tragic journey, Terri Schiavo
is at rest," he said. "I remain convinced, however, that Terri's death
is a window through which we can see the many issues left unresolved
in our families and in our society. For that, we can be thankful for
all that the life of Terri Schiavo has taught us."

Although several right-to-die cases have been fought in the courts
across the nation in recent years, none had been this public,
drawn-out and bitter.

Six times, the Court declined to intervene. As Schiavo's life ebbed
away earlier this month, Congress rushed through a bill to allow the
federal courts to take up the case. President Bush signed it March
21. But the federal courts refused to intervene.

Described by her family as a shy woman who loved animals, music and
basketball, Terri Schindler grew up in Pennsylvania and battled a
weight problem in her youth.

"And then when she lost all the weight, she really became quite
beautiful on the outside as well. What was inside she allowed to shine
out at that point," a friend, Diane Meyer, said in 2003.

She met Michael Schiavo, pronounced SHY-voh, at Bucks County Community
College near Philadelphia in 1982. She worked for a short time for the
Bell Telephone Company in Pennsylvania. They wed two years
later. After they moved to Florida, she worked in an insurance agency.

But recurring battles with weight led to the eating disorder that was
blamed for her collapse at 26. Doctors said she suffered severe brain
damage when her heart stopped beating because of a potassium
imbalance. Her brain was deprived of oxygen for 10 minutes before she
was revived, doctors estimated, while waiting for an ambulance and
in transit to emergency care.

Because Terri Schiavo did not leave written wishes on her care,
Florida law gave preference to Michael Schiavo over her parents. But
the law also recognizes parents as having crucial opinions in the care
of an incapacitated person.

A court-appointed physician testified her brain damage was so severe
that there was no hope she would ever have any cognitive abilities.

Still, her parents, who visited her nearly every day, reported their
daughter responded to their voices. Video showing the dark-haired
woman appearing to interact with her family was televised
nationally. But the court-appointed doctor said the noises and facial
expressions were reflexes.

Both sides accused each other of being motivated by greed over a
$1 million medical malpractice award from doctors who failed to
diagnose the chemical imbalance.

However, that money, which Michael Schiavo received in 1993, has all
but evaporated, spent on his wife's care and the court fight. Just
$40,000 to $50,000 remained as of mid-March.

Michael Schiavo's lawyers suggested the Schindlers wanted to get some
of the money. And the Schindlers questioned their son-in-law's
sincerity, saying he never mentioned his wife's wishes until winning
the malpractice case.

The parents tried to have Michael Schiavo removed as his wife's
guardian because he lives with another woman and has two children with
her. Michael Schiavo refused to divorce his wife, saying he feared the
Schindlers would ignore her desire to die.

Schiavo lived in her brain-damaged state longer than two other young
women whose cases brought right-to-die issues to the forefront of
public attention.

Karen Quinlan lived for more than a decade in a vegetative state
brought on by alcohol and drugs in 1975 when she was 21; New Jersey
courts let her parents take her off a respirator a year after her
injury. Nancy Cruzan, who was 25 when a 1983 car crash placed her in a
vegetative state, lived nearly eight years before the U.S. Supreme
Court ruled that her parents could withdraw her feeding tube. 

Schiavo's feeding tube was briefly removed in 2001. It was reinserted
after two days when a court intervened. In October 2003, the tube was
removed again, but Gov. Jeb Bush rushed Terri's Law through the
Legislature, allowing the state to have the feeding tube reinserted
after six days. The Florida Supreme Court later struck down
the law as unconstitutional interference in the judicial system by the
executive branch.  

Nearly two weeks ago, the tube was removed for a third and final time.

Associated Press reporters Allen Breed, Vickie Chachere, Mark Long,
Mitch Stacy and Ron Word contributed to this story.

This message to TELECOM Digest was prompted by friends of Terri Shiavo
 from her college days at Bucks Community College.  

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 Associated Press.

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

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

From: T. Sean Weintz <strap@hanh-ct.org>
Subject: Re: Cell Phone Jammer For Sale MONIX MGB-1S
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 21:28:23 -0500
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com


Robert Bonomi wrote:

> On some systems, with some cards, you can over-ride the built-in
> Ethernet address, and tell it to use an Ethernet address you specify.
> This is not an option under MS-Windows.

Talk about ignorance in action! ;-) (hey, you said it first <G>)

IT IS an option in Windows, if you have a card and driver that support 
it. MOST modern ethernet cards and drivers will allow this under 
Windows. In fact it's been years since I have encountered one that did 
NOT support assigning your own mac address under windows.

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

Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 17:04:38 -0500
From: Chris Farrar <cfarrar1307@rogers.com>
Subject: Re: Blackboards vrs. Whiteboards


hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote about Subject: Blackboards vs. Whiteboards
on Date: 30 Mar 2005 10:25:59 -0800

> I heard my school district will modernize and replace the classic
> "blackboard" (or greenboard) with modern 'whiteboards'.  I can't help
> but wonder if this is a dumb idea.

> AFAIK, blackboards last forever.  Lots of old schools still have their
> original ones.  In contrast, whiteboards seem sensitve to nicks and
> scrapes.

> I believe black/greenboards cost less than whiteboards.

> But most significantly is the chalk vs. marker.

> Chalk is much cheaper than markers.  Markers always run out quickly.
> Someone forgets and uses the wrong kind permanently staining the
> whiteboard.

> Lastly, markers have that weird chemical smell.

> Seems to me there's nothing wrong with blackboards and nothing to be
> gained by whiteboards.

> Thoughts anyone?

Well, blackboards do generate chalk dust.  And the way kids seem to
have alergies to almost everything under the sun, and parents that
will file contingency lawsuits if someone looks at their kids funny, I
wonder if it is to head off lawsiuts that the chalk dust is causing
Johnny's asthma to act up.

Chris

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

From: Dale Farmer <dale@cybercom.net>
Organization: The  fuzz in the back of the fridge. 
Subject: Re: Blackboards vs. Whiteboards
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 22:51:51 GMT


hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:

> I heard my school district will modernize and replace the classic
> "blackboard" (or greenboard) with modern 'whiteboards'.  I can't help
> but wonder if this is a dumb idea.

> AFAIK, blackboards last forever.  Lots of old schools still have their
> original ones.  In contrast, whiteboards seem sensitve to nicks and
> scrapes.

> I believe black/greenboards cost less than whiteboards.

> But most significantly is the chalk vs. marker.

> Chalk is much cheaper than markers.  Markers always run out quickly.
> Someone forgets and uses the wrong kind permanently staining the
> whiteboard.

> Lastly, markers have that weird chemical smell.

> Seems to me there's nothing wrong with blackboards and nothing to be
> gained by whiteboards.

> Thoughts anyone?

That this has nothing to do with telecom.   So I'll leave it at that.

    --Dale

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

From: DevilsPGD <ihatespam@crazyhat.net>
Subject: Re: Blackboards vs. Whiteboards
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 17:13:15 -0700
Organization: Disorganized


In message <telecom24.137.12@telecom-digest.org> hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
wrote:

> I heard my school district will modernize and replace the classic
> "blackboard" (or greenboard) with modern 'whiteboards'.  I can't help
> but wonder if this is a dumb idea.

> AFAIK, blackboards last forever.  Lots of old schools still have their
> original ones.  In contrast, whiteboards seem sensitve to nicks and
> scrapes.

> I believe black/greenboards cost less than whiteboards.

> But most significantly is the chalk vs. marker.

> Chalk is much cheaper than markers.  Markers always run out quickly.
> Someone forgets and uses the wrong kind permanently staining the
> whiteboard.

> Lastly, markers have that weird chemical smell.

> Seems to me there's nothing wrong with blackboards and nothing to be
> gained by whiteboards.

> Thoughts anyone?

I'll take a whiteboard over a blackboard for readability any day.

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

From: Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: Blackboards vs. Whiteboards
Organization: Symantec
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 20:28:58 -0500


In article <telecom24.137.12@telecom-digest.org>, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com 
wrote:

> Seems to me there's nothing wrong with blackboards and nothing to be
> gained by whiteboards.

This web site mentions chalk dust as a common trigger of asthma attacks 
in children:

http://kidshealth.org/kid/health_problems/allergy/asthma.html

A google search shows a number of other pages mentioning similar 
connections.


Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu
Arlington, MA

*** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me ***

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

From: T. Sean Weintz <strap@hanh-ct.org>
Subject: Re: Blackboards vs. Whiteboards
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 21:35:16 -0500
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com


Hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:

> I believe black/greenboards cost less than whiteboards.

I would expect a good quality, real slate blackboard (the kind I had
in all my classrooms growing up) is considerably MORE than a
whiteboard.

> But most significantly is the chalk vs. marker.

Yes.

> Chalk is much cheaper than markers.  

YES!

> Markers always run out quickly.
> Someone forgets and uses the wrong kind permanently staining the
> whiteboard.

Yup. However I have seen some good enameled white boards that DON'T
stain very easily -- "permanent" marker wipes right off with a little
alcohol.

> Lastly, markers have that weird chemical smell.

And teenagers can sniff them ... Happens when you give them glue,
paint, correction fluid ... It will happen with markers.

> Seems to me there's nothing wrong with blackboards and nothing to be
> gained by whiteboards.

Initially they may be cheaper to install new. It's a losing
proposition fiscally when you look at the cost of markers vs. chalk
and the cost of replacing damaged white boards.

> Thoughts anyone?

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

Subject: Re: Blackboards vs. Whiteboards
From: Mark Atwood <mark@atwood.name>
Organization: EasyNews, UseNet made Easy!
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 08:22:40 GMT


hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com writes:

> Chalk is much cheaper than markers.  Markers always run out quickly.
> Someone forgets and uses the wrong kind permanently staining the
> whiteboard.

> Lastly, markers have that weird chemical smell.  Seems to me there's
> nothing  wrong  with  blackboards   and  nothing  to  be  gained  by
> whiteboards.  Thoughts anyone?

Chalk dust is hell on electronics.

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

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The fact that so many classrooms are
now also equipped with computers and other electronics may have played
some role in the decision.    PAT] 

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

From: John Hines <jbhines@newsguy.com>
Subject: Re: Blackboards vs. Whiteboards
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 10:15:12 -0600
Organization: www.jhines.org
Reply-To: john@jhines.org


hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:

> Lastly, markers have that weird chemical smell.

Blackboards are always dusty if they get used.

White reflects light, so it would brighten up a room.

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

From: richgr@panix.com (Rich Greenberg)
Subject: Re: Fax Station ID
Date: 30 Mar 2005 16:32:28 -0500
Organization: Organized?  Me?


In article <telecom24.137.6@telecom-digest.org>,
 <NOTvalid@surplus4actors.INFO> wrote:

> John Schmerold wrote:

>> Anyone know if it's a law or regulation that requires faxes to include
>> station identification at top of every page sent ?

> Yes ... but

> Only if made after a certain year.

> My 4800bps fax card from my XT which I still use is exempt.

Time to upgrade.  Adding the ID is not the responsibity of the modem,
but of the fax software that drives the modem.  Winfax in my case.
Newer faxes do 14.4 kbaud faxes.


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: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi)
Subject: Re: Fax Station ID
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 02:01:37 -0000
Organization: Widgets, Inc.


In article <telecom24.137.6@telecom-digest.org>,
 <NOTvalid@surplus4actors.INFO> wrote:

> John Schmerold wrote:

>> Anyone know if it's a law or regulation that requires faxes to include
>> station identification at top of every page sent ?

> Yes ... but

> Only if made after a certain year.

> My 4800bps fax card from my XT which I still use is exempt.

Sorry, John, but you are *wrong*.

You, "the person" sending the fax are *still* required to place the
identification information at the top/bottom of every page, or on the
first page.

You are correct that _equipment_ manufactured before 20 Dec 1992 does
not have to do this 'automatically', HOWEVER, just because you are
using such equipment you are _not_ exempt from the requirement of 47
USC 227 (d) (1).

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

From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi)
Subject: Re: GSM-900
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 02:50:32 -0000
Organization: Widgets, Inc.


In article <telecom24.137.20@telecom-digest.org>, Jason
<cheanglong@gmail.com> wrote:

> Thank you all for the explanation. It really helps.

> But may I know for a transmitter and a receiver, will the transmitting
> frequency be different than the receiving frequency?  I know there are
> such cases. But why they make it this way?  

So they can both work _at_the_same_time_.   duh!

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

From: Joseph <JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: GSM-900
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 19:02:30 -0800
Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com


On 30 Mar 2005 05:04:16 -0800, Jason <cheanglong@gmail.com> wrote:

> But may I know for a trasnmitter and a receiver, will the trasnmitting
> frequency be different than the receiving frequency?  I know there are
> such cases. But why they make it this way?  

Transmitting and receiving frequencies are different.

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

From: Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com>
Subject: Re: Time for the Recording Industry to Face the Music
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 16:00:38 -0600
Organization: Wizard Information


It was a dark and stormy night when hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:

> Well then, what would be an appropriate royalty for musicians and
> price for CDs?  Well-known recording artists seem to be living quite
> well. 

Actually, most musicians make their money from concerts and maybe
merchandising.  "Few musicians ever actually receive royalties from
their record sales on major labels", even including name bands like the
Backstreet Boys (NYT article reprinted at
http://knowyourmusic.com/index.asp?LogID=131 ), and individuals like
Janis Ian, who said "in 37 years as a recording artist, I've created 25+
albums for major labels, and never once received a royalty check that
didn't show I owed _them_ money" (
http://www.janisian.com/article-internet_debacle.html ) and David Byrne
( http://www.boingboing.net/2005/03/28/david_byrne_launches.html ).

Royalties get paid on "profits", and the recording industry is as
ingenious as Hollywood in creative accounting practices that ensure
there never will be anything labelled a profit.  The economics for a
hypothetical successful band are described in an entertainment column:
http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/story/60991p-57008c.html

Of course, none of that is to say that the record companies aren't
entitled to make some money.  But it's misleading to suggest that shared
music steals food from the tables of the creators of the music.

(Sorry, stretch as I may, the only ObTelecom I can think of is "and the
recording companies use _telephones_ in plotting their nefarious deeds"
:-D )

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

Subject: Re: Science and Society: Anatomy of a Techno-Myth -- Economist.com
From: tom.horsley@att.net (Thomas A. Horsley)
Organization: AT&T Worldnet
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 22:40:11 GMT


> I don't think the scare of using cell phones while pumping gas ever
> got too far.  It'd be a very easy thing to check -- what were the
> causes of gas station fires and technically could a cell phone cause
> that?  As an all-electronic device, cell phones normally don't
> generate sparks.

There is certainly no evidence that cellphones can start gas station
fires (and a lot of evidence against it from MythBusters episodes to
research by the peteroleum safety institute), nevertheless every gas
station I go to has an official looking sign near the pumps telling
you not to use cellphones :-).  

-- >>==>> The *Best* political site  <URL:http://www.vote-smart.org/>
   >>==+ email: Tom.Horsley@worldnet.att.net icbm: Delray Beach, FL |
   <URL:http://home.att.net/~Tom.Horsley> Free Software and Politics
   <<==+

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

From: T. Sean Weintz <strap@hanh-ct.org>
Subject: Re: Science and Society: Anatomy of a Techno-Myth -- Economist.com
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 21:37:21 -0500
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com


hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:

> You don't need to be a scientist to see through this crap, only some
> common sense and some careful thinking is needed.

Both (common sense and careful thinking) are in woefully short supply
in this area.

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

From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi)
Subject: Re: Verizon, Voicewing and Portability
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 02:45:40 -0000
Organization: Widgets, Inc.


In article <telecom24.137.13@telecom-digest.org>, Robert Bonomi
<bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com> wrote:

[[..  munch  ..]]

> *IF* you have a _reliable_ cable TV provider, they may offer Internet 
> access, and could be worth checking out.  If, like many places, the cable
> TV service is subject to frequent short-duration outages, you should take 
> into consideration what effect similar outages will have on your Internet
> use.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: In the nearly two years since I decided
> to ditch Southwestern Bell (for everything) and go with CableOne for
> my high speed internet, I do not think there has been five minutes of
> downtime. Well, there was one time I decided to move a television set
> into my computer room so I could watch television while working on the
> Digest, and in the process of hooking up a splitter to the cable line
> and attaching a television/radio combination to the cable which (at
> that point in my system) had just been the internet, I got a splitter
> installed incorrectly. I had that same day installed a Cisco router
> for the computers, and between the ill-advised television/radio on the
> cable line in my computer room and the Cisco router, the Motorola SB-4220
> Surfboard Cable Modem (supplied by CableOne) somehow lost track of what
> it was doing. But the tech guy at CableOne very graciously got me back
> on line in about 10 minutes once I decided to call them and ask for help.
> Cable only rarely goes off line, I have found. PAT]

A lot depends on where you are, and who your cable provider is.  "Big city"
cable tends to be -less- reliable than smaller-town installation.  Probably
because bigger cities tended to get wired earlier.  Older, more problematic,
infrastructure.

Cable TV here -- metro Chicago -- has short-duration outages (i.e.,
3-15 seconds or so) several times a week, *on*average*.  It looks like
an amplifier somewhere power-cycles.  I _don't_ know about the
Internet service, but the "reliability" of the TV failures does not
inspire confidence.

My folks, in another state, have 'cable Internet' -- they don't have
any choice, being a couple of thousand feet too far away from the
C.O. for DSL.  A few weeks ago, the cable company did an over-night
'upgrade' of the head-end equipment.  It was FIVE DAYS before my folks
Internet connection worked again.  Getting the problem resolved took:
more than TWELVE HOURS (cumulative) sitting on hold, waiting to speak
to a customer-service rep, _and_ *THREE* on-site visits by the cable
co. techs, Ultimate determination, it _was_ a problem in the new
head-end gear; the site visits didn't accomplish anything, except to
establish that what my folks were reporting was the _exact_ truth.
*sigh*.

Cable may be a good choice for some.  A lot depends on the provider.
Unfortunately, in most locales, you have as much choice for a cable
provider as you have for an ILEC.

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

From: John McHarry <jmcharry@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Secret Service DNA - "Distributed Networking Attack"
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 04:09:52 GMT
Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net


Since this is their job, at least it is an efficient use of public
money, but it does give one an idea about how subtle security can be
when challenged by an adversary with intelligence and resources.

I worked for a short period for an entity that dealt in national
security, although I never got more than peripherally involved. The
one thing that struck me immediately was that we weren't up against
kids or crooks, but people as smart and patriotic as ourselves.

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

From: TELECOM Digest Editor <ptownson@telecom-digest.org>
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 20:55:00 CST
Subject: New Sponsor Comes on Board With Digest Web Site


I am pleased to welcome AllSlots.com, an online casino service
as a new sponsor for one year, effective April 1, 2005. If you
enjoy online wagering, casino-style, from the privacy of your home
computer, you may wish to check out 
http://www.allslots.com/online-casinos.php . And, my thanks for their
support.      


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 #139
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Apr  1 21:29:36 2005
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j322Ta415106;
	Fri, 1 Apr 2005 21:29:36 -0500 (EST)
Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2005 21:29:36 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200504020229.j322Ta415106@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 #140

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 1 Apr 2005 21:30:00 EST    Volume 24 : Issue 140

Inside This Issue:                            Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Telecom Update #475, April 1, 2005 (John Riddell)
    Protecting Teens Online (Monty Solomon)
    Verizon's Pitch Could Signal Local Cable War (Monty Solomon)
    Exclusive: SBC Comments on the Vonage E-911 Issue (Jack Decker)
    Qwest Raises Offer For MCI (Telecom dailyLead from USTA)
    Microsoft Drops Teen Blaster Writer's $500,000 Fine (Lisa Minter)
    Re: Blackboards vs. Whiteboards (DevilsPGD)
    Re: Blackboards vs. Whiteboards (Henry)
    Re: Blackboards vs. Whiteboards (Richard Kaszeta)
    Re: Blackboards vs. Whiteboards (Lisa Hancock)
    Re: Blackboards vs. Whiteboards (Neal McLain)
    Re: GSM-900 (jason)
    Re: Every Ten Days (Dave Garland)
    Re: Every Ten Days (Choreboy)
    Re: Sprint PCS Vision Added to Open Relay DataBase (Dave Garland)
    Re: Sprint PCS Vision Added to Open Relay DataBase (jmeissen@aracnet)
    Does Your Computer Look Like This? (Patrick Townson)
    Last Laugh! Spammer With a Toll Free Number (Steve Shlichter)

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: Telecom Update #475, April 1, 2005
Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2005 15:32:14 -0500
From: John Riddell <jriddell@angustel.ca>


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

TELECOM UPDATE

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

published weekly by Angus TeleManagement Group
http://www.angustel.ca

Number 475: April 1, 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:

** Bell Begins IP Telephony Rollout

** Telus Says Shaw Breaks Local Phone Rules

** Telecom Review Members Selected?

** Nortel Hires New Technology Officer

** Entourage Technicians on Strike

** Satellite Carrier Distributes OneConnect VoIP

** Call-Net Wants Database Charges Slashed

** Yak Joins Peering Alliance

** Telus Wants Winback Ban Lifted

** CRTC Toughens Rules for Telco Service to Competitors

** Qwest Still Trying to Buy MCI

** Financial Results

      Cygnal Technologies

      SR Telecom

      WaveRider

** Report -- Cablecos to Get 11% of Home Phones

** CRTC Sets New Rules for 900 and 976

** New IXPL Routes Deregulated

** One-Day Conference to Examine WiMAX

** CIRA to Hold Annual Meeting

BELL BEGINS IP TELEPHONY ROLLOUT: Following several months of
technical trials, Bell Canada's broadband IP telephone
service, Digital Voice, is now available to consumers in
Quebec City, Trois-Rivieres, and Sherbrooke. Pricing depends
on which unlimited long distance plan the customer selects:
$38 for province-wide, $40 for Canada-wide, and $45 for
Canada-U.S. There is no contract or activation fee, and the
first month is free.

** The CRTC is expected to rule this spring on whether=20
   incumbent telcos must file tariffs for this type of=20
   service.

TELUS SAYS SHAW BREAKS LOCAL PHONE RULES: Telus says Shaw is
not complying with its obligations as a local phone service
carrier, as set out in Decision 97-8. The telco wants the
CRTC to order Shaw to stop offering local phone service until
it can show it has met all requirements.

** Telus says Shaw deliberately launched local phone service
   in Calgary before it could provide equal access to all
   long distance carriers and comply with industry
   arrangements for transferring customers.

www.crtc.gc.ca/PartVII/eng/2005/8622/t66_200503418.htm

TELECOM REVIEW MEMBERS SELECTED? Today's Toronto Star reports
industry speculation that the members of the panel to review
Canadian telecom policy will be: Gerri Sinclair, former head
of Microsoft's MSN.ca; Hank Intven, former Executive Director
telecom at the CRTC, now a partner at McCarthy Tetrault; and
Andre Tremblay, former CEO of Microcell Telecommunications.
(see Telecom Update #470)

NORTEL HIRES NEW TECHNOLOGY OFFICER: Gary Kunis, who was
Cisco's Chief Science Officer until 2002, has been named
Chief Technology Officer of Nortel Networks. Nortel's current
CTO, Brian McFadden, has been appointed Chief Research
Officer. Both appointments are effective Monday, April 4.

** Nortel will hold a combined 2004/2005 annual shareholders
   meeting in Toronto June 29.

ENTOURAGE TECHNICIANS ON STRIKE: 1,400 technicians employed
by Entourage Technology Solutions, the company that does
residential repair and installation for Bell Canada, went on
strike March 24. An Ontario provincial mediator has invited
Bell and the Communications Energy and Paperworkers Union to
return to negotiations on April 4.

** Bell Canada recently announced plans to buy the 57% of
   Entourage it doesn't own, and operate it as a wholly owned
   subsidiary. (See Telecom Update #470)

SATELLITE CARRIER DISTRIBUTES ONECONNECT VoIP: RamTelecom, an
Ottawa-based satellite services provider, has begun offering
OneConnect's hosted IP telephony service across Canada, using
its LinkStar platform.

CALL-NET WANTS DATABASE CHARGES SLASHED: Call-Net says Bell Canada
charges competitors exorbitant fees to update its database when
customers request blocking of collect or bill-to-third-party
calls. The current fee was set in 2000: Call-Net argues costs have
plummeted since then, and only a 15% margin should be charged.

** Furthermore, Bell automatically charges this fee when
numbers are ported to Call-Net, even though no additional
database change is necessary.  This accounts for 2/3 of the
fees Bell has charged Call-Net for the service, amounting to
"millions of dollars ... over the past six years."

www.crtc.gc.ca/PartVII/eng/2005/8622/c25_200502858.htm

YAK JOINS PEERING ALLIANCE: Yak Communications, a VoIP provider in
Canada, is among the six initial members of XConnect, a new
international VoIP peering alliance that offers IP-based
interconnection and VoIP phone number lookup services.

TELUS WANTS WINBACK BAN LIFTED: Telus has asked the CRTC to
eliminate, in Calgary and anywhere else Shaw offers phone
service, the current rules preventing ILECs from attempting
to win back local customers for 12 months after they choose a
competitor's service.

** In Telus' view, "cable entry changes everything" and the reasons
   for the current rules no longer apply.

www.crtc.gc.ca/PartVII/eng/2005/8622/t66_200503393.htm

CRTC TOUGHENS RULES FOR TELCO SERVICE TO COMPETITORS: CRTC Decision
2005-20 sets 14 Quality of Service indicators that the major incumbent
telcos must meet for services they provide to competitors, such as
clearing service repair calls. If any indicator is missed, the ILEC
must pay a rebate, up to a maximum of 5% of the competitor's payments
for the period if all indicators are missed.

** The Commission says that the indicators are a minimum
   acceptable level of service, and that smaller penalties
   have proven to be insufficient to motivate the ILECs to
   meet required standards.

www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Decisions/2005/dt2005-20.htm

QWEST   STILL  TRYING   TO   BUY  MCI:   The  Verizon-MCI-Qwest   saga
continues.  Despite repeated  decisions  by MCI's  Board  to accept  a
buyout offer from Verizon, Qwest  is still pitching, and MCI agreed to
meet with it  again after the Denver-based telco  has raised its offer
to US$8.9 billion, $1.4 billion more than Verizon's.

FINANCIAL RESULTS: The following results are for 2004:

** Cygnal Technologies reports revenues of $140 million, down
   5% from 2003. EBITDA was nil, and the net loss of $0.8
   million was slightly less than in 2003.

** SR Telecom had revenues of $124 million, down 3% from
   2003, but fourth-quarter sales were down 40% from a year
   earlier. The net loss for 2004 doubled to $86 million. The
   company says it is experiencing "uncertainty associated
   with...refinancing issues."

** WaveRider Communications had revenues of $9.5 million, down 27%
   from 2003. The net loss of $6.3 million was up 24%.

REPORT -- CABLECOS TO GET 11% OF HOME PHONES: The latest
Convergence Consulting Group report on "The Battle for the
North American Couch Potato" predicts that Canadian cable TV
companies will capture 11% of the residential telephone
market by the end of 2007.

www.convergenceonline.com

CRTC SETS NEW RULES FOR 900 AND 976: CRTC Telecom Decision 2005-19
establishes new consumer safeguards for 1-900 and 1-976
services. Content providers must disclose all charges at the beginning
of the call, and cannot link toll-free calls to billable 900
services. Telcos must offer 900 call-blocking with no initial set-up
charge, and must waive all reasonably disputed charges for first-time
disputes.

www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Decisions/2005/dt2005-19.htm

NEW IXPL ROUTES DEREGULATED: The CRTC has added several new
interexchange private line routes to those on which the incumbent
telcos no longer need to file tariffs, because competitors also serve
those routes.

www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Decisions/2005/dt2005-18.htm

ONE-DAY CONFERENCE TO EXAMINE WiMAX: The Canadian Wireless
Telecommunications Association's will hold a one-day conference on
WiMAX technology in Toronto on April 13.  Conference program details
are available at:

www.cwta.ca/CWTASite/english/conference/WiMAX.html

CIRA TO HOLD ANNUAL MEETING: The Canadian Internet
Registration Authority will hold its 2005 annual general
meeting in Toronto and online on April 28, 2005, noon to 3pm.
To pre-register, visit www.cira.ca/en/agm/2005/agm-registration.html.

HOW TO SUBMIT ITEMS FOR TELECOM UPDATE


E-MAIL: editors@angustel.ca


FAX:    905-686-2655

MAIL:   TELECOM UPDAT
        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:

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, 1 Apr 2005 10:11:04 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Protecting Teens Online


Pew Internet Report

54% of parents with teenagers use internet filters - a big jump from 2000

WASHINGTON, March 16 -- More than half of American families with
teenagers use filters to limit access to potentially harmful online
content -- a 65% increase from the number of those who used filters in
2000. But big majorities of both teens and parents believe that teens
do things on the internet that their parents would not approve of.

 ...

http://www.pewinternet.org/PPF/r/100/press_release.asp

http://www.pewinternet.org/PPF/r/152/report_display.asp

http://www.pewinternet.org/report_display.asp?r=152

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

Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2005 10:32:32 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Verizon's Pitch Could Signal Local Cable War


By Steven Rosenberg, Globe Staff  |  March 31, 2005

Coming soon to northern Massachusetts: Cable competition between 
Comcast and Verizon.

Verizon, the voice, wireless, and data telecommunications company, has
begun installing a fiber-optic network that it hopes will attract
cable television subscribers in Lynn, Lynnfield, Topsfield, Nahant,
Swampscott, and West Newbury. The network will also provide phone
service and Internet service up to 7.5 times faster than Comcast's
entry-level package.

Verizon's announcement marks the first time a company has offered to
build a separate cable television system in more than one community
north of Boston. Currently Wakefield is the only community north of
Boston where more than one cable company operates. RCN has been
competing with Comcast there for several years.

http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2005/03/31/verizons_pitch_could_signal_local_cable_war/

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

From: Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@withheld on request>
Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 11:28:07 -0500
Subject: Exclusive: SBC Comments on the Vonage E-911 Issue


http://blogs.zdnet.com/ip-telephony/index.php?p=328

-Posted by Russell Shaw @ 8:55 am 

In a previous post today, I surmised why SBC seems to be reluctant to
work with Vonage to devise E-911 solutions.

Now, SBC has their say. Spokesperson Wes Warnock just emailed me to
clarify their position on this issue:

"First, SBC recognizes that there are no shortcuts when it comes to
public safety. That said, SBC does not own the 9-1-1 system. Public
safety agencies do.

"Vonage needs to take yes for an answer. We have 9-1-1 solutions in
place for VoIP providers today. Vonage appears more concerned about
finding ways to provide E9-1-1 on the cheap."

Full story at:
http://blogs.zdnet.com/ip-telephony/index.php?p=328


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, 1 Apr 2005 12:19:19 EST
From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA <usta@dailylead.com>
Subject: Qwest Raises Offer For MCI


Telecom dailyLead from USTA
April 1, 2005
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=20521&l=2017006

TODAY'S HEADLINES

NEWS OF THE DAY
* Qwest raises offer for MCI
BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH
* Time Warner testing mobile phone service in Kansas City
* SBC picks Scientific Atlanta for video rollout
* Stealthy startup seeks to shake up core routing market
* Nortel taps a new CTO
* A chat with Avaya's head honcho
USTA SPOTLIGHT 
* At SUPERCOMM: Register today for the IP Video Conference
EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES
* BellSouth adds end-to-end class of service to VPN
VOIP DOWNLOAD
* ISPs dialing for dollars
* New modem allows toggling between VoIP, SIP networks
* Quebec's VoIP market gets more crowded
REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE
* T-Mobile lobbies for access to UNEs

Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others.
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=20521&l=2017006

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

Date: 01 Apr 2005 10:17:05 -0800
From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: Microsoft Drops Teen Blaster Writer's $500,000 Fine


SEATTLE (Reuters) - Jeffrey Lee Parson, the teen convicted of
infecting 48,000 computers with a variant of the destructive Blaster
worm, will not have to pay $500,000 in restitution to Microsoft Corp.
the world's largest software maker said on Wednesday.

Instead, the Minnesota teen will have to perform 225 hours of
community service in addition to a year and half in prison and an
earlier order to perform 100 hours of community service, once the
final sentence is signed by Judge Marsha Pechman of the U.S. District
Court in Seattle. He also will be placed under supervision for three
years following the sentence.

Microsoft, which released Parson from his financial obligation in a
legal agreement signed by both parties earlier this week, said it was
satisfied with the final sentence.

"Mr. Parson's additional community service will have a stronger impact
on him in serving his sentence," Tim Cranton, senior attorney at
Microsoft, said in an e-mailed statement.

Parson pleaded guilty last year to creating a variant of the worm,
which infected computers in mid-2003 and targeted computers at
Microsoft. Parson said he created his "B" or "teekids" variant of the
Blaster worm and used it to access 50 computers which he then used to
launch a broader attack on more than 48,000 computers.

Blaster and its variants are self-replicating Internet worms that bore
through a security hole in Windows, Microsoft's operating system which
is found on more than 90 percent of the world's personal computers.

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: DevilsPGD <ihatespam@crazyhat.net>
Subject: Re: Blackboards vs. Whiteboards
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 20:26:27 -0700
Organization: Disorganized


In message <telecom24.139.7@telecom-digest.org> T. Sean Weintz
<strap@hanh-ct.org> wrote:

>> Lastly, markers have that weird chemical smell.

> And teenagers can sniff them ... Happens when you give them glue,
> paint, correction fluid ... It will happen with markers.

All the more reason to switch to whiteboards.  Darwin's theories cease
to function properly when you sink to the lowest common denominator.

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

From: henry999@eircom.net (Henry)
Subject: Re: Blackboards vs. Whiteboards
Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2005 08:29:29 +0200
Organization: Elisa Internet customer


John Hines <jbhines@newsguy.com> wrote:

> White reflects light, so it would brighten up a room.

Also, coloured markers on a whiteboard are more visually effective than
coloured chalk on a black- or greenboard.

Cheers,

Henry

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

From: Richard Kaszeta <rich@kaszeta.org>
Subject: Re: Blackboards vrs. Whiteboards
Date: 01 Apr 2005 07:40:16 -0600
Organization: University of MN ME Dept


Chris Farrar <cfarrar1307@rogers.com> writes:

> Well, blackboards do generate chalk dust.  And the way kids seem to
> have alergies to almost everything under the sun, and parents that
> will file contingency lawsuits if someone looks at their kids funny, I
> wonder if it is to head off lawsiuts that the chalk dust is causing
> Johnny's asthma to act up.

As a frequent user of both types of boards in the past (teaching
college classes), I can say that you also get dust from whiteboards,
and it's the nasty grimy powder from the dry-erase markets.

I don't like whiteboards anyways, since as a lefty they are very
difficult to use; if my hand even lightly glances over what I just
wrote, it wipes off, whereas chalk is fairly tolerant.

That, and I've never gotten woozy from a chalkboard, whereas an
afternoon spent entirely around whiteboards with uncapped markers will
give you a pretty good buzz.


Richard W Kaszeta
rich@kaszeta.org
http://www.kaszeta.org/rich

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

From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Subject: Re: Blackboards vs. Whiteboards
Date: 1 Apr 2005 08:08:16 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


Barry Margolin wrote:

> This web site mentions chalk dust as a common trigger of asthma
> attacks in children:

What I don't understand is that blackboards have been around for
ages but asthma seems to be growing among kids.  Given that, I
wonder if chalkdust is really the cause.

Another poster complained this was off-topic.  This newsgroup
tends to examine a variety of issues regarding all _communication_,
not just telecom.

BTW, I've seen electronic whiteboards that transmit the writings or
produce a hardcopy, though they don't seem to get much use.

Also, I must admit whiteboards can double as a projection screen,
instead of having a separate screen.  With the decrease of price in
computer projectors and ease of products like PowerPoint (which I
personally dislike), perhaps writings will be pre-done by computer
rather than written on the fly.  (There's also the older transparency
overhead projector that's been around for a long time.)

However, I have always found it easier to follow and take notes of a
traditional lecture where the teacher writes on a blackboard as he
goes along, rather than showing an entire frame all at once (and that
disappears for the next slide).

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: When I first reviewed this subject in
preparing the issue of the Digest a few days ago, my first thought was
that Lisa was referring to the 'whiteboard' concept which is common
in certain chat programs for computer: the screen is divided in two
parts with half given over to a whiteboard on which the chat participants 
can 'doodle' or draw things for the other participants in the chat.
PAT]

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

Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 11:15:34 -0600
From: Neal McLain <nmclain@annsgarden.com>
Subject: Re: Blackboards vs. Whiteboards


Dale Farmer <dale@cybercom.net> wrote:

> That this has nothing to do with telecom ...

Unless it's an electronic whiteboard.
http://tinyurl.com/3u8xe

Neal McLain

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, see my other message in this
issue on this topic. That's what I first thought Lisa was going to
discuss, given the popularity of computers in schools these days and
a teacher being able to display things at various student workstations
around the room on the computer.  PAT]

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

From: Jason <cheanglong@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: GSM-900
Date: 1 Apr 2005 09:02:14 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


But since we transmit in x freq, then the receiver must tune to x feq
in order to receive the signal right?  Why transmit at x freq and
receive at y freq?

Or I have misunderstood. Kindly enlighthen.

Thank you,

Jason

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Because both microphones and
loudspeakers basically tend to do the same thing. Have you ever
plugged a microphone in to a 'speaker jack' or a speaker into 
a 'microphone jack'? They can do each other's jobs quite well,
since, after all, each of them has something inside which tends to
'vibrate' to sound waves. If you ever had a microphone too close
to a speaker, or a telephone too close to a radio (during a call
in show you were talking on) you hear a squeal, or 'feedback', the
noise caused by the sound waves you or someone is producing going
around and around. Microphones not only 'hear' the principal sound
being given to them, they also 'hear' the amplified sound of the
original sound coming back to go around again. Changing the
frequencies eliminates a lot of that problem.  My explanation is
probably not the best, but I hope it gives you the idea.   PAT]

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

From: Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com>
Subject: Re: Every Ten Days
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 21:00:28 -0600
Organization: Wizard Information


It was a dark and stormy night when Choreboy
<choreboyREMOVE@localnet.com> wrote:

> March 9, somebody from 877 467 3277 called.  I answered on the second
> ring and they hung up.  They did it again March 19 and March 29.

Large telemarketing operations sometimes use dialers that call
numbers, and when there is an answer shunt the call to an available
human telemarketer.  If all the telemarketers are busy (on the phone,
on break, whatever), you get a few seconds of dead air, then it hangs
up.

This is an efficient use of the (probably minimum-wage) telemarketers,
as they don't waste time dialing, waiting while it rings, getting
answering machines, etc.  The efficiency, of course, comes at the
expense of the victims like you.

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

From: Choreboy <choreboyREMOVE@localnet.com>
Subject: Re: Every Ten Days
Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 11:29:17 -0500
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com


Choreboy wrote:

> March 9, somebody from 877 467 3277 called.  I answered on the second
> ring and they hung up.  They did it again March 19 and March 29.

> A search engine turned up a coed 3,000 miles from here whose blog
> reported the same thing in November:

> " ... omg someone called me and then hung up ... here I got their
> number it's 1-877-467-3277 lol so if you wanna call and bitch at them
> do so."

> If she was annoyed that somebody didn't apologize for misdialing, it's
> hard to imagine that instead of dialing back immediately, she would
> have thought it over and asked those who saw her blog to harass the
> caller.  It's easier to believe that because she has a blog, the
> company offered her a commission for anyone who called in her name.

> I suspect that people all over the country are receiving these hang-up
> so some will call back to bitch because if these calls are logged,
> their names can be sold on a list of people who, according to
> somebody's interpretation of the law, are fair game for telemarketers.

> I hesitate to call the toll-free number, but I don't want to keep
> running to answer the phone for a company that intends to hang up on
> me.  What should I do?

> Choreboy

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That telephone number 1-877-467-3277
> belongs to 'Sears Home Improvement Products'.    PAT]

Thank you.  How did you find out?  

It seems strange that they've hung up on me every time they called,
and the California blogger reported the same thing.  Could dialing
that number establish a "business relationship" with the telemarketer?
Would it be safer to complain by some other channel?


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The way I found out was by using a
phone line *not associated with myself* letting it ring until a woman
answered (I did it twice to make sure that 877-467-3277 was answered
'Sears Home Improvement Products' both times) then I chose to belch in
a rather noisy, obscene manner each time before disconnecting. 

Considering the dump I live in, which is likely as not to blow down or
away in a Kansas tornado sometime, I did not see where Home
Improvements could be of any use, at least not if _I_ had to pay for
them, which is what, I suspect, the woman at 877-467-3277 had in mind
for me. PAT]

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

From: Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com>
Subject: Re: Sprint PCS Vision Added to Open Relay DataBase
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 21:05:46 -0600
Organization: Wizard Information


It was a dark and stormy night when Eric Friedebach
<friedebach@yahoo.com> wrote:

> It seems that Sprint has been added to the Open Relay DataBase... 
> Has anyone here had this happen to their ISP? How long did it take to
> get it resolved?

Every now and again, one of my ISP's mail servers will find its way
onto a RBL (realtime blackhole list) such as that.  Usually they get
it resolved in a couple of hours.  But my ISP is pretty proactive
about stomping on spammers and people with open relays.  Maybe if the
RBL proprietors thought they were lax, it might take a bit longer to
get off.  (And every RBL has its own criteria, one or two have
reputations of being very slow to unlist.)

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

From: jmeissen@aracnet.com
Subject: Re: Sprint PCS Vision Added to Open Relay DataBase
Date: 1 Apr 2005 16:22:38 GMT
Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com


In article <telecom24.138.7@telecom-digest.org>,
Eric Friedebach  <friedebach@yahoo.com> wrote:

> It seems that Sprint has been added to the Open Relay DataBase
> <www.ordb.org> by mistake somehow. Sprint has no idea how this
> happened, and they can't tell me when this will be resolved.

Riiiigghht. From the ORDB web pages, "stores IP-addresses of verified
open SMTP relays." The verification is done by a series of automated
tests. They also attempt to notify the postmaster at the listed site
when they become listed, and removal is as easy as requesting to be
retested.

Frankly, I wouldn't believe anything a Sprint customer service rep
tells me. It's their job to make you believe that any problem with
service is not theirs.


John Meissen                                     jmeissen@aracnet.com

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

From: Patrick Townson <ptownson@cableone.net>
Subject: Does Your Computer Look Like This?
Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2005 18:02:41 -0600


In 1954, the  well-known Popular Electronics Magazine in connection
with the Rand Corporation put together an artist's conception of what
computers would look like in fifty years, in 2004. Look at it here. 

http://www.mountainwings.com/past/5082.htm

This is _not_ an April Fool's joke.   


PAT

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

From: shlichter1@aol.com <shlichter1@aol.com>
Subject: Spammer With a Toll Free Number
Date: 1 Apr 2005 16:38:12 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com



Sounds like they want my credit card of SS number to ripe me off.  From
the ringback tone it appears to be an off shore system.

Everyone call and see about claiming your prizes.

THE ONLY GOOD SPAMMER IS A DEAD ONE!! HAVE YOU HUNTED ONE DOWN TODAY?
 (c) 2005  I Kill Spammers, Inc.  A Rot in Hell Company.

        --- Here is the message received in email ---

Please call me at 1-866-677-4100. I previously tried to contact you at
951-352-0222, but was unable to reach you. This is reference to an
entry form you filled out, either on-line or at a major mall or movie
theater.

I actually have some decent news in regards to the $500 shopping spree
and Global Travel or Chevrolet / Lexus contest. I have an address,
claim number, and further details for you. Since all prizes are well
over $500, I will need a few moments of your time to cover all related
lottery-type information from procuring your prizes due to any tax
issues on them.

Sincere congratulations!

The Prize Claim Coordinators

P.S. For your convenience, I am available 9:00 AM to 4:30 PM Central
Standard Time, Monday to Friday

172.128.38.11 Dec 9 2004 1:29AM

Sender:
The Prize Claim Coordinators
105 South River Rd 
North Aurora, IL, 60542

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

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 #140
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat Apr  2 01:02:01 2005
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j32621616820;
	Sat, 2 Apr 2005 01:02:01 -0500 (EST)
Date: Sat, 2 Apr 2005 01:02:01 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200504020602.j32621616820@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 #141

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 2 Apr 2005 01:02:00 EST    Volume 24 : Issue 141

Inside This Issue:                            Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Bell Canada Launches VoIP Without Reg Approval (Jack Decker)
    Book Review: The Great Telecom Meltdown (Patrick Townson)
    Re: What Happened To Channel 1 (Dan Lanciani)
    Re: Vonage May Route 911 Call to Congress, FCC (Tim@Backhome.org)
    Re: Cell Phone Compatibility (John Levine)
    Re: Verizon, Voicewing and Portability (Steve Sobol)
    Re: The Real Reason Why SBC Won't Work With Vonage on E-911 (T. Weintz)
    Re: Classic Telephone Call on PC (T. Sean Weintz)
    Re: New Technology Brings Back Old Problem For 911 (T. Sean Weintz)
    Re: Fax Station ID (T. Sean Weintz)
    Re: Blocking VOIP, Other Apps, Clearwire (Fred Goldstein)
    Re: GSM-900 (Michael Sullivan)
    Re: Does Your Computer Look Like This? (G. Paul Ziemba)
    Re: Does Your Comptuer Look Like This? (Michael Sullivan)
    Re: Obituary: Schiavo Dies After Feeding Tube Removed (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 <jack-yahoogroups@withheld on request>
Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 19:22:46 -0500
Subject: Bell Canada Launches VoIP without Reg Approval


http://www.phoneplusmag.com/hotnews/54h115345379033.html

By Charlotte Wolter

In a move that could put it head to head with Canadian regulator CRTC
(Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Council), Bell
Canada (BCE Inc.) has launched its consumer voice-over-IP service,
Bell Digital Voice, in one of its local service areas without waiting
for approval by the regulatory authority.

The CRTC has been in the process of developing explicit policies for
VoIP services, but is not expected to issue formal regulations until
later this year. In the meantime, Bell Canada has launched the service
in three locations in Quebec province: Sherbrooke, Quebec City and
Trois-Rivieres, after a trial of several months in Sherbrooke.

"Bell Canada is throwing down the gauntlet," says Jon Arnold,
principal of J. Arnold Associates, a VoIP consulting firm. "They
are saying, 'You are taking too long to make a decision on VoIP.' "

Bell Canada is using the carefully chosen term 'retail Internet
applications' to describe its new service. The reason for the wording
is the only explicit CRTC regulation on Internet services is a 1998
ruling that exempts 'retail Internet applications' from pricing
regulations.

Full story at:
http://www.phoneplusmag.com/hotnews/54h115345379033.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, 01 Apr 2005 09:25:45 -0500
From: TELECOM Digest Editor <ptownson@telecom-digest.org>
Subject: Book Review: The Great Telecom Meltdown


Author: Fred R. Goldstein
Publisher: Artech House, Boston
ISBN: 1-58053-939-4

Fred Goldstein, a long time participant in TELECOM Digest has recently
written a new book on the state of affairs in telephony. The book is
entitled, 'The Great Telecom Meltdown'.  Published by Artech House, 
this 200 page book describes, in sometimes vivid detail, exactly
what went wrong in the telecom industry, particularly in the past
decade. Although Fred does touch on the earlier history of the Bell
System, beginning in 1876 and continuing through and beyond the
divestiture in 1982, the book's major emphasis is on the time frame
of the 1990's through the present. 

In today's telecom business environment, you have to have a good grasp 
of _what went wrong_  and caused the failure of so many telecom firms
between 2000 and 2002 if you now expect to succeed. Some of the
topics covered in this book include:

Chapter 1: Ma Bell and her Natural Monopoly, 1876-1969.
Chapter 2: The Rebirth of Competition.
Chapter 3: Divestiture: Equal Access and Chinese Walls.
Chapter 4: The Internet Boom and the Limits to Growth.
Chapter 5: The Deutoronomy Networks.
Chapter 6: Losing by Winning: Wireless License Auctions.
Chapter 7: Competitive Access Providers, A Costly Way to Local Competition.
Chapter 8: DLECS and ELECS: An Exercise in Oversupply.
Chapter 9: CLECS Winning Strategies are Met by Rule Changes.
Chapter 10: Focusing on the Bottom Line. 
  and subchapters here are: Asset Valuation is Risky.
                            Accounting was Scandalous.
                            WorldCom and the Limits to Mergers.
                            AT&T Acted in Good Faith on Worldcoms Numbers.
                            Global Double Crossing.
                            New Services Need to Fit into the Food Chain.
                            Old Dinasaurs Die Hard.

Fred speaks in a rather blunt way and explains what has gone wrong
with the telecom industry, especially in the past few years. Fred and
I have been on radio 'talk shows' together in years past, so I had
some correspondence with him in email recently and asked him a few
questions which are covered below:

PAT: What were the most important legal or regulatory changes that led
to the meltdown?

Fred: The Meltdown happened because several bubbles burst at once.  The 
telecommunications industry isn't one thing, it's really several sectors. 
They all benefited from the late 1990s boom, and they all melted down 
together.  A lot of people have assumed that the Telecom Act of 1996 was 
the main culprit. But that turns out to have played a minor role.  Two 
things really had more to do with it.  First off, the 1984 AT&T divestiture 
created a fully competitive long distance sector, which enabled anyone to 
string fiber.  Second, the Internet was opened to the public in 1992 and 
privatized.  That created a huge demand for bandwidth, which got people 
interested in stringing more fiber.  By  1998, supply was starting to 
overwhelm demand.  This led to cheaper long distance calling rates, which 
killed the industry's cash cow.

PAT:  How were so many investors, entrepreneurs, and even economic
journalists led so far astray?

Fred: Capitalism feeds on greed and foolishness.  The stock market was
booming, investors were looking for places to put their money, and
entrepreneurs were willing to take it.  People were looking for
excuses to jump onto the bandwagon.  Some industry analysts even drank
the flav'r'ade by believing the story that the Internet was doubling
every hundred days.  That one factoid helped justify billions of
dollars of investment.  Yet it was not based in reality.  It came from
a Worldcom UUNET salesman's "best case scenario", what would happen
*if* the Internet were doubling every hundred days.  But it got retold
and retold until the 1998 Worldcom annual report stated it as fact. Of
course we now know that Worldcom's reports could be an exercise in
creative writing.

PAT: Was the meltdown a surprise?  What are the warning signs of a new
bubble?

Fred: No, it wasn't really a surprise at all, because too much money
was being spent irrationally.  Equipment vendors and network operators
were gearing up to handle increasing demand for dial-up ISP
connections, just as the big users were starting to shift to
broadband.  Venture capital-fed DSL operators were lining up next to
each other in crowded telco central offices, putting in several times
as much equipment as the local market could possibly support.
Competitive access providers were trenching fiber atop each other down
the same "NFL city" streets.  And the big European operators formed a
round firing squad when they overbid in the 2000 UK and Germany "3G"
license auctions.

PAT: What public telecom policies would be best for consumers and
investors?

Fred: Policies need to encourage competition where it is economically
sustainable, while regulating monopolies to prevent them from abusing
their customers.  The current FCC gets it entirely wrong, emphasizing
the private-property nature of the telephone company's wire plant, and
is moving to allow the incumbent telephone companies to take control
of Internet service and even content that traverses "their" wire.  The
FCC then encourages competitors to string their own parallel
facilities.  This is entirely wrong, as the history of the past decade
shows that overbuilding is rarely profitable.  The only winners were
the early investors who sold out to greater fools.

The outside plant is a natural monopoly, a public utility, that should be 
available on a cost-based nondiscriminatory basis.  The FCC's 
"hypothetically efficient competitor" policy only works during a boom cycle 
like that of 1996-1999, which can never be sustained.  Once the local wire 
or fiber is properly regulated, innovation can take place over that wire, 
making more efficient use of capital and therefore having a reasonable 
chance at becoming profitable.

PAT: And how are your sales going on the book? Is the price per copy
seriously $79 per copy?

Fred: Yes, list $79, not that it was my idea -- Artech House does
technical books which tend to have a small audience that is really,
really interested, and can get the company to pay.  Textbooks often go
at that price too, since they know the audience has little choice,
once they manage to get the book assigned.  If the book does well
enough, maybe I can talk them into a lower price for another printing.

It is moving rather well for Artech, several hundred so far, and its Amazon 
number has gone as high as 13,000 or so, before drifting down of course, 
which means they've moved a few copies.

PAT: Thanks for talking with me about this.

Fred: And thank you!

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

You can look on Amazon for 'The Great Telecom Meltdown' or you can
inquire of the publisher, Artech House http://www.artechhouse.com . 

Patrick Townson 

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

Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2005 02:46:44 EST
From: Dan Lanciani <ddl@danlan.com>
Subject: Re: What Happened To Channel 1


ihatespam@crazyhat.net (DevilsPGD) wrote:

> In message <telecom24.134.12@telecom-digest.org> Dan Lanciani
> <ddl@danlan.com> wrote:

>> Except that (according to the original proposal) it won't run in the
>> clear anywhere you can "tap" without relatively sophisticated die
>> probing equipment.  Are you aware of some change in the approach or
>> are you just assuming that the manufacturers will screw up the
>> implementation?  If the latter, remember that the original proposal
>> also incorporates key revocation for compromised device families.

> Sure, but imagine the legal backlash if suddenly Sony's TVs no longer
> work.

I don't imagine that there would be much legal backlash as long as
"legitimate" users were supplied with an upgrade, especially if that
upgrade were provided before the remaining devices were made to fail.
Note that this seems to be exactly what is happening with some
receivers that predate the broadcast flag mandate (you remember, the
receivers that the FCC and broadcast flag apologists claimed would
continue to work unchanged after the flag was enabled) so there is
precedent.  See for example:

http://product.samsung.com/stb_upgrade/

Now of course, there are cost tradeoffs between plugging a hole and
placating the "legitimate" owners of the equipment you need to
upgrade.  Given that the original broadcast flag proposal was pretty
much a rehash of existing digital rights management proposals for
other consumer content (and the broadcast flag mandate is a great way
to get that DRM infrastructure deployed) I suspect that the costs of
key revocation have already been considered.

Dan Lanciani
ddl@danlan.*com

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

From: Tim@Backhome.org
Subject: Re: Vonage May Route 911 Call to Congress, FCC
Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 06:09:05 -0800
Organization: Cox Communications


Typical arrogance of SBC.  Sounds like AT&T in 1970.

What SBC is conveniently forgetting is that the 911 system belongs to
local or regional government (the residents and taxpayers) not the
@#!&* legacy phone company.

I presume Vonage is smart enough to make that case.

Jack Decker wrote:

> http://news.com.com/Vonage+may+route+911+call+to+Congress,+FCC/2100-7352_3-5647706.html

> By Ben Charny
> Staff Writer, CNET News.com

> Internet phone provider Vonage may ask Congress and the Federal
> Communications Commission to help it solve problems with SBC over
> subscriber access to the 911 emergency call network.

> SBC's decision not to work more closely with Vonage, made public
> Wednesday, may delay efforts to fix the problem that keeps a majority
> of U.S. Net phone providers from successfully routing 911 calls to the
> right emergency calling center. Many of those 911 calls are instead
> sent to non-emergency operators, with no guarantee the calls will
> reach dispatch centers close enough to provide the most effective
> help.

> In mid-February, Vonage asked SBC, BellSouth, Qwest and Verizon, the
> nation's largest local phone companies collectively known as the
> Bells, to provide access to their 911 infrastructure within the next
> 60 days. At first, it appeared the logjam had been broken: SBC met
> with Vonage to work out the logistics; Verizon, the largest Bell, also
> committed to testing just such a system; and Qwest, the smallest of
> the Bells, began considering its options.

> While Verizon and BellSouth are now cooperating, SBC has refused to do
> so, telling the FCC that Vonage and other Net phone providers need to
> develop a standard way to route the 911 calls appropriately. What
> Vonage was asking to test, SBC claimed, was a proprietary fix. "SBC
> can not agree to engage in numerous individual tests with each and
> every VoIP provider," it recently told the FCC, referring to the Net
> phone technology also known as voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP). A
> spokesman wasn't immediately available for comment.

> Vonage spokeswoman Brooke Schulz said Vonage is considering asking
> Congress and the FCC to demand SBC open up its 911 infrastructure to
> Vonage and other Net phone operators. In rebuking SBC's proprietary
> claim, Schulz said operators Packet8, AT&T's CallVantage and Verizon
> Communications VoiceWing Net phone service all use the same 911
> products, "so how can SBC call what we're doing proprietary?"

> Full story at:
> http://news.com.com/Vonage+may+route+911+call+to+Congress,+FCC/2100-7352_3-5647706.html

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

Date: 1 Apr 2005 02:50:26 -0000
From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
Subject: Re: Cell Phone Compatibility
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


> I have a couple of inactive cell phones (Motorola 120e and Samsung
> GS-x426) that are lying around because I have taken phone
> upgrades. ... The Motorola was originally used in the Verizon
> Wireless network, and the Samsung was used in the AT&T Wireless
> network, but I have a feeling other providers could work with these
> phones.

It's good you asked, because your feeling is wrong.

The Moto 120e is a dual-band CDMA phone, and is doubtless locked to
work only on Verizon.  The Samsung is a GSM phone that is locked to
ATTWS.  To work on any other network, they'd need to be unlocked.  If
you still have service with the carriers, you could try calling them
or going to one of their stores and ask nicely if they'll unlock them,
but don't be surprised if they say no.

If you could unlock them, a big if, the CDMA phone would work with
other CDMA 800/1900 carriers, many of of the second tier telco-related
ones like Alltel.  The GSM phone would work on other GSM networks,
which in the US basically means Cingular (the part that didn't used to
be ATTWS) and T-Mobile.

I'd suggest selling them as locked phones and making it clear that
they're for Verizon and ATTWS.

R's,

John

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

From: Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net>
Subject: Re: Verizon, Voicewing and Portability
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 19:48:40 -0800
Organization: Glorb Internet Services, http://www.glorb.com


Robert Bonomi wrote:

> My folks, in another state, have 'cable Internet' -- they don't have
> any choice, being a couple of thousand feet too far away from the
> C.O. for DSL.  A few weeks ago, the cable company did an over-night
> 'upgrade' of the head-end equipment.  It was FIVE DAYS before my folks
> Internet connection worked again.  

That's interesting. I'm in a relatively unpopulated corner of the Town
of Apple Valley, part of the Victor Valley which is in California's
High Desert region.  The population of Victor Valley is around
300,000. Other than Barstow, which is served by Time Warner Cable, all
of the cities here (as well as several San Bernardino County
municipalities "down the hill" on the other side of the mountains) are
served by Charter. Apple Valley itself has about 60,000 people living
here.

I had an extremely aggravating week one week about 18 months ago,
where something at my headend broke, and Charter kept coming out to
fix it, and it kept breaking. Repeatedly, over the course of six
days. They finally got it fixed permanently. I forget what it was.

It was aggravating because I was telecommuting to work at the time,
and my job description primarily involved working online. :)

But since then, Charter's been rock-solid in this area. It's gotten to
the point that if I have a problem, I assume it's my el-cheapo SMC
Barricade router* -- and usually, that's a correct assumption, and
rebooting the router fixes the problem.

**SJS

*I don't know if all Barricades suck. Mine does, but mine's the
bottom-of-the-line model from about three years ago, and I bought it
for $30 new, so I don't really expect much out of it.

-- 
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: T. Sean Weintz <strap@hanh-ct.org>
Subject: Re: The Real Reason Why SBC Won't Work With Vonage on E-911
Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 16:38:12 -0500
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com


TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to a writer:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Can't you just see SBC chomping at the
> bit to get the old 'Bell System' out of cold storage and back into
> service with all its old ways, albiet modernized somewhat?  Put this
> thing down -- refusal to work on 911 with VOIP carriers as one more
> thing to negotiate when the FCC is asked to approve the AT&T/SBC
> merger.  PAT]

Scary. I am in what was SNET (Southern New England Telephone) territory. 
What was I believe the oldest RBOC in the country -- in fact I am right 
now sitting only about 1500 feet away from the site first commercial 
switching office in the country.

SBC bought out SNET a few years back, and has done NOTHING for us but
take what WAS good service and make it lousy, while raising prices and
laying off workers. Back in the monolithic BELL ATT days, things were
MUCH more reliable than they are now. I'm talking REAL sloppy stuff --
botched record keeping, service suddenly shifted to a different set of
pairs on the underground feed for no apparent reasons, etc. etc.

SNET HAD been in the process of running fiber all over our state (and
starting to do Cable TV!) when SBC bought them out and nixed all that.

I HATE SBC. My only hope now is that perhaps Verizon will get big enough 
to buy them out? Or maybe some sort of deal that would give our state to 
Verizon? (All the surrounding states, and even a teeny tiny portion of 
this state, have Verizon as the local RBOC ILEC.)

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

From: T. Sean Weintz <strap@hanh-ct.org>
Subject: Re: Classic Telephone Call on PC
Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 16:43:01 -0500
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com


Gerhard Nowak wrote:

> Hi there,

> Since 3 months I try to get any proggy and tried out everything starting 
> from Hyperterminal to make a phonecall on my laptop!

> Its just not possible!  It's amazing, how all related programs guide
> into the wrong direction.

> Please help, if there is anybody out there to do so. Maybe I got
> something wrong, or else.  I don`t know:

> If I use hyperterminal of windows -- and all other proggies are
> derived from this - I can call a party, of course; and I also hear the
> voice, but there is never a conversation and I can never answer, I can
> not even "lift" the phone of the hook!

> What to do?

> Thanks in advance,

> Gerry

I've never seen a program that will do what you are trying to do.

What would have to happen is the computers sound card would have to 
record your voice on the sound cards microphone, digitize it, and then 
play it back out the modem. To do that, you need a modem that shows up 
as a multimedia device under windows (most don't) and of course you also 
need software to actually do what I describe above. I have never seen such.

Plenty of software will DIAL for you, but then expects that once the
call is made you will pick up the call on a plain old handset plugged
into the passthru port on your modem.

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

From: T. Sean Weintz <strap@hanh-ct.org>
Subject: Re: New Technology Brings Back Old Problem For 911
Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 16:47:07 -0500
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com


Jack Decker wrote:

> "What we want to make people aware of is they are not able to access
> 911 like you can on a traditional phone," said Mackinac County 911
> Coordinator Pam Matelski. "The dispatch center will not get your
> information."

<tongue in cheek mode>

Given the amount of airtime this issue has been given, anyone who is NOT 
aware of the VOIP vs. 911 issue should be left to die when calling 911, 
thus weeding their stupidity out of the gene pool and hopefully 
improving humanity.

<\tounge in chee mode>

Seriously. Ths issue has been beaten to death in the media.

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

From: T. Sean Weintz <strap@hanh-ct.org>
Subject: Re: Fax Station ID
Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 16:51:38 -0500
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com


Robert Bonomi wrote:

> Sorry, John, but you are *wrong*.

> You, "the person" sending the fax are *still* required to place the
> identification information at the top/bottom of every page, or on the
> first page.

> You are correct that _equipment_ manufactured before 20 Dec 1992 does
> not have to do this 'automatically', HOWEVER, just because you are
> using such equipment you are _not_ exempt from the requirement of 47
> USC 227 (d) (1).

So when FAX.COM sends me junk faxes and they put MY OWN PHONE NUMBER
in as the header on the fax, and also send MY OWN NUMBER as the CLID
info (from what is likely a PRI they are using to war dial fax
numbers), they are at least DOUBLY breaking the law, huh?

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

Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 23:04:22 -0500
From: Fred Goldstein <SeeSigForEmail@wn6.wn.net>
Subject: Re: Blocking VOIP, Other Apps, Clearwire 


On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 22:37:09 -0500, Jack Decker wrote:

> [Jack Decker Comment: The basic issue here is much larger than VoIP -
> the fact is that most people who pay a monthly fee for broadband
> expect to be able to connect to "the Internet" and all the
> applications available there.  For some strange reason a few ISP's
> seem to have the attitude that it's not sufficient that their
> customers are paying for an Internet connection, but instead they feel
> that if they offer an add-on service such as VoIP, they should be able
> to block competitive services.  Now, I want you to think about the
> Internet services you use and the web pages you visit, because let me
> tell you, if they make this stick, NOTHING on the Internet is
> guaranteed accessible to you.

But that is, legally, the case.  Under current US law, ISPs are
regulated as "information" providers, precisely because they are not
simply providing bit pipes.  Sure, most ISPs just pass everything,
because that's what many people want and it's a competitive market.
But it's not as if "ISP" is a licensed common carrier.  It's an
information provider.  If blocking some things is how they optimize
the performance of other things, that's their business.

Common carriers are a different entity.  The problem is that the Bells
do not want to be common carriers any more; they want to provide
"information" service on an exclusive basis, kicking off other ISPs.
That would be very, very dangerous, but it's before the FCC right now
(Verizon and BellSouth Forbearance petitions).  Without competition
*or* common carriage at an underlying layer (ATM, what their DSL uses
now), they could block anything they want and that's that.  ...  

> My point is this: Up until now, Internet providers have pretty much
> acted like common carriers -- in fact, they have evaded prosecution on
> copyright infringement charges by explicitly stating that they were 
> common carriers and do not monitor the traffic that their customers 
> send back and forth.

Wrong, wrong, wrong.  They are NOT common carriers, have never stated
that they were common carriers, and don't want to be common carriers.
ISPs have separate legal rights concerning content owned by their
customers, but it's not part of common carriage.

> Now, all of a sudden, a few of them seem to want
> to go the other way.  Well if that be the case, and they no longer
> claim to be common carriers but in fact are actively blocking certain
> kinds of traffic, then watch the lawsuits begin for the traffic they
> DON'T block -- and they have brought it all on themselves by their
> greed.

They are governed by contract law.  Clearwire is apparently acting
within its contract.  You don't like it?  Go somewhere else.  That's
the beauty of the ISP business, so long as competition remains
available.

> For those of you who read this and are connected with an Internet
> Service Provider, and if your ISP belongs to the "U.S. Internet
> Industry Association", may I respectfully suggest that you think long
> and hard about David McClure's comments in Light Reading, and whether
> that is the type of organization you wish to belong to.

The USIIA is *not* a real ISP trade association.  It is a public
relations front, an "astroturf" operation run by Sam Simon's Issue
Dynamics Inc., public relations agent for the Bells.  Simon's IDI
creates phoney organizations in order to promote their clients'
interests.  I have an article on him on my web site
http://www.ionary.com/ion-astroturf.html .  Other IDI fronts are APT,
TRAC and New Millennium Research Council.  So whatever McClure is
saying is what Verizon is thinking.


  Fred Goldstein    k1io  fgoldstein "at" ionary.com
  ionary Consulting       http://www.ionary.com/ 

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

From: Michael D. Sullivan <userid@camsul.example.invalid>
Subject: Re: GSM-900
Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2005 05:10:32 GMT


Jason wrote:

> But since we transmit in x freq, then the receiver must tune to x feq
> in order to receive the signal right?  Why transmit at x freq and
> receive at y freq?

> Or I have misunderstood. Kindly enlighthen.

Many (but not all) two-way radio transmission systems that operate in 
full duplex (which means there are two full-time transmission paths, one 
in each direction) use different frequencies for each of the two paths. 

One path, known as the downlink, uses frequency X to transmit from the 
base station to the mobile, and the other path, known as the uplink, 
uses frequency Y to transmit from the mobile to the base station at the 
same time.  Under this scenario, the handset transmits on Y to a base 
station receiver tuned to Y, while the base station transmits on X to 
the handset, which is tuned to receive X.  Operating in this manner is 
known as frequency division duplex, or FDD.

Using paired frequencies that are sufficiently far apart allows the
receiver at each end to be able to operate without getting overloaded
and desensitized by the transmitter at the same end.  If the receiver
were tuned to the same frequency being used to transmit at the same
time, it would pick up its own transmitter's strong signal and
wouldn't be able to pick up the much weaker signal coming from the
other end.

Some communications networks use a single frequency for both
transmissions, but alternate the use of that frequency in time so that
neither end is actually trying to receive when it is transmitting,
known as time division duplex or TDD.  One way of operating in this
manner is to use "simplex" transmissions, such as on ham radio bands
or old-fashioned taxi dispatching systems, where you say "over" when
you are finished and then the other party keys its transmitter on to
respond.  Another way to accomplish it is to alternate between
transmitting and receiving at a constant, high rate, with both units
carefully synchronized.

Keeping the units synchronized at a high enough rate for high-quality
speech is complex, and even more so when the distance between the two
units can vary considerably, since for every mile of distance, there
is a delay between transmission and reception of 1/18,600 second.
Thus, if the system is designed for a maximum transmission distance of
20 miles and a minimum of 0 miles, there must be at least 1/9300
second of dead air at the beginning and end of each time slice to keep
the two transmissions from overlapping, wasting at least 1/2325 second
for each pair of time slices (1 in each direction).  If the time
slices themselves are short, as they must be for conversational speech
that isn't going to tolerate significant delay due to the time
compression and decompression involved, a significant amount of
transmission time is wasted.

And that's for just a single two-way voice transmission.  GSM networks
combine many conversations into a single paired radio channel, which
is itself time-sliced, utilizing time division multiple access (TDMA);
but GSM separates the TDMA uplink and downlink transmissions by
frequency, using FDD.  So GSM is an FDD/TDMA system.  In applications
where an appreciable time delay is acceptable, TDD/TDMA can be used,
in which transmission time on a single frequency is sliced up between
up- and downlinks, each of which is further time-sliced into multiple
communications channels.


Michael D. Sullivan
Bethesda, MD (USA)
(Replace "example.invalid" with "com" in my address.)

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

From: G. Paul Ziemba <paul+usenet@w6yx.stanford.edu>
Subject: Re: Does Your Computer Look Like This?
Date: Sat, 2 Apr 2005 04:19:01 UTC
Organization: The Treehouse


Patrick Townson <ptownson@cableone.net> wrote:

> In 1954, the  well-known Popular Electronics Magazine in connection
> with the Rand Corporation put together an artist's conception of what
> computers would look like in fifty years, in 2004. Look at it here. 

> http://www.mountainwings.com/past/5082.htm

Wasn't this a FARK photoshop contest entry?

> This is _not_ an April Fool's joke.   

"That is not my dog."


G. Paul Ziemba
FreeBSD unix:
 8:16PM  up 84 days, 21:03, 9 users, load averages: 0.24, 0.22, 0.17

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

From: Michael D. Sullivan <userid@camsul.example.invalid>
Subject: Re: Does Your Computer Look Like This?
Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2005 05:14:40 GMT


Patrick Townson wrote:

> In 1954, the  well-known Popular Electronics Magazine in connection
> with the Rand Corporation put together an artist's conception of what
> computers would look like in fifty years, in 2004. Look at it here. 

> http://www.mountainwings.com/past/5082.htm

> This is _not_ an April Fool's joke.   

No, it's not an April Fool's joke.  It's a hoax.  The photo at issue 
came from a Photoshopping competition on fark.com.  Debunked at: 
http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/hoaxes/computer.asp

-- 

Michael D. Sullivan
Bethesda, MD (USA)
(Replace "example.invalid" with "com" in my address.)

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Shucks, gee-whiz; I can't get anything
past you guys, can I?  Oh well, Patrick, nice try, but no cigar.  PAT]

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

From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Subject: Re: Obituary: Schiavo Dies After Feeding Tube Removed
Date: 1 Apr 2005 07:30:05 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


Lisa Minter wrote:

> By MIKE SCHNEIDER, Associated Press Writer

 From a communication point of view, the facts of this story were
terribly distorted.  The parents' point of view and their videos got
very widespread airing on TV, but the dry boring medical assessments
got much less airing.  As a result, many viewers got the impression
the girl was in better shape than she was.  Further, the Internet was
used to transmit all sorts of false malicious gossip about her
husband; he was doing far more to take care of her than generally
described.

For those who read all the way to the back of the newspaper or watched
the late night cable news, the full facts were shown.  But most people
don't or can't do that.

I'm sensitive to this issue because I went through it with a family
member.  When someone is that sick -- as I've seen in nursing
homes -- they don't look or act as nicely as the parents' videos showed.

> "And so his heartless cruelty continues until this very last moment,"
> said the Rev. Frank Pavone, a Roman Catholic priest. He added: "This
> is not only a death, with all the sadness that brings, but this is a
> killing, and for that we not only grieve that Terri has passed but we
> grieve that our nation has allowed such an atrocity as this and we
> pray that it will never happen again."

This kind of thinking is really disturbing.  The intimates are
certainly entitled to their point of view.  However, other familes
simply do not share those religious attitudes about medical care.  A
feeding tube is not lifting a glass of water, it is surgical
procedure.  Like any medical procedure, there is a choice of
proceeding or not, and that must be weighed upon the expected the
results.

This situation has shown there are some people who believe that every
medical procedure possible must be applied or it is a "killing" as the
priest above says.  But other people do not see it that way.  I'm
afraid their views will be imposed on the rest of us.

> ... with many arrested as they tried to bring her food and water.

That illustrated the lack of understanding in this case.  They
could've brought her all the food and water they wanted and it would
not have done a damn bit of good.

> Court-appointed doctors ruled she was in a
> persistent vegetative state, with no real consciousness or chance of
> recovery.

What is sad is that many people refused to accept this medical fact.
It was reviewed again and again by many doctors.  Yet some others --
based only on what they saw on TV -- claimed otherwise.

> [her parents] said she laughed, cried, responded to them
> and tried to talk.

Sadly, there was absolutely no real evidence of that.  If any of that
actually occured, there would've been no case or issue because no
doctor would pull the tube given that.

I don't like to criticize the parents in their time of grief, but they
chose to involve the country's legislators and turn this into a
national spectacle.  The fact is they were in denial about their
daughter's condition.  It is terribly painful for parents to lose a
child and many parents don't handle it well.  But that doesn't justify
dragging in the US Congress.

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I do not like to criticize the family
or Ms. Shiavo's husband either in this time of grieving for all of
them. But I really suspect that this 'lose-lose' situation for all of
them -- and all of us, really -- is going to continue to backfire on
the various politicians who persisted in sticking their nose into the
mess, for example, the brothers Bush and certain other elements of the
far right, including Terry Randall, all of whom, I suspect are hoping/
wishing that the stench will go away soon. Far too many newspapers and
radio/television outlets have 'changed formats' to one of "All
Schiavo, all the time" recently.  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 #141
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat Apr  2 20:06:21 2005
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j3316LN25347;
	Sat, 2 Apr 2005 20:06:21 -0500 (EST)
Date: Sat, 2 Apr 2005 20:06:21 -0500 (EST)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200504030106.j3316LN25347@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 #142

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 2 Apr 2005 20:05:00 EST    Volume 24 : Issue 142

Inside This Issue:                     Remember to Set Your Clock Ahead!

    Prepaid vrs. 'Regular' Cell Phone Service (TELECOM Digest Editor)
    Microsoft Employee Sentenced for Software Theft (Lisa Minter)
    Yahoo Hires Gen. Manager of MSN's Programming Group (Lisa Minter)
    Cell Phone Service Comparisons (Den)
    DECT For Local Loop: 'Boot up Time' (news@absamail.co.za)
    Re: Fax Station ID (DevilsPGD)
    Re: Fax Station ID (Robert Bonomi)
    Re: Classic Telephone Call on PC (Robert Bonomi)
    Re: Classic Telephone Call on PC (Gerhard Nowak)
    Re: Blackboards vs. Whiteboards (John Hines)
    Re: GSM-900 (Chris Farrar)
    Re: Cell Phone Compatibility (Steve Sobol)
    Re: Verizon's Pitch Could Signal Local Cable War (Steve Sobol)
    Re: The Real Reason Why SBC Won't Work With Vonage on E-911 (Thor Simon)
    Re: Does Your Computer Look Like This? (Robert Bonomi)
    Re: Book Review: The Great Telecom Meltdown (John Levine)
    Re: Every Ten Days (Choreboy)
    Re: Obituary: Schiavo Dies After Feeding Tube Removed (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: Sat, 2 Apr 2005 18:37:21 EST
From: TELECOM Digest Editor <ptownson@telecom-digest.org>
Subject: Prepaid vrs. 'Regular' Cell Phone Service


I have mentioned before that I have _two_ working cellular phones
here.  They are both Nokia 5165 models (digital service). The original
phone that I used both in Chicago, on the bus trip to here in
Independence, and for a month or so after that is on AT&T Wireless
(although it was not on prepaid in those days, just on regular service
with a Chicago 630 area code).  I went downtown one day back then, to
a store which had an AT&T Wireless sign on the front of it, and asked
the lady about switching me over to a local (area 620-331) number. She
said she could not do it, mainly because they were no longer AT&T
 ... which had gone out of business here in town a few days before. "We
are now Cingular Wireless," the lady told me.  "Myself and my two
clerks were with AT&T, but they 'traded us' off to Cingular when
Cingular took over Independence. The sign painters are coming out
today or tomorrow to change our sign and windows. But if you want to
go with Cingular, I can certainly help you."

I handed her the (at the time) _one_ Nokia 5165 phone I had and said
okay, program it over to Cingular. She looked at the phone and said,
"We cannot program that phone, it is permanently locked in firmware to
AT&T. When you quit AT&T the phone becomes useless." Thinking that maybe
she was lying to me in order to get a sale for Cingular, I checked with
various other places: the Cellular One dealer a few doors away, the
Radio Shack dealer here (who sells for Alltel under the Radio Shack
corporate deal), the United States Cellular dealer on Chestnut Street,
and the salesman at the Alltel Corporate kiosk out at Walmart. They
all said the same thing: Phone is locked into AT&T; buy any of ours
that you wish, on our various service plans, but that physical phone
you are holding now is _only useable_ on AT&T. 

So I went back to the Cingular Wireless lady (whose store was now
properly decorated and marked as 'Cingular' rather that 'AT&T' and
told her I would take one of her service plans __if she could replace
the 5165 in order that I did not have to get all new peripherals for
it, after all, a Cellsocket and a headphone and a battery charger for
one 5165 will fit any 5165 phones; they don't care _who_ provides the
service.

"Well, yeah, she said, I think I have one in back somewhere," and she
found another 5165 _not firmware locked_ and she programmed it up for
use on Cingular Wireless with a local 620-330 number. She gave it to
me for ten dollars with a one year agreement. I chatted with the
person in Chicago who was holding the (now expired) agreement on the
AT&T phone, and his suggestion was 'just toss it in the trash and
we will go with the new Cingular phone you got instead.'  But I did
not have the heart to just toss a perfectly good phone in the trash,
so I talked to someone in Tulsa (we here in Independence are in the
'Tulsa Market' on AT&T) and I had her put it on prepaid service,
figuring I would not use it a lot since I had just gotten the new
Cingular ... and all my peripherals would work on either phone. But
I took from the various selections I was offered a number out of
Wichita, KS (316-841). Now fast-forward three or four years; that is
where I am at today. One Nokia 5165 on Cingular, regular service 
locally here in Independence, and one Nokia 5165 on AT&T Prepaid
service out of Wichita, which is considered 'roaming' when used here
in town. 

On Thursday I called AT&T to replenish the time on the prepaid phone;
I only buy ten dollars of time because it expires whether used or not
after 45 days. But this time, the recorded menu for 'adding time to
your prepaid wireless' had changed. The recorded message said "We are
now known as Cingular Go service, the prices are the same, but you
get 90 days to use it up, and you can purchase prepaid time at your
local Cingular dealer."  So, I went back downtown and talked to the
lady I deal with at Cingular. She agreed, "we will _soon_ be able to
take 'Go phone' payments; not right now, but hopefully soon." She
continued, "and you can also get a local number here in Independence
for your prepaid phone as well, we don't have any more '330' numbers,
now they are assigning on 620-714, but to get that prepaid phone
changed over to a local number, when you call to have it done
(I cannot do it here as of now), be certain to tell the clerk that
you are 'Tulsa Market' otherwise they will try to do it out of
Wichita and claim that AT&T (now Cingular) is  not in the 620  area.
The _only way_ Cingular (prepaid or regular service) will give you
a 620 number is if they are clued into the fact that this agency is
out of the Tulsa market, otherwise they will assume you are up in 
the bigger towns north end of state or else Wichita and try to give
you a 316 or a 913 number."

I came back home and called the number she had given me. They indeed
know all about assigning new numbers, but here is where the kicker
comes in: Yes, we now are Cingular, and yes, the former AT&T prepaid
service plan is now 'Go' from Cingular. But the only way you can get a
620 number is by _purchasing_ a new GSM phone. Cingular is now almost
entirely GSM; older digital customers such as yourself with the
Nokia 5165 phone are 'grandfathered' but no more digital service to
new prepaid customers (which I would be) allowed. And it seems they
refuse to assign a 620 number to anyone other than with a new
GSM-style phone. According to the folks at Cingular Wireless, "there
is no guarentee your old digital phone will work correctly on the
GSM network," that is why we do not allow old digital customers (other
than the 'regular customers' to use their existing phones."

The lady I deal with downtown at Cingular Wireless said "those people 
at (our) corporate office are largely correct. I suggest you probably
would work out okay, but _they_ say the old AT&T firmware, while it
does allow number changes to be made, does _not_ allow for carrier
changes to be made. They told me how to go about changing phone
numbers for already existing Cingular Wireless customers; I could
maybe change your existing (Cingular) Nokia 5165 phone and program it
for a new number, but that old AT&T firmware is going to mess us up
if we try to get a number change _into 620_ using it. She said the
only people Cingular is allowing to go on prepaid service these days
are people with the newer GMS phones; the ones that have the little
card I have to slide in it. 

By now I am completely confused. Can any reader familiar with GMS and
AT&T Wireless and Cingular Wireless help me figure this out?  I am
willing, and desirous of using my old Nokia phone as long as I can;
the Cingular phone is perfect for me; it works with local seven digit
dialing. Only very rarely (when the local tower is overloaded for some
reason) does it go into 'roaming mode'. The AT&T phone defaults to
'roaming mode' since I am no where near Wichita or Tulsa or Chicago
(the screen message calls where I am 'extended area', but that is the
next step above 'roaming', and it demands to begin each outgoing call
with 'press one for English; enter your own number; enter your PIN;
enter the number you wish to call.' However, when I was on AT&T full
time as a 'regular' (not a prepaid) customer, I did not get all that
nonsense about 'enter your number and your PIN' before I was allowed
to make any calls at all; according to Cingular Wireless I should not
get that nonesense from them either _if I am a 'local' user_, prepaid
or not, that it is only 'roaming' customers on 'prepaid' who get that
request.


PAT

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

Date: 02 Apr 2005 13:58:41 -0800
From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: Microsoft Employee Sentenced for Software Theft


Richard Gregg, 45, agreed to a plea agreement in U.S.
District Court in Seattle, where he admitted to ordering more
than $13 million worth of software meant for internal use and
selling it to pay off a mortgage and buy luxury cars.

Gregg, who worked at Microsoft until late 2002, had cooperated with
prosecutors in their investigation, a fact that Judge John Coughenour
said he took into consideration at the sentencing.

Redmond, Washington-based Microsoft cracked down on criminal theft in
late 2003 and put in more stringent policies after similar incidents
involving employees selling Microsoft's high-end software for personal
gain were discovered.

Microsoft hired investigators and made changes to its internal
ordering system in order to prevent future incidents.
           
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: 02 Apr 2005 13:59:31 -0800
From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: Yahoo Hires Gen. Manager of MSN's Programming Group


Scott Moore will be based in Santa Monica, California, and report to
Yahoo Media Group leader Lloyd Braun. Moore will join the company on
May 2 and oversee a number of media sites within the group, Yahoo
said.

Earlier in his career, Moore had been publisher of Slate, the Internet
magazine recently sold by Microsoft to the Washington Post.

Yahoo, which is expanding in Southern California amid a move closer to
Hollywood's entertainment companies, has been led by former studio
chief Terry Semel since 2001.

Yahoo hired Braun, a former chairman of Walt Disney Co.'s ABC
Entertainment Television Group, in November.

The Silicon Valley company, which reaps most of its revenue from
advertising, is actively seeking content deals as it moves to broaden
into entertainment and beyond such staples as shopping, e-mail and Web
search.

Yahoo already has signed content deals with "Survivor" creator Mark
Burnett Productions and JibJab Media, a producer of short animated
films.

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: Den <nul@nul.nul>
Subject: Cell Phone Service Comparisons
Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2005 16:23:04 GMT


Group:

Is there a site or publication that gives an unbiased comparison of
the difference cell phone service plans?  I'm thinking of moving from
pay-as-you-go but there seems to be so much choice!

Cheers,

Den 

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

From: news@absamail.co.za
Subject: DECT For Local Loop: 'Boot up Time'.
Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2005 03:22:31 -0600


Hi,

I'm told that DECT takes 10 minutes after power-up, before an incoming
call can be detected !!

DECT has been used in rural areas in 'developing' countries, where
solar-charges have been used for power.  Apparently when the 'base
station' is 15 Km removed, the subscriber needs to transmit
continually 250mW power. Which means about 500mW continual standby
power !

My suggestion to use a 5% duty cycle to check for incoming call
detection, each say 2 seconds, was re-buffed on the basis that 'boot
up' takes 10 minutes.  If so, what accounts for this massive delay ?

Thanks for any info.

== Chris Glur.

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

From: DevilsPGD <ihatespam@crazyhat.net>
Subject: Re: Fax Station ID
Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2005 00:25:24 -0700
Organization: Disorganized


In message <telecom24.141.10@telecom-digest.org> T. Sean Weintz
<strap@hanh-ct.org> wrote:

> Robert Bonomi wrote:

> So when FAX.COM sends me junk faxes and they put MY OWN PHONE NUMBER
> in as the header on the fax, and also send MY OWN NUMBER as the CLID
> info (from what is likely a PRI they are using to war dial fax
> numbers), they are at least DOUBLY breaking the law, huh?

Yes indeed, they definitely are.

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

From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi)
Subject: Re: Fax Station ID
Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2005 09:48:07 -0000
Organization: Widgets, Inc.


In article <telecom24.141.10@telecom-digest.org>, T. Sean Weintz
<strap@hanh-ct.org> wrote:

> Robert Bonomi wrote:

>> Sorry, John, but you are *wrong*.

>> You, "the person" sending the fax are *still* required to place the
>> identification information at the top/bottom of every page, or on the
>> first page.

>> You are correct that _equipment_ manufactured before 20 Dec 1992 does
>> not have to do this 'automatically', HOWEVER, just because you are
>> using such equipment you are _not_ exempt from the requirement of 47
>> USC 227 (d) (1).

> So when FAX.COM sends me junk faxes and they put MY OWN PHONE NUMBER
> in as the header on the fax, and also send MY OWN NUMBER as the CLID
> info (from what is likely a PRI they are using to war dial fax
> numbers), they are at least DOUBLY breaking the law, huh?

Yuppers.  *YOU* can take them to court for violation of 47 USC 227, and
clearly show 'wilful and deliberate' non-compliance.  The mere violation
entitles you to 'statutory damages' of $500 per fax. The 'wilful...' part
entitles you to _triple_ that amount, per fax.

Faking the Caller-ID, runs afoul of FTC 'telemarketing rules', +and+
similar FCC rules.  The govt. has to go after them on that, but it is
$11,000 in fines for *each* instance.

Note: What you're getting isn't from "FAX.COM" any more. The feds
_did_ sue them out of existence.  The perps behind that operation,
_didn't_ "learn from the experience", however, and _despite_ being
named *personally* in the court orders, have set up a new network of
sham corporations to continue their abusive ways.

The "wheels of justice" are grinding slowly, but when the hammer
falls, there _will_ be prison time involved.  The Feds do _not_ take
it lightly when somebody *deliberately* sets out to violate their
orders.

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

From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi)
Subject: Re: Classic Telephone Call on PC
Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2005 09:37:15 -0000
Organization: Widgets, Inc.


In article <telecom24.141.8@telecom-digest.org>, T. Sean Weintz
<strap@hanh-ct.org> wrote:

> Gerhard Nowak wrote:

>> Hi there,

>> Since 3 months I try to get any proggy and tried out everything starting 
>> from Hyperterminal to make a phonecall on my laptop!

>> Its just not possible!  It's amazing, how all related programs guide
>> into the wrong direction.

>> Please help, if there is anybody out there to do so. Maybe I got
>> something wrong, or else.  I don`t know:

>> If I use hyperterminal of windows -- and all other proggies are
>> derived from this - I can call a party, of course; and I also hear the
>> voice, but there is never a conversation and I can never answer, I can
>> not even "lift" the phone of the hook!

>> What to do?

>> Thanks in advance,

>> Gerry

> I've never seen a program that will do what you are trying to do.

It *does* exist. 

> What would have to happen is the computers sound card would have to
> record your voice on the sound cards microphone, digitize it, and
> then play it back out the modem. To do that, you need a modem that
> shows up as a multimedia device under windows (most don't) and of
> course you also need software to actually do what I describe
> above. I have never seen such.

As you say, special hardware is required.  It's called a 'voice/data'
modem.  a whole bunch of people used to sell 'em; I have no idea about
the current market, not having used a dial-up modem in probably 5
years.  ("always on" broadband does change your habits! :)

The 'bundled' software that came with such modems *did* provide the
capabilities the OP is trying to use.

I've got an old Toshiba "Tecra" laptop (Windows 95) that has a
voice/data modem, and came with full-blown "telephony" software.  Not
only can I use the built-in microphone/speakers as a "hands-free"
telephone/speakerphone, It does automatic telephone answering, and
even handles multiple voice-mail mailboxes.  About the only "big
system" feature it _doesn't_ have is a programmable IVR subsystem.
<grin>

I still like my antique "Complete Answering Machine" (from 'The
Complete PC') better though -- their mailbox access from the
keyboard/screen is a truly superior design.  Too bad they 'went
under', years ago.  Their voice/fax/modem card is one reason I still
have a _286-based_ box running!

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

From: Gerhard Nowak <nonspam@gmx.net>
Subject: Re: Classic Telephone Call on PC
Date: Sat, 2 Apr 2005 15:40:43 +0400
Organization: Arcor


Thanks for answering.  Now I`m a bit released.  I just thought, only I
don`t see the solution.

But why is it working on VoIp so easily?

My problem is to connect my international calls via VoIp to local
calls from people don`t have ADSL so that these people can talk
together.  Here in Mauritius not many people can afford ADSL and is
much more expensive than in the States or in Europe.

I thought, the realisation of this idea must be much easier ...

But thanks anyway I will continue to look for a possibility, maybe I can
at least manage to weld the Phone-cable to my headset ... like in the
old times with accoustic coupler ... or switch to Linux.

Regards,

Gerry
Mauritius

T. Sean Weintz <strap@hanh-ct.org> schrieb im Newsbeitrag 
news:telecom24.141.8@telecom-digest.org:

> I've never seen a program that will do what you are trying to do.

> What would have to happen is the computers sound card would have to
> record your voice on the sound cards microphone, digitize it, and then
> play it back out the modem. To do that, you need a modem that shows up
> as a multimedia device under windows (most don't) and of course you also
> need software to actually do what I describe above. I have never seen 
> such.

> Plenty of software will DIAL for you, but then expects that once the
> call is made you will pick up the call on a plain old handset plugged
> into the passthru port on your modem.

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

From: John Hines <jbhines@newsguy.com>
Subject: Re: Blackboards vs. Whiteboards
Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2005 00:21:10 -0600
Organization: www.jhines.org
Reply-To: john@jhines.org


hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:

> I heard my school district will modernize and replace the classic
> "blackboard" (or greenboard) with modern 'whiteboards'.  I can't help
> but wonder if this is a dumb idea.

I remember elementary Catholic school, 20 years ago, where white
shirts, and black pants was the uniform of the day, so when come the
last class on Friday, stealing what ever chalk was left on the board,
was the thing to do.

We had "chicken fights" on the walk home, where one guy on the back of
another would try and do as much damage as he could.

The white chalk would wash out no problems, so mom wasn't mad.

Egoism, bumps and bruises ...

That and being bad that day in class and you could be penalized by
having to say after and "clap the erasers", which meant you'd miss the
fights. <g>

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

Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2005 01:25:57 -0500
From: Chris Farrar <cfarrar1307@rogers.com>
Subject: Re: GSM-900


Jason <cheanglong@gmail.com> wrote about Re: GSM-900 on Date: 1 Apr
2005 09:02:14 -0800 

>> But since we transmit in x freq, then the receiver must tune to x feq
>> in order to receive the signal right?  Why transmit at x freq and
>> receive at y freq?  

> The answer is "Full Duplex" vs "Half Duplex."

Think of a Family Radio Service (FRS) walkie talkie.  You transmit and
listen on the same frequency.  If you're transmitting, you can't hear.
If you're listening, you can't transmit.  Only one side can speak at a
time.  If both transmit at the same time, you can't hear each other,
and anyone else on the same frequency hears garbage as you get walked
on.

Transmit at X, and the other side transmits at Y, you listen on Y and
they listen on X.  Thus both of you can talk simutaneously, like a
land line telephone.

Chris

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

From: Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net>
Subject: Re: Cell Phone Compatibility
Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 22:36:11 -0800
Organization: Glorb Internet Services, http://www.glorb.com


John Levine wrote:

> It's good you asked, because your feeling is wrong.

> The Moto 120e is a dual-band CDMA phone, and is doubtless locked to
> work only on Verizon.  

It won't be unless it was sold as a prepay phone. Verizon doesn't lock
their postpay phones.

> If you could unlock them, a big if, the CDMA phone would work with
> other CDMA 800/1900 carriers, many of of the second tier telco-related
> ones like Alltel.  The GSM phone would work on other GSM networks,
> which in the US basically means Cingular (the part that didn't used to
> be ATTWS) and T-Mobile.

Alltel would activate it. US Cellular and Sprint wouldn't (they both
run CDMA).  I don't know whether Western Wireless would or not (WW
also runs CDMA).

The flat-rate prepay providers (Cricket, MetroPCS, Northcoast PCS)
definitely won't. Like USCC and SPrint, they will only activate phones
they originally sold.

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: Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net>
Subject: Re: Verizon's Pitch Could Signal Local Cable War
Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 22:38:16 -0800
Organization: Glorb Internet Services, http://www.glorb.com


Monty Solomon wrote:

> By Steven Rosenberg, Globe Staff  |  March 31, 2005

> Coming soon to northern Massachusetts: Cable competition between 
> Comcast and Verizon.

Yawn. Ameritech competed with some of the local cables in Cleveland
years before Verizon decided to compete with Comcast in Massachusetts.

The cable operation was called Americast, and Ameritech had to divest
it when they sold themselves to SBC.

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: tls@panix.com (Thor Lancelot Simon)
Subject: Re: The Real Reason Why SBC Won't Work With Vonage on E-911
Date: Sat, 2 Apr 2005 07:14:02 UTC
Organization: Public Access Networks Corp.
Reply-To: tls@rek.tjls.com


In article <telecom24.141.7@telecom-digest.org>, T. Sean Weintz
<strap@hanh-ct.org> wrote:

> SBC bought out SNET a few years back, and has done NOTHING for us but
> take what WAS good service and make it lousy, while raising prices and
> laying off workers. Back in the monolithic BELL ATT days, things were
> MUCH more reliable than they are now. I'm talking REAL sloppy stuff --
> botched record keeping, service suddenly shifted to a different set of
> pairs on the underground feed for no apparent reasons, etc. etc.

I'm not sure what the "monolithic BELL ATT days" might have been, but
I would just like to point out that Southern New England Telephone
(SNET) was never part of AT&T; it was not a wholly-owned subsidiary
like most other regional operating companies and it was not directly
controlled by AT&T in the same way in which the others were.  SNET had
a separate ownership structure and was allowed to use the Bell logo,
but remain at least partially outside the control of the Bell System,
because of some very savvy dealmaking by its founders early on; Bell
needed them more than they needed Bell, and so things were always done
a little bit differently -- just a little bit, but still differently
 -- in SNET territory than in the "monolith".

SNET and Cincinnati Bell had more in common in some ways with
Rochester Tel and the other large single-region independents than with
the regional companies that had been absorbed into AT&T.  The one way
one could say, though, that they were "monolithic" is that unlike the
pure independents they still bought their switchgear from Western
Electric and generally conformed to operating practices established by
Bell Labs research.

It's not right to talk about what SNET or Cincinnatti Bell did and
draw conclusions about how AT&T was or was not, because those two
Bell companies were not part of AT&T.


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: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi)
Subject: Re: Does Your Computer Look Like This?
Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2005 09:19:55 -0000
Organization: Widgets, Inc.


In article <telecom24.140.17@telecom-digest.org>, Patrick Townson
<ptownson@cableone.net> wrote:

> In 1954, the  well-known Popular Electronics Magazine in connection
> with the Rand Corporation put together an artist's conception of what
> computers would look like in fifty years, in 2004. Look at it here. 

> http://www.mountainwings.com/past/5082.htm

> This is _not_ an April Fool's joke.   

While it may not be an "April Fool's" joke, it is, in actual fact, a
JOKE, or at best "creative fiction".  That picture, as shown, I can
guarantee, did *NOT* run in _any_ 1954 (or even approximately that
year) publication.

Proof: the "console" in the foreground is a DECwriter LA-36 (or
possibly a LA-120 -- a very similar-looking, but _newer_, model), that
was first manufactured in 1974.  See:
<http://www.columbia.edu/acis/history/la36.html>

Proof: the 'cut-line' mentions the FORTRAN programming language, which
was first released in 1957.  Three years _after_ the purported
publication of this material.

Note: whomever created the "fiction" also got the geometry slightly
wrong -- the white frame of the LA-36 does not _quite_ line up with
the console panel it is supposedly part of.  The front-left corner is
slightly 'behind' the front edge of that panel, while the front-right
corner is slightly _in_front_ of the front edge of that same panel.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: As I said in the last issue, it is very
hard -- damn near impossible -- to pull the wool over you guy's eyes.
Try as hard as I may.   PAT]

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

Date: 2 Apr 2005 21:30:48 -0000
From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
Subject: Re: Book Review: The Great Telecom Meltdown
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


> Author: Fred R. Goldstein
> Publisher: Artech House, Boston
> ISBN: 1-58053-939-4

I've also read it, and it's really good.  It collects the whole story
of the effect on Telecom of dereg and the 1990s bubble into one place,
something you can't find anywhere else.

Artech priced it rather high at $79.99.  I hope Fred arranges for a
lower cost edition.

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: Choreboy <choreboyREMOVE@localnet.com>
Subject: Re: Every Ten Days
Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2005 19:34:47 -0500


Dave Garland wrote:

> It was a dark and stormy night when Choreboy
> <choreboyREMOVE@localnet.com> wrote:

>> March 9, somebody from 877 467 3277 called.  I answered on the second
>> ring and they hung up.  They did it again March 19 and March 29.

> Large telemarketing operations sometimes use dialers that call
> numbers, and when there is an answer shunt the call to an available
> human telemarketer.  If all the telemarketers are busy (on the phone,
> on break, whatever), you get a few seconds of dead air, then it hangs
> up.

> This is an efficient use of the (probably minimum-wage) telemarketers,
> as they don't waste time dialing, waiting while it rings, getting
> answering machines, etc.  The efficiency, of course, comes at the
> expense of the victims like you.

That could explain what happened March 9.  I answered on five rings. 
After eight seconds or so I heard a click.  

It wouldn't explain the next two calls.  March 19 I answered on four
rings and got a dial tone.  March 29 I answered on one or two rings
and heard a click a second or so after I said hello.

I can't be sure it's Sears.  In the past few months, Caller ID has shown
apparent telemarketers calling from out-of-service numbers, from
888-888-8888, and from 111-111-1111.

Choreboy

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

From: AES <siegman@stanford.edu>
Subject: Re: Obituary: Schiavo Dies After Feeding Tube Removed
Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2005 08:18:39 -0800
Organization: Stanford University


In article <telecom24.141.15@telecom-digest.org>, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com 
wrote:

>> "And so his heartless cruelty continues until this very last moment,"
>> said the Rev. Frank Pavone, a Roman Catholic priest. He added: "This
>> is not only a death, with all the sadness that brings, but this is a
>> killing, and for that we not only grieve that Terri has passed but we
>> grieve that our nation has allowed such an atrocity as this and we
>> pray that it will never happen again."

> This kind of thinking is really disturbing.  The intimates are
> certainly entitled to their point of view.  However, other familes
> simply do not share those religious attitudes about medical care. 

This is certainly OT for this group; but when you see a message as 
thoughtful and well done as this entire message was, you're willing to 
forgive the error.

This priest is a real jerk.  And the really serious problem is, is he
just stating the moral views he believes his parishoners and fellow
Catholics should follow for themselves;  is he urging his
parishoners to vote for laws and legislators that will use the power
of the State to forcibly impose their religious views on the rest of
us, who do not share his views, in the management of our own lives?

His statements are very frightening.

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There was a very interesting program
today at our local synagogue. A professor of theology from the
university at Lawrence, Kansas was invited to come and preach; his
sermon topic was 'Liberal Jews and Terri Schiavo'; afterward, at the
coffee hour, he and the rabbi entertained a question and answer
session. Most interesting, most revealing. The times are really
changing in these United States, to be sure.  

Oh, and remember, this is 'spring ahead' night on our clocks. Move
your clocks _up one hour_ sometime tonight or tomorrow!   PAT]

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

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

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

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 50
                        Independence, KS 67301
                        Phone: 620-402-0134
                        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 #142
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun Apr  3 18:35:34 2005
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j33MZXS05687;
	Sun, 3 Apr 2005 18:35:34 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2005 18:35:34 -0400 (EDT)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200504032235.j33MZXS05687@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 #143

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 3 Apr 2005 18:35:00 EDT    Volume 24 : Issue 143

Inside This Issue:                            Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Vatican Used SMS, Email to Announce Pope's Death (Lisa Minter)
    China's Giant Pandas Get Broadband (Lisa Minter)
    EFFector 18.10: WIPO Lockout Inspires Global Protest (Monty Solomon)
    EFFector 18.11: Supreme Court Justices Grill Both Sides (Monty Solomon)
    LG and Matsushita to Settle Plasma Dispute -- Paper (Monty Solomon)
    Re: Blackboards vs. Whiteboards (Tony P.)
    Re: New Technology Brings Back Old Problem For 911 (Tony P.)
    Re: The Real Reason Why SBC Won't Work With Vonage on E-911 (Tony P.)
    Re: The Real Reason Why SBC Won't Work With Vonage on E-911 (Wesrock)
    Re: Cell Phone Compatibility (Joseph)
    Re: Every Ten Days (Wesrock@aol.com)
    Re: Some Concerned About Privacy Implications of E-ZPass (Dave Close)
    Re: Obituary: Schiavo Dies After Feeding Tube Removed (Joseph)
    Re: Obituary: Schiavo Dies After Feeding Tube Removed (jmeissen@aracnet)
    List of Schiavo Donors Will Be Sold by Direct-Marketing Firm (M Solomon)
    Re: Does Your Computer Look Like This? (Dave Garland)
    Re: Does Your Computer Look Like This? (Tony P.)
    Re: Classic Telephone Call on PC (Robert Bonomi)
    Re: Digest Has a New Sponsor (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: 03 Apr 2005 11:43:25 -0700
From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: Vatican Used SMS, Email to Announce Pope's Death


VATICAN CITY (Reuters) - It took just minutes for the Catholic Church
to alert the world's media of John Paul's death -- using text messages
and email so the 2,000-year-old Church could meet the new demands of
real-time news.

Just a quarter of an hour after the Pope was pronounced dead Saturday
at 9:37 p.m., the Vatican sent journalists an SMS message alerting
them to a pending statement.

Television networks across the globe were already on standby a minute
later when the email communique was beamed to a sea of
state-of-the-art handheld computers, purchased by journalists at the
suggestion of the Vatican.

"The Holy father died this evening at 21:37 in his private apartment,"
it said, in a simple Word document.

TV spectators across the globe learned of the Pope's death even before
the thousands of faithful gathered in prayer below the Pope's window
in St. Peter's Square.

Archbishop Leonardo Sandri only informed them minutes later and their
reaction -- a long round of applause, an Italian custom -- was
captured on television in real time.

During John Paul's life and after his death, the Vatican was at pains
to accommodate the mass media, which closely followed the 84-year-old
Pope's decline and spells in hospital.

Medical bulletins this year gave brief snapshots of the Pontiff's
condition, growing increasingly pessimistic as they prepared the world
for the worst.

It was a marked break from the secrecy surrounding previous
pontificates, even as recently as the 1960s. The Vatican, for example,
kept Pope John XXIII's inoperable stomach cancer secret until just a
few days before he died in June 1963.

The Pope himself wrote in a February letter that the Church should not
be shy of using the media, including the Internet, to spread its
message, saying the "mass media can and must promote justice and
solidarity."  

For the faithful, the extremely public suffering and death of John
Paul became a central part of his message and inspired comparisons
with Jesus Christ.  

Stricken with illnesses including Parkinson's Disease, he was unable
to walk or, in the final weeks, speak publicly.

"For me, his suffering had purpose," said Sonia Stipa, 41, holding a
candle in St. Peter's Square. "It was like the pain that Jesus endured
for humanity."

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: 03 Apr 2005 11:42:07 -0700
From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: China's Giant Pandas Get Broadband


BEIJING (Christian Science Monitor) Calling all tech-savvy pandas --
China's biggest nature reserve in the foggy mountains of southwest
Sichuan province is now wired for broadband.

Some might argue that the Wolong Giant Panda Nature Reserve, China's
largest, is now ready for the world's first panda internet cafe, but
the great digital leap forward is aimed more at panda protection.

Researchers are able to process real-time data on the pandas,
including photos and video signals, around the clock at any given
corner of the nature reserve, or observe giant panda cubs on a daily
basis without having to step out of their offices," Xinhua said.

"Digital technology has changed communication between Wolong and the
rest of the world and will help promote information sharing on giant
panda protection," said Zhang Weimin, director of the reserve.

"This will not only help increase the number of giant pandas, but also
help us manage the living environment of giant pandas in a more
efficient manner."

Wolong, founded in 1963, covers 200,000 hectares (772 square miles)
and is home to 76 giant pandas.

The giant panda is one of the world's most endangered species, with an
estimated 1,000 living in Sichuan and in northwestern Shaanxi and
Gansu provinces.

Statistics from the State Forestry Administration released last year
show the number of pandas in the wild in China has risen by more than
40 percent from 1,110 in the 1980s to 1,590, while a total of 161 are
in captive breeding programs worldwide.

"Despite the increase, the animal's existence is menaced by problems
including loss of habitat and a low rate of reproduction," Xinhua
said, meaning that pandas are not yet out of the woods.

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 Christian Science Publishing Society. 

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

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

Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2005 00:56:33 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: EFFector 18.10: WIPO Lockout Inspires Global Protest


EFFector  Vol. 18, No. 10  March 25, 2005  donna@eff.org

A Publication of the Electronic Frontier Foundation
ISSN 1062-9424

In the 326th Issue of EFFector:

 * WIPO Lockout Inspires Global Protest
 * EFF Appeals Ruling in Apple Case
 * Leading Nonprofits Take Stand Against Business Method
   Patents
 * CopyNight Reminder - Mashups & Martinis, March 29
 * Tell a Friend About EFF - Send a Postcard From the 
   Electronic Frontier!
 * MiniLinks (17): New Indian Patent Law Threatens Human 
   Health
 * Administrivia

http://www.eff.org/effector/18/10.php

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

Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2005 00:58:11 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: EFFector 18.11: Supreme Court Justices Grill Both Sides


EFFector  Vol. 18, No. 11  March 31, 2005  donna@eff.org

A Publication of the Electronic Frontier Foundation
ISSN 1062-9424

In the 327th Issue of EFFector:

 * Supreme Court Justices Grill Both Sides at Copyright
   Hearing
 * New US Passports Will Serve as Terrorist Beacons
 * It's Official: TSA Lied 
 * MiniLinks (11): A Few Notes From the Grokster Argument
 * Administrivia

http://www.eff.org/effector/18/11.php

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

Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2005 01:12:28 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: LG and Matsushita to Settle Plasma Dispute -- Paper


Reuters
Saturday, April 2, 2005; 8:28 AM

TOKYO (Reuters) - The world's No. 1 and 3 suppliers of plasma panels,
the key component in flat-screen televisions, have agreed to settle
their dispute over plasma display technology, a newspaper said on
Saturday.

South Korea's LG Electronics Inc. and Japan's Matsushita Electric
Industrial Co. filed lawsuits against each other last year, claiming
infringements on patents related to plasma technology. The suits have
led to a halt of imports of LG panels into Japan and Matsushita panels
to South Korea.

The tussle has been just one of a number of legal disputes over panel
technology among Japanese firms and rivals from South Korea and
Taiwan, underscoring a fierce fight for position in the potentially
lucrative market for flat panel TVs.

The two companies have been holding talks and are expected to agree on
a settlement that would require LG to pay royalties to Matsushita
while allowing each firm access to some of the other's patents, the
Nihon Keizai Shimbun said.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A20736-2005Apr2

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

From: Tony P. <kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net>
Subject: Re: Blackboards vs. Whiteboards
Organization: ATCC
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2005 12:00:59 -0400


In article <telecom24.142.10@telecom-digest.org>, jbhines@newsguy.com 
says:

> hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:

>> I heard my school district will modernize and replace the classic
>> "blackboard" (or greenboard) with modern 'whiteboards'.  I can't help
>> but wonder if this is a dumb idea.

> I remember elementary Catholic school, 20 years ago, where white
> shirts, and black pants was the uniform of the day, so when come the
> last class on Friday, stealing what ever chalk was left on the board,
> was the thing to do.

> We had "chicken fights" on the walk home, where one guy on the back of
> another would try and do as much damage as he could.

> The white chalk would wash out no problems, so mom wasn't mad.

> Egoism, bumps and bruises ...

> That and being bad that day in class and you could be penalized by
> having to say after and "clap the erasers", which meant you'd miss the
> fights. <g>

Can you honestly tell me you guys never chalked a nun/priest/brother?
That was a favorite trick -- just run up and pat em' on the back with
a well used eraser.

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

From: Tony P. <kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net>
Subject: Re: New Technology Brings Back Old Problem For 911
Organization: ATCC
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2005 12:11:17 -0400


In article <telecom24.141.9@telecom-digest.org>, strap@hanh-ct.org 
says:

> Jack Decker wrote:

>> "What we want to make people aware of is they are not able to access
>> 911 like you can on a traditional phone," said Mackinac County 911
>> Coordinator Pam Matelski. "The dispatch center will not get your
>> information."

> <tongue in cheek mode>

> Given the amount of airtime this issue has been given, anyone who is NOT 
> aware of the VOIP vs. 911 issue should be left to die when calling 911, 
> thus weeding their stupidity out of the gene pool and hopefully 
> improving humanity.

> <\tounge in chee mode>

> Seriously. Ths issue has been beaten to death in the media.

Because the incumbents are hemorrhaging red ink because of VoIP, and 
their offerings come too little too late. 

So at any opportunity they'll try to kill VoIP, or at least the
competitors at first, then they'll let their own VoIP services whither
so people will flock back to the three-9's reliability of circuit
switched.

The issue with E-911 is NOT a technical issue at all. For example, 
Vonage can get E-911 to work just fine in Rhode Island of all places. I 
dial 911 and I get the actual emergency answer point and they get my 
address info. 

Vonage uses facilities based carriers like Paetec and Focal, those 
already have interconnection to E-911 services in most every community 
they server. 

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

From: Tony P. <kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net>
Subject: Re: The Real Reason Why SBC Won't Work With Vonage on E-911
Organization: ATCC
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2005 12:06:21 -0400


In article <telecom24.141.7@telecom-digest.org>, strap@hanh-ct.org 
says:

> TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to a writer:

>> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Can't you just see SBC chomping at the
>> bit to get the old 'Bell System' out of cold storage and back into
>> service with all its old ways, albiet modernized somewhat?  Put this
>> thing down -- refusal to work on 911 with VOIP carriers as one more
>> thing to negotiate when the FCC is asked to approve the AT&T/SBC
>> merger.  PAT]

> Scary. I am in what was SNET (Southern New England Telephone) territory. 
> What was I believe the oldest RBOC in the country -- in fact I am right 
> now sitting only about 1500 feet away from the site first commercial 
> switching office in the country.

> SBC bought out SNET a few years back, and has done NOTHING for us but
> take what WAS good service and make it lousy, while raising prices and
> laying off workers. Back in the monolithic BELL ATT days, things were
> MUCH more reliable than they are now. I'm talking REAL sloppy stuff --
> botched record keeping, service suddenly shifted to a different set of
> pairs on the underground feed for no apparent reasons, etc. etc.

> SNET HAD been in the process of running fiber all over our state (and
> starting to do Cable TV!) when SBC bought them out and nixed all that.

> I HATE SBC. My only hope now is that perhaps Verizon will get big enough 
> to buy them out? Or maybe some sort of deal that would give our state to 
> Verizon? (All the surrounding states, and even a teeny tiny portion of 
> this state, have Verizon as the local RBOC ILEC.)

Verizon does seem to be in a better position to purchase SBC at this 
point. But I suspect they'll first bankrupt Qwest, absorb it and then 
take either take on or start merger talks with SBC. 

Mother Bell will be reunited, but without the regulatory framework from 
days of old. Woe to the consumer. 

For all of SBC's blatant behavior the one to really watch is Verizon.
Look at the bid war they're having with Qwest over MCI. I suspect
their true motivation is to make Qwest pay far too much for MCI and
then they'll roll in for the liquidation.

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Ma Bell will live on forever, just like
Terri Schiavo.  In our nightmares, perhaps, but Ma does not intend you
should forget about her anytime soon.  PAT]

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

From: Wesrock@aol.com
Date: Sat, 2 Apr 2005 20:39:26 EST
Subject: Re: The Real Reason Why SBC Won't Work With Vonage on E-911


In a message dated Sat, 2 Apr 2005 07:14:02 UTC, tls@panix.com (Thor
Lancelot Simon) writes:

> In article <telecom24.141.7@telecom-digest.org>, T. Sean Weintz
> <strap@hanh-ct.org> wrote:

>> SBC bought out SNET a few years back, and has done NOTHING for us but
>> take what WAS good service and make it lousy, while raising prices and
>> laying off workers. Back in the monolithic BELL ATT days, things were
>> MUCH more reliable than they are now. I'm talking REAL sloppy stuff --
>> botched record keeping, service suddenly shifted to a different set of
>> pairs on the underground feed for no apparent reasons, etc. etc.

> I'm not sure what the "monolithic BELL ATT days" might have been, but
> I would just like to point out that Southern New England Telephone
> (SNET) was never part of AT&T; it was not a wholly-owned subsidiary
> like most other regional operating companies and it was not directly
> controlled by AT&T in the same way in which the others were.  SNET had
> a separate ownership structure and was allowed to use the Bell logo,
> but remain at least partially outside the control of the Bell System,
> because of some very savvy dealmaking by its founders early on; Bell
> needed them more than they needed Bell, and so things were always done
> a little bit differently -- just a little bit, but still differently
> -- in SNET territory than in the "monolith".

I worked for Southwestern Bell for 32 years before I retired.  What
does this have to do with SNET?  Well, one of the things that they did
was send SWBT folks to AT&T headquarters for a month to see how it
worked there.

The AT&T folks, not knowing exactly what to do with you, often gave
you tasks like calling the operating companies and telling them about
some new procedure or something they should do or something AT&T was
doing that might affect the BOCs.

Most of the companies would listen more or less attentively, although
the companies were less monolithic in their operations than many
think.  Even in the five SWBT states, there were some state
organizations more independent than others.

Anyway, in doing these calls to other Bell companies, it was very
noticeable when you called SNET that they were very well aware that
they were not controlled by AT&T.  They might thank you for calling,
to be polite, but clearly they understood that they would do what SNET
wanted to do.

Same thing was true with Cincinnati & Suburban Bell Telephone Company
(the full name of the company then), although not quite so overtly.

Then there was Bell Canada, of which AT&T then owned only something
like 2%.  (Actually, they were pretty agreeable to work with, although
not accepting instructions for AT&T as anything other than just
informational.)


Wes Leatherock
wesrock@aol.com

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

From: Joseph <JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Cell Phone Compatibility
Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2005 16:57:06 -0800
Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com


On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 08:26:26 -0700, SmarSquid <smarsquid@hotmail.com>
wrote:

> I have a couple of inactive cell phones (Motorola 120e and Samsung
> GS-x426) that are lying around because I have taken phone
> upgrades. They are blanked out and ready for service, and I want to
> sell them on E-Bay. Howver, prospective buyers will want to know what
> cellular service providers the equipment will work with. How can I
> learn this? The Motorola was originally used in the Verizon Wireless
> network, and the Samsung was used in the AT&T Wireless network, but I
> have a feeling other providers could work with these phones. More
> network compatibility means a higher number of potential buyers.

As the French might say it depend.  The Verizon CDMA phone will likely
work only on another CDMA carrier that allows their customers to
attach a non-native CDMA equipment to their network.  Many networks
such as Sprint PCS which is also a CDMA network will not allow
connection of any device that they either do not sell or has been
formerly on their network.  They will check their database to see
whether the ESN (electronic serial number) is there.  If it is not
many carriers will not activate a handset that has not been on their
network.

In the case of the AT&T Wireless phone it will depend on which kind of
phone it is.  If it is a TDMA phone you will only be able to use it on
AT&T Wireless' TDMA network and not on any other network such as
cingular's TDMA network.  Cingular/AT&T will not activate any new TDMA
phone service though I imagine you can switch the ESN from what
someone already has to another phone which has been on the AT&T
Wireless network.

If it was on the AT&T Wireless GSM network you could use it on another
GSM network provided that the SIM lock is defeated.  AT&T Wireless did
not and will not give unlock codes for the GSM phones that it sold and
you either have to go to sites that will "remotely unlock" or find
someone to flex/flash the phone so that you can use it on another
network.  Also with older GSM phones that AT&T Wireless sold they were
single band 1900 only.  To get the best possible service you really
should get a dual band 850/1900 phone.

If you know which was the original provider you need to let your
perspective buyer know this.  Many buyers are well aware of what will
and will not work for them so I'd strongly advise giving as much
information as possible including which networks (and technology if
you know it) the phone uses.  Also you need to be sure and give the
correct full model number since some models have the same model number
but are for different technologies e.g. Motorola V60c, t or g
depending on whether it's CDMA, TDMA or GSM.

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

From: Wesrock@aol.com
Date: Sat, 2 Apr 2005 19:58:25 EST
Subject: Re: Every Ten Days


In a message dated Thu, 31 Mar 2005 21:00:28 -0600, Dave Garland
<dave.garland@wizinfo.com> writes:

> It was a dark and stormy night when Choreboy
> <choreboyREMOVE@localnet.com> wrote:

>> March 9, somebody from 877 467 3277 called.  I answered on the second
>> ring and they hung up.  They did it again March 19 and March 29.

> Large telemarketing operations sometimes use dialers that call
> numbers, and when there is an answer shunt the call to an available
> human telemarketer.  If all the telemarketers are busy (on the phone,
> on break, whatever), you get a few seconds of dead air, then it hangs
> up.

> This is an efficient use of the (probably minimum-wage) telemarketers,
> as they don't waste time dialing, waiting while it rings, getting
> answering machines, etc.  The efficiency, of course, comes at the
> expense of the victims like you.

This has been going on for quite a few years, and generated so many
complaints that the Oklahoma Legislature passed a law forbidding the
practice.

It has, of course, been no more effective than laws or regulations
calling with only a recorded message.


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

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

From: dave@compata.com (Dave Close)
Subject: Re: Some Concerned About Privacy Implications of E-ZPass System
Date: 2 Apr 2005 21:29:41 -0800
Organization: Compata, Costa Mesa, California


Stuart Barkley <stuartb@4gh.net> writes:

> The article and discussion here both miss what I consider a more
> important issue with the EZ-pass system:

And another issue, maybe not so important, but serious for some:
portability. If you travel on business and rent a car, you are usually
stuck using the cash lanes on local toll roads. Even if you have a
working transponder at home which is compatible with the local system,
you aren't supposed to try using it. The transponder is only valid for
use in a registered vehicle, which your rental car isn't.

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: Joseph <JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Obituary: Schiavo Dies After Feeding Tube Removed
Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2005 17:05:45 -0800
Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com


On 31 Mar 2005 11:54:41 -0800, Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
wrote:

> By MIKE SCHNEIDER, Associated Press Writer

> PINELLAS PARK, Fla. - Terri Schiavo, the severely brain-damaged woman
> who spent 15 years connected to a feeding tube in an epic legal and
> medical battle that went all the way to the White House and Congress,
> died Thursday, 13 days after the tube was removed. She was 41.

This topic has occupied the national media now for more than 15 years.
What it has to do with telecom is beyond my comprehension.  Why we
have to see yet another re-hashing of this non-topical business here
mystifies me.  Yes, her circumstance is tragic.  No, it doesn't belong
here.  It's been all over the national news.  We don't need it here.
I'm really starting to wonder what the editor of this digest/news
group's rationale for putting this stuff here.  More and more stuff is
ending up in this space and it has absolutely nothing to do with
telecom and why is it here?

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You should see the Terri Shiavo crapola
which shows up in my mailbox in a day's -- no, several hours' -- time
I _do not_ print here. As Monty Solomon points out a couple messages
 from now in this issue, her father sold the rights to the mailing
list of people who had been moved enough in recent days to write him
or his wife. So, even if all you did was take a few seconds to send
them a note saying "I am sorry about your grief", your name and _email
address_ has now been sold -- at a pretty penny I might add -- to 
spammers who wanted that list so _they_ could milk it also for all 
their cracked-pot causes, etc. Just read the message elsewhere in this
issue; don't take my word for it.  PAT]

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

From: jmeissen@aracnet.com
Subject: Re: Obituary: Schiavo Dies After Feeding Tube Removed
Date: 3 Apr 2005 05:05:12 GMT
Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com


In article <telecom24.141.15@telecom-digest.org>,
<hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:

> This kind of thinking is really disturbing.  The intimates are
> certainly entitled to their point of view.  However, other familes
> simply do not share those religious attitudes about medical care.  

What is more disturbing, in my mind, is that once they decided to let
the body die (regardless of the state of the mind), they chose to let
it happen through two weeks of starvation and dehydration.

This is a sad statement about humanity, that we'll use drugs to
painlessly put a mortally wounded dog out of its misery, but a human
body must be forced to endure two weeks of torture until its organs
fail.

And even as Shiavo fades into memory, the feds continue their assault 
on Oregon's Death With Dignity laws ... what a bizarre society
we live in.

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What do you mean, 'Shiavo fades into
memory ...' _they_ are not going to allow that to happen. The net,
like many broadcasting stations in recent weeks is going to convert to
'All Schiavo news, all the time'. And you call this a 'bizarre
society'?  As Lisa Minter explained it to me last week, when news that
a top honcho in Boy Scouts of America (I am sure you've heard of them,
and _their_ posture on how everything good and patriotic about America
does *not* include H-people) got arrested by police and confessed to
_being a pedophile_ when several hundred pictures of little boys naked
and engaging in sex were found on his computer at BSA headquarters;
my, oh my ... well Lisa said, "This society is really fuc--d." Yeah, I
have to wonder.

Now for today's Terri Shiavo report, here is Monty Solomon.  PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2005 13:22:42 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: List of Schiavo Donors Will Be Sold by Direct-Marketing Firm


By DAVID D. KIRKPATRICK and JOHN SCHWARTZ

WASHINGTON, March 28 - The parents of Terri Schiavo have authorized a 
conservative direct-mailing firm to sell a list of their financial 
supporters, making it likely that thousands of strangers moved by her 
plight will receive a steady stream of solicitations from 
anti-abortion and conservative groups.

"These compassionate pro-lifers donated toward Bob Schindler's legal 
battle to keep Terri's estranged husband from removing the feeding 
tube from Terri," says a description of the list on the Web site of 
the firm, Response Unlimited, which is asking $150 a month for 6,000 
names and $500 a month for 4,000 e-mail addresses of people who 
responded last month to an e-mail plea from Ms. Schiavo's father. 
"These individuals are passionate about the way they value human 
life, adamantly oppose euthanasia and are pro-life in every sense of 
the word!"

Privacy experts said the sale of the list was legal and even 
predictable, if ghoulish.


http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/29/politics/29donate.html?ex=1269752400&en=f1312f1b5ae170ad&ei=5090


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.
Also check out http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra/nytimes.html

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

From: Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com>
Subject: Re: Does Your Computer Look Like This?
Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2005 22:43:20 -0600
Organization: Wizard Information


It was a dark and stormy night when Patrick Townson
<ptownson@cableone.net> wrote:

> http://www.mountainwings.com/past/5082.htm

> This is _not_ an April Fool's joke.   

Maybe not by *you*.  But it's photoshopped.
http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/hoaxes/computer.asp even has the original
picture (a museum exhibit of a submarine's control room) that was
modified.  (Notice there's something Escher-like about the way the paper
hangs in that printer.. at the top it's at the rear of the printer, but
hanging straight down somehow it's close to the front when it gets to
the bottom.  And the printer's design is more '60s than '50s.)

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

From: Tony P. <kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net>
Subject: Re: Does Your Computer Look Like This?
Organization: ATCC
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2005 12:16:50 -0400


In article <telecom24.141.13@telecom-digest.org>, 
paul+usenet@w6yx.stanford.edu says:

> Patrick Townson <ptownson@cableone.net> wrote:

>> In 1954, the  well-known Popular Electronics Magazine in connection
>> with the Rand Corporation put together an artist's conception of what
>> computers would look like in fifty years, in 2004. Look at it here. 

>> http://www.mountainwings.com/past/5082.htm

> Wasn't this a FARK photoshop contest entry?

Yes it was. That's a DEC LA36 printing terminal if I'm not mistaken. 

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: So what does this have to do with
Terry Shiavo?   PAT]

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

From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi)
Subject: Re: Classic Telephone Call on PC
Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2005 15:48:41 -0000
Organization: Widgets, Inc.


In article <telecom24.142.9@telecom-digest.org>, Gerhard Nowak
<nonspam@gmx.net> wrote:

> Thanks for answering.  Now I`m a bit released.  I just thought, only I
> don't see the solution.

> But why is it working on VoIp so easily?

> My problem is to connect my international calls via VoIp to local
> calls from people don`t have ADSL so that these people can talk
> together.  Here in Mauritius not many people can afford ADSL and is
> much more expensive than in the States or in Europe.

> I thought, the realisation of this idea must be much easier ...

Heck, why didn't you _say_ that's what you wanted to do?  Doing -that-
is an entirely different matter than what you first asked about.

See <http://www.asterisk.org>

The price is right -- the software is free, Although it won't run
under MS Windows, the Windows "replacement" that is required is also
free.

> But thanks anyway I will continue to look for a possibility, maybe I can
> at least manage to weld the Phone-cable to my headset ... like in the
> old times with accoustic coupler ... or switch to Linux.

Ding, ding, ding!  we have a winner!   Asterisk requires Linux, or similar.

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

From: SELLCOM Tech support <support@sellcom.com>
Subject: Re: New Sponsor Comes on Board With Digest Web Site
Organization: www.sellcom.com
Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2005 18:27:53 GMT


TELECOM Digest Editor <ptownson@telecom-digest.org> posted on that
vast internet thingie:

> an online casino service

Have you no ethics at all?

Steve

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.  New www.electrictrains.biz

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: About as many as you have. 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 #143
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Apr  4 16:17:01 2005
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j34KH1v16460;
	Mon, 4 Apr 2005 16:17:01 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2005 16:17:01 -0400 (EDT)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200504042017.j34KH1v16460@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 #144

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 4 Apr 2005 16:15:00 EDT    Volume 24 : Issue 144

Inside This Issue:                            Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Anonymous E-mailer Steps Forward After Supreme Court Order (M Solomon)
    Fourth Man Indicted in Republican Phone-Jamming Scheme (Monty Solomon)
    Increasingly, the Bells See Their Future on a Screen (Monty Solomon)
    Some Colleges Falling Short in Security Of Computers (Monty Solomon)
    Music Rules (Monty Solomon)
    NYS AG Spitzer Gets Verizon to Wake Up. A Bit (Danny Burstein)
    Bidfraud Website "Grand Opening" -- Read Capabilities (Stop Fraud)
    USB to RJ-45 console cable? (JXM2119)
    Wired: Word From on High: Jam Cell Calls (Lisa Minter)
    Re: Prepaid vrs. 'Regular' Cell Phone Service (Joseph)
    Re: The Real Reason Why SBC Won't Work With Vonage on E911 (Justin Time)
    Re: Blackboards vs. Whiteboards (Tony P.)
    Re: Does Your Computer Look Like This? (DevilsPGD)
    Re: Sprint PCS Vision Added to Open Relay DataBase (SELLCOM Tech)
    Re: Cell Phone Service Comparisons (Justin Time)
    OpinionJournal Article: The Soul of a Controversy (Withheld)

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, 3 Apr 2005 22:43:49 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Anonymous E-Mailer Steps Forward After Supreme Court Order


PORTLAND, Maine --After a year of court wrangling, the sender of an
insulting e-mail who fought to withhold his identity in a case that
tested the waters of Internet anonymity has stepped into light.

James Stanley Jr., president and CEO of The Liberty Group, said
Thursday that he sent a satirical e-mail to a half-dozen Great
Diamond Island residents on Christmas Eve 2003 under another island
resident's name.

"I regret that the entire incident ever took place," Stanley said in
a statement. "It was a spontaneous, tongue-in-cheek bit of silliness
that for reasons that are still unfathomable has taken on a life of
its own."

Ronald Fitch, whose identity was used to send the e-mail, had
contended the e-mail amounted to identity theft and fraud. But
through his lawyers, Stanley claimed it was anonymous free speech,
protected by the Constitution.

Two weeks ago the Maine Supreme Judicial Court ordered, without 
addressing First Amendment issues, that Stanley's identity had to be 
revealed.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/maine/articles/2005/04/01/anonymous_e_mailer_steps_forward_after_supreme_court_order/

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: 'The Liberty Group', a right-wing
organization, should have known it was identity theft and fraud if
they specifically gave some other person's identifiable name and
address. All they had to say, if they had wanted to avoid that 
problem was state, "there is no such real person as Ronald Fitch" and
been vague on his address or not given an address at all. I have had
people do that same thing to me; there was nothing I could do about
it under those circumstances.  PAT] 

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

Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2005 23:05:25 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Fourth Man Indicted in Republican Phone-Jamming Scheme


April 3, 2005

CONCORD, N.H. --A fourth man has been charged with taking part in a
Republican scheme to jam Democrats' get-out-the-vote phone lines on
Election Day 2002.

Shaun Hansen, of Spokane, Wash., headed a former telemarketing company
that placed hundreds of hang-up calls to five phone lines run by
Democrats and one run by the Manchester firefighters union.

Prosecutors say Hansen's Mylo Enterprises of Sandpoint, Idaho, was
hired by Republican operatives to place the calls.

Hansen is accused of violating a federal law that forbids placing
anonymous telephone calls to annoy or harass someone. He has not
entered a plea, but is scheduled to appear in U.S. District Court in
Concord on May 9.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/new_hampshire/articles/2005/04/03/fourth_man_indicted_in_republican_phone_jamming_scheme/

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

Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2005 01:45:20 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Increasingly, the Bells See Their Future on a Screen


By MATT RICHTEL and KEN BELSON

SAN FRANCISCO, April 3 - The telephone companies are desperate to be
seen, not just heard.

In the coming months, the Bell telephone companies, including SBC and
Verizon, will start selling television programming in their most
recent effort to crack a market in which they have had almost no
presence.

The cable industry, meeting here this week for its annual trade show,
is already bracing for the assault on its prime turf.

To offer paid TV services, the Bells are spending billions of dollars
to expand their superfast fiber optic networks and improving
technology that can send video to their phone and Internet customers.
SBC alone is expected to spend about $4 billion over three years to
install fiber lines to reach neighborhoods where half of its 36
million customers live.

But in addition to laying new fiber lines, the phone companies also
must acquire expensive programming rights, go through the tedious
process of getting permission from municipalities to sell television,
and master the Internet-based technology that sends video programming
over the same crowded network that now delivers voice and data
streams.

And even after making these gargantuan investments, the Bells will
face formidable challenges to break into the saturated market for pay
TV. To lure customers from the cable and satellite providers,
analysts said, they have to offer better programming and features at
a lower price compared to cable.

They have little choice but to take the gamble.

Cellphone carriers are chewing into the Bells' traditional landline
business. And cable companies -- leaders in the high-speed Internet
access business -- are fast entering the phone market with
Internet-based services. To compete with cable's offerings, the phone
companies are pushing to sell an array of services -- Internet
connections, wireless and television -- in a bundle.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/04/business/04iptv.html?ex=1270267200&en=d0a786872bb8af85&ei=5090

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.

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

Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2005 01:46:43 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Some Colleges Falling Short in Security Of Computers


By TOM ZELLER Jr.

If the computer age is continually testing how well institutions
protect personal information, the nation's colleges and universities
may be earning a failing grade.

Last Monday, administrators at the University of California, 
Berkeley, acknowledged that a computer laptop containing the names 
and Social Security numbers of nearly 100,000 people - mostly 
graduate school applicants - had been stolen. Just three days 
earlier, Northwestern University reported that hackers who broke into 
computers at the Kellogg School of Management there may have had 
access to information on more than 21,000 students, faculty and 
alumni. And one week before that, officials at California State 
University, Chico, announced a breach that may have exposed personal 
information on 59,000 current, former and prospective students.

There is no evidence that any of the compromised information has been 
used to commit fraud. But at a time of rising concerns over breaches 
at commercial data warehouses like ChoicePoint and LexisNexis, these 
incidents seem to highlight the particular vulnerabilities of modern 
universities, which are heavily networked, widely accessible and 
brimming with sensitive data on millions of people.

Data collected by the Office of Privacy Protection in California, for 
example, showed that universities and colleges accounted for about 28 
percent of all security breaches in that state since 2003 - more than 
any other group, including financial institutions.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/04/technology/04data.html?ex=1270267200&en=c1009f3311210ac6&ei=5090

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

Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2005 21:19:01 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Music Rules


A Supreme Court ruling against peer-to-peer network Grokster would do 
more than punish music pirates. It would affect the future of the 
Internet.

By Andrew Leonard

March 30, 2005 | I decided to rip my vinyl in honor of MGM vs.
Grokster, the case heard before the Supreme Court on Tuesday that will
likely result in a landmark ruling on copyright law.

"To rip one's vinyl" means to convert long-playing records to digital
files. And if some doomsayers are correct, it's the kind of thing the
music biz would be able to prevent me from doing if the Grokster
decision goes their way. In a worst-case scenario, anything that would
allow me to copy music, whether it's a CD-burner, some audio-editing
software, or a peer-to-peer network like Grokster, would be illegal.

But to be honest, stopping me from taking moldering P-Funk, Rolling
Stones and R.E.M. albums and transforming them into MP3s for my own
enjoyment is not the highest priority for the entertainment industry.
In the Grokster case, a roll-call of music and movie studios are
targeting their sights on file-sharing peer-to-peer networks. Their
argument is that the creators of those networks should be deemed
responsible for what people do with them -- technically, that means
they should be found guilty of "secondary liability" for the copyright
infringement committed by file sharers.

The case before the Supreme Court does not pertain to whether the
actual act of file sharing is illegal. Let's accept for now that when
you or I grab a copy of the newest Aimee Mann track from Kazaa or
LimeWire, we are committing intellectual-property piracy, stealing
royalties from starving artists, and threatening the entire economic
basis of the music industry. Personally, I enjoy supporting the
artists I like by purchasing their records on iTunes, and I especially
savor doing so after I have heard a free sample of their music over
the Net. But that's an entirely separate issue from what's at stake in
this case. MGM vs. Grokster deals with whether the creators of a
technology are responsible for how it used. It's not an understatement
to say that the case could influence the future of the Internet.

This is why the "secondary liability" charge makes a lot of folks,
particularly those in the computer, consumer electronics and telecom
industries, very nervous. A decision in favor of the plaintiffs would
represent a reversal of the precedent set 20 years ago in the famous
"Sony-Betamax" case, which held that Sony was not liable for any
copyright abuses likely to be perpetrated by owners of VCRs because
there were "substantial noninfringing" uses of the product. In other
words, because the VCR could be used for perfectly legitimate
purposes, like watching a rented movie, it was OK for Sony to sell it,
even if some people were going to use it to tape copyrighted
television shows.

http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2005/03/30/grokster/


TELECOM Digest Editors's Note: Salon.com is available on line here
daily by setting your browser to:
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra/nytimes.html (far right column,
botton of the right column), new articles daily. PAT]

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

From: Danny Burstein <dannyb@panix.com>
Subject: NYS AG Spitzer Gets Verizon to Wake Up. A Bit
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2005 22:24:43 -0400
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC


"Verizon to block `cramming' of computer charges on phone bills

By MICHAEL GORMLEY,  AP Writer April 3, 2005, 12:16 PM EDT

"Albany NY - Verizon Communications Inc. will fight the 'cramming ' of
unauthorized charges by companies such as Internet providers that
appear on phone bills.

"New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer said the settlement is the
first time a telephone company has been required to monitor and
correct the fraudulent billing practices by other companies on phone
bills. The action follows complaints about the unauthorized charges by
Internet providers, Web hosting and other services on Verizon phone
bills.

"Spitzer said small businesses and residential customers in New York
claimed Verizon did nothing to help them resolve the charges and
instead told Verizon customers to solve the matter with those
companies. The agreement applies only to New York customers.

[snipppety snip. There's nothing yet on Spitzer's web site so I don't
know quite how extensive this agreement is. As we all know, there's
plenty of sleaze in the entire "third party" billing the telcos handle
and the phrase in the article about "Internet providers, Web
hosting..." is very selective ... ]

rest at:

http://www.newsday.com/news/local/wire/newyork/ny-bc-ny--phonebillcramming0403apr03,0,6464120,print.story?coll=ny-region-apnewyork

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

From: Stop Fraud <thankyou@x.com>
Subject: Bidfraud Website "Grand Opening" -- Read Inside for capabilities
Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2005 12:10:24 GMT
Organization: Road Runner


After 1000 plus hours in development -- Bidfraud.com is "breathing."

http://www.bidfraud.com

Features:

Capable of archiving ebay auction transactions locally on our server.
This is important, as ebay deletes transactions every few months.  It
is as simple as entering an ebay item number when creating a report.

example of archived ebay page:

http://www.bidfraud.com/cachedpages/6113839605/alouette-amusement/6113839605.html

The above archived page, while it still exists at bidfraud.com, no
longer exists at ebay.com

Report templates contain an area to write a narrative as well as an
interface to upload as many as 10 images/files (word & excel, etc.)
The use of pictures as well as other supporting documents will help to
substantiate and validate a claim.

Example of report with pictures:

http://www.bidfraud.com/example.php

Easy search interface capable of finding a suspect by user name, email
or item number at various sites.

Simple private messaging, including a chat system are provided.

Registration is Free.

Easy to use interface.

If you wish to advertise on the site, it is free, but space is
limited.  Please use contact page on www.bidfraud.com to make a
request.

Example of ad layout/dimensions:  http://www.bidfraud.com/ads.htm

Next time you leave negative feedback at ebay or any other site,
please reference them to bidfraud.

Thank you. 

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

From: JXM2119 <>
Subject: USB to RJ-45 Console Cable?
Reply-To: jxm2119_AT_rochester.rr.com@syrcnyrdrs-01.nyroc.rr.com
Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2005 22:41:33 GMT
Organization: Road Runner


Hi All,

I have read numerous threads on Google goups and cannot come up with
an answer on this one.

I have already read and seen that there are cables/adapters that
go from USB to DB-9. That would allow you to connect your standard
serial console cable as you normally would. I am trying to find a way
to eliminate this.

I would like to buy/make a cable that will have a USB connector on one
end and an RJ-45 on the other. I'm not sure if it is as easy as
cutting off a connector on the usb and just terminating the RX/TX/GND
like you can do with a serial cable (DB-9).

I know there may be some issues with going from USB to RS-232
signaling and I could always build some kind of breakout box in the
middle.

Any thoughts?????

- Jay

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

Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2005 16:45:51 PDT
Subject: Wired: Word From on High: Jam Cell Calls
From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>


Word From on High: Jam Cell Calls

Four churches in Mexico have unobtrusively installed Israeli-made
cell-phone jammers to thwart those who don't seem to understand they
should turn the things off during services or weddings. They're not
the only ones to install the jammers.

http://www.wired.com/news/gizmos/0,1452,65378,00.html?tw=wn_story_mailer

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

From: Joseph <JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Prepaid vrs. 'Regular' Cell Phone Service
Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2005 10:07:47 -0700
Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com


On Sat, 2 Apr 2005 18:37:21 EST, TELECOM Digest Editor
<ptownson@telecom-digest.org> wrote:

> Can any reader familiar with GMS and
> AT&T Wireless and Cingular Wireless help me figure this out?  I am
> willing, and desirous of using my old Nokia phone as long as I can;
> the Cingular phone is perfect for me

I assume you know that GSM is a totally different system than you use
with your Nokia 5165.  The Nokia 5165 is a TDMA (IS-136) phone and
absolutely will not work with anything other than IS-136.  It
absolutely will not work with GSM at all.  If your handset works stay
with it.  Cingular will not activate any new TDMA service.  If you
find another TDMA phone which is/was used on cingular's TDMA service
you can probably switch it out, but AFAIK cingular does not sell any
new TDMA IS-136 handsets any longer.  They really want to transition
people to GSM (and of course they want their customers to pay for the
"privilege" as well!)  

Welcome to Cingular!  Resistance is futile.  You have been
assimiliated.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yeah, that is true, but all I wanted to
do was swap my existing area 316 (Wichita) prepaid number on AT&T with
an area 620 (Independence area) prepaid number on AT&T (now
Cingular). But the phone is several years old (dating back to my
Chicago days) however it works quite well. If I am going to absolutely
have to (some day) go with GSM, maybe I will chat with the ladies who
run the Cell One store or the United States Cellular place here, and
see if I can get any better deals from them.   PAT]

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

From: Justin Time <a_user2000@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: The Real Reason Why SBC Won't Work With Vonage on E-911
Date: 4 Apr 2005 05:15:05 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com


The better rumor regarding Verizon and their plans is on the wireless
front.  They will let Sprint merge with Nextel and then take Sprint
Wireless.  Sprint PCS is the only other major CDMA carrier.  Nextel,
using Motorola's iDEN, is actually fairly close in its operation to
CDMA (a lot closer than to GSM or TDMA).  The real piece the carriers
want is Nextel and their "Direct Connect" or walkie-talkie feature.

Rodgers Platt

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note:  Two questions for you Rodgers: One, 
which in your opinion is the bigger threat right now, Verizon or SBC
(which of course is also Cingular Wireless)?  My second question is,
isn't the walkie-talkie feature of Nextel really just a fancy sort
of speed dial which transmits over the speaker phone? If I had a
Nextel 'walkie talkie' style phone and my friend in Chicago used his
Nextel walkie-talkie phone to call me, it surely would not go over
some airwaves would it?    PAT]

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

From: Tony P. <kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net>
Subject: Re: Blackboards vs. Whiteboards
Organization: ATCC
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2005 11:58:52 -0400


In article <telecom24.140.11@telecom-digest.org>, nmclain@annsgarden.com 
says:

> Dale Farmer <dale@cybercom.net> wrote:

>> That this has nothing to do with telecom ...

> Unless it's an electronic whiteboard.
> http://tinyurl.com/3u8xe

At my last job we had one of those Smart Boards. It's a whiteboard
that you don't use traditional marker on. You project the image and
then pick up the tools from the tray to mark up that image.

You can then save the marked drawings. BTW, this doesn't preclude you
from using it as a whiteboard. I used ours plenty of times as a true
whit board without having to use those damned markers.

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

From: DevilsPGD <ihatespam@crazyhat.net>
Subject: Re: Does Your Computer Look Like This?
Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2005 21:38:32 -0600
Organization: Disorganized


In message <telecom24.142.15@telecom-digest.org>
bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) wrote:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: As I said in the last issue, it is very
> hard -- damn near impossible -- to pull the wool over you guy's eyes.
> Try as hard as I may.   PAT]

Why would you want to?

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, I don't especially want to, but
it was April Fool's Day and I thought some laughs would have been fun.
Too bad my joke was ruined.  :(    PAT]

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

From: SELLCOM Tech support <support@sellcom.com>
Subject: Re: Sprint PCS Vision Added to Open Relay DataBase
Organization: www.sellcom.com
Reply-To: support@sellcom.com
Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2005 18:25:49 GMT


jmeissen@aracnet.com posted on that vast internet thingie:

> In article <telecom24.138.7@telecom-digest.org>,
> Eric Friedebach  <friedebach@yahoo.com> wrote:

>> It seems that Sprint has been added to the Open Relay DataBase
>> <www.ordb.org> by mistake somehow. Sprint has no idea how this
>> happened, and they can't tell me when this will be resolved.

If you trace route to many of the spam / porn sites being spamvertised
you will find that their websites are provided US connectivity by the
scum at sprintlink.net.  I have had some that I have received spam for
weeks and sprintlink.net continues to enable the foreign spam websites
in spite of repeated notice.

Steve 

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.  New www.electrictrains.biz

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

From: Justin Time <a_user2000@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Cell Phone Service Comparisons
Date: 4 Apr 2005 05:23:19 -0700


Hey,

If you can find a site that manages even to keep up with all the
different cell plans offered by the carriers it would be something!
Carriers change their plans to react to market pressure and to create
a new market.  That is why you cannot find any two plans from
competing carriers that line up item-for-item.  That, and the fact new
plans are announced quarterly -- or more often if market conditions
warrant -- make the job of any telecom manager even more hectic.  Just
try adding a new phone to that great plan you got only 3 weeks ago ...

Rodgers Platt

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

Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2005 18:41:45 -0400
Subject: OpinionJournal Article: The Soul of a Controversy
From: Telecom Digest Reader via OpinionJournal <editor@telecom-digest.org>


Pat:

Please consider posting this in Obituary thread about Terry Schiavo.

The writer clearly understands the Descartian Duality.  If this topic
is going to be in the digest, we need to elevate the discussion.

For fairly obvious reasons, wish to remain anonymous -- I don't need
the hatemail from either side of this controversy.

The Soul of a Controversy: After Terri Schiavo's death, questions
remain. 

BY DAVID B. HART

Terri Schiavo has now died, but of course the controversy surrounding
her last days will persist indefinitely.  Most of the issues raised as
she was dying were legal and moral; but at the margins of the storm,
questions of a more "metaphysical" nature were occasionally raised in
public.

For instance, I heard three people on the radio last week speculating
on the whereabouts of her "soul."

One opined that where consciousness has sunk below a certain minimally responsive level, the soul has already departed the body; the other two thought that the soul remains, but as a dormant prisoner of the ruined flesh, awaiting release. 
Their arguments, being intuitive, were of little interest. 
What caught my attention was the unreflective dualism to which all
three clearly subscribed: The soul, they assumed, is a kind of magical
essence haunting the body, a ghost in a machine.

This is in fact a peculiarly modern view of the matter, not much older
than the 17th-century philosophy of Descartes.  While it is now the
model to which most of us habitually revert when talking about the
soul -- whether we believe in such things or not -- it has scant basis
in either Christian or Jewish tradition.

The "living soul" of Scripture is the whole corporeal and spiritual
totality of a person whom the breath of God has wakened to life.
Thomas Aquinas, interpreting centuries of Christian and pagan
metaphysics, defined the immortal soul as the "form of the body," the
vital power animating, pervading, shaping an individual from the
moment of conception, drawing all the energies of life into a unity.

This is not to deny that, for Christian tradition, the soul transcends
and survives the earthly life of the body.  It is only to say that the
soul, rather than being a kind of "guest" within the self, is instead
the underlying mystery of a life in its fullness.  In it the
multiplicity of experience is knit into a single continuous and
developing identity.

It encompasses all the dimensions of human existence: animal functions
and abstract intellect, sensation and reason, emotion and reflection,
flesh and spirit, natural aptitude and supernatural longing.

As such, it grants us an openness to the world of which no other
creature is capable, allowing us to take in reality through feeling
and thought, recognition and surprise, will and desire, memory and
anticipation, imagination and curiosity, delight and sorrow, invention
and art.

The fourth-century theologian Gregory of Nyssa calls the soul a
"living mirror" in which all things shine, so immense in its capacity
that it can, when turned toward the light of God, grow eternally in an
ever greater embrace of divine beauty.

For the seventh-century theologian Maximus the Confessor, the human
soul is the "boundary" between material and spiritual reality --
heaven and earth -- and so constitutes a microcosm that joins
together, in itself, all the spheres of being.

I doubt even the dogmatic materialists among us are wholly insensible
to the miraculous oddity that in the midst of organic nature there
exists a creature so exorbitantly in excess of what material causality
could possibly adumbrate, a living mirror where all splendors gather,
an animal who is also a creative and interpretive being with a longing
for eternity.  Whether one is willing to speak of a "rational soul" or
not, there is obviously an irreducible mystery here, one that commands
our reverence.

Granted, it is easiest to sense this mystery when gazing at the
Sistine Chapel's ceiling or listening to Bach.

But it should be evident -- for Christians at least -- even when
everything glorious and prodigious in our nature has been stripped
away and all that remains is frailty, brokenness and dependency, or
when a person we love has been largely lost to us in the labyrinth of
a damaged brain.  Even among such ravages -- for those with the eyes
to see it -- a terrible dignity still shines out.

I do not understand exactly why those who wanted Terri Schiavo to die
had become so resolute in their purposes by the end.  If she was as
"vegetative" as they believed, what harm would it have done, I wonder,
to surrender her to the charity (however fruitless) of her parents? Of
this I am certain, though: Christians who understand their faith are
obliged to believe that she was, to the last, a living soul.

It is true that, in some real sense, it was her soul that those who
loved her could no longer reach, but it was also her soul that they
touched with their hands and spoke to and grieved over and adored.

And this also means that it was a living soul that we as a society
chose to abandon to starvation and thirst -- which should, at the very
least, give us cause to consider what else we may have abandoned along
the way.

Mr. Hart, an Eastern Orthodox theologian, is the author of "The Beauty
of the Infinite" (Eerdmans).

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thank you very much for this fitting
conclusion to the 'Terri Shiavo Obituary Thread', which itself has 
now been declared dead, unless anyone absolutely has something they
wish to add.   Seriously, this is _not_ going to become the 'Terri
Shiavo News All the Time' corner of the net. There are lots of such
places and URL's which will live on and on and on, I suspect, and they
do not need, nor welcome my assistance in their debates. 

My _original intent_ in allowing the first message of the thread to
see the light of day here last week was to lead up to the message by
Monty Solomon posted yesterday telling how greed had once again taken
root in the net, with the sale, for purposes of spam, the email names
and mailing list of those folks who had presumably expressed their
condolences to the family and/or the husband; either their condolences
or their hatred, one or the other, or both. That, and the fact that
Ms. Schiavo had been employed years ago for a short time by Bell of
Pennsylvania then later as a clerk/telephone operator for the
'insurance company' in Florida, seemed to make the message at least
a wee bit relevant here in this forum on communications. 

And what should have been a very private, personal matter between a
husband and his wife turned into such a three-ring circus with the
politicians, legislators, judges and other 'professionals' getting
involved. I know, that as a disabled person myself -- though hardly
in the category of Ms. Shiavo -- I would be greatly aggrieved by the
notion of someone deciding for me that 'my time had come'. In this
lose-lose situation one good thing _did_ come out of it for me at
least, and perhaps some of you.  If you have not written a living 
will, and instructions for (a) your treatment if you get in Ms. Shiavo's
situation and (b) the disposal of your remains, consider doing so
_today_. 

Most of you long term readers know that I was 'as good as dead' back 
in 1999-2000, following my brain aneurysm. I was comatose for two
months, and like Ms. Shiavo, fed through a tube in my stomach. The
doctors and therapists 'did me a favor' -- or did they? -- by bringing
me around two months and a few days following November 26, 1999 (in
late January, 2000). To this day, April, 2005 I _still_ feel groggy
and dizzy, with very poor memory skills, and a variety of other
incidental problems. Sometimes I have to wonder, I really do. Why I 
was brought back to life (?) after two months and left as essentially
a half-person is not something I can understand. Those of you who were
readers here back in the 1980's and 1990's know many of my ideas and
attitudes were much, much different, when I felt like a whole person,
something that has remained evasive to me now for several years. 

Do yourself and your partners/companions a _big favor_. Write up those
living wills today, please. You don't know when your time is up, any
more than I knew on that Thursday morning that I would wind up
comatose in a hospital in Topeka -- a hundred miles away -- by
nightfall. Now, is there any more to say on the obituary thread? I
hope not.    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 #144
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Apr  5 14:16:30 2005
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j35IGTJ28298;
	Tue, 5 Apr 2005 14:16:30 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2005 14:16:30 -0400 (EDT)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200504051816.j35IGTJ28298@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 #145

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 5 Apr 2005 14:15:00 EDT    Volume 24 : Issue 145

Inside This Issue:                            Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Prison Cell Phone Scandal (Lisa Minter)
    MIT Developing $100 Laptops for Children (Lisa Minter)
    Free VOIP Resources - Learn VOIP (H.323, SIP, MGCP, RTP) (tek junkie)
    Verizon FTTP in Mass (Monty Solomon)
    Cingular Mobi-MLB.com Gameday Audio (Monty Solomon)
    Update, was: NYS AG Spitzer Gets Verizon to Wake Up. (Danny Burstein)
    Lingo - Stay Far, Far Away (radezeeuw@yahoo.com)
    Michigan Attorney General Mike Cox Warns Consumers (Jack Decker)
    Microsoft Targets RIM's BlackBerry With Software Update (Telecom daily)
    Verizon Threatens to Walk Away From MCI Offer (Telecom dailyLead USTA)
    Re: The Real Reason Why SBC Won't Work With Vonage on E-911 (S Sobol)
    Re: The Real Reason Why SBC Won't Work With Vonage on E-911 (Justin Tim)
    Re: USB to RJ-45 Console Cable? (nmclain@annsgarden.com)
    Re: USB to RJ-45 Console Cable? (Scott Dorsey)
    Re: USB to RJ-45 Console Cable? (James Carlson)
    Re: Sprint PCS Vision Added to Open Relay DataBase (SELLCOM Tech) 
    Re: Sprint PCS Vision Added to Open Relay DataBase (Scott Dorsey)
    Re: Some Concerned About Privacy Implications of E-ZPass (G Berkowitz)
    Re: Some Concerned About Privacy Implications of E-ZPass (Justin Time)
    Re: Every Ten Days (Hank Karl)
    Re: Does Your Computer Look Like This? (Paul Vader)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: Prison Cell Phone Scandal
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2005 19:48:01 -0400


Prisoners sometimes smuggle in cell phones to use in continuing their
criminal enterprises. Follow this link to view the
article: Prison Cell Phone Scandal
<http://www.syncmag.com/article2/0,1759,1763276,00.asp> 

Copyright (c) 2005 Ziff Davis Media Inc. 

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

Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2005 14:51:21 PDT
From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: MIT Developing $100 Laptops for Children 


   http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/ptech/04/04/hundred.dollar.laptops.ap/index.html

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

Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2005 10:05:16 PDT
From: tek junkie <tekjockey@yahoo.com>
Subject: Free VOIP Resources - Learn VOIP (H.323, SIP, MGCP, RTP)


==============================================================
 >>>>>Free VOIP RESOURCES - Learn VOIP (H.323, SIP, MGCP, RTP)
==============================================================

All, Learn VOIP (H.323, SIP, MGCP, RTP) at: http://www.voip-start.com
Tutorials, news, resource links and pdf's on learning voip.

Great for:
businesses looking to implement VOIP in their companies
professionals seeking knowledge.
Fresh content - updated daily!
Vist the links and feed your appetite for knowledge!
http://www.voip-start.com

Check it out... :-)

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

Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2005 20:26:20 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Verizon FTTP in Mass.


     Verizon Brings Fiber to Consumers and Small Businesses in 11
     Additional Massachusetts Communities

Industry-Leading Verizon Fiber-to-the-Premises Network Means Blazing-Fast
                Data, Crystal Clear Voice and Video Capability

Company's Transformational Technology to Benefit Residential and Business
                Customers, Boost Economic Development

BOSTON, April 4 /PRNewswire/ -- Verizon is bringing to 11 additional
communities in Massachusetts one of the most significant advancements
in telecommunications technology in the past 100 years.

The company today announced it is rolling out a fiber-optic network -
known as fiber to the premises, or FTTP -- to many customers in the
communities of Georgetown, Hamilton, Littleton, Marlborough,
Middleboro, Needham, Stoneham, Tewksbury, Tyngsborough, Wakefield and
Wenham.

The all-fiber network will deliver faster data speeds and crystal
clear voice, and also has the capability to offer a full suite of
video services, a competitive choice to existing cable television
providers.  The company will seek a franchise agreement before
offering cable TV service in a selected community.

Today's announcement brings to 39 the number of communities in eastern
Massachusetts identified by the company for deployment of its
all-fiber network. The others are Andover, Bedford, Belmont, Boxford,
Burlington, Canton, Dedham, Holliston, Hopkinton, Lakeville,
Lexington, Lincoln, Lynn, Lynnfield, North Reading, Nahant, Natick,
Newton, Reading, Sherborn, Swampscott, Topsfield, Wellesley,
Westborough, West Newbury, Westwood, Winchester and Woburn.

FTTP uses hair-thin strands of fiber and optical electronics to
directly link homes and businesses to Verizon's network.  The
state-of-the-art network upgrade will unleash a range of advanced
communication services.

     - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=48122799

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

Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2005 20:59:37 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Cingular Mobi-MLB.com Gameday Audio


     MobiTV and Cingular Pitch Live Major League Baseball Audio
     Broadcast to Mobile Phones

Cingular Wireless Customers Can Now Access Live MLB Broadcasts Right from
                            Their Wireless Phones

ATLANTA and BERKELEY, Calif., April 4 /PRNewswire/ -- Cingular
Wireless, the largest wireless carrier in the U.S., and MobiTV, the
world's first television network for mobile phones, today launched the
availability of Mobi- MLB.com Gameday Audio to Cingular Wireless
subscribers.  Cingular's customers can now listen live to every Major
League Baseball game played from opening day to the World Series,
directly from their wireless phones.

Cingular's Mobi-MLB.com Gameday Audio service provides subscribers
with access to more than 2,500 MLB games with the same audio broadcast
available on radio. This agreement with MLB Advanced Media (MLBAM)
delivers unlimited access to subscribers who can choose up to 30 feeds
each day with the option to select their home team announcers.

     - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=48122145

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

From: Danny Burstein <dannyb@panix.com>
Subject: Update, was: NYS AG Spitzer Gets Verizon to Wake Up. A Bit
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2005 01:21:45 UTC
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC


In <Pine.NEB.4.62.0504032223370.21084@panix5.panix.com> danny burstein
<dannyb@panix.com> writes:

> "Verizon to block 'cramming' of computer charges on phone bills

>   By MICHAEL GORMLEY,  AP Writer April 3, 2005, 12:16 PM EDT

> "Albany NY - Verizon Communications Inc. will fight the 'cramming '
> of unauthorized charges by companies such as Internet providers that
> appear on phone bills.

It's now up on Spitzer's site:

	http://www.oag.state.ny.us/press/2005/apr/apr04a_05.html

Typical paragraph:

	"Verizon must terminate contracts with third parties that 
	have persistent complaint levels. The Attorney GeneralÕs 
	investigation found that in some cases, Verizon did not promptly 
	take action against parties with high complaint levels, even after 
	lawsuits and regulatory actions had been commenced

Still no mention of anything back at the telco for facilitating these
charges, no recompense to the consumer who had to notice the fake bill
and take the time to complain, and no requirement for pro-activity
(i.e. if 50% of "Integra-sleaze" charges are disputed, Verizon can let
the other 50% of the payments made by the recipients go through).

But it's a decent start. Personally I believe anyone sending 10,000 fake 
bills through a telco (and the telco that assists) should be treated to
the same criminal charges that anyone mailing out 10,000 fake invoices, 
hoping that 1/4 of the recipients would send in a check, would get.

_____________________________________________________
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
		     dannyb@panix.com 
[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]

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

From: radezeeuw@yahoo.com <rdezeeuw@gmail.com>
Subject: Lingo - Stay Far, Far Away
Date: 4 Apr 2005 13:32:10 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com


I have had Lingo for a few months and continuously had bad connections
 ... after many calls to their tech department.

I cancelled it on March 9 and they told me that there was a
cancellation fee of $ 39.95 because I was beyond the trial period.
OK, fine, I can live with that.

Now I received a bill on our credit card statement for the normal
monthly fee, dated March 17 ... eight days after I cancelled.

I just called the billing department and they claim that the bill was
generated on March 5 and I should have been told that I might as well
wait to cancel until the end of March since the billing had already
occurred.  But, I was not told that ... plus I was cancelling it
because it did not work.

So, in addition to the 39.95 cancellation fee, I get to pay for days
when I did not even use it.

Also -- I switched to AT&T Voice IP and it works GREAT!!!!

Stay far, far way from Lingo.

Rick DeZeeuw

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

From: Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@withheld at request>
Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2005 11:35:42 -0400
Subject: Michigan Attorney General Mike Cox Warns Consumers of Voice
Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com


http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=109&STORY=/www/story/04-04-2005/0003329186&EDATE=

Michigan Attorney General Mike Cox Warns Consumers of Voice Over the
Internet Technology Limitations http://www.michigan.gov/ag

               Cox Concerned About Lack of 9-1-1 Coverage

LANSING, Mich., April 4 /PRNewswire/ -- Attorney General Mike Cox
advised consumers today about possible limitations regarding "Voice
Over the Internet," or VoIP, technology.  Advertised in Michigan, VoIP
technology may not offer access to 9-1-1 emergency services.

"While VoIP may offer less expensive telephone service, consumers
should be seriously concerned about the possible risks of not having
access to 9-1-1 emergency services," Cox said. 

"I encourage every Michigan consumer to become informed about this new
technology and the important differences between it and traditional
telephone service, especially in regards to proper access to the 9-1-1
emergency system."  VoIP technology allows consumers to make telephone
calls using a broadband Internet connection instead of a regular
telephone line.

Some VoIP services do not provide access to emergency 9-1-1.  A
Consumer Alert detailing Cox's concerns is available at the Attorney
General's Web site, http://www.michigan.gov/ag .  "If the advertising,
brochure, or other marketing materials are silent on this issue, it is
likely that 9-1-1 is not being provided," Cox said.  Even for those
companies that do provide 9-1-1 service, it may not be the full
service on which consumers rely.

For example, the landline telephone system automatically provides
9-1-1 operators with the caller's location, while the VoIP service may
not.  Landline telephone systems also route 9-1-1 calls through
emergency phone lines while VoIP may route these calls to a general
call center.  Even when the VoIP service includes traditional 9-1-1
access, it may not be automatically activated and consumers must take
proactive steps in order to place a 9-1-1 call.

    If you are a VoIP subscriber:

    * Verify that you can access 9-1-1 with your telephone by checking
your VoIP provider's Web site.  DO NOT dial 9-1-1 to test your access
to the emergency response network.

    * Be sure to activate the emergency calling feature of your
service plan, if applicable.

    *  If the power is out, your VoIP service may be out, too.  Consider
purchasing a back up power supply.

    * Inform children, babysitters, and visitors about your VoIP
service and relevant limitations.

    * Consider keeping a landline telephone to access 9-1-1 emergency
services.

    Consumers with a questions or a complaint about VoIP may contact
the Attorney General's Consumer Protection Division toll-free at
1-877-765-8388, by writing to P.O. Box 30213, Lansing, MI 48909, or by
visiting http://www.michigan.gov/ag .

    The Attorney General provides Consumer Alerts to inform the public
of unfair, misleading, or deceptive business practices, and to provide
information and guidance on other issues of concern.

SOURCE Michigan Attorney General Web Site: http://www.michigan.gov/ag

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/

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

ate: Mon, 4 Apr 2005 12:56:42 EDT
From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA <usta@dailylead.com>
Subject: Microsoft targets RIM's BlackBerry with software update


Telecom dailyLead from USTA
April 4, 2005
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=20556&l=2017006

TODAY'S HEADLINES

NEWS OF THE DAY
* Microsoft targets RIM's BlackBerry with software update
BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH
* Telecom Italia unloads TIM
* Alaska ILEC turns to softswitch technology
* SBC, Verizon set to begin long-awaited move into TV
USTA SPOTLIGHT 
* Small Company Summit starts this Wednesday in Minneapolis
EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES
* Cable, high-tech industries draw closer in converged world
* Yahoo! seen pressuring Hollywood to produce for Internet
REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE
* AT&T appeals FCC decision on prepaid calling cards

Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others.
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=20556&l=2017006

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

Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2005 12:46:57 EDT
From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA <usta@dailylead.com>
Subject: Verizon Threatens to Walk Away From MCI Offer


Telecom dailyLead from USTA
April 5, 2005
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=20591&l=2017006

TODAY'S HEADLINES

NEWS OF THE DAY
* Verizon threatens to walk away from MCI offer
BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH
* Report: VoIP adoption poised to skyrocket
* Sprint lands cable deals
* Leap unveils flat-rate calling plan
USTA SPOTLIGHT 
* Announcing Phone Facts Plus 2005
EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES
* Cable takes a shot at digital convergence
* The new broadband lifestyle
REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE
* Quebec's highest court outlaws satellite TV signal theft

Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others.
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=20591&l=2017006

Legal and Privacy information at http://www.dailylead.com/about/privacy_legal.jsp

SmartBrief, Inc.
1100 H ST NW, Suite 1000
Washington, DC 20005

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

From: Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net>
Subject: Re: The Real Reason Why SBC Won't Work With Vonage on E-911
Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2005 20:12:40 -0700
Organization: Glorb Internet Services, http://www.glorb.com


Justin Time wrote:

> The better rumor regarding Verizon and their plans is on the wireless
> front.  They will let Sprint merge with Nextel and then take Sprint
> Wireless.  Sprint PCS is the only other major CDMA carrier. 

Wrong. Alltel just got a lot larger by buying CellularONE, and USCC is
not a bit player either (although they're significantly smaller than
the others).

Then, TELECOM Digest Editor questioned:

> My second question is, isn't the walkie-talkie feature of Nextel
> really just a fancy sort of speed dial which transmits over the
> speaker phone?

No.

> Nextel 'walkie talkie' style phone and my friend in Chicago used his
> Nextel walkie-talkie phone to call me, it surely would not go over
> some airwaves would it?    PAT]

It would.

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"


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: My next question, to Steven, is about
Alltel's purchase of Cellular One. _Which_ Cellular One? I had always
thought 'Cellular One' was a brand name for a consortium of various
cellular carriers which used the 'Cellular One' name.   PAT]

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

From: Justin Time <a_user2000@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: The Real Reason Why SBC Won't Work With Vonage on E-911
Date: 5 Apr 2005 05:43:05 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com


TELECOM Digest Editor originally questioned, which is more of a
threat, SBC or Verizon:

As far as your first question, define threat.  Is Verizon or SBC a
threat to what?

As far as Nextel, I am not the expert on Nextel and their technology,
but the analogy I use when discussing the differences between Nextel
and Cellular service and the attempts to recreate the "Direct Connect"
feature by carriers such as Verizon Wireless and AT&T was that Nextel
was a walkie-talkie with a phone feature, the others are a cell phone
with a walkie-talkie feature.

Nextel was built on the LMRS, or Land Mobile Radio Service frequencies
and services.  This was the taxicab and business dispatch frequency
band.  Nextel also incorporated a lot of the "Mom and Pop" paging
companies and their frequencies in order to obtain bandwidth.  As far
as "Direct Connect" being a "fancy sort of speed dial", you could
probably argue that it is true just as my analogy is true.  The Nextel
(actually Motorola) implementation is known for its connect speed,
normally in the range of just a couple of seconds vice the up to 10 or
more for the traditional cellular carriers.  The conversation is
carried on in the same way as the walkie-talkies, most people scream
into their device and blast everyone in the area with the maximum
volume on the speaker.

Some have stated if the units are close enough they will transmit
between themselves directly without using a tower, otherwise they will
use a site and be carried just as if it were a cell-to-cell
conversation.  We recently installed a Nextel base station in one of
our buildings and it is configured to carry a total of 19 concurrent
conversations on three frequencies.  These include the "dispatch" or
two-way and regular cellular type calls.  It is possible for a person
on the 6th floor to carry on a conversation to a unit in the basement
with their two-way.  While it may not sound like much, the building is
almost 100 years old and has load-bearing walls on the top floor that
are almost two meters thick made out of red brick.  There is a 28 dB
loss between the office on the outside of the wall and the inner part
of the building.  In terms most can relate to, that's going from four
bars of signal to one.

But yes Pat, if you and your friend in Chicago wanted to hold a
walkie-talkie conversation it would be carried on both airwaves and
landlines.

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That sounds rather amazing to me, in
view of the fact that we are about 700 miles from Chicago, and I have
never yet seen any 'radio equipment' (with ease to carry around, and
battery operated and low radiation power) which could cover such a
distance. I could see a few miles in a city, or two such units in
a town like this where I am, but Citizen Band, 2-meter units, and
even the older style pocket pagers cannot 'make a trip' like that, 
(700 miles from Chicago) but Nextel can?

Regards 'threat', I was referring to the 'threat' to consumers, in
making informed choices in telecom services. Which of them -- Verizon or
SBC -- is more likely to clamp the lid down on us sometime soon if
they are able to do so?   PAT]  

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

Date: Mon,  4 Apr 2005 21:13:35 -0600
From: nmclain@annsgarden.com
Subject: Re: USB to RJ-45 Console Cable?


JXM2119 <jxm2119_AT_rochester.rr.com@syrcnyrdrs-01.nyroc.rr.com> wrote:

> I would like to buy/make a cable that will have a USB
> connector on one end and an RJ-45 on the other.

If by "RJ-45" you mean an 8-position modular connector wired to carry
an Ethernet circuit, you'll need an adapter such as Planet Technology
Corp. Model PT9500.  I have two of these devices in service,
connecting oldish PCs (W98) to a Linksys router.  They work great.

L-Com sells the adapter, including the software driver (3.5" floppy), for
$29.00.  See http://tinyurl.com/6ddc3 .

> I'm not sure if it is as easy as cutting off a connector
> on the usb and just terminating the RX/TX/GND like you
> can do with a serial cable (DB-9).

Ethernet uses balanced circuits, whereas EIA-232 (formerly RS-232) and
EIA-574 (same voltages as EIA-232, but implemented with a DB-9
connector) use unbalanced circuits.  It takes more than just a
different connector to make the transition between balanced and
unbalanced.


Neal McLain

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

From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey)
Subject: Re: USB to RJ-45 Console Cable?
Date: 4 Apr 2005 18:50:56 -0400
Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000)


JXM2119 <jxm2119_AT_rochester.rr.com@syrcnyrdrs-01.nyroc.rr.com>
wrote:

> I have already read and seen that there are cables/adapters that
> go from USB to DB-9. That would allow you to connect your standard
> serial console cable as you normally would. I am trying to find a way
> to eliminate this.

Those boxes have a lot of electronics inside them, basically one FPGA
that is programmed to do all the conversion.

> I would like to buy/make a cable that will have a USB connector on one
> end and an RJ-45 on the other. I'm not sure if it is as easy as
> cutting off a connector on the usb and just terminating the RX/TX/GND
> like you can do with a serial cable (DB-9).

No, it's not even close.  This would be like transplanting a dog's
head on a human being.  It takes a good bit of glue logic, and I
suppose you could build all the glue yourself with TTL but you'd wind
up with a big expensive box full of stuff.

What is wrong with the USB/RS-232C interface boxes that you don't like?
Can you just put a serial card in your machine?

--scott

"C'est un Nagra.  C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I'd feel very sorry for the dog, if
the animal lived through it all. PAT]

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

From: James Carlson <james.d.carlson@sun.com>
Subject: Re: USB to RJ-45 Console Cable?
Date: 05 Apr 2005 11:13:57 -0400
Organization: Sun Microsystems


JXM2119 <> writes:

> I have already read and seen that there are cables/adapters that
> go from USB to DB-9. That would allow you to connect your standard
> serial console cable as you normally would. I am trying to find a way
> to eliminate this.

> I would like to buy/make a cable that will have a USB connector on one
> end and an RJ-45 on the other. I'm not sure if it is as easy as
> cutting off a connector on the usb and just terminating the RX/TX/GND
> like you can do with a serial cable (DB-9).

Most of the ones I've seen have the electronics that "convert" USB
into RS-232 embedded in the DB-9 end of the cable, so lopping that off
would give you a useless wire.

> I know there may be some issues with going from USB to RS-232
> signaling and I could always build some kind of breakout box in the
> middle.

> Any thoughts?????

It's probably simpler to get a passive DB-9 to RJ45 adapter and plug
that on the end of a USB to DB-9 cable.


James Carlson, KISS Interop                    <james.d.carlson@sun.com>
Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive         71.234W   Vox +1 781 442 2084
MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757   42.497N   Fax +1 781 442 1677

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

From: SELLCOM Tech support <support@sellcom.com>
Subject: Re: Sprint PCS Vision Added to Open Relay DataBase
Organization: www.sellcom.com
Reply-To: support@sellcom.com
Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2005 18:25:49 GMT


jmeissen@aracnet.com posted on that vast internet thingie:

> In article <telecom24.138.7@telecom-digest.org>,
> Eric Friedebach  <friedebach@yahoo.com> wrote:

>> It seems that Sprint has been added to the Open Relay DataBase
>> <www.ordb.org> by mistake somehow. Sprint has no idea how this
>> happened, and they can't tell me when this will be resolved.

If you trace route to many of the spam / porn sites being spamvertised
you will find that their websites are provided US connectivity by the
scum at sprintlink.net.  I have had some that I have received spam for
weeks and sprintlink.net continues to enable the foreign spam websites
in spite of repeated notice.

Steve 

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.  New www.electrictrains.biz

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

From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey)
Subject: Re: Sprint PCS Vision Added to Open Relay DataBase
Date: 4 Apr 2005 18:59:05 -0400
Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000)


Eric Friedebach  <friedebach@yahoo.com> wrote:

> It seems that Sprint has been added to the Open Relay DataBase
> <www.ordb.org> by mistake somehow. Sprint has no idea how this
> happened, and they can't tell me when this will be resolved.

In my basic experience, ORDB is pretty good about removing sites
within a day or so of a problem being resolved.  This, however,
requires sysadmins who understand how the mail system works and who
have the skill to fix it.  This is almost certainly absent at Sprint
if my experiences with them are any judge.

These days the most common way of getting an open relay is to have a
Windows machine that is infected with any one of a number of viruses
that install them.  But, with a machine that is intended to relay
messages to an external network, there are a large number of ways that
an incompetent admin can hose things up.  I would not be surprised if
nobody at Sprint DOES understand the problem.  --scott


"C'est un Nagra.  C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

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

From: Gene S. Berkowitz <first.last@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Some Concerned About Privacy Implications of E-ZPass System
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2005 23:26:10 -0400


In article <telecom24.1 43.12@telecom-digest.org>, dave@compata.com
says:

> Stuart Barkley <stuartb@4gh.net> writes:

>> The article and discussion here both miss what I consider a more
>> important issue with the EZ-pass system:

> And another issue, maybe not so important, but serious for some:
> portability. If you travel on business and rent a car, you are usually
> stuck using the cash lanes on local toll roads. Even if you have a
> working transponder at home which is compatible with the local system,
> you aren't supposed to try using it. The transponder is only valid for
> use in a registered vehicle, which your rental car isn't.

> 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

I've been wondering about this.  Why can't the rental cars include an
EZ-pass, then simply bill you for tolls accrued during the rental
period?

The only thing worse than a clueless tourist is a clueless tourist 
blocking the EZ-pass lane.

--Gene

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

From: Justin Time <a_user2000@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Some Concerned About Privacy Implications of E-ZPass System
Date: 4 Apr 2005 12:35:06 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com


Uhmm "Registered Vehicle"????

> The transponder is only valid for use in a registered vehicle, which
> your rental car isn't.

Since when aren't rental cars registered?  Every one I've ever driven,
and even those in the state of California had a vehicle registration in
the car -- or else it wouldn't have had plates.

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

From: Hank Karl <notgiven@nothere.com>
Subject: Re: Every Ten Days
Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2005 17:00:37 -0400
Organization: NETPLEX Internet Services - http://www.ntplx.net/


On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 18:08:04 -0500, Choreboy
<choreboyREMOVE@localnet.com> wrote:

> I hesitate to call the toll-free number, but I don't want to keep
> running to answer the phone for a company that intends to hang up on
> me.  What should I do?

Report them to the FCC.  The TSR (which includes the national "do not
call" list) requires Telemarketers to have a low call abandonment
rate, and to play a message stating who called if no agent is
available.  They also must allow the phone to ring for either (IIRC)
four rings or fifteen seconds.

> Choreboy

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That telephone number 1-877-467-3277
> belongs to 'Sears Home Improvement Products'.    PAT]

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

From: pv+usenet@pobox.com (Paul Vader)
Subject: Re: Does Your Computer Look Like This?
Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2005 21:29:52 -0000
Organization: Inline Software Creations


Patrick Townson <ptownson@cableone.net> writes:

> with the Rand Corporation put together an artist's conception of what
> computers would look like in fifty years, in 2004. Look at it here. 
> http://www.mountainwings.com/past/5082.htm

> This is _not_ an April Fool's joke.   

Perhaps not, but it is a made up picture:

http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/hoaxes/computer.asp *

* PV   something like badgers--something like lizards--and something
       like corkscrews.

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

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 #145
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Apr  6 00:57:26 2005
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j364vPx03553;
	Wed, 6 Apr 2005 00:57:26 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2005 00:57:26 -0400 (EDT)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200504060457.j364vPx03553@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 #146

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 6 Apr 2005 00:58:00 EDT    Volume 24 : Issue 146

Inside This Issue:                            Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Satellite Radio Takes Off, Altering the Airwaves (Monty Solomon)
    Verizon Juices up Its DSL Service (Monty Solomon)
    Comcast Eyes Advertising System for DVRs (Monty Solomon)
    Cable Execs Say They're Not Blocking Outside VoIP (Jack Decker)
    Re: Wired: Word From on High: Jam Cell Calls (John McHarry)
    Re: The Real Reason Why SBC Won't Work With Vonage on E-911 (L. Hancock)
    Re: The Real Reason Why SBC Won't Work With Vonage on E-911 (Sullivan)
    Re: Prison Cell Phone Scandal (Fred Atkinson)
    Re: Some Concerned About Privacy Implications of E-Z Pass (Chris Farrar)
    Accessing an Old Norvergence Article (Eli Varenberg)
    Re: Obituary: Schiavo Dies After Feeding Tube Removed (John McHarry)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2005 15:12:17 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Satellite Radio Takes Off, Altering the Airwaves


By LORNE MANLY

Just a blink after the newly emergent titans of radio -- Clear Channel
Communications, Infinity Broadcasting and the like -- were being
accused of scrubbing diversity from radio and drowning listeners in
wall-to-wall commercials, the new medium of satellite radio is fast
emerging as an alternative. And broadcasters are fighting back.

The announcement on Friday by XM Satellite Radio -- the bigger of the
two satellite radio companies -- that it added more than 540,000
subscribers from January through March pushed the industry's customer
total past five million after fewer than three and a half years of
operation. Analysts call that remarkable growth for companies charging
more than $100 annually for a product that has been free for 80 years.

Total subscribers at XM and its competitor, Sirius Satellite Radio,
will probably surpass eight million by the end of year, making
satellite radio one of the fastest-growing technologies ever --
faster, for example, than cellphones.

To keep that growth soaring, XM and Sirius are furiously signing up
carmakers to offer satellite radio as a factory-installed option and
are paying tens of millions of dollars for exclusive programming. On
Sunday, XM began offering every locally broadcast regular-season and
playoff Major League Baseball game to a national audience, having
acquired the rights in a deal that could be worth up to $650 million
over 11 years. And Howard Stern is getting $500 million over five
years to leave Infinity and join Sirius next January. Each company
offers 120 or more channels of music, news, sports and talk.

Though satellite radio is still an unprofitable blip in the radio
universe, it is pushing commercial radio to change its sound.
Broadcasters are cutting commercials, adding hundreds of songs to
once-rigid playlists, introducing new formats and beefing up their
Internet offerings. A long-awaited move to digital radio could give
existing stations as many as five signals each, with which they could
introduce their own subscription services -- but with a local flavor
that satellite is hard pressed to match.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/05/national/05satellite.html?ex=1270353600&en=724b9d6f25b87447&ei=5090

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

Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2005 20:50:59 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Verizon Juices up Its DSL Service


By Peter J. Howe, Globe Staff  |  April 5, 2005

Verizon Communications Inc. ratcheted up the broadband Internet arms
race yesterday, doubling the speed of its $30-a-month service while
confirming that 11 more Massachusetts communities are getting its new
super-fast fiber-optic network.

Verizon's $30 digital subscriber line service will now offer
downstream access at up to 3 megabits, up from 1.5 megabits currently
and much closer to cable modems, for subscribers willing to sign a
one-year contract, or bundle DSL with phone service.

Subscribers who have already been paying $40 for 3 megabit service
will have their bills automatically lowered, starting with the next
billing cycle. Because of technology limitations, however, only about
half of customers whose phone lines can support Verizon DSL will be
able to get the faster speed, spokeswoman Bobbi Henson said.

At the same time, Verizon raised to 39 the number of Bay State
communities where it has confirmed it is building out its FiOS
fiber-optic network, which can deliver Internet access at speeds up to
30 megabits per second. This year, FiOS will also offer cable
television packages in direct competition with Comcast Corp. and
satellite TV companies.


http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2005/04/05/verizon_juices_up_its_dsl_service/ 


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

Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2005 23:37:38 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Comcast Eyes Advertising System for DVRs


SAN FRANCISCO (AP) -- Comcast Corp. is working with TiVo Inc. on an 
advertising system that will insert new, updated commercials into 
already-recorded programs, the company said.

Comcast Chief Executive Roberts told cable executives late Monday 
that under such a system, programs that were recorded weeks ago on a 
TiVo digital video recorder would have their old commercials replaced 
with new ones.

The system could also take into account viewer patterns to make ads 
more targeted and relevant, Roberts explained.

Philadelphia-based Comcast, the country's largest cable company, 
announced last month it would start offering TiVo's DVRs by 2006.

The new technology could help make DVRs more palatable to TV 
networks, which are concerned about losing advertising opportunities 
because DVRs allow viewers to fast-forward past commercials in 
recorded shows.

      - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=48173844

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

From: Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@withheld on request>
Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 11:16:23 -0400
Subject: Cable Execs Say They're Not Blocking Outside VoIP
Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com


http://informationweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=160403733

Would cable companies block independent Internet services like Voice
over IP from their broadband offerings? Not a chance, according to
some top execs who spoke at the National Cable & Telecommunications
Show Sunday.  By Paul Kapustka

Advanced IP Pipeline
	  	
SAN FRANCISCO -- Would cable companies block independent Internet
services like Voice over IP from their broadband offerings? Not a
chance, according to some top execs who spoke at the National Cable &
Telecommunications Show here Sunday.

Those sentiments were echoed later in the day at a panel discussing
government issues, where a chief legal staffer on the House Energy &
Commerce committee said that members of that committee are "very
concerned" about incidents like the recent port-blocking case
involving Vonage and Madison River Communications, and that upcoming
telecom reform legislation might include specific wording prohibiting
the practice.

According to Paul Allen, the co-founder of Microsoft who is now
chairman and the largest shareholder of Charter Communications, and
Thomas Rutledge, chief operating officer of Cablevision, their
companies shouldn't have to worry about violating any such
law. Rutledge dismissed the idea of selectively blocking services out
of hand, even though players like Vonage might compete with
Cablevision's own VoIP offering.

"If you look at our high-speed network, Yahoo's on it, Google's on it,
AOL's on it and voice is on it," Rutledge said in an interview after
Sunday's keynote panel discussion. "Our customers expect to access to
the sites our network enables them to have, and the applications that
they're able to reach. For us to do anything otherwise would be
against our economic interest."

Kyle McSlarrow, the newly minted president and CEO of the NCTA, said
cable-company CEOs he has talked to since he's been on the job are
"absolutely" against selective blocking of Internet services or
applications.

Full story at:
http://informationweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=160403733

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: John McHarry <jmcharry@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Wired: Word From on High: Jam Cell Calls
Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 01:45:57 GMT
Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net


On Sun, 03 Apr 2005 16:45:51 -0700, Lisa Minter wrote:

> Word From on High: Jam Cell Calls

> Four churches in Mexico have unobtrusively installed Israeli-made
> cell-phone jammers to thwart those who don't seem to understand they
> should turn the things off during services or weddings. They're not
> the only ones to install the jammers.

This is kind of old news. Jammers are illegal in the US, but if I were
building or extensively remodeling a theatre, church, etc., I would
make it into a Faraday cage. Done right, it is also good insulation.

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

From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Subject: Re: The Real Reason Why SBC Won't Work With Vonage on E-911
Date: 5 Apr 2005 14:08:37 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com


Jack Decker wrote:

> It's probably no secret that I don't have a lot of love for SBC,
> mainly because it seems as though any time they have a choice between
> doing something that would be beneficial to their customers or the
> general public, or making a profit, they always seem to choose to make
> a profit.

That's what regular businesses always do -- go for the profit.
Why should you be so surprised?

Some businesses have a very strong customer service/support policy.
They don't do so because it's "nice", they do so because they believe
it is most profitable FOR THEM to do so.  Other businesses are not so
big on customer service but have lower prices.  That's the free
market -- you choose the kind of business for yourself.

The old regulated-monopoly Bell System and airline industry operated
on a service philosophy since they were tightly regulated.  Eventually
the public complained rates were too high.  So, Bell got out of
leasing phones -- AND providing 24/7 free service to support those
phones.  The airlines stopped the freebies too (like easy ticket
exchanges annd interchanges with other airlines).

If you don't like SBC, don't use them.  Cable companies sell broadband
now and you can get your phone service through them.  Tell your town
to subscribe to VOIP so your 911 calls will go through.

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But try to be realistic, would you
Lisa?  For most people, it is not as simple as just saying, 'Do not
use SBC.' I managed to pull that off, after considerable grief, and
I _know how the 'system' works_, but as we have said here many times,
not all cablecos are as effecient and friendly and prepared as ours
is here Independence. Not everyone has access to good _alternative_
phone networks as we do here. Oh, I agree, ASAP get yourslf weened
off of Traditional Bell if that's your pleasure, but its not all that
easy even for experienced people to do, let alone newbies to telecom.
PAT] 

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

From: Michael D. Sullivan <userid@camsul.example.invalid>
Subject: Re: The Real Reason Why SBC Won't Work With Vonage on E-911
Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 02:38:54 GMT


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: My next question, to Steven, is about
> Alltel's purchase of Cellular One. _Which_ Cellular One? I had always
> thought 'Cellular One' was a brand name for a consortium of various
> cellular carriers which used the 'Cellular One' name.   PAT]

Alltel is acquiring Western Wireless, which not only uses the Cellular 
One brand name in its business as other companies do, it owns the brand 
and franchises use of the name.


Michael D. Sullivan
Bethesda, MD (USA)
(Replace "example.invalid" with "com" in my address.)

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

From: Fred Atkinson <fatkinson@mishmash.com>
Subject: Re: Prison Cell Phone Scandal
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2005 15:32:17 -0400


Perhaps *this* might define a legitimate use for a cell phone jammer.  

Fred 

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

Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 16:40:44 -0400
From: Chris Farrar <cfarrar1307@rogers.com>
Subject: Re: Some Concerned About Privacy Implications of E-Z Pass System 


Gene S. Berkowitz <first.last@comcast.net> wrote:

> And another issue, maybe not so important, but serious for some:

>> portability. If you travel on business and rent a car, you are usually
>> stuck using the cash lanes on local toll roads. Even if you have a
>> working transponder at home which is compatible with the local system,
>> you aren't supposed to try using it. The transponder is only valid for
>> use in a registered vehicle, which your rental car isn't.

> I've been wondering about this.  Why can't the rental cars include an
> EZ-pass, then simply bill you for tolls accrued during the rental
> period?

Humm, New York E-ZPass can be transplanted into any vehicle of the
same class.  I had one that I was using for a few weeks before I
"registered" my licence plate with them, as I was waiting for them to
mail me my PIN numbers to access my account.  The CSR on the phone
said that as long as the E-ZPass is valid, they don't care what car it
is in.

The same goes for Ontario's Hwy 407ETR.  The only caviat is that if
the transponder isn't read it will generate a bill to the rental
company, who will in turn hit you for it plus a surcharge to handle
their time and effort to figure out who had the car that day.

As for why not have an E-ZPass for the rental fleet, cost is probably
a big issue.  The amount of pre-paid tolls has to be pretty hefty.

Chris

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

Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 17:48:11 -0400
From: Eli Varenberg <eliv44@asrlab.org>
Subject: Accessing an Old Norvergence Article


Dear Mr. Townson:

I am trying to access an October 2003, perhaps October 15, 2003 digest
that appeared at one point at the following webpage:

http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/telecom-archives/TELECOM_Digest_Online/1140.html (This link no longer works.)

I am seeking a complaint against Norvergence, which is referenced in
the following article:
http://www.leasingnews.org/archives/October%202003/10-15-03.htm.

I'd appreciate your help in finding this digest. If you have any questions, 
please e-mail me or call me.

Sincerely,

Eli Varenberg, Researcher
Art science Research Laboratory
www.asrlab.org

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Ah yes, Norvergence! I think the item
you are looking for is here:

http://massis.lcs.mit.edu/archives/back.issues/volume.22/vol22.iss651-700

	(and in particular issue 675, through issue 690.)

Articles that old have long since been flushed from the online Digest
you referred to (1140.html) but I think if you look in the above
cluster of 50 back issues you will find a copy of it. There were so
many articles complaining about Norvergence I don't know which one
you specifically want. If you go to the above rather large file, use
an editor of some sort to sort down to issue 675 and look through it
in detail, also the issues following. 

If you ever have any other occassion to look for an older article
 from our archives, which does not show up in the
TELECOM_Digest_Online files because of its age, then use this formula:

Try to extrapolate the YEAR, MONTH and DATE of the article as best
you can.   Then go to http://telecom-digest.org/back.issues and
start from there. First locate the year in particular, then the month
and in each instance you will get a cluster of 50 back issues. (We
publish two or three issues daily). Our files go back to 1981, but are
only filed by individual issue (instead of clusters of 50) as of last
year. With the real, real old stuff, you can also use the
accelerated index covering 3 years at a time between 1989 and 1998,
and sort through those by subject line or author. On that real old
stuff I will help you as much as I can if you will send me clues like
you did this time. Working your way through our old archives will 
cause a sane person to go crazy. Maybe that is what imminently
qualifies me as the editor/publisher/caretaker around here. 

I hope this helps and is what you want.  Please let me know. Certain
topics around here, such as Bell System, Norvergence, and Terri Shiavo
never seem to go away. PAT] 

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

From: John McHarry <jmcharry@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Obituary: Schiavo Dies After Feeding Tube Removed
Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 02:16:17 GMT
Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net


On Sun, 03 Apr 2005 05:05:12 +0000, jmeissen wrote:

> What is more disturbing, in my mind, is that once they decided to let
> the body die (regardless of the state of the mind), they chose to let
> it happen through two weeks of starvation and dehydration.

> This is a sad statement about humanity, that we'll use drugs to
> painlessly put a mortally wounded dog out of its misery, but a human
> body must be forced to endure two weeks of torture until its organs
> fail.

It is certainly the Peronismo sin Peron of euthanasia, but the medical
authorities claim it is painless and without feelings of hunger or
thirst.  I think part of their motivation is laws criminalizing
euthanasia, including voluntary suicide for the competent.

Part of it also must be the feeling that there is a moral difference
between not acting to prolong "life" and acting to end it. Most of the
world failed to act to stop the genocide in the Balkans, and in
Africa, but seems to see a difference between that and actively
slitting the throats. I don't know why there is a feeling that one is
more answerable for action than for inaction, but it seems to fit some
sort of primitive moral intuition.

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Do we have Ms. Shiavo buried yet, at
least for the purposes of this 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 #146
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Apr  6 13:35:36 2005
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j36HZaq11039;
	Wed, 6 Apr 2005 13:35:36 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2005 13:35:36 -0400 (EDT)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200504061735.j36HZaq11039@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 #147

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 6 Apr 2005 13:36:00 EDT    Volume 24 : Issue 147

Inside This Issue:                            Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Amazon.com Plans Plant Facility Expansion in s.e. Kansas (P.Townson)
    Microsoft Aids Florida Anti-Spam Lawsuits (Lisa Minter)
    Google Adding Personal Video to Search Repertoire (Lisa Minter)
    Hackers Add Web, Chat to PSP Video Game Player (Lisa Minter)
    China's Tomb-Sweeping Day Joins Internet Age (Lisa Minter)
    New Heights For In-Flight Internet (Marcus Didius Falco)
    Verizon Brings VoiceWing Internet-Based Calling to Mass. (Monty Solomon)
    Maine Joins Fight to Keep Pay Phones (Monty Solomon)
    Re: USB to RJ-45 Console Cable? (James Carlson)
    Re: Can Somebody Please Explain CSD to Me? (Koos van den Hout)
    Re: Wired: Word From on High: Jam Cell Calls (jtaylor)
    Re: Wired: Word From on High: Jam Cell Calls (Thor Lancelot Simon)
    Re: The Real Reason Why SBC Won't Work With Vonage E-911 (Lisa Hancock)
    Re: The Real Reason Why SBC Won't Work With Vonage E-911 (Steve Sobol)
    Re: Google Maps (AES)
    Re: Classic Telephone Call on PC (Gerhard Nowack)
    So ... What's an E-mail Address Worth to a Spammer? (Danny Burstein)

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 Apr 2005 11:00:00 CDT
From: Telecom Digest Editor <ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
Subject: Amazon.com Plans Plant Facility Expansion in s.e. Kansas


(Excerpts from the Independence Reporter and Coffeyville Journal).

On Monday, managers of the Amazon.com distribution facility in
Independence/Coffeyville were given approval by the Montgomery
County Commissioners in their regular meeting to expand their
facilty. County Commissioners reviewed the plans presented by
Amazon.com and gave the required approvals.  

The company plans to begin the expansion in early May in order
to accomodate its planned expansion in its line of products sold
over the Internet. Amazon estimates the number of new jobs to
be created as a result of the expansion is 20; however they said
that might be a conservative estimate. Last year's plant expansion
resulted in 94 new jobs. Amazon employs 430 people full time, but
during the holiday season has expanded to 1500 people.  The company
noted the volume of merchadise shipped each day out of Coffeyville
is the highest it has ever been. 

The 'Coffeyville Industrial Park' -- Amazon's base of operations -- 
is located mid-way between Independence and Coffeyville.

Patrick Townson

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

Date: 05 Apr 2005 22:55:59 -0700
From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: Microsoft Aids Florida Anti-Spam Lawsuits


SEATTLE (Reuters) - Microsoft Corp.  said on Monday it has aided
Florida's attorney general in anti-spam lawsuits against two Tampa
residents, who the state says are responsible for sending tens of
thousands of spam messages.

Microsoft, which has been engaged in a three-year fight against virus
writers, hackers, spammers and Internet scam artists, said in a
statement that Scott Filary and Donald Townsend of Tampa, Florida,
were responsible for "running a bogus e-mail and Internet operation
responsible for sending more than 65,000 illegal spam messages during
the past year."

Filary and Townsend could not immediately be reached for comment.

Florida's top prosecutor, Charlie Crist, said the investigation
against the two was conducted with Microsoft's help.

Microsoft says spam, or unsolicited email advertisements touting
everything from home refinancing to miracle health cures, could hurt
users of its Windows operating system, which runs more than 90 percent
of the world's personal computers.

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 . 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: 05 Apr 2005 22:57:05 -0700
From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: Google Adding Personal Video to Search Repertoire



SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Google Inc. plans to put out a call for
personal video clips as it moves to further expand the reach of its
Web search business, company co-founder Larry Page said on Monday.

"We're going to start taking video submissions from people," Page said
at the annual cable industry convention in San Francisco.

Google in January rolled out the test version of its video search
service that allows users to find content in television programs from
such providers as Fox News, the NBA and PBS.

The service, called Google Video, allows users to see still images
from the video clips and associated closed-captioning.

Google has search relationships with numerous content and broadband
providers and hopes to extend those into new areas.  For example,
cable company Comcast Corp. uses Google search on its site and also
creates its own content.

"We're always looking for ways to expand partnerships," Google
co-founder Sergey Brin said.

The company on Monday also said it would provide data about popular
Web searches to Current, a new television network for the 18- to
34-year-old audience that is backed by former U.S.  Vice President Al
Gore and other investors.

Google's main rival Yahoo Inc.  led by former Hollywood studio
executive Terry Semel, has made a big move into entertainment and
already has struck exclusive content deals with "Survivor" creator
Mark Burnett and JibJab Media, a producer of short animated films.

Google's Brin said investors should not take the company's recent
steps as a cue that it, too, is making similar moves into
entertainment.

"Entertainment is one of the applications (of search). It is one of
the kinds of information you can find -- it's just one," Brin said.

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 . 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: 05 Apr 2005 22:58:34 -0700
From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: Hackers Add Web, Chat to PSP Video Game Player


By Ben Berkowitz

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Sony Corp new PlayStation Portable is turning
into a great tool for Web browsing, comics reading and online chat --
and it also happens to play video games, movies and music, if you
prefer that sort of thing.

The $249 PSP handheld video game player went on sale in the United
States on March 24, and it took very little time before techies added
the kinds of functions to the PSP that Sony did not include -- and may
never have intended. One man needed only 24 hours to get a working
client for Internet Relay Chat, or IRC, an older messaging platform.

"I was on IRC, and someone mentioned how cool it would be to use their
PSP on Wi-Fi at Starbucks to talk to people over IRC. I said, 'I can
do that', so I began working on it immediately," said Robert Balousek,
creator of PSPIRC ( http://www.pspirc.com ), in an email interview.

Balousek said as many as 100,000 people may have visited the IRC
client, and he is starting work on a new project that would let PSP
users chat on the AOL Instant Messenger network.

Hacking new video game hardware is old hat -- rare is the console that
does not get its own version of the operating system from enterprising
developers. But the gaming and hacking communities embraced the PSP
with speed rarely seen in the console world -- a nod, perhaps, to its
portability.

Other "hacks" include a way to transfer TV shows recorded by the
digital video recorder to the PSP
( http://www.zatznotfunny.com/ttg.htm#psp ); a program for reading
ebooks, ( http://gamefries.blogspot.com/2005/03/how-to-get-e-books-on-
your-psp.html ); and a viewer for comics downloaded from the Internet
( http://www.8bitjoystick.com/archives/jake_how_to_read_web_
comics_on_a_playstation_portable.php ).

Much of the new PSP functionality comes from using the Web browser
built into the racing game "Wipeout Pure," which was meant to go to a
Sony site. By changing some of the PSP's network settings, the browser
can be pointed to an Internet portal.

A number of people have already set up such portals, formatted to fit
in the PSP's screen and offering links and a place to enter Web
addresses. The technology blog Engadget has rounded up a number of
those links.

Sony Computer Entertainment of America, the Japanese conglomerate's
U.S. gaming unit, did not respond to requests for comment.

But the tinkerers suggest Sony probably did not have their work in
mind when they released the PSP. Balousek said the company had only
left small loopholes for outsiders to use.

The development community wishes that would change, as evidenced by an
open plea to Sony posted April 5 on the Web site PS2dev.org (
http://www.ps2dev.org ), which is dedicated to the development of
open-source software projects for the PS2.

"I suggest to Sony that they should work with us to develop a method
to allow home-brew software" using technology to protect Sony
copyrights," the site's editor "Oobles" wrote.

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

Date: 05 Apr 2005 22:57:59 -0700
From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: China's Tomb-Sweeping Day Joins Internet Age


BEIJING (Reuters) - Chinese burned virtual candles and incense, sent
digital flowers and set fire to paper cell phones on Tuesday as modern
technology changes the way the ancient Qing Ming Tomb-Sweeping Day is
celebrated.

Tomb-Sweeping Day is a traditional holiday when people honor their
ancestors and flock to cemeteries, but many young Chinese consider
conventional ceremonies like setting off firecrackers, burning real
incense and paper and making offerings of food and drink as passe,
Xinhua news agency said.

"Internet mourning, such as on the 'online cemetery', where virtual
candles or joss-sticks are lit and virtual flowers are sent, is in
fashion, saving millions of people of Chinese origin the trouble of
traveling long distances in order to sweep tombs for their ancestors,"
it said.

New technology had also changed what people like to burn for ancestors
to enjoy in the afterlife as well as traditional items such as cars
and houses, Xinhua said.

Some mourners had added mobile phones "or other big ticket items that
might be of particular interest for the deceased."


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 . 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: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 02:47:37 -0400
From: Marcus Didius Falco <falco_marcus_didius@yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: New Heights For In-Flight Internet


http://www.cnn.com/2005/TRAVEL/03/31/bt.internet.flight/index.html

LONDON, England (CNN) -- The Internet has changed the way many
business travelers book their flights, and now it looks set to change
the culture within the cabin.

No executive wants to arrive at their hotel room after a long-haul
flight and have 100 e-mails waiting for them -- one of the reasons why
German carrier Lufthansa took the lead and installed in-flight
Internet access last May.

Since then Japan Airlines, All Nippon Airlines and Scandinavian
Airlines have followed suit, while Singapore Airlines, China Airlines,
Korean Air and Asiana Airlines have announced their intent to install
the system on long-range aircraft.

"I would kill for Internet access on a flight to Europe, it is
something business travelers want and are willing to pay for," says
Chris McGinnis of Travel Skills Group, a business travel consultancy
in Atlanta, Georgia.

Boeing's Connexion network charges flat-rate fees from $10 on short
flights to $30 for long flights for Internet access, with download
data speeds of five Mbps per aircraft, to be shared among all
in-flight users.

The price compares favorably with those for using in-flight
telephones, which are built into airplane seats. This service -- at
more than $2 a minute -- is still expensive and infrequently used by
business travelers

In-flight Internet access works by sending electronic signals from
planes to orbiting satellites, which are then relayed to ground
stations.

Boeing launched the service five years ago, just before the September
11, 2001 attacks.

But at that time U.S. airlines were not in a position to take up the
service.

Many U.S. airlines are still in a difficult position financially and
Delta Airlines is only now considering in-flight Internet -- which
would make it the first domestic U.S. airline to do so.

Connexion now faces competition from OnAir, a European joint venture that 
includes Boeing's rival Airbus.

In-flight expectations

Affordable in-flight Internet access could be a source of revenue for
airlines. But service providers may have to bring prices down for
uptake to be significant.

Yet Connexion believes the technology will be a great asset for
airlines, since the Internet is an important tool, and which business
travelers are willing to pay for to catch up on work.

"This technology gives airlines a powerful tool to differentiate
themselves from their competition," Stanley Deal from Connexion says.

However, once more airlines sign on, business travelers may begin to
expect Internet access on major long-haul business routes.

It could then follow the trend at global five star hotels, where
business travelers now expect wireless broadband Internet for free
before checking in.

Despina Afentouli contributed to this report for CNN

Find this article at:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/TRAVEL/03/31/bt.internet.flight/index.html

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

Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2005 10:21:02 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Verizon Brings VoiceWing Internet-Based Calling to Massachusetts


     Verizon Brings VoiceWing Internet-Based Calling to Massachusetts
     for as Low as $19.95 a Month

VoiceWing Costs Less Than Traditional Phone Service and Harnesses the 
Power of the Internet to Provide Unique Calling Features

BOSTON, April 6 /PRNewswire/ -- Residents of Massachusetts now have a
new low-cost, feature-rich option for telephone service with
VoiceWing, an Internet-based calling service from Verizon. One
VoiceWing calling plan just introduced today gives customers 500
minutes of outbound local and domestic long-distance for just $19.95 a
month. An unlimited local and long-distance plan is also available for
as low as $29.95 a month.

VoiceWing customers use a small telephone adapter provided by Verizon
to connect their own telephones to their home high-speed Internet
connections. The telephone adapter allows the VoiceWing customer to
send and receive calls over the Internet instead of using a standard
phone line. The service works with both DSL and cable modem broadband
connections and allows subscribers to call anyone, anywhere,
worldwide.

     - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=48188401

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

Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2005 10:22:27 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Maine Joins Fight to Keep Pay Phones


By GLENN ADAMS Associated Press Writer

FAYETTE, Maine (AP) -- Along a hilly stretch of road in central Maine,
there's no cell phone service for more than a mile.

Callers once used the pay phone outside the Fayette Country Store, 
but that ended when the phone company, despite objections, removed 
it. Customers who need to make toll calls now are told to drive a few 
miles to use a pay phone at the Readfield Post Office.

Around the state and country, similar scenes are playing out as
telephone companies remove unprofitable pay phones. In Maine alone,
the 8,200 pay phones available to the public in 1998 dropped to 4,500
by 2003, according to state Rep. Herbert Adams.

     - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=48184373

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

From: James Carlson <james.d.carlson@sun.com>
Subject: Re: USB to RJ-45 Console Cable?
Date: 06 Apr 2005 07:27:57 -0400
Organization: Sun Microsystems


nmclain@annsgarden.com writes:

> JXM2119 <jxm2119_AT_rochester.rr.com@syrcnyrdrs-01.nyroc.rr.com> wrote:

>> I would like to buy/make a cable that will have a USB
>> connector on one end and an RJ-45 on the other.

> If by "RJ-45" you mean an 8-position modular connector wired to carry
> an Ethernet circuit, you'll need an adapter such as Planet Technology
> Corp. Model PT9500.  I have two of these devices in service,
> connecting oldish PCs (W98) to a Linksys router.  They work great.

RJ-45 connectors are also commonly used for all sorts of serial links
 -- including async (using RS-232 levels), sync (often RS-422), and
even telecom (such as DS-1).  It's not just Ethernet.

-- 
James Carlson, KISS Interop                    <james.d.carlson@sun.com>
Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive         71.234W   Vox +1 781 442 2084
MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757   42.497N   Fax +1 781 442 1677

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

From: Koos van den Hout <koos+newsposting@kzdoos.xs4all.nl>
Subject: Re: Can Somebody Please Explain CSD to Me?
Date: 6 Apr 2005 12:40:05 GMT
Organization: http://idefix.net/~koos/


bob@jfcl.com wrote:

> I live in San Jose (San Francisco Bay Area) and have Cingular GSM
> service with a Nokia 6620 phone.  I'm told that with CSD I can use my
> phone as a modem for my laptop and place a point-to-point data call to
> my ISP.  Is that right?

Yes. Although I don't know what 'CSD' stands for in this context.

> Does my ISP need any special equipment to receive this call, or does
> any regular dial up line suffice for the destination?

The ISP doesn't need special equipment. Your GSM provider (Cingular)
needs modem equipment to convert gsm-data to normal 9600 bps calls.

Your ISP does need to accept calls at those rates. Some have their
modems set up to reject calls at 'lower' speeds.

> What do I tell the Cingular sales people on the phone that I want to
> buy?

A Nokia 6620 data cable. A google search for that term gives me
http://www.nokiausa.com/nokia_accessories/6620/1,2224,70,00.html

> Thanks in advance for the help.  I won't have any trouble setting up a
> dialup connection on my PC, but I'm afraid I don't know very much
> about cell phone technology.

To your computer it will look like a normal modem that understands
Hayes commands to build a connection and dial your ISP.  Your phone
will convert it to a gsm-data call. Cingular can have a different rate
for those calls and not count it against 'voice' minutes you may have.

Hope this helps in getting yourself connected,

Greetings,

Koos van den Hout

Koos van den Hout,           PGP keyid RSA/1024 0xCA845CB5 via keyservers
koos@kzdoos.xs4all.nl        or DSS/1024 0xF0D7C263                     -?)
Fax +31-30-2817051           Visit the site about books with reviews    /\\
http://idefix.net/~koos/             http://www.virtualbookcase.com/   _\_V

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

From: jtaylor <jtaylor@deletethis.hfx.andara.com>
Subject: Re: Wired: Word From on High: Jam Cell Calls
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2005 08:21:29 -0300
Organization: MCI Canada News Reader Service


John McHarry <jmcharry@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:telecom24.146.5@telecom-digest.org:

> On Sun, 03 Apr 2005 16:45:51 -0700, Lisa Minter wrote:

>> Word From on High: Jam Cell Calls

>> Four churches in Mexico have unobtrusively installed Israeli-made
>> cell-phone jammers to thwart those who don't seem to understand they
>> should turn the things off during services or weddings. They're not
>> the only ones to install the jammers.

> This is kind of old news. Jammers are illegal in the US, but if I were
> building or extensively remodeling a theatre, church, etc., I would
> make it into a Faraday cage. Done right, it is also good insulation.

And so we have a situation where it is not the act that is illegal,
but the method.

Would those who so quickly hope for a lawsuit to arise from a jammer
interfering with an emergency wireless telephone call also claim that
a building so constructed would similarly be grounds for action?

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

From: tls@panix.com (Thor Lancelot Simon)
Subject: Re: Wired: Word From on High: Jam Cell Calls
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2005 11:55:59 UTC
Organization: Public Access Networks Corp.
Reply-To: tls@rek.tjls.com


In article <telecom24.146.5@telecom-digest.org>, John McHarry
<jmcharry@comcast.net> wrote:

> On Sun, 03 Apr 2005 16:45:51 -0700, Lisa Minter wrote:

>> Word From on High: Jam Cell Calls

>> Four churches in Mexico have unobtrusively installed Israeli-made
>> cell-phone jammers to thwart those who don't seem to understand they
>> should turn the things off during services or weddings. They're not
>> the only ones to install the jammers.

> This is kind of old news. Jammers are illegal in the US, but if I were
> building or extensively remodeling a theatre, church, etc., I would
> make it into a Faraday cage. Done right, it is also good insulation.

Really?  I'd be interested to know what the current state of the art
for "done right" is in this area.  I saw such a room constructed once,
about 10-15 years ago: it had "wallpaper" with a conductive grid
printed on the back, and long strips of copper tape running up each
corner of the room to ensure that all the sides were shorted together.
There was chicken-wire-like mesh in the ceiling (this made running
cables a real pain!) and I'm not sure what was in the floor.  But I
wouldn't call anything I saw there particularly good thermal
insulation.

I've always figured this must just be how it's done.  Is there some
other method?


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: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Subject: Re: The Real Reason Why SBC Won't Work With Vonage on E-911
Date: 6 Apr 2005 07:15:19 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But try to be realistic, would you
> Lisa?  For most people, it is not as simple as just saying, 'Do not
> use SBC.' I managed to pull that off, after considerable grief, and
> I _know how the 'system' works_, but as we have said here many times,
> not all cablecos are as effecient and friendly and prepared as ours
> is here Independence. Not everyone has access to good _alternative_
> phone networks as we do here. Oh, I agree, ASAP get yourslf weened
> off of Traditional Bell if that's your pleasure, but its not all that
> easy even for experienced people to do, let alone newbies to telecom.
> PAT]

In my town, the cable company, when still small and locally owned,
relaid its network with fibre-optic cable.  I suspect the investment
is not that high to do so.  Afterwards they jacked up their rates.

As to good alternatives not being available, that's the free market
that society wanted by breaking up the Bell System.

Maybe other subscribers do like SBC and there isn't enough demand for
alternatives.  The textbooks say if people don't like SBC service,
other providers will come in to provide it since they'll be a demand
for their services.

Some people forget that in the real world, a "free market" is often
not what an economics textbook make it out to be.  There is no
guarantee that you'll have multiple grocery stores, gas stations, or
department stores.  There's no guarantee that the equilibrium reached
in a competitive marketplace is one that we like -- such as the
situation described here.

In cellular phones, it seems to me most companies have settled on a
$40/month service plan, and it's hard to find something cheaper for
occassional users.  Theorectically competition should bring that price
down, but the marketplace settled on this particular equilibrium, for
better or for worse.

I must admit I get frustrated when people complain as in this context.
To me, it seems people want the low rates and high service quality of
the old Bell System ALONG WITH competitive choices.  In other words,
they want only the 'good' things about a free marketplace but none of
the bad.  They forget that in a free marketplace businesses can be
jerks.  (I believe it was Mr. Decker himself who pointed out how a gas
station was not very customer friendly and he had to schlep further
down the road to find another).  That's the situation now.  There is
competition and alternatives, but sometimes one must "go down the
road" to find it.

People complain today the phone companies aren't too helpful if you
have a problem like static on your line.  The subscriber must
disconnect every phone in their house and check carefully to be sure
it isn't in any of their telephone sets, answering machines, computer
modems, faxes, or house wiring.

As mentioned before, people once complained about paying $1.00 every
month to rent each extension telephone set.  But, they conveniently
forgot that if they had any problems, regardless of cause (telephone
set, house wiring, street wiring, central office, or long distance),
one quick easy phone call took care of it.  (Back then telephone sets
and wiring were built to last forever to keep down maintenance costs
and keep service quality high.  No longer.)

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

From: Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net>
Subject: Re: The Real Reason Why SBC Won't Work With Vonage on E-911
Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 22:17:59 -0700
Organization: Glorb Internet Services, http://www.glorb.com


Michael D. Sullivan wrote:

>> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: My next question, to Steven, is about
>> Alltel's purchase of Cellular One. _Which_ Cellular One? I had always
>> thought 'Cellular One' was a brand name for a consortium of various
>> cellular carriers which used the 'Cellular One' name.   PAT]

> Alltel is acquiring Western Wireless, which not only uses the Cellular 
> One brand name in its business as other companies do, it owns the brand 
> and franchises use of the name.

Gah! Thanks, Michael. Yes. Western Wireless purchased the CellularONE
brand name from SBC. The many SBC CellularONE markets became
Cingular. Dobson CellularONE and Western Wireless CellularONE remained
CellularONE. WW owned the brand for a few years; Dobson owns a C1
franchise. Anyone have a list of the other C1 franchisees?

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"

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Dobson owns the Cellular One franchise
here in Independence, and a few miles southeast of here in Liberty, KS
has an antenna set up which is used not only by Cellular One but by
other carriers such as Cingular Wireless and US Cellular and Alltel.
PAT]

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

From: AES <siegman@stanford.edu>
Subject: Re: Google Maps
Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 08:15:02 -0700
Organization: Stanford University


I love all the remarkable, almost unbelievable and unlimited features
of Google.  But it truly bothers me that what is fast becoming THE
primary reference and search tool and "window on the world" for me and
so many others is founded on and controlled by an entirely commercial
and primarily advertising-supported financial base.

Sergey Brin and the other founders of Google can say all they want
about their company's ultimate purpose being to "do good", and I'm
quite willing to believe they're sincere about this.  But they won't
always be around and may not always have control of Google, and in the
end, "He who pays the piper calls the tune."  Think about the power
and the ability to control just what information you are provided --
or are NOT provided -- the potential control that could be exercised
over what commercial, political, technical, ideological,
environmental, or other information is made readily available to you
 -- by less idealistic people who might (in fact, are certain to)
acquire ownership of Google some time in the future.

I think the viewpoint expressed in what I sometimes use as a sig file 
contains way too much truth:

"Power tends to corrupt.  Absolute power corrupts absolutely."  
Lord Acton (1834-1902)

"Dependence on advertising tends to corrupt.  Total dependence on  
advertising  corrupts totally."   My own equivalent for today.

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

From: Gerhard Nowak <nonspam@gmx.net>
Subject: Re: Classic Telephone Call on PC
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2005 19:56:41 +0400
Organization: Arcor


Yes, I think you are right!  Again after failed welding activities
I will have to finally install the asterisk in my Redhat 9.0,
but I don`t know, if the X-pro also will work there.

Only I am not so convinced about Linux yet: Just two days ago I
installed Amule on it and it was running fine, but soon it crashed and
couldn`t be uninstalled anymore (bcause it says "no such file
installed") and when I try to reinstall the .rpm it says "is already
installed"!

Such thing will never happen in Windows, btw., Linux also didn`t
recognize the soundcard yet and there is no special Linux-driver out
there for this.  (Redhat 9.0 on an IBM TP600E Laptop)

Thanks to everybody.

Gerry 
Mauritius

Robert Bonomi <bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag 
news:telecom24.143.18@telecom-digest.org:

> In article <telecom24.142.9@telecom-digest.org>, Gerhard Nowak
> <nonspam@gmx.net> wrote:

> Heck, why didn't you _say_ that's what you wanted to do?  Doing -that-
> is an entirely different matter than what you first asked about.

> See <http://www.asterisk.org>

> The price is right -- the software is free, Although it won't run
> under MS Windows, the Windows "replacement" that is required is also
> free.

> Ding, ding, ding!  we have a winner!   Asterisk requires Linux, or 
> similar.

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

From: Danny Burstein <dannyb@panix.com>
Subject: So ... What's an E-Mail Address Worth to a Spammer?
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2005 09:47:46 -0400
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC


(note: while this is part of the Schiavo case I'm
forwarding it over for the very specific spam related issue, 
not to reopen the rest of the painful sequence /db)

         	-----------

"An article last Tuesday about the decision by the parents of
Terri Schiavo to let a conservative direct-mailing firm sell a
list of their financial supporters referred incorrectly to the
price the firm would charge. It is $150 per thousand names or
e-mail addresses [a], not $150 a month for all of them. 
(The list consists of 6,000 names and 4,000 e-mail addresses.)

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/05/pageoneplus/corrections.html

original article:
  	http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/29/politics/29donate.html?

[a] that's $0.15, or 15 cents/name
_____________________________________________________
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 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 #147
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Apr  7 01:50:27 2005
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j375oQB16279;
	Thu, 7 Apr 2005 01:50:27 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2005 01:50:27 -0400 (EDT)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200504070550.j375oQB16279@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 #148

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 7 Apr 2005 01:50:00 EDT    Volume 24 : Issue 148

Inside This Issue:                            Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Question on Caller ID on Panasonic KX-TA624 (eljainc@ameritech.net)
    Harrasing Annoying Ex Boyfriend Phone Calls CALLER ID Manager (Paratwa)
    MCI Rejects Qwest's Offer For Third Time (Telecom dailyLead from USTA)
    Re: Wired: Word From on High: Jam Cell Calls (Dale Farmer)
    Re: Wired: Word From on High: Jam Cell Calls (Robert Bonomi)
    Re: Wired: Word From on High: Jam Cell Calls (Thomas A. Horsley)
    Re: Google Maps (Steve Sobol)
    Re: Can Somebody Please Explain CSD to Me? (Joseph)
    Re: Prison Cell Phone Scandal (T. Sean Weintz)
    Re: Cable Execs Say They're Not Blocking Outside VoIP (Thomas Horsley)
    Re: Obituary: Schiavo Dies After Feeding Tube Removed (Joseph)
    Last Laugh! Supreme Court Grokster - Funny Spin (randall62@gmail.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: eljainc@ameritech.net
Subject: Question on Caller ID on Panasonic KX-TA624
Date: 6 Apr 2005 12:44:30 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com


Hello,

We have a Panasonic KX-TA624 hybrid phone system along with the
KXT-7735 phones. We have 4 phone lines and the caller ID card is
properly set up on the system. When an incoming call comes in, each
phone displays the CID information. However, if one person is on a call
and another call comes in, they do not see caller ID information. The
phone line display only lights. Is there a way to have the system
display CID information on the other calls?  I believe the other phone
extensions that are not in use will see the CID information.

Thanks,

Mike McWhinney

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

From: Paratwa <support@usenetserver.com>
Subject: Harrasing Annoying Ex Boyfriend Phone Calls CALLER ID Manager
Organization: UseNetServer
Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 18:38:49 -0500


I'm mainly posting this in the hope that it might help other Google
searchers, with my particular problem.  Basically I discovered that
the police don't do much to individuals who enjoy harassing and
annoying others by calling their phone.  My situation was somewhat
unique in that an ex boyfriend of my wife enjoyed calling at all hours
of the night once leaving 37 messages on our answering machine.  I
used all the phone company resources I could buy from Bellsouth (call
block, caller anonymous rejection and caller ID) to no avail.  The
Bellsouth call block feature doesn't work to block cell phones (how
nice for our annoying caller) and he simply turned off the feature
blocking HIS phone number.  Since he didn't leave threatening messages
the police didn't care.  We were reduced to just turning off the
ringer and answering machine at night and reviewing the
caller ID prior to answering the phone during the day.

Finally took a chance on the somewhat pricey Caller ID Manager from
Privacy Corps.  I couldn't find any independent comments on this
device from others, so here are mine.  The good news is it works --
peace and quiet finally.  The annoying callers phone number is
programmed to go to an unused port on the device.  When he calls the
phone doesn't ring and he can't leave a message on the answering
machine.  I programmed it to block my cell phone temporarily as a
test.  Calling the device with a blocked numbers leads the caller to
believe your phone is ringing, which is perfect for my situation.  He
doesn't even know he isn't harrassing us but thinks he is.  Another
nice freature is the display is much larger than my phones so it's
useful as a mundane caller ID device as well.  

The Caller ID manager has other useful features I haven't taken
advantage of yet mainly because of the one bad feature of the device
which I'll discuss below.  It can be programmed to not allow ANY calls
between certain hours (sorry Aunt Bertha I guess we left the ringer
off).  Also it has a silent feature good for avoiding phone calls,
while entertaining or watching a movie.  The silent feature can be
setup for a couple hours after which it automatically allows the phone
to ring again.

Ok the bad news.  I recommend you burn the manual immediately after
opening the box.  I've installed motherboards in computers, setup a
wireless home network and setup a 5.1 home theater in my house, but
the Caller ID manager eluded all my programming attempts. The web site
FAQ is likewise useless since much of it is a copy / paste of the
manual.  

Please Privacy Corps write a new manual and post it on your
web site -- I'll review it for a small fee. Another thing that could
bother others is that all other phones need to have their ringer off
or you have to buy another remote device from the same people for the
other phone.  Otherwise the other phones will ring.  If you buy the
remote thing, with the caller ID manager, its half price --
unfortunately I missed this selling point.  We've had our phone
ringers off, except for the main phone, for so long it isn't a problem
to have only one phone ringing.

The manual is useless is so I had to call technical support.  I
recommend you be seated as you read further.  I didn't have to wait
long and talked to somebody who spoke clear ENGLISH and was friendly
AND actually understood the device backwards and forwards.  If anybody
from Privacy Corps ever reads this don't let that guy leave -- at least
till you've rewritten the manual.  With his help I had the device
wired and setup as I needed fairly quickly (less than 30 minutes).

If you have an annoying ex boyfriend/girlfriend/spouse whatever this
is the device for you.  The web sites are http://www.privacycorps.com
and http://www.person-to-person.net .  The last one is the one with
the FAQ and a tips section consisting of portions of the manual.

Regards.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I am glad it works for you. Southwestern
Bell (SBC; their chairman's office, or rather, the flunky who responds
in his name) has a rather odd philosophy on customer privacy. If you 
do all the things you are able to do to block out unwanted calls, and
still continue to recieve calls from caller ID '000-000-0000' or some
similar nonsensical number, SBC none-the-less insists that they have 
delivered caller ID. If you ask them why can't they do a database
dip and treat obviously undialable/unreachable numbers as anonymous
(and you have paid to have anonymous calls rejected). "We received
caller ID and passed it along, therefore it is _not_ an 'anonymous'
call and not subject to anonymous call rejection." And other telcos can
reject calls from interLATA numbers; why can't SBC?  Well, they could
if they wanted to; but customer privacy is not a big thing with them. 
SBC is such a sleazy, cheap operation.  PAT]

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

Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2005 13:51:53 EDT
From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA <usta@dailylead.com>
Subject: MCI Rejects Qwest's Offer For Third Time


Telecom dailyLead from USTA
pril 6, 2005
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=20626&l=2017006

TODAY'S HEADLINES

NEWS OF THE DAY
* MCI rejects Qwest's offer for third time
BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH
* Cablevision offers $16.5 billion for Adelphia
* How high will Qwest go?
* CFOs predict solid growth for MSOs
* Nokia to build plant in India
USTA SPOTLIGHT 
* SIP Demystified Now Available in the Telecom Bookstore
EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES
* Mobile phones to get TV listings
* Skype taps into outside programmers' creativity
REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE
* More students download entertainment legally

Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others.
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=20626&l=2017006

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

From: Dale Farmer <dale@cybercom.net>
Organization: The  fuzz in the back of the fridge. 
Subject: Re: Wired: Word From on High: Jam Cell Calls
Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 19:35:10 GMT


Thor Lancelot Simon wrote:

> In article <telecom24.146.5@telecom-digest.org>, John McHarry
> <jmcharry@comcast.net> wrote:

>> On Sun, 03 Apr 2005 16:45:51 -0700, Lisa Minter wrote:

>>> Word From on High: Jam Cell Calls

>>> Four churches in Mexico have unobtrusively installed Israeli-made
>>> cell-phone jammers to thwart those who don't seem to understand they
>>> should turn the things off during services or weddings. They're not
>>> the only ones to install the jammers.

>> This is kind of old news. Jammers are illegal in the US, but if I were
>> building or extensively remodeling a theatre, church, etc., I would
>> make it into a Faraday cage. Done right, it is also good insulation.

> Really?  I'd be interested to know what the current state of the art
> for "done right" is in this area.  I saw such a room constructed once,
> about 10-15 years ago: it had "wallpaper" with a conductive grid
> printed on the back, and long strips of copper tape running up each
> corner of the room to ensure that all the sides were shorted together.
> There was chicken-wire-like mesh in the ceiling (this made running
> cables a real pain!) and I'm not sure what was in the floor.  But I
> wouldn't call anything I saw there particularly good thermal
> insulation.

> I've always figured this must just be how it's done.  Is there some
> other method?

That's one way.  For new construction, embed the grounded mesh inside
the walls ceiling and floor so it is less easy to damage.  Size of the
mesh is dictated by what wavelengths you want to stop.

--Dale

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

From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi)
Subject: Re: Wired: Word From on High: Jam Cell Calls
Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 21:45:39 -0000
Organization: Widgets, Inc.


In article <telecom24.147.11@telecom-digest.org>, jtaylor
<jtaylor@deletethis.hfx.andara.com> wrote:

> John McHarry <jmcharry@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:telecom24.146.5@telecom-digest.org:

>> On Sun, 03 Apr 2005 16:45:51 -0700, Lisa Minter wrote:

>>> Word From on High: Jam Cell Calls

>>> Four churches in Mexico have unobtrusively installed Israeli-made
>>> cell-phone jammers to thwart those who don't seem to understand they
>>> should turn the things off during services or weddings. They're not
>>> the only ones to install the jammers.

>> This is kind of old news. Jammers are illegal in the US, but if I were
>> building or extensively remodeling a theatre, church, etc., I would
>> make it into a Faraday cage. Done right, it is also good insulation.

> And so we have a situation where it is not the act that is illegal,
> but the method.

> Would those who so quickly hope for a lawsuit to arise from a jammer
> interfering with an emergency wireless telephone call also claim that
> a building so constructed would similarly be grounds for action?

In the U.S. *operating* an unlicensed transmitter is, with a few
exceptions, contrary to law.  _Operating_ a transmitter, whether
licensed or otherwise, to "deliberately interfere" with the operation
of another licensed transmitter is contrary to law.

Pure "passive" measures, however, are *NOT* proscribed by law.  Among
other reasons, because your signal has no 'right' of transit across
somebody else's private property.

Engaging in a legally proscribed activity that has the side-effect of
"danger to life and limb" of un-involved third parties _does_ open one
up to civil suit from those who suffered adverse consequences from the
_proscribed_ activity -- as well as the risk of criminal prosecution
for those actions.

An aside, I have direct knowledge of one church that actually Faraday
caged their sanctuary.  In fact, they did it nearly *FORTY* years ago,
now. They were undergoing change from 'traditional' to 'modern' style
of services, including a complete remodel of the sanctuary -- with a
very "open" area for the ministers, etc.  No podium, lectern, etc.
So, they went with _wireless_ microphones feeding the P.A. system.

All the various changes were perceived to be a -major- improvement,
attendance was climbing, more younger people were being drawn in,
etc. etc.  Then there was a momentous Sunday morning, when somebody
with a high-powered mobile radio (probably an illegal CB rig) drove
down the street, during the sermon.  There was a "most unfortunate"
juxtaposition of his language over the minister's sermon, as his
transmission overloaded the receiver for the PA system.  There wasn't
any practical way to eliminate the wireless mic's, while retaining the
'character' of the new-style services, so they _did_ shield the entire
sanctuary to prevent any recurrence.

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

Subject: Re: Wired: Word From on High: Jam Cell Calls
From: tom.horsley@att.net (Thomas A. Horsley)
Organization: AT&T Worldnet
Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 22:51:48 GMT


> Would those who so quickly hope for a lawsuit to arise from a jammer
> interfering with an emergency wireless telephone call also claim that
> a building so constructed would similarly be grounds for action?

Judging from the crowd of folks you always see walking back and forth
and talking on their cells in parking lots, most buildings are
apparently *already* constructed this way :-).

>>==>> The *Best* political site <URL:http://www.vote-smart.org/> >>==+
      email: Tom.Horsley@worldnet.att.net icbm: Delray Beach, FL      |
<URL:http://home.att.net/~Tom.Horsley> Free Software and Politics <<==+

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

From: Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net>
Subject: Re: Google Maps
Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 16:34:15 -0700
Organization: Glorb Internet Services, http://www.glorb.com


AES wrote:

> I love all the remarkable, almost unbelievable and unlimited features
> of Google.  But it truly bothers me that what is fast becoming THE
> primary reference and search tool and "window on the world" for me and
> so many others is founded on and controlled by an entirely commercial
> and primarily advertising-supported financial base.

How do you expect Google to pay its bills if it's not going to be either 
advertising-supported or subscriber-supported?

> environmental, or other information is made readily available to you
>  -- by less idealistic people who might (in fact, are certain to)
> acquire ownership of Google some time in the future.

Google's already gone public. I think you're a little late expressing your 
concerns.

> "Dependence on advertising tends to corrupt.  Total dependence on  
> advertising  corrupts totally."   My own equivalent for today.

"I want a free lunch, but I'm not willing to allow other people to pay
for it."  My interpretation of your quote.


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: Joseph <JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Can Somebody Please Explain CSD to Me?
Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 20:56:14 -0700
Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com


On 6 Apr 2005 12:40:05 GMT, Koos van den Hout
<koos+newsposting@kzdoos.xs4all.nl> wrote:

> To your computer it will look like a normal modem that understands
> Hayes commands to build a connection and dial your ISP.  Your phone
> will convert it to a gsm-data call. Cingular can have a different rate
> for those calls and not count it against 'voice' minutes you may have.

CSD = circuit switched data.  CSD uses plan minutes as opposed to GPRS
which just uses data and data is billed differently.  By the kilobyte
(if measured) or unlimited in some cases.

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

From: T. Sean Weintz <strap@hanh-ct.org>
Subject: Re: Prison Cell Phone Scandal
Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 12:59:29 -0400
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com


Fred Atkinson wrote:

> Perhaps *this* might define a legitimate use for a cell phone jammer.  

> Fred 

Except I wonder how many prisons have their corrections officers using
cell phones to communicate with one another?

Don't want to jam *them*, of course.

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

Subject: Re: Cable Execs Say They're Not Blocking Outside VoIP
From: tom.horsley@att.net (Thomas A. Horsley)
Organization: AT&T Worldnet
Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 22:46:39 GMT


> ...Rutledge dismissed the idea of selectively blocking services out of
> hand...

Practically every cable company I know of blocks port 80 so you can't
host a web server on your home machine, so it is nice to know they are
gonna stop that too :-).

>>==>> The *Best* political site <URL:http://www.vote-smart.org/> >>==+
      email: Tom.Horsley@worldnet.att.net icbm: Delray Beach, FL      |
<URL:http://home.att.net/~Tom.Horsley> Free Software and Politics <<==+

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

From: Joseph <JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Obituary: Schiavo Dies After Feeding Tube Removed
Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 10:17:02 -0700
Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com


On Wed, 06 Apr 2005 02:16:17 GMT, [Telecom digest editor>] wrote:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Do we have Ms. Shiavo buried yet, at
> least for the purposes of this Digest?   PAT]

Since Mr. Townsend is the editor of TD/CDT he of course could return
submissions to those who submit them and let them know that it is not
of relevance to TD/CDT.  But then again it would require a bit of
editorial control.

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Do you have any idea what you are
talking about?  Mr. Townsend returns _several hundred_ submissions
each day, largely spam in nature to the senders. Maybe to show you 
what I am talking about, tomorrow or the next day I should just open
the gate and let _everything_ go out, at least to the Usenet audience.
I mean, do you think it is just some sort of accident that you get 15-20
messages in most issues, as though that is all that comes in? And by
the by, to quote Mr. Oscar Wilde, I could care less what the
newspapers say about me as long as they spell my name correctly. It is
TOWNSON, not 'Townsend'.  PAT]             

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

From: randall62@gmail.com
Subject: Last Laugh! Supreme Court Grokster - Funny Spin
Date: 6 Apr 2005 10:46:10 -0700


Here is an funny spin on the whole Grokster in the Supreme Court:

http://www.orlandocitybeat.com/custom/popculture/ocb-popculture-rant033005-s,0,5997369.story?coll=ocb--pop-promos

You can get lofty about the issues or view them from the level of the
man-in-the-street, but you can't do both objectively.


cya,
Rnl

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

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 #148
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Apr  7 17:00:47 2005
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j37L0lb24115;
	Thu, 7 Apr 2005 17:00:47 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2005 17:00:47 -0400 (EDT)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200504072100.j37L0lb24115@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 #149

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 7 Apr 2005 16:58:00 EDT    Volume 24 : Issue 149

Inside This Issue:                            Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Cable Industry Touts Move Into Telecommunications (Lisa Minter)
    Viacom's MTV Launches Web-Based TV 'Channel' (Lisa Minter)
    AOL Launches Internet Phone Service (Lisa Minter)
    AOL Unveils Pricey VoIP Offering (Jack Decker)
    Verizon's Press Release on New, Overpriced, Limited VoIP (Jack Decker)
    Great Post For Someone Thinking About VoIP (Jack Decker)
    VoIP Adapter With High REN? (Thor Lancelot Simon)
    Telemarketing to Cellphones (HarryHydro)
    AOL Goes VoIP (Telecom dailyLead from USTA)
    Sperm - Not so Mobile (Monty Solomon)
    Opposition to Cell Phones on Airplanes (Lisa Hancock)
    Re: Harrasing Annoying Ex Boyfriend Phone Calls CALLER ID (Justin Time)
    Re: Question on Caller ID on Panasonic KX-TA624 (Carl Navarro)
    Re: Prison Cell Phone Scandal (Fred Atkinson)
    Re: Wired: Word From on High - Jam Cell Calls (Marcus Didius Falco)
    Re: Obituary: Schiavo Dies After Feeding Tube Removed (Fred Atkinson)

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 Apr 2005 23:12:09 -0700
From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: Cable Industry Touts Move Into Telecommunications


By Jeremy Pelofsky

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - After years of promises, U.S.  cable
companies will finally launch telephone service on a large scale this
year, executives at the National Cable & Telecommunications Industry's
annual convention this week said.

Cable companies like Time Warner Inc.  and Cox Communications Inc.
see offering telephone service as a key area for growth in the $57.6
billion industry -- and plenty of other companies were at the
convention to offer revenue-enhancing options like on-screen caller
identification and messaging.

Already the cable industry has about 3 million telephone customers but
that is expected to explode with the advance of service via high-speed
Internet as well as regulations making it easier for customers to take
their phone numbers with them while switching providers.

Time Warner Cable, the No. 2 U.S. cable operator, at the end of 2004
had 220,000 voice customers and was adding 10,000 a week.

"This year is the year that we're now starting to ramp up," Time
Warner Cable Chief Executive Glenn Britt said in an interview this
week. "At the moment, we're just learning how to sell it, how to
service it, how to install it and how to bundle it with other
products."

A.G. Edwards analysts forecast that cable operators would benefit from
a large jump in customers buying Internet-based phone service, known
as voice over Internet protocol (VOIP).

"The number of available homes passed by VOIP service
should grow substantially in 2005," the report said. "Average
revenue per user for the service trends in the $40 area, adding
meaningful incremental revenue potential."

The big local carriers, known as the Baby Bells, last year lost almost
8 million residential landlines because of competition from cable,
wireless and the Internet. But the Bells are not standing idle,
looking to expand into cable's turf of video service.

Additionally, No. 3 wireless carrier Sprint Corp.  president and chief
operating officer Len Lauer showed up at the show since cable
operators are looking to offer customers a complete bundle of
entertainment and communications services.

"It's convergence of devices, it's convergence of access, it's
convergence of workplace and also the homeplace," Lauer said in an
interview. "We don't think any one company can do it alone ... we
think it's really going to take a new approach to partnering."

As attendees walked the 190,000 square feet of the show, they saw not
only the latest cable television offerings, but also displays from
companies like Siemens offering telecommunications services like
on-screen caller ID.

That company has deals with cable operators such as Cablevision
Systems Corp. and Time Warner to help roll out Internet-based phone
services and expects them to expand their client base.

"They started with the residential play because the cable goes into
your TV. The next step to take is business customers," Harald Braun,
president of Siemens' carrier network division, said in an interview.

He also said Siemens is working on features such as call blocking and
tracking mobile-phone or e-mail messages on television screens.

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: 06 Apr 2005 23:12:39 -0700
From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: Viacom's MTV Launches Web-Based TV 'Channel'


NEW YORK (Reuters) - MTV Networks, home to raucous pop culture
television hits like "The Osbournes" and "Punk'd," on Wednesday
launched a free Web-based "channel" that places many of its popular
programs on the Internet.

MTV, a unit of media conglomerate Viacom Inc., debuted "MTV
Overdrive," a web site where viewers watch full length music video on
demand, extended versions of programs that have aired on MTV's
television network and original video updates from its MTV News
operation.

With Overdrive, now in limited testing and due for full release April
25, MTV joins a host of companies using high-speed Internet
connections to deliver high-quality video to consumers without using a
TV, including Walt Disney, Microsoft Corp., Alcatel, Akimbo and other
telecommunications providers.

"With an incredibly high percentage of young people using broadband,
it seemed essential to create a new hybrid screen with its own
content," said Jason Hirschhorn, Senior Vice President of Digital
Music & Media at MTV Networks.

The service will feature music videos, clips from live performances
and shows like "TRL," movie trailers and eventually programs related
to video games and fashion.

It will be supported by inserted video advertising and billboard ads
from Microsoft, Procter & Gamble and Sony Corp's Sony Pictures, as
well as other top advertisers from the TV network.

Van Toffler, President of MTV Networks Group said he is not concerned
that putting the shows on the Web will draw viewers away from the MTV
television franchise.

"The TV experience is still great. Our ratings are moving higher and
we don't fear that (losing viewers)," he said at a press
conference. "(Also) we are capturing money that is going to new
media."

Toffler added that the company is in talks with cable operators such
as Comcast about possibly delivering the channel to cable subscribers,
but said there were no deals in place.
           
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: 06 Apr 2005 23:30:22 -0700
From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: AOL Launches Internet Phone Service


By MATTHEW FORDAHL, AP Technology Writer

SAN JOSE, Calif. - America Online Inc. on Thursday launched its
Internet telephone service, jumping into a market that's already
crowded with startups, cable operators and even traditional phone
companies.

The AOL Internet Phone Service, which is being offered to AOL members
and others in 40 markets at first, includes the regular features of
traditional telephony and combines them with advanced services that
are accessed on a PC over the Internet.

The offering "will uniquely combine advanced tools, competitive
pricing plans and AOL's hallmark ease of use to allow mass-market
consumers to take full advantage of the revolution underway in
Internet voice technology," said Jon Miller, AOL's chief executive.

Instead of traveling over the traditional phone system that's been
around for more than a century, calls are converted to packets of data
and streamed over the Internet. All providers generally charge less
and offer more advanced features than traditional phone companies.

The technology, known as Voice over Internet Protocol, VoIP, is being
touted as the next big revolution in communications.

Dozens of companies have entered the market in recent years, ranging
from startups like Vonage Holdings Corp. to traditional telecom
players like Verizon Communications Inc. Most major cable operators
are also developing or rolling out services.

AOL's subscribers must have a high-speed Internet connection and a
router. An adapter connects to the router, and a conventional phone
can be plugged into the adapter. Users will receive a number and can
make or receive calls.

AOL's starting price for new users is $29.99 per month for the first
six months; increasing to $39.99 after that. It includes unlimited
local and long-distance calling within the U.S. and Canada as well as
unlimited access to the regular AOL service over existing broadband.

Plans for current AOL users start at $13.99 a month (increasing to
$18.99 after three months) for unlimited local and regional calling to
$29.99 (increasing to $34.99) for a global calling plan with
low international rates.

The price for new users is steeper than the current Internet telephony
leader, Vonage, which charges $24.99 a month for unlimited
U.S. and Canada dialing. Packet8, a similar service offered by 8x8
Inc., charges $19.95 for its "Freedom Unlimited" plan.

AOL is apparently trying to differentiate itself by bundling its
online service. It also claims to make it easier for consumers to
manage their service from a Web-based "dashboard," which New
Jersey-based Vonage also uses to describe its Web-interface. From
there, users can change call-forwarding settings, view call logs and
access contact lists that will dial a number simply by clicking on it.

Subscribers also will be able to see if someone is online; and
theoretically available to chat by instant message or by voice, the
company said.

AOL also is trying to avert a criticism lodged at other Internet
telephone companies by providing enhanced 911 service that delivers a
caller's address to dispatchers in case of an emergency. Packet8
currently offers the same, but charges extra. Vonage takes a different
approach that requires users to register their address in advance.

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, Associated Press. 

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

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

From: Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@withheld on request>
Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 12:01:27 -0400
Subject: AOL Unveils Pricey VoIP Offering


http://voxilla.com/voxstory153.html

SoapVox

VOXILLA.COM News Report

America Online (AOL) will officially launch its Voice over IP service
called 'AOL Internet Phone Service' Thursday, the company announced in
a press statement released late Wednesday night.

The service, to be bundled with access to AOL's internet content and
including unlimited calling to the U.S. and Canada, is being offered
in 40 U.S. markets and will carry a price of $39.99 per month,
significantly higher than most existing VoIP services.

During the first six months, new customers will be offered a $10
discount. But, even reduced to $29.99, the AOL price will be higher
than services such as BroadVoice, Packet8, VoicePulse and Vonage, each
of which has a significant head start on the Time Warner-owned
internet service giant that has fallen on difficult times of late.

Currently, AOL has about 22.6 million internet customers, having lost
about 4.5 million over the past two years. Existing AOL customers will
pay between $13.99 to $29.99 per month to add the company's VoIP
service, though those rates will increase by $5.00 in three
months. For a limited time, the company will give current AOL members
who sign up a free wireless home network base station.

Full story at:
http://voxilla.com/voxstory153.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: Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@withheld on request>
Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 12:22:36 -0400
Subject: Verizon's Press Release on New, Overpriced, Limited VoIP


What's ironic about this announcement, besides the fact that this new
limited minutes plan is priced higher than competitive plans by
companies such as VoicePulse and BroadVoice, is that the announcement
has a dateline of Muskegon, Mich.  That's not unusual because
Verizon's state headquarters are in Muskegon.  But what is ironic is
that you can't get a Muskegon number with Verizon's VoIP service.  In
fact, if you read the list of area codes in which numbers are offered,
neither 231 (northwest Lower Peninsula, including Muskegon and several
other Verizon exchanges) nor 269 (Southwest lower Michigan, which also
has many Verizon exchanges) are on that list.  Could it be that
Verizon doesn't want their own ILEC customers buying their VoIP
service?

But no matter, other companies including the two I mentioned above
have numbers in many of these Verizon exchanges, and their similar
offerings are less expensive and they offer more features.
Furthermore, though I have no proof of this one way or another, it
would not surprise me if, because Verizon is a traditional telco, they
tack on a few of the extra fees that are so prominent in the
traditional telephone industry.  Personally I see nothing at all in
this announcement that would motivate me to pick Verizon's offering
over that of another company (and I would make that same comment about
AOL's similarly-overpriced service, also announced today).

http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/04-07-2005/0003338600&STORY&EDATE=

Verizon Brings VoiceWing Internet-Based Calling to Michigan for as Low
as $19.95 a Month    http://www.verizon.com Company Archive

VoiceWing Costs Less Than Traditional Phone Service and Harnesses the
   Power of the Internet to Provide Unique Calling Features

MUSKEGON, Mich., April 7 /PRNewswire/ -- Residents of Michigan now
have a new low-cost, feature-rich option for telephone service with
VoiceWing, an Internet-based calling service from Verizon.  One
VoiceWing calling plan just introduced today gives customers 500
minutes of outbound local and domestic long-distance for just $19.95 a
month.  An unlimited local and long-distance plan is also available
for as low as $29.95 a month.

    VoiceWing customers use a small telephone adapter provided by
Verizon to connect their own telephones to their home high-speed
Internet connections.  The telephone adapter allows the VoiceWing
customer to send and receive calls over the Internet instead of using
a standard phone line.  The service works with both DSL and cable
modem broadband connections and allows subscribers to call anyone,
anywhere, worldwide.

    "VoiceWing lets you use something familiar -- your own home phone
and broadband connection -- to save money and communicate in exciting
new ways," said Michelle Swittenberg, executive director for Verizon's
consumer VoIP services.  "It's like having a customized, portable
telephone service and personal assistant rolled into one."  

The service is offered nationally, and subscribers, regardless of
where they live, can choose from 167 area codes, including the 248,
313, 517, 586, 616, 734 and 810 codes in Michigan.  Customers can take
VoiceWing with them by using their adapter to make and receive calls
anywhere there is a DSL or cable modem high-speed Internet connection.
Subscribers can also purchase up to five additional telephone numbers
with their choice of area codes to use on their VoiceWing service for
incoming calls.  "This is very convenient for calling with out-of-town
friends and family," said Swittenberg.  

"For example, if you live in Michigan and your mother lives in
Atlanta, you can purchase an additional incoming number with your
mother's 404 area code.  Now every call mom makes to you is a local
call for her."  Both VoiceWing calling plans include faxing
capabilities; calls to Puerto Rico and other U.S.  Territories; a
30-day money-back guarantee; and low per-minute international calling
rates, including 1 cent per minute to Canada, 3 cents per minute to
the United Kingdom and 6-to-11 cents per minute to various locations
in Mexico.  

All VoiceWing subscribers can make unlimited calls to other VoiceWing
subscribers at no additional charge.  Both VoiceWing plans also
include an extensive roster of advanced calling features that can be
conveniently controlled through an online personal account manager
that is accessible from any Internet-enabled computer.  These advanced
calling features include:

     * Call Logs with Click to Dial: A list of all incoming, outgoing
       and missed calls for three days, including name, telephone
       number, date, time of day, physical location and duration of
       the call. Customers can click on calls to have VoiceWing dial
       them, or to easily add the caller's information to the
       customer's address book.

     * Visual Voice Mail: Customers can see their voice mails online,
       listen by clicking on them and click a Forward button to send
       the audio message by e-mail to as many recipients as the
       customer would like.

     * Enhanced Call Forwarding: Schedule call forwarding ahead of
       time for a specific date and time of day, or as a recurring
       event.  Customers can quickly re-direct calls to another phone
       directly from their personal account manager.  E-mail alerts
       will remind customers of when a scheduled call-forward is about
       to take place.

     * Scheduled Callbacks: Schedule important calls in advance
       online.  Customers' phones will ring at the appointed time, and
       they will then be connected to the call.

     * Synchronized Personal Address Book: Customers can save
       telephone numbers and e-mail addresses of people who have
       called, arrange contacts in convenient groups, click on a phone
       number to dial it, or send an e-mail directly from their
       account manager. Only Verizon eliminates the hassle of creating
       and maintaining multiple address books by synchronizing
       customers' VoiceWing address books with a variety of other PC
       and PDA address books.

     * Do Not Disturb: Sends all calls straight to voice mail and only
       allows the important ones through.  Customers can designate up
       to 20 phone numbers to go through.

     * Simultaneous Ring: Customers can designate up to three phone
       numbers where they'd like calls to ring in addition to their
       VoiceWing phone number.  The first phone answered will be
       connected to the call.

     * Back-up Number: Customers can designate another phone, such as
       their cell phone or office phone, where their VoiceWing calls
       can be automatically routed in case of a power failure or
       broadband outage.

     * Incoming Call Block: Allows customers to block up to 20
       telephone numbers and send the calls directly to voice mail.
       Customers can easily add or remove numbers they want blocked
       either through their online account manager or by entering a
       code on their telephone handset.

     * Anonymous Call Rejection: Allows customers to refuse calls from
       parties who have blocked or restricted their Caller ID
       information and to send these calls directly to voice mail.

     * Permanent Caller ID Block: Gives VoiceWing customers total
       control over who sees their Caller ID information whenever they
       make an outbound call. By simply setting up Caller ID Block
       online, all calls are anonymous until the VoiceWing customer
       disables the feature.

     To learn about even more VoiceWing calling features, customers
can visit http://www.verizon.com/voicewing and select "Calling
Features" from the menu.  Customers can also order service at this Web
site.  If they do, they get their first month of service free.

    With more than $71 billion in annual revenues, Verizon
Communications Inc.  (NYSE: VZ) is one of the world's leading
providers of communications services.  Verizon has a diverse work
force of more than 210,000 in four business units: Domestic Telecom
serves customers based in 29 states with wireline telecommunications
services, including broadband and other services.  Verizon Wireless
owns and operates the nation's most reliable wireless network, serving
43.8 million voice and data customers across the United States.
Information Services operates directory publishing businesses and
provides electronic commerce services.  International includes
wireline and wireless operations and investments, primarily in the
Americas and Europe.  For more information, visit
http://www.verizon.com.

    VERIZON'S ONLINE NEWS CENTER: Verizon news releases, executive
speeches and biographies, media contacts, high quality video and
images, and other information are available at Verizon's News Center
on the World Wide Web at http://www.verizon.com/news.  To receive news
releases by e-mail, visit the News Center and register for customized
automatic delivery of Verizon news releases.


SOURCE Verizon
Web Site: http://www.verizon.com 

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

From: Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@withheld on request>
Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 12:57:46 -0400
Subject: Great Post For Someone Thinking About VoIP


Today a post showed up on BroadbandReports.com that is worth reading
even if you already know about VoIP.  This is the sort of post that,
when a non-techie-type friend or relative asks you about VoIP, you can
point them here and it will lay out all the pros and cons of VoIP for
them (the benefit to that is that it helps manage their expectations --
if they know EXACTLY what to expect, they're less likely to blame you
if there's a hiccup in their service!).  Bookmark this one, you just
might be thankful you did:

http://www.broadbandreports.com/forum/remark,13109066

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

From: tls@panix.com (Thor Lancelot Simon)
Subject: VoIP Adapter With High REN?
Date: 7 Apr 2005 15:20:37 -0400
Organization: PANIX -- Public Access Networks Corp.
Reply-To: tls@rek.tjls.com


I am trying to switch two of three phone lines in a very large, very
old house over to VoIP.  The house has quite literally twenty
extensions split between the three lines -- I think I need at least 4
or 5 REN per line, plus the ability to drive all the wire leading to
those handsets (over 100' in some cases) without exploding the audio
output circuit in the ATA.

Does anyone make equipment meant for this that I can use with a
mainstream VoIP provider?  It's been suggested to me that Packet8
might be my best chance since they build their own gear but I don't
see anything suitable on their web site.

I am basically looking for a Cisco ATA-186 (including the 2-line
capability) on steroids.


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: HarryHydro <harryhydro@hotmail.com>
Subject: Telemarketing to Cellphones
Date: 7 Apr 2005 10:32:32 -0700


In a few weeks, cell phone numbers are being released to telemarketing
companies and you will start to receive sale calls. You will be
charged for these calls.

Call this number from your cell phone 888-382-1222.

It is the national DO NOT CALL list. It only takes a minute of your
time. It blocks your number for 5 years. Please pass this on to
everyone you know who doesn't want to be hassled.

Or you can go to donotcall.gov and do it on-line.

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

Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2005 13:39:50 EDT
From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA <usta@dailylead.com>
Subject: April 7, 2005 - AOL Goes VoIP


Telecom dailyLead from USTA
April 7, 2005
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=20660&l=2017006


TODAY'S HEADLINES

NEWS OF THE DAY
* AOL goes VoIP
BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH
* Qwest may approach MCI shareholders
* Verizon launches low-cost VoIP tier
* MSOs looks to add mobile phone service to bundles
* Interview with RIM's co-CEO
USTA SPOTLIGHT 
* Telecom Engineering Conference at SUPERCOMM: Register today!
EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES
* Bluetooth no longer an afterthought
* MSN adds phone features to IM software
REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE
* MGM v. Grokster is latest chapter in technology v. copyright saga

Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others.
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=20660&l=2017006

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

Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2005 08:35:36 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Sperm - Not so Mobile


http://www.newcastle.edu.au/news/media-releases/2005/aitkenmobile.htm

Friday 18 February, 2005

A preliminary study at the University of Newcastle has identified that
radio waves of a similar frequency to those associated with mobile
phones can damage sperm DNA in mice.

Professor John Aitken and Dr Bruce King from the Faculty of Science
and Information Technology conducted the preliminary study exposing
mice to electromagnetic radiation at a frequency similar to what most
people receive from their mobile phones.

Initial results found that there was more DNA damage in the exposed
sperm than in sperm from the control groups.

Professor Aitken stresses, "Clearly further research needs to be done
before we are able to establish an impact of mobile phone use on sperm
quality. These are very preliminary findings that will have to be
substantiated in additional, more detailed, studies."

The study will be published in the International Journal of Andrology.

http://www.newcastle.edu.au/news/media-releases/2005/aitkenmobile.htm

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But, wouldn't exposing a mouse to the
radiation of a cellular phone be the equivilent of exposing a human
being to the radiation of a nuclear bomb? What would happen to _your_
sperm if you were within range of radiation from a nuclear bomb? The
little guy running around at your feet is getting that same kind of
radiation (relative to his size and body build) from a cell phone I
would assume, when to him, this 'giant thing in the air' is right in
his midst. What would happen to a mouse if exposed to the benign
amount of radiation from a (built for human use) X-Ray machine?  PAT]

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

From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock)
Subject: Opposition to Cell Phones on Airplanes
Date: 7 Apr 2005 10:01:58 -0700


The regulators are considering to allow cell phones to be used on
airlines.  There is opposition on the grounds they could be used to
coordinate and attack and upset passengers.

See:
http://www.kyw1060.com/news_story_detail.cfm?newsitemid=45229

Regretfully, the heavy use of cell phones on commuter trains and
Amtrak has been very annoying.  Cellphones have little sidetone and
people speak very loud, so everybody around has to listen to the
conversation.  Phones are constantly ringing in all sorts of songs.

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

From: Justin Time <a_user2000@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Harrasing Annoying Ex Boyfriend Phone Calls CALLER ID Manager
Date: 7 Apr 2005 05:20:45 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com


Sheesh Pat!

Because of your extreme dislike of SBC you seem to have fallen for
this advertisement written as a sob story about harrassing phone calls
that "no one would do anything about."  The story has all the earmarks
of an urban ledgend -- no verifiable facts and no way to ascertain
even if the story is true.

Rodgers Platt

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: All I can do is speak to my own 
experience. I was harassed for a couple months by AT&T (of all
people!) who three or four times per day would call me on my
ring-ring (distinctive ringing) line, looking for someone I had
never heard of, and because of SBC's alleged inability to do anything
to help me eventually _I_ had to invest in a long distance call at
my own expense to call them back and trace through it with them. And
SBC (to name just one of the Bell companies) absolutely refuses to
do _anything_ about harassing phone calls except charge their
_customer_ fifteen dollars for each use of *57. Bell used to have
an 'Annoyance Call Bureau' to deal with those things; now apparently
that has to be a profit center for them like everything else. PAT]
 
------------------------------

From: Carl Navarro <cnavarro@wcnet.org>
Subject: Re: Question on Caller ID on Panasonic KX-TA624
Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 08:58:01 -0400


On 6 Apr 2005 12:44:30 -0700, eljainc@ameritech.net wrote:

> Hello,

> We have a Panasonic KX-TA624 hybrid phone system along with the
> KXT-7735 phones. We have 4 phone lines and the caller ID card is
> properly set up on the system. When an incoming call comes in, each
> phone displays the CID information. However, if one person is on a call
> and another call comes in, they do not see caller ID information. The
> phone line display only lights. Is there a way to have the system
> display CID information on the other calls?  I believe the other phone
> extensions that are not in use will see the CID information.

Did you read the manual?  Under Call Waiting, you'll find that you
have to turn the feature on.  7311# for outside call waiting.

Carl Navarro

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

From: Fred Atkinson <fatkinson@mishmash.com>
Subject: Re: Prison Cell Phone Scandal
Reply-To: fatkinson@mishmash.com
Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 13:57:22 GMT
Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net


On Wed, 06 Apr 2005 12:59:29 -0400, T. Sean Weintz <strap@hanh-ct.org>
wrote:

> Except I wonder how many prisons have their corrections officers using
> cell phones to communicate with one another?

> Don't want to jam *them*, of course.

The truth of the matter is that cell phones are considered very
unreliable for law enforcement/emergency rescue type operations,
especially when bad weather sets in (because everyone starts calling
and tying up systems).  If they are using them, they shouldn't be.

They should still be using public safety radio services/systems.


Fred 

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

Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 16:21:22 -0400
From: Marcus Didius Falco <falco_marcus_didius@yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Wired: Word From on High: Jam Cell Calls 


jtaylor <jtaylor@deletethis.hfx.andara.com> wrote, quoting John McHarry:

> John McHarry <jmcharry@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:telecom24.146.5@telecom-digest.org:

>> On Sun, 03 Apr 2005 16:45:51 -0700, Lisa Minter wrote:

>>> Word From on High: Jam Cell Calls

>>> Four churches in Mexico have unobtrusively installed Israeli-made
>>> cell-phone jammers to thwart those who don't seem to understand they
>>> should turn the things off during services or weddings. They're not
>>> the only ones to install the jammers.

>> This is kind of old news. Jammers are illegal in the US, but if I were
>> building or extensively remodeling a theatre, church, etc., I would
>> make it into a Faraday cage. Done right, it is also good insulation.

> And so we have a situation where it is not the act that is illegal,
> but the method.

> Would those who so quickly hope for a lawsuit to arise from a jammer
> interfering with an emergency wireless telephone call also claim that
> a building so constructed would similarly be grounds for action?

No, because that is "passive." Most modern office buildings have so
much steel and wire in them that they are nearly impervious. My
doctor's office is in a building that's so tight I often can't listen
to the radio, let alone use my cell phone. It's a real nuisance when
I'm at the pharmacy picking stuff up. If I have to talk to my wife, I
have to go out to the sidewalk.

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

From: Fred Atkinson <fatkinson@mishmash.com>
Subject: Re: Obituary: Schiavo Dies After Feeding Tube Removed
Reply-To: fatkinson@mishmash.com
Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 14:08:48 GMT
Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net


Well, 

I'm still not sure anyone outside the family (or maybe even
inside the family) has got an accurate picture of what happened.  

The part that disturbs me is that the husband (if you can call him
that, since he's already had children with another woman) has a great
deal of personal relief from her death.  It takes a great deal of
responsibility away from him.  And he can get on with his new life
with this other woman.

So, why would he care that the parents wanted to preserve her life?
Why not just divorce her and let her parents manage the situation,
since that's what they wanted to do, anyway?  I'm wondering what the
financial arrangements were in the event of her death.  That would
likely be altered (and not in his favor) if he divorced her.

I could be wrong, of course.  But as you said, there was so much
distortion of the issue that I can't feel good about it.  I'd have to
know a lot more than I think was ever disclosed before I could put my
suspicions to rest.

Regards, 


Fred 

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: We really have to shut down this thread
on Terri Schiavo.  Thanks to all who have participated in 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 #149
******************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Apr  7 23:05:51 2005
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id j3835p726715;
	Thu, 7 Apr 2005 23:05:51 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2005 23:05:51 -0400 (EDT)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <200504080305.j3835p726715@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 #150

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 7 Apr 2005 23:05:00 EDT    Volume 24 : Issue 150

Inside This Issue:                            Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    A Trail of DNA and Data (Marcus Didius Falco)
    Philly Reveals Wireless Plan (David Chessler)
    Re: Telemarketing to Cellphones (David B. Horvath, CCP)
    Re: Telemarketing to Cellphones (Paul Vader)
    Re: Telemarketing to Cellphones (Joseph)
    Re: Google Maps (AES)
    Re: Sperm - Not so Mobile (T. Sean Weintz)
    Re: Prison Cell Phone Scandal (T. Sean Weintz)
    Re: VOIP Adapter With High REN (GlowingBlue Mist)
    Re: Harrasing Annoying Ex Boyfriend Phone Calls CALLER ID Mgr (Paratwa)

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: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 17:40:43 -0400
From: Marcus Didius Falco <falco_marcus_didius@yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: A Trail of DNA and Data



http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A20454-2005Apr2.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A20454-2005Apr2?language=3Dprinter

By Paul Saffo

Sunday, April 3, 2005; Page B01

If you're worried about privacy and identity theft, imagine this:

The scene: Somewhere in Washington. The date: April 3, 2020.

You sit steaming while the officer hops off his electric cycle and
walks up to the car window. "You realize that you ran that red light
again, don't you, Mr. Witherspoon?" It's no surprise that he knows
your name; the intersection camera scanned your license plate and your
guilty face, and matched both in the DMV database. The cop had the
full scoop before you rolled to a stop.

"I know, I know, but the sun was in my eyes," you plead as you fumble
for your driver's license.

"Oh, don't bother with that," the officer replies, waving off the license
while squinting at his hand-held scanner. Of course. Even though the old
state licensing system had been revamped back in 2014 into a "secure"
national program, the new licenses had been so compromised that the street
price of a phony card in Tijuana had plummeted to five euros. In
frustration, law enforcement was turning to pure biometrics.

"Could you lick this please?" the officer asks, passing you a nanofiber
blotter. You comply and then slide the blotter into the palm-sized gizmo he
is holding, which reads your DNA and runs a match against a national
genomic database maintained by a consortium of drug companies and credit
agencies. It also checks half a dozen metabolic fractions looking for
everything from drugs and alcohol to lack of sleep.

The officer looks at the screen, and frowns, "Okay, I'll let you off with a
warning, but you really need more sleep. I also see that your retinal
implants are past warranty, and your car tells me that you are six months
overdue on its navigation firmware upgrade. You really need to take
care of both or next time it's a ticket."

This creepy scenario is all too plausible. The technologies described are
already being developed for industrial and medical applications, and the
steadily dropping cost and size of such systems will make them affordable
and practical police tools well before 2020. The resulting intrusiveness
would make today's system of search warrants and wiretaps quaint
 anachronisms.

Some people find this future alluring and believe that it holds out the
promise of using sophisticated ID techniques to catch everyone from
careless drivers to bomb-toting terrorists in a biometric dragnet. We have
already seen places such as Truro, Mass., Baton Rouge, La. and Miami ask
hundreds or thousands of citizens to submit to DNA mass-testing to catch
killers. Biometric devices sensing for SARS symptoms are omnipresent in
Asian airports. And the first prototypes of systems that test in real time
for SARS, HIV and bird flu have been deployed abroad.

The ubiquitous collection and use of biometric information may be
inevitable, but the notion that it can deliver reliable, theft-proof
evidence of identity is pure science fiction. Consider that oldest of
biometric identifiers -- fingerprints. Long the exclusive domain of
government databases and FBI agents who dust for prints at crime scenes,
fingerprints are now being used by electronic print readers on everything
from ATMs to laptops. Sticking your finger on a sensor beats having to
remember a password or toting an easily lost smart card.

But be careful what you touch, because you are leaving your identity
behind every time you take a drink. A Japanese cryptographer has
demonstrated how, with a bit of gummi bear gelatin, some cyanoacrylic
glue, a digital camera and a bit of digital fiddling, he can easily
capture a print off a glass and confect an artificial finger that
foils fingerprint readers with an 80 percent success rate. Frightening
as this is, at least the stunt is far less grisly than the tale,
perhaps aprocryphal, of some South African crooks who snipped the
finger off an elderly retiree, rushed her still-warm digit down to a
government ATM, stuck it on the print reader and collected the
victim's pension payment. (Scanners there now gauge a finger's
temperature, too.)

Today's biometric advances are the stuff of tomorrow's hackers and
clever crooks, and anything that can be detected eventually will be
counterfeited.  Iris scanners are gaining in popularity in the
corporate world, exploiting the fact that human iris patterns are
apparently as unique as fingerprints.  And unlike prints, iris images
aren't left behind every time someone gets a latte at Starbucks. But
hide something valuable enough behind a door protected by an iris
scanner, and I guarantee that someone will figure out how to capture
an iris image and transfer it to a contact lens good enough to fool
the readers. And capturing your iris may not even require sticking a
digital camera in your face -- after all, verification requires that
the representation of your iris exist as a cloud of binary bits of
data somewhere in cyberspace, open to being hacked, copied, stolen and
downloaded. The more complex the system, the greater the likelihood
that there are flaws that crooks can exploit.

DNA is the gold standard of biometrics, but even DNA starts to look
like fool's gold under close inspection. With a bit of discipline, one
can keep a card safe or a PIN secret, but if your DNA becomes your
identity, you are sharing your secret with the world every time you
sneeze or touch something. The novelist Scott Turow has already
written about a hapless sap framed for a murder by an angry spouse who
spreads his DNA at the scene of a killing.

The potential for DNA identity theft is enough to make us all wear a
gauze mask and keep our hands in our pockets. DNA can of course be
easily copied -- after all, its architecture is designed for
duplication -- but that is the least of its problems. Unlike a credit
card number, DNA can't be retired and swapped for a new sequence if it
falls into the hands of crooks or snoops. Once your DNA identity is
stolen, you live with the consequences forever.

This hasn't stopped innovators from using DNA as an indicator of
authenticity. The artist Thomas Kinkade signs his most valuable
paintings with an ink containing a bit of his DNA. (He calls it a
"forgery-proof DNA Matrix signature.") We don't know how much of Tom
is really in his paintings, but perhaps it's enough for forgers to
duplicate the ink, as well as the distinctive brush strokes.

The biggest problem with DNA is that it says so much more about us
than an arbitrary serial number does. Give up your Social Security
number and a stranger can inspect your credit rating. But surrender
your DNA and a snoop can discover your innermost genetic secrets --
your ancestry, genetic defects and predispositions to certain
diseases. Of course we will have strong genetic privacy laws, but
those laws will allow consumers to "voluntarily" surrender their
information in the course of applying for work or pleading for health
care. A genetic marketplace not unlike today's consumer information
business will emerge, swarming with health insurers attempting to
prune out risky individuals, drug companies seeking customers and
employers managing potential worker injury liability.

Faced with this prospect, any sensible privacy maven would conclude
that DNA is too dangerous to collect, much less use for a task as
unimportant as turning on a laptop or working a cash machine. But
society will not be able to resist its use. The pharmaceutical
industry will need our DNA to concoct customized wonder drugs that
will fix everything from high cholesterol to halitosis. And crime
fighters will make giving DNA information part of our civic duty and
national security. Once they start collecting, the temptation to use
it for other purposes will be too great.

Moreover, snoops won't even need a bit of actual DNA to invade our
privacy because it will be so much easier to access its digital
representation on any number of databanks off in cyberspace. Our
Mr. Witherspoon will get junk mail about obscure medical conditions
that he's never heard of because some direct marketing firm "bot" will
inspect his digital DNA and discover that he has a latent disease or
condition that his doctor didn't notice at his annual checkup.

It is tempting to conclude that Americans will rise up in revolt, but
experience suggests otherwise. Americans profess a concern for privacy, but
they happily reveal their deepest financial and personal secrets for a free
magazine subscription or cheesy electronic trinket. So they probably will
eagerly surrender their biometric identities as well, trading fingerprint
IDs for frequent shopper privileges at the local supermarket and genetic
data to find out how to have the cholesterol count of a teenager.

Biometric identity systems are inevitable, but they are no silver
bullet when it comes to identity protection. The solution to identity
protection lies in the hard work of implementing system-wide and
nationwide technical and policy changes. Without those changes, the
deployment of biometric sensors will merely increase the opportunities
for snoops and thieves -- and escalate the cost to ordinary citizens.

It's time to fix the problems in our current systems and try to anticipate
the unique challenges that will accompany the expanded use of biometrics.
It's the only way to keep tomorrow's crooks from stealing your fingers and
face and, with them, your entire identity.

Paul Saffo is a director of the Institute for the Future, a forecasting
organization based in Silicon Valley.

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: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 18:58:25 -0400
From: David Chessler <chessler@usa.net>
Subject: Philly Reveals Wireless Plan


 From WiFi Planet --
http://www.wi-fiplanet.com/news/article.php/3495991
By Eric Griffith

According to the Philadelphia Daily News, at noon today, John Street,
the mayor of Philadelphia, Penn., and the cities CIO Dianah Neff
planned to make official the business plan behind Wireless
Philadelphia (http://www.phila.gov/wireless/ -- see below), the city's
embattled move to bring wireless broadband to everyone in its
surroundings.

The cost will be $10 million dollars to install as many as 3,000
wireless nodes on light poles across the 135 square mile city, with an
additional $5 million to run the network for the first two years,
according to Neff. The money won't come from tax payersa major gripe
of the anti-municipal-wireless crowdbut will be raised through taxable
bonds or getting low-interest loans. The money would be repaid in four
years.

No one company has been picked yet to do the install or provide
equipment for the network, but Neff believes a selection will be made
by June 30, with deployment to start in August. Subscribers could be
online by the end of the year.

The network will be owned by a non-profit also called Wireless
Philadelphia, which will be run by a CEO and appointees from Mayor
Street.  Wireless Philadelphia will make money by licensing the
network to carriers, which would resell access to end users. Neither
the city nor Wireless Philadelphia would actual serve as the wireless
ISP. Licensers will be required to keep the cost for end-users
downlikely lower than $20 per month. Even less for low-income homes.

Right now, they estimate that 42% of the city's denizens are not
online.  This is usually due to the cost of broadband.

The companies Wireless Philadelphia could let use the network may be
some that tried to stop it in the first place. Local providers of
cable and DSL based broadband like City Councilman Frank Rizzo has
long been an opponent of the Wireless Philadelphia project, and says
it is not something government should do. He fears taxpayer money will
be needed if subscribers don't sign up, and that the technology will
be outdated very soon. In a op-ed piece in today's Chicago Tribune
http://www.chicagotribune.com/technology/chi-0504070283apr07,1,5006951.story?coll=chi-techtopheds-hed&ctrack=1&cset=true ,
Rizzo implies that Wi-Fi is "just another Big Dig," referring to the
highly over-budget highway project in Boston that is still having
issues even after completion. He says "the real costs could range from
$30 million to $100 million for a feasible network" to cover Philly.

Wireless Philadelphia has gotten around the city council by not using
public funds and by going non-profit. They don't need the council's
approval.

The push to put a wireless cloud across Philly has been at the center
of attacks against muni-backed Wi-Fi networks for months. A bill was
passed by the Pennsylvania state legislature last yearjust weeks after
the news surfaced that Philly wanted such a network that would prevent
any state municipalities from installing a broadband network without
an incumbent provider getting a right of first refusal. In December of
last year, Verizon waived that right, and the project proceeded. Other
cities in the state have until January 1, 2006 to give their local
telcos a chance to put in a network first.

In February, a Washington D.C. based group called the New Millenium 
Research Council (NMRC), issued a report called "Not in the Public 
Interest: The Myth of Municipal W-Fi Networks "
http://www.wi-fiplanet.com/news/article.php/3468381 , which 
called into question the necessity, anti-competitiveness and overall 
viability of municipal run wireless networks.

Many have charged the NRMC with a "lack of transparency," especially
in terms of the groups backing, potentially by big telcos like
Verizon. They also say the report ignores many successful deployments
of municipal wireless, such as the network in Chaska, Minn.

That network is powered by equipment from Tropos Network, and that
company's CEO, Ron Sege, has become one of the most vocal proponents
of muni wireless networks (which is no surprise, as he wants his
company to sell more products). In a commentary at ZDNet this week
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1035_22-5653856.html , he argues that the
anti-muni groups have "flawed arguments" and says "Policies that limit
the rapid deployment of broadband wireless networks mean limiting the
real benefits of these networks to public safety, economic growth and
the education and enrichment of our citizens."

Philly and Chaska are far from the only cities with, or considering, a
wireless Wi-Fi cloud. Others include Minneapolis, St. Paul & Moorhead,
Minn.; Alexandria, Va.; Rochester & Buffalo, N.Y.; Rio Rancho, N.M.;
Atlanta, Georgia; Chicago, Ill.; Las Vegas, Nev.; Lexington, Ky.;
Addison & San Antonio, Texas; and Lompoc, Isla Vista, Fullerton,
Cerritos, & San Francisco, Calif; Independence, KS; others. There are
many more Tropos already claims over 125 metro-scale customers. And
that's just the Wi-Fi networks. Many more have fixed wireless
broadband that uses pre-WiMax or proprietary equipment to replace the
physical lines needed for DSL and cable modems, even T1 leased lines.

However, many states have passed or are trying to pass legislation
similar to Pennsylvania's that would, at worst, make city-wide
wireless networks illegal. Those states include West Virginia, Texas,
Colorado, Florida, Nebraska, Illinois, and others. Similar bills were
tried in Indiana and Virginia but died in committee, according the
MuniWireless.com March 2005 report
http://www.muniwireless.com/reports/docs/March2005Report.pdf 

http://www.phila.gov/wireless/

City of Philadelphia will be hosting the Wireless Internet Institute
(W2i) Digital Cities Convention: The Frontier of Broadband Wireless
Applications at the Pennsylvania Convention Center May 2-4, 2005

Promote Open Metro-scale Wireless Connective Citywide Wireless
Philadelphia aims to strengthen the City's economy and transform
Philadelphia's neighborhoods by providing wireless internet access
throughout the city.  Wireless Philadelphia will work to create a
digital infrastructure for open-air internet access and to help
citizens, businesses, schools, and community organizations make
effective use of this technology to achieve their goals while
providing a greater experience for visitors to the City.

Advocate of Wireless Community Networking Appointed by Mayor John
F. Street in July 2004, the Wireless Philadelphia Executive Committee
(Committee) serves as an advisory/advocacy group for wireless
community networking through community outreach programs,
communications with the press and participation in meetings and
conferences. Wireless Philadelphia seeks to educate the general public
and businesses about the benefits of wireless community
networking. Wireless Philadelphia seeks to utilize existing wireless
technologies and incorporate evolving wireless technologies as they
become available.

Provide a Forum for Wireless Networking Wireless Philadelphia provides
a forum for discussion to enhance usage of emerging wireless
technologies especially for those related to building wireless
community networks. The Committee seeks to promote the third-party
development of research, development and use of mobile mesh networks
to enrich neighborhood economic viability.

Recommend Policy

The Committee will formulate recommendations in several policy areas
including fees, roles and responsibilities, extent of service, privacy
and security. The Committee will identify possible legal and
regulatory barriers and help develop strategies to overcome them.

Future Uses

Wireless Philadelphia will develop a process through which the initial
outdoor network can be expanded to allow indoors utilization by
residents, businesses, visitors, institutions, and students. In so
doing, Wireless Philadelphia shall coordinate efforts with other
agencies of City to maximize the social, developmental, and
educational return .

 > From the Chicago Tribune --
http://www.chicagotribune.com/technology/chi-0504070283apr07,1,5006951.story?coll=chi-techtopheds-hed&ctrack=1&cset=true

Wi-Fi: Is it just another Big Dig?

By Frank Rizzo
a member at large of the Philadelphia City Council
Published April 7, 2005

In Chicago and elsewhere, city administrators are considering a
massive, open-ended public works project: municipally owned and
subsidized wireless (Wi-Fi) networks. The goal, say the bureaucrats,
is to capitalize on advances in wireless technology to build a local
information nirvana that will help bridge the digital divide.

But before embarking on this seemingly visionary agenda, local
governments should take a closer look at municipal forays into the
world of telecommunications. For if they do, they might find that
history littered with cost overruns, debt and rapidly outdated
systems. And if they look under the hood at what self-interested
consultants are selling them on projected costs of new wireless
systems, they are likely to find a bit of Enron-style accounting.

The wireless revolution has much seductive allure, to be sure. Wi-Fi
hot spots -- whereby a hard-wired router sends wireless signals in an
area with a radius of 300 feet -- abound in many homes, coffee shops
and elsewhere.

The even more robust Wi-Max technologies, with propagation capability
over many miles, may also soon come to the market. These new services
have aided mostly upscale consumers with expensive laptop computers.

But while a wireless router at home is relatively inexpensive, an
entirely new wireless network built by a local government is likely to
be very costly for many years -- when municipal budgets are expected
to be increasingly strapped. In Philadelphia's 135 square miles, a
wireless network would likely require well over 20,000 access points
-- remote routers, essentially -- with no more than 10 subscribers per
access point to ensure satisfactory speeds.

The city that I represent as a council member at large -- Philadelphia
-- seems to be the national test tube for this debate. Here, the chief
information officer -- backed up by a battery of financially
interested analysts -- projects that the City of Brotherly Love could
construct such a system for less than $11 million.

But with numbers like this, she could wind up in a heap of trouble
were she held accountable to investor disclosure laws.

Simply put, believing one can cover our 135 square miles with a
wireless network for $11 million is like believing the moon is made of
green cheese.

Independent analyses and prevailing market prices for network and
construction costs make clear that the real costs could range from $30
million to $100 million for a feasible network. And this is just the
starting point. For most cities with a greater landmass, the costs
would be even greater.

Once committed, taxpayers are likely to be on the hook for the
foreseeable future. Sheer maintenance will cost annually a minimum of
10 to 15 percent of the initial upfront costs, according to most
experts. Further, engineers estimate that an astounding 60 percent of
the equipment requires replacement or upgrading every three to five
years. These expenses, together with other operating and
administrative costs, network redundancy and security over ever
insecure wireless technologies -- as the hacking into Paris Hilton's
cell phone reminds us -- could cost tens of millions of additional
dollars. And, as many experts tell us, the city's new wireless network
could quickly be outdated with advances in technology. It is precisely
this kind of unrealistic planning that created Boston's Big Dig tunnel
project fiasco.

Indeed, municipal forays into local telecom networks have created a
sea of red ink in Georgia, Iowa, Oregon and elsewhere. Realizing this,
and faced increasingly with demands for greater budgetary scrutiny
over these proposals, some city administrators are engaging in a
strange dance: They argue that they can solve the problem of
ballooning network costs simply by handing off the network to a
private vendor.

The notion of cash-squeezed local governments seeking to enter an ever
more competitive marketplace, only to then hand off a
taxpayer-financed network in the form of a subsidy to one competitor
in that marketplace, would seem an odd role for government --
particularly in a city that represents the birthplace of
democracy. Remember, of course, that the wireless Internet service
industry is increasingly competitive, with scores of carriers entering
the marketplace. In Chicago alone, there are hundreds of hot spots.

If, on the other hand, local governments really want ownership of such
speculative ventures, they should stop playing hide the ball and
instead be honest with the taxpayers -- the bill payers -- about real
costs and the need for the government's entry into an increasingly
competitive industry.

What's really needed is a true national broadband policy. Rather than
subsidizing narrow-band technologies, the federal Universal Service
Fund should promote market-based incentives to ensure universal
rollout of broadband technology and access to needed computer hardware
for underserved communities.

This kind of comprehensive, thoughtful approach would dramatically
boost our economy and our literacy without putting vulnerable
municipal budgets at dire risk with Don Quixote searches for the
broadband cure.

Copyright  2005, Chicago Tribune

 From WiFi Planet --
http://www.wi-fiplanet.com/news/article.php/3468381 (there are
many links in this article -- go to the site to go deeper)

Think Tank Trashes Municipal-Run Wireless
By Eric Griffith

A report out today from the Washington D.C.-based New Millenium
Research Council (NMRC), called "Not in the Public Interest The Myth
of Municipal W-Fi Networks," calls into question the necessity, the
anti-competitiveness, and the overall viability of towns, cities, or
counties installing wireless broadband and treating it like a public
utility.

However, Wi-Fi-supporting pundits point out potential issues with not
only the arguments made in the report but also the objectivity of the
authors, who the pundits brand as "sock puppets of industry."

The NRMC was created in 1999 to "develop workable, real-world
solutions to the issues and challenges confronting policy makers,
primarily in the fields of telecommunications and technology." The
group is an "independent project" of Issue Dynamics, Inc. (IDI), a
group that has the support of such incumbent telcos as Bell South,
Comcast, SBC, Sprint, Verizon and Verizon Wireless to name just a few
(according to reports at eWeek.)

In a phone briefing held today with journalists, the authors of
various sections of the report gave a summary of their analysis, all
of which uniformly question the need for any kind of government-run
and funded wireless broadband system. Arguments against include:


Anti-competitiveness:

Municipal wireless networks will be funded by taxpayers. "When a
private sector company fails, it must respond. But government
[programs] can be propped up with additional tax dollars," according
to Technology Counsel Braden Cox, counsel for the Competitive
Enterprise Institute.

Past failures:

"Nearly every municipal network of the last decade has failed badly,"
says David P. McClure, president and CEO of U.S. Internet Industry
Association.  When asked directly what municipal networks had failed,
speakers mentioned Marietta, Georgia, a utility district in Washington
state, and others though not all are necessarily wireless.

Not addressing the "Digital Divide:"

McClure's section of the report states that the phrase is a catchall,
and can't be limited just to a lack of free broadband. He also says
"econometric data shows no specific link between broadband
availability and economic development." And, he says, it won't
increase tourism either, since it won't offer more than the Wi-Fi
already available in public access hotspots run by private companies.

It's already covered:

Steven Titch, a senior fellow with the Heartland Institute, said that major 
cities proposing municipal broadband (like Philadelphia and San Francisco) 
are already well served by existing hotspots. Citing numbers from 
JiWire.com, Titch says San Francisco, for example, has 399 hotspot 
locations, 42 of which are free. He says that most municipal networks would 
only cover areas like downtowns and airports anyway areas that are usually 
well-covered with Wi-Fi connections already.

Government Censorship:

"If broadband ownership is by municipalities or county governments,
you have the potential for government censorship that most of the
journalists on this call would bristle against vehemently," said Barry
Aarons, analyst with the Institute for Policy Innovation. Many states,
including Indiana and Nebraska, are already contemplating bans on
municipal broadband networks, much like the one that was signed into
law in Pennsylvania not long ago. Big companies like Intel are
considering lobbying against such measuresmunicipalities are, after
all, potential customers for future WiMax long-range wireless products
that would be powered by Intel chips.

Glenn Fleishman, editor of the popular blog Wi-Fi Networking News,
took the group to task before the report was even out in a post on
February 1, after BusinessWeek's blog took the group's findings at
face value. While he says he doesn't wholeheartedly oppose the NMRC's
point of view, he was put off by the lack of "transparency" of the
groups the authors represent. Most are seen as being possibly funded
by telecom organizations, such as Verizon, which stand to lose out to
municipalities doing their own wireless.  (Verizon, however, gave a
right of refusal to Philadelphia after first trying to block that
city's network plans even after the Pennsylvania anti-muni-network law
passed.)

Esme Vos has been writing exclusively about municipal wireless
networks on her blog MuniWireless for two years. She's previously
written about the Heartland Institute when it stated in October 2004
that that "virtually everyone who wants broadband services can get DSL
from their telephone company or cable modem service from their cable
company"a sentiment they echoed in today's call. Vos said at the time,
"Where is this paradise?  Maybe in Seoul, Korea."

Today on her site, referring to an early article Heartland placed on
its own site as a preview to today's NMRC report, she said "For some
reason, it does not cite the successful municipal Wi-Fi (and wired)
deployments we all know about: Chaska (MN), Scottsburg (IN), Auburn
(IN), among others. No, in the world of Heartland, they do not exist."

She counters that, contrary to what the NRMC report says, the false
hopes don't lay with the municipal broadband deployments, but in the
"false hopes propagated for so long by the cable and DSL incumbents,
the one that promises to bring fast, cheap broadband to YOUR
neighborhood. Only now people are very impatient and the equipment is
becoming very cheap."

Fleishman says in his rebuttal against the same Heartland article,
"Municipal broadband is almost the last resort of cities and towns
that can no longer wait on the promises or lack of promises from
incumbents." In a perfect world, he says, municipalities wouldn't have
to build networks: the private companies would already have done so
"without sock puppets making their arguments for them."


 From ZDNet -- http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1035_22-5653856.html

Should cities hook up to WiFi?
By Ron Sege

Commentary -- Recently, parties lacking experience and facts have
suggested that municipalities should not promote or fund broadband
wireless networks.  Their arguments ignore a growing number of
successful municipal deployments and rely on incorrect assertions.

These flawed arguments put the public at risk of making incorrect
policy decisions and having to live with the consequences. Policies
that limit the rapid deployment of broadband wireless networks mean
limiting the real benefits of these networks to public safety,
economic growth and the education and enrichment of our citizens. They
mean that the United States will forgoe its best option for improving
its dismal world ranking in terms of per-capita availability of
broadband.

Broadband wireless networks are the fastest, lowest cost and simplest
way to increase broadband availability. Municipal broadband wireless
networks do not require digging up streets, complex RF engineering or
expensive subscriber devices. Wireless Philadelphia, based on similar,
albeit smaller systems, conservatively estimates a citywide mesh
network will cost $60,000 per square mile to construct. With a land
area of 135 square miles, this translates into $8.1 million to install
the mesh network. Add a comfortable margin (based on Tropos
experience) for security systems, billing systems, network management
systems, routers to connect to the Internet and the like and, all in,
the cost of deploying a broadband wireless network in Philadelphia
would be about $11 million.

Municipal broadband wireless networks today provide many benefits to
cities and their citizens. For instance, chaska.net, a citywide Wi-Fi
network in Chaska, Minnesota, projects that revenues from their 2,000+
subscribers will fund the network's operating costs, pay the interest
and repay the principal -- without using taxpayer funds. The 16-square
mile network was financed (less than $600,000) with four-year
equipment certificates. And 25 percent of Chaskas homes have signed on
for broadband Internet access speeds (>1Mbps, symmetrical) at dial-up
prices ($16/month).

Other cities have turned to broadband wireless to support public
safety and other operations. In San Mateo, California, police officers
now spend 8,000 more hours a year on their beats, because a municipal
broadband wireless network gives them mobile access to databases and
in-field reporting. In Corpus Christi, Texas, a broadband wireless
network is automating utility meter reading, reading 73 water meters
per second, compared to minutes per meter using manual processes. New
Orleans installed a broadband wireless network to support public
safety video surveillance. The system was quickly and easily
installed, and reduced the murder rate by 57 percent in six months and
auto theft by 25 percent in the covered areas.

While cities are improving public services with broadband wireless
networks, many project that their networks will provide more bandwidth
than city workers will consume. Mindful of tight budgets, they intend
to sell this excess bandwidth to help pay for the initial installation
and operating costs. This is good fiscal prudence.

Often municipalities foot a fraction of the cost of installation and
operation in other ways. Business models include public-private
partnerships such as allowing service providers to use city rights of
way tenant in exchange for low-cost accounts for use by city
workers. Other possible models allow service providers to lease
capacity on municipally owned wireless networks, split installation
costs with private entities in exchange for service and revenue
sharing, or provide capital to for-profit and non-profit entities in
exchange for an ownership stake. Different models are appropriate for
different local goals and circumstances.

Fears that new technology will quickly obsolete municipal wireless
networks are vastly overblown. To date, over 100 million Wi-Fi client
devices have been shipped. Wi-Fi is connecting an increasing
assortment of devices, not just laptops and PDAs but also security
cameras, traffic management systems, meter readers, location sensors,
cell phones and much more. And Wi-Fi will get even faster and more
capable over time. Further, new technologies such as WiMAX are easily
integrated into broadband wireless networks.

In conclusion, the parties debating this issue must consider the facts
outlined above. With these facts, they must also acknowledge that
broadband wireless networks today provide numerous benefits to many
constituencies.  With the facts in hand, lets develop policies at the
state and federal level that encourage the development of broadband
wireless networks, not ones that stifle their creation. The winners
will be the citizens, no matter who deploys a broadband wireless
network--municipality or service provider.

Biography

Ron Sege is CEO of Tropos Networks, which sells equipment to
carriers, service providers and municipalities deploying
metro-scale Wi-Fi.

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 whose
use has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. The
'johnmacsgroup' 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, Ron Sege and Tropos Networks.

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


                            John F. McMullen
                    http://www.westnet.com/~observer
                   BLOG: http://johnmacrants.blogspot.com/

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

Date: Thu,  7 Apr 2005 17:22:35 -0400
Subject: Re: Telemarketing to Cellphones
From: David B. Horvath, CCP <dhorvath@withheld_on_request>


PAT -- please remove my email address to keep SPAM down...

This is an urban legend -- you can confirm that by checking
www.snopes.com for more information.  Your cell number is not going to
be "released" to the telescum.

I do recommend (have done so myself) that you include your cell number 
in any do-not-call list entries maintained by the FTC.

- David

On Date: 7 Apr 2005 10:32:32 -0700, HarryHydro <harryhydro@hotmail.com> 
wrote:

> In a few weeks, cell phone numbers are being released to telemarketing
> companies and you will start to receive sale calls. You will be
> charged for these calls.

> Call this number from your cell phone 888-382-1222.
 
> It is the national DO NOT CALL list. It only takes a minute of your
> time. It blocks your number for 5 years. Please pass this on to
> everyone you know who doesn't want to be hassled.

> Or you can go to donotcall.gov and do it on-line.

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, I did this way back when the 
'Do Not Call' list was first getting started. In addition to my 
personal line, my distinctive ring-ring line, and my VOIP number,
I also added my cellular phone number; my VOIP and cell numbers were
never questioned.   PAT]

------------------------------

From: pv+usenet@pobox.com (Paul Vader)
Subject: Re: Telemarketing to Cellphones
Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 21:25:22 -0000
Organization: Inline Software Creations


HarryHydro <harryhydro@hotmail.com> writes:

> In a few weeks, cell phone numbers are being released to telemarketing
> companies and you will start to receive sale calls. You will be
> charged for these calls.

Urban legend. http://www.snopes.com/politics/business/cell411.asp *

* PV   something like badgers--something like lizards--and something
       like corkscrews.

------------------------------

From: Joseph <JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Telemarketing to Cellphones
Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 17:41:49 -0700
Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com


On 7 Apr 2005 10:32:32 -0700, HarryHydro <harryhydro@hotmail.com>
wrote:

> In a few weeks, cell phone numbers are being released to telemarketing
> companies and you will start to receive sale calls. You will be
> charged for these calls.

> Call this number from your cell phone 888-382-1222.

> It is the national DO NOT CALL list. It only takes a minute of your
> time. It blocks your number for 5 years. Please pass this on to
> everyone you know who doesn't want to be hassled.

> Or you can go to donotcall.gov and do it on-line.

Before you get everyone all excited and bent out of shape maybe you
should tell the *whole* story and not just the bit that's supposed to
make us all worry that cell phone numbers will be released to
telemarketers.  The truth is that a wireless 411 "directory" is being
developed.  Your number in most cases will not automatically be
included in this directory.  In most cases you will have to *opt in*
to the directory.  Even when you do opt in there will be no paper
directory.  It will only be available through operators.

You are being terribly irresponsible in circulating this untrue rumor
that telemarketers will receive cell phone numbers.

http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/bl_cell_phone_directory.htm

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: So what harm is there in adding your
cell phone and/or VOIP number to the list just to 'be safe'?   PAT]

------------------------------

From: AES <siegman@stanford.edu>
Subject: Re: Google Maps
Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 14:32:46 -0700
Organization: Stanford University


In article <telecom24.148.7@telecom-digest.org>, Steve Sobol
<sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote:

> How do you expect Google to pay its bills if it's not going to be either 
> advertising-supported or subscriber-supported?

> "I want a free lunch, but I'm not willing to allow other people to pay
> for it."  My interpretation of your quote.

Well, in fact I have paid subscriptions to a number of magazines and a
newspaper or two that I think have reasonably high editorial
standards.  Since I think KQED-FM is a fairly decent and largely
advertiser independent information source, I've been a voluntary
subscriber and donator to them for decades (I even supported KPFA for
quite a while...).  I've voted for (and as a taxpayer helped pay off)
public library bond issues for decades.  Back when I had four
school-age children in the house I even once purchased, at retail, a
complete set of the Britannica.

I don't know how to solve the problem (the very real, serious, and
IMHO increasing) problem of corruption of many of our primary
information sources and media by advertising I'd willingly pay a
significant subscription fee for access to a Google equivalent that
was equally good and that I could be sure was and would remain truly
advertiser independent.

------------------------------

From: T. Sean Weintz <strap@hanh-ct.org>
Subject: Re: Sperm - Not so Mobile
Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 19:03:08 -0400
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com


Monty Solomon wrote:

> http://www.newcastle.edu.au/news/media-releases/2005/aitkenmobile.htm

> Friday 18 February, 2005

> A preliminary study at the University of Newcastle has identified that
> radio waves of a similar frequency to those associated with mobile
> phones can damage sperm DNA in mice.

Damn. Now I need to take the cell phones away from my mice. How are
they supposed to call me at work to let me know when they are out of
cheese now?


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Very clever retort, but my presumption 
is the researchers would rather experiment with mice than with human
children, etc.   PAT]

------------------------------

From: T. Sean Weintz <strap@hanh-ct.org>
Subject: Re: Prison Cell Phone Scandal
Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 19:04:24 -0400
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com


Fred Atkinson wrote:

> On Wed, 06 Apr 2005 12:59:29 -0400, T. Sean Weintz <strap@hanh-ct.org>
> wrote:

>> Except I wonder how many prisons have their corrections officers using
>> cell phones to communicate with one another?

>> Don't want to jam *them*, of course.

> The truth of the matter is that cell phones are considered very
> unreliable for law enforcement/emergency rescue type operations,
> especially when bad weather sets in (because everyone starts calling
> and tying up systems).  If they are using them, they shouldn't be.

> They should still be using public safety radio services/systems.

> Fred 

Hmm ... a few years ago I know many of the local police departments
back here used them. Dunno if that is still true.

------------------------------

From: GlowingBlueMist <nobody@invalid.com>
Subject: Re: VoIP Adapter With High REN?
Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2005 21:27:17 -0500
Organization: SunSITE.dk - Supporting Open source


Thor Lancelot Simon <tls@panix.com> wrote in message 
news:telecom24.149.7@telecom-digest.org:

> I am trying to switch two of three phone lines in a very large, very
> old house over to VoIP.  The house has quite literally twenty
> extensions split between the three lines -- I think I need at least 4
> or 5 REN per line, plus the ability to drive all the wire leading to
> those handsets (over 100' in some cases) without exploding the audio
> output circuit in the ATA.

> Does anyone make equipment meant for this that I can use with a
> mainstream VoIP provider?  It's been suggested to me that Packet8
> might be my best chance since they build their own gear but I don't
> see anything suitable on their web site.

> I am basically looking for a Cisco ATA-186 (including the 2-line
> capability) on steroids.

You might want to try something like a REN extender or two.  An
example of one can (Viking RG-10A) be found at:
http://salestores1.com/virgelrgribo.html

It claims to boost the ring signal to 15 REN and should work with what
ever brand of VOIP interface you have as long as it will already ring
a single phone instrument correctly.

------------------------------

From: Paratwa <support@usenetserver.com>
Subject: Re: Harrasing Annoying Ex Boyfriend Phone Calls CALLER ID Manager
Organization: UseNetServer
Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 18:46:44 -0500


If your referring to my story its just that -- a personal story.  You
won't find it in the paper and it certainly wasn't in the local news.
Heck in today's world of stalkers and murders I'm amazed I couldn't
find others with similar problems via a search.  In any event if you
really want proof I can at the very least probably dig up a police
report and pdf it to you -- for proper monetary compensation of not
less than $25.

For what its worth by sheer coincidence the idiot called from a pay
phone last night an left a message.  He has probably figured out that
something isn't right since he could leave a message with the first
try on a pay phone and couldn't do it again, since I blocked it.


On 7 Apr 2005 05:20:45 -0700, Justin Time <a_user2000@yahoo.com>
wrote:

> Sheesh Pat!

> Because of your extreme dislike of SBC you seem to have fallen for
> this advertisement written as a sob story about harrassing phone calls
> that "no one would do anything about."  The story has all the earmarks
> of an urban ledgend -- no verifiable facts and no way to ascertain
> even if the story is true.

> Rodgers Platt

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: All I can do is speak to my own 
> experience. I was harassed for a couple months by AT&T (of all
> people!) who three or four times per day would call me on my
> ring-ring (distinctive ringing) line, looking for someone I had
> never heard of, and because of SBC's alleged inability to do anything
> to help me eventually _I_ had to invest in a long distance call at
> my own expense to call them back and trace through it with them. And
> SBC (to name just one of the Bell companies) absolutely refuses to
> do _anything_ about harassing phone calls except charge their
> _customer_ fifteen dollars for each use of *57. Bell used to have
> an 'Annoyance Call Bureau' to deal with those things; now apparently
> that has to be a profit center for them like everything else. 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 #150
******************************
