Classified Ads
TD Extra News

Add this Digest to your personal   or  

 

Message Digest Volume 29 : Issue 45 : "text" Format Messages in this Issue: Re: How do you get your number off a list so that it's gone, gone Re: How do you get your number off a list so that it's gone, gone Re: How do you get your number off a list so that it's gone, gone Re: How do you get your number off a list so that it's gone, gone Re: ISDN (was: Re: Two 1A ESS COs to be Replaced in 2010; 59 Remain) Re: ISDN Re: ISDN Re: Toucn-Tone<tm> on SxS Re: Toucn-Tone<tm> on SxS Re: Area Code 710? Re: Area Code 710? Re: Area Code 710? Listening In on a Pay Phone in Queens ====== 28 years of TELECOM Digest -- Founded August 21, 1981 ====== 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, and other stuff of interest. Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2010 16:30:34 -0800 From: Steven <diespammers@killspammers.com> To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: How do you get your number off a list so that it's gone, gone Message-ID: <hl4rra$enh$1@news.eternal-september.org> T wrote: > In article > <6645152a1002101518k5b6344e0w85361cf9c5b6509d@mail.gmail.com>, > john@mayson.us says... > >> I had the same happen. Well sort of. Different parties. I'd get >> a call asking for money. The first time they called they informed >> me there was a $75 minimum donation. I pointed out I was on the >> "Do Not Call" list. They quickly pointed out they're exempt. I >> explained I knew that, but I would like them to honor that still. >> They told me they didn't have to. I explained that I'm not going >> to give them any money and if they continue to call I will not only >> never give them money, but I will give money to their opponent and >> vote for their opponent. That actually did the trick despite me >> living in a conservative county and congressional district in >> Texas. Me voting for a Democrat would be as effective as spitting >> into the wind. > > I get all sort of political calls here. The saving grace, Google > Voice. I signed up for a number and have it point at my main > number. The nice thing is, you can teach Google voice to recognize > numbers of people you WANT to hear from. If they call it rings > through, if not they're asked to record their name at the tone and > then it rings your phone and plays back the name. Based on that you > can either accept or decline the call. > > So now when I go to political sites and they request a phone > number, they get the Google Voice number. I have a nasty fix, when I get a call that is not in my phone book,the caller will get milliwatt. My friends all call my Google Voice number which is pointed to a private line that is not used or if I'm on the road my cell phone. I had an insurance broker trying to drum up business that would call me 3 or 4 times a day and reporting it did no good, the tone stopped it the first time. -- The only good spammer is a dead one!! Have you hunted one down today? (c) 2010 I Kill Spammers, Inc., A Rot in Hell. Co. Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2010 18:10:58 -0800 From: Sam Spade <sam@coldmail.com> To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: How do you get your number off a list so that it's gone, gone Message-ID: <SSndn.6744$YR1.5601@newsfe17.iad> Adam H. Kerman wrote: > When you state that you aren't the person, yeah, they believe > you. They just don't care. They really want YOU to do their work for > them. Next time, demand their commission. Caller ID is worth its weight in gold. If you don't recognize the number don't answer it. ***** Moderator's Note ***** Privacy protection is like spam or virus prevention: it's an arms race. Those who call have learned to make caller-id less useful by either putting your own number on it, or "Out of Area", or an 800 number that they hope you'll be curious about. The next step in the arms race will be active devices that demand a secret code, and after that will be active devices that demand the code from numbers the devices don't recognize. In the future, (remember what I said about social maps?) those who seek to talk to you without your invitation will insert the phone number of one of your friends into the caller-id info, and you or your automatic screening device will answer the call without thinking. You heard it here first. Bill Horne Moderator Date: Sat, 13 Feb 2010 10:01:11 -0800 From: Sam Spade <sam@coldmail.com> To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: How do you get your number off a list so that it's gone, gone Message-ID: <HNBdn.55182$3n2.2069@newsfe01.iad> Sam Spade wrote: > Adam H. Kerman wrote: > >> When you state that you aren't the person, yeah, they believe >> you. They just don't care. They really want YOU to do their work for >> them. Next time, demand their commission. > > > Caller ID is worth its weight in gold. If you don't recognize the > number don't answer it. > > > ***** Moderator's Note ***** > > Privacy protection is like spam or virus prevention: it's an arms > race. Those who call have learned to make caller-id less useful by > either putting your own number on it, or "Out of Area", or an 800 > number that they hope you'll be curious about. The next step in the > arms race will be active devices that demand a secret code, and > after that will be active devices that demand the code from numbers > the devices don't recognize. > > In the future, (remember what I said about social maps?) those who > seek to talk to you without your invitation will insert the phone > number of one of your friends into the caller-id info, and you or > your automatic screening device will answer the call without > thinking. > > You heard it here first. > > Bill Horne > Moderator First, they would have to know their intended prey's friends. That is a quantum jump. And, anyone who might get curious about an 800 number is not well trained at all. ;-) We have been doing quite nicely in our little home with audible caller ID (Meridian 9516), at&t privacy manager, at&t voice mail, and the 9516's voice mail. It has been in a stable state for perhaps 10 years now. We have yet to take the bait. It does require self-control. My wife took longer to come up to speed (she is not a phone phreak) but today she is bullet-proof. Any doubt whatsoever the identified call goes to the 9516's voice mail. And, of course, they seldom leave a message. ***** Moderator's Note ***** This may be a left-handed compliment, but you are clearly an outlyer on this particular (pun intended) Bell curve. What I said about social maps is basically that the current generation of teenagers has grown up in an environment where they have given away, without realizing it, the last bastion of privacy available to the common man: the names of their friends. By using social-networking services and sites (everything from AIM to Facepage), computer "savvy" children have allowed major database suppliers to assemble lists of those they grew up with and whom they are willing to talk to without hesitation: they will soon find out the cost of that carelessness when pitchmen of all stripes, be they life-insurance salesmen or bill collectors, will use that information to catch them off-guard. That is not a "quantum jump", nor even a paradigm shift: it's a incremental increase in the number and effectiveness of the weapons available to those who seek to part customers from their money. It will happen. I'm of a different mind about what constitutes 'victory' in this battle: you feel that you have 'won' because you have prevented unknown persons from reaching you by telephone. I, however, feel I win only when I'm not aware that an attempt was made, i.e., when my quiet enjoyment of my home and my family can't be interrupted by anyone I have not chosen to allow. The only bait I'm willing to have in my life is at the end of my fishing hook. Bill Horne Moderator Date: Sat, 13 Feb 2010 14:08:27 -0800 From: Sam Spade <sam@coldmail.com> To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: How do you get your number off a list so that it's gone, gone Message-ID: <wpFdn.97436$CM7.65183@newsfe04.iad> Telecom Digest Moderator wrote: > I'm of a different mind about what constitutes 'victory' in this > battle: you feel that you have 'won' because you have prevented > unknown persons from reaching you by telephone. I, however, feel I > win only when I'm not aware that an attempt was made, i.e., when my > quiet enjoyment of my home and my family can't be interrupted by > anyone I have not chosen to allow. The only bait I'm willing to have > in my life is at the end of my fishing hook. Your point is well taken. But, I have indeed won within the constraints of the technology and my motivation. Well, there is one option with the 9516 that goes closer to your goal. That is name-only announce. Thus, only the numbers with a voice tag in my name will announce and those will no voice tag will remain silent (instead of being announced by Miss Nortel). I haven't done this because I am too lazy to tag all my wife's friends. But, if I had your determination it would indeed work exactly as you want. ***** Moderator's Note ***** It's a question of degree, not of determination. I may be determined to avoid annoyance calls altogether, and you may be determined to retain the ability to choose what calls to answer on a case-by-case basis. Both approaches accomplish the goals that were set out. This is, as I said, an arms race. The defender's dilemma applies. Date: Sat, 13 Feb 2010 02:25:02 +0000 (UTC) From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman) To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: ISDN (was: Re: Two 1A ESS COs to be Replaced in 2010; 59 Remain ) Message-ID: <hl52hu$9q1$1@grapevine.csail.mit.edu> In article <hl2spv$2jc4$1@grapevine.csail.mit.edu>, Bill Horne appended the following to my text: > Please tell us more about the phone(s) and the choices each offers. There's really not much to say. > I'm especially interested in the encryption tool(s) which each > vendor and/or system has available. The only ones I know about that have crypto built-in are the Linksys ones, and they can have private keys installed as a part of provisioning. Since I never had access to their provisioning tools, I was never able to set them up. They used a proprietary (or at least undocumented) key-exchange protocol transported in the SIP HELLO message. They also used fairly short keys and something they called a "mini-certificate", not standard PKIX or OpenPGP. > I'd also like - very much - to know what factors (other than money) > drove the cutover: it's very rare for a large organization to make so > fundamental a change, so please share what you know about the > decision-making process. I was/am not privy to information of that sort. Different division of the Institute, at a much higher pay grade. The only thing that I was ever told in a public forum was that the cost of maintaining two parallel infrastructures, one for voice and one for data, was deemed unsupportable. -GAWollman -- Garrett A. Wollman | What intellectual phenomenon can be older, or more oft wollman@bimajority.org| repeated, than the story of a large research program Opinions not shared by| that impaled itself upon a false central assumption my employers. | accepted by all practitioners? - S.J. Gould, 1993 Date: Sat, 13 Feb 2010 11:27:26 -0500 From: Bill Horne <redacted@invalid.speakeasy.net> To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: ISDN Message-ID: <4B76D2EE.90203@speakeasy.net> > On 12 Feb 2010 06:37:20 UTC, John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> said: > >> I ordered a PRI for one client who wanted the Nortel BCM system (a >> PBX), and also PRIs for clients who wanted the asterisk VoIP >> system. Amazingly (to me) all PRIs were actually fiber lines to the >> MPOE where they were converted to <something> (2-pair) over Cat5 >> that connected to the PCI card(s) in the asterisk system(s). > > I don't think anyone's still installing traditional two-pair T1. My > T1 was two-pair when they installed it in 1995, but a couple of years > ago they switched to [HDSL], so there was one pair coming to the house, > and a little line powered box that turned it back into the traditional > two pairs I plugged into my CSU/DSU. > > There's tons of used T1 equipment available, on ebay and specialized > places. I got a WANIC T1 card on ebay for under $100, probably > because nobody else knew what it was. Do you prefer to use a CSU/DSU because that's what you had on hand, or it's what your router is equiped for, or are there advantages, such as V.35 access for test equipment, that make it a better setup? Bill Horne -- If music be the food of love then laughter is its queen and likewise if behind is in front then dirt in truth is clean - Keith Reid Date: 14 Feb 2010 01:03:11 -0000 From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: ISDN Message-ID: <20100214010311.55312.qmail@simone.iecc.com> Telecom Digest Moderator wrote: > John Levine wrote: >> There's tons of used T1 equipment available, on ebay and specialized >> places. I got a WANIC T1 card on ebay for under $100, probably >> because nobody else knew what it was. > > Do you prefer to use a CSU/DSU because that's what you had on hand, > or it's what your router is equiped for, or are there advantages, > such as V.35 access for test equipment, that make it a better setup? a) It's what my cards were set up for. b) Easier to test. The last CSU/DSU I used had an Ethernet jack and I could telnet into it from behind my firewall. c) Sacrificial relatively cheap equipment in case of lightning strike ***** Moderator's Note ***** I hadn't thought about the lightning protection aspect: I'll keep that in mind if I'm ever in the market for HDSL or other similar wire-based services. What, by the way, does an HDSL line cost in round numbers? Does your ISP use it to deliver your phone connections as well? Bill Horne Moderator Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2010 12:37:42 -0600 (CST) From: jsw <jsw@ivgate.omahug.org> To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: Toucn-Tone<tm> on SxS Message-ID: <201002111837.o1BIbgbY098524@ivgate.omahug.org> > You could readily tell which route your call had taken, because if > it used the high usage trunks from the 4A, the call setup was almost > instantaneous, while if it took the final route through Ponca City, > the 4A outpulsed to the step office in Ponca City and through it to > Blackwell with step pulses. I admit it's kinda strange to think of a 5XB with a primary path via a SxS office. ;-) On the former 712-366 office, some unusual timing was evident. In particular, calls to the Council Bluffs 1E office actually completed faster (712-322, et. al.) than those intra-office to 712-366. The calls to the 1E evidently used the first selector only with rapid MF outpulsing, while it took more time for the various selectors in the SxS office to complete the intra-office calls. Many calls from 712-366 at the time went via the downtown (Omaha) xbar tandem. You could always hear the MF burst to the newer offices, the {scratch-scratch} to panel or 1XB, or the {click-click-click ...} to a step office. Date: Sat, 13 Feb 2010 20:11:54 EST From: Wesrock@aol.com To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: Toucn-Tone<tm> on SxS Message-ID: <114f2.518191ff.38a8a7da@aol.com> In a message dated 2/13/2010 11:35:35 AM Central Standard Time, jsw@ivgate.omahug.org writes: > Wes Leatherock wrote: >> You could readily tell which route your call had taken, because if >> it used the high usage trunks from the 4A, the call setup was almost >> instantaneous, while if it took the final route through Ponca City, >> the 4A outpulsed to the step office in Ponca City and through it to >> Blackwell with step pulses. > I admit it's kinda strange to think of a 5XB with a primary path via > a SxS office. ;-) The high usage group was always the primary path. The final group got the calls when all HU trunks were busy. That's why it was called the final group. Wes Leatherock wesrock@aol.com wleathus@yahoo.com Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2010 12:50:12 -0600 (CST) From: jsw <jsw@ivgate.omahug.org> To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: Area Code 710? Message-ID: <201002111850.o1BIoCkv099410@ivgate.omahug.org> On 10 Feb 2010 04:13:25 UTC, Robert Bonomi wrote: > Have you heard the phrase "I could tell you, but then I'd have to kill > you"? <evil grin> The late Mike Riddle, who used to post here semi-frequently, shared with me a few details of 710 after Patrick T. here stated that the less said about AC 710 in the Digest, the better. Mike was a retired USAF communications officer and had some knowledge of this, much of which I'm sure he could not share, and did state that it was a not very well known emergency government AC which was indeed tied into, to a certain extent, the PSTN. He did admonish me and others to 'never go playing around dialing AC 710 numbers to see what happens', implying that visits from jackbooted thugs flying in black helicopters were not out of the question. ;-) ***** Moderator's Note ***** I take a different approach to some things than Pat Townson did, and one of them is restricted access to public services based on unknown, secret, or undocumented criteria. The PSTN was built, and is now maintained, by rate-payers whom are entitled to equal access with other rate-payers, absent publicly-debated and well documented exceptions. We could argue whether "government officials" deserve special or privileged access to the PSTN during times of crisis, national emergency, or natural disaster. I'm not starting that debate, but I am wondering if this NPA 710 system is (or will be) used to grant privileged access to persons not in need of it, or at times when it's not warranted. Bluntly put, this has the earmarks of political pork at its worst: a system separate from the military communications network, giving unnamed and unknowable persons the right to usurp communications capability from others, to be used for purposes which are also unnamed and unknowable. This is not a low-number license plate or some other token that conveys only symbolic power: this is a special lane on the highway reserved for "Elites only" and where the cars all have tinted windows. Let's consider a few possibilities: 1. It would be trivially easy to set up "710" numbers that political hacks could pass along as favors to their contributors, thus giving out a status symbol which carries not only status, but a real, valuable, and dangerous capability, i.e., to have one's calls placed more quickly, and even to knock a competitor's call off the line, during time-critical events such as a stock-market crash. 2. Of course, the "National Security" would hide a lot of possible gaffes from prying eyes: records of which congressman called which industrialist the day before major legislation is reported out of committee, or the identities of those who booked passage on a particular cruise when a particular governor was also embarking, etc. 3. I think it's inevitable - remember, there are hundred of exchange codes within an NPA - that the system would grow to include privileged access for all manner of exceptions, with everyone from the cop on the corner to the school principal enjoying (and growing to expect) non-monetary compensation in the form of priority telephone access, paid for by the taxpayers. 4. These numbers, which would start out as "friend of a friend" giveaways, would in turn find their way into the hands of criminals that would take advantage of the "national security" veil to prevent wiretap warrants from being effective. You might think me a doom-sayer, but I'm not. I'm being pessimistic, to be sure, but I don't think these concerns are unrealistic. If a congressman who wants your money could supply you with a 710 number that would allow you to interrupt a call in progress between a newspaper reporter and his source, or to eavesdrop on a call in progress between your wife and her lover, I'd bet you'd write the check. During a "60 Minutes" program, the interviewer asked about his relationship with his brother, who is on the FBI's "Ten Most Wanted Fugitives" list, and William Bulger said "There's a curious thing about power: if people think you have it, then you do have it"! If your business associates or subordinates know that you have privileged access to the phone network, they will act on the assumption that you have power which they have been denied. The GETS system is a way of distributing both the appearance of, and the reality of power, and giving all manner of political hangers-on, minor officials, mobsters, and fat-cat contributors the capability to arrogate their own, private communications network - one guaranteed to work even when less deserving citizens are cut off. Bill Horne Moderator and future resident of the gulag Date: Sat, 13 Feb 2010 12:15:33 -0800 From: Steven <diespammers@killspammers.com> To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: Area Code 710? Message-ID: <hl7197$d8a$1@news.eternal-september.org> Telecom Digest Moderator wrote: > On 10 Feb 2010 04:13:25 UTC, Robert Bonomi wrote: > >> Have you heard the phrase "I could tell you, but then I'd have to kill >> you"? <evil grin> [Moderator snip] > ***** Moderator's Note ***** > > Bluntly put, this has the earmarks of political pork at its worst: a > system separate from the military communications network, giving > unnamed and unknowable persons the right to usurp communications > capability from others, to be used for purposes which are also unnamed > and unknowable. This is not a low-number license plate or some other > token that conveys only symbolic power: this is a special lane on the > highway reserved for "Elites only" and where the cars all have tinted > windows. [Moderator snip] After the 1971 Sylmar Earthquake with restored emergency circuits first; old step days, after the Northridge quake circuits for non-emergency were restricted for a couple of days and in the effected areas for longer. Many large companies have their own system that cover many sites around the world with internal numbers and dialing, the 710 is really not that different. -- The only good spammer is a dead one!! Have you hunted one down today? (c) 2010 I Kill Spammers, Inc., A Rot in Hell. Co. Date: Sun, 14 Feb 2010 08:31:06 +1100 From: David Clayton <dcstar@myrealbox.com> To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: Area Code 710? Message-ID: <pan.2010.02.13.21.31.02.601623@myrealbox.com> On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 12:50:12 -0600, Telecom Digest Moderator wrote: > ***** Moderator's Note ***** > > The GETS system is a way of distributing both the appearance of, and the > reality of power, and giving all manner of political hangers-on, minor > officials, mobsters, and fat-cat contributors the capability to arrogate > their own, private communications network - one guaranteed to work even > when less deserving citizens are cut off. > > Bill Horne > Moderator and future resident of the gulag Shouldn't that last line read: ".... one guaranteed to work even when more deserving citizens are cut off."??? - - Regards, David. David Clayton Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. Knowledge is a measure of how many answers you have, intelligence is a measure of how many questions you have. ***** Moderator's Note ***** It all depends on your point of view: those who are given power might think that they deserve it and that those who weren't given it don't deserve it. That's human nature. In the case of a publicly-regulated utility, the theory is that everyone deserves equal access, and although the practice has never reached that Olympian ideal, the GETS system is a big step in the wrong direction. Bill Horne Moderator Date: Sat, 13 Feb 2010 11:09:45 -0800 (PST) From: Joseph Singer <joeofseattle@yahoo.com> To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Listening In on a Pay Phone in Queens Message-ID: <588642.27747.qm@web52703.mail.re2.yahoo.com> By MANNY FERNANDEZ Published: February 12, 2010 Benjamin Patir called his son because he was lonely and, perhaps more important, because he had a quarter. Robert J. Covelli called his son, too, to find out if, at some point during the more than 24 hours he spent in custody, he had become, for the first time, a grandfather. Frank Federico, fresh from a courthouse jail cell, called his mother, who spared him any lectures and asked him if he needed a ride home. The three men used the same curbside pay phone on a busy block of Queens Boulevard last week. So did Carlos Luciano, who lent his cellphone to his wife. And Alex Santana, who bought a banana to get change. And Marvin McCain, a subway conductor trying to call in sick, and two men uninterested in giving their names or explaining why, at midnight on a neon-lit stretch of Kew Gardens, Queens, they had to make a call. Everybody knows the public pay phone is dying, but nobody inclined to watch this one would believe it. It sits across the street from Queens Criminal Court, on a patch of sidewalk facing Fast & Fresh Supermarket Deli & Grocery. In the age of the iPhone and the BlackBerry, in a city where cellphones are cheaper and more plentiful than toasters, the pay phone outside Fast & Fresh is outdated, outnumbered, outperformed. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/13/nyregion/13payphone.html TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly to telecom- munications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition 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 Bill Horne. 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. The Telecom Digest is moderated by Bill Horne. Contact information: Bill Horne Telecom Digest 43 Deerfield Road Sharon MA 02067-2301 781-784-7287 bill at horne dot net Subscribe: telecom-request@telecom-digest.org?body=subscribe telecom Unsubscribe: telecom-request@telecom-digest.org?body=unsubscribe telecom 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 Copyright (C) 2009 TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. 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 The Telecom digest (13 messages)