29 Years of the Digest ... founded August 21, 1981
Add this Digest to your personal
or 
The Telecom Digest for April 07, 2011
Volume 30 : Issue 89 : "text" Format
====== 29 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 Bill Horne 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: Tue, 5 Apr 2011 12:10:50 -0400
From: danny burstein <dannyb@panix.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Afghanistan (!!!!!) has more cellular competition than the US
Message-ID: <Pine.NEB.4.64.1104051209340.17303@panix5.panix.com>
(from an article describing how the Taliban have
allowed the cell companies to turn their networks
back on. That's political, so not for here.....)
"The shutdown, which was honored by all four of
Afghanistan's private cellular networks, shows
the influence the Taliban wield in many parts of
the country"
http://www.silive.com/newsflash/index.ssf/story/taliban-turn-cell-phones-back-on-in/499aa7f446814d26a6213df35d1c2bd2
- Two companies in the US, four in Afghanistan....
_____________________________________________________
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
dannyb@panix.com
[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2011 09:10:38 -0500
From: John Mayson <john@mayson.us>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Afghanistan (!!!!!) has more cellular competition than the US
Message-ID: <BANLkTikdrexSFb7ybp35_xnBxe3uPrNvJg@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 11:10 AM, danny burstein <dannyb@panix.com> wrote:
>
> - Two companies in the US, four in Afghanistan....
We don't have just two. Yet.
Malaysia has about 1/11th the US population but has four major
cellular providers: Maxis, Celcom, DiGi, and U Mobile.
--
John Mayson <john@mayson.us>
Austin, Texas, USA
Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2011 17:50:35 -0400
From: tlvp <tPlOvUpBErLeLsEs@hotmail.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Afghanistan (!!!!!) has more cellular competition than the US
Message-ID: <op.vtjdmlsritl47o@acer250.gateway.2wire.net>
On Wed, 06 Apr 2011 10:10:38 -0400, John Mayson <john@mayson.us> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 11:10 AM, danny burstein <dannyb@panix.com> wrote:
>>
>> - Two companies in the US, four in Afghanistan....
> ...
> Malaysia has about 1/11th the US population but has four major
> cellular providers: Maxis, Celcom, DiGi, and U Mobile.
Even Poland has 4 (or more) -- Orange, Plus, Era, and Play (more if you
include the minor players, like the SIM card issuers affiliated with a
couple of grocery chains, like Carrefour Polska, whose "frequent shopper"
bonuses take the form of added minutes on the affiliated SIM card).
Cheers, -- tlvp
--
Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2011 09:25:17 -0400
From: "AJB Telecom" <ajbtelecom@frontier.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Does FiOS support rotary phones?
Message-ID: <000a01cbf45e$14d68f60$01fea8c0@dell8100>
Bill [our moderator] said:
>I had done a seach for "field phone" on Ebay, and I was about to
>redirect my browser to another page when I noticed an ebay listing for
>a ta-263/pt field phone. The listing says it comes with two linesman's
>whistles, and has a picture of them.
>Somebody, please make my day: tell me the frequencies of those
>whistles. Ghod, please, let one of them be 2600. I'll laugh for a
>whole day.
>Bill
Bill, I wish I could make your day on this one, but those particular
whistles do not do 2600 Hz. One of them was indeed intended for SF
trunk signaling, but at 1600 Hz. The other whistle made a 1000 Hz
tone that was pulsed at 20 hertz. The TA-263 itself was actually a
TA-43 field phone combined with a low-pass filter and [4-wire] matching
network that allowed a tech in the field to clip on to [open wire]
analog carrier trunks without disturbing the active traffic.
The whistles, of course, were used to replicate the in-band ringing and
trunk seizure signals used by the carrier systems, and set up paths by
which a crew in the field could talk to the CO end[s]. Note that the
link that was set up was just a straight voice-band connection, the
phone did not communicate using carrier. I can not begin to guess
whether it was possible to actually seize trunks and set up routes with
the 1600 hertz SF tone [toot?], or if was merely used to ring-down the
distant end.
Now, if you really want a field phone that can do 2600 Hz, there is
at least one that I know of [and there could be others]. The TA-341
wasn't actually a field unit, but it was ruggedized. It is also the
only Army phone I have ever seen that is painted a lovely Navy grey.
It is a desk phone, designed for connection to the 4 wire lines that
were commonly used by the military and government in the Autovon era.
Note that these were not carrier trunks, but were often long-haul and
could include voice-band repeaters. The TA-341 can do 1000 hertz ring
signaling, and can also speak 2600 hertz SF. Amazingly, it does not
have an Autovon keypad.
Jim Bennett
**************************************************
Speaking from a secure undisclosed location.
***** Moderator's Note *****
Jim, thank you for the info. I would like to know a little bit more,
not only about the ta-341 that you mention, but about "field" phones
in general. For those of us whom are facing their second childhood and
are considering higher-priced toys, please tell me which phones I can
hook up to my POTS line and use.
I mentioned my brother having a ta-312 phone, to which he added a
touch-tone adapter (it's a ta-955/pt, btw). It works fine on his home
phone line, and is too heavy & old-looking for his kids to take, so he
likes it. I might get one myself, since the cordless phone I usually
use is never at the base station when I need it, and I'm tired of
going on safari chasing the mating call of the elusive horned owlet. ;-)
Bill Horne
Moderator
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2011 08:30:18 -0700 (PDT)
From: Lisa or Jeff <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: How long does it take to port a phone number?
Message-ID: <104d0a30-7420-437b-88d6-3e386c8a10f0@p16g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>
On Apr 5, 12:27 am, Bob K <SPAM...@rochester.rr.com> wrote:
> I recently switched from the telephone company I had been using for a
> very long time (since before dial!) to the local cable company. Part of
> this changeover was the porting of my telephone number to the new provider.
>
> The release of the telephone number to the cable company took longer
> than I thought it should. To be specific, it was exactly 3 weeks.
> ... Any thoughts?
For what it's worth, a friend of mine ported his number several times
over a short period of time and had no problems. He thought a
competing carrier would be cheaper, but they merely stated all the
"fees" differently and was no saving at all. He then tried a
different competing carrier and found the same thing. He switched
back to Verizon.
I suspect you were delayed because of the "freeze" you had applied to
your number. My mother put a 'lock' on her telephone account and when
she got sick I had a heck of time trying to straighten it out with the
phoneco due to the lock--they simply refused to talk to me even though
her account was seriously in arrears and I was trying to get it paid
up. Finally she had a good day and could talk to them directly
unfreezing the lock.
To Mr. Horne--did you ever get your trouble previously discussed
resolved?
***** Moderator's Note *****
Oh, yuck. Someone finally called me "mister". Now I really feel old.
I didn't get the toll restrictions removed from my line, if that's
what you're referring to: we continued to use Google voice, and that
worked out OK even though we had no access to the Google interface on
the Internet. The problem is that our cordless phones have "timed"
tone buttons that send a tone burst that's sometimes too short for the
Google hardware to recognize: I was able to dig a 2500 set out of the
morass that is my basement, and we found that it worked a lot better.
The larger issue, though, has nothing to do with Google: it's that
Verizon is employing salespeople who have obviously been trained to
lie and to deceive their customers. The company's viewpoint seems to
be that too few of their customers will take action for it to impact
the bottom line.
Bill Horne
Moderator
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2011 03:56:16 +0000 (UTC)
From: David Lesher <wb8foz@panix.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Does FiOS support rotary phones?
Message-ID: <ingo90$ese$1@reader1.panix.com>
ATT has U-Verse and a new "iNID" (short for "intelligent network
interface device") for same...
In a note to the alarm industry, they say:
However, Pulse-Dialing is not supported by AT&T U-verse Voice.
Only monitored alarm panels that support Touch-Tone dialing
should be used.
I'm not clear on what the iNED does {not} do. It appears it bonds 2
pair back to the 52B U-verse coffin, and on your side it has POTS, TV
and TCP/IP out with the TCP/IP going inside via HPNA over coax [vice
MOCA over coax...].
--
A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz@nrk.com
& no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX
Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433
Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2011 10:33:59 -0500
From: Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: How long does it take to port a phone number?
Message-ID: <ini15e$l62$1@dont-email.me>
On 4/4/2011 11:27 PM, Bob K wrote:
> Part of this changeover was the porting of my telephone number to
> the new provider...
>
> The release of the telephone number to the cable company took
> longer than I thought it should. To be specific, it was exactly 3
> weeks.
That's how long it was for me (porting from Qwest).
Dave
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2011 09:19:54 -0700 (PDT)
From: Lisa or Jeff <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: "Phone Fight!" cellular litigation
Message-ID: <906dfbb6-afa2-43a9-889c-3a37b53c3008@w21g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>
Newsweek has a graphic on how makers of smart phones are all suing
each other.
http://www.newsweek.com/2011/04/03/phone-fight.html
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2011 16:34:54 +0000 (UTC)
From: "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: New Austin area code confirmed to be hoax
Message-ID: <ini4ne$6d1$2@news.albasani.net>
John Mayson <john@mayson.us> wrote:
>New Austin area code confirmed to be hoax
>http://www.bizjournals.com/austin/news/2011/04/01/new-austin-area-code-plan-confirmed-hoax.html?ana=handmark
Is there something Austin-specific about 834 that people should have
recognized it as humor?
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.
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 (9 messages)
Return to Archives ** Older Issues