29 Years of the Digest ... founded August 21, 1981
Add this Digest to your personal
or 
The Telecom Digest for April 29, 2011
Volume 30 : Issue 110 : "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: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 09:04:56 -0400
From: danny burstein <dannyb@panix.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Looks like "fake caller ID" laws are about to get a boost
Message-ID: <Pine.NEB.4.64.1104270853400.2033@panix5.panix.com>
One of the ugly secrets about CNID is how easy it
is to spoof. This has valid purposes, as when a
hospital with whole bunches of offices and affiliates
wants to send over the "main" number. But it's also
got plenty of ugly ones.
It seems that there's a political campaign going
on in Green Bay, Wisconsin. A bunch of folk signed a
"recall petition" against Democrat Dave Hansen.
(Party ID and name here for reference. Rest assured the
other sides utilize similar tricks).
So naturally (and kind-of legitimately, kind of), the
local Democratic party started calling all the people
on the petition (it's public info) to verify that they
really, truly, signed it. (The whole issue of intimidation
is another story, and is a Big Can of political worms).
But... the Caller ID on these calls wasn't the phone
number for the Democratic Party Hq. or a similar group.
Instead it displayed...
... it displayed... the local hospital.
Which, of course, most assuredly got people seeing
it to pick up the phone and answering.
Lots of folk are really, really, pissed.
Oh, the contracted telemarketer claims it was an honest
mistake from when they programmed up their phone system,
and they immediately fixed it.
More info:
a: from a Republican blog:
http://www.wisgop.org/dems-committing-fraud-harassment-in-green-bay/
b: news article:
http://wtaq.com/news/articles/2011/apr/26/aurora-baycare-tied-political-phone-calls/
_____________________________________________________
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
dannyb@panix.com
[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2011 09:07:47 -0700
From: Sam Spade <sam@coldmail.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Looks like "fake caller ID" laws are about to get a boost
Message-ID: <BLydndzDrtNJDSTQnZ2dnUVZ_radnZ2d@giganews.com>
danny burstein wrote:
> One of the ugly secrets about CNID is how easy it
> is to spoof. This has valid purposes, as when a
> hospital with whole bunches of offices and affiliates
> wants to send over the "main" number. But it's also
> got plenty of ugly ones.
>
> It seems that there's a political campaign going
> on in Green Bay, Wisconsin. A bunch of folk signed a
> "recall petition" against Democrat Dave Hansen.
>
> (Party ID and name here for reference. Rest assured the
> other sides utilize similar tricks).
>
> So naturally (and kind-of legitimately, kind of), the
> local Democratic party started calling all the people
> on the petition (it's public info) to verify that they
> really, truly, signed it. (The whole issue of intimidation
> is another story, and is a Big Can of political worms).
>
> But... the Caller ID on these calls wasn't the phone
> number for the Democratic Party Hq. or a similar group.
> Instead it displayed...
>
> ... it displayed... the local hospital.
Why are so many people like sheep? Once they figured out it was not the
hospital they simply should have held down a DTMF button for several
seconds followed by a hang-up.
***** Moderator's Note *****
No, no, NO! Don't hang up!
Think about it: you've already been molested. Why not take one for the
team, and listen to the whole sales pitch?
Telemarketing is a numbers game: if a phone sales sleezoid makes a
sale every n calls, then for every hangup, the salesdroid at the other
end of the phone knows he is now 1/n calls closer to making a
sale. THEY WANT YOU TO HANG UP QUICKLY!
If everyone whom they called took the time to listen to their sales
pitch and then say "No, thank you, but please put me on your
do-not-call list", then the whole industry would be out of business in
two months.
Bill Horne
Moderator
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2011 17:41:20 -0400
From: Pete Cresswell <x@y.Invalid>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Looks like "fake caller ID" laws are about to get a boost
Message-ID: <qnnjr61rrrqsbvt5ne1mk014cpa4grtri5@4ax.com>
Per Sam Spade:
>DTMF button
?
--
PeteCresswell
***** Moderator's Note *****
DTMF means "Dual Tone MultiFrequency". It's another way to say
"Touch Tone", since that's a trademark.
BTW, the tones are a LOT louder on the other end of the call: each
phone has a muting circuit that cuts the volume way down in the
caller's handset, but someone on the other end will get a bad blast of
sound. Police departments now advise those who are receiving obscene
phone calls to push one of the Touch Tone buttons: they used to tell
people to keep a whistle by the phone, but DTMF serves the same
purpose.
And, as I wrote before, I think it's better to listen to the whole
pitch so as to slow the process down and keep the telemarketers from
getting to the next victim that much more quickly.
Bill Horne
Moderator
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2011 11:23:38 -0700 (PDT)
From: Lisa or Jeff <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Looks like "fake caller ID" laws are about to get a boost
Message-ID: <cc6e57e8-37d7-4f76-9bb3-be7c0856bdb3@dn9g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>
On Apr 27, 9:04 am, danny burstein <dan...@panix.com> wrote:
> Oh, the contracted telemarketer claims it was an honest
> mistake from when they programmed up their phone system,
> and they immediately fixed it.
It's amazing how many "honest mistakes" telemarketers have made after
they're caught violating various laws, such as calling people on no-
call lists, claiming someone had an existing relationship when they
did not, calling people in nursing homes or on cell phones, etc.
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2011 17:43:38 -0400
From: Pete Cresswell <x@y.Invalid>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Looks like "fake caller ID" laws are about to get a boost
Message-ID: <jonjr6h5fnk3rgf4kc64j27d010q1ksjs8@4ax.com>
Per Lisa or Jeff:
>
>It's amazing how many "honest mistakes" telemarketers have made after
>they're caught violating various laws, such as calling people on no-
>call lists, claiming someone had an existing relationship when they
>did not, calling people in nursing homes or on cell phones, etc.
It's my take that No-Call is fast becoming moot as more
telemarketers move offshore and spoof numbers.
According to the (rather lame sounding) letters I've been getting
from the Pennsylvania Attorney General's office, there's "nothing
we can do"....
--
PeteCresswell
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2011 17:59:54 -0600
From: Fred Atkinson <fatkinson.remove-this@and-this-too.mishmash.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Looks like "fake caller ID" laws are about to get a boost
Message-ID: <20110429000058.19922.qmail@gal.iecc.com>
I don't believe it.
I almost never get a telemarketing call and my number has
been on the DNC list for nearly three years now.
It works for me.
Regards,
Fred
At 03:43 PM 4/28/2011, you wrote:
>Per Lisa or Jeff:
> >
> >It's amazing how many "honest mistakes" telemarketers have made after
> >they're caught violating various laws, such as calling people on no-
> >call lists, claiming someone had an existing relationship when they
> >did not, calling people in nursing homes or on cell phones, etc.
>
>It's my take that No-Call is fast becoming moot as more
>telemarketers move offshore and spoof numbers.
>
>According to the (rather lame sounding) letters I've been getting
>from the Pennsylvania Attorney General's office, there's "nothing
>we can do"....
>
>--
>PeteCresswell
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 11:08:40 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Apple Q&A on Location Data
Message-ID: <p06240808c9dde0c9c9e2@[192.168.181.130]>
April 27, 2011
Apple Q&A on Location Data
Apple would like to respond to the questions we have recently
received about the gathering and use of location information by our
devices.
1. Why is Apple tracking the location of my iPhone?
...
http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2011/04/27location_qa.html
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2011 06:23:37 -0700
From: Sam Spade <sam@coldmail.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Innocent man busted for child porn after neighbor leached Wi-Fi
Message-ID: <uPOdna3Up7HE9yTQnZ2dnUVZ_rOdnZ2d@giganews.com>
danny burstein wrote:
>
> Perhaps it's also time to have the local (or, in this case,
> Federal) law enforcement types to rethink their gung-ho
> "assault team" attitude when apprehending suspects for
> non-violent crimes, eh?
>
> These people weren't running away, there was no child
> at risk in the home, and 6 AM gunplay can lead to some
> pretty ugly results. On both sides.
They are like Nazis. It's one of many freedoms we have lost in this
once great country.
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2011 14:35:52 +0000 (UTC)
From: tls@panix.com (Thor Lancelot Simon)
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Does FiOS support rotary phones?
Message-ID: <ipbu08$72m$1@reader1.panix.com>
In article <000501cbf189$db2d6530$01fea8c0@dell8100>,
AJB Consulting <ajbcs@frontier.com> wrote:
>Our esteemed moderator wrote:
>
>>***** Moderator's Note *****
>
>>AFAIK, FiOS terminates the "fiber" portion of the path at a local CEV,
>>and the physical layer is Coaxial cable from there to the homes. That,
>>at least, is the way my sister's FiOS install happened, and I don't
>>think the CEV equipment is powered from the CO. That means that FiOS
>>is subject to the same limits as any SLC-served POTS line.
>
>>FWIW. YMMV. My 2 cents.
>
>>Bill Horne
>>Moderator
>
>Bill, what you described sounds more like the AT&T U-verse system.
>
>Every FiOS install I have ever seen uses an ONT [Optical Network
>Termination] in the subscriber's home. The acronym dissects [supposedly]
>to "Fiber In Off the Street," after all... Or else it is named after
>a parish in Northern Spain. ;)
I can confirm this. I happen to have on my desk right now a Verizon
FiOS wiring plan for a 300-unit multiple dwelling in New York City.
It has a separate fiber drop to every apartment and an ONT in each
apartment that is subscribed to Verizon service. It has two layers
of passive optical hubs and no powered components -- or, at least, no
components that require building power. Whether any of the optical
components are actually powered to allow remote testing, etc. I do
not know but would tend to speculate likely not. I believe there
is really, truly, a 300 fiber bundle running in from the street and
that it's not actively multiplexed until that location. Maybe
there are totally passive ways to do DWDM now so the passive "hubs"
in the building actually have unpowered frequency multipliers/dividers
in them -- I do not know.
But it is unquestionably the case that even in multiple dwellings
(and in this case we are talking about 15 separate buildings served
by a single Verizon cable entrance!) VZ does bring the fiber all the
way to the ONT in the customer's home.
--
Thor Lancelot Simon tls@panix.com
And now he couldn't remember when this passion had flown, leaving him so
foolish and bewildered and astray: can any man?
William Styron
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2011 15:55:57 +0000 (UTC)
From: tls@panix.com (Thor Lancelot Simon)
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Does FiOS support rotary phones?
Message-ID: <ipc2md$mml$1@reader1.panix.com>
In article <ipbu08$72m$1@reader1.panix.com>,
Thor Lancelot Simon <tls@panix.com> wrote:
>
>not know but would tend to speculate likely not. I believe there
>is really, truly, a 300 fiber bundle running in from the street and
>that it's not actively multiplexed until that location. Maybe
>there are totally passive ways to do DWDM now so the passive "hubs"
>in the building actually have unpowered frequency multipliers/dividers
>in them -- I do not know.
I have looked into this a bit more; the above is not really correct in
two important respects.
1) The fiber "hubs" used by Verizon appear to be passive optical
beam splitters/combiners. The network is fully broadcast for
downstream communications with a link layer beneath any standard
Ethernet framing that emulates point-to-point Ethernet behavior
(it would certainly seem that since there is a single downstream
transmitter collisions really aren't possible so this should not
be hard). Downstream transmissions are encrypted so that, in theory,
only a specific ONT can decrypt them.
Upstream is a little funny. The upstream signal supposedly
propagates only towards the head end (how this is done optically
I do not know but I'm sure it's possible), so encryption is not
used. I don't know how the head end handles collisions though
it appears TDM in the upstream direction is used to attempt to
assure they do not occur.
2) Fully passive DWDM/CWDM equipment is, in fact, available from several
suppliers, but use of it in a PON deployment such as FiOS would be,
at least, not something that is standardized.
So, the diagram I have that shows VZ entering the building in question
with two fibers -- not 300 -- is almost certainly correct in that detail,
and I was speaking whereof I knew not.
--
Thor Lancelot Simon tls@panix.com
And now he couldn't remember when this passion had flown, leaving him so
foolish and bewildered and astray: can any man?
William Styron
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2011 14:37:56 +0000 (UTC)
From: tls@panix.com (Thor Lancelot Simon)
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Does FiOS support rotary phones?
Message-ID: <ipbu44$72m$2@reader1.panix.com>
In article <incs58$5lr$1@reader1.panix.com>,
David Lesher <wb8foz@panix.com> wrote:
>>***** Moderator's Note *****
>
>> I suppose it's possible that the cable which came in from the street
>> was, in fact, a fiber-optic cable: the Verizon tech told me it was
>> coaxial, but that might be a misnomer.
>
>> The tech told me that the cable used "Moca" format, and when I asked
>> how it compared to Docsis, he just said "It's better".
>
>> I'll leave it to the experts to explain my confusion away.
>
>He's the confused one....not you.
>
>I see no way that Verizontal ever puts the ONT anywhere but inside the
>residence, for a basic reason: what would power it out there on the
>pole? Further, since it's the vict^H^H^H^H subscriber's job to not
>just supply it power but also buy & install new batteries..who will
>climb the pole...?
>
>Obviously in a MDU, where there's one multiport unit; it's slightly
>different. There, your unit does get POTS via existing twisted pair
>and TV & TCP/IP via MOCA/coax.
It's not different. This isn't how Verizon wires multiple dwellings,
likely because they do not want to maintain or are (with good reason)
concerned they could not get permission to install duplicative coax
cable in structures already served by the local cableco.
--
Thor Lancelot Simon tls@panix.com
And now he couldn't remember when this passion had flown, leaving him so
foolish and bewildered and astray: can any man?
William Styron
Date: 28 Apr 2011 10:58:15 -0400
From: tls@panix.com (Thor Lancelot Simon)
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Need a large PBX.
Message-ID: <ipbva7$7ji$1@panix5.panix.com>
I have a somewhat pressing need to replace an existing 400-extension
PBX which cannot be easily converted to VoIP and for which Centrex
service would not be economical (no surprise there).
I am pricing several options but I'm no longer up to date on what's
available in the unfashionable traditional-PBX marketplace. What should
I be looking at, and what's it likely to run me? Voicemail and a
dial-by-name attendant are requirements though I can bolt on an IVR system
of some kind for those if it's more cost effective.
Almost all traffic is local to the PBX. The minimal outside traffic
is currently handled by 10 ground-start trunks but this particular
aspect of the system could, of course, be replaced by something more
modern. Elsewise, I really do want a plain vanilla old fashioned PBX.
Not that anyone seems to want to sell me one of those these days.
--
Thor Lancelot Simon tls@panix.com
And now he couldn't remember when this passion had flown, leaving him so
foolish and bewildered and astray: can any man?
William Styron
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2011 11:16:40 -0700 (PDT)
From: Lisa or Jeff <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: An intersting use for phone relays
Message-ID: <ff9cd116-46b1-4b16-9136-cc1ffbc5c086@x10g2000vbn.googlegroups.com>
On Apr 22, 4:13 pm, T <kd1s.nos...@cox.nospam.net> wrote:
> Check this out. I think it's an awesome use of discarded technology.
>
> http://hackaday.com/2010/11/18/electromechanical-computer-built-from-
> relays/
Along these lines, the Bell System Technical Journal had a 1950
article discussing relay memory requirements for telephone
exchanges. Relays could have two stable states. Rather technical in
terms of math.
http://www.alcatel-lucent.com/bstj/vol29-1950/articles/bstj29-3-343.pdf
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 (13 messages)
Return to Archives ** Older Issues