|
|
The Telecom Digest for April 22, 2010
Volume 29 : Issue 111 : "text" Format
Messages in this Issue:
Re: Security (David Clayton)
Re: Phone in one hand, ticket in the other (Lee Choquette)
Re: More teens are texting, 75% have cell phones Kenny McCormack)
Re: More teens are texting, 75% have cell phones (Jeff)
Illinois Commerce Commission approves sale of VZ (GTE/Contel) to Frontier (Mark J. Cuccia)
Re: Toll-Free 855 Coming Soon ... (Neal McLain)
====== 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: Wed, 21 Apr 2010 17:50:52 +1000
From: David Clayton <dcstar@myrealbox.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Security
Message-ID: <pan.2010.04.21.07.50.50.41645@myrealbox.com>
On Tue, 20 Apr 2010 14:34:52 -0400, Anonymous wrote:
> In thirteen years of IT work, I had reason to know things about different
> networks. For one, the login/password on EVERY server in the offices of
> EVERY agent for a nationwide insurance company is "Admin/PassWord", or
> something similar.
.......
> Surely my experience is roughly typical - unless I just happened to hit
> the ONLY insecure systems in the country?
>
> Given that there is effectively no security on many or most of the
> networks connected to the Internet - why is there not more havoc created
> by either people who wish us ill or perhaps bored teenagers or Russian
> cyber-criminals?
I used to work with Nortel PBX's, and the number of installations that
still had the "0000" master password (way after initial install) was
frightening.
"Toll fraud" used to be a big issue before all this new-fangled Internet
stuff became prominent, it was no surprise (to me, at least) that both
things were/are happening.
--
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.
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2010 17:25:32 +0000 (UTC)
From: Lee Choquette <leec@xmission.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Phone in one hand, ticket in the other
Message-ID: <hqncec$8sf$1@news.xmission.com>
In article <4BC20AC4.6060308@thadlabs.com>,
Thad Floryan <thad@thadlabs.com> wrote:
>http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/04/08/feds-fund-distracted-driving-traps/
>[...]
>Some police officers say enforcement is difficult because, for instance,
>it can be difficult to tell the difference between a motorist texting
>or dialing a phone, an act not prohibited under any law.
Is dialing a phone safer than talking? I would intuitively think it's
less safe. (Presumably these officers are excluding hands-free voice
dialing.) Of course one should base law on real data and not intuition.
>Studies have shown that drivers talking on a cellphone face four times
>the crash risk of someone not talking on a cellphone, and that the
>risks at least double when a motorist is texting.
Nothing is said about dialing. Did the studies show it was relatively
safe, contrary to intuition?
Lee
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2010 19:33:23 +0000 (UTC)
From: gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack)
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: More teens are texting, 75% have cell phones
Message-ID: <hqnju3$j4f$1@news.xmission.com>
In article <f84c5107-2297-457f-896f-424eec3543b9@j12g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>,
<hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
> Article on MSNBC about teens and cellphones: see:
> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36650790/ns/technology_and_science-wireless/
Is this in the category of: Water is wet?
--
(This discussion group is about C, ...)
Wrong. It is only OCCASIONALLY a discussion group
about C; mostly, like most "discussion" groups, it is
off-topic Rorsharch [sic] revelations of the childhood
traumas of the participants...
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2010 13:50:47 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jeff <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: More teens are texting, 75% have cell phones
Message-ID: <3988956e-978f-4f97-b5bf-f4a5c82af0e9@r1g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>
On Apr 21, 3:33 pm, gaze...@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack)
wrote:
> > Article on MSNBC about teens and cellphones: see:
> >http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36650790/ns/technology_and_science-wireless/
> Is this in the category of: Water is wet?
No, it is not.
The article is comprehensive and goes into detail about trends in
cellphone use; not only who is using them, but what they're using them
for. It has numerous statistics broken down by year, function (ie
voice, text, etc), and age group.
--Jeff.
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2010 18:09:56 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Mark J. Cuccia" <markjcuccia@yahoo.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Illinois Commerce Commission approves sale of VZ (GTE/Contel) to Frontier
Message-ID: <62639.93281.qm@web31101.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
On Wednesday 21-April-2010, the Illinois Commerce Commission (ICC)
approved the sale of remaining legacy GTE and GTE-once-Contel in the
state of Illinois still held by VeriZon, to Frontier.
This makes Illinois the eighth of the nine states required to approve
of the transfer of VeriZon landline operations in some or most of up to
15 states across the US. NOTE that each state agencies' approval only
applies to their own state, and is NOT binding one way or the other on
what happens to any other state where VeriZon is selling exchange areas
to Frontier.
The West Virginia Public Service Commission still needs to approve of
the sale of VeriZon to Frontier in its state. In this case, the sale is
not of any GTE or Contel, but rather the entire BOC, legacy Bell Atlantic/
C&P-of-West-Virginia, from VeriZon to Frontier. Whether or not the WV-PSC
approves, a decision is expected during May or June 2010.
The Federal Communications Commission also needs to approve of the
proposed transaction before any of it (all or part) can actually take
effect. The Federal Trade Commission has already approved of the sale.
Frontier's shareholders have also approved, but approval from VeriZon's
shareholders is not required.
The FCC is expected to give an announcement of whether or not it
approves probably AFTER West Virginia has made its announcement.
My understanding is that this is NOT an "all or nothing" deal, with the
exception of the approvals from the Federal agencies. Each state is
responsible ONLY for its own jurisdiction, with no direct effect on any
other states' situations (with one exception to be mentioned below).
Two/three years ago, with the sale of legacy BOC NYNEX/NET&T in Maine,
New Hampshire, Vermont from VeriZon to FairPoint, ALL THREE states'
regulatory agencies had to approve before ANY of the deal could be
considered effective, however -- as well as the FCC/etc.
There was an Administrative Law Judge in Illinois who a couple of months
ago recommended that the ICC reject the VeriZon/Frontier transaction.
This was NOT binding, as seen by the ICC's unanimous decision today to
approve of the VeriZon/Frontier sale, which applies ONLY to Illinois as
well. (Some news items appeared to state that the Illinois ALJ's
decision applied to the entire deal, and also appeared to state that
the judge's decision was a binding rejection of the entire deal, which
it is NOT in both cases!
There is one small case where the sale of an exchange area in one state
is dependent on that of an adjacent state, and that involves the
Crows-Hematite VA ratecenter, which is at the VA/WV state-line border.
The customers in this ratecenter get their dial-tone from VZ/BA/C&P-WV's
White Sulphur Springs WV c.o.switch. The West Virginia PSC still has to
approve of the sale of legacy BOC C&P-WV from VeriZon to Frontier before
anything can continue forward w/r/t Crows-Hematite VA. Frontier does
have a filing before the Virginia State Corporation Commission to
takeover operation (rates, tariffs, etc) of the Crows-Hematite VA from
VeriZon, assuming that the WV-PSC approves of the sale of legacy BOC
C&P-WV from VeriZon to Frontier.
Of course, ALL of this also still requires approval of the FCC!
An ICC Press Release has been uploaded to their website, dated today,
Wednesday 21-April-2010:
http://www.icc.illinois.gov/downloads/public/Frontierrn%20(2).doc
The actual order hasn't yet been uploaded to the ICC website as of the
time that I'm preparing this posting, but the main page for this
docket/case involving VeriZon and Frontier in Illinois (Case 09-0268)
can be found at:
http://www.icc.illinois.gov/docket/casedetails.aspx?no=09-0268
with relevant documents found at:
http://www.icc.illinois.gov/docket/Documents.aspx?no=09-0268
When Wednesday's actual ICC order is finally issued and uploaded to
their website, probably later on Wednesday night, it will likely be
available from the "documents" page.
Mark J. Cuccia
markjcuccia at yahoo dot com
Lafayette LA, formerly of New Orleans LA pre-Katrina
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2010 19:23:47 -0700 (PDT)
From: Neal McLain <nmclain@annsgarden.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Toll-Free 855 Coming Soon ...
Message-ID: <90bd90fa-db9e-4aa6-bd8f-f928bc2e589a@j21g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>
On Apr 17, 6:43 pm, dwolf...@panix.com (David Wolff) wrote:
> Disney is so big, I wondered why they bothered with the "W" in
> 407-WDISNEY instead of forcing the entire US phone system to allow them
> to use a six-digit subscriber # (407-DISNEY).
If they're that big, they could get their own area code. According to
areacode-info.com, 642 is available. Then their main number could be
642-539-6687.
Neal McLain
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 (6 messages)
|
or 