|
|
Message Digest
Volume 28 : Issue 122 : "text" Format
Messages in this Issue:
Nice interface to Telecom-Digest
Re: AT&T doubling 3G capacity
News readers, was Re: AT&T doubling 3G capacity
Re: Waveguide (was "size a major consideration...")
Re: Waveguide (was "size a major consideration...")
Re: Waveguide (was "size a major consideration...")
Re: AT&T to discontinue CallVantage voip service
Re: FiOS in MDU Buildings
Re: FiOS in MDU Buildings
Nebraska commission loses appeal on Internet call fees
Re: Nebraska commission loses appeal on Internet call fees
Re: Nebraska commission loses appeal on Internet call fees
====== 27 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: Mon, 27 Apr 2009 14:10:38 -0500
From: "schmerold2@gmail.com" <schmerold2@gmail.com>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Nice interface to Telecom-Digest
Message-ID: <49F6032E.6010307@gmail.com>
I spent quite a bit of time digging around for the instructions to
change my email address on this list. Yesterday, I found:
http://lists.services.net/cgi-bin/mj_wwwusr/domain=telecom-digest.org
For whatever reason, this site made more sense to me than what I found
on http://telecom-digest.org
Hope this helps someone....
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 02 May 2009 10:40:37 -0500
From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi)
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: AT&T doubling 3G capacity
Message-ID: <GoKdnWkS_aLo9GHUnZ2dnUVZ_hZi4p2d@posted.nuvoxcommunications>
In article <gtga2d$8fl$1@panix2.panix.com>,
Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote:
>Dan Lanciani <ddl@danlan.com> wrote:
>>|***** Moderator's Note *****
>>|
>>|Is Readnews Open Source?
>>
>>Yes, it is part of B news. But it is very, very old. I'm probably
>>the only person still running it...
>
>Out of curiosity, have you considered upgrading to a more modern
>newsreader, like rn?
>--scott
>
>--
>"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
>
>***** Moderator's Note *****
>
>Scott,
>
>Please publish a list of the newsreaders and combined email/news
>clients available for open source users. I'm particularly interested
>in software for the KDE environment.
Look at 'knews', and 'trn', for a start.
------------------------------
Date: 2 May 2009 23:15:55 -0000
From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: News readers, was Re: AT&T doubling 3G capacity
Message-ID: <20090502231555.56928.qmail@simone.iecc.com>
>Please publish a list of the newsreaders and combined email/news
>clients available for open source users. I'm particularly interested
>in software for the KDE environment.
Evolution and Thunderbird come to mind.
Personally, I still prefer using trn in a shell window, because its
threading and killfiles are better than the competition.
R's,
John
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 02 May 2009 21:35:34 GMT
From: Howard Eisenhauer <howarde@REMOVECAPShfx.eastlink.ca>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Waveguide (was "size a major consideration...")
Message-ID: <jdepv45644ebu932478ko767gs1f376mue@4ax.com>
On Sat, 2 May 2009 09:49:39 -0400 (EDT), Neal McLain
<nmclain@annsgarden.com> wrote:
>Temporary moderator wrote:
>
>> I'm surprised at the difference in loss of waveguide vs. coax:
>> all the cell sites I've ever seen appear to use coax, so either
>> they're using the flexible type [of waveguide] or the cellular
>> engineers are employing the coax loss to contribute a large part
>> of their loss budget for the antenna arrays being used.
>
It does indeed contribute a lot of loss, typically 3db. Wave guide
would be alot more efficient but for the frequencies used for cellular
(850-900 Mhz), or even the PCS bands (~2000 MHz) it would be
impractical due to size.
>I think what you're seeing on cell towers is flexible waveguide
>("Heliax"): http://tinyurl.com/cudezg
*Snip*
"Heliax" (Andrews trade name) as used on cell towers is actually a
hard line coax, not wave guide. There is a w/g product thats very hard
to tell from the hardline from more than a few feet away but the w/g
generally has an oval cross section where the hardline is round. The
lowest frequency I've seen the w/g used for is 6 GHz.
H.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 3 May 2009 18:57:38 -0400
From: T <kd1s.nospam@cox.nospam.net>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Waveguide (was "size a major consideration...")
Message-ID: <MPG.2467eb6a1d9da90c9899f9@reader.motzarella.org>
In article <jdepv45644ebu932478ko767gs1f376mue@4ax.com>,
howarde@REMOVECAPShfx.eastlink.ca says...
>
> On Sat, 2 May 2009 09:49:39 -0400 (EDT), Neal McLain
> <nmclain@annsgarden.com> wrote:
>
> >Temporary moderator wrote:
> >
> >> I'm surprised at the difference in loss of waveguide vs. coax:
> >> all the cell sites I've ever seen appear to use coax, so either
> >> they're using the flexible type [of waveguide] or the cellular
> >> engineers are employing the coax loss to contribute a large part
> >> of their loss budget for the antenna arrays being used.
> >
>
> It does indeed contribute a lot of loss, typically 3db. Wave guide
> would be alot more efficient but for the frequencies used for cellular
> (850-900 Mhz), or even the PCS bands (~2000 MHz) it would be
> impractical due to size.
[Moderator snip]
I've dealth with hardline for amateur radio repeaters. Tough to work
with but fairly low loss on 70cm.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 03 May 2009 09:30:08 +1000
From: David Clayton <dcstar@myrealbox.com>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Waveguide (was "size a major consideration...")
Message-ID: <pan.2009.05.02.23.30.07.683270@myrealbox.com>
On Sat, 02 May 2009 09:49:39 -0400, Neal McLain wrote:
........
> These systems used the same off-the-shelf RF transmission components --
> antennas, radomes, waveguide, connectors -- that manufacturers were making
> for other industries. At the time, Andrew was the biggest manufacturer in
> the business. You could see those big Andrew microwave antennas (easily
> identified by the red "lightning flash" logo on the radome) hanging on
> water towers in small towns all across America.
.......
I thought the big "lightning flash" was a generic warning logo for any
microwave transmitter? (having seen them on the Telco towers here in
Australia).
--
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: 2 May 2009 23:06:20 -0000
From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: AT&T to discontinue CallVantage voip service
Message-ID: <20090502230620.54279.qmail@simone.iecc.com>
>Does Lingo require a separate router like Vonage does, or will it work
>with a PC directly. Will Lingo operate directly with Asterisk?
It's like Vonage, they send you a TA that is locked to their service,
or you can get a TA integrated into a router. To answer someone
else's question, Primus is bankrupt but they seem to have plenty of
cash so I think they're unlikely to go away any time soon.
The only two-way service I know of that lets you provide your own SIP
device is Broadvoice. Dunno what their financial situation is, but
they have been around for a while.
The options for small-scale SIP are frustratingly limited. For
outbound, I can recommend the service from a German company called
Betamax who sell through sites like voip-discount.com. Their rates
are quite low, 10 euros credit gets you 120 days of free calls to most
of the developed world, and you use the credit for the few calls
(mobiles mostly) that aren't free. Voice quality is good, no call
features like three-way, you do that with Asterisk. I use Voxbone for
inbound calls, but they don't accept small customers any more and have
a 500 line minimum.
R's,
John
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 2 May 2009 16:08:43 -0700 (PDT)
From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: FiOS in MDU Buildings
Message-ID: <43a97d06-2f40-442d-9dbe-3a903a0ba579@21g2000vbk.googlegroups.com>
On May 2, 11:25 am, Neal McLain <nmcl...@annsgarden.com> wrote:
> Question for Lisa: has Verizon installed FiOS in your building yet?
They're still working on it. Part of the issue is where and how the
lines will be run to get into a unit. Mgmt isn't very interested in
it and they absolutely don't want any new external wires or boxes
outside of buildings.
I was looking forward to getting it mainly to dump the cable
company. But FIOS requires a large terminal box and battery box and
lasts only 8 hours if there's a power failure. Ironically, this is a
return to "local battery" service instead of "common battery" service,
and I'm not too thrilled about that.
***** Moderator's Note *****
I think building owners are more concerned about having to let anyone
drill holes in their walls: IANALB, if they let Verizon do it, then I
think the CLEC's get "Most Favored Nation" status too.
The only way around the problem would be for the building owner to run
fiber to every apartment and require every ILEC or CLEC to hook on at
the same demarc. However, that's a can of worms in itself, since there
are so many different types of fiber and connectors.
As far as the power problem goes, you can keep a deactivated cell
phone in your house, and use it for 911 calls if the FiOS terminal is
dead. (He said, while ducking).
Bill Horne
Temporary Moderator
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 3 May 2009 11:26:44 -0700 (PDT)
From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: FiOS in MDU Buildings
Message-ID: <d1b63af9-430b-4a6e-b977-310c94da4ea2@r34g2000vbi.googlegroups.com>
> ***** Moderator's Note *****
>
> I think building owners are more concerned about having to let anyone
> drill holes in their walls: IANALB, if they let Verizon do it, then I
> think the CLEC's get "Most Favored Nation" status too.
I should've mentioned they were burned by the cable company. When
cable first came through, run by a local outfit, they were very
accomodating and wiring discretely. But now it's a national outfit,
they literally throw wires over roofs, across sidewalks, and refuse to
come back and do it right. I don't blame mgmt for being nervous about
new wiring coming in and new holes drilled.
What does "IANALB" mean?
> The only way around the problem would be for the building owner to run
> fiber to every apartment and require every ILEC or CLEC to hook on at
> the same demarc. However, that's a can of worms in itself, since there
> are so many different types of fiber and connectors.
In our community, at least, the condo won't do its own wiring (at
least I hope not).
It wouldn't be as much of an issue if they could trust the utilities,
but they've been burned. (Unfortunately, they share some of the blame
by not having past agreements put in writing or asking for too much.)
> As far as the power problem goes, you can keep a deactivated cell
> phone in your house, and use it for 911 calls if the FiOS terminal is
> dead. (He said, while ducking).
A deactivated cell phone would probably be forgetten and when it's
needed (assuming it could be found), its battery probably would be
worn down.
Further, if there was a serious extended power failure the cell towers
probably would be dead, too, since their batteries aren't so great.
I realize the odds of an _extended_ power failure are low. But we
have had them.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 2 May 2009 21:57:29 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Fred Goodwin, CMA" <fgoodwin@sbcglobal.net>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Nebraska commission loses appeal on Internet call fees
Message-ID: <2324054c-ec3b-46e9-ad8b-ab4a4f16ca13@l5g2000vbc.googlegroups.com>
Nebraska commission loses appeal on Internet call fees
http://tech.yahoo.com/news/ap/20090501/ap_on_hi_te/ne_internet_calls_2
By MARGERY A. GIBBS, Associated Press Writer
Fri May 1, 2009 4:08PM EDT
OMAHA, Neb.
A federal appeals court has upheld a lower court ruling exempting
Internet phone service provider Vonage Holdings Corp. from paying a
state telephone fee.
In an opinion released Friday, a three-member panel of the 8th U.S.
Circuit Court of Appeals rejected arguments from members of the
Nebraska Public Service Commission. The PSC had been trying to force
Vonage and its customers to pay into the state's Universal Service
Fund.
All traditional phone companies pay into the Universal Service Fund.
But Voice over Internet Protocol - or VoIP - providers such as
Holmdel, N.J.-based Vonage say they provide an information service
rather than a telecommunications service.
Traditional telephone providers have argued that VoIP services should
be subject to the same oversight and fee requirements that they face.
But VoIP providers say they should be classified as a data service
provider and left alone, much as cable TV companies have been. Vonage
offers Internet voice service by leasing transmission lines from
telephone and cable companies.
[excerpted]
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 03 May 2009 09:14:09 -0600
From: Robert Neville <dont@bother.com>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Nebraska commission loses appeal on Internet call fees
Message-ID: <rncrv4hk6sllhc1ad6muoq6r3kak959v8h@4ax.com>
> The [Nebraska] PSC had been trying to force
>Vonage and its customers to pay into the state's Universal Service Fund.
>
>All traditional phone companies pay into the Universal Service Fund.
>But Voice over Internet Protocol - or VoIP - providers such as
>Holmdel, N.J.-based Vonage say they provide an information service
>rather than a telecommunications service.
A point of clarification here: this ruling pertains to a state that was
attempting to force Vonage to fund a state USF. This is on top of, but separate
from the Federal USF. Vonage is still required to fund the Federal USF, as well
as Federal Relay and local 911 centers.
One might wonder why, if Vonage has been declared that it is an information
service and not a voice service, that it is required to fund any of those.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 3 May 2009 11:31:04 -0700 (PDT)
From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Nebraska commission loses appeal on Internet call fees
Message-ID: <f7ff49d1-b40f-4459-a76f-189892094af1@e14g2000vbe.googlegroups.com>
On May 3, 9:58 am, "Fred Goodwin, CMA" <fgood...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> A federal appeals court has upheld a lower court ruling exempting
> Internet phone service provider Vonage Holdings Corp. from paying a
> state telephone fee.
> All traditional phone companies pay into the Universal Service Fund.
> But Voice over Internet Protocol - or VoIP - providers such as
> Holmdel, N.J.-based Vonage say they provide an information service
> rather than a telecommunications service.
Nonsense. They're providing telecommunications service.
> Traditional telephone providers have argued that VoIP services should
> be subject to the same oversight and fee requirements that they face.
Correctly so.
> But VoIP providers say they should be classified as a data service
> provider and left alone, much as cable TV companies have been. Vonage
> offers Internet voice service by leasing transmission lines from
> telephone and cable companies.
Ok, but then don't force the telephone companies to lease lines for
their use or accept calls for them.
You'd think by now the country would've learned the dangers of cream
skimming and stilted playing fields.
At least the PSC had it right.
>
> [excerpted]
------------------------------
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 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.
The Telecom Digest is currently being moderated by Bill Horne while
Pat Townson recovers from a stroke.
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) 2008 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 (12 messages)
******************************
|
or 