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
| Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2014 06:29:17 +0000
From: MotoFox <dvbugz@invalid.sdf.org>
To: telecomdigestsubmissions.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Telephony nostalgia - dialing POP-CORN for free time of day
Message-ID: <lss6j6$gi3$1@motofox-rules.dont-email.me>
On Sat, 17 May 2014 21:19:23 -0700, Thad Floryan <thad@thadlabs.com>> wrote:
> All things come to an end and it looks like the time of day service
> that has been offered by one company or another since 1929 is ending.
> On Sept 19th, you will no longer get the time of day when you call
> POP-CORN in Northern California. Or 853-XXXX in Southern California.
In discussions of the end of telephone time and weather services, one
thing I notice seems to be overlooked is that in most urbanised NPAs,
there's bound to be at least one active airport or private airfield.
Airports, especially those wherein the National Weather Service has a
presence, operate weather announcement machines that provide weather
information and Zulu time to pilots in a standardised format, using a
computerised voice. These are called ASOS services, and are usually
available via VHF radio broadcasts and telephone. (This is different
from ATIS, which also generally includes information about the
airport's runway and facilities, though in some very small airfields
like KVUO the ASOS broadcast is the ATIS.) Thus, most NPAs should
have at least one or more ASOS lines you can call into to obtain the
time and the local weather.
ASOS lines are intended for civilian public usage and apart from
regular long-distance tolls, it costs nothing to call an ASOS. In my
part of 503, the magic number is 284-6771 (try it). These things are
all over the nation; the Web site airnav.com lists them along with the
radio frequencies (attention monitors!) for each local airport, thus
it is a valuable resource to obtain your local ASOS number/s. Weather
reports are given in metric and nautical measurements, but all one has
to know to obtain their local time is their time zone's offset from
GMT - for me it's -0800 (or -0700 when daylight time is in effect).
Thus, while the telephone companies may be discontinuing their
private, (usually) ad-based time services for whatever reason, time
and weather via telephone is far from dead.
References:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automated_Surface_Observing_System |
| Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2014 21:28:19 -0400
From: Bill Horne <bill@horneQRM.net>
To: telecomdigestsubmissions.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: This has got to stop
Message-ID: <lsrkrk$rse$1@dont-email.me>
I'm like many Americans: I like to watch films or tv shows on NetFlix.
Comcast and NetFlix recently signed an agreement which ended Comcast's
throttling of NetFlix content. Not surprisingly, NetFlix performance
to Comcast customers increased dramatically after the agreement.
Verizon and NetFlix have not come to terms yet: presumably because
Verizon wants a bigger cut than Comcast. I have a Verizon ADSL line,
not because I like or dislike Comcast, but because it's the least-cost
option for getting reasonable speed for my computer.
Except, NetFlix isn't being delivered reasonably: Verizon is
throttling NetFlix at ever-more-aggressive rates, so that anything I
watch is being interrupted every few minutes while my Roku player
buffers content.
I'd ask if there was someone in the FCC whom is responsible for
investigating what I think is obvious coercion, but I think the answer
is also obvious.
--
Bill Horne
(Remove QRM from my address to write to me directly)
|
| Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2014 16:54:37 -0400
From: Fred Goldstein <fg_es@ionaryQRM.com>
To: telecomdigestsubmissions.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: This has got to stop
Message-ID: <lstp5v$ek2$1@dont-email.me>
On 8/17/2014 9:28 PM, Bill Horne wrote:
> I'm like many Americans: I like to watch films or tv shows on NetFlix.
>
> Comcast and NetFlix recently signed an agreement which ended Comcast's
> throttling of NetFlix content. Not surprisingly, NetFlix performance
> to Comcast customers increased dramatically after the agreement.
>
> Verizon and NetFlix have not come to terms yet: presumably because
> Verizon wants a bigger cut than Comcast. I have a Verizon ADSL line,
> not because I like or dislike Comcast, but because it's the least-cost
> option for getting reasonable speed for my computer.
>
> Except, NetFlix isn't being delivered reasonably: Verizon is
> throttling NetFlix at ever-more-aggressive rates, so that anything I
> watch is being interrupted every few minutes while my Roku player
> buffers content.
>
> I'd ask if there was someone in the FCC whom is responsible for
> investigating what I think is obvious coercion, but I think the answer
> is also obvious.
>
Nothing going on there is even within the FCC's actual jurisdiction, let
alone in violation of any rule. After all, this is about content
distribution, not telecom. Netflix doesn't own wire and doesn't even
want to rent any. It's just servers in data centers, a big computing and
content-leasing company. There is always the possibility of an
antitrust issue, but what is VZ doing that competes with Netflix?
The problem with Netflix is that they assume that the cost of Internet
bandwidth is precisely zero. They come across this because the retail
price of wireline bandwidth -- that is, what most ISPs charge home
subscribers per byte transferred -- is not metered, and thus zero. To
be sure, for most ISPs (urban cable and telco), the cost per bit has
been so low that it really wasn't worth fretting about. The cost of
providing service was in the fixed physical plant, not the usage.
But Netflix takes that "too small to meter" cost, which turns out to be
not quite zero after all, and multiplies it many fold. It puts so much
load on the network that it alone can force an upgrade of routers, an
increase in the number of switching systems or multiplexing nodes. And
it does this via streaming, which is relatively inelastic, compared at
least to TCP, which the network was after all designed around.
TCP uses capacity elastically: Dropped packets cause it to slow down,
creating an endless sawtooth pattern of end-to-end rates. So it can
adapt from dial-up speed to gigabit fiber. Streaming however needs a
minimum speed. Netflix, to their credit, does attempt to monitor the
connection and regularly adjust its streaming rate, and video quality,
to what works. But it still imposes a massive load on ISPs, which can
displace or degrade other applications.
So ISPs naturally want to be compensated for the load. And Netflix
doesn't want to pay. Netflix thinks its content is so groovy that ISPs
should be willing to upgrade their networks to accommodate its demands.
ISPs think otherwise.
This is the whole point of the traditional Internet business model -- it
is a voluntary agreement to exchange traffic for mutual benefit. And
mutual benefit often involves money to create that mutual balance.
Frankly I think the cable companies should be required to let Netflix
rent space on their Video on Demand servers, so that users can watch
cable shows the way their choice of diety intended them to. And then
the Internet can do the stuff that only it can do, not waste the bulk of
its capacity on TV. But it isn't working out that way. Netflix is thus
trying to use regulatory pressure to change the Internet's business
model to favor it. They want the Internet's wholesale prices to be
regulated so that TV distributors pay ISPs nothing. And once the FCC
starts regulating that, who knows what other aspects of crazy telecom
rate regulation will show up? Sorry, but I'd rather let Netflix play by
the Internet's rules than make the Internet kowtow to it.
***** Moderator's Note *****
Please do not use the word "invalid" in domain names. The Majordomo
server which distributes this email reacts to "invalid" by removing
the sender's name from the email.
It's OK to obfuscate your email address (see the F.A.Q.), but putting
"invalid" into your domain name causes more problems than it solves.
Bill Horne
Moderator
|
| Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2014 15:58:33 -0700
From: John David Galt <jdg@remove-this.diogenes.sacramento.ca.us>
To: telecomdigestsubmissions.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: This has got to stop
Message-ID: <lsu0eq$g6c$1@blue-new.rahul.net>
On 2014-08-18 13:54, Fred Goldstein wrote:
> The problem with Netflix is that they assume that the cost of Internet
> bandwidth is precisely zero. They come across this because the retail
> price of wireline bandwidth -- that is, what most ISPs charge home
> subscribers per byte transferred -- is not metered, and thus zero. To
> be sure, for most ISPs (urban cable and telco), the cost per bit has
> been so low that it really wasn't worth fretting about. The cost of
> providing service was in the fixed physical plant, not the usage.
Horse hockey.
Netflix is not using Verizon's bandwidth. Verizon's own subscribers --
who have already paid for that bandwidth -- are using what is theirs, and
Verizon is only dragging Netflix's name into the fray to distract us all
from the simple fact that Verizon is trying to cheat its paying customers.
What this tells me is that there is too little competition in the telecom
industry -- otherwise Verizon would never dare try to throttle any site --
and the feds not only should be vetoing the pending ComCast merger and any
more like it, they should be breaking up the existing giants, especially
Verizon and AT&T, into smaller companies once more.
|
| Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2014 18:53:58 -0500
From: GlowingBlueMist <GlowingBlueMist@remove-this.blackhole.io>
To: telecomdigestsubmissions.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: This has got to stop
Message-ID: <lsu3rm$go6$1@dont-email.me>
On 8/17/2014 8:28 PM, Bill Horne wrote:
> I'm like many Americans: I like to watch films or tv shows on NetFlix.
>
> Comcast and NetFlix recently signed an agreement which ended Comcast's
> throttling of NetFlix content. Not surprisingly, NetFlix performance
> to Comcast customers increased dramatically after the agreement.
>
> Verizon and NetFlix have not come to terms yet: presumably because
> Verizon wants a bigger cut than Comcast. I have a Verizon ADSL line,
> not because I like or dislike Comcast, but because it's the least-cost
> option for getting reasonable speed for my computer.
>
> Except, NetFlix isn't being delivered reasonably: Verizon is
> throttling NetFlix at ever-more-aggressive rates, so that anything I
> watch is being interrupted every few minutes while my Roku player
> buffers content.
>
> I'd ask if there was someone in the FCC whom is responsible for
> investigating what I think is obvious coercion, but I think the answer
> is also obvious.
>
This is one reason VPN providers are becoming so popular.
Stick your NetFlix in a VPN tunnel and most times you eliminate those
pesky problems like interruptions.
There are free as well as paid VPN providers on the market making it
possible to test with a free VPN provider and later switching to a paid
one should you want to spend some cash or get different "pay to play"
features.
Check out the article and especially the video at this link for an
example of NetFlix over a VPN on a Verizon feed.
http://lifehacker.com/use-a-vpn-to-bypass-your-isps-throttling-of-netflix-or-1608538080
I agree it's only a work around but it is one way to get what you want
with out dealing with Verizon's crap.
|
| Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2014 21:29:25 -0500
From: Doug McIntyre <merlyn@dork.geeks.org>
To: telecomdigestsubmissions.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: How Verizon lets its copper network decay to force phone customers onto fiber
Message-ID: <ccqdnbjuwuKY-GzOnZ2dnUU7-VGdnZ2d@giganews.com>
rvh40@remove-this.insightbb.com writes:
> There is a small number of companies in any location which accept
> metal for recycling.
> If Joe Schmoe shows up at the depot with a truckbed full of copper
> cable, they know he didn't come across it legitimately.
How's that?
There are many legit recyclers of large trucks full of copper cabling.
Ie. datacomm techs routinely pull old dead comm cable from the
ceilings when they retrofit a space. That ancient 25-pair and cat3
just goes onto the truck for recycling.
I also know my electrician collects all his junk wire for recycling,
and eventually saves up trash barrels full of it to go on a recycling
run.
--
Doug McIntyre
doug@themcintyres.us
|
| Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2014 19:05:17 -0400
From: bill@horneQRM.net (Bill Horne)
To: telecomdigestsubmissions.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: FCC issues $100,000 NAL
Message-ID: <20140818230517.GA21515@telecom.csail.mit.edu>
I just got an email that alerted me to this news: the Federal
Communications Commission has issued an Notice of Apparent Liability
for forfeiture (NAL) to an Oklahoma LEC, charging negligence in
routing 911 traffic and proposiing a $100,000 fine.
This is from the FCC website:
- - - - - - - -
1. 911 is the single most critical tool for citizen emergency
communications. The American public universally relies upon 911 in a
time of crisis. When there is an emergency citizens can, should, and
do trust that when they call 911, someone will answer the phone. The
Hinton Telephone Company of Hinton, Oklahoma, Inc. (Hinton)
undermined that trust and betrayed its customers when for several
months in 2013 it apparently routed 911 calls from Caddo County,
Oklahoma, to an automated AT&T operator message which instructed
callers to "hang up and dial 911" if their call is an emergency. That
trust was further betrayed when Hinton allegedly continued to allow
911 calls to be routed to the automated message for three months after
the company discovered the problem. The company returned the system to
functionality only after being contacted by FCC investigators and
directed to do so. This is manifestly unacceptable. This betrayal is
particularly egregious and dangerous for a rural community like Caddo
County, Oklahoma, whose residents may be far from help and most in
need of reliable and efficient emergency communications. The
Commission's 911 rules are intended to ensure that emergency calls are
routed properly and always result in contact with public safety
personnel. Hinton apparently failed to use reasonable judgment in
routing its Caddo County customers' 911 calls, willfully and
repeatedly violating our rules, and created a significant threat to
the life and property of the residents of Caddo County, Oklahoma. This
is unconscionable and warrants a substantial penalty. We propose to
fine Hinton $100,000.
Rest at
http://www.fcc.gov/document/100k-nal-oklahoma-carrier-sending-911-calls-autorecording
--
Bill Horne
(Remove QRM from my email address to write to me directly)
|
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 educational service offered to
the Internet 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 © 2014 E. William Horne. All rights reserved.
Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as
yourself. Thank you!
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.
