29 Years of the Digest ... founded August 21, 1981
Add this Digest to your personal
or 
The Telecom Digest for June 30, 2011
Volume 30 : Issue 160 : "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, 29 Jun 2011 02:26:36 -0700
From: Sam Spade <sam@coldmail.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: FCC to Caller ID spoofers: STOP IT
Message-ID: <Vv2dnWfFr7NRcpfTnZ2dnUVZ_gqdnZ2d@giganews.com>
danny burstein wrote:
>
> Under the Act, callers are still permitted to alter caller ID
> information if their purposes are not harmful or fraudulent. For
> example, domestic violence shelters may have important reasons for not
> revealing the actual number of the shelter, and doctors responding to
> after-hours messages from patients may choose to transmit their office
> numbers rather than their cell phone numbers.
I don't see how technically a doctor could do that.
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2011 11:38:24 -0400
From: Matt Simpson <net-news69@jmatt.net>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: FCC to Caller ID spoofers: STOP IT
Message-ID: <net-news69-0D7140.11382429062011@news.toast.net>
In article <Vv2dnWfFr7NRcpfTnZ2dnUVZ_gqdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
Sam Spade <sam@coldmail.com> wrote:
> danny burstein wrote:
>
> >
> > Under the Act, callers are still permitted to alter caller ID
> > information if their purposes are not harmful or fraudulent. For
> > example, domestic violence shelters may have important reasons for not
> > revealing the actual number of the shelter, and doctors responding to
> > after-hours messages from patients may choose to transmit their office
> > numbers rather than their cell phone numbers.
>
> I don't see how technically a doctor could do that.
With a smartphone, use a VOIP application that allows customization of
outbound caller ID. For example, I have Skype on my iPhone, and I have
it set up to send my Google Voice number as the caller ID.
Most systems that allow this do require some kind of verification that
the supplied number is "controlled" by the caller. I think when I set
up Skype, it gave me a verification code online and then called the
number and asked me to enter the code. So it doesn't allow random
spoofing, but the scenario of transmitting an office number instead of
the cellphone number is possible with VOIP.
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2011 02:30:57 -0700
From: Sam Spade <sam@coldmail.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Battery power support today
Message-ID: <juidnbH5QfJPbZfTnZ2dnUVZ_uGdnZ2d@giganews.com>
David Lesher wrote:
> T <kd1s.nospam@cox.nospam.net> writes:
>
> [call blocked during NE Blackout]
>
>
>>Probably because while the central offices were fully backed up, the T
>>carriers probably had no redundant power at the repeater points. That
>>resulted in trunk losage, no doubt.
>
>
> I've never seen T-carrier run off anything but loop voltage, aka
> span power. That's why there's 130 vdc to bite you when you are
> on the pair...
>
> And since that span power is appled by/at the CO..
>
That is my recollection as well.
The exception was a pair-gain provision such as the Bell Systems SLC 96,
which was used in rural areas and in areas of rapid residential
construction. I believe the terminating SLC 96 box had to have local
power. Anyone know differently?
I imagine SLC 96s are long gone for residential suburban areas but they
likely still exist in some rural areas.
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2011 15:26:41 +0000 (UTC)
From: David Lesher <wb8foz@panix.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Battery power support today
Message-ID: <iufg7h$6q4$1@reader1.panix.com>
Sam Spade <sam@coldmail.com> writes:
>The exception was a pair-gain provision such as the Bell Systems SLC 96,
>which was used in rural areas and in areas of rapid residential
>construction. I believe the terminating SLC 96 box had to have local
>power. Anyone know differently?
Oh yes, SLC's need power.
>I imagine SLC 96s are long gone for residential suburban areas
>but they likely still exist in some rural areas.
I was just in Aptos/Watsonville CA region, and there are
SLC-96's on every other corner. The giveway is the line of
shiny T1 repeater cans feeding same.
I'd be far happier if they were SLC-FO's as then I could get
Hi-Cap from them.
But that's not to say the SLC powers the T1 feeding it. I assume
that if the T span was long enough, it would be powered from
both ends. [I don't know how many repeaters you could run on
span power but it had to be a lot...]
--
A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz@nrk.com
& no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX
Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 23:28:52 +0000 (UTC)
From: David Scheidt <dscheidt@panix.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Flash Exploits on the Loose: Update Now
Message-ID: <iudo3k$ntd$1@reader1.panix.com>
AES <siegman@stanford.edu> wrote:
:In article
:<1309182911.46972.YahooMailClassic@web34204.mail.mud.yahoo.com>,
: "John C. Fowler" <johnfpublic@yahoo.com> wrote:
:>
:> "App" is a fuzzy term which could mean anything running on your
:> computer at all if you stretched it enough.
:>
:Agreed -- but also, when you see "app" (or "plugin", or "fldr")
:appearing in the "Kind" column in a Finder window, those terms are
:referring to a very sharply defined identifier or characteristic of each
:individual "Finder object", is that not so?
:And by the way, what about the term "Finder object"?
:I just spent a couple of hours reading the user's manual for a popular
:sync program which repeatedly used that term for the objects it would
:operate on in a Finder window -- but never, ever defined it.
:Is "Finder object" a defined term in "Mac-talk"? (that is, in technical
:discussions of Apple's OS X?)
:Is anything of any sort whose icon you can drag into a Findow window a
:"Finder object"? Or only a more limited set of objects, like certain
:types of files?
A finder object is something you can manipulate in the finder. So
files and folders, of course, but also windows, disk drives, etc.
It's not a very common usage, outside of the AppleScripting community,
I don't think, and probably doesn't belong in most end-user docs.
--
sig 35
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2011 10:56:12 -0400
From: Geoffrey Welsh <gwelsh@spamcop.net>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: FCC to Caller ID spoofers: STOP IT
Message-ID: <4E0B3D0C.7030307@spamcop.net>
On 28/06/2011 2:46 PM, danny burstein wrote:
> Violators are subject to up to $10,000 for each violation, or three
> times that amount for each day of continuing violation, to a maximum of
> $1 million for any continuing violation
... if they're caught. And, in addition to any technical or political
(e.g. they're calling from outside the U.S.) hurdles that may make
catching them difficult, for years the content of this very forum had
led me to believe that there is little or no budget and less motivation
for agencies to put in the work required to track down the culprits.
Maybe the fine will encourage some agency to invest the time, but
somehow I don't see this having any more effect than, say, the CAN-SPAM
act had on all the junk mail we receive...
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2011 09:00:44 -0700
From: Bruce Bergman <brucebergman@gmail.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Battery power support today
Message-ID: <BANLkTikg3_jasxgAbPLuJ5WqtABxNZVHKg@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 12:20 AM, <telecom-owner@telecom-digest.org> wrote:
>
> Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 09:22:40 +0100
> From: "Ricardus" <richard_powderhill@btopenworld.com>
> To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
> Subject: Re: Battery power support today
> Message-ID: <3E893697B96D4F01B2B54969BAB5AD43@RichardPC>
>
>
>
> On Sun, 26 Jun 2011 11:43:12 -0700, Sam Spade <sam@coldmail.com> wrote:
> >Ricardus wrote:
> >> Will all concerned with power generators go to the Bedini website & give
> >> opinion?
> >
> >Do you have a link to the correct website?
>
> Try this: http://www.icehouse.net/john1/foreward.html
>
Oh, that one - I thought that was where you were going. Bedini is one
among the panoply of "Perpetual Motion Machine" theories that have been well
and truly busted, more than once. TANSTAAFL, you need to get the energy
from somewhere.
Now you could set up your "Free Power" demonstration right under an overhead
high tension transmission line, or a building right next to a high powered
broadcast transmission tower and "magically" get energy out of the aether by
tapping the EMF fields with your system acting as a simple antenna, but
that's pure deception. Several of Tesla's original inventions were like
that - transmission of energy without wires or physical connection, or
tapping an external source, not creating it out of nothing.
(You can walk around under an AM Broadcast antenna holding a fluorescent
light bulb that's glowing in the RF field, especially at a 50KW Clear
Channel blowtorch like KFI. Or up on Mount Wilson where all the TV
transmitters serving Los Angeles County are, they've historically run
obscene power levels up in the multi-megawatt range on the Video and another
MW on the Audio - even after the digital conversion they have stayed high to
ensure their reach through a geographically large market. That energy isn't
"Free", it's just* someone else *getting stuck with the power bill.)
It would be relatively simple to put reliable permanent automatic-start
emergency power at all Telco, CellCo and CATV remote sites, but it has to be
mandated by the regulatory agencies. The added cost puts one carrier at a
serious competitive disadvantage versus the others that won't have all the
capital sunk and the ongoing maintenance expenses, so they aren't going to
do it voluntarily. Even though they'll be the only carriers still working
through the next major disaster, that's very hard to sell to customers
looking at the bottom-line price.
It would be simple to build an armored curb-side pedestal combining a small
generator plant, a gas meter if Natural Gas is available (unlimited run time
if the gas distribution system stays up), and an automatic transfer switch &
excercise controller. And nearby you bury a small double-wall fuel tank
(gasoline, diesel, propane, their choice) in a standard concrete vault for a
local fuel source - pop the outer lid and crane out the tank for service or
inspection, and the vault is tertiary containment. (Much harder for a
wayward car to run it over when it's buried.)
Right now, the companies all say they'll bring out portable generators in an
emergency. But they don't have anywhere near enough units to go around
stored locally, and using service trucks equipped with generators parked at
the sites takes them off necessary repair duties.
They won't be able to deploy portable generators quickly with most highways
roads and bridges impassible after a major earthquake or blizzard,
especially if the central cache is stored out of state. (I've heard that's
Verizon's emergency plan.) Arranging air-freight will take time, and as the
Berlin Airlift showed there is a hard limit as to how much can be
transported in by air if that's your only open route - plus humanitarian aid
always has first priority. The Fire Department USAR Team and their gear
will bump your generators every time, and by the time they get on a plane a
week later the roads are open again.
And as someone already pointed out, they don't make chains stout enough to
lock up an unattended portable generator in some areas - or they'll cut the
generator chassis and leave the chain... Heck, some of the permanent
pedestal mounted ones may get stolen unless the pedestals are alarmed and a
LEO can respond to the alarm in time.
--<< Bruce >>--
[Attachment of type text/html removed.]
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 (7 messages)
Return to Archives ** Older Issues