29 Years of the Digest ... founded August 21, 1981
Add this Digest to your personal
or 
The Telecom Digest for August 17, 2011
Volume 30 : Issue 206 : "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: Tue, 16 Aug 2011 17:14:32 +1000
From: David Clayton <dcstarbox-usenet@yahoo.com.au>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: BART cuts off subway cell phone service
Message-ID: <pan.2011.08.16.07.14.29.175687@yahoo.com.au>
On Mon, 15 Aug 2011 07:45:37 -0700, Lisa or Jeff wrote:
>>From MSNBC:
>
> ... The posting comes in response to BART officials on Thursday
> cutting off underground cellphone service for a few hours at several
> stations to thwart a planned protest ...
>
> full article at:
> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44139412/ns/technology_and_science-security/
Pointless - by the time anyone has organised any sort of protest they
won't need to use the subway infrastructure.
> The use of cell phone technology by mobs to coordinate attacks has created
> disturbances in London and Philadelphia where property has been damaged
> and people injured.
Yeah, I believe that people also use their voices for that sort of thing
too - shall we cut out their tongues as well?
--
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: Tue, 16 Aug 2011 08:06:38 -0700 (PDT)
From: Lisa or Jeff <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: BART cuts off subway cell phone service
Message-ID: <61f8d16c-6373-480b-a656-358c9ecfb117@p19g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>
On Aug 16, 3:14 am, David Clayton <dcstarbox-use...@yahoo.com.au>
wrote:
> > ... The posting comes in response to BART officials on Thursday
> > cutting off underground cellphone service for a few hours at several
> > stations to thwart a planned protest ...
> Pointless - by the time anyone has organised any sort of protest they
> won't need to use the subway infrastructure.
There have been quite a few articles on this issue over the years on
how protestors have used cell phones to circumvent police and conduct
disruptive activity.
>> The use of cell phone technology by mobs to coordinate attacks has
>> created disturbances in London and Philadelphia where property has
>> been damaged and people injured.
>
> Yeah, I believe that people also use their voices for that sort of
> thing too - shall we cut out their tongues as well?
Apples and candy bars.
None the less, I believe one can be charged with the crime of
"incitement to riot". There is of course the old example, "shouting
'fire' in a crowded theatre".
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2011 20:43:42 -0500
From: GlowingBlueMist <glowingbluemist@truely.invalid>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Verizon strike
Message-ID: <4e49cb50$0$2616$892e0abb@auth.newsreader.octanews.com>
On 8/14/2011 6:56 PM, John Levine wrote:
>> I got rid of Vonage as it required a PC be powered on all the time to
>> have continuous phone service, same as Skype (no adapter, just
>> software).
>
> Huh? When I had Vonage, they provided me a Cisco ATA-186 with one
> jack for the RJ-45 from the router and another jack with the RJ-11 to
> the phone. I couldn't have run it through my PC if I wanted to.
Right you are John.
Sorry, it appears that my memory was malfunctioning as usual.
I meant to say that I had booted Magic Jack, not Vonage.
Date: 15 Aug 2011 23:38:05 -0000
From: "John Levine" <johnl@iecc.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Extensions to pay phones?
Message-ID: <20110815233805.99372.qmail@joyce.lan>
>How common was it to offer flat rate to business subscribers? I can't
>help but suspect the majority of business subscribers (those within
>cities and larger towns) had message rate service.
Pretty common outside the northeast and Chicago, as I recall.
R's,
John
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2011 17:07:33 -0700 (PDT)
From: Wes Leatherock <wleathus@yahoo.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Extensions to pay phones?
Message-ID: <1313453253.9595.YahooMailClassic@web111718.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
--- On Mon, 8/15/11, Lisa or Jeff <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
> On Aug 14, 8:30 pm, Wes Leatherock
> <wleat...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> > Some businesses were fussy in those days, others were not. In
> > areas where 1FB service was common, many businesses had phones for
> > customer use, others had no objection to allowing customers or
> > others from using their regular business phones.
> > 1FB means "Single party Flat-rate Business"
>
> I can understand that if a business didn't have to pay a message
> unit charge for a call, then it wouldn't mind as much people using
> the phone.
>
> How common was it to offer flat rate to business subscribers? I
> can't help but suspect the majority of business subscribers (those
> within cities and larger towns) had message rate service.
As far as I know, 1FB was the standard offering in Southwestern Bell
territory. I know in Dallas the tariff prhibited 1MB (measured) on
the same premises without special permission. The conceern was that
business would list or advertise their measured number, and use it for
incoming calls only, which meant there would never be any outgoing
measured number calls and so there would be no revenue on that line
besides the minimal monthly charge.
In fact, it was often hard to find out that measured service was
available, either residence or business.
Wes Leatherock
wleathus@yahoo.com
wesrock@aol.com
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2011 09:15:22 -0700 (PDT)
From: Lisa or Jeff <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: NYC ordered to retain street call boxes
Message-ID: <7d402c03-d372-4a60-867f-e437154da41c@1g2000vbu.googlegroups.com>
From the NY Times:
A federal judge in Manhattan has refused to allow the Bloomberg
administration to eliminate 15,000 emergency-help boxes from New
York's streets, saying the city's proposed alternative involving
public pay phones is not adequate because it would discriminate
against the deaf and hearing-impaired.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/16/nyregion/city-is-ordered-to-keep-emergency-help-boxes.html?ref=nyregion
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2011 08:03:19 -0700 (PDT)
From: Tom Horne <hornetd@gmail.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Verizon strike
Message-ID: <c038b862-b32a-45d6-b2fc-c253d4fd1441@a31g2000vbt.googlegroups.com>
On Aug 15, 7:33 am, bon...@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) wrote:
> In most areas you can get a 'naked' (no dial tone) DSL circuit.
[Moderator snip]
> Unlike a pair with 'dial tone', a field tech cannot tell whether
> [the] pair is 'in use' (meaning 'active', not 'off hook') by simply
> hooking a butt-set onto the pair, and 'listening' for voice, or
> dial-tone. There have been lots of 'naked' DSL circuit outages
> because a field tech unwittingly 'stole' an active pair to fix
> another problem.
Lineman have been equipped with DSL detecting butt sets for many years
now. When the butt set is connected to a DSL signal pair it sounds an
alarm and / or will not go off hook. So accidental downing of DSL
service is no longer that much of a problem. Some Butt sets can even
function like a piggy back telephone and conduct voice calls without
downing the line. I own two such Harris sets.
--
Tom Horne
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2011 09:55:26 -0700 (PDT)
From: Joseph Singer <joeofseattle@yahoo.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: BART cuts off subway cell phone service
Message-ID: <1313513726.68338.YahooMailClassic@web161507.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
Mon, 15 Aug 2011 07:45:37 -0700 (PDT) Lisa or Jeff <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
referring to:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44139412/ns/technology_and_science-security/
> IMHO, since BART owns the cell phone infrastructure on its subway,
> it has the right to suspend cell phone service.
> The use of cell phone technology by mobs to coordinate attacks has
> created disturbances in London and Philadelphia where property has
> been damaged and people injured.
What BART did may have in fact been legal, but it is not much different
than what dictators in Egypt and other Arab countries have done to
"squelch" those who they deem subversives. Cameron in the UK has
proposed that communications be cut off as well. Is this what we want
our governments to come down to?
And does BART own the cellphone infrastructure or the companies who
installed it?
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2011 12:37:42 -0700 (PDT)
From: Lisa or Jeff <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: BART cuts off subway cell phone service
Message-ID: <c1023527-c5a3-4b0c-82be-75867042675e@w11g2000vbp.googlegroups.com>
On Aug 16, 12:55 pm, Joseph Singer <joeofseat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> What BART did may have in fact been legal, but it is not much different
> than what dictators in Egypt and other Arab countries have done to
> "squelch" those who they deem subversives. Cameron in the UK has
> proposed that communications be cut off as well.
There is a significant difference between BART and those other
governments, and that is the issue of passenger safety on an active
busy railroad. Subway stations are a constrained area, and it is very
dangerous to block access to trains as the protesters did. That
creates overcrowding on the platforms which can lead to injury of
passengers. A subway station is a very different place than a broad
square.
> Is this what we want
> our governments to come down to?
Cell phone service in subways is a fairly new service, and social
considerations have to be worked out. Society would not want such
cell phone service to be used to disrupt train operation in tunnels.
I will just say that everyday people have to get to work, get home to
their children, etc. and if protesters are upset at the discontinuance
of a new cell phone service, then they should be equally upset at
disrupting transit service and creating a safety hazard. Transit
passengers have rights, too.
It should be noted that using a cell phone is prohibited on some
transit lines to avoid disturbing other passengers, and this is a
popular concept. I suspect transit agencies provide antenna for cell
phone carriers because they get nice rent from the carriers, even if
their passengers don't like it. (A proposal in NYC drew opposition,
but I think its going in anyway.)
> And does BART own the cellphone infrastructure or the companies who
> installed it?
According to one article:
"The agency did not jam cell signals, which is illegal, but shut off
the system - which Johnson said is allowable under an agreement with
several major phone service providers that pay rent to BART."
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/08/16/MNGT1KNJU1.DTL
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2011 17:59:52 -0400
From: "Geoffrey Welsh" <gwelsh@spamcop.net>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Extensions to pay phones?
Message-ID: <1e96c$4e4ae82a$adce0af1$22884@PRIMUS.CA>
Lisa or Jeff wrote:
> How common was it to offer flat rate to business subscribers?
How long ago are we talking here? I don't recall seeing local metered
service, even on business lines, in Bell Canada territory even going
back to the 80s. I'm not saying that such lines didn't exist, only
that I never encountered one so they weren't standard and probably not
very common.
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2011 22:10:46 +0000 (UTC)
From: David Lesher <wb8foz@panix.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Extensions to pay phones?
Message-ID: <j2ept6$g3o$1@reader1.panix.com>
Lisa or Jeff <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> writes:
> How common was it to offer flat rate to business subscribers? I
> can't help but suspect the majority of business subscribers (those
> within cities and larger towns) had message rate service.
AFAIK, only SWB and BS offered it. [Everyone] in Ameritech, Bell
Atlantic, & NYNEX territory had 1MB. In two places, NYC & Chicago,
there wasn't even 1FR service available.
--
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
***** Moderator's Note *****
1FR is "Single party, Flat-rate Residential" service
1FB is "Single party, Flat-rate Business" service
1MB is "Single party, Measured Business" service
Bill Horne
Moderator
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2011 19:41:39 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: HTC attempts serious patent play against Apple in federal court
Message-ID: <p062408cbca70b09bba71@[10.0.1.4]>
HTC attempts serious patent play against Apple in federal court
By Chris Foresman
HTC has decided to up the ante in its smartphone patent tussle with
Apple. The company has filed a patent infringement lawsuit against
Apple in Delaware, accusing Apple of infringing three of its patents
with nearly every product Apple makes. HTC may be hoping this suit
will give it some leverage with Apple, which currently has four
patent infringement lawsuits and two International Trade Commission
complaints pending against the Tawainese smartphone maker.
...
http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2011/08/htc-attempts-serious-patent-play-against-apple-in-federal-court.ars
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