Classified Ads
TD Extra News

Add this Digest to your personal   or  

 

Message Digest Volume 28 : Issue 298 : "text" Format Messages in this Issue: Re: Area code 533 assigned for personal communications services Re: Area code 533 assigned for personal communications services Area code 533 assigned for personal communications services Re: Area code 533 assigned for personal communications services Re: caller pays, was Area code 533 assigned Re: Area code 533 assigned for personal communications services Oral Arguments Set For Comcast Appeal 911 flaw delayed help to attack victim Re: 911 flaw delayed help to attack victim Appeals court says swearing in text messages isn't a crime FairPoint stock price falls after delisting Re: FairPoint stock price falls after delisting Re: Area code 533 assigned for personal communications services Re: Area code 533 assigned for personal communication services ====== 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: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 06:19:55 -0400 From: John Stahl <aljon@stny.rr.com> To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu Subject: Re: Area code 533 assigned for personal communications services Message-ID: <20091029102017015.VJEI1116@hrndva-comm-mta03.mail.rr.com> In article <hc83cq$5qr$1@news.albasani.net> "Adam H. Kerman" wrote: > Area code 500 is exhausted, and 533 has been assigned for personal > communications services. I had no idea these featurs were so > popular. History indicates that when the FCC was first considering "Cellular" services (back in the 1970's), they discounted the European plan already in effect which assigned specific AC's (NPA's) to their burgeoning Cellular service so that all NXX's (exchanges) in these NPA's would only be for cell phones. Of course as we all know, instead the FCC only allowed the early cellular service supplier's to use NXX's in the already issued (land-line) NPA covering their specific initial service area(s) which were the largest MSA's (starting with number 1 and licensing each successive MSA) until all had two carriers. Of course we all know now that the FCC had no idea how large this service would grow and that they would have to put together new NPA plans with over-lays, etc. to ultimately cover the demand for telephone numbers in each NPA area until where we find ourselves today. Had they had a crystal ball they might have better chosen the European plan with special NPA (just like this new FCC release of AC 533) for this growing service. So, perhaps, the FCC has finally "seen the light" and is now issuing special NPA's for mobile (cellular) services. As a side to this, the FCC just recently indicated that they might want to take back some of the TV spectrum already reissued for public services as the world is going more wireless-ly every day. Perhaps they do now finally see that wireless is here to stay (after all more and more consumer's are dropping their land-lines every day for the mobile "leash"!) and are finally scrambling to cover the future needs for (these) services. John Stahl Telecom/Data Consultant Aljon Enterprises Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 10:27:55 -0700 (PDT) From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu Subject: Re: Area code 533 assigned for personal communications services Message-ID: <bfc2d288-527c-4675-ab9f-438674a54fbf@j24g2000yqa.googlegroups.com> On Oct 29, 6:19 am, John Stahl <al...@stny.rr.com> wrote: > As a side to this, the FCC just recently indicated that they might > want to take back some of the TV spectrum already reissued for public > services as the world is going more wireless-ly every day. Perhaps > they do now finally see that wireless is here to stay (after all more > and more consumer's are dropping their land-lines every day for the > mobile "leash"!) and are finally scrambling to cover the future needs > for (these) services. Dropping one's landline for a mobile phone has certain advantages, such as the cell phone becomming the "universal number" to reach the person anywhere they might be. In certain situations it could also be cheaper. But there are certainly disadvantages to go all wireless, too: Can one get broadband computer services from a teleco or cable company if they don't have voice service? That is, can you get DSL without an associated voice line? But with cell phones often times the meter is running and it isn't cheap. For instance, as an individual I make and receive a number of social calls between 7 pm and 9 pm weeknights. I believe on most cellphone plans that is still 'prime time' and the meter is running. Some (many?) cellphone plans consider major holidays as still weekdays, not weekends, so calls made on Labor Day are also running up the meter. All of us have to call our banks, credit card, health insurance, etc., and sit on hold. We don't think about the cost because almost all such calls are via 800 numbers. But on a cell phone, during prime time the meter is running. This translates to someone either going into overtime or getting a high-end plan that has lots of extra minutes. High end plans are pricey. The other issue is reliability. Cell phones are significantly less reliable than traditional landlines. Batteries can wear out, and need to be charged, something one can forget to do or find themselves unable to do. Signals might be blocked by buildings or odd atmospheres. Calls get cut off. Phones themselves are easily lost or break. Sound qualtiy is lousy. I wonder how many traditional landlines are being permanently lost to wireless, as opposed to being lost to alternative carriers, like cableTV providers. Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 20:13:27 EDT From: Wesrock@aol.com To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu Subject: Area code 533 assigned for personal communications services Message-ID: <c6e.433b0a02.381b89a7@aol.com> In a message dated 10/29/2009 10:30:33 AM Central Daylight Time, aljon@stny.rr.com writes: > Of course we all know now that the FCC had no idea how large this > service would grow and that they would have to put together new NPA > plans with over-lays, etc. to ultimately cover the demand for > telephone numbers in each NPA area until where we find ourselves > today. Had they had a crystal ball they might have better chosen the > European plan with special NPA (just like this new FCC release of AC > 533) for this growing service. I can't imagine anyone would call a cell-only number to call a local plumber, handyman, or any other outfit publishing such a number in their advertisements. Of course, Europe is generally caller-pays so I don't think any cell phone number could be a viable alternative as a number someone could use to call a local business. Wes Leatherock wesrock@aol.com wleathus@yahoo.com Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 03:21:40 +0000 (UTC) From: danny burstein <dannyb@panix.com> To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu Subject: Re: Area code 533 assigned for personal communications services Message-ID: <hcdm44$oal$1@reader1.panix.com> In <c6e.433b0a02.381b89a7@aol.com> Wesrock@aol.com writes: > I can't imagine anyone would call a cell-only number to call a local > plumber, handyman, or any other outfit publishing such a number in > their advertisements. Well, sure, if you're calling the office of a plumbing outfit that has 25 plumbers and fifty helpers and a dozen trucks.. But plenty of businesses of this type are just a couple, or half dozen... people, some of whom could easily be just "on call" stringers. And for many of those, yes, the public number is, indeed, the cellphone the boss carries around since she'd rather "get" your call in live time than hope you'll leave a msg on an answering machine.... -- _____________________________________________________ Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key dannyb@panix.com [to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded] Date: 30 Oct 2009 03:17:29 -0000 From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu Subject: Re: caller pays, was Area code 533 assigned Message-ID: <20091030031729.1431.qmail@simone.iecc.com> On Thu, 29 Oct 2009, Wesrock@aol.com wrote: > I can't imagine anyone would call a cell-only number to call a local > plumber, handyman, or any other outfit publishing such a number in > their advertisements. Of course, Europe is generally caller-pays so > I don't think any cell phone number could be a viable alternative as > a number someone could use to call a local business. I can assure you that when I was in England last year, as often as not the phone number on tradesmen's trucks was a mobile. Although it costs more to call a mobile than a landline if you are calling from a landline or from outside the country, most mobile phones have bundled minute plans that treat mobile and landine the same. This makes the practical effect of caller pays much less than it is here. Of course, they still have separate number spaces and they'll never have portability between landline and mobile like we do here. R's, John Date: 30 Oct 2009 03:25:35 -0000 From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu Subject: Re: Area code 533 assigned for personal communications services Message-ID: <20091030032535.1492.qmail@simone.iecc.com> On Thu, 29 Oct 2009, John Stahl said: > History indicates that when the FCC was first considering "Cellular" > services (back in the 1970's), they discounted the European plan > already in effect which assigned specific AC's (NPA's) to their > burgeoning Cellular service so that all NXX's (exchanges) in these > NPA's would only be for cell phones. Well, sure. There weren't enough spare NPAs to do a reasonable geographic overlay. I suppose they could have taken the European approach of making the mobile space one giant rate center, but at the time, long distance was expensive, and it was considered important to assign mobiles to geographic places. I don't know whether mobile-landline portability was always planned, or if they later realized it was possible. > So, perhaps, the FCC has finally "seen the light" and is now issuing > special NPA's for mobile (cellular) services. No, they are not. See www.nanpa.com for actual facts. R's, John Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 08:25:33 -0700 (PDT) From: Neal McLain <nmclain@annsgarden.com> To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu Subject: Oral Arguments Set For Comcast Appeal Message-ID: <8be3ccf5-8de8-40ab-98cb-9a4ccc306cb9@b3g2000pre.googlegroups.com> >From Broadcasting and Cable, October 28: D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals will hear arguments on BitTorrent-Comcast case Jan. 8. By John Eggerton -- Broadcasting & Cable, 10/28/2009 The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit has set Jan. 8 as the date for oral argument in Comcast's appeal of the FCC's network management decision in the BitTorrent case. http://tinyurl.com/Comcast-Bittorrent NBC Universal is an intervener in this case. Neal McLain Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 08:39:21 -0700 (PDT) From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu Subject: 911 flaw delayed help to attack victim Message-ID: <e0466e30-d57d-436e-ad42-0966061f95b9@k4g2000yqb.googlegroups.com> The following is a disturbing story. The Newark NJ Star Ledger reported that the victim of an attack dialed 911 for help, but apparently the 911 center was unable to determine the location of the call. It was not clear whether the 911 center had the technology to do so, or [if] there was a flaw [in] it. Perhaps others more familiar with modern 911 operation can elaborate. For full article please see: http://www.nj.com/news/ledger/jersey/index.ssf?/base/news-15/1256781309273050.xml&coll=1 I wonder how many 911 centers in the US are properly equipped to identify where the calling phone is. It seems to me that anyone in trouble should use a landline phone if at all available. Unfortunately there are few pay phones out there these days and one might have to go to a house. I think most people in a store, home, or office would call the police if a stranger banged on the door and asked them to do so (I would do so merely because someone was banging on my door). However, there are some businesses in high crime areas where the clerks do not speak English very well and stay locked in a booth. For a motorist in trouble on a rural highway the situation is harder. Most of us do not pay attention to intermediate landmarks when we travel a road--we are looking for the distant place where we get off. That is, if we're exiting at exit #104 and we've passed #24, we're not gonna remember that we just passed #24. So, if we get into trouble and call for help, we'll have little idea of where we are. [Comments requested. Public replies, please. Thanks.] ***** Moderator's Note ***** The person who made the call was already inside a building: he was a priest inside a church rectory. He was attacked by a church employee, apparently while making his 911 call. It's very unlikely that a faster response would have helped him, since the newspaper article alluded to "32 stab wounds". The problem is not caused by cell phones: it's caused by the unrealistic expectations we have regarding what is and is not possible in public-safety responses. The TV-viewing public has adopted a fantasy where it expects a telephone to transform into a trained and well-equiped and well-supported public safety professional in the blink of an eye, all the while forgetting the basic imperatives of distance and time. Municipal managers have endorsed electronics as the "magic bullet" which cures all ills, and have placed poorly trained call-takers in positions where experienced police officers and/or firefighters would be more effective. The results have been foreseeable. Bill Horne Moderator Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 10:05:22 +1100 From: David Clayton <dcstar@NOSPAM.myrealbox.com> To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu Subject: Re: 911 flaw delayed help to attack victim Message-ID: <pan.2009.10.29.23.05.18.129863@NOSPAM.myrealbox.com> On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 08:39:21 -0700, Telecom Digest Moderator wrote: > The problem is not caused by cell phones: it's caused by the > unrealistic expectations we have regarding what is and is not > possible in public-safety responses. The TV-viewing public has > adopted a fantasy where it expects a telephone to transform into a > trained and well-equiped and well-supported public safety > professional in the blink of an eye, all the while forgetting the > basic imperatives of distance and time. Municipal managers have > endorsed electronics as the "magic bullet" which cures all ills, and > have placed poorly trained call-takers in positions where > experienced police officers and/or firefighters would be more > effective. The results have been foreseeable. A similar false expectation is being built up where I live after the big bush fires earlier this year resulted in so many deaths. A new system of SMS notifications is being implemented based on the BILLING address of the mobile service! Yep, you many not be anywhere near a possible disaster (or you might be right in the middle of it) but you will only get a warning message if the phone's billing address matches the region.... There are so many obvious flaws in any system relying on technology to work during a major catastrophe that you really don't want to have people believing that they can rely on it, but we always seem to keep heading down that path. There is a Royal Commission into the bushfires still in progress, and we see regular testimony on the TV news of people complaining about delays when they tried to ring the (horrendously overloaded) emergency services during the event - and others basically demanding that these resources should be staffed 24/7 with the ability to service a major disaster (but they never seem to say that they are willing to pay for such an expensive system). It's the mentality that some people just seem to expect their own personal police officer/ambulance/fire truck just waiting for them at the other end of a (100% reliable) phone call. -- 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: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 16:21:21 -0500 From: John Mayson <john@mayson.us> To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu Subject: Appeals court says swearing in text messages isn't a crime Message-ID: <6645152a0910291421r12d19c81k698b1aaa36b9e38d@mail.gmail.com> "A 16-year-old California boy dumped by his high school girlfriend didn't violate a state obscenity law by using four-letter words in anguished text messages to his ex, an appellate court ruled this week. The boy, identified by his initials in the ruling, was convicted by a juvenile court judge in Chico, California, of sending threatening or obscene telephone communications, based on two profanity-laced text messages he sent the girl shortly after the breakup last year." More at http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/10/text/ -- John Mayson <john@mayson.us> Austin, Texas, USA Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 18:48:52 -0700 (PDT) From: Joseph Singer <joeofseattle@yahoo.com> To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu Subject: FairPoint stock price falls after delisting Message-ID: <579321.1066.qm@web52701.mail.re2.yahoo.com> PORTLAND, Maine - The stock price of FairPoint Communications Inc. has fallen to just over a dime a share after the company was delisted from the New York Stock Exchange. The ticker symbol of the North Carolina-based company was changed from FRP to its new over-the-counter listing of FRCMQ after it filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy on Monday. As of Thursday morning, it was trading for as little as 12 cents a share, down from 37 cents a share at the end of the trading day on Friday. FairPoint's stock was trading at more than $10 a share in the week before the company acquired Verizon Communications' land line and Internet properties in northern New England on April 1, 2008. http://www.boston.com/news/local/maine/articles/2009/10/29/fairpoint_stock_price_falls_after_delisting/?rss_id=3DBoston.com+--+Maine+news shortened URL: http://bit.ly/2ePnlK Date: 30 Oct 2009 03:27:20 -0000 From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu Subject: Re: FairPoint stock price falls after delisting Message-ID: <20091030032720.1513.qmail@simone.iecc.com> In article <579321.1066.qm@web52701.mail.re2.yahoo.com> you write: >PORTLAND, Maine - The stock price of FairPoint Communications Inc. has >fallen to just over a dime a share after the company was delisted from >the New York Stock Exchange. Considering that they are bankrupt, which means their debts exceed their assets, it's hard to imagine why anyone would value their stock at more than $0.00. In situations like this, the old stock is usually cancelled, and they issue new stock to the creditors as the company comes out of bankruptcy. R's, John PS: Too bad you can't short a penny stock. Date: 30 Oct 2009 03:20:12 -0000 From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu Subject: Re: Area code 533 assigned for personal communications services Message-ID: <20091030032012.1455.qmail@simone.iecc.com> On Wed, 28 Oct 2009, "Adam H. Kerman" said: > Correction: These can point to numbers outside the country. Your > telephone bill might contain a not so nice surprise! So can an 800 number. The price of a 500 number is set by the carrier providing the number. > John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> wrote: >> No, that's 700 numbers. The idea of 500 numbers was that they were >> intended for personal follow-me service and the like, charged to the >> caller. > > So these aren't sold by long-distance providers? Is the 500 number > limited to a particular provider or can they be ported? Like I said, nearly all of them are assigned to the big wireless carriers. I don't see any inter-carrier portability. >> a 900 number, I figured they would fail. From the little I can see >> on Google, I get the impression that the 500 numbers in use don't >> cost anything to the caller. > > I don't get it, then. Me neither. I've never seen a 500 number in use other than one or two used for arcane things like state educational dialup networks. R's, John Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 20:59:29 -0700 (MST) From: Steve Grandi <grandi@noao.edu> To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu Subject: Re: Area code 533 assigned for personal communication services Message-ID: <alpine.OSX.1.00.0910292046300.745@pb-15.local> OnStar uses (500) numbers. To quote from a puff piece at http://www.comcare.org/uploads/OnStar%20PR.pdf OnStar received the Cellular Telecommunications & Internet Association's (CTIA) first Future Vision Award for great strides in the areas of data products, software products and end-user applications. OnStar employees were honored in 1999 with the General Motors Boss Kettering Award for the first implementation of a national wireless network using a non-geographic area code (500) to deliver OnStar mobile communication services. -- Steve Grandi National Optical Astronomy Observatory/AURA Inc., Tucson AZ USA Internet: grandi@noao.edu Voice: +1 520 318-8228 FAX: +1 520 318-8360 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 (14 messages)