31 Years of the Digest ... founded August 21, 1981
Add this Digest to your personal
or 
The Telecom Digest for March 26, 2013
Volume 32 : Issue 71 : "text" Format
====== 31 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 that person, or email address
owner.
Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be
sold or given away without the explicit written consent of the owner of
that address. 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: Sun, 24 Mar 2013 13:45:21 -0500
From: GlowingBlueMist <addresss-withheld@invalid.telecom-digest.org>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: More Extensions and Lightning Protection
Message-ID: <kinhg8$r3$1@dont-email.me>
On 3/24/2013 8:49 AM, Fred Atkinson, WB4AEJ wrote:
> At 01:20 AM 3/24/2013, you wrote:
>> Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2013 17:52:04 +0000 (UTC)
>> From: David Lesher <wb8foz@panix.com>
>> To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
>> Subject: Re: More Extensions and Lightning Protection
>> Message-ID: <kikq44$p48$1@reader2.panix.com>
>>
>> John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> writes:
>>
>>>> Linksys says the maximum number of extensions on one line is
>>>> two.
>>
>>> Linksys is being very conservative. Three phones will probably work
>>> fine, particularly if they are modern phones with electronic ringers.
>>
>> I agree with John. Most tweedle-deedle phones draw 0.1-0.3 REN's; not
>> the 1.0 of a real phone such as a WECO 2500 set.
>
> Thanks for the information, guys.
>
> As far as the lightning protection, Mike Sandman has a device. So I
> guess that when I am ready to run that extension out to the work shop,
> I will be able to use those protectors to protect the ATA and the
> phone(s) in the work shop.
>
> This is what he showed me:
> http://www.sandman.com/surge.html#KIT4A
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Fred
If you go to the index of the catalog and scroll down to item #7 "Long
Loop Adapters" and then scroll down to "Ring Voltage Booster ||" You
will find an adapter that will convert a single line's output to a REN
of 7.5. True it's not cheap at $124.95 bit the Sandman's catalog does
have what you asked for.
Personally I'd pick two portable phone adapters. One at the remote
location supporting one remote wireless and another at the house that
comes with 4 or 5 wireless extension phones, checking the specs to get
both with a partial REM each so they can co-reside on the same VOIP
adapter with no ring voltage adapter being needed.
Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2013 15:04:19 -0400
From: tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Service Migration Advice
Message-ID: <fzims8d69cms.1dpr4v6he0lq7.dlg@40tude.net>
On Sun, 24 Mar 2013 08:01:01 -0500, Frank Stearns wrote, re:
> ... trans-area code move ...
> If that's true, it seems the only option I have is to port that old
> land line number to a new cell phone or perhaps a VOIP account. ...
1) Before your old land line number gets itself disconnected, you can, I
believe, port it (for a one-time $20 fee) to Google Voice (provided you
have at least one available phone line -- land or cellular -- that your new
Google Voice service can still ring through to).
(If that's wrong, someone, please holler!)
> ... Cell providers tell me I can only have one number per cell phone.
Mmm ... that depends. 2) Here's one scenario under which one cellular
handset can have (ring for, and call out as) two different numbers: there
are dual-SIM GSM handsets that accept two entirely independent phone SIMs,
each issued by its own cellular service provider, and each offering its own
phone #. You can take up two lines of service with one provider, or a line
of service with each of two providers, pop the corresponding SIMs into such
a handset, and be able to choose which of the two SIMs to use for a given
outbound call (or SMS), and whether one, both, or neither of those SIMs
shall be "present" to accept inbound calls (or SMS).
Only "problem" is that at most one call can be active at a time.
One such handset: Sony Ericson's Xperia Tipo Dual (ST21a2 or ST21i2) -- but
there are many more, I'm sure.
> I also have a custom ringing number on my old land line account.
> Inbound toll-free calls are forwarded there. This is perhaps easier,
> as the toll-free service provider can forward inbound toll-free calls
> just about anywhere. The ring pattern identifying an inbound
> toll-free call would be gone, but that's not a serious problem.
>
> It seems that what I really need is the opposite of what google voice
> provides: they appear to offer one inbound number that can then be
> fanned out to various numbers. But what I'd like is the ability to
> collect inbound calls to multiple numbers and forward them one number
> (current cell, for example), all without the need for a "permanent"
> account from the likes of Century Link.
>
> Right now, it seems the pragmatic solution is that porting of my old
> land number to a new cell phone (this can be done for sure).
> Toll-free calls would be forwarded to that new cell as well.
>
> Fortunately, at the moment, the call volume on the old land and
> toll-free numbers is light and I can likely do fine with a cheap,
> pre-paid, non-contract cell.
>
> Sorry to be so long-winded; hope I've made the situation clear.
>
> I'd be most interested if anyone has better ideas about managing this
> changing situation, and even a final word if it is possible to put any
> area code in a different area code. (And if yes, what I need to say to
> a CS rep to make that happen.)
>
> Thanks in advance
> Frank
Your other questions will depend on others here for answers, sorry.
HTH. Cheers, -- tlvp
--
Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP.
Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2013 12:15:48 -0500
From: Doug McIntyre <merlyn@dork.geeks.org>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Service Migration Advice
Message-ID: <N-2dnXb6jstZqdLMnZ2dnUVZ_s6dnZ2d@giganews.com>
Frank Stearns <franks.pacifier.com@pacifier.net> writes:
>The first apparent fib I was told by Century Link CS sometime back
>was the ability to move my current land-line number (have had it for
>33 years) to a different area code..
It is just poor training and laziness, and probably the fact that with
area-code overlays, the LEC sales reps are used to dealing with
multiple area codes in a given area, but didn't bother to check if
this was a change to a different rate center. That isn't allowed in
the traditional LEC wireline service.
>That trans-area code move seemed counter to what I've understood
>about the "traditional" telco system, but I was assured that 21st
>technology and systems allowed for this.
Sure, it could, but LECs are dinosaurs and don't want to upset the
apple cart, because then they'd probably lose all their customers. :-)
>If that's true, it seems the only option I have is to port that old
>land line number to a new cell phone or perhaps a VOIP account. ..
Another choice may be cell-phone related, but several of them provide
a "home-phone" cell option. Much like a VoIP box, but communicates via
cell network, plug your standard phones into it. Mine came with a
battery backup in it, no idea how long it would last. You can pick up the
box and transport it anywhere and have the same phone #, much like
cell-phone roaming. If you are staying there, you probably want to get
your E911 location registered properly.
Another one may be buying voice service from the local cable company,
which may be able to LNP the number into their system whereas
traditional LEC won't do it.
>I also have a custom ringing number on my old land line account.
I don't know what services support custom ringing through.
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2013 00:34:11 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Database Is Shut Down by NASA for a Review
Message-ID: <p0624080bcd75841e3094@[10.0.1.5]>
Database Is Shut Down by NASA for a Review
By MARK MAZZETTI
March 22, 2013
WASHINGTON - NASA has shut down a large public database and is
limiting access to agency facilities by foreign citizens as part of a
broader investigation into efforts by China and other countries to
get information about important technology.
NASA announced the security procedures this week, after the F.B.I.
arrested a Chinese citizen at Dulles International Airport in
Virginia who had boarded a plane to Beijing.
The man, Bo Jiang, had been working as a contractor at NASA's Langley
Research Center in southern Virginia. According to an affidavit filed
on Monday, Mr. Jiang is being charged with making false statements to
federal agents - failing to disclose that he was carrying a laptop,
hard drive and SIM card that were discovered after a search of his
belongings.
...
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/23/us/nasa-shuts-down-database-during-security-inquiry.html
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2013 00:31:06 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Big Data and a Renewed Debate Over Privacy
Message-ID: <p0624080acd75835c0314@[10.0.1.5]>
Big Data Is Opening Doors, but Maybe Too Many
By STEVE LOHR
March 23, 2013
IN the 1960s, mainframe computers posed a significant technological
challenge to common notions of privacy. That's when the federal
government started putting tax returns into those giant machines, and
consumer credit bureaus began building databases containing the
personal financial information of millions of Americans. Many people
feared that the new computerized databanks would be put in the
service of an intrusive corporate or government Big Brother.
"It really freaked people out," says Daniel J. Weitzner, a former
senior Internet policy official in the Obama administration. "The
people who cared about privacy were every bit as worried as we are
now."
Along with fueling privacy concerns, of course, the mainframes helped
prompt the growth and innovation that we have come to associate with
the computer age. Today, many experts predict that the next wave will
be driven by technologies that fly under the banner of Big Data -
data including Web pages, browsing habits, sensor signals, smartphone
location trails and genomic information, combined with clever
software to make sense of it all.
Proponents of this new technology say it is allowing us to see and
measure things as never before - much as the microscope allowed
scientists to examine the mysteries of life at the cellular level.
Big Data, they say, will open the door to making smarter decisions in
every field from business and biology to public health and energy
conservation.
"This data is a new asset," says Alex Pentland, a computational
social scientist and director of the Human Dynamics Lab at the M.I.T.
"You want it to be liquid and to be used."
But the latest leaps in data collection are raising new concern about
infringements on privacy - an issue so crucial that it could trump
all others and upset the Big Data bandwagon. Dr. Pentland is a
champion of the Big Data vision and believes the future will be a
data-driven society. Yet the surveillance possibilities of the
technology, he acknowledges, could leave George Orwell in the dust.
...
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/24/technology/big-data-and-a-renewed-debate-over-privacy.html
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) 2013 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 (5 messages)
Return to Archives ** Older Issues