|
|
Message Digest
Volume 28 : Issue 121 : "text" Format
Messages in this Issue:
Re: AT&T to discontinue CallVantage voip service
Re: AT&T doubling 3G capacity
Waveguide (was "size a major consideration...")
Re: AT&T to discontinue CallVantage voip service
FiOS in MDU Buildings
====== 27 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: Sat, 2 May 2009 01:38:00 +0000 (UTC)
From: danny burstein <dannyb@panix.com>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: AT&T to discontinue CallVantage voip service
Message-ID: <gtg85o$epm$1@reader1.panix.com>
In <20090501210958.74983.qmail@simone.iecc.com> John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> writes:
>> Can someone recommend another VOIP service?
>I didn't like Vonage either, but I've been reasonably happy with Lingo,
>the voip service from Primus Telecommunications, a largish international
>long distance telco.
>If interested, write me directly and I'll send you a coupon.
Vonage is certainly more expensive than the new comers, but let's
give them credit where it's due - they pretty much are the folk
who pushed this whole technology out there to the public.
So I'll give them a bit more of a look than I would the others.
That being said, the economics of most VOIP companies are very,
very, shaky, and are based on _huge_ dept loads. Oh, and their
business model can colapse very quickly with some regulatory
changes.
I personally would recommend two services. The first
is Skype, which is "free" to any other Skype account and
pretty cheap to a PSTN number. They've got a rate card, with
plenty of options at http://www.skype.com
The second is available to folk who already have a t-Mobile
cellular account. They'll provide you with a special router which
accepts a SIM card, and that'll give you a psuedo-landline jack
out the back of it (which you can hook up to a landline
phone, or a wireless unit, or others stuff). Cost is $10/month
plus taxes and fees, which winds up totalling about $15 month.
Again, this is only applicable if you've already got a t-Mobile
cellular account.
I'm mentioning the latter one because t-Mobile is a valid fullscale
telco, thus the VOIP portion isn't likely to disappear without notice.
Disclosure: I'm a t-mobile user and shareholder.
Oh, one related point. It's pretty important to have a router
that has a "quality of service" option for the VOIP packets. Otherwise
anything else going on at the same time, such as your e-mail or web
browsing, could easily cause you grief. (The QOS isn't perfect, but
it makes a big difference).
--
_____________________________________________________
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
dannyb@panix.com
[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]
***** Moderator's Note *****
I wonder if Vonage is using a new "single port" router because of QOS
issues. If the Vonage box has to be first in line between the cable
modem or dsl modem and the "regular" router feeding your other
Internet usage, then Vonage gets first pick at the bandwidth.
Bill Horne
Temporary Moderator
------------------------------
Date: 1 May 2009 22:10:21 -0400
From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey)
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: AT&T doubling 3G capacity
Message-ID: <gtga2d$8fl$1@panix2.panix.com>
Dan Lanciani <ddl@danlan.com> wrote:
>|***** Moderator's Note *****
>|
>|Is Readnews Open Source?
>
>Yes, it is part of B news. But it is very, very old. I'm probably
>the only person still running it...
Out of curiosity, have you considered upgrading to a more modern
newsreader, like rn?
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
***** Moderator's Note *****
Scott,
Please publish a list of the newsreaders and combined email/news
clients available for open source users. I'm particularly interested
in software for the KDE environment.
Thank you!
Bill Horne
Temporary Moderator
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 02 May 2009 08:43:32 -0500
From: Neal McLain <nmclain@annsgarden.com>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Waveguide (was "size a major consideration...")
Message-ID: <49FC4E04.2000105@annsgarden.com>
Temporary moderator wrote:
> I'm surprised at the difference in loss of waveguide vs. coax:
> all the cell sites I've ever seen appear to use coax, so either
> they're using the flexible type [of waveguide] or the cellular
> engineers are employing the coax loss to contribute a large part
> of their loss budget for the antenna arrays being used.
I think what you're seeing on cell towers is flexible waveguide
("Heliax"): http://tinyurl.com/cudezg
Back in the good ol' days (before this fiber optic stuff came along),
many of us older cable guys used flexible waveguide for 12- and 18-GHz
microwave transmission systems. We could transmit the entire CATV
spectrum over a distance of about 25 miles. Back then, of course, the
"entire CATV spectrum" only extended up to about 400 MHz, or channel 53.
These systems could be used to distribute signals throughout a city, or
to distribute signals to distant communities in rural areas. In the
1970s and early 80s, hundreds of these systems were in use.
These systems used the same off-the-shelf RF transmission components --
antennas, radomes, waveguide, connectors -- that manufacturers were
making for other industries. At the time, Andrew was the biggest
manufacturer in the business. You could see those big Andrew microwave
antennas (easily identified by the red "lightning flash" logo on the
radome) hanging on water towers in small towns all across America.
Most of the radio equipment was manufactured by Hughes Aircraft
Company. When I first got into the cable business, I was surprised to
learn that a big defense contractor like Hughes was making stuff for the
cable industry. But in retrospect, it makes sense: the stuff Hughes was
building for the cable industry wasn't much different from the stuff
they were building for other purposes. The basic components were
essentially the same.
Of course, once fiber came along, all this microwave stuff suddenly
became obsolete. Most of the old microwave systems have been replaced
with fiber, and the equipment has been removed. Some of it has been
sold to cable companies in South America, but most of it has been
recycled or junked.
Neal McLain
Retired Cable Guy
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 02 May 2009 07:35:47 -0700
From: Sam Spade <sam@coldmail.com>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: AT&T to discontinue CallVantage voip service
Message-ID: <8TYKl.2031$%_2.1920@newsfe04.iad>
Robert Neville wrote:
>
> In my experience, call quality issues from any company are usually related to
> bandwidth constraints and jitter on the underlying connection and not with the
> VOIP service.
>
> ***** Moderator's Note *****
>
> Isn't that a bit like blaming poor line quality on old cable and dirty splices?
>
> Bill Horne
> Temporary Moderator
A better analogy is to blame poor VOIP quality on your "inside wiring"
and bad telephone sets.
I have had Vonage since its inception and also have a very high speed
ISP. In the first couple of years there were some echo issues, but
those have long since disappeared.
I really like having my primary number in DC although I am in
California. I also have one virtual number that is local. When you
factor in Vonage's package of features and its giant free calling area
(includes part of Europe) no one else comes close.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 02 May 2009 09:00:41 -0500
From: Neal McLain <nmclain@annsgarden.com>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: FiOS in MDU Buildings
Message-ID: <49FC5209.6000008@annsgarden.com>
Back in July 2006, there appeared on this list a thread-within-a-thread
concerning the installation of Verizon FiOS (and, by extension, similar
FTTH offerings) in MDU buildings. Lisa Hancock raised a question about
why Verizon did not offer FiOS in her condo building. I responded with
a generic explanation about some of the problems that I thought Verizon
would face, based on my own experiences getting cable TV installed in
MDU buildings back in the 1970s and 80s. See http://tinyurl.com/c28bo2
This very subject came up at a recent Broadband Properties conference in
Dallas. According to an April 28 report by Communications Technology
magazine:
"Verizon's SVP Technology Mark Wegleitner extolled the
virtues of laying fiber all the way to each separate
unit with terminations at in-unit optical network
terminals (ONTs). But real property developers and
managers pointed out certain problems with bringing one
particular provider's equipment all the way into a
resident's apartment or condominium."
Rest at http://tinyurl.com/ckwgvc
The problems that building owners mention certainly sound familiar!
Question for Lisa: has Verizon installed FiOS in your building yet?
Neal McLain
------------------------------
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 Patrick Townson. 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 currently being moderated by Bill Horne while
Pat Townson recovers from a stroke.
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) 2008 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)
******************************
|
or 