28 Years of the Digest ... founded August 21, 1981

Classified Ads
TD Extra News

Add this Digest to your personal   or  


The Telecom Digest for August 05, 2010
Volume 29 : Issue 211 : "text" Format

Messages in this Issue:

New area code for eastern Oklahoma(Wesrock)
Re: Do rate centers cross state lines?(The Kaminsky Family)
Re: Do rate centers cross state lines?(John Levine)
Re: Model 15 RO Teletype available (OT)(Harold Hallikainen)
Re: Model 15 RO Teletype available (OT)(Robert Bonomi)
Re: Model 15 RO Teletype available (OT)(Jim Haynes)
Re: Overlay acceptance(Koos van den Hout)
Re: Railroads(Randall)
Re: Do rate centers cross state lines?(Mark J Cuccia)
Re: My experience with cell phones overseas(Joseph Singer)
Re: My experience with cell phones overseas(John Mayson)
FairPoint may ask court to reverse Vt. ruling(Joseph Singer)

====== 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


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, 3 Aug 2010 20:11:34 EDT From: Wesrock@aol.com To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: New area code for eastern Oklahoma Message-ID: <bc072.3f716aa7.398a0a36@aol.com> >From newsok.com (The Oklahoman, Oklahoma City, Okla.), August 3, 2010 Wes Leatherock wesrock@aol.com _wleathus@yahoo.com_ (mailto:wleathus@yahoo.com) New area code coming soon to eastern Oklahoma Residents of Oklahoma's 918 telephone area code may begin using 10-digit dialing for local calls as soon as Saturday, although they won't be required to do so until March. Northeast Oklahoma (http://newsok.com/keysearch/?er=1&CANONICAL=Oklahoma&CATEGORY=STATE) area code test period begins Saturday A seven-month "permissive calling period" begins Saturday for Oklahoma residents in the 918 area code. That area code, which serves Tulsa (http://newsok.com/keysearch/?er=1&CANONICAL=Tulsa&CATEGORY=CITY) and much of eastern Oklahoma, is running out of new telephone numbers, so numbers with a new 539 area code will become available next spring. The overlay plan approved by state regulators in January means eastern Oklahoma residents will have to dial 10 digits - the area code and phone number - on all local calls. That change won't be required until March 5, but the permissive calling period allows residents time to acclimate. Numbers with the new 539 area code will be available April 1, but telephone customers still will be able to request 918 numbers as long as they are available, according to the _Oklahoma Corporation Commission_ http://newsok.com/keysearch/?er=1&CANONICAL=Oklahoma+Corporation+Commission&CATEGORY=ORGANIZATION The remaining 918 numbers are expected to run out by the last quarter of 2012. The new area code will be Oklahoma's fourth, joining 918, 405 and 580. An area code can accommodate about 7.8 million telephone numbers, according to the North American Number Plan, which serves 19 North American countries. _JAY F. MARKS_ (http://newsok.com/keysearch/?er=1&CANONICAL=Jay+Marks&CATEGORY=PERSON), Business Writer Read more: _ http://newsok.com/new-area-code-coming-soon-to-eastern-oklahoma/article/3481885?custom_click=pod_headline_local-financial-news#TB_inline?heightE0&widthD0&inlineId=emailFriend#ixzz0vai9xidj
Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2010 20:09:14 -0700 From: The Kaminsky Family <kaminsky@kaminsky.org> To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: Do rate centers cross state lines? Message-ID: <4c58daf0$0$1652$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net> danny burstein wrote: > In <i38t25$ed7$1@blue.rahul.net> John David Galt <jdg@diogenes.sacramento.ca.us> writes: > The other is the community of Marble Hill in Northern Manhattan. > The physical phone cables run through a Bronx central office, > and during the breakup of the (212) area code, these folk, > despite being in Manhattan, were assigned into the new (718) one. A little background on Marble Hill. The border between the island of Manhattan and the mainland (the Bronx) was (until the early 1900's) Spuyten Duyvil Creek (don't trust me on the spelling; it means "in spite of the devil" in Dutch [1]). In 1909 (as I remember it, but don't bet on the date), the Harlem River Ship Canal was built to connect the Harlem River to the Hudson River, enabling navigation around what was left of Manhattan Island. Marble Hill is the portion of the old island north of the canal. It is now on the mainland, and every couple of years when I was growing up there the borough president of the Bronx would come to Marble Hill and try to claim it for the Bronx - to no avail. The neighborhood is served by the Bronx Post Office, [ob telecom] Bronx central offices (I am guessing more than one, but do not know for certain), and Bronx schools, but votes in New York County with Manhattan Island. No surprise that they went to 718 with the Bronx. Mark [1] In the time before the English took over New Amsterdam (memory says that was 1664 - but it has been many years since grade school), a Dutch colonist had to cross the creek on an urgent errand (I've forgotten what, but it was a matter of life and death). Now the tides go up the Hudson well past this point, and when the creek was high, the water at the junction of the creek and the river was pretty wild. So the colonist said, "in spite of the devil" and swam across. I cannot remember whether he survived, but I suspect the creek would have been named after him if he perished. I have never understood why he didn't try to cross further upstream, where it had to be smoother.
Date: 4 Aug 2010 16:21:28 -0000 From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: Do rate centers cross state lines? Message-ID: <20100804162128.30722.qmail@joyce.lan> >First is Fisher's Island, in Long Island Sound. Legally >it's part of Suffolk County, an eastern NYC suburb. Right, it's always been connected to New London, which is much closer than Long Island where the rest of Suffolk County is. I recall some articles a while ago about the complicated stuff they had to do to route 911 calls through AT&T and two ILECs to get them back to the center in Long Island. >The other is the community of Marble Hill in Northern Manhattan. >The physical phone cables run through a Bronx central office, >and during the breakup of the (212) area code, these folk, >despite being in Manhattan, were assigned into the new (718) one. Marble Hill is physically part of the Bronx. When they blasted out the Harlem River, which separates the Bronx from Manhattan, to make it more navigable in the 1800s, they rerouted it from north of Marble Hill to south. The residents feel very strongly that they are Manhattanites and have objected to attempts to give them area codes or zip codes that suggest otherwise. R's, John
Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2010 05:53:30 -0700 (PDT) From: Harold Hallikainen <harold@hallikainen.com> To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: Model 15 RO Teletype available (OT) Message-ID: <b7bf2d29-59e1-4a9f-a915-884157a5ecfd@y32g2000prc.googlegroups.com> While in high school, I ran several miles of single conductor wire through trees to a friend's house. We ran a couple [of] model 15 Teletypes over that line to ground. I quickly discovered that T=L/R on that circuit. I used a low voltage power supply and adjusted it for 60mA loop current. We got garbage when we typed. We then used the power supplies that came with the Teletypes, which were something like 150VDC with a large series resistor limiting the current to 60mA. They worked fine. The time constant had kept the selector magnet current from increasing to a high enough current during a mark bit time for the bit to be detected properly. With the higher voltage and the series R, it worked great. We added some current detect relays in series at each end with capacitors across them. When the current was off for a long time, the relay would drop out and turn off the printer motor. We had a power supply at each end. We could turn on the supply at one end or the other, start the motors at both ends, then leave a message. We'd then turn off the supply. The printers would "run open" for a second, then shut down. These were running 60WPM and were real tolerant of our line. Of course, by telegraph standards, this was a pretty short line. I read once that when experimenting with undersea telegraph, they originally put a big roll of wire in a vat of saltwater and tried to send a message through it. It appeared that undersea telegraph was not going to work because it was so slow with even this relatively short wire. It was later determined that the big coil of wire was a pretty good inductor. Also, finally, on Morse... In 1969, I went to the FCC office in San Francisco to take the exam for my radiotelephone license. The PA system in the FCC office used Morse. They'd use tone over speakers to send the name of the person and the line they needed to pick up on the phone. I don't know when that was taken out. Perhaps when the FCC office moved out of San Francisco. I use Morse ringtones on my cellphone to ID who's calling me. For my next phone, I'd like Morse text entry for text messaging and email. Harold
Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2010 08:25:04 -0500 From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: Model 15 RO Teletype available (OT) Message-ID: <AuOdnVd2BL-t98TRnZ2dnUVZ_jGdnZ2d@posted.nuvoxcommunications> In article <i39mh9$eiq$1@reader1.panix.com>, Rich Greenberg <richgr@panix.com> wrote: >In article <a60b8bad-229f-4ccf-a907-161b31460874@x20g2000pro.googlegroups.com>, >Lisa or Jeff <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote: > >>* Let's see, that's 1 word per second, or 5 characters per second, or >>25 bits per second, right? (not counting start stop bits) > >No, its actually 6 characters or 30 bits/word. You have to count the >space between words. At the typical 66 speed, thats 66 bits/sec. For an 8-bit data code with 1 start and 1 stop bit -- i.e. 10 bit per character, 'words per minute' was the sam as the bit-rate per second. 10 bits/char * 6 characters (5 printing, plus the space) exactly compensates for the difference between 'per second' and "per minute". <grin> IIRC, ttys used 1 start, and 1.5 stop bits. giving a total 'frame' of 7.5 bits. If that's correct, 60 WPM was the equivalent of 45 baud, and 66 WPM was 49.5 baud. That also 'looks right' -- I remember shaking my head over the `half bit' in the speed specification. :)
Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2010 11:04:43 -0500 From: Jim Haynes <jhaynes@cavern.uark.edu> To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: Model 15 RO Teletype available (OT) Message-ID: <AoadnbGMsfoGEsTRnZ2dnUVZ_oOdnZ2d@earthlink.com> On 2010-08-02, Lisa or Jeff <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote: > > When a Morse telegraph line was converted to teleprinter, did the > physical line need to be upgraded to properly handle the bits from the > teleprinters? Even at the slow speed of 60 words-per-minute that's a > lot of bit* per second to move over a coarse open wire with ground > return. Were the relay repeaters sensitive and fast enough to replay > teleprinter bits? > 45.45 bits per second for 60 wpm teleprinter. Certainly you wouldn't use regular Morse hardware, such as the old Morse relays, in teleprinter service. But as for the line itself, Western Union for a long time operated time division multiplex over duplexed, ground-return wire circuits. This was typically four channel multiplex. I don't know the bit rate off the top of my head but seems like in the range of 100-200 bits/sec. This lasted into the 1950s, when they converted to frequency division multiplex carrier systems using electronics. One of the problems of the conversion was that they had to achieve essentially voice-grade lines, metallic pairs, and they had all these single-wire ground-return lines so it was hard to find a pair of wires on a pole line where both wires of the pair had the same wire gauge and material and position on the crossarms for the length of the run. I have some information dating from about 1930 on W.U. operating tables, showing teleprinter operation but with a key and sounder to use if the teleprinter failed. So the relays and repeaters of that time frame were good enough for teleprinter use.
Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2010 19:44:07 +0000 (UTC) From: Koos van den Hout <koos+newsposting@kzdoos.xs4all.nl> To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: Overlay acceptance Message-ID: <i3cfu7$34p$4@kzdoos.xs4all.nl> Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1002@zugschl.us> wrote in <i2r8kl$h1v$1@news1.tnib.de>: > John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> wrote: >>>Additionally, we handle PBXes a little different here. Dependent on >>>the number of lines (I think that you would say, the width of the >>>trunk) to the PBX, the subscriber gets a base number of a certain >>>length and can add on her own extension numbers ad discretion. >> >>I agree that can be very convenient. I have stayed in hotels where >>the front desk's number was something like 222-333-0. and you could >>direct dial room 123 as 222-333-123. > This is indeed the normal way to do things in a hotel. The Austrians > even went one step further: When the front desk's number is 05212 > 1234, room 123 could be 05212 1234 123. > Don't ask me how that is implemented technically. Using so-called "overlap dial". Dive into the documentation for the isdn drivers in asterisk and you will see it mentioned a few times. Basically the ISDN switch at the phone company allows for an ISDN switch to signal 'give me more digits' and request those from the user at the other end. But with the option for a timeout ('this is all you are going to get') and with the option to signal 'no more digits' (for example when the originating end used preprogrammed dialing as found on mobile phones). It is only available over ISDN where there is a lot more communication between the exchange and the equipment at the user end. For as far as I am aware this service is offered in Germany and Austria. The Netherlands switched to a fixed-length number plan on 10-10-1995: 10 digits total (including the 0) with 3 or 4 digit area codes and 7 or 6 digit subscriber numbers. Koos van den Hout -- The Virtual Bookcase, the site about books, book | Koos van den Hout news and reviews http://www.virtualbookcase.com/ | http://idefix.net/ PGP keyid DSS/1024 0xF0D7C263 |
Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2010 13:24:08 -0400 From: Randall <rvh40.remove-this@and-this-too.insightbb.com> To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: Railroads Message-ID: <ECC6A0EC-2581-4570-A98E-9D81356DE5A5@insightbb.com> > From: Jim Haynes <jhaynes@cavern.uark.edu> > To: redacted@invalid.telecom-digest.org. > Subject: Re: Model 15 RO Teletype available (OT) > Message-ID: <LpqdnaQh1ZOT3sXRnZ2dnUVZ_gidnZ2d@earthlink.com> > The railroads continued to use Morse right into the 1960s. In > contrast to Western Union, telegraphy was a tool in running a > railroad rather than the reason for existence of the company. And > again the simplicity of the hardware was worth something. The > railroads did use teleprinters extensively on circuits where the > traffic warranted. Burlington Northern was still using telex in 1987. A client of mine was ripping up abandoned BN lines for scrap then, and BN was carrying the scrap from where it was ripped up to the recycling yards. Larry kept track of where his cars were (and how much they weighed) thanks to telex transmissions from BN.
Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2010 05:08:48 -0700 (PDT) From: Mark J. Cuccia <markjcuccia@yahoo.com> To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: Do rate centers cross state lines? Message-ID: <40955975-0258-4641-90c2-a39cc194c57e@v15g2000yqe.googlegroups.com> David Kaye originally wrote (in part): > As to NPA/NXX spanning, there are rural areas where it's easier to > service one state from another. I seem to remember a small area of > northern California serviced from Oregon. I'm trying to find the > actual communities but can't at the moment. I believe this is also > true between California and Nevada. John David Galt replied: > I've found only one case: a "Verdi, CA" exchange in 530 is served by > a switch in Verdi, NV. There is no town of Verdi in CA; the nearest > town in CA is Farad (exit 201 on I-80). Most of the terrain in > between is inaccessible mountains (that stretch of I-80 runs along > the narrow Truckee River canyon), so whoever is on the "Verdi, CA" > exchange must be awfully hard to get to. While the Verdi CA side is served with dial-tone from the Verdi NV side, each side has its own unique state/area code based NPA-NXX code: VERDNV11RS2 is the switch, a REMOTE at that, owned by at&t/SBC/ Nevada*Bell, located in Verdi NV in the Reno NV (northern Nevada) LATA. 775-345 Verdi NV 530-479 Verdi CA Danny Burstein replied: > We've had two in the larger NYC area. > > First is Fisher's Island, in Long Island Sound. Legally it's part of > Suffolk County, an eastern NYC suburb. > > Per the Wiki write-up, though, it's "2 miles (3 km) off the > southeastern coast of Connecticut across Fishers Island Sound. It > is approx. 11 miles (18 km) from the tip of Long Island (NY)..." So far, true. > The physical phone lines are run from Ct. central offices. NOT true. Someone is fooling someone and using Wikipedia to do it. Fishers' Island NY is its own telephone company, with its own c.o.switch, and is also its own LATA due to the demands of the NY State PSC back in the early/mid-1980s. The original plans drafted by pre-divestiture AT&T was to have Fishers' Island NY to be a part of the (semi-BOC) SNET Connecticut LATA, since Fishers' Island "homed" on the AT&T-LL/SNET tandem in New London CT. However, the NY State PSC objected to having any NY State-based customers, rate-centers, c.o.switches, etc. associated with any outside state's LATAs. I don't know offhand if there are any NY State customers getting dial-tone from any PA or NJ or CT or MA or VT (or Quebec or Ontario) central offices, but IF any do, they would be associated with a NY State-based LATA. However, there are several NY State-based LATAs which serve adjacent-state customers which have their own state/NPA-based c.o.codes, although they could get their dial-tone from their own switch as well as from the NY side. Of course, with CLECs and wireless these days, the ILEC trunking and such does not necessarily have to be the same as the competitors' network configurations. Fishers' Island NY, FSISNYXF788, is based on Fishers' island, owned by the Fishers' Island Telephone Company (OCN 0095), and its own LATA #921. The NPA-NXX is 631-788, the 631 area code being for Suffolk County since the 516/631 NPA split of 1999/2000, 516 being retained by Nassau County. Prior to that split, Fishers' Island was 516-788. Fishers' Island NY is still "homed" on Connecticut, homing on an AT&T-LL 4ESS in New Haven CT for quite some time post-divestiture, the trunks still passing through New London CT. All competitive carriers which trunk to Fishers' Island do need to pass through AT&T- LL, even before SBC/SNET bought AT&T to become at&t. However, wireless provider cell towers on the CT side might serve Fishers' Island NY customers, and there might be some CLECs/etc. who now have their own microwave links to Fishers' Island NY. But the incumbent landline service does have their own c.o.switch on the Island, NOT served out of CT, even though they do "home" on CT for toll. > The other is the community of Marble Hill in Northern Manhattan. The > physical phone cables run through a Bronx central office, and during > the breakup of the (212) area code, these folk, despite being in > Manhattan, were assigned into the new (718) one. > > (With the more modern carrier trunks and switches that don't care > about distance, I wouldn't make any bets on the current arrangement). Marble Hill is still jurisdictionally a part of Manhattan. Until about 100 years ago (or so), they were geographically a "bump" on the northernmost tip of (northwestern) Manhattan, the Harlem River's course swinging around this Marble Hill tip of Manhattan. But a new channel was dredged just to the south of the Marble Hill area, so that the Harlem River would be aligned with the course just to the west and east of Marble Hill, cutting off Marble Hill from the rest of Manhattan geographically (but not jurisdictionally). The original channel segment to the north of Marble Hill seems to have been filled up, thus making Marble Hill geographically a part of the Bronx, though it was never changed to being jurisdictionally a part of the Bronx. However, I understand that many borough/county-based services (NY City is a single municipal jurisdiction spread over five individual counties/boroughs) for Marble Hill are handled out of the Bronx, even though Marble Hill is still a jurisdictional part of Manhattan Borough/New York County. Thus, it was easier to provide dial-tone from a Bronx-based c.o.switch, and the c.o.codes remained with Bronx (718) when Bronx migrated from 212 to 718 back in 1992/93 (the rest of 718 for Brooklyn/Queens/Staten Isl. split form 212 back in 1984). Offhand, I don't know if the 718-NXX c.o.codes that serve Marble Hill also serve other Bronx points though. But note that so far, nobody has shown an actual example of an NPA-NXX code that crossed a state line, at least not in the modern "DDD" era, other than the "aliased" situation where one could use either sides' uniquely defined NPA-NXX codes to reach each side, although telco officially defined the NPA-NXX for each jurisdictional side. Of course, this worked in the SXS days, but not in the ESS/Digital days. "Officially", area codes are NOT to cover more than one state. Canada on the other hand, has had examples of area codes covering all or part of adjacent provinces or territories. And 809 used to cover numerous countries/territories/etc. in the +1 NANP-Caribbean area, until they all split into their own unique area codes during the 1995-99 period. St. Kitts and Nevis is a single jurisdictional entity, with +1-869, but there had been talk about ten years ago that they were considering splitting into their own island countries. I wonder if Nevis would have wanted to split off from +1-869 into a different +1 area code? Sint Maarten in the (soon to be politically dissolved) Netherlands Antilles is at some future (postponed) date to join the NANP as +1-721, splitting off from the Netherlands Antilles +599 country code. Other soon-to-be "ex" Netherlands Antilles (yet still associated with Holland to some degree) islands might also consider joining the NANP. It is still unclear if they will be requested to also be associated with +1-721, or if they would be assigned their own +1-NPA codes. In the case of Nevis and in the (soon to be dissolved Netherlands Antilles), there are unique NXX c.o.codes, so if there was still NPA code sharing, things would still be defined by the NXX code. If there were a change in any area codes, it would also be "smooth" as far as the c.o.codes, as well. The same also "mostly" applies to Canada where there are area codes that cross province/territorial boundaries, as far as c.o.codes being "uniquely" associated with a rate-center in a particular province or territory. But there are obviously going to be "undocumented" cases of an NPA-NXX in a rural area near a state line which crosses over into the adjacent state! And I'm not referring to special "FX" (Foreign Exchange) service. Some of these have been documented: Sandy Valley NV in Clark County, SDVYNV11RS2, 702-723, also used to cover the handful of customers on the California side, also known as Sandy Valley (CA). I forget the actual political aspects that took place about ten years ago, with the California PUC, but SBC/ Nevada*Bell had to eventually register the CA-side as a unique rate-center of Sandy Valley CA with the CA-PUC, and have a CA-based c.o.code assigned, 760-657, thus renumbering these CA-side customers. They still have the same local (EAS) calling areas. Hyder AK USA not only gets its dial-tone from Stewart BC Canada, but it still is numbered as part of the Canada-side, 250-636. Not only the BC 250 area code, but also the 636 c.o.code for Stewart BC (Canada) also serves customers in Hyder AK (USA). Prior to 2006, all of BC was area code 604 though, so back then the code was 604-636. Prior to 2000, GTE-of-Alaska was the "official" ILEC for the Hyder AK USA side, but since GTE owned BC-Tel, or by now the BC-side of Telus was still owned in part by GTE. But in 2000, either GTE or VeriZon chose to exit Alaska, selling off their service areas in the state (about twelve or thirteen total) to about six different local "home grown" Alaskan independent telcos. This also included the Hyder AK USA side. Since then, (OCN 3017) "Alaska Telephone Company" is the official service provider for the Alaska/USA (Hyder) side customers, billed in US$. However, all they are really doing is re-selling dial-tone from the Telus Stewart BC Canada side switch, STWTBC01DS1. I don't know if the Stewart BC Canada vs. Hyder AK USA side customers are differentiated by thousands or hundreds blocks in the line-numbers though. While there might be some special considerations regarding to 907 Alaska customers calling 250-636 customers, and vice-versa, for the most part, a call to/from ALL of 250-636, including the Hyder AK USA side with the "rest of the world" is considered a call to/from Stewart BC Canada, and billed as such. Finally, as to "dial-tone" that crosses political boundaries, including state, province, territory, and even country/national boundaries within the NANP, this has been rather common for decades. However, NUMBERING and CODE resources crossing that level of political boundary, while not unknown, as been rare. But Codes (NXX and even area codes) crossing county/parish/township/municipal/etc. boundaries is VERY common. And with VoIP and wireless, numbering and geography/jurisdictions are becoming very disassociated! Mark J. Cuccia markjcuccia at yahoo dot com Lafayette LA, formerly of New Orleans LA pre-Katrina
Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2010 17:08:40 -0700 (PDT) From: Joseph Singer <joeofseattle@yahoo.com> To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: My experience with cell phones overseas Message-ID: <691113.84484.qm@web52702.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Sun, 1 Aug 2010 12:08:05 +0800 John Mayson <john@mayson.us> wrote: > I have a personal cell phone though AT&T Wireless and my company > provides me with a phone through Verizon Wireless. My first stop > was Moscow. I was only there for about 90 minutes. Neither phone > worked. I was able to get my iPod Touch working on the airport's > free wifi by guessing at what the Russian language splash page > wanted me to do. > > My next stop was Singapore. Again, neither phone worked. Use of > free wifi in Singapore requires registration. I didn't bother as > they have plenty of free computers throughout the terminal. > > My destination was Penang, Malaysia. Again, neither phone worked. > I wasn't sure my Verizon phone would work, but sort of expected my > AT&T phone to work. I'm supposed to have international on both > phones. Not to mean any disrespect, but any number of guides to using mobile services in other countries for the traveler from the US will tell you basic facts such as certain native carriers (like Verizon) will not work outside of a limited number of countries on its CDMA service and will only work if you have a device that is capable of using GSM networks which is what the majority of countries in the world use. Even if you do have a device that is capable of using foreign networks US carriers (GSM carriers as well) will not let you place calls unless you ask them to give you global roaming capability.
Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2010 09:03:24 +0800 From: John Mayson <john@mayson.us> To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: My experience with cell phones overseas Message-ID: <AANLkTim9MQSVwKxo+HLtiW=tFECrhOZVVo_9DAABPPax@mail.gmail.com> On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 8:08 AM, Joseph Singer <joeofseattle@yahoo.com> wrote: > > Not to mean any disrespect, but any number of guides to using mobile > services in other countries for the traveler from the US will tell you > basic facts such as certain native carriers (like Verizon) will not > work outside of a limited number of countries on its CDMA service and > will only work if you have a device that is capable of using GSM > networks which is what the majority of countries in the world use. > Even if you do have a device that is capable of using foreign networks > US carriers (GSM carriers as well) will not let you place calls unless > you ask them to give you global roaming capability. None taken. I questioned if the phone would work, but someone back home insisted it would. Since I work for a global company with a lot of Americans traveling to this part of Malaysia I thought perhaps it was CDMA capable. I did request global roaming on my AT&T phone and it still doesn't work. However I have found it easier and less expensive to use a local SIM card. -- John Mayson <john@mayson.us> Austin, Texas, USA
Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2010 16:55:52 -0700 (PDT) From: Joseph Singer <joeofseattle@yahoo.com> To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: FairPoint may ask court to reverse Vt. ruling Message-ID: <362542.42614.qm@web52703.mail.re2.yahoo.com> MONTPELIER, Vt.: FairPoint Communications may ask a federal court to overturn Vermont regulators' rejection of its reorganization plan as northern New England's dominant landline phone company tries to emerge from bankruptcy, a company executive said Tuesday. Michael Smith, president of FairPoint's Vermont operations, said that's one of two broad options the company is looking at after the Public Service Board nixed the company's reorganization plan on June 28. That decision put Vermont at odds with New Hampshire and Maine, which had approved the reorganization plan. http://www.boston.com/news/local/maine/articles/2010/08/03/fairpoint_may_ask_court_to_reverse_vt_ruling/ Or, for a version optimized for printing - http://bit.ly/atiKWI
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 (12 messages)

Return to Archives ** Older Issues