The Telecom Digest for January 02, 2011
Volume 30 : Issue 2 : "text" Format
Messages in this Issue:
====== 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: Sat, 01 Jan 2011 01:28:13 -0800
From: Sam Spade <sam@coldmail.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Happy New Year!
Message-ID: <o5GdnSQfAegzboPQnZ2dnUVZ_vudnZ2d@giganews.com>
Telecom Digest Moderator wrote:
> Thank you all for your support and help in 2010. I appreciate your
> suggestions and kind words more than I can say, and I'm going to
> use your advice to improve this publication as much as I can in 2011.
>
> Here are my resolutions for the new year:
>
> 1. We'll have more information about VoIP and other non-traditional
> technologies.
>
> 2. I'll add more to our archives about the networks, technologies, and
> management of both the Bell System and of other companies.
>
> 3. I'll seek out and publish opinions from industry leaders.
>
> Happy New Year!
>
> Bill
>
Happy New Year, Bill.
I would be especially eager to learn how Vonage really works. It's all
a mystery to me. Sure, I undersand the transmission method, but I don't
have a clue about how they "switch" calls and how they interface into
the PSTN. I recall the suits where Verizon (I believe) seriously
challenged Vonage for a time, based on Vonage's violation of Verizon
patents, or something like that.
Clearing the air on Vonage and VoIP would be great.
Another interesting subject would be the history of how strong the FCC
was in the 1995 Caller ID decision, then in subsequent years have seem
to lost interest in maintaining the integrity of Caller ID delivery and
they never did address the reserved PBX component of the original decision.
Date: 1 Jan 2011 18:52:22 -0000
From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Happy New Year!
Message-ID: <20110101185222.94266.qmail@joyce.lan>
>I would be especially eager to learn how Vonage really works. It's all
>a mystery to me. Sure, I undersand the transmission method, but I don't
>have a clue about how they "switch" calls and how they interface into
>the PSTN.
There's nothing magic. They have deals with CLECs for local numbers,
and a lot of gateways. When I had a Vonage phone, I did some traceroutes
and it appeared that all of the outgoing calls went over the net to
Vonage HQ in New Jersey and were switched there. Calls to other Vonage
customers went back over the net to the other customer, calls to landlines
went through a gateway to the phone network.
Incoming calls go to whatever CLEC handles the number, and out through
a VoIP gateway. My number was an Ithaca NY number, switched by
Paetec in Syracuse, and I saw the incoming packet stream coming from
Syracuse.
Regards,
John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. http://jl.ly
Date: Sat, 01 Jan 2011 09:04:03 -0600
From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi)
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: iPhone rage: boy hit for refusing to switch off on plane
Message-ID: <_pOdndA2a4r-34LQnZ2dnUVZ_sednZ2d@posted.nuvoxcommunications>
In article <pan.2010.12.30.22.01.08.677906@myrealbox.com>,
David Clayton <dcstar@myrealbox.com> wrote:
>On Thu, 30 Dec 2010 17:51:43 +1100, David Clayton wrote:
>
>>
>http://www.theage.com.au/travel/travel-news/iphone-rage-boy-hit-for-refusing-to-switch-off-on-plane-20101230-19amy.html
>>
>> iPhone rage: boy hit for refusing to switch off on plane December 30, 2010
>> - 10:39AM
>>
>> A US man who struck a teenage boy for refusing to turn off his iPhone
>> before a Southwest Airlines flight has been arrested on battery charges,
>> police said on Wednesday.
>.........
>> ***** Moderator's Note *****
>>
>> You go, grandpa! Young whippersnappers!
>>
>> Bill Horne
>> Moderator
>
>I'm still waiting for the inevitable puns from this group re the iPhone
>and "battery charges"...
sigh One would think this group would know that 'battery' is an
incorrect description if it involves only a single 'cell'.
As for the puns, it is ampere-ically obvious that one must stay current, lest
one be reduced to "say, Watt?" at an unfamilar joule, or hollering "NO MHO!!"
at a particularly revolting one. It is also worth noting that this is the
only type of puns with a national holiday -- October 12th[1] -- in their
honor.
>***** Moderator's Note *****
>
>Ah, but "Assault and Battery" is different than "Assault with a battery"!
>
That said, every battry electrolyte is a chemical salt. Hence, by
_definition_, you always have "a salt with a battery".
[1] Coloumbus Day, that is.
--
Robert Bonomi
***** Moderator's Note *****
Acid redux causes Acid Reflux! Film at eleven!
Bill Horne
Moderator
Date: Sat, 01 Jan 2011 14:20:30 -0500
From: tlvp <tPlOvUpBErLeLsEs@hotmail.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: iPhone rage: boy hit for refusing to switch off on plane
Message-ID: <op.vom9cgegitl47o@acer250.gateway.2wire.net>
On Sat, 01 Jan 2011 10:04:03 -0500, Robert Bonomi
<bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com> wrote:
> ...
> [1] Coloumbus Day, that is.
Surely you meant Coulombos Day, no, Robert?
Happy New Year, and cheers, -- tlvp
--
Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP
***** Moderator's Note *****
Are you guys getting a charge out of this? It just leaves me feeling
drained.
Bill Horne
Moderator
Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2011 23:23:18 +0000 (UTC)
From: Paul <pssawyer@comcast.net.INVALID>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: iPhone rage: boy hit for refusing to switch off on plane
Message-ID: <Xns9E60BB13B69CCSenex@188.40.43.213>
tlvp <tPlOvUpBErLeLsEs@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:op.vom9cgegitl47o@acer250.gateway.2wire.net:
> On Sat, 01 Jan 2011 10:04:03 -0500, Robert Bonomi
> <bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com> wrote:
>
>> ...
>> [1] Coloumbus Day, that is.
>
> Surely you meant Coulombos Day, no, Robert?
>
> Happy New Year, and cheers, -- tlvp
> --
> Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP
>
> ***** Moderator's Note *****
>
> Are you guys getting a charge out of this? It just leaves me
> feeling drained.
>
> Bill Horne
> Moderator
>
>
Resistance is futile...
--
Paul
Date: Sun, 02 Jan 2011 09:21:19 +1100
From: David Clayton <dcstar@myrealbox.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: iPhone rage: boy hit for refusing to switch off on plane
Message-ID: <pan.2011.01.01.22.21.16.272852@myrealbox.com>
On Sat, 01 Jan 2011 09:04:03 -0600, Robert Bonomi wrote:
> In article <pan.2010.12.30.22.01.08.677906@myrealbox.com>, David Clayton
> <dcstar@myrealbox.com> wrote:
>>On Thu, 30 Dec 2010 17:51:43 +1100, David Clayton wrote:
>>
>>
>>http://www.theage.com.au/travel/travel-news/iphone-rage-boy-hit-for-refusing-to-switch-off-on-plane-20101230-19amy.html
>>>
>>> iPhone rage: boy hit for refusing to switch off on plane December 30,
>>> 2010 - 10:39AM
>>>
>>> A US man who struck a teenage boy for refusing to turn off his iPhone
>>> before a Southwest Airlines flight has been arrested on battery
>>> charges, police said on Wednesday.
>>.........
>>> ***** Moderator's Note *****
>>>
>>> You go, grandpa! Young whippersnappers!
>>>
>>> Bill Horne
>>> Moderator
>>
>>I'm still waiting for the inevitable puns from this group re the iPhone
>>and "battery charges"...
>
> sigh One would think this group would know that 'battery' is an
> incorrect description if it involves only a single 'cell'.
Maybe the accused thought of his predicament in the terms of: "If I'd only
grabbed his battery I wouldn't have ended up in this cell"?
.........
(Sorry!)
--
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.
***** Moderator's Note *****
David, I declare you the winner. You have discharged your obligation.
And, with the end of January 1, I close our little bit of silliness.
Bill Horne
Moderator
Date: Sat, 01 Jan 2011 01:21:12 -0800
From: Sam Spade <sam@coldmail.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: For Some Travelers Stranded in Airports, Relief Is in 140 Characters
Message-ID: <XpGdndqw7JOUb4PQnZ2dnUVZ_qednZ2d@giganews.com>
Monty Solomon wrote:
> For Some Travelers Stranded in Airports, Relief Is in 140 Characters
>
> By KIM SEVERSON
> December 29, 2010
>
> ATLANTA - Some travelers stranded by the great snowstorm of 2010
> discovered a new lifeline for help. When all else fails, Twitter
> might be the best way to book a seat home.
>
> While the airlines' reservation lines required hours of waiting - if
> people could get through at all - savvy travelers were able to book
> new reservations, get flight information and track lost luggage. And
> they could complain, too.
>
> Since Monday, nine Delta Air Lines agents with special Twitter
> training have been rotating shifts to help travelers wired enough to
> know how to "dm," or send a direct message. Many other airlines are
> doing the same as a way to help travelers cut through the confusion
> of a storm that has grounded thousands of flights this week.
>
> But not all travelers, of course. People who could not send a Twitter
> message if their life depended on it found themselves with that
> familiar feeling that often comes with air travel - being left out of
> yet another inside track to get the best information.
>
> For those in the digital fast lane, however, the online help was a godsend.
>
> ...
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/30/us/30airlines.html
>
(soap box mode on) In my senior citizen/consumer advocate opinion, this
amounts to an unfair advantage for those who choose to pay for text
messaging. Although I am a senior, I have always been an early adapter.
HP-35 calculator in 1972. Kaypro II CPM computer with 1200 baud
modem, circa 1980. Vonage customer since their inception. I
effectively fought the California PUC on their early regressive position
on Caller ID in 1996-97 by becoming an intervenor in their first Caller
ID case (after they lost their fight with the FCC to not offer Caller ID
in California.)
I bought an Apple G3 Iphone 2 years ago and my wife has a plain vanilla
Motorola wireless phone on AT&T's family plan. But, we blocked text
messaging because it is useless to us and would only expose us to
unsolicited commercial messages on our dime. So, we would be left out
in the cold with this latest airline scheme. Of course, I can do email
with my Iphone. It would seem that if Delta Airlines, and other
carriers, are going to open Twitter as a portal(end run) around long
lines or clogged reservation telephone lines, then in fairness they
should place email communications right up there with Twitter. (soap
box mode off)
Date: Sat, 01 Jan 2011 08:12:01 -0800
From: Richard <rng@richbonnie.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: CNAM for toll-free numbers
Message-ID: <kakuh618l9s4i7eicpj22ilva7rickn6it@4ax.com>
On Sat, 1 Jan 2011 02:36:42 +0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman"
<ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>Except that toll-free numbers CANNOT originate calls. A toll-free number
>either points to a group of inbound trunks or an ordinary phone line, which
>gives its own number in ANI. Outbound calls from a call center originate on
>outbound trunks with their own ANI.
I frequently get junk calls and legitimate calls where the Caller ID
is a toll-free number, e.g., 800-xxx-xxxx. Are these numbers spoofed?
Dick
Date: 1 Jan 2011 23:32:37 -0000
From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: CNAM for toll-free numbers
Message-ID: <20110101233237.72525.qmail@joyce.lan>
>>Except that toll-free numbers CANNOT originate calls. ...
>I frequently get junk calls and legitimate calls where the Caller ID
>is a toll-free number, e.g., 800-xxx-xxxx. Are these numbers spoofed?
ANI is not Caller ID. The ANI is the billing info, which is very hard
to spoof, provided by the originating telco switch, and points to the
actual line that made the call. Caller ID can be set by terminal
equipment, particularly if the call originates over ISDN or VoIP, and
can be set to more or less whatever the caller wants. There are
perfectly legitimate reasons for ANI and CNID not to match, with the
most common being that the ANI is a PBX trunk, and the CNID is the
number of the extension.
If the 800-xxx-xxxx really is a number at which you can call back the
person who's calling, I suppose I wouldn't describe it as spoofed.
And they're doing you a favor, since approximately 100% of calls with
800 CNID are calls you can safely not answer.
Regards,
John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. http://jl.ly
Date: Sat, 01 Jan 2011 10:01:27 -0600
From: Neal McLain <nmclain@annsgarden.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: USA broadband isn't broadband per FCC report...
Message-ID: <4D1F4FD7.1090000@annsgarden.com>
>> As for "Broadband," Great Thinkers of the cable TV industry (and their
>> regulators) have for years been using that term to describe analog
>> distribution networks.
>
> Yes, but in the context of the cable carrying multiple disparate
> services that did not affect each other on the same media, "Broadband"
> is 100% accurate.
>
> That is the issue I keep banging on about, it is a specific technical
> term that has been hijacked by so many fools that it is now almost
> worthless.
But was it a "specific technical term" in 1972 when the Madison city
council "hijacked" it?
Neal McLain
Date: Sun, 02 Jan 2011 09:28:49 +1100
From: David Clayton <dcstar@myrealbox.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: USA broadband isn't broadband per FCC report...
Message-ID: <pan.2011.01.01.22.28.46.510160@myrealbox.com>
On Sat, 01 Jan 2011 10:01:27 -0600, Neal McLain wrote:
> >> As for "Broadband," Great Thinkers of the cable TV industry (and their
> >> regulators) have for years been using that term to describe analog
> >> distribution networks.
> >
> > Yes, but in the context of the cable carrying multiple disparate
> > services that did not affect each other on the same media, "Broadband"
> > is 100% accurate.
> >
> > That is the issue I keep banging on about, it is a specific technical
> > term that has been hijacked by so many fools that it is now almost
> > worthless.
>
> But was it a "specific technical term" in 1972 when the Madison city
> council "hijacked" it?
>
AFAIK the term was used decades before that to describe any
telecommunication media that carried multiple disparate channels.
In Australia the (then) monopoly telco had it own "Broadband Division"
which provisioned and maintained all the interstate telephony/TV trunk
links - and all the technicians and engineers were taught the difference
between "Broadband" and "Narrowband" services.
I don't know the technical details of the Madison City Council service,
was it actually still an accurate use of the term back then in comparison
to slapping any data service that has above 56K dial-up modem speeds with
it these days?
--
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: Sat, 1 Jan 2011 22:15:42 +0000 (UTC)
From: Joseph Pine <josephpine@invalid.invalid>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Number portability and the demise of line number pools in bankruptcy
Message-ID: <Xns9E60A56BF25A8nomailnomailorg@188.40.43.230>
David Clayton <dcstar@myrealbox.com> wrote in
news:pan.2010.12.25.22.50.28.312619@myrealbox.com:
> Just a general question on the number portability of Cell services in the
> US, just how easy is it to change carriers and keep your number?
We switched from T-Mobile to AT&T a few months ago without any service
problems that I'm aware of.
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)
|
| |
or 