---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message-ID: <20171028050529.GA6478@telecom.csail.mit.edu> Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2017 01:05:29 -0400 From: Bill Horne <bill@horneQRM.net> Subject: AT&T, CenturyLink say they're safe from Krack Wi-Fi vulnerability by Sean Buckley AT&T and CenturyLink have not reported that any of their broadband customers have been affected by the KRACK (or Key Reinstallation Attack) Wi-Fi vulnerability that was recently discovered by researcher Mathy Vanhoef. While not providing a specific statement on whether it had seen any issues from the vulnerability, AT&T cited a statement put out by the Wi-Fi Alliance. http://www.fiercetelecom.com/telecom/at-t-centurylink-say-they-re-safe-from-krack-wi-fi-vulnerability -- Bill Horne (Remove QRM from my email address to write to me directly) ------------------------------ Message-ID: <20171028045746.GA6422@telecom.csail.mit.edu> Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2017 00:57:46 -0400 From: Bill Horne <bill@horneQRM.net> Subject: Verizon Will Remove Video Throttling From Plans for an Extra $10 Per Month By Ryan Whitwam In past years, "unlimited" mobile data actually meant unlimited. Today, there are myriad limits placed on the so-called unlimited plans sold by Verizon, T-Mobile, and others. For example, Verizon's unlimited plans throttle your video streams to a lower bitrate than other data. If you really want to get around that limit, Verizon will now be happy to take more of your money every month to do away with video throttling. Video throttling on mobile plans gained traction recently when T-Mobile introduced its Binge On service. That granted customers unlimited video streaming that didn't count against their capped plans, but the video would be limited to 480p (standard defin- ition). T-Mobile kept this restriction when it moved to offering only "unlimited" plans. Other carriers were apparently watching keenly to see if Tmo could get away with video throttling, even- tually implementing their own versions. https://www.extremetech.com/mobile/258009-verizon-will-remove-video-throttling-plans-extra-10-per-month -- Bill Horne (Remove QRM from my email address to write to me directly) ------------------------------ Message-ID: <CA+K-LfbxutLFJTYzWq_ +_5atKJKnY_7G3iYCzVmi3cAbwcvi7Q@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2017 00:37:04 -0400 From: "Michael D. Sullivan" <mds@remove-this.camsul.com> Subject: Re: History--Western Union's cellular service, 1984 In Message-ID: <2df61722-86e6-4e3c-ad26-0626d5dc9204@googlegroups.com> on Wed, 25 Oct 2017 13:57:26 -0700 (PDT) HAncock4 <withheld@invalid.telecom-digest.org> wrote: > In 1984, the Western Union Telegraph Company got into the cellular > mobile phone business. Below is a link to an ad they ran in "New > York" magazine. > > Unfortunately, at that time W/U was losing serious money in various > ventures. They were forced to sell off their bandwidth. Had they > been able to keep it a few more years, it would've been very > valuable. > > https://books.google.com/books?id=gOUCAAAAMBAJ&lpg=PA23&dq=look%20%22western%20union%22&pg=PA23#v=onepage&q&f=false That ad doesn't advertise cellular *service*, but physical cellular *phones* made by WUTC's E.F. Johnson subsidiary. WUTC didn't have any cellular "bandwidth" in New York. There were two cellular licensees in New York back then; one of the two initial licenses was awarded to the NYNEX cellular affiliate and the other was awarded to Cellular Telephone Corporation, a joint venture of LIN Broadcasting, Metromedia, and a coalition of New York paging companies (principally Metromedia). Western Union Telegraph Co. was not involved. (I was the chief of the FCC's Mobile Services Division, responsible for cellular rules and licensing, at the time.) -- Michael D. Sullivan Bethesda, Md. ------------------------------ ********************************************* End of telecom Digest Sat, 28 Oct 2017