From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Jan 15 02:09:09 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id CAA05782; Fri, 15 Jan 1999 02:09:09 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 02:09:09 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199901150709.CAA05782@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #1 TELECOM Digest Fri, 15 Jan 99 02:08:00 EST Volume 19 : Issue 1 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Another Year of the Digest (TELECOM Digest Editor) Pacific Bell Plans to Boost Rollout of Digital Subscriber Lines (Tad Cook) Bell Atlantic Trying to Show It's Open to Competition (Greg Stahl) PBX at Home (Max Morris) Motorola Expands CDMA Users' Digital Roaming Capabilities (Monty Solomon) Ameritech's Call-Blocking Service Too Costly, Trade Group Says (Tad Cook) Book Review: "TCP/IP Network Administration", Craig Hunt (Rob Slade") Book Review: "The Internet Kids & Family Yellow Pages (Rob Slade) Book Review: "How to Access the Federal Government on Internet (Rob Slade) Book Review: "Harley Hahn's Internet & Web Yellow Pages (Rob Slade) Book Review: "The Internet Book", Douglas Comer (Rob Slade) Book Review: "Learning Perl", Randal L. Schwartz/T Christiansen(Rob Slade) Book Review: "The Internet Complete Reference", Harley Hahn (Rob Slade) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-727-5427 Fax: 847-675-3140 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: editor@telecom-digest.org (Patrick Townson) Subject: Another Year of the Digest Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 10:00:00 CST Hello once again! Okay, I will admit that I have been lax in getting issues of the Digest out to you since before Christmas. I will *try* to increase production this year ahead of us, but with no promises right now as to how many issues will come out. I've got something else I am working on which for me holds a lot of excitement. I think I will soon be doing an 'internet radio' broadcast on a regular basis. For those of you not familiar with the concept, it works like this: If you have an audio/video player attached to your browser, you can view/listen to literally hundreds of television and radio stations which put their signal out on the net. In addition, there are numerous internet-only 'netcasters' who do not use the open airwaves as in traditional radio/television services. You simply use your browser to address their URL or home page, click on the 'listen live' icon, wait a few seconds for your Real Player to open and make a connection, then listen or watch the program/station. If you do not have a media player, any of them will gladly give you one for free. Many such services are listed on web pages in common, such as that of broadcast.com, which in addition to providing links to hundreds of others also provides its own content. Most of us would be hard-pressed to obtain time or space on the site of a commercial broadcaster, and even the internet-only netcasters are pretty much into it for the money. No money, no sponsor, no radio/TV program ... that simple. But there are exceptions, and I want to tell you about one of them today because I was thrilled to find them on the net. http://www.freespeech.org is a totally not-for-profit internet-only radio/television service which allows anyone to have space for free to present programs airing their views, their ideas, etc. All you need on your end is audio encoding software with an audio input on your computer. It helps of course to work hard at preparing a quality presentation, an interesting index.html on the front of it, and a modicum of decent recording equipment on your end. If you have video equipment, so much the better; you can use it also. It is all free of charge, but like yours truly they always are willing to accept contributions to help with their expenses. I am told it is run as a labor of love by one and a half people, which is a half of a person more than I have working on this Digest. Users are limited to 25 megs of space, which is really quite adequate to hold several thirty minute radio presentations or a couple of larger television presentations at a time, depending on how you put it together, etc. Your 'overhead' consists of using some of the space for an index.html and a short file (.ram) which is used to get the browser to open the media file (.rm) itself. A 43 minute test recording I made took about 5.5 megs for the .rm file. You prepare it all at your site then FTP it over to your directory on their site. You cannot get shell access at their site, just somewhat controlled FTP access to your own directory. Put your index.html, your assortment of .rm files with their associated .ram files over there and you are all set. **No commercial programming! No sponsors! No Visa/Mastercard! No spam! Just non-commercial free speech; all you want of it. You can ask for money for your efforts in a reasonable, non-offensive way.** It helps if your personal politics lean a bit to the left, Pacifica Radio style, like a college radio station, but they won't hold it against you if you don't keep your open mind so open that all your brains falls out. In the process of signing up for an account, they take great pains to point out that 'free speech', while theoretically free, isn't totally so. Regardless of what you think, for example, about the controversy surrounding copyright law; what you personally think about child porn having no free speech protection; what you personally feel should be allowed where lewd, crude and/or rude presentations are concerned on the net; they insist that participants on their 'television network' obey the law. They reserve the right to dump you if you become too much of a pain, if you cause legal problems or if you disrupt other programs being aired/produced, etc, which is how it should be. They *do* allow hate speech, but reserve the right to label it at such in their own master listing of program content. They are very anti- government and encourage programs on all sorts of relevant topics, as long as you don't break the law or encourage/aid/abet others in breaking it. I suppose you could probably put on a live sex act for others to watch (in the old CB Radio days, the guys would leave their microphones locked open while they were having sex so that everyone could hear the sounds, etc) but I suspect all it would do is get a few yawns from the 'been there, done it, seen it all' people who would tune it in. And if anything would mortify me more than being observed in such a posture, it would be knowing that my audience was bored with the presentation and tuning me out. So show some good taste and class, won't you? http://www.freespeech.org They bill themselves as Internet Television with programs produced by the people, 'because the people know better'. I think so too. Maybe I will see your program there, and I hope when I get mine up and running you will listen to it. You can tell them I referred you. Happy new year! PAT ------------------------------ Subject: Pacific Bell Plans to Boost Rollout of Digital Subscriber Lines Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 22:30:23 PST From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) By George Avalos, Contra Costa Times, Walnut Creek, Calif. Knight Ridder/Tribune Business News Dec. 15--The race to quicken the pace of using the Internet will soon get a boost from Pacific Bell, which will dramatically expand availability of a fast online technology that can compete against lightning-quick cable modems, and may lower the price for the service. The telephone company disclosed Monday it intends to speed up deployment of its digital subscriber line, or DSL, product. The technology is able to juice up the performance of standard telephone lines and render them capable of transmitting computerized data at speeds much faster than conventional phone-based modems. "We're going to be launching some aggressive plans on DSL in the next couple of weeks to put it into most Bay Area communities," said Gary Rath, an area vice president for Pacific Bell. Pac Bell is installing DSL gear at dozens of central switching offices around the state. The company has deployed the DSL technology in 89 California central offices. That's about 14 percent of the 650 central offices statewide. Pacific Bell also has installed DSL equipment at 24 of the company's 86 switching centers, or 28 percent of the total in the region. DSL, under Pacific Bell's current plans, would be installed in dozens more switching offices in California. Some industry insiders familiar with the plans have speculated the number of DSL-equipped switching offices will top 200 by the end of 1999. The phone company, though, wouldn't provide precise figures. "People are clamoring for high-speed Internet access," said John Britton, Pacific Bell spokesman. "California is probably where people want this technology more than anyplace else." California is the state where 35 percent of the nation's Internet traffic begins and terminates, some industry insiders estimate. The phone company may have little choice but to move quickly to broaden its DSL customer base before people who want fast access to the Internet migrate to alternative products. A rival technology that uses a cable TV system to connect customers to the Internet is gaining subscribers rapidly. The cable-based service may get a boost next year when cable modems are more readily available in retail outlets. And analysts believe cable modems can transmit data more quickly than DSL networks. What's more, the Bay Area's cable modem service, Home, charges less -- about $40 a month -- to subscribe than Pacific Bell's least-expensive DSL option. Getting the DSL technology and an Internet connection costs at least $89 a month. But Pacific Bell is readying a counterattack on pricing, according to some previous comments made to analysts by the top executive at Pacific Bell's parent, SBC Communications Inc. Analysts have suggested that Pacific Bell's current DSL prices are too high for consumers. SBC boss Edward Whitacre said recently that he could foresee DSL pricing dropping as low as $50 to $60 a month for the slowest version of the service. That would put the cost more in the price range of mainstream digital consumers. Pacific Bell executives believe the back-and-forth battle over fast online access means consumers can come out winners. "I think 1999 will be the year of a memorable leap forward in the delivery of data communications to the home," Pac Bell's Rath said. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 00:24:29 -0500 (EST) From: Greg Stahl Subject: Bell Atlantic Trying to Show It's Open to Competition I just read an interesting piece in the 7 Jan 99 issues of Edupage stating that Bell Atlantic has developed a system to allow its "New York customers to change local phone providers easily and quickly". Has anyone heard anything about this ?? Thanks, Greg Greg A. Stahl- KE4LDD Communications Technician St. Lawrence University Telecommunications Dept. Canton, NY 13617 V- (315)229-5918 GSTA@music.stlawu.edu F- (315)229-5547 http://www.stlawu.edu/gsta "Logic is the beginning of wisdom, not the end" -Spock ------------------------------ From: Max Morris Subject: PBX at Home Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 01:06:32 -0800 Patrick and others at Telecom Digest, I wonder if you'd be able to help with this question? I've searched through your archives some but haven't been successful in finding an answer. I know this is sort of a loop around / DISA function, but cheap and easy for the home (though still with passcode capability!). I'd really appreciate a recommendation. Thanks very much!!! -Max Morris > From: Toby Nixon > Sent: Wednesday, January 06, 1999 10:37 AM > To: Max Morris > Subject: RE: PBX at home > > I have definitely seen mention of devices that allow you to call in on one > line, enter a password, and be connected to a second line, for much less > than a PBX. I've seen these mentioned on comp.dcom.telecom. I don't > remember what they were called, though. I've done some quick poking around > and haven't turned up anything, but I think if you posted a message to > that newsgroup, or gave a call to Patrick Townson (847-727-5427) or Mike > Sandman (630-980-7710), you'd turn up something. > > -- Toby > > -----Original Message----- > From: Max Morris > Sent: Tuesday, January 5, 1999 10:42 PM > To: Toby Nixon > Subject: PBX at home > > Hi Toby, > > I wonder if you could do me a favor and give me some advice. > > I'm looking to buy something that will give me the following > functionality. I have two telephone lines at home, say A and B. I have > very cheap international rates at home through MCI (10 cents per minute to > the UK, anytime) on line B. I would like to be able to call inbound on > line A from work or my cell phone (a cheap local call), enter some > security code, get dialtone on line B, and place an outbound international > call to the UK getting the cheap rate and costing work or me on the cell > phone little to nothing. > > I've looked around and can't find anything simple that will do this. I > know a PBX or key system should be able to do this, but that seems like > overkill to have in my home. Can you think of something on the cheaper > side that can do this for me? Pointers to useful web sites would be great > if you can't think of a specific product. > Thanks very much! > -Max [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There are 'WATS extenders' still being sold by a few companies but their usefulness versus their danger is questionable considering how inexpensive long distance rates have become in recent years and how much hacking and phreaking is done on the phone network with the likelyhood that sooner or later -- and probably sooner -- someone is going to dial that number, hear dial tone as an answer and set about breaking your passcode. It is always risky business leaving a dial tone where others can find it. You can get software for your computer which will answer one line and allow it to be linked to another line without actually letting you (or any unauthorized others) hear dial tone. It just takes the incoming line off hook and sits there in dead silence. Once you have entered your password and given it the full ten or more digit number you wish to call, it looks through its database to see if such a call is auth- orized and then puts it through on a second line, making a bridge to the first line only when it hears a voice on the second line. You could write the database of authorized numbers to exclude everything but the one single number you call in the UK. When you entered that one number, it would find it to be authorized, dial it and patch the lines together. Anyone else entering an 'unauthorized number' (in this example, every number in the world except the one you call) would find themselves sitting in silence for a few seconds and then abruptly disconnected. Or you might try a service like 'My Line' from Call America. It is a dedicated 800 number both for incoming and outgoing calls. People can dial it and reach you, but you can also dial it, enter your pass- code and make outgoing calls, including international calls. Get the details on this from jbucking@callamerica.com I've had a My Line account for several years now and love it. PAT] ------------------------------ Reply-To: Monty Solomon From: Monty Solomon Subject: Motorola Expands CDMA Users' Digital Roaming Capabilities Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 15:50:02 -0500 Motorola Expands CDMA Users' Digital Roaming Capabilities Via Service Option Negotiation January 6, 1999 12:46 PM EST ARLINGTON HEIGHTS, Ill.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Jan. 6, 1999-- Digital Cellular Operators Can Offer More Flexible Service to Customers Of Enhanced Variable Rate Coder Networks Motorola, Inc.'s Network Solutions Sector (NSS) announced today it is offering its CDMA (Code Division Multiple Access) operators the ability to expand their customers' digital cellular roaming capabilities with the introduction of enhanced system software. With Motorola NSS' Service Option Negotiation solution, customers who currently enjoy the benefits of state-of-the-art 8K EVRC (Enhanced Variable Rate Coder) call quality can now take their digital features with them when they roam throughout Motorola NSS-based networks. Operators with CDMA equipment supplied by Motorola NSS, or by a combination of Motorola and other vendors, can take advantage of this solution to provide their EVRC customers seamless digital coverage throughout all of their markets. To date, Motorola NSS is the only cellular network vendor to offer Service Option Negotiation to address the EVRC roaming issue. Service Option Negotiation, an industry standard protocol, sets up the commands by which a cellular base station communicates with the cellular handsets throughout a system. When a caller enters into a network's coverage area, the cellular handset must "speak the same language" as the network in question. In the cellular industry, the most recent advance in digital voice encoder technology is EVRC, a feature which provides landline-quality voice transmission, superior capacity gains and complete background noise suppression. But until now, customers on EVRC networks have been unable to take advantage of these features when roaming outside of their home system and into incompatible digital networks - networks which do not incorporate EVRC vocoders. Lack of Service Option Negotiation causes EVRC digital calls to be converted to analog systems or dropped entirely because the handsets do not speak the same language as the non-EVRC network. Motorola NSS' solution requires no hardware upgrades to the CDMA network or software upgrades to customers' digital cellular handsets. Additionally, it provides a graceful migration path both to future vocoder technologies and to next generation digital standards. The solution is commercially available today. Operators can receive the Service Option Negotiation with Motorola NSS' standard CDMA software offering. "As the leader in value-based software development, we strive to provide cellular operators and service providers with software that increases their revenue base by augmenting their customers' minutes-of-use," said John Cipolla, vice president and general manager of Motorola NSS' CDMA Systems Division. "We are enthusiastic about our interoperability solutions, such as Service Option Negotiation, and hope other infrastructure vendors will take a similar approach." In a report issued last month by the Cahners In-Stat Group, a leading wireless industry research and consulting firm, Motorola NSS was cited as the leading international provider of commercial CDMA digital cellular networks. The analysis of cellular, PCS and wireless local loop markets shows Motorola NSS with a total of 31 commercial system awards internationally. Others include Lucent with 17 awards; Qualcomm, 16; Nortel, 10; and Samsung, four. Motorola NSS combines the operations of the former cellular infrastructure group and iDEN organizations and is responsible for manufacturing, sales and integration of Motorola's cellular infrastructure and iDEN cellular/two-way radio products. NSS is a multi-billion dollar business with more than 16,000 employees. Headquartered in Arlington Heights, Illinois, NSS has major engineering, marketing and manufacturing facilities in northern Illinois, Texas, Arizona, Florida, the United Kingdom, Israel, Brazil, China/Hong Kong, Singapore and Japan. Motorola, Inc. is a global leader in advanced electronic systems and services. Sales in 1997 were $29.8 billion. For further information on Motorola, please visit the web site at http://www.motorola.com/. ------------------------------ Subject: Ameritech's Call-Blocking Service Too Costly, Trade Group Says Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 22:30:25 PST From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) Ameritech's New Call-Blocking Service Is Too Costly, Trade Group Says By Doug Sword, The Indianapolis Star and News Knight Ridder/Tribune Business News Jan. 5--If you've ever wondered what it would be worth to rid yourself of pesky, dinner-interrupting telemarketers, Ameritech has the answer: $3.95 a month. Beginning today, Ameritech will roll out its new Privacy Manager service in three Indiana cities -- Indianapolis, Gary and Hammond. While the service costs $3.95 a month, it requires Caller ID with Name to work, which costs an extra $9.50 a month. That's too much, says a telemarketing group, arguing that consumers can get pretty much the same result by being firm with telemarketers and asking to be removed from calling lists. Unlike any other privacy-protection service, such as Caller ID, Privacy Manager will identify 100 percent of callers, says Curt Witte, Ameritech's vice president for customer applications. That offers customers a degree of control over their phone line they've never had before, he said. This is how it works: Privacy Manager kicks in when a call shows up as "blocked," "private," "out of area," "unavailable" or "unknown" on a Caller ID display. Ameritech's research shows that calls from telemarketers generate a large majority of these kinds of messages, Witte said. Before connecting the call, Privacy Manager kicks in and asks the caller to give his or her name. In initial testing, seven out of 10 of these callers simply hung up, Witte said. "The beauty is that your phone doesn't even ring," he said. If the caller does identify himself or herself, the consumer's phone rings and a recording of the name is played. If the consumer presses "1" on the touch-tone phone the call is put through and pressing "2" rejects the call. Pressing "3" activates a message that informs the caller that telemarketing calls are not accepted at this residence and asks that the consumer's name be added to the telemarketer's "do not call" list. That's a legally binding request, Ameritech points out. Federal law prohibits telemarketers from calling someone who's made such a request for 10 years. Consumers can make the same legally binding requests themselves without paying $13.45 a month for Caller ID and Privacy Manager, says Chet Dalzell, spokesman for the Direct Marketing Association, a telemarketing industry trade group. "Generally, any consumer who does not want to receive telemarketing calls at home has choices," he said. Telling each telemarketer who calls to remove your name from a calling list is one way to do it. Anyone wishing to be removed from the calling lists of all Direct Marketing Association members need only send a letter with their name, address and phone number to Telephone Preference Service, Direct Marketing Association, P.O. Box 9014, Farmingdale, NY 11735-9014. Some customers love to buy the latest telephone technology and Privacy Manager "is a feature that some people will find handy," said Jerry Polk, utility policy analyst for Citizens Action Coalition. But Privacy Manager raises the question of "Where does it end?" he said. Local phone companies came up with Caller ID, then they sold a product to telemarketers that blocked Caller ID, Polk said. Now Ameritech has come up with a new feature that thwarts the Caller ID block. Ameritech plans to follow Privacy Manager's introduction with an advertising campaign beginning Jan. 18. The ads will feature peaceful home scenes, asking the viewer if it's worth interrupting a family's time together with calls from telemarketers. One of the ads targets Ameritech's rivals, long-distance companies, as a prime source of intrusive telemarketing calls. The technology that allows an answering system to interact with both a caller and a customer is new and exclusive to Ameritech. The Chicago-based company is negotiating with other telephone companies to sell them a license to use the technology. Ameritech rolled the product out first in Chicago and Detroit last September, followed by Cleveland and Columbus, Ohio. The trio of Indiana cities where Privacy Manager becomes available today represents the third wave of the product's rollout. Ameritech will offer the product in stages through next year in the remainder of its five-state Midwestern territory. Privacy Manager, like Caller ID and call-waiting, falls into a category of products that aren't regulated by Indiana. Ameritech critics claim that the cost of adding such products to a phone line is only a small fraction of what the company charges for them. Critics also point to the huge profits these unregulated products generate as a major reason Ameritech has reported record profits in each of the last five years. ------------------------------ From: Rob Slade Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 08:13:34 -0800 Subject: Book Review: "TCP/IP Network Administration", Craig Hunt Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca BKTCPADM.RVW 981025 "TCP/IP Network Administration", Craig Hunt, 1998, 1-56592-322-7, U$32.95/C$46.95 %A Craig Hunt %C 103 Morris Street, Suite A, Sebastopol, CA 95472 %D 1998 %G 1-56592-322-7 %I O'Reilly & Associates, Inc. %O U$32.95/C$46.95 800-998-9938 fax: 707-829-0104 nuts@ora.com %P 630 p. %T "TCP/IP Network Administration, second edition" The growth of the Internet, in terms of the number of computers connected, has been doubling each year for at least the last fifteen. This means that in this coming year about thirty million computers will get connected, and in the year following, approximately sixty million. This growth cannot continue indefinitely. One constraint is the number of computers in the world, and another is the limit on the number of numeric Internet IP addresses available, although IPv6 may soon extend that a fair ways. One of the most important limiting factors, however, is the availability of knowledge about the connection and configuration of computers to the Internet. Hunt, with his initial release of this book, went a fair way to removing this last as a barrier. His test is now the standard text for those running ISPs (Internet Service Providers), intranets, and corporate connections to the Internet. If you are a UNIX system manager, this book is a thorough guide to configuring an Internet connection. (Even if you are not on the Internet, it is an excellent overview of the requirements for using TCP/IP to network your own machines.) For some, the guide may be on the technical side--but then, network administration is a formidably technical task. In spite of the nature of the topic, Hunt has done a superlative job in ensuring that the content is not only clear, but readable as well. The first three chapters discuss the concepts behind TCP/IP, routing, and the domain name and name service. The next six cover the basics of connections and configuration. Chapter ten provides information on sendmail. This is likely separated from details on the primary network services in chapter thirteen due to the broader nature of sendmail's functions. There are also chapters on troubleshooting, security. Appendices cover additional topics such as serial link interfaces and dynamic configuration. If you are not working in UNIX, many of the low level specifics will not be of much use. Many of the items, however, can either be used as rough outlines, or adapted to non-UNIX systems. Many programs may be different, but a lot of the structure, data and concepts will be the same. For those charged with the practical details of bringing a system into the Internet, this book is uniquely helpful. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1994, 1998 BKTCPADM.RVW 981025 rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@sprint.ca robertslade@usa.net p1@canada.com Find virus and book info at http://www.victoria.tc.ca/techrev/rms.html Robert Slade's Guide to Computer Viruses, 0-387-94663-2 (800-SPRINGER) ------------------------------ From: Rob Slade Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 19:12:52 -0800 Subject: Book Review: "The Internet Kids & Family Yellow Pages Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca BKINKDYP.RVW 981025 "The Internet Kids & Family Yellow Pages/Golden Directory", Jean Armour Polly, 1997, 0-07-882340-4, U$19.99 %A Jean Armour Polly mom@netmom.com %C 300 Water Street, Whitby, Ontario L1N 9B6 %D 1997 %G 0-07-882340-4 %I McGraw-Hill Ryerson/Osborne %O U$19.99 905-430-5000 fax: 905-430-5020 %P 576 p. %T "The Internet Kids & Family Yellow Pages/Golden Directory second edition" A great many of the child or educationally oriented books on the Internet have lists of resources, but this addition has considerably more range, or at least size, than most of the others. As with various titles in the "yellow pages" ("Golden Directory" outside of the US) series, the collection is a massive one, even though it couldn't be exhaustive. For kids, with incessant demands for information on every topic under the sun, massive is what you want. (It even has a listing for Alta Vista, Digital's "mother of all" search engines.) The main bulk of the book lies in the listings. Rather ironically, in attempting to provide a sufficient number of subject headings, the author/editor may have gone a little overboard. There is, for example, a section on the United States, including subsections on both the federal government and politics, but there is also a main subject listing for U.S. Presidents and First Ladies. Then again, there isn't a history subsection under United States, but there are subsections for U.S. History and U.S. History-Civil War under the main History subject. The index is reasonable, though not exhaustive, and should make up for shortcomings in the organizational structure. There is also an introduction with a few useful tips that unfortunately seem to get lost in a fair amount of verbiage. A concluding section seems to have sometimes questionable answers to parent's questions, and some parenting related sites. The sites are well chosen. There is a wide range of both topics and levels. (A helpful feature for a future edition might be the inclusion of indicators for grade and age suitability.) Occasionally the descriptions contain erroneous or misleading "facts": this is possibly due to taking the claims listed in those sites at face value without checking. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1996, 1998 BKINKDYP.RVW 981025 rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@sprint.ca robertslade@usa.net p1@canada.com Find virus and book info at http://www.victoria.tc.ca/techrev/rms.html Robert Slade's Guide to Computer Viruses, 0-387-94663-2 (800-SPRINGER) ------------------------------ From: Rob Slade Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 21:00:17 -0800 Subject: Book Review: "How to Access the Federal Government on Internet Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca BKHAFGOI.RVW 981025 "How to Access the Federal Government on the Internet 1998", Bruce Maxwell, 1997, 1-56802-295-6, U$28.95 %A Bruce Maxwell bmaxwell@mindspring.com %C 1414 22nd Street N.W., Washington, DC 20037 %D 199 %G 1-56802-295-6 %I Congressional Quarterly Inc. %O U$28.95 800-638-1710 fax 202-887-6706 bookhelp@cq.com %P 282 p. %S Washington Online %T "How to Access the Federal Government on the Internet 1998" For those interested in (the U.S.) government, and access to its information, Maxwell has provided a very useful compendium of addresses. As he admits, this is not an exhaustive list to U.S. federal government systems available through the Internet, but it definitely gives a good, broad starting field. University and other sites with a specialized interest in the government are listed, although strictly political organizations are rare. For example, the "Queer Resources Directory" is included, but the Electronic Frontier Foundation is not. The reader is expected to be reasonably familiar with the Internet use: the information given in the introduction is intended only to help keep the listings brief. (One addition to the introduction is a section on the reliability, or lack thereof, of Internet data. The piece notes that not all discrepancies are due to propagandists: source material providers have been known to release multiple versions of the same document.) The site descriptions do note the type of access method (increasingly, of course, this is the World Wide Web). General instructional material has been removed, helping to reduce the size of the book, and limit it to the reference information itself. All of that would be extremely valuable for those interested in government and access to information, but since the feds have fingers in just about every pie, there is much more. The various departments provide information on access to information, agriculture, arts and museums, business, children and families, defense, computers, demographics, education, emergency response, energy, environment, foreign affairs, medicine, history, employment, law, technology, space, and transportation. Government sites often provide the most informative content to be found in the net. Maxwell has added to this with a very useful index: I didn't really expect to find anything under computer viruses but was pleasantly surprised to note an entry for the NIST Computer Security Resource Clearinghouse and the CIAC (Computer Incident Advisory Capability) site. (Which points out the fast changing nature of the net: since the book was published NIST has, alas, virtually eliminated its role in this area.) For the avid U.S. government watcher, an essential. For the serious Internet information gatherer, regardless of nationality, a very useful resource. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1995, 1996, 1998 BKHAFGOI.RVW 981025 rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@sprint.ca robertslade@usa.net p1@canada.com Find virus and book info at http://www.victoria.tc.ca/techrev/rms.html Robert Slade's Guide to Computer Viruses, 0-387-94663-2 (800-SPRINGER) ------------------------------ From: Rob Slade Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 08:06:34 -0800 Subject: Book Review: "Harley Hahn's Internet & Web Yellow Pages Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca BKINTYLP.RVW 981025 "Harley Hahn's Internet & Web Yellow Pages/Golden Directory", Harley Hahn, 1997, 0-07-882300-5, C$42.95 %A Harley Hahn %C 2600 Tenth St., Berkeley, CA 94710 %D 1997 %G 0-07-882300-5 %I Osborne McGraw-Hill %O C$42.95 800-227-0900 1-800-2-MCGRAW FAX: 1-717-794-2080 %P 904 p. + CD-ROM %T "Harley Hahn's Internet & Web Yellow Pages/Golden Directory 1997 Edition" An Internet "Yellow Pages" is no less ambitious a project than a "White Pages," probably more so. The pace of change on the Internet is rapid, and ill-suited to the long lead times of book publishing. In addition, the volume and range of information on the net is staggering. Nevertheless, even the very brief "catalogues" found in introductory guides tend to be a lot of fun and serendipitously useful. This is fun. There are addresses for famous people, programming resources, UFO theorists, software utilities, government information and all the various and varied topics of the net. There are cartoons and graphics included; about four per page; which seem to take the place of the advertising in a regular yellow pages directory. This is somewhat useful. For Internet resource people, this is a lot faster than "grep"ing the active-groups and list-of-lists files when the persistent "What can you do on the Internet?" question pops up. The closest competition, "New Riders' Official Internet Yellow Pages" (cf BKNRYLPG.RVW) is more formal but actually contains fewer listings, and is not as likely to find information on what you are looking for. This needs work. The entries lean heavily on Web pages and are light on mailing lists. The large format and 900 pages of listings look impressive until you see the amount of white space and number of cartoons. (The white space ["yellow" space?] *does* make the layout attractive and easy to read.) The subject categories could stand some input from a "real world" document such as a real yellow pages directory or the Sears list of subject headings. The index is vital, and needs the most work of all in order to make this a major reference work. I also note still more degradation in the quality of the information in this edition. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1994-1998 BKINTYLP.RVW 981025 rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@sprint.ca robertslade@usa.net p1@canada.com Find virus and book info at http://www.victoria.tc.ca/techrev/rms.html Robert Slade's Guide to Computer Viruses, 0-387-94663-2 (800-SPRINGER) ------------------------------ From: Rob Slade Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 13:48:09 -0800 Subject: Book Reivew: "The Internet Book", Douglas Comer Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca BKINTBOK.RVW 981025 "The Internet Book", Douglas Comer, 1997, 0-13-890161-9 %A Douglas Comer dec@purdue.edu %C 113 Sylvan Avenue, Englewood Cliffs, NJ 07632 %D 1997 %G 0-13-890161-9 %I Prentice Hall %O (515) 284-6751 FAX (515) 284-2607 %P 327 p. %T "The Internet Book: Everything You Need to Know About Computer Networking and How the Internet Works, second edition" It is difficult to find books which give some background to the Internet. Most guides assume that readers are either already thoroughly familiar with computer communications, or are uninterested. The history of the Internet often vaguely mentions military or government projects without giving much idea of the problems which needed solving. Given the growth in computer networking, a reference is needed which lies between non-explanations ("This computer is connected to that computer and they talk to each other") and the TCP/IP programming manuals. This book fills a lot of those gaps. After an initial introduction to the current state of the Internet, chapters two through six give a very simple introduction to data communications and the need therefor. Those who have any kind of technical communications background may find the explanations a touch simplistic. On the other hand, I have frequently found that, even among the computer elite, telecommunications is a specialty and mystery area. With such rapid Internet growth, and for those who need some level of explanation without getting beyond their technical depth, this is likely to be very useful. It's easily readable. (It's also accurate.) Chapters seven to ten explain the drive for, and growth of, the Internet including excellent explanations of "why". The basic underlying concepts of the Internet protocols are covered in chapters eleven to seventeen, before nine chapters describe the primary application level tools of the system. These sections are written at a conceptual level, dealing with what the various tools can do, rather than the minutiae of what button to push to get a specific program to do it. This approach ensures that the book will be relevant in all situations, and will not go out of date quickly. A concluding chapter ties it all together with a look at both the benefits and some of the problems of the vast "digital library." This is an important addition to the library of Internet references. I heartily recommend it to those involved in network training, both as a resource, and as insurance that you truly understand what you are teaching. To date, the primary source material for the study of the development of the Internet, aside from the RFCs (Requests For Comments) themselves, has been the "Internet System Handbook" (cf. BKINTSYS.RVW), but it tends to be written at a technical or academic level. For those at the non-technical level who are wondering what the heck the Internet is (and one of Comer's anecdotes points out the hilarious misconceptions that are abroad), and what it all means, this is your book. (Once again, I must declare a bias in regard to this book. I am mentioned in the acknowledgements, although my "contribution" to the book was simply to review an early draft of the first edition. An excerpt from my review of the first edition also appears in the cover blurbs. Nonetheless, I can honestly say that I have not found any other book that explains the concepts and principles behind the Internet as well as this one. With the passing of the years some of my "top four" Internet picks; "The Internet Navigator" [cf. BKINTNAV.RVW], "Finding it on the Internet" [cf. BKFNDINT.RVW], and "Zen and the Art of the Internet" [cf. BKZENINT.RVW]; have become, while still valuable, less immediately relevant. This text is still, and perhaps increasingly, important.) copyright Robert M. Slade, 1994, 1998 BKINTBOK.RVW 981025 rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@sprint.ca robertslade@usa.net p1@canada.com Find virus and book info at http://www.victoria.tc.ca/techrev/rms.html Robert Slade's Guide to Computer Viruses, 0-387-94663-2 (800-SPRINGER) ------------------------------ From: Rob Slade Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User Date: Thu, 15 Jan 1999 10:12:45 -0800 Subject: Book Review: "Learning Perl", Randal L. Schwartz/Tom Christiansen Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca BKLRNPRL.RVW 981024 "Learning Perl", Randal L. Schwartz/Tom Christiansen, 1997, 1-56592-284-0, U$29.95/C$42.95 %A Randal L. Schwartz %A Tom Christiansen %C 103 Morris Street, Suite A, Sebastopol, CA 95472 %D 1997 %G 1-56592-284-0 %I O'Reilly & Associates, Inc. %O U$29.95/C$42.95 800-998-9938 fax: 707-829-0104 nuts@ora.com %P 302 p. %T "Learning Perl, second edition" One of the advantages of the Apple II computer (Yes, son, I *am* old enough to remember that. Now put that lollipop down and listen) was the Applesoft tutorial on the BASIC computer language. With a steady pace, interesting examples, some wit, and a reasonable curriculum, it taught tens, perhaps even hundreds of thousands of people, how to program. It taught them BASIC, of course, which was a fatal flaw, but you can't have everything. The loss of the tutorial book, in the IIg and Mac lines, was a regrettable happening. "Learning Perl" may not take its place entirely, but it comes close. The humour is definitely there, starting even before the book does, in the foreword. Sometimes it is devious and subtle, as in the program which asks for "any last request" ... and then discards the input before informing the hapless user that the request cannot be performed. The pacing is realistic, as are the examples, although perhaps a bit slow to come to something useful, or likely to grab immediate attention. However, this book is not going to make many converts from the non- programming crowd. While chapter one is a very careful, step-by-step, approach to input and output, with some manipulations of text for error checking, chapter two immediately plunges into scalar variable and all operators, while three deals with arrays. Not that the sections are written poorly, by any means, but they would be a tad intimidating for the novice. Other topics covered include control structures, hashes, basic I/O, regular expressions, functions, miscellaneous control structures, filehandles and file tests, formats, directory access, file and directory manipulation, process management, other data transformation, system database access, user database manipulation, converting other languages to Perl, and CGI programming. For those who are truly keen to learn Perl (such as the legions of Webmasters needing to collect and manipulate data from forms) this is a good introduction. There are questions at the end of each chapter, and an appendix with the answers. Appendix B lists libraries and modules, C gives a brief introduction to networking topics in Perl, and D covers other topics. The foreword promotes Perl as a general purpose computer language. If that is so, then it is a very complex tool and one cannot expect much of a tutorial. On the other hand, references to Perl tend to stress its capacity for building "quick and dirty" tools for text manipulation, primarily mail. If this is so, then some simple but real-life examples, such as a rot13 reader or a program to extract articles from electronic digests, would have improved the work. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1993, 1998 BKLRNPRL.RVW 981024 rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@sprint.ca robertslade@usa.net p1@canada.com Find virus and book info at http://www.victoria.tc.ca/techrev/rms.html Robert Slade's Guide to Computer Viruses, 0-387-94663-2 (800-SPRINGER) ------------------------------ From: Rob Slade Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 11:43:25 -0800 Subject: Book Review: "The Internet Complete Reference", Harley Hahn Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca BKINCORF.RVW 981024 "The Internet Complete Reference", Harley Hahn, 1996, 0-07-882138-X, U$32.95/C$47.95 %A Harley Hahn %C 300 Water Street, Whitby, Ontario, L1N 9B6 %C 2600 Tenth St., Berkeley, CA 94710 %D 1996 %G 0-07-882138-X %I Osborne/McGraw-Hill %O U$32.95/C$47.95, 905-430-5000/800-227-0900/800-2MCGRAW %P 802 p. %T "The Internet Complete Reference, second edition" You have to warm to the enthusiasm of a book which says that the Internet is more impressive than the pyramids, more beautiful than Michelangelo's "David" and more important than the inventions of the industrial revolution. In the first paragraph of the Introduction. Those of us who are barraged with calls for "point-and-click- everything" can be equally heartened by the statement that the Internet is not for dummies, though not only for nerds: "It is for those people who are willing to think and to learn." Having said that, this guide is particularly suited to the new user unsure of what to use the Internet for. The material is of limited technical depth, and is delivered with humour which lightens the tone. Unfortunately, this edition has started down the slippery slope of sarcasm that has limited other works. Topics covered in the book include a conceptual background to the Internet, an overview of applications, as well as the hardware, software, and service requirements for connecting to the net. In this, and in later chapters discussing specific applications, the author recommends some study of the UNIX operating system and its tools. In this day of graphical interfaces it may be felt that UNIX is redundant, but an understanding of the system can go a long way to explaining seeming oddities in net behaviour. As well, many people still access the net through community based systems that rely on text based tools such as pine and lynx. Discussion of mail involves email addressing (with perhaps a little too much coverage of sending mail to other networks), email concepts, and the pine mail agent. (Oddly, the chapter on mailing lists comes near the end of the book.) The World Wide Web has chapters on background, graphical browsing, advanced topics, and lynx. There are solid explanations of Usenet, gopher, ftp, telnet, talk, IRC (Internet Relay Chat), and MUDs (Multiple User Domains). Those who know what they want from the Internet may wish to look at more specific and detailed works. Too, this volume does tend to emphasize Unix and the Unix applications. (Hahn does not neglect chances to promote his other books, particularly those on UNIX.) Still, this primer does cover much ground that a lot of the newer Internet guides neglect. Worth considering for the beginning browser. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1994, 1998 BKINCORF.RVW 981024 rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@sprint.ca robertslade@usa.net p1@canada.com Find virus and book info at http://www.victoria.tc.ca/techrev/rms.html Robert Slade's Guide to Computer Viruses, 0-387-94663-2 (800-SPRINGER) ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #1 **************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Jan 27 19:17:40 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id TAA00772; Wed, 27 Jan 1999 19:17:40 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 19:17:40 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199901280017.TAA00772@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #2 TELECOM Digest Wed, 27 Jan 99 19:16:00 EST Volume 19 : Issue 2 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Cook on U.S. Government Giving IANA Contract to ICANN (Ronda Hauben) Re: Cook on U.S. Government Giving IANA Contract to ICANN (Ronda Hauben) Video Over ISDN (Joachim Weber) Telemarketing by Playing Recordings (Michael A. Covington) 1+ Long Distance (Keith Michaels) Surprising Number of Consumers Ignore Long-Distance Discounts (Tad Cook) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-727-5427 Fax: 847-675-3140 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ronda Hauben Subject: Cook on U.S. Government Giving IANA Contract to ICANN Date: 26 Jan 1999 23:50:15 GMT Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC Following is a report by Gordon Cook sent to the IFWP list which is helpful in understanding some of what has been happening with the behind the scenes maneuvers of the U.S. government to transfer Internet assets from the public to the private sector. My comments on this will follow in the next message. From: Gordon Cook Subject: [ifwp] what ICANN is up to: the financial arrangements for paying IANA salaries; why the NIST solicitation for ICANN contracts is illegal and can be stopped with an ORSC protest letter; why its a waste of board member's time to talk to mail lists; conversations with esther dyson and mike roberts and others For the past 48 hours I have done nothing but research and write the following. Keeping IANA Paychecks Coming The process last summer of setting up newco (IANA) essentially ran out of time. Details like the coming October 1 unemployment of the IANA staff, including Jon Postel, went into the month of September unsettled. They did so presumably because the parties putting things together assumed that Magaziner would have no choice but to bless ICANN on October 1 and hand over keys to the kingdom to them as well as money for them to start doing their work. When it became clear that this likely would not happen, something had to be done about the paychecks of IANA employees. Mike Roberts on behalf of ICANN made a deal with USC and ISI whereby they (ISI) would enter a transition agreement with ICANN so that ICANN would pay the salaries of the IANA employees (six people) effective October 1. (Where ICANN gets the money is anyone's guess - likely from GIP - ie IBM.) Thus Mike Roberts found himself in a situation where he had to scurry at the end of September to file ICANN's incorporation papers so that as of October 1st ICANN would exist as a legal entity and be able to sign an agreement with ISI whereby the IANA employees remained legally ISI/USC employees with full benefits (health care etc). This was conditional on ICANN sending ISI a monthly check to cover the cost of their benefits through Dec 31, 1998. IANA expenses for office support, network connectivity etc would be paid from the DARPA Teranode network contract with ISI through 12/31/98. When they realized that 12/31/98 would come and go without a legally constituted and functional ICANN to take responsibility for the IANA employees, the December 24 agreement mentioned in the NIST solicitation in the January 6 Commerce Business Daily was struck to handle both functions. It supposedly is nothing more than a continuation of the agreements that were reached last summer with ICANN to continue to pay salaries and Terranode to cover network and other expenses. Solicitation Number 52SBNT9C1020 from NIST is to formalize these informal agreements by giving ICANN a NIST contract by which they will be responsible for paying for the IANA functions. ON Going Mechanics such as NIST Contract Versus NTIA MOU of 11/25/98 The on going needs which, like it or not, ICANN is now legally constituted to fill create a situation where it becomes very difficult for Becky Burr on the one hand and Elliot Maxwell to hold ICANN's feet to the fire on the issues of its unaccountable bylaws and openness. The reason why is that ICANN knows that IANA salaries must be paid and that other parts of the Magaziner constructed house of cards like the requirement for NSI to develop a shared database by April 1, 1999 with specs subject to review by an ICANN (NewCo) appointed review panel. (If memory serves me correctly Becky gave ICANN permission to appoint such a panel of experts.) The problem is that with each step of the way and each action or approval granted ICANN purely for administrative reasons, NTIA is in effect tacitly recognizing and transferring authority to IANA. The intent of the 11/25/98 MOU may have been good, but the fact of the matter however is that it looks like IANA can erode the good intent by simply out waiting NTIA. I suspect that legal action will be required to VOID the sole source solicitation or to sue the US Gov't and the ICANN board before we will see any change in ICANN's behavior. Given the direction of events ICANN will either open up its operations to public scrutiny or it will find itself in court. IOdesign is likely to sue again and given the course of events, we'd welcome that. To be meaningful the NTIA needs to revisit the ICANN MoU and spell out milestones and due dates for deliverables. If Becky and Elliot do not do this we may begin to wonder whether they mean for the MOU to be taken seriously. Lack of Trust, Suspicion and Paranoia Reaching new Highs I have seen a credible assertion that claims IANA staff are being restricted in technical communications they can have with with NSI. I have reached the appropriate people at NSI who have assured me that as far as they can tell all necessary channels of technical communication are fully open with IANA and with everyone else for that matter. I also reached Mike Roberts on his cell phone. Mike, in the middle of a business meeting, graciously took a very few minutes to hear my concerns. Mike said that he could unequivocally assure me that neither he, nor Esther, nor the ICANN board, nor any ICANN lawyers had placed any restrictions on the IANA staff. He added that he believed that it was only rumor and said that if there were any shred of truth to it would be Ron Ohlander, the ISI administrator who would know. (Legally ISI still is the employer of the IANA staff, so if any orders were given Ohlander would be in a posityion to know. I have a call into him but suspect that he will be unreachable before tomorrow.) On balance, I suspect - given that I have reached directly or indirectly virtually everyone involved - that the rumor was likely based on a misunderstanding and has no real substance. The probing however proved to be a useful exercise, because time and time again I was told that the amount of fear, distrust, and paranoia on the part of all was running extremely high. I conclude that two things are at fault. One ICANN's continued insistence on closed board meetings and secrecy, and two that the actions of the MIGHTY Five taken with Sims Cochetti and Magaziner to form ICANN last summer were deeply flawed ICANN Policy as a Destroyer of Trust I have documented elsewhere the widespread disgust with the ICANN Policy of closed board meetings Dave Farber - however well intentioned he may have been is one of the creators of this mess. On Monday, perhaps like the Sorcerer's apprentice horrified by what had transpired Dave stuck his neck out on the IFWP list and said: It is time to raise the issue yet again of the distressing fact that the Board meetings of ICANN are closed. Many moons ago several of us strongly suggested that it would be appropriate for the ICANN Board to operate under the same set of rules that US Federal Advisory Boards operate under as well as NotForProfit Boards like EFF and ISOC. Namely all meetings are open to the public to attend and listen. Often observers do not have the right to talk except for a set aside period during the meeting when 5 minute positions can be requested. The Board has the right to convene in Executive Session but in all cases the subjects that can be discussed at exec session are limited, sometimes by law and more often by good faith and the fear of law. I strongly suggest that this be the principle that ICANN adopt rapidly. Why am I bringing this up. I was told that the ICANN Board meeting in Singapore is closed and that there will be a open "meeting" the day before. That is not the same thing. Open meetings are a good way to gather opinions and an OPEN BOARD meeting is a necessary way to insure openness and the respect of the community WHICH THE ICANN BOARD MUST SERVE. (caps intentional). If there is a reason why this is not appropriate for ICANN but is for the others , I think the ICANN Board owes it to the community to tell us now those reasons in detail.[End quote of Farber message.] Esther Dyson chose to answer not Farber but Jeff Williams saying: Yes. It is in our bylaws and in all the public statements we have made. Basically, we could have had "open" board meetings with executive sessions that were closed, but we figured (the Initial Board voted) that this (below) is the best way to do it. Dave Farber to his great cerdit came back and wrote to the IFWP list: "Esther, There is no real problem scheduling an Exec Session for a Board meeting. The PITAC and all other federal Advisory Boards do that ALL the time. An open NON-Board meeting is not an OPEN BOARD Meeting. The public has a right to see how the issues are handled etc in such an organization and the best way to ensure that is to have OPEN Board meetings. Sorry, Dave" Farber made a third comment about how the logistics of such could be handled. Esther answered *NONE* of Farber's three comments. Unfortunately no list members spoke up on Farber's behalf. This morning however Esther Dyson did call me from the airport. We had an extremely useful 10 minute conversation before she had to run for her plane. She did not say it was off record. At the end I asked if there was anything off record, adding that I felt what she said needed to be accurate and wanted to try to ensure that. "Well why not send it to me before you put it out?" I hesitantly said yes and asked what kind of turn around I would get. 36 hours (she would be on net when she got the chance) was the reply as she dashed off. This leaves me with an unpleasant problem. I am going ahead with my notes on the call. I believe I can be quite accurate. If I am not I invite Esther to send me corrections of or do the correcting herself. Time here is important and her information, while not a huge surprise, is very helpful in understanding the dynamics of what is happening. Now for the details of the conversation: Dyson: I understand and am sympathetic to Dave Farber's call for open Board meetings. But you have got to understand that half our board is not American and they think the US federal open meetings law is something they should not have to subject themselves to. These are business people who don't have their board meetings in public. When they were invited to be on the ICANN board, they could read in the ICANN by laws that ICANN board meetings would be closed. This was something they felt comfortable with. COOK: But if you are saying that after Farber's posting you polled the board again and the board is STILL voting to keep board meetings closed, then some of the American members must also be voting despite the flack you are getting to keep the meetings closed? Dyson: Yes. Now when we get members, if the members vote for open board meetings, we will have to have open board meetings. So stick with us a while and the board meetings will eventually become open. You must understand: These are business people. Corporate boards don't have public board meetings. Cook: But this *IS* the internet for heaven sakes ....internet business is done in the open. Dyson: That's what the mail lists claim. But the mail lists are a self selected minority of the people that we must serve. Those not on the mail lists are quite happy with what we are doing. [Cook: I believe this to be almost a verbatim quote of Esther's words.] I have a thick skin so I am willing to subject myself to abuse. But why should the board members be forced to waste their time listening to and dealing with the wild accusations that abound on these lists? Cook: Agreed that it can get quite abusive, but the abuse comes with the territory. What if IFWP were run on a server where civil discourse rules apply and are ENFORCED! Dyson: Sounds attractive. Cook: I am very hopeful that this will happen. Please join us there. Talk to us. With substance. With fair answers to questions designed to establish some common values and build some trust. Dyson: perhaps. Let me consider it. Cook: please do. Let me just say that the board suffers from the same disease that NSI management did in assuming that Internet mail lists are an irritant.....something that doesn't matter. I was told that twice last year by Don Telage as I tried to explain that NSI's refusal to allow any NSI employee had help to cement hatred of NSI on the network. Perhaps the show down with Becky last September, gave NSI second thoughts because NSI has changed its policy. Sounds like the board is going to have to learn the same lesson that NSI learned. Dyson: I hear what you are saying but unfortunately there's not time to respond....gotta run, bye. Jock Gill (holder of the first major internet policy position in the clinton administyration) wrote me privately a day ago and captured the essense of what Esther was saying. (Used with Jock's permission). The issue, I think, is that the good folks you (Gordon) inquired about come from, for the most part, old industrial/educational hierarchies which are famous for being autocratic, top down, feudal fiefdoms with all the management style that implies. As well as no requirements to run open meeting in a democratic way -- they do not come from the world of elected public servants who assume such rules. Thus why would we expect them to act in any way other than what they have been successful at? New tricks for old dogs? Not too likely. Let's not ask for miracles. Who on the board in question really understands the concept of stupid networks and smart edges and the new management paradigm it is enabling? Who on the board understands management by dialogue, not monologue? What Then is the Solution? Although I haven't asked Dave Farber directly, I suspect and certainly *HOPE* that he is horrified by what he and the remainder of the Mighty Five have done. Lets assume Esther gave a fair rendition of what the reasons are for ICANN's silence in front of the rest of the Internet. Farber, Cerf, Roberts, Landweber and Bradner are smart enough to know that in working with Sims and Cochetti and Magaziner in the summer and in agreeing to create a board of business people who knew nothing about the internet they were creating a potential monster - certainly that they were creating an entity that in being haughty and closed to the open discussion culture of the net would be asking for recrimination and conflict. Because they acted as a cabal to provide adult supervision to the Internet, they may well now have created an entity that will be still born because it simply cannot get enough trust from anyone involved to do its job. Dave Farber is to be commended for speaking out on Monday. But with no one crawling out on the limb behind him he has fallen silent. I hope he spoke out because he is looking at what he helped to create and is horrified by what he sees. It seems that the best way for Dave to show that he was serious is to keep up the pressure.. IF THE MIGHTY FIVE JUST MADE AN HONEST MISTAKE LAST SEPTEMBER NOW IS THE TIME FOR THEM TO SHOW THAT SUCH IS THE CASE. The NIST Solicitation on Behalf of NTIA Meanwhile we must ask what Becky Burr is doing with NTIA solicitation on behalf of ICANN? I spoke late Tuesday afternoon to Teresa Reefe, contracts specialist at NIST. COOK: Why to NIST? Why not NTIA? Reefe: because while NTIA has a grants and cooperative agreements office, it does not have a contracts office and this is a contract with ICANN. COOK: who decided it would be a contract and on what grounds? Reefe: I'd like to know that myself. it was our lawyers downtown. they just delivered intrustions out here. When NTIA does a contract they have to use our office (Nist) COOK: Does the FAR apply? Reefe: yes COOK: the CBD said Nist intends to award a sole source contract to ICANN for operation of the Internet Assigned Numbers authority. What is meant by "operation"....?? How is the IANA defined? Are we talking about paying the salries of Joyce reynolds bill manning and others? Reefe: don't know.... that will be part of the solicitation being prepared. Cook: Ahh....solici ------------------------------ From: Ronda Hauben Subject: Re: Cook on U.S. Government Giving IANA Contract to ICANN Date: 26 Jan 1999 23:51:28 GMT Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC Thanks to Gordon Cook for his recent report on what is happening with the NIST annoucement for giving the IANA contract to ICANN. However, I want to add some aspects that Gordon left out in this situation. The problem to me is *not* that the NTIA or NIST is sole sourcing this contract. The problem is 1) That it is holding IANA hostage to an illegitimate and secretly contrived plan to give away very lucrative assets to a private sector entity. These assets will give great power over the Internet and all who use it to those who grab control over this entity. 2) That IANA is too important a part of the Internet to be held hostage in this way. It isn't that some other private sector business entity should get control of IANA through competitive contract solicitations, but rather that a U.S. government entity that is appropriate, like DARPA, should continue to administer the contract with IANA and pay the salaries of those who work for IANA while there be a genuine discussion and examination of how to create a protected environment for IANA to function that includes the public interest being dominant, not commercial objectives. 3) That the U.S. public and folks all over the world have contributed to the funding of the Internet and of its development and achievements. These folks should not be disenfranchised by this power play of the U.S. government holding the paychecks of IANA folks hostage to their trying to pass enormously valuable and power giving assets to some private entities. 4) I didn't notice the U.S. government having any problem paying for the big bills that it has taken to build the Internet (for the U.S. share of the bills), and the public interest needs to be protected now and the Internet needs a way to scale and to continue to serve as a unique new medium of worldwide communication. Therefore the U.S. government should stop hassling the IANA folks and should make sure that their pay checks are paid by the U.S. government. 5) For a long range solution, the administrative fees for IP numbers shouldn't be going for profits for various entities, but if needed could pay the what are minimal costs for IANA folks salaries. 6) The fruit of a poison tree is poison. The longer this power play by the U.S. govenrment goes on, the worse the situation will get. There is the need for an investigation into how this all happened and a plan for making the needed changes so that the public interest is dominant in what is happening, not someone's idea of how to convert the Internet into a plaything for marketeers. 7) When Ira Magaziner called me this summer he said there were 2 problems the U.S. government was trying to solve. a) the problem with trademarks and domain names b) the problem of international pressure for participation in what happens with the Internet. (I don't have my notes now from talking with him, but I will try to find them to see more specifically what he said.) However, subsequent to talking with him, I have seen the minutes from the Federal Network Advisory Committee meeting in 1996 where the U.S. government talked about the need to protect American commercial interests with regard to the Internet and began a process of encouraging the Internet Society and it seems others like the European Union, WIPO etc to figure out how to take over IANA. Though there are minutes of this meeting, there is no real indication of the discussion that went on to make this decision. Nor is there any indication that there was any concern for or interest by any of those present in what the public interest is in regard to the present and future of the Internet and how this would be represented in plans for giving away public assets and control over IANA to some private sector corporation. This meeting in 1996 is exactly the kind of situation that computer pioneers like Norbert Wiener and others like C.P. Snow warned against happening at the 1961 conference they held on Scientists and Decision Making at MIT. They described how there would be government decisions that had to be made regarding the future of the computer and it was very important that these decisions *not* be made by a few people in secret, but that they be the subject of broad discussion and debate. They pointed out that when such important decisions were made by a few people they would more likely be bad decisions, while the broader discussion by large numbers of people made it more likely that such decisions would be good decisions. The decision to transfer IANA and other key and controlling functions of the Internet and the assets involved with these functions to a private sector entity is a bad decision. These are functions that need to be carried out in service of the public and they require public protection of the assets and the power so that it can be used for the cooperative purposes, not for some private purpose. The Internet is too important to be playing such power games with. It is good that Jim Fleming uncovered what is happening with the NIST giving ICANN a control to run IANA. But how to get the problem of what is happening out to as many people as possible is what seems to be needed and it would be good to have whatever help the press or people in the U.S. or around the world, or online or off line can give, as possible. In his talk at the MIT conference, C.P. Snow proposed the importance of as many people as possible knowing what was going on and being involved in the discussion of what should happen. This is what is needed now, and any help making that happen would seem to be of value. Thus what Cook describes is a power play using IANA and the Internet and its users as pawns. The 1961 meeting at MIT that predicted just such actions would happen and discussed how to deal with them is descrived in: Chapter 6 of Netizens "Cybernetics, Time-sharing, Human-computer Symbiosis and Online Communities" The chapter is online at http://www.columbia.edu/~hauben/netbook Ronda ronda@panix.com. ------------------------------ From: Joachim Weber Subject: Video Over ISDN Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 22:36:09 +0000 Organization: Aachen University of Technology / Rechnerbetrieb Informatik Hello, Is there anybody who can give some hints to me about how to transmit video (avi) via ISDN using a protocol named H.320 (H.221). I am using MS Visual C++ V6 and MS Direct Draws (6.0) Multimedia Facilities to display videos in windows applications. As this works rather good, my next task is to transmit audio and video data over ISDN. I am wondering wether there is a SDK or a driver which can help me in fulfilling the indicated task. Please note that this has nothing to do with internet. It is just about connecting a computer with an isdn card to a phone capable of receiving audio and video data in H.221 Hope someone knows something useful. Please let me know. Best Regards, Joachim Weber ------------------------------ From: Michael A. Covington Subject: Telemarketing by Playing Recordings Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 09:31:21 -0500 Organization: MindSpring Enterprises I was under the impression that telemarketing machines that dialed you and played a recording, with no human operator, had been banned. Just now I got a call from one, an outfit called VPT that sells pagers. The only identifying information given was the 800 number, 1-800-388-2161, repeated many times. The Caller ID said only "out of area." Am I right that they're breaking some regulation? Is anyone here acquainted with them? Michael A. Covington / AI Center / The University of Georgia http://www.ai.uga.edu/~mc http://www.mindspring.com/~covington <>< ------------------------------ From: keith.r.michaels@boeing.com (Keith Michaels) Subject: 1+ Long Distance Organization: The Boeing Company Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 18:51:26 GMT Why do I have to choose a 1+ long distance carrier? Why can't I just use 1010+ numbers exclusively and forget about paying AT&T or MCI their minimum monthly. As far as I'm concerned, 1+ dialing offers NO advantage. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Actually, you don't have to pick a 1+ carrier. Most telcos will let you default your long distance calls to carrier 'none'. Then dialing 1+ anything except 800/888/877 gets you a recorded message that your call cannot be completed as dialed. Ditto attempts to call '00', the long distance operator. But you do wind up dialing more digits, and asd Tad Cook points out in the next message a smart consumer can get much better deals. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Surprising Number of Consumers Ignore Long-Distance Discounts Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 20:42:39 PST From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) Surprising Number of Consumers Ignore Long-Distance Discounts By Jennifer Files, The Dallas Morning News Knight Ridder/Tribune Business News Jan. 26--Deborah Perl said no to every discount long-distance offer that came her way. The telemarketing tactics bothered her so much, she hardly thought about the deals she passed up. Like about half of U.S. customers, Ms. Perl, a pharmaceutical saleswoman in Dallas, stuck with her phone company's "basic" rates. While she frequently saw ads for dime-a-minute long-distance, her calls with AT&T cost up to 30 cents a minute. "As opposed to wanting to be the most educated consumer I could be, I was more concerned that the phone companies were bothering me," she said after checking last month's phone bill. Minutes later, she called AT&T. "I said, `OK, I just looked at my phone bill. I'm an idiot. We have to do something about this."' AT&T suggested a calling plan that Ms. Perl expects will cut her monthly long-distance bills by about $30. A surprising number of people pay too much for long-distance, simply because they never asked for a better deal. Only 36 percent of Americans subscribe to a discount program, according to a recent survey by Yankee Group, a technology consulting firm. "They're everybody. They're in every socioeconomic group," Yankee analyst Fred Voit said of the customers who don't use discount plans. "It's not just people who don't make long-distance phone calls. We have people who make long-distance phone calls who spend a lot of money." Basic-rate customers span all age groups and income levels. Among people who are drawn to technology, 45 percent of those surveyed said they use calling plans, compared with 31 percent of people who don't buy high-tech products until they become commonplace. Yankee says some people probably subscribe to discount plans but don't remember signing up for them. MCI WorldCom and other companies say relatively few of their subscribers pay their highest rates, because most customers choose them to get a break on their rates. AT&T, however, says 60 percent of its customers pay basic rates. "People get so confortable with what they've always done, they don't see any reason for change, and meanwhile they're paying more than they have to," said Nilda Weglarz, a spokeswoman for the nation's largest long-distance provider. "Any AT&T customer who makes long-distance calls should be on a calling plan." AT&T says a substantial number of its subscribers make no long-distance calls. More frequent callers do tend to use calling plans, cutting rates to 15 cents a minute or less. In 1992, 72 percent of residential calling minutes were charged at basic rates. As more callers have switched to calling plans, that's fallen to 25 percent of minutes. Asked why the company doesn't simply lower its rates for other customers, Ms. Weglarz said, "Our research has shown that there is a certain percentage of consumers who do not want to participate in a calling plan for whatever reason they may have. They are simply not interested." Ms. Weglarz says her relatives roll their eyes when she tries to get them to call the phone company and ask for lower rates. "I'm talking about my own family who are college-educated people and I'm saying, `What plan are you on?' and they say, `What?"' But why wouldn't people be interested in saving money? "I believe it falls in the camp of too many options," said Renee Fraser, a consumer psychologist who heads Fraser/Huff advertising in Santa Monica, Calif. AT&T alone offers an array of calling plans that many customers would find confusing. One plan, pitched on television by Mad About You star Paul Reiser, bills calls at 15 cents a minute, all the time. Another plan charges 10 cents a minute, plus a $4.95 monthly fee, with a special promotional rate of 5 cents for weekend calls if customers ask for it. (According to AT&T's Internet site, after a customer has been on the plan for six months, calls on Saturdays will cost 10 cents a minute. Sunday rates are scheduled to rise to 10 cents a minute in mid-November.) Customers can often get lower rates by signing up and receiving bills over the Internet. Other plans offer frequent-flier miles or cash for signing up. Dialing 10-10 and a three-digit code at the beginning of a call saves money sometimes but can cost more on other calls. Monthly fees and fluctuating rates make comparisons difficult. And while there always seems to be a better deal out there, there are plenty of bad ones. "People fail to take action because they believe they have little hope of finding a better solution," Ms. Fraser said. Like Ms. Perl, many customers don't realize that they're paying more than necessary. Others say they believe the savings aren't worth the risk of signing up with a bad plan. And many customers prefer the predictability of the basic service they've always had with AT&T. "There's a bit of loyalty. They've always been here and always provided good service," said one lifelong AT&T customer, who asked not to be identified by name. Winston Brown, a retired technical salesman in Dallas, never thought to check his long-distance rates until he noticed high fees for vacation calls he'd made with his telephone credit card. When he called AT&T to ask about the charges, he realized he'd been overpaying for years. "I felt like I was being ripped off. They must have six plans they can put you on, but you'd never know it," Mr. Brown said. After analyzing his calling patterns and checking with other phone companies, he switched to a plan offered by MCI WorldCom. The Public Utility Commission of Texas compares rates for several Texas phone companies at its Internet site, www.puc.state.tx.us/rates/trates.htm. More help is available from the Telecommunications Research & Action Center, a nonprofit group, at www.trac.org. But customers don't need to be Internet-savvy to find a lower rate, said Leslie Kjellstrand, spokeswoman for the Public Utility Commission. "All you have to do is pick up the phone and say, `What can you do for me?"' ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #2 **************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Jan 27 20:17:43 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id UAA03920; Wed, 27 Jan 1999 20:17:43 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 20:17:43 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199901280117.UAA03920@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #3 TELECOM Digest Wed, 27 Jan 99 20:18:00 EST Volume 19 : Issue 3 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson The End of Morse Code? (Danny Burstein) Book Review: "DNS and BIND", Paul Albitz/Cricket Liu (Rob Slade) Pac*Bell ADSL Bandwidth Fraud? (Robert L. McMillin) Book Review: "Just Java", Peter van der Linden (Rob Slade) Waiting For Windows Refund Day (Monty Solomon) A Cell of Your Own? Who Needs a Payphone? (Tad Cook) Why Don't CLID Boxes Do This ... (phs3) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-727-5427 Fax: 847-675-3140 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 22:11:55 EST From: Danny Burstein Subject: The End of Morse Code? (fwd) Nice writeup ... ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 15:48:44 -0800 (PST) From: Jay D. Dyson To: Defcon Stuff Subject: The End of Morse Code? -----BEGIN FORWARDED ARTICLE----- The Economist, Jan. 23, 1999 SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY ... --- ... .-. .. .--. (SOS, RIP) Morse code is being replaced by a new satellite-based system for sending distress calls at sea. Its dots and dashes have had a good run for their money "Calling all. This is our last cry before our eternal silence." Surprisingly this message, which flashed over the airwaves in the dots and dashes of Morse code on January 31st 1997, was not a desperate transmission by a radio operator on a sinking ship. Rather, it was a message signalling the end of the use of Morse code for distress calls in French waters. Since 1992 countries around the world have been decommissioning their Morse equipment with similar (if less poetic) sign-offs, as the world's shipping switches over to a new satellite- based arrangement, the Global Maritime Distress and Safety System. The final deadline for the switch-over to GMDSS is February 1st, a date that is widely seen as the end of an era. For although dots and dashes will not die out altogether -- they will, for example, continue to be used by amateur radio operators, spies, and some members of the armed forces -- the switch to GMDSS marks the end of the last significant international use of Morse. The code has, however, had a good history. From its origins in 1832, when an American inventor called Samuel Morse first started scribbling in his notebook, it grew to become the global standard for sending messages along wires and, later, over the airwaves. Morse code was, in effect, the network protocol for the world's first Internet: the international telegraph network, whose cables trussed up the globe in the second half of the 19th century. The mother of all networks: Appropriately for a technology commonly associated with radio operators on sinking ships, the idea of Morse code is said to have occurred to Samuel Morse while he was on board a ship crossing the Atlantic. At the time Morse was a painter and occasional inventor, but when another of the ship's passengers informed him of recent advances in electrical theory, Morse was suddenly taken with the idea of building an electric telegraph. Other inventors had been trying to do just that for the best part of a century. Morse succeeded and is now remembered as "the father of the telegraph" partly thanks to his singlemindedness -- it was 12 years, for example, before he secured money from Congress to build his first telegraph line -- but also for technical reasons. Compared with rival electric telegraph designs, such as the needle telegraph developed by William Cooke and Charles Wheatstone in Britain, Morse's design was very simple: it required little more than a "key" (essentially, a spring-loaded switch) to send messages, a clicking "sounder" to receive them, and a wire to link the two. But although Morse's hardware was simple, there was a catch: in order to use his equipment, operators had to learn the special code of dots and dashes that still bears his name. Originally, Morse had not intended to use combinations of dots and dashes to represent individual letters. His first code, sketched in his notebook during that transatlantic voyage, used dots and dashes to represent the digits 0 to 9. Morse's idea was that messages would consist of strings of numbers corresponding to words and phrases in a special numbered dictionary. But Morse later abandoned this scheme and, with the help of an associate, Alfred Vail, devised the Morse alphabet, which could be used to spell out messages a letter at a time in dots and dashes. At first, the need to learn this complicated-looking code made Morse's telegraph seem impossibly tricky compared with other, more user-friendly designs. Cooke's and Wheatstone's telegraph, for example, used five needles to pick out letters on a diamond-shaped grid. But although this meant that anyone could use it, it also required five wires between telegraph stations. Morse's telegraph needed only one. And some people, it soon transpired, had a natural facility for Morse code. As electric telegraphy took off in the early 1850s, the Morse telegraph quickly became dominant. It was adopted as the European standard in 1851, allowing direct connections between the telegraph networks of different countries. (Britain chose not to participate, sticking with needle telegraphs for a few more years.) By this time Morse code had been revised to allow for accents and other foreign characters, resulting in a split between American and International Morse that continues to this day. On international submarine cables, left and right swings of a light-beam reflected from a tiny rotating mirror were used to represent dots and dashes. Meanwhile a distinct telegraphic subculture was emerging, with its own customs and vocabulary, and a hierarchy based on the speed at which operators could send and receive Morse code. First-class operators, who could send and receive at speeds of up to 45 words a minute, handled press traffic, securing the best-paid jobs in big cities. At the bottom of the pile were slow, inexperienced rural operators, many of whom worked the wires as part-timers. As their Morse code improved, however, rural operators found that their new-found skill was a passport to better pay in a city job. Telegraphers soon swelled the ranks of the emerging middle classes. Telegraphy was also deemed suitable work for women. By 1870, a third of the operators in the Western Union office in New York, the largest telegraph office in America, were female. Just as skilled operators found that they could recognise each other over the wires from their style of Morse code, many operators claimed to be able to recognise women operators. Inevitably, romances were initiated over the wires -- just as they are today by e-mail. There were even a handful of weddings by telegraph. In a dramatic ceremony in 1871, Morse himself said goodbye to the global community of telegraphers he had brought into being. After a lavish banquet and many adulatory speeches, Morse sat down behind an operator's table and, placing his finger on a key connected to every telegraph wire in America, tapped out his final farewell to a standing ovation. By the time of his death in 1872, the world was well and truly wired: more than 650,000 miles of telegraph line and 30,000 miles of submarine cable were throbbing with Morse code; and 20,000 towns and villages were connected to the global network. Just as the Internet is today often called an "information superhighway", the telegraph was described in its day as an "instantaneous highway of thought". But by the 1890s the Morse telegraph's heyday as a cutting-edge technology was coming to an end, with the invention of the telephone and the rise of automatic telegraphs, precursors of the teleprinter, neither of which required specialist skills to operate. Morse code, however, was about to be given a new lease of life thanks to another new technology: wireless. Following the invention of radiotelegraphy by Guglielmo Marconi in 1896, its potential for use at sea quickly became apparent. For the first time, ships could communicate with each other, and with the shore, whatever the weather and even when out of visual range. In 1897 Marconi successfully sent Morse code messages between a shore station and an Italian warship 19km (12 miles) away. The first sea rescue after a distress call sent by radiotelegraph took place in 1899, when a lightship in the Dover Straits reported the grounding of Elbe, a steamship. Two years later, Marconi sent the first transatlantic radio signal: three dots, the letter "S" in Morse code. By 1910, Morse radio equipment was commonplace on ships. The sinking of the Titanic in 1912, however, highlighted the need for radio operators to listen at all times for distress signals. After the disaster it emerged that the liner Californian had been only a few miles away, and that hundreds of lives might have been saved had the Californian's radio operator been on duty and so able to receive the Titanic's "SOS" distress call. At the first International Convention for Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS), held in London in 1914, it was agreed that large vessels should maintain 24-hour radio watch. This rule has remained ever since, with subsequent SOLAS conventions gradually introducing new rules to keep pace with the development of technologies such as radiotelephony. The advent of satellite technology led the International Maritime Organisation to amend the SOLAS convention in 1988 to introduce GMDSS, an automated emergency communications system based on satellite and radio links. Optional since 1992, GMDSS equipment will be compulsory worldwide from February 1st on all ships that exceed 300 tonnes, carry 12 or more passengers, or travel in international waters. (Owners of smaller vessels can install the equipment if they wish.) Under GMDSS, anyone on board a ship in distress merely has to press a button to send a distress call containing the vessel's identification number and its precise location -- there is no need for a skilled Morse operator. And so, after nearly 170 years, Morse code will finally slip beneath the waves. Over and out: As communications protocols go, Morse has lasted a surprisingly long time - -- admittedly with a few tweaks here and there. So how might its modern descendant, the Internet Protocol (TCP/IP), fare in comparison? TCP/IP was devised in 1973 by Robert Kahn and Vinton Cerf (a man with Morse-like stature in the Internet world who is often known as the "father of the Internet"). As with Morse code before it, TCP/IP is being improved to respond to new challenges and technologies. Its addressing system is now being overhauled to make room for billions of additional connections, to allow for the wireless devices expected to proliferate over coming years and to enable even household appliances to go online. Mr Cerf is also working on how to extend the Internet to such other places as the moon and Mars, since the time delays as radio signals travel through space make the current protocol unsuitable. Further improvements will follow: indeed, since it is spoken by computers, not humans, TCP/IP is easier to adapt than was Morse. Even so, in today's fast-changing computer world, it seems unlikely that TCP/IP will remain in continuous use for anything like as long as the century and a half managed by Morse code, its distant digital ancestor. - ----- END FORWARDED ARTICLE ----- [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: My sincere thanks to Danny for sending along this really great bit of history for the Digest. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Rob Slade Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 14:43:27 -0800 Subject: Book Review: "DNS and BIND", Paul Albitz/Cricket Liu Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca BKDNSBND.RVW 981115 "DNS and BIND", Paul Albitz/Cricket Liu, 1998, 1-56592-512-2, U$32.95/C$46.95 %A Paul Albitz %A Cricket Liu %C 103 Morris Street, Suite A, Sebastopol, CA 95472 %D 1998 %G 1-56592-512-2 %I O'Reilly & Associates, Inc. %O U$32.95/C$46.95 800-998-9938 fax: 707-829-0104 nuts@ora.com %P 520 p. %T "DNS and BIND", 3rd ed. Of the millions of users on the Internet, almost all are blissfully unaware of the complexity and magnitude of the task of network routing. How does the network know where to deliver a piece of email? In fact, given the packet nature of all Internet traffic, how do telnet or ftp packets get, reliably and generally quickly, to their destination? Few even recognize the term DNS, the Domain Name Service, which handles the problem. Administrators may have used BIND, the Berkeley Internet Name Domain program, to manage DNS, but may not fully understand the importance, use or finer aspects of it. This book gives both background and operational details. Topics covered include background of the system, an explanation of the workings of DNS, how to get BIND and a domain name, setting up BIND, DNS and email, configuring hosts, maintaining BIND, modifying domains, creation of subdomains, advanced features and security, nslookup, BIND debugging messages, troubleshooting, the Resolver and Name Server Library routines, as well as miscellaneous other information. Given the nature of the network routing problem, a full understanding of DNS likely requires actual hands-on work. Albitz and Liu have, however, put together clear, straightforward, and sometimes even lighthearted text to make the learning process as painless as possible. The book also covers more advanced topics than straightforward routing administration. Bind 8.1.2 is the basic version for the book, but it also looks back to Bind 4.8.3 and 4.9.x because of the number of shipping products that may still be based on those. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1995, 1997, 1998 BKDNSBND.RVW 981115 rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@sprint.ca robertslade@usa.net p1@canada.com Find virus, book info http://victoria.tc.ca/int-grps/techrev/rms.htm Mirrored at http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade/rms.htm Linked to bookstore at http://www97.pair.com/robslade/ Robert Slade's Guide to Computer Viruses, 0-387-94663-2 (800-SPRINGER) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 06:53:10 -0800 From: Robert L. McMillin Organization: Syseca, Inc. Subject: Pac*Bell ADSL Bandwidth Fraud? Pac*Bell's ADSL offerings have been so far really exciting: quite inexpensive, and widely deployed (for an initial rollout). However, I just heard something from an ISP friend of mine that is making me really jittery about buying: according to him, Pac*Bell is concentrating their ADSL lines back at DS3 junctions, and rather heavily overloading these. This, obviously, is a bid to keep the price of ADSL down. However, some users are reporting speeds as low as 10 kb/s during peak usage times because of this. That is, you'd be better off using a conventional dial-up ISP with any flavor of analog modem. Has anyone else heard of this story? Robert L. McMillin | Not the voice of Syseca, Inc. | rlm@syseca-us.com Personal: rlm@helen.surfcty.com | rlm@netcom.com ------------------------------ From: Rob Slade Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 09:07:45 -0800 Subject: Book Review: "Just Java", Peter van der Linden Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca BKJSJAVA.RVW 990108 "Just Java", Peter van der Linden, 1999, 0-13-010534-1, U$44.99/C$63.00 %A Peter van der Linden pvdl@best.com %C One Lake St., Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458 %D 1998 %G 0-13-010534-1 %I Prentice Hall %O U$44.99/C$63.00 201-236-7139 fax: 201-236-7131 %P 776 p. + CD-ROM %S SunSoft Press Java Series %T "Just Java 1.2, fourth edition" Huh. Back to the original, and somewhat inaccurate, title. This book is a fairly clear introduction to Java. The material is accessible to the non-programmer, albeit with some dedication. The content is fast paced, so you may need to go over some sections several times. But it isn't *just* Java. Oh, no. The jokes start on the *dedication* page. I am saddened by the loss of the "World's Best" Rolls-Royce, the waterbomb-carrying paper airplane, and the amusing but painfully realistic look at getting connected to the Internet, but the table of easily misunderstood error messages and things learned on the Internet are still there. I guess as the book grows, something has to give. Chapter one looks at the what and why of Java. Chapter two goes a long way, although perhaps not all the way, to explaining object- oriented programming. (Chapter six adds to it.) This section is perhaps best appreciated by C programmers, although it does a fair amount of demystifying of object terminology. The structure of the book has been reorganized, making it less sectional. The chapters form a more standard, sequential tutorial on Java, covering the basics, keywords, types, names, arrays, operators. classes, statements, interfaces, packages, threads, applets, security, libraries, GUI, containers, the AWT (Abstract Window Toolkit), graphics, file I/O, and networking. But I must also talk about the CD-ROM. Generally I don't, since many authors simply throw on a few megs of shareware or RFCs, which may or may not have a bearing on the topic of the book. Not our Peter. First off, there is over 500 megabytes on the CD, filling it almost completely. The Java 1.2 JDK (Java Development Kit) wasn't ready in time for the book, but it has the older versions for WinNT/9x, Mac, Solaris, Linux, and so forth. (Don't have Linux? It's got that too.) Or, if you'd rather program in Perl, ada, Fortran, C, or Eiffel, it can help you too. Plus FAQs (Frequently Asked Questions lists), sample code, games, the paper airplane (animated), Sherlock Holmes stories, the Magna Carta, the Jargon File, and a new and different Rolls story. The directory structure may not be immediately obvious to all, but then, that's what grep is for. Also, the link to the book (the CD is navigable via browser) off the main page doesn't seem to work, but that's what the "Go" box is for. So, while it may or may not be the world's best tutorial on Java, it is definitely the most enjoyable. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1996 - 1999 BKJSJAVA.RVW 990108 rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@sprint.ca robertslade@usa.net p1@canada.com Find virus, book info http://victoria.tc.ca/int-grps/techrev/rms.htm Mirrored at http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade/rms.htm Linked to bookstore at http://www97.pair.com/robslade/ Robert Slade's Guide to Computer Viruses, 0-387-94663-2 (800-SPRINGER) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 13:39:13 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Waiting for Windows Refund Day http://www.wired.com/news/news/technology/story/17442.html Waiting for Windows Refund Day by Chris Oakes 2:10 p.m. 20.Jan.99.PST If you don't use Windows, why should you pay for it? That's the logic driving a group of Linux users who want to make good on a tiny clause built into the Windows end-user license. The clause offers a refund to PC owners who buy a computer preloaded with Windows 98, but don't use the operating system. If it gathers steam, their effort could lead to legal action requiring Microsoft and PC vendors to make it easier to opt out of using the Windows OS on their PCs. "I'm hoping in the long run we'll be able to pressure Microsoft to change their OEM contracts," said Matt Jensen a participant in the effort and webmaster for the Windows Refund Center. The site will coordinate and track efforts to obtain refunds from users' respective PC manufacturers. The movement ramped up Tuesday, and the grassroots group has set aside 15 February as Windows Refund Day when those seeking to uninstall Windows from their PCs will send out their letters. Jensen and others are contributing ideas to the Refund Center following the news of an Australian PC owner's effort to obtain a refund for his copy of Windows. Discussion of Geoffrey Bennett's saga began on Slashdot , a site popular with users of the alternative PC operating system Linux. Attorney Erwin Shustak, chief litigator of securities and corporate finance at the law firm Shustak, Jalil, & Heller, said Bennett's effort may not lead to immediate, dramatic consequences, but could give rise to an eventual class-action lawsuit. Microsoft and PC makers "had a contract that clearly said what [users] were entitled to do, and yet they didn't honor the contract," Shustak said of Bennett's story. "They made it extremely difficult for him to obtain what he was supposed to obtain. I believe it was an illusory clause; they had no procedure sent up to honor it." The Microsoft Windows End-User License Agreement, or EULA, that accompanies the IBM ThinkPad reads, "If you do not agree to the terms of this EULA, PC manufacturer and Microsoft are unwilling to license the software product to you. In such an event ... you should promptly contact PC manufacturer for instructions on a return of the unused product(s) for a refund." Microsoft could not immediately be reached for comment. Full story to follow. Copyright ) 1994-99 Wired Digital Inc. All rights reserved. ------------------------------ Subject: A Cell of Your Own? Who Needs a Pay Phone? Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 00:00:18 PST From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) SANTA ANA, Calif. (AP) -- Some of the toughest new restrictions in California could be sounding last call for pay phones in neighborhoods where people need them most. This Orange County city this month joined a growing number of towns enacting ordinances threatening removal of thousands of streetside phones: nuisances to some people who have phones of their own; lifelines to people who can't afford one. "I wish they were all yanked out," said Debbie McEwen, who complains that the phone booth near her Santa Ana home is plagued by graffiti, cigarette butts and loiterers. "They're magnets. People hang out all day and all night." As cellular telephones become standard equipment for those who can afford them, pay phones continue to proliferate thanks to federal deregulation. But Santa Ana and other communities are beginning to see them as eyesores. Critics complain many newer pay phones are poorly maintained, and many people are put off by the ads they display. Santa Ana's measure has angered pay phone owners who say they will be forced to remove most of the city's 1,500 outdoor phones. Officials say the phones have spread so rapidly it's uncertain how many have been installed; many new ones lack the required permits. Statewide, the number of pay phones has increased by nearly 65,000 to about 265,000 since 1990, according to Public Utilities Commission figures. Practically all the new phones were installed by independent companies. Santa Ana's ordinance does not target specific phones for removal. It establishes strict rules the owners say will make it too costly to change and operate the phones. The ordinance limits the amount of exposed conduit connecting phone lines to booths and bans the use of exposed wires connecting a pay phone to overhead lines. Of the 300 phones Pacific Bell has in the city, about 210 would not comply with the new ordinance, Pacific Bell executive Tom Weber said. "It's not just my pay phones in Santa Ana I'm worried about. It's my 930 phones I have in Southern California," said owner Ken Scott, president of San Diego Pay Phone Owners Association. "If this takes off in other cities, it's going to be a mess out there, and it's a mess that doesn't need to happen." The owners have vowed to fight the proposed law, saying it punishes the entire industry for the sins of a few irresponsible operators. But reducing pay phones seems to be the trend across the country, the {Los Angeles Times} reported Monday. Some older ordinances were aimed at drug dealing and prostitution, but communities are increasingly focusing on aesthetics. -- In California, Huntington Park bans pay phones on private property in its business district, a law that is being challenged by the telephone industry; -- Preservationists in New York are fighting plans to add nearly 20,000 public phones across the city, fearful the booths will block views of historic landmarks; -- In downtown Perth Amboy, N.J., booths are prohibited within 600 feet of each other; -- Chicago officials have removed thousands of pay phones outside stores. Besides complaints from phone owners that Santa Ana's landmark law infringes on their rights, the prospect of removing booths has also sparked safety concerns. Community activists point out that one-third of all 911 calls in Santa Ana come from pay phones. Jack Elwir, owner of H&H Liquor Store on Civic Center Drive, said the three phones outside his businesses are used regularly by people making calls to family in Mexico. "A lot of customers don't have phones -- or even cars," he said. Until recently, Claudia Vasquez said the phone outside her home was her main link to friends and family because she didn't have the identification to get her own. She recently got the problem straightened out and had a line installed. "They can't remove the phones," Vasquez said. "People use them all the time." [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The two COCOTS of mine which readers will recall me discussing about a year ago when I had them put in for the benefit of the bus riders and had them programmed for extremely low and fair rates wound up getting vandalized so much that I was going to have them removed entirely, however the company which services them for me suggested a few improvements, including the latest vandal- proof technology. They put in two new phones which appear to be almost impossible to vandalize. They have some sort of heavy metal across the front, and a thing at the top where coins go in that prevent 'stuffing' the coin slot with string and other things designed to capture the coins people insert. When I started getting at least one complaint each day about the old phones, I called and asked them to find some solution. The new phones sort of look like the type of phone installed for prisoner use in jails, etc. Let's see these get vandalized! PAT] ------------------------------ From: p.h.s.3@watvm.uwaterloo.ca (phs3) Subject: Why Don't CLID Boxes do This ... Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 03:56:16 GMT Organization: Remove dots from userid portion to reply .. or do they? Since we got CLID, we find that we use it a lot as a telephone directory for numbers of folks for which we have a short-term need. For example, my daughter is off to a friend's house for the afternoon; in negotiating the visit, her parents have probably called our house, so their number is on the box. Far easier to scroll back to find it than to look it up. After the visit, we don't need the number for days/weeks/months/ever again, so we don't care. Now, that works fine. What happens, though, is that we wind up spending a certain amount of time "maintaining" the box -- deleting OUT OF AREA, PRIVATE CALL, and 'boring' numbers such as my office # when I call home (which appears as the office switchboard number, thus not even being useful if my wife didn't know my number by heart). If we don't do this, then numbers which we *do* want kept -- my sister-in-law's second line, neighbor's cell number, etc., scroll off and are lost. So...we would love a CLID box which allowed: - defining numbers as "nuisance" numbers, to be kept until reviewed, then deleted either immediately, the next time a call comes in, or just first when the box fills up; - the ability to "lock" numbers, much as my pager allows, so they won't scroll off; - a "delete duplicates", so the 15 calls back & forth about the visit to the friend's house don't waste space in the box. Anyone heard of such a beast? Or are CLID boxes such a commodity that features aren't worth the trouble? Yeah, we could do this with a PC, but we're not likely to put one at each phone ... Cheers, ..phsiii ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #3 **************************** Subject: TELECOM Digest V19_#4 TELECOM Digest Wed, 27 Jan 99 22:34:00 EST Volume 19 : Issue 4 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Book Review: "Internet Security", Meyers/Sheldon/Snyder (Rob Slade) Caller-ID and International Calls (John Cagnola) UCLA Short Course on "Communication Systems Using Digital Signal (Goodin) TV Site Reveals Personal Data (Monty Solomon) Book Review: "Stopping Spam", Alan Schwartz/Simson Garfinkel(Rob Slade) Keeping Tabs on Sex Offenders (Monty Solomon) Bell Canada Replaces Operators With U.S. Based Excell (David Leibold) Cell Phone Glitch Jams Thousands (Mike Pollock) Re: Book Review: "The Internet Complete Reference", H.Hahn (John R Levine) Re: Ameritech's New Call-Blocking Service Is Too Costly (Rick R. Cox) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-727-5427 Fax: 847-675-3140 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Rob Slade Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1999 00:57:05 GMT Subject: Book Review: "Internet Security", Tim Meyers/Tom Sheldon/Joel Snyder Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca BKINSECR.RVW 981115 "Internet Security", Tim Meyers/Tom Sheldon/Joel Snyder, 1997, 1-56205-760-X, U$65.00/C$91.95/UK#61.49 %A Tim Meyers %A Tom Sheldon %A Joel Snyder %C 201 W. 103rd Street, Indianapolis, IN 46290 %D 1997 %G 1-56205-760-X %I Macmillan Computer Publishing (MCP) %O U$65.00/C$91.95/UK#61.49 800-858-7674 317-581-3743 info@mcp.com %P 916 p. + CD-ROM %T "Internet Security: Professional Reference", 2nd ed. "Internet" and "security" are two items of great interest, so I guess someone had to write this book. However, I wish it had been someone willing to put some thought into it. Internet security is a complex and many-facetted field, and the narrow views presented here don't come close to doing it justice. Part one is supposed to be about managing Internet security, but it mostly contains a grab bag of background information on the net, with fairly large gaps in the coverage. Chapter one looks at IP addressing and domains, with a mixed lot of UNIX commands related to the net. Some daemon processes are listed in chapter two, along with some discussion of writing your own with shell scripts or Perl, and twenty pages of program listings. A number of UUCP programs are overviewed in chapter three. Some UNIX, NT, and DOS auditing programs and utilities are listed in chapter four. Part two looks at access security. Sniffing and spoofing are reviewed in chapter five, but the sections on protection may be less than helpful. Chapter six is supposed to tell you how to build a firewall. It does list a large number of UNIX utilities related to the function, but this might have been more useful if there had first been even the most token attempt to explain what a firewall was, and the different types and functions. There is a basic explanation in chapter seven, but aimed primarily at evaluation of commercial firewall products. Chapter eight is a very detailed exploration of SATAN (Security Administrator Tool for Analyzing Networks), covering the basic concept of looking for your own holes, a number of tools that look for specific holes, detection tools to note probing attempts, and the operation of SATAN itself. There is a detailed description of Kerberos exchange messages in chapter nine. Part three purports to be about the security of messaging, but seems to be limited to encryption of content. Chapter ten gives the usual, banal introduction to encryption, using examples of old, outmoded substitution ciphers, and never realistically discussing algorithm or key strength, nor key management. Chapter eleven is a rewrite of the documentation for PGP (Pretty Good Privacy) 2.6.2. Part four lumps together four topics under the heading of "modern concerns." Some Windows NT security features are discussed in chapter twelve, but not in much detail. (In fact, the chapter is entitled "Windows NT Internet Security" but doesn't have much to say about the Internet at all.) Chapter thirteen looks at Java, but the security content seems to relate strictly to the bytecode verifier and the applet "sandbox," and doesn't have much detail on those topics. CGI (Common Gateway Interface) security for Web forms gets a very terse review in chapter fourteen. After all of the foregoing, I was pleasantly astounded to find that the virus information, in chapter fifteen, is quite good. The explanation of how viruses work is extremely thorough, and the description of the different types of antiviral software is solid. The recommendations for recovery are not quite as good (FDISK can create more trouble than the virus you are trying to get rid of) and the review of Windows NT is rather optimistic. There are rather massive holes in the coverage presented in this book. The heavy UNIX concentration is only one example, but there are whole subjects not even mentioned. On the other hand, great chunks of the material contained in these pages have only the most tenuous connection to either the Internet or security. While there are some good bits that might justify the purchase of this book for experts, by no means can it be recommended as a sole source, or even an introduction. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1998 BKINSECR.RVW 981115 rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@sprint.ca robertslade@usa.net p1@canada.com Find virus, book info http://victoria.tc.ca/int-grps/techrev/rms.htm Mirrored at http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade/rms.htm Robert Slade's Guide to Computer Viruses, 0-387-94663-2 (800-SPRINGER) ------------------------------ From: John.Cagnol@sophia.nospam.inria.fr Subject: Caller-id and International Calls Date: 27 Jan 1999 10:58:10 +0100 Organization: I.N.R.I.A Sophia-Antipolis (France) Hi, When I get an incoming international call, my phone company now displays "PRIVATE" on my caller-id instead of "OUT-OF-AREA" as they used to. They have been arguing, over the past month, that both "PRIVATE" and "OUT-OF-AREA" are normal behavior of the system, it just depends on the route of the call. I believed "OUT-OF-AREA" means "the network doesn't know the number" while "PRIVATE" means "the caller blocked his number so you're not going to get it". I am looking for any information to back up that belief. Is there any ITU recommendation describing what the telco should display on CID for international calls? Any help would be appreciated. John Cagnol Please remove .nospam out of my email address Usual disclaimer applies ------------------------------ From: Bill Goodin Subject: UCLA Short Course on "Communication Systems Using Digital Signal" Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1999 00:08:27 GMT On April 5-9, 1999, UCLA Extension will present the short course, "Communication Systems Using Digital Signal Processing", on the UCLA campus in Los Angeles. The instructors are Bernard Sklar, PhD, Communications Engineering Services, and frederick harris, MS, Professor, Electrical and Computer Engineering, San Diego State University. As part of the course materials, each participant receives a copy of the text, "Digital Communications: Fundamentals and Applications", by Bernard Sklar. This course provides comprehensive coverage of digital communications. It differs from other communications courses in its emphasis on applying modern digital signal processing techniques to the implementation of communication systems. This makes the course essential for practitioners in this rapidly changing field. Error-correction coding, spread spectrum techniques, and bandwidth-efficient signaling are all discussed in detail. Basic digital signaling methods and the newest modulation-with-memory techniques are described. Many traditional communication applications such as modulation/demod- ulation, channelization, channel equalization, synchronization, and frequency synthesis are being implemented with new digital signal processing techniques to achieve high performance. The course analyzes these techniques, including multirate filters, I-Q sampling, and conversion between I-Q and real signals. UCLA Extension has presented this highly successful short course since 1990. The course fee is $1595, which includes the text and extensive course notes. These course materials are for participants only, and are not for sale. For additional information and a complete course description, please contact Marcus Hennessy at: (310) 825-1047 (310) 206-2815 fax mhenness@unex.ucla.edu http://www.unex.ucla.edu/shortcourses/ This course may also be presented on-site at company locations. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 13:41:14 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: TV Site Reveals Personal Data http://www.wired.com/news/news/technology/story/17437.html TV Site Reveals Personal Data by James Glave 12:05 p.m. 20.Jan.99.PST In an apparent online privacy snafu, approximately 600 Ohio residents found their personal information posted on the Web site of their local Fox television affiliate Wednesday. The names, home addresses, emails, and comments appeared in a publicly accessible text file on the Web site for WRGT Fox 45 until Wednesday morning. Station employees said it was the work of a cracker, but the individuals who claimed to have discovered the page attribute the mix-up to inept programming. "Fox's blatant incompetence in dealing with this matter reflects a media we've come to expect (especially Fox): sloppy, irresponsible, and arrogant," read an email sent to the 600 email addresses in the file from an organization calling itself Black Flag. In the email, Black Flag claimed to have discovered the file after examining a script on the site that processed the results of viewer feedback. The group said that the script spooled the submitted comments and personal data to a publicly accessible file. The script has since been removed. "We immediately informed Fox 45 of this gross violation of privacy through repeated faxes and messages," the message continued. "While they took the submission form down, the file remained for anyone with Internet access to see.... After repeatedly failing to make progress with Fox, we decided to email all the other people at risk." WRGT-TV promotions director Mike Hanson said he had not heard from Black Flag, or seen any faxes. He accused the group of cracking the site, stealing the data, and creating the page. "We feel like we got hit in the back of the head," said Hanson, who claimed that Black Flag had changed his password so that he could not access his site. "They come along and they mess with this info, and then they send a mass mailing, so here we are in this whirlwind." "There was no fax, no email, no person. No one has heard anything about it," Hanson said. Hanson said that he recently assumed authority over the site from the previous webmaster, who died. John Gwen of Modern Technologies, the site's current webmaster, could not be reached for comment. A search of the file by Wired News uncovered 657 individual email addresses. The page was removed from the site at about 9:25 a.m. PST. "It's the bad people who have privacy issues, and we didn't have a clue," said Hanson. Black Flag did not respond to emails from Wired News. "We are going to talk to our server [contact] and see what options we have to make sure this isn't going to happen in the future," Hanson said. "The average state of security at Web sites is appallingly low and people generally, even with a site with a privacy policy, have very little recourse," said Jason Catlett, a data privacy expert and CEO of Junkbusters. "A law, like most countries have, that would provide statutory damages of $100 to $500 would give sites a financial incentive to make sure they get it right," said Catlett. In December, the Web site for CBS SportsLine inadvertently exposed 9 megabytes worth of personal data from consumers who had entered contests on the site. "How many more times does this specific privacy violation have to occur before something is done to protect people?" asked Catlett. Copyright ) 1994-99 Wired Digital Inc. All rights reserved. ------------------------------ From: Rob Slade Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 11:44:23 -0800 Subject: Book Review: "Stopping Spam", Alan Schwartz/Simson Garfinkel Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca BKSTPSPM.RVW 981030 "Stopping Spam", Alan Schwartz/Simson Garfinkel, 1998, 1-56592-388-X, U$19.95/C$29.95 %A Alan Schwartz alansz@araw.mede.uic.edu %A Simson Garfinkel simsong@vineyard.net %C 103 Morris Street, Suite A, Sebastopol, CA 95472 %D 1998 %G 1-56592-388-X %I O'Reilly & Associates, Inc. %O U$19.95/C$29.95 800-998-9938 fax: 707-829-0104 nuts@ora.com %P 208 p. %T "Stopping Spam" Eternal vigilance is the price of junk free email. Therefore, readers expecting to find a quick fix for spam in this book are possibly going to be disappointed. Those who persevere, however, will find much useful material that is both interesting, and valuable in the fight against unsolicited and commercial mass mail bombing. Chapter one details the problem with a definition of spam, the functionally differing types of spam, the different intention of spam (including reputation attacks), and the reasons why spam should be combatted, rather than merely tolerated and deleted. A historical background to the situation is provided in chapter two. This includes mention of viral programs (plus a repetition of the myth that CHRISTMA EXEC caused a mass shutdown of VNET). the primary emphasis, though, is on the Green Card Lawyers, Cyberpromotions, and others of that ilk. (A warning against vigilante actions is also germane.) The current position is described very briefly in chapter three. Groups of spammers and spamming tools are noted. (Perhaps the authors do not want to give anyone ideas, but the technology section is very terse indeed.) In closing, a nightmare future spam scenario is provided. Chapter four provides a solid technical background for further discussion of spam, covering mail agents and the mail and news protocols. A number of steps that the average computer user can take are listed in chapter five. The range from hiding your identity or preventing address "harvesting" (not all the suggestions are convenient), to the more active detecting of spammers behind spoofing techniques, and reporting to authorities. Similar advice for newsgroups is given in chapter six, emphasizing specific programs like NoCeM. Chapter seven moves into larger areas of responsibility with advice on both policy and practical configuration settings to reduce both incoming and outgoing spam. The larger net community is addressed in chapter eight. An appendix lists a wide variety of resources, but the annotations may not always give you the complete picture. For example, the Spam Media Tracker Web site is listed, but at a relatively old address. This, of course, happens all the time on the net, but it is stranger that there is no mention of the spam-news mailing list, the original (and ongoing) source for the site. It would, or course, be prohibitive to identify all international agencies dealing with spam. However, do note that only US government offices are noted as departments to report to. While understandable, the tone of moral outrage that colours the initial chapters may not be as helpful as a calmer precis. As the book hits its stride, though, it provides a good deal of helpful and useful information. All ISPs (Internet Service Providers), corporate network administrators, and net help desks should have a copy of this reference handy. Any serious Internet user will also find it well worth the price. As the authors put it, in slightly different words, the only thing necessary for the triumph of spammers is that good users do nothing. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1998 BKSTPSPM.RVW 981030 rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@sprint.ca robertslade@usa.net p1@canada.com Find virus, book info http://victoria.tc.ca/int-grps/techrev/rms.html Robert Slade's Guide to Computer Viruses, 0-387-94663-2 (800-SPRINGER) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 15:08:03 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Keeping Tabs on Sex Offenders http://www.wired.com/news/news/politics/story/17345.html Keeping Tabs on Sex Offenders by Jill Priluck 2:00 p.m. 14.Jan.99.PST In a move that has raised more than a few eyebrows among civil libertarians, the state of Texas on Wednesday began allowing consumers to search its Web site to see if any convicted sex offenders live nearby. For the price of a bagel and coffee -- a mere US$3.15 -- the Texas Registered Sex Offender page allows users to search for sex offenders by ZIP code, name, sex, race, and date of birth. "The site makes the information more available so that people can know what sex offenders are in their neighborhoods," said Charlene Cain, program analyst for the Texas Department of Public Safety. The page, developed and maintained by Austin-based MicroAssist, now stores about 29,000 sex offender records compiled from police departments, sheriff's offices, and other law enforcement agencies. The new data supplements the more than 3 million criminal convictions that the site has made available since June 1998. Civil liberties advocates worry about the larger privacy implications of such registries. "Providing absolute publicity calls into question the attempts in Megan's Law to limit the dissemination of stigmatizing information," said Marc Rotenberg, director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center. "The offender becomes the scarlet letter of Hawthorne's New England." Megan's Law passed as part of the 1994 Crime Bill and requires states to enact regulations requiring violent sex offenders to register with law enforcement agencies. Local officials are permitted to alert communities if a registered sex offender is living in the neighborhood. The law is named for Megan Kanka, a 7-year-old New Jersey girl who was raped and killed in 1994 by a repeat sex offender living across the street. In August 1997, a federal appeals court upheld the law, arguing that it did not violate the double jeopardy clause, which says that a person cannot be punished more than once for the same crime. Unlike communication notification laws, which limit the dissemination of sex offender information, Rotenberg noted that online criminal records are borderless. "The geographic specificity that Megan's Law presupposes simply doesn't carry over to the interspecificity that the Internet makes possible," said Rotenberg. "The general argument is that this is a second punishment and is stigmatizing for people who have served time for a crime committed," he said. "There's a certain amount of vigilantism, when for example someone lists the wrong address." The database includes a caveat, warning that users should confirm any information with the Department of Public Safety. "The implications in Texas is that we're starting to catch up with the rest of the country by shredding the shroud of secrecy and giving families and citizens the option of finding out who's residing in their neighborhoods," said Andy Kahn of the Mayor's Crime Victims Office in Houston. According to Carol Dorris, staff attorney at the National Center for Victims of Crime, government bodies are increasingly publicizing information about criminals. "But whether somebody in London needs to know, I don't know," Dorris said. In Harris County, there was a 13 percent increase in adult sex offenders. The number of child molesters released in 1998 more than doubled. Copyright ) 1994-99 Wired Digital Inc. All rights reserved. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There are some sex offense cases involving children -- and older teens as well -- which are so horrible to contemplate that any efforts made to provide community notification should be welcomed. Megan is one such example, as was little Adam Walch in Florida several years ago; and who can forget the hideous event in Petaluma, California a few years ago involving the young lady whose body was mutilated? As an aside, in that case the City of Petaluma *nearly went bankrupt* in their expenditure of tax funds supporting the police in their efforts to apprehend and convict the man who was responsible for the ugly crime. The City of Petaluma authorities went way 'over budget' but said they would not stop until there was full and complete closure for the victim and her family, and the entire community supported the decision to borrow money to keep the city operating when it went in the red financially as a result. I guess Polly Klas is recovering, as best one might. God bless her and her family. Adam Walch's father started a national database for missing children, and Megan was the impetus for the controversial sex registry now implemented in every state. Do I support sex-offender databases which are open to public view? That's a tough call. I fully and completely support the internet and freedom of information. But I feel it should contain information only on serious crimes of a sexual nature and not every minor 'offense' which happens along. In some states, the law provides for registration upon conviction for such things as lewd conduct in a place where the offender(s) only real 'crime' was being indiscrete in their choice of location and/or proposed partner, etc. Listing that sort of 'crime' does nothing except appeal to the prurient interests of the person examining the database. Here in the Chicago area, both the City of Chicago and the County of Cook have their databases on the net for view, although the user has to jump through some hoops to get any information out of it. One has to first identify the ward/precinct in question, then go through *hundreds* (yes, that many!) of names trying to match them up with streets (and the number on the street is not given). Naturally when they started them up for public view, the newspapers gave it full coverage including the URL for each. No details of the crime are given. But why a sex offender database and not one for shoplifters, bank robbers and car thieves? Maybe all criminal records everywhere should be easily accessible, then we could toss out once and for all the idea that a penitentiary is a place to become penitent and that people do redeem themselves and change their lives for the better. Maybe it is because all of us at some time or another in our lives come to the kinds of acts which would cause one to be listed. I used to have a neighbor who was employed by the Cook County Department of Corrections. His days were spent sitting at an 'intake desk' at the jail processing in hundreds of new inmates daily. I once asked him, did you ever stop to think about how easy it would be to f--- up and find yourself seated on the wrong side of that desk you work at? His first response was a defensive one; he did not want to talk about it. Later he said to me, yeah, he had thought about it. I sit where I do and they sit where they do for one reason only, the grace of God. They got caught, I and many of my co-workers have not. That simple. So you support the idea of a sex offender database? Well, good. Maybe we will see you listed there some day when your filthy laundry gets hung out to dry. And don't say it can't happen to you; it can quite easily. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 11:34:12 EST From: David Leibold Subject: Bell Canada Replaces Operators With U.S. Based Excell {The Toronto Star} 16 January 1999 featured a story on Bell Canada's plans to scrap its own operator service and have the U.S. based Excell provide operator services in the future. Article can be found (at least for a short time) on the Star's website, www.thestar.ca, and specifically was found at: News Story: Last call for operators - January 16, 1999 http://www.thestar.ca/thestar/editorial/news/990116NEW02b_CI-BELL16.html ------------------------------ From: Mike Pollock Subject: Cell Phone Glitch Jams Thousands Date: Wed 27 Jan 1999 22:39:32 -0500 Maine man's cell phone jams tens of thousands of calls CRYSTAL RIVER, Fla. (AP) - When the mysterious white car with tinted windows and a small satellite dish on top pulled up to Calvin Simpson's motor home, the retired engineer was puzzled. ``I thought, ``What are those guys doing?' Then they came up to me, and I said, ``Uh-oh.' '' The men, engineers for GTE Wireless, had found their culprit, tracking a technological glitch to Simpson's cellular phone. For 10 days, Simpson unwittingly had been jamming cellular service for tens of thousands of customers in Citrus and Hernando counties. GTE Wireless customers in west Citrus and Hernando began having trouble with their phones on Jan. 4 - the same day Simpson brought his motor home to the Crystal Isle RV Resort for the winter from his home in South Portland, Maine. The glitch tied up GTE Wireless customer service representatives and confounded the engineers, who are still not entirely sure what caused the problem. Engineers think Simpson's phone was constantly transmitting signals to a ``set-up channel'' on a cellular phone tower behind Crystal River's City Hall. The channel is supposed to take signals and relay them to their destinations. Simpson's phone, however, sent signals to the channel even when he wasn't trying to make a call. Whenever his phone was on, the constant signal prevented any cellular phone user from making a call via that tower. Any GTE Wireless customer traveling through the Crystal River area in the 10-day period was likely affected. And if the Simpsons had taken a road trip with their cellular phone turned on, engineers think they would have temporarily blacked out any cellular phone tower along the way. GTE Wireless spent days in Crystal River trying to figure out what was causing the outage before tracking the faulty signal to Simpson's cellular phone. They used the same technology cellular phone companies use to track stolen cell phones. Once they found Simpson on Wednesday, they simply asked him to turn off his cell phone. Bingo. That did it. Like magic, GTE Wireless was back in service in Crystal River. ``When I pulled the plug, they had a big sigh of relief,'' Simpson said. The engineers who tracked him down got Simpson a new cell phone. The company plans to take Simpson's old, faulty phone apart in hopes of finding out exactly what it was that went wrong. Ron Proleika, a Tampa-based spokesman for GTE Wireless, said he plans to tell cellular industry trade magazines about the problem because he thinks the unusual defect may be the first of its kind. Proleika would not reveal just how many customers GTE Wireless has in the area, but estimated the number of people affected by the 10-day outage was in the ``tens of thousands.'' ------------------------------ Date: 27 Jan 1999 18:00:55 -0000 From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: Book Review: "The Internet Complete Reference", Harley Hahn Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > "The Internet Complete Reference", Harley Hahn, 1996, 0-07-882138-X, > U$32.95/C$47.95 FYI, this three-year-old book is now out of print. There's a new 1999 version, completely rewritten from scratch by my sister and others, that should be available in the next month or two. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 johnl@iecc.com, Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner, http://iecc.com/johnl, Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail ------------------------------ From: Rick.R.Cox@ait4.ameritech.com (Rick Cox) Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 10:28:50 -0500 Subject: Re: Ameritech's New Call-Blocking Service Is Too Costly I would like to relate my personal experience with this feature. While it's true that I am an Ameritech employee, I can say without reservation that I would pay full price for this feature anyway. I wouldn't mind if it cost less, but it's worth the current price. For years my household has been deluged with calls from telemarketers, companies doing surveys, etc. In all seriousness, we would be subjected to an average of ten calls per day. I have done the "Do not call here, take me off your list" routine several times. But there are hundreds of companies out there. Some want donations. Some want to sell me something. Some want my opinion. I don't want to talk to any of them. And the thought of having to individually tell each of them to leave me alone is daunting to say the least. Now I get, maybe, two calls per month from those people. My serenity has been restored. And I get Caller ID with Name as part of the package. I like this feature because it gives me peace and quiet. Also, with it I don't have to make dozens, if not hundreds of calls to stop all these companies (and their myriad divisions) from disturbing me. Just my 2 cents, Rick Cox Data Design Consultant Ameritech Team Data ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #4 **************************** From ptownson Fri Jan 29 18:34:12 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id SAA26732 for telecom-recent; Fri, 29 Jan 1999 18:34:12 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 18:34:12 -0500 (EST) From: TELECOM Digest Editor Message-Id: <199901292334.SAA26732@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: telecom-recent Subject: TELECOM Digest V19_#3 > TELECOM Digest Wed, 27 Jan 99 20:18:00 EST Volume 19 : Issue 3 > > Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson > > The End of Morse Code? (Danny Burstein) > Book Review: "DNS and BIND", Paul Albitz/Cricket Liu (Rob Slade) > Pac*Bell ADSL Bandwidth Fraud? (Robert L. McMillin) > Book Review: "Just Java", Peter van der Linden (Rob Slade) > Waiting For Windows Refund Day (Monty Solomon) > A Cell of Your Own? Who Needs a Payphone? (Tad Cook) > Why Don't CLID Boxes Do This ... (phs3) > > TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not > exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere > there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of > public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America > On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated > newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. > > Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual > readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: > > * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * > > The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick > Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax > or phone at: > Post Office Box 4621 > Skokie, IL USA 60076 > Phone: 847-727-5427 > Fax: 847-675-3140 > ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** > > Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: > http://telecom-digest.org > > They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: > ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives > (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) > > A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note > to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this > method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom > Archives. > > ************************************************************************* > * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * > * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * > * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * > * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* > * ing views of the ITU. * > ************************************************************************* > > In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert > has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and > enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order > telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has > been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very > inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request > a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com > --------------------------------------------------------------- > > 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 twenty 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. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 22:11:55 EST > From: Danny Burstein > Subject: The End of Morse Code? (fwd) > > Nice writeup ... > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 15:48:44 -0800 (PST) > From: Jay D. Dyson > To: Defcon Stuff > Subject: The End of Morse Code? > > -----BEGIN FORWARDED ARTICLE----- > > The Economist, Jan. 23, 1999 > SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY > > ... --- ... .-. .. .--. (SOS, RIP) > > Morse code is being replaced by a new satellite-based system for sending > distress calls at sea. Its dots and dashes have had a good run for their > money > > "Calling all. This is our last cry before our eternal silence." > > Surprisingly this message, which flashed over the airwaves in the dots > and dashes of Morse code on January 31st 1997, was not a desperate > transmission by a radio operator on a sinking ship. Rather, it was a > message signalling the end of the use of Morse code for distress calls > in French waters. Since 1992 countries around the world have been > decommissioning their Morse equipment with similar (if less poetic) > sign-offs, as the world's shipping switches over to a new satellite- > based arrangement, the Global Maritime Distress and Safety System. > The final deadline for the switch-over to GMDSS is February 1st, a > date that is widely seen as the end of an era. > > For although dots and dashes will not die out altogether -- they will, > for example, continue to be used by amateur radio operators, spies, > and some members of the armed forces -- the switch to GMDSS marks the > end of the last significant international use of Morse. The code has, > however, had a good history. From its origins in 1832, when an > American inventor called Samuel Morse first started scribbling in his > notebook, it grew to become the global standard for sending messages > along wires and, later, over the airwaves. Morse code was, in effect, > the network protocol for the world's first Internet: the international > telegraph network, whose cables trussed up the globe in the second > half of the 19th century. > > The mother of all networks: > > Appropriately for a technology commonly associated with radio operators on > sinking ships, the idea of Morse code is said to have occurred to Samuel > Morse while he was on board a ship crossing the Atlantic. At the time > Morse was a painter and occasional inventor, but when another of the > ship's passengers informed him of recent advances in electrical theory, > Morse was suddenly taken with the idea of building an electric telegraph. > > Other inventors had been trying to do just that for the best part of a > century. Morse succeeded and is now remembered as "the father of the > telegraph" partly thanks to his singlemindedness -- it was 12 years, for > example, before he secured money from Congress to build his first > telegraph line -- but also for technical reasons. Compared with rival > electric telegraph designs, such as the needle telegraph developed by > William Cooke and Charles Wheatstone in Britain, Morse's design was very > simple: it required little more than a "key" (essentially, a spring-loaded > switch) to send messages, a clicking "sounder" to receive them, and a wire > to link the two. But although Morse's hardware was simple, there was a > catch: in order to use his equipment, operators had to learn the special > code of dots and dashes that still bears his name. > > Originally, Morse had not intended to use combinations of dots and dashes > to represent individual letters. His first code, sketched in his notebook > during that transatlantic voyage, used dots and dashes to represent the > digits 0 to 9. Morse's idea was that messages would consist of strings of > numbers corresponding to words and phrases in a special numbered > dictionary. But Morse later abandoned this scheme and, with the help of > an associate, Alfred Vail, devised the Morse alphabet, which could be used > to spell out messages a letter at a time in dots and dashes. > > At first, the need to learn this complicated-looking code made Morse's > telegraph seem impossibly tricky compared with other, more user-friendly > designs. Cooke's and Wheatstone's telegraph, for example, used five > needles to pick out letters on a diamond-shaped grid. But although this > meant that anyone could use it, it also required five wires between > telegraph stations. Morse's telegraph needed only one. And some people, > it soon transpired, had a natural facility for Morse code. > > As electric telegraphy took off in the early 1850s, the Morse telegraph > quickly became dominant. It was adopted as the European standard in 1851, > allowing direct connections between the telegraph networks of different > countries. (Britain chose not to participate, sticking with needle > telegraphs for a few more years.) By this time Morse code had been revised > to allow for accents and other foreign characters, resulting in a split > between American and International Morse that continues to this day. On > international submarine cables, left and right swings of a light-beam > reflected from a tiny rotating mirror were used to represent dots and > dashes. > > Meanwhile a distinct telegraphic subculture was emerging, with its own > customs and vocabulary, and a hierarchy based on the speed at which > operators could send and receive Morse code. First-class operators, who > could send and receive at speeds of up to 45 words a minute, handled press > traffic, securing the best-paid jobs in big cities. At the bottom of the > pile were slow, inexperienced rural operators, many of whom worked the > wires as part-timers. As their Morse code improved, however, rural > operators found that their new-found skill was a passport to better pay in > a city job. Telegraphers soon swelled the ranks of the emerging middle > classes. > > Telegraphy was also deemed suitable work for women. By 1870, a third of > the operators in the Western Union office in New York, the largest > telegraph office in America, were female. Just as skilled operators found > that they could recognise each other over the wires from their style of > Morse code, many operators claimed to be able to recognise women > operators. Inevitably, romances were initiated over the wires -- just as > they are today by e-mail. There were even a handful of weddings by > telegraph. > > In a dramatic ceremony in 1871, Morse himself said goodbye to the global > community of telegraphers he had brought into being. After a lavish > banquet and many adulatory speeches, Morse sat down behind an operator's > table and, placing his finger on a key connected to every telegraph wire > in America, tapped out his final farewell to a standing ovation. By the > time of his death in 1872, the world was well and truly wired: more than > 650,000 miles of telegraph line and 30,000 miles of submarine cable were > throbbing with Morse code; and 20,000 towns and villages were connected to > the global network. Just as the Internet is today often called an > "information superhighway", the telegraph was described in its day as an > "instantaneous highway of thought". > > But by the 1890s the Morse telegraph's heyday as a cutting-edge technology > was coming to an end, with the invention of the telephone and the rise of > automatic telegraphs, precursors of the teleprinter, neither of which > required specialist skills to operate. Morse code, however, was about to > be given a new lease of life thanks to another new technology: wireless. > > Following the invention of radiotelegraphy by Guglielmo Marconi in 1896, > its potential for use at sea quickly became apparent. For the first time, > ships could communicate with each other, and with the shore, whatever the > weather and even when out of visual range. In 1897 Marconi successfully > sent Morse code messages between a shore station and an Italian warship > 19km (12 miles) away. The first sea rescue after a distress call sent by > radiotelegraph took place in 1899, when a lightship in the Dover Straits > reported the grounding of Elbe, a steamship. Two years later, Marconi > sent the first transatlantic radio signal: three dots, the letter "S" in > Morse code. By 1910, Morse radio equipment was commonplace on ships. > > The sinking of the Titanic in 1912, however, highlighted the need for > radio operators to listen at all times for distress signals. After the > disaster it emerged that the liner Californian had been only a few miles > away, and that hundreds of lives might have been saved had the > Californian's radio operator been on duty and so able to receive the > Titanic's "SOS" distress call. At the first International Convention for > Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS), held in London in 1914, it was agreed that > large vessels should maintain 24-hour radio watch. > > This rule has remained ever since, with subsequent SOLAS conventions > gradually introducing new rules to keep pace with the development of > technologies such as radiotelephony. The advent of satellite technology > led the International Maritime Organisation to amend the SOLAS convention > in 1988 to introduce GMDSS, an automated emergency communications system > based on satellite and radio links. > > Optional since 1992, GMDSS equipment will be compulsory worldwide from > February 1st on all ships that exceed 300 tonnes, carry 12 or more > passengers, or travel in international waters. (Owners of smaller vessels > can install the equipment if they wish.) Under GMDSS, anyone on board a > ship in distress merely has to press a button to send a distress call > containing the vessel's identification number and its precise location -- > there is no need for a skilled Morse operator. And so, after nearly 170 > years, Morse code will finally slip beneath the waves. > > Over and out: > > As communications protocols go, Morse has lasted a surprisingly long time > - -- admittedly with a few tweaks here and there. So how might its modern > descendant, the Internet Protocol (TCP/IP), fare in comparison? TCP/IP > was devised in 1973 by Robert Kahn and Vinton Cerf (a man with Morse-like > stature in the Internet world who is often known as the "father of the > Internet"). > > As with Morse code before it, TCP/IP is being improved to respond to new > challenges and technologies. Its addressing system is now being > overhauled to make room for billions of additional connections, to allow > for the wireless devices expected to proliferate over coming years and to > enable even household appliances to go online. Mr Cerf is also working on > how to extend the Internet to such other places as the moon and Mars, > since the time delays as radio signals travel through space make the > current protocol unsuitable. > > Further improvements will follow: indeed, since it is spoken by computers, > not humans, TCP/IP is easier to adapt than was Morse. Even so, in today's > fast-changing computer world, it seems unlikely that TCP/IP will remain in > continuous use for anything like as long as the century and a half managed > by Morse code, its distant digital ancestor. > > - ----- END FORWARDED ARTICLE ----- > > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: My sincere thanks to Danny for sending > along this really great bit of history for the Digest. PAT] > > ------------------------------ > > From: Rob Slade > Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User > Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 14:43:27 -0800 > Subject: Book Review: "DNS and BIND", Paul Albitz/Cricket Liu > Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca > > BKDNSBND.RVW 981115 > > "DNS and BIND", Paul Albitz/Cricket Liu, 1998, 1-56592-512-2, > U$32.95/C$46.95 > %A Paul Albitz > %A Cricket Liu > %C 103 Morris Street, Suite A, Sebastopol, CA 95472 > %D 1998 > %G 1-56592-512-2 > %I O'Reilly & Associates, Inc. > %O U$32.95/C$46.95 800-998-9938 fax: 707-829-0104 nuts@ora.com > %P 520 p. > %T "DNS and BIND", 3rd ed. > > Of the millions of users on the Internet, almost all are blissfully > unaware of the complexity and magnitude of the task of network > routing. How does the network know where to deliver a piece of email? > In fact, given the packet nature of all Internet traffic, how do > telnet or ftp packets get, reliably and generally quickly, to their > destination? Few even recognize the term DNS, the Domain Name > Service, which handles the problem. Administrators may have used > BIND, the Berkeley Internet Name Domain program, to manage DNS, but > may not fully understand the importance, use or finer aspects of it. > This book gives both background and operational details. > > Topics covered include background of the system, an explanation of the > workings of DNS, how to get BIND and a domain name, setting up BIND, > DNS and email, configuring hosts, maintaining BIND, modifying domains, > creation of subdomains, advanced features and security, nslookup, BIND > debugging messages, troubleshooting, the Resolver and Name Server > Library routines, as well as miscellaneous other information. > > Given the nature of the network routing problem, a full understanding > of DNS likely requires actual hands-on work. Albitz and Liu have, > however, put together clear, straightforward, and sometimes even > lighthearted text to make the learning process as painless as > possible. The book also covers more advanced topics than > straightforward routing administration. Bind 8.1.2 is the basic > version for the book, but it also looks back to Bind 4.8.3 and 4.9.x > because of the number of shipping products that may still be based on > those. > > copyright Robert M. Slade, 1995, 1997, 1998 BKDNSBND.RVW 981115 > > rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@sprint.ca robertslade@usa.net p1@canada.com > Find virus, book info http://victoria.tc.ca/int-grps/techrev/rms.htm > Mirrored at http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade/rms.htm > Linked to bookstore at http://www97.pair.com/robslade/ > Robert Slade's Guide to Computer Viruses, 0-387-94663-2 (800-SPRINGER) > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 06:53:10 -0800 > From: Robert L. McMillin > Organization: Syseca, Inc. > Subject: Pac*Bell ADSL Bandwidth Fraud? > > Pac*Bell's ADSL offerings have been so far really exciting: quite > inexpensive, and widely deployed (for an initial rollout). However, I > just heard something from an ISP friend of mine that is making me > really jittery about buying: according to him, Pac*Bell is > concentrating their ADSL lines back at DS3 junctions, and rather > heavily overloading these. This, obviously, is a bid to keep the > price of ADSL down. However, some users are reporting speeds as low as > 10 kb/s during peak usage times because of this. That is, you'd be > better off using a conventional dial-up ISP with any flavor of analog > modem. > > Has anyone else heard of this story? > > Robert L. McMillin | Not the voice of Syseca, Inc. | rlm@syseca-us.com > Personal: rlm@helen.surfcty.com | rlm@netcom.com > > ------------------------------ > > From: Rob Slade > Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User > Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 09:07:45 -0800 > Subject: Book Review: "Just Java", Peter van der Linden > Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca > > BKJSJAVA.RVW 990108 > > "Just Java", Peter van der Linden, 1999, 0-13-010534-1, > U$44.99/C$63.00 > %A Peter van der Linden pvdl@best.com > %C One Lake St., Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458 > %D 1998 > %G 0-13-010534-1 > %I Prentice Hall > %O U$44.99/C$63.00 201-236-7139 fax: 201-236-7131 > %P 776 p. + CD-ROM > %S SunSoft Press Java Series > %T "Just Java 1.2, fourth edition" > > Huh. Back to the original, and somewhat inaccurate, title. This book > is a fairly clear introduction to Java. The material is accessible to > the non-programmer, albeit with some dedication. The content is fast > paced, so you may need to go over some sections several times. But it > isn't *just* Java. Oh, no. The jokes start on the *dedication* page. > I am saddened by the loss of the "World's Best" Rolls-Royce, the > waterbomb-carrying paper airplane, and the amusing but painfully > realistic look at getting connected to the Internet, but the table of > easily misunderstood error messages and things learned on the Internet > are still there. I guess as the book grows, something has to give. > > Chapter one looks at the what and why of Java. Chapter two goes a > long way, although perhaps not all the way, to explaining object- > oriented programming. (Chapter six adds to it.) This section is > perhaps best appreciated by C programmers, although it does a fair > amount of demystifying of object terminology. The structure of the > book has been reorganized, making it less sectional. The chapters > form a more standard, sequential tutorial on Java, covering the > basics, keywords, types, names, arrays, operators. classes, > statements, interfaces, packages, threads, applets, security, > libraries, GUI, containers, the AWT (Abstract Window Toolkit), > graphics, file I/O, and networking. > > But I must also talk about the CD-ROM. Generally I don't, since many > authors simply throw on a few megs of shareware or RFCs, which may or > may not have a bearing on the topic of the book. Not our Peter. > First off, there is over 500 megabytes on the CD, filling it almost > completely. The Java 1.2 JDK (Java Development Kit) wasn't ready in > time for the book, but it has the older versions for WinNT/9x, Mac, > Solaris, Linux, and so forth. (Don't have Linux? It's got that too.) > Or, if you'd rather program in Perl, ada, Fortran, C, or Eiffel, it > can help you too. Plus FAQs (Frequently Asked Questions lists), > sample code, games, the paper airplane (animated), Sherlock Holmes > stories, the Magna Carta, the Jargon File, and a new and different > Rolls story. The directory structure may not be immediately obvious > to all, but then, that's what grep is for. Also, the link to the book > (the CD is navigable via browser) off the main page doesn't seem to > work, but that's what the "Go" box is for. > > So, while it may or may not be the world's best tutorial on Java, it > is definitely the most enjoyable. > > copyright Robert M. Slade, 1996 - 1999 BKJSJAVA.RVW 990108 > > rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@sprint.ca robertslade@usa.net p1@canada.com > Find virus, book info http://victoria.tc.ca/int-grps/techrev/rms.htm > Mirrored at http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade/rms.htm > Linked to bookstore at http://www97.pair.com/robslade/ > Robert Slade's Guide to Computer Viruses, 0-387-94663-2 (800-SPRINGER) > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 13:39:13 -0500 > From: Monty Solomon > Subject: Waiting for Windows Refund Day > > http://www.wired.com/news/news/technology/story/17442.html > > Waiting for Windows Refund Day > by Chris Oakes > 2:10 p.m. 20.Jan.99.PST > > If you don't use Windows, why should you pay for it? > > That's the logic driving a group of Linux users who want to make good > on a tiny clause built into the Windows end-user license. The clause > offers a refund to PC owners who buy a computer preloaded with Windows > 98, but don't use the operating system. > > If it gathers steam, their effort could lead to legal action requiring > Microsoft and PC vendors to make it easier to opt out of using the > Windows OS on their PCs. > > "I'm hoping in the long run we'll be able to pressure Microsoft to > change their OEM contracts," said Matt Jensen a participant in the > effort and webmaster for the Windows Refund Center. The site will > coordinate and track efforts to obtain refunds from users' respective PC > manufacturers. > > The movement ramped up Tuesday, and the grassroots group has set aside > 15 February as Windows Refund Day when those seeking to uninstall > Windows from their PCs will send out their letters. > > Jensen and others are contributing ideas to the Refund Center following > the news of an Australian PC owner's effort to obtain a refund for his > copy of Windows. Discussion of Geoffrey Bennett's saga began on Slashdot > , a site popular with users of the alternative PC operating system > Linux. > > Attorney Erwin Shustak, chief litigator of securities and corporate > finance at the law firm Shustak, Jalil, & Heller, said Bennett's effort > may not lead to immediate, dramatic consequences, but could give rise to > an eventual class-action lawsuit. > > Microsoft and PC makers "had a contract that clearly said what [users] > were entitled to do, and yet they didn't honor the contract," Shustak > said of Bennett's story. "They made it extremely difficult for him to > obtain what he was supposed to obtain. I believe it was an illusory > clause; they had no procedure sent up to honor it." > > The Microsoft Windows End-User License Agreement, or EULA, that > accompanies the IBM ThinkPad reads, "If you do not agree to the terms of > this EULA, PC manufacturer and Microsoft are unwilling to license the > software product to you. In such an event ... you should promptly > contact PC manufacturer for instructions on a return of the unused > product(s) for a refund." > > Microsoft could not immediately be reached for comment. > > Full story to follow. > > Copyright ) 1994-99 Wired Digital Inc. All rights reserved. > > ------------------------------ > > Subject: A Cell of Your Own? Who Needs a Pay Phone? > Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 00:00:18 PST > From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) > > SANTA ANA, Calif. (AP) -- Some of the toughest new restrictions in > California could be sounding last call for pay phones in neighborhoods > where people need them most. > > This Orange County city this month joined a growing number of towns > enacting ordinances threatening removal of thousands of streetside > phones: nuisances to some people who have phones of their own; > lifelines to people who can't afford one. > > "I wish they were all yanked out," said Debbie McEwen, who complains > that the phone booth near her Santa Ana home is plagued by graffiti, > cigarette butts and loiterers. "They're magnets. People hang out all > day and all night." > > As cellular telephones become standard equipment for those who can > afford them, pay phones continue to proliferate thanks to federal > deregulation. > > But Santa Ana and other communities are beginning to see them as > eyesores. Critics complain many newer pay phones are poorly > maintained, and many people are put off by the ads they display. > > Santa Ana's measure has angered pay phone owners who say they will be > forced to remove most of the city's 1,500 outdoor phones. Officials > say the phones have spread so rapidly it's uncertain how many have > been installed; many new ones lack the required permits. > > Statewide, the number of pay phones has increased by nearly 65,000 to > about 265,000 since 1990, according to Public Utilities Commission > figures. Practically all the new phones were installed by independent > companies. > > Santa Ana's ordinance does not target specific phones for removal. It > establishes strict rules the owners say will make it too costly to > change and operate the phones. > > The ordinance limits the amount of exposed conduit connecting phone > lines to booths and bans the use of exposed wires connecting a pay > phone to overhead lines. > > Of the 300 phones Pacific Bell has in the city, about 210 would not > comply with the new ordinance, Pacific Bell executive Tom Weber said. > > "It's not just my pay phones in Santa Ana I'm worried about. It's my > 930 phones I have in Southern California," said owner Ken Scott, > president of San Diego Pay Phone Owners Association. "If this takes > off in other cities, it's going to be a mess out there, and it's a > mess that doesn't need to happen." > > The owners have vowed to fight the proposed law, saying it punishes the > entire industry for the sins of a few irresponsible operators. > > But reducing pay phones seems to be the trend across the country, the > {Los Angeles Times} reported Monday. Some older ordinances were aimed at > drug dealing and prostitution, but communities are increasingly > focusing on aesthetics. > > -- In California, Huntington Park bans pay phones on private property > in its business district, a law that is being challenged by the > telephone industry; > > -- Preservationists in New York are fighting plans to add nearly > 20,000 public phones across the city, fearful the booths will block > views of historic landmarks; > > -- In downtown Perth Amboy, N.J., booths are prohibited within 600 > feet of each other; > > -- Chicago officials have removed thousands of pay phones outside > stores. > > Besides complaints from phone owners that Santa Ana's landmark law > infringes on their rights, the prospect of removing booths has also > sparked safety concerns. > > Community activists point out that one-third of all 911 calls in Santa > Ana come from pay phones. > > Jack Elwir, owner of H&H Liquor Store on Civic Center Drive, said the > three phones outside his businesses are used regularly by people > making calls to family in Mexico. > > "A lot of customers don't have phones -- or even cars," he said. > > Until recently, Claudia Vasquez said the phone outside her home was > her main link to friends and family because she didn't have the > identification to get her own. She recently got the problem > straightened out and had a line installed. > > "They can't remove the phones," Vasquez said. "People use them all the > time." > > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The two COCOTS of mine which readers > will recall me discussing about a year ago when I had them put in for > the benefit of the bus riders and had them programmed for extremely > low and fair rates wound up getting vandalized so much that I was > going to have them removed entirely, however the company which services > them for me suggested a few improvements, including the latest vandal- > proof technology. They put in two new phones which appear to be almost > impossible to vandalize. They have some sort of heavy metal across the > front, and a thing at the top where coins go in that prevent 'stuffing' > the coin slot with string and other things designed to capture the > coins people insert. When I started getting at least one complaint > each day about the old phones, I called and asked them to find some > solution. The new phones sort of look like the type of phone installed > for prisoner use in jails, etc. Let's see these get vandalized! PAT] > > ------------------------------ > > From: p.h.s.3@watvm.uwaterloo.ca (phs3) > Subject: Why Don't CLID Boxes do This ... > Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 03:56:16 GMT > Organization: Remove dots from userid portion to reply > > .. or do they? > > Since we got CLID, we find that we use it a lot as a telephone > directory for numbers of folks for which we have a short-term need. > For example, my daughter is off to a friend's house for the afternoon; > in negotiating the visit, her parents have probably called our house, > so their number is on the box. Far easier to scroll back to find it > than to look it up. After the visit, we don't need the number for > days/weeks/months/ever again, so we don't care. > > Now, that works fine. What happens, though, is that we wind up > spending a certain amount of time "maintaining" the box -- deleting > OUT OF AREA, PRIVATE CALL, and 'boring' numbers such as my office # > when I call home (which appears as the office switchboard number, thus > not even being useful if my wife didn't know my number by heart). If > we don't do this, then numbers which we *do* want kept -- my > sister-in-law's second line, neighbor's cell number, etc., scroll off > and are lost. > > So...we would love a CLID box which allowed: > > - defining numbers as "nuisance" numbers, to be kept until reviewed, > then deleted either immediately, the next time a call comes in, or > just first when the box fills up; > > - the ability to "lock" numbers, much as my pager allows, so they > won't scroll off; > > - a "delete duplicates", so the 15 calls back & forth about the visit to the > friend's house don't waste space in the box. > > Anyone heard of such a beast? Or are CLID boxes such a commodity that > features aren't worth the trouble? Yeah, we could do this with a PC, > but we're not likely to put one at each phone ... > > Cheers, > > ..phsiii > > ------------------------------ > > End of TELECOM Digest V19 #3 > **************************** From mcuccia@mailhost.tcs.tulane.edu Mon Feb 1 15:52:38 1999 Received: from spnode03.tcs.tulane.edu (spnode03.tcs.tulane.edu [129.81.224.11]) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id PAA25178 for ; Mon, 1 Feb 1999 15:52:21 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost (mcuccia@localhost) by spnode03.tcs.tulane.edu (8.8.5/8.8.4) with SMTP id OAA43098 for ; Mon, 1 Feb 1999 14:52:14 -0600 X-Authentication-Warning: spnode03.tcs.tulane.edu: mcuccia owned process doing -bs Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 14:52:14 -0600 (CST) From: Mark J Cuccia X-Sender: mcuccia@spnode03.tcs.tulane.edu Reply-To: Mark J Cuccia To: telecom-recent@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V19_#2 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII TELECOM Digest Wed, 27 Jan 99 19:16:00 EST Volume 19 : Issue 2 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Cook on U.S. Government Giving IANA Contract to ICANN (Ronda Hauben) Re: Cook on U.S. Government Giving IANA Contract to ICANN (Ronda Hauben) Video Over ISDN (Joachim Weber) Telemarketing by Playing Recordings (Michael A. Covington) 1+ Long Distance (Keith Michaels) Surprising Number of Consumers Ignore Long-Distance Discounts (Tad Cook) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-727-5427 Fax: 847-675-3140 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ronda Hauben Subject: Cook on U.S. Government Giving IANA Contract to ICANN Date: 26 Jan 1999 23:50:15 GMT Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC Following is a report by Gordon Cook sent to the IFWP list which is helpful in understanding some of what has been happening with the behind the scenes maneuvers of the U.S. government to transfer Internet assets from the public to the private sector. My comments on this will follow in the next message. From: Gordon Cook Subject: [ifwp] what ICANN is up to: the financial arrangements for paying IANA salaries; why the NIST solicitation for ICANN contracts is illegal and can be stopped with an ORSC protest letter; why its a waste of board member's time to talk to mail lists; conversations with esther dyson and mike roberts and others For the past 48 hours I have done nothing but research and write the following. Keeping IANA Paychecks Coming The process last summer of setting up newco (IANA) essentially ran out of time. Details like the coming October 1 unemployment of the IANA staff, including Jon Postel, went into the month of September unsettled. They did so presumably because the parties putting things together assumed that Magaziner would have no choice but to bless ICANN on October 1 and hand over keys to the kingdom to them as well as money for them to start doing their work. When it became clear that this likely would not happen, something had to be done about the paychecks of IANA employees. Mike Roberts on behalf of ICANN made a deal with USC and ISI whereby they (ISI) would enter a transition agreement with ICANN so that ICANN would pay the salaries of the IANA employees (six people) effective October 1. (Where ICANN gets the money is anyone's guess - likely from GIP - ie IBM.) Thus Mike Roberts found himself in a situation where he had to scurry at the end of September to file ICANN's incorporation papers so that as of October 1st ICANN would exist as a legal entity and be able to sign an agreement with ISI whereby the IANA employees remained legally ISI/USC employees with full benefits (health care etc). This was conditional on ICANN sending ISI a monthly check to cover the cost of their benefits through Dec 31, 1998. IANA expenses for office support, network connectivity etc would be paid from the DARPA Teranode network contract with ISI through 12/31/98. When they realized that 12/31/98 would come and go without a legally constituted and functional ICANN to take responsibility for the IANA employees, the December 24 agreement mentioned in the NIST solicitation in the January 6 Commerce Business Daily was struck to handle both functions. It supposedly is nothing more than a continuation of the agreements that were reached last summer with ICANN to continue to pay salaries and Terranode to cover network and other expenses. Solicitation Number 52SBNT9C1020 from NIST is to formalize these informal agreements by giving ICANN a NIST contract by which they will be responsible for paying for the IANA functions. ON Going Mechanics such as NIST Contract Versus NTIA MOU of 11/25/98 The on going needs which, like it or not, ICANN is now legally constituted to fill create a situation where it becomes very difficult for Becky Burr on the one hand and Elliot Maxwell to hold ICANN's feet to the fire on the issues of its unaccountable bylaws and openness. The reason why is that ICANN knows that IANA salaries must be paid and that other parts of the Magaziner constructed house of cards like the requirement for NSI to develop a shared database by April 1, 1999 with specs subject to review by an ICANN (NewCo) appointed review panel. (If memory serves me correctly Becky gave ICANN permission to appoint such a panel of experts.) The problem is that with each step of the way and each action or approval granted ICANN purely for administrative reasons, NTIA is in effect tacitly recognizing and transferring authority to IANA. The intent of the 11/25/98 MOU may have been good, but the fact of the matter however is that it looks like IANA can erode the good intent by simply out waiting NTIA. I suspect that legal action will be required to VOID the sole source solicitation or to sue the US Gov't and the ICANN board before we will see any change in ICANN's behavior. Given the direction of events ICANN will either open up its operations to public scrutiny or it will find itself in court. IOdesign is likely to sue again and given the course of events, we'd welcome that. To be meaningful the NTIA needs to revisit the ICANN MoU and spell out milestones and due dates for deliverables. If Becky and Elliot do not do this we may begin to wonder whether they mean for the MOU to be taken seriously. Lack of Trust, Suspicion and Paranoia Reaching new Highs I have seen a credible assertion that claims IANA staff are being restricted in technical communications they can have with with NSI. I have reached the appropriate people at NSI who have assured me that as far as they can tell all necessary channels of technical communication are fully open with IANA and with everyone else for that matter. I also reached Mike Roberts on his cell phone. Mike, in the middle of a business meeting, graciously took a very few minutes to hear my concerns. Mike said that he could unequivocally assure me that neither he, nor Esther, nor the ICANN board, nor any ICANN lawyers had placed any restrictions on the IANA staff. He added that he believed that it was only rumor and said that if there were any shred of truth to it would be Ron Ohlander, the ISI administrator who would know. (Legally ISI still is the employer of the IANA staff, so if any orders were given Ohlander would be in a posityion to know. I have a call into him but suspect that he will be unreachable before tomorrow.) On balance, I suspect - given that I have reached directly or indirectly virtually everyone involved - that the rumor was likely based on a misunderstanding and has no real substance. The probing however proved to be a useful exercise, because time and time again I was told that the amount of fear, distrust, and paranoia on the part of all was running extremely high. I conclude that two things are at fault. One ICANN's continued insistence on closed board meetings and secrecy, and two that the actions of the MIGHTY Five taken with Sims Cochetti and Magaziner to form ICANN last summer were deeply flawed ICANN Policy as a Destroyer of Trust I have documented elsewhere the widespread disgust with the ICANN Policy of closed board meetings Dave Farber - however well intentioned he may have been is one of the creators of this mess. On Monday, perhaps like the Sorcerer's apprentice horrified by what had transpired Dave stuck his neck out on the IFWP list and said: It is time to raise the issue yet again of the distressing fact that the Board meetings of ICANN are closed. Many moons ago several of us strongly suggested that it would be appropriate for the ICANN Board to operate under the same set of rules that US Federal Advisory Boards operate under as well as NotForProfit Boards like EFF and ISOC. Namely all meetings are open to the public to attend and listen. Often observers do not have the right to talk except for a set aside period during the meeting when 5 minute positions can be requested. The Board has the right to convene in Executive Session but in all cases the subjects that can be discussed at exec session are limited, sometimes by law and more often by good faith and the fear of law. I strongly suggest that this be the principle that ICANN adopt rapidly. Why am I bringing this up. I was told that the ICANN Board meeting in Singapore is closed and that there will be a open "meeting" the day before. That is not the same thing. Open meetings are a good way to gather opinions and an OPEN BOARD meeting is a necessary way to insure openness and the respect of the community WHICH THE ICANN BOARD MUST SERVE. (caps intentional). If there is a reason why this is not appropriate for ICANN but is for the others , I think the ICANN Board owes it to the community to tell us now those reasons in detail.[End quote of Farber message.] Esther Dyson chose to answer not Farber but Jeff Williams saying: Yes. It is in our bylaws and in all the public statements we have made. Basically, we could have had "open" board meetings with executive sessions that were closed, but we figured (the Initial Board voted) that this (below) is the best way to do it. Dave Farber to his great cerdit came back and wrote to the IFWP list: "Esther, There is no real problem scheduling an Exec Session for a Board meeting. The PITAC and all other federal Advisory Boards do that ALL the time. An open NON-Board meeting is not an OPEN BOARD Meeting. The public has a right to see how the issues are handled etc in such an organization and the best way to ensure that is to have OPEN Board meetings. Sorry, Dave" Farber made a third comment about how the logistics of such could be handled. Esther answered *NONE* of Farber's three comments. Unfortunately no list members spoke up on Farber's behalf. This morning however Esther Dyson did call me from the airport. We had an extremely useful 10 minute conversation before she had to run for her plane. She did not say it was off record. At the end I asked if there was anything off record, adding that I felt what she said needed to be accurate and wanted to try to ensure that. "Well why not send it to me before you put it out?" I hesitantly said yes and asked what kind of turn around I would get. 36 hours (she would be on net when she got the chance) was the reply as she dashed off. This leaves me with an unpleasant problem. I am going ahead with my notes on the call. I believe I can be quite accurate. If I am not I invite Esther to send me corrections of or do the correcting herself. Time here is important and her information, while not a huge surprise, is very helpful in understanding the dynamics of what is happening. Now for the details of the conversation: Dyson: I understand and am sympathetic to Dave Farber's call for open Board meetings. But you have got to understand that half our board is not American and they think the US federal open meetings law is something they should not have to subject themselves to. These are business people who don't have their board meetings in public. When they were invited to be on the ICANN board, they could read in the ICANN by laws that ICANN board meetings would be closed. This was something they felt comfortable with. COOK: But if you are saying that after Farber's posting you polled the board again and the board is STILL voting to keep board meetings closed, then some of the American members must also be voting despite the flack you are getting to keep the meetings closed? Dyson: Yes. Now when we get members, if the members vote for open board meetings, we will have to have open board meetings. So stick with us a while and the board meetings will eventually become open. You must understand: These are business people. Corporate boards don't have public board meetings. Cook: But this *IS* the internet for heaven sakes ....internet business is done in the open. Dyson: That's what the mail lists claim. But the mail lists are a self selected minority of the people that we must serve. Those not on the mail lists are quite happy with what we are doing. [Cook: I believe this to be almost a verbatim quote of Esther's words.] I have a thick skin so I am willing to subject myself to abuse. But why should the board members be forced to waste their time listening to and dealing with the wild accusations that abound on these lists? Cook: Agreed that it can get quite abusive, but the abuse comes with the territory. What if IFWP were run on a server where civil discourse rules apply and are ENFORCED! Dyson: Sounds attractive. Cook: I am very hopeful that this will happen. Please join us there. Talk to us. With substance. With fair answers to questions designed to establish some common values and build some trust. Dyson: perhaps. Let me consider it. Cook: please do. Let me just say that the board suffers from the same disease that NSI management did in assuming that Internet mail lists are an irritant.....something that doesn't matter. I was told that twice last year by Don Telage as I tried to explain that NSI's refusal to allow any NSI employee had help to cement hatred of NSI on the network. Perhaps the show down with Becky last September, gave NSI second thoughts because NSI has changed its policy. Sounds like the board is going to have to learn the same lesson that NSI learned. Dyson: I hear what you are saying but unfortunately there's not time to respond....gotta run, bye. Jock Gill (holder of the first major internet policy position in the clinton administyration) wrote me privately a day ago and captured the essense of what Esther was saying. (Used with Jock's permission). The issue, I think, is that the good folks you (Gordon) inquired about come from, for the most part, old industrial/educational hierarchies which are famous for being autocratic, top down, feudal fiefdoms with all the management style that implies. As well as no requirements to run open meeting in a democratic way -- they do not come from the world of elected public servants who assume such rules. Thus why would we expect them to act in any way other than what they have been successful at? New tricks for old dogs? Not too likely. Let's not ask for miracles. Who on the board in question really understands the concept of stupid networks and smart edges and the new management paradigm it is enabling? Who on the board understands management by dialogue, not monologue? What Then is the Solution? Although I haven't asked Dave Farber directly, I suspect and certainly *HOPE* that he is horrified by what he and the remainder of the Mighty Five have done. Lets assume Esther gave a fair rendition of what the reasons are for ICANN's silence in front of the rest of the Internet. Farber, Cerf, Roberts, Landweber and Bradner are smart enough to know that in working with Sims and Cochetti and Magaziner in the summer and in agreeing to create a board of business people who knew nothing about the internet they were creating a potential monster - certainly that they were creating an entity that in being haughty and closed to the open discussion culture of the net would be asking for recrimination and conflict. Because they acted as a cabal to provide adult supervision to the Internet, they may well now have created an entity that will be still born because it simply cannot get enough trust from anyone involved to do its job. Dave Farber is to be commended for speaking out on Monday. But with no one crawling out on the limb behind him he has fallen silent. I hope he spoke out because he is looking at what he helped to create and is horrified by what he sees. It seems that the best way for Dave to show that he was serious is to keep up the pressure.. IF THE MIGHTY FIVE JUST MADE AN HONEST MISTAKE LAST SEPTEMBER NOW IS THE TIME FOR THEM TO SHOW THAT SUCH IS THE CASE. The NIST Solicitation on Behalf of NTIA Meanwhile we must ask what Becky Burr is doing with NTIA solicitation on behalf of ICANN? I spoke late Tuesday afternoon to Teresa Reefe, contracts specialist at NIST. COOK: Why to NIST? Why not NTIA? Reefe: because while NTIA has a grants and cooperative agreements office, it does not have a contracts office and this is a contract with ICANN. COOK: who decided it would be a contract and on what grounds? Reefe: I'd like to know that myself. it was our lawyers downtown. they just delivered intrustions out here. When NTIA does a contract they have to use our office (Nist) COOK: Does the FAR apply? Reefe: yes COOK: the CBD said Nist intends to award a sole source contract to ICANN for operation of the Internet Assigned Numbers authority. What is meant by "operation"....?? How is the IANA defined? Are we talking about paying the salries of Joyce reynolds bill manning and others? Reefe: don't know.... that will be part of the solicitation being prepared. Cook: Ahh....solici ------------------------------ From: Ronda Hauben Subject: Re: Cook on U.S. Government Giving IANA Contract to ICANN Date: 26 Jan 1999 23:51:28 GMT Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC Thanks to Gordon Cook for his recent report on what is happening with the NIST annoucement for giving the IANA contract to ICANN. However, I want to add some aspects that Gordon left out in this situation. The problem to me is *not* that the NTIA or NIST is sole sourcing this contract. The problem is 1) That it is holding IANA hostage to an illegitimate and secretly contrived plan to give away very lucrative assets to a private sector entity. These assets will give great power over the Internet and all who use it to those who grab control over this entity. 2) That IANA is too important a part of the Internet to be held hostage in this way. It isn't that some other private sector business entity should get control of IANA through competitive contract solicitations, but rather that a U.S. government entity that is appropriate, like DARPA, should continue to administer the contract with IANA and pay the salaries of those who work for IANA while there be a genuine discussion and examination of how to create a protected environment for IANA to function that includes the public interest being dominant, not commercial objectives. 3) That the U.S. public and folks all over the world have contributed to the funding of the Internet and of its development and achievements. These folks should not be disenfranchised by this power play of the U.S. government holding the paychecks of IANA folks hostage to their trying to pass enormously valuable and power giving assets to some private entities. 4) I didn't notice the U.S. government having any problem paying for the big bills that it has taken to build the Internet (for the U.S. share of the bills), and the public interest needs to be protected now and the Internet needs a way to scale and to continue to serve as a unique new medium of worldwide communication. Therefore the U.S. government should stop hassling the IANA folks and should make sure that their pay checks are paid by the U.S. government. 5) For a long range solution, the administrative fees for IP numbers shouldn't be going for profits for various entities, but if needed could pay the what are minimal costs for IANA folks salaries. 6) The fruit of a poison tree is poison. The longer this power play by the U.S. govenrment goes on, the worse the situation will get. There is the need for an investigation into how this all happened and a plan for making the needed changes so that the public interest is dominant in what is happening, not someone's idea of how to convert the Internet into a plaything for marketeers. 7) When Ira Magaziner called me this summer he said there were 2 problems the U.S. government was trying to solve. a) the problem with trademarks and domain names b) the problem of international pressure for participation in what happens with the Internet. (I don't have my notes now from talking with him, but I will try to find them to see more specifically what he said.) However, subsequent to talking with him, I have seen the minutes from the Federal Network Advisory Committee meeting in 1996 where the U.S. government talked about the need to protect American commercial interests with regard to the Internet and began a process of encouraging the Internet Society and it seems others like the European Union, WIPO etc to figure out how to take over IANA. Though there are minutes of this meeting, there is no real indication of the discussion that went on to make this decision. Nor is there any indication that there was any concern for or interest by any of those present in what the public interest is in regard to the present and future of the Internet and how this would be represented in plans for giving away public assets and control over IANA to some private sector corporation. This meeting in 1996 is exactly the kind of situation that computer pioneers like Norbert Wiener and others like C.P. Snow warned against happening at the 1961 conference they held on Scientists and Decision Making at MIT. They described how there would be government decisions that had to be made regarding the future of the computer and it was very important that these decisions *not* be made by a few people in secret, but that they be the subject of broad discussion and debate. They pointed out that when such important decisions were made by a few people they would more likely be bad decisions, while the broader discussion by large numbers of people made it more likely that such decisions would be good decisions. The decision to transfer IANA and other key and controlling functions of the Internet and the assets involved with these functions to a private sector entity is a bad decision. These are functions that need to be carried out in service of the public and they require public protection of the assets and the power so that it can be used for the cooperative purposes, not for some private purpose. The Internet is too important to be playing such power games with. It is good that Jim Fleming uncovered what is happening with the NIST giving ICANN a control to run IANA. But how to get the problem of what is happening out to as many people as possible is what seems to be needed and it would be good to have whatever help the press or people in the U.S. or around the world, or online or off line can give, as possible. In his talk at the MIT conference, C.P. Snow proposed the importance of as many people as possible knowing what was going on and being involved in the discussion of what should happen. This is what is needed now, and any help making that happen would seem to be of value. Thus what Cook describes is a power play using IANA and the Internet and its users as pawns. The 1961 meeting at MIT that predicted just such actions would happen and discussed how to deal with them is descrived in: Chapter 6 of Netizens "Cybernetics, Time-sharing, Human-computer Symbiosis and Online Communities" The chapter is online at http://www.columbia.edu/~hauben/netbook Ronda ronda@panix.com. ------------------------------ From: Joachim Weber Subject: Video Over ISDN Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 22:36:09 +0000 Organization: Aachen University of Technology / Rechnerbetrieb Informatik Hello, Is there anybody who can give some hints to me about how to transmit video (avi) via ISDN using a protocol named H.320 (H.221). I am using MS Visual C++ V6 and MS Direct Draws (6.0) Multimedia Facilities to display videos in windows applications. As this works rather good, my next task is to transmit audio and video data over ISDN. I am wondering wether there is a SDK or a driver which can help me in fulfilling the indicated task. Please note that this has nothing to do with internet. It is just about connecting a computer with an isdn card to a phone capable of receiving audio and video data in H.221 Hope someone knows something useful. Please let me know. Best Regards, Joachim Weber ------------------------------ From: Michael A. Covington Subject: Telemarketing by Playing Recordings Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 09:31:21 -0500 Organization: MindSpring Enterprises I was under the impression that telemarketing machines that dialed you and played a recording, with no human operator, had been banned. Just now I got a call from one, an outfit called VPT that sells pagers. The only identifying information given was the 800 number, 1-800-388-2161, repeated many times. The Caller ID said only "out of area." Am I right that they're breaking some regulation? Is anyone here acquainted with them? Michael A. Covington / AI Center / The University of Georgia http://www.ai.uga.edu/~mc http://www.mindspring.com/~covington <>< ------------------------------ From: keith.r.michaels@boeing.com (Keith Michaels) Subject: 1+ Long Distance Organization: The Boeing Company Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 18:51:26 GMT Why do I have to choose a 1+ long distance carrier? Why can't I just use 1010+ numbers exclusively and forget about paying AT&T or MCI their minimum monthly. As far as I'm concerned, 1+ dialing offers NO advantage. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Actually, you don't have to pick a 1+ carrier. Most telcos will let you default your long distance calls to carrier 'none'. Then dialing 1+ anything except 800/888/877 gets you a recorded message that your call cannot be completed as dialed. Ditto attempts to call '00', the long distance operator. But you do wind up dialing more digits, and asd Tad Cook points out in the next message a smart consumer can get much better deals. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Surprising Number of Consumers Ignore Long-Distance Discounts Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 20:42:39 PST From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) Surprising Number of Consumers Ignore Long-Distance Discounts By Jennifer Files, The Dallas Morning News Knight Ridder/Tribune Business News Jan. 26--Deborah Perl said no to every discount long-distance offer that came her way. The telemarketing tactics bothered her so much, she hardly thought about the deals she passed up. Like about half of U.S. customers, Ms. Perl, a pharmaceutical saleswoman in Dallas, stuck with her phone company's "basic" rates. While she frequently saw ads for dime-a-minute long-distance, her calls with AT&T cost up to 30 cents a minute. "As opposed to wanting to be the most educated consumer I could be, I was more concerned that the phone companies were bothering me," she said after checking last month's phone bill. Minutes later, she called AT&T. "I said, `OK, I just looked at my phone bill. I'm an idiot. We have to do something about this."' AT&T suggested a calling plan that Ms. Perl expects will cut her monthly long-distance bills by about $30. A surprising number of people pay too much for long-distance, simply because they never asked for a better deal. Only 36 percent of Americans subscribe to a discount program, according to a recent survey by Yankee Group, a technology consulting firm. "They're everybody. They're in every socioeconomic group," Yankee analyst Fred Voit said of the customers who don't use discount plans. "It's not just people who don't make long-distance phone calls. We have people who make long-distance phone calls who spend a lot of money." Basic-rate customers span all age groups and income levels. Among people who are drawn to technology, 45 percent of those surveyed said they use calling plans, compared with 31 percent of people who don't buy high-tech products until they become commonplace. Yankee says some people probably subscribe to discount plans but don't remember signing up for them. MCI WorldCom and other companies say relatively few of their subscribers pay their highest rates, because most customers choose them to get a break on their rates. AT&T, however, says 60 percent of its customers pay basic rates. "People get so confortable with what they've always done, they don't see any reason for change, and meanwhile they're paying more than they have to," said Nilda Weglarz, a spokeswoman for the nation's largest long-distance provider. "Any AT&T customer who makes long-distance calls should be on a calling plan." AT&T says a substantial number of its subscribers make no long-distance calls. More frequent callers do tend to use calling plans, cutting rates to 15 cents a minute or less. In 1992, 72 percent of residential calling minutes were charged at basic rates. As more callers have switched to calling plans, that's fallen to 25 percent of minutes. Asked why the company doesn't simply lower its rates for other customers, Ms. Weglarz said, "Our research has shown that there is a certain percentage of consumers who do not want to participate in a calling plan for whatever reason they may have. They are simply not interested." Ms. Weglarz says her relatives roll their eyes when she tries to get them to call the phone company and ask for lower rates. "I'm talking about my own family who are college-educated people and I'm saying, `What plan are you on?' and they say, `What?"' But why wouldn't people be interested in saving money? "I believe it falls in the camp of too many options," said Renee Fraser, a consumer psychologist who heads Fraser/Huff advertising in Santa Monica, Calif. AT&T alone offers an array of calling plans that many customers would find confusing. One plan, pitched on television by Mad About You star Paul Reiser, bills calls at 15 cents a minute, all the time. Another plan charges 10 cents a minute, plus a $4.95 monthly fee, with a special promotional rate of 5 cents for weekend calls if customers ask for it. (According to AT&T's Internet site, after a customer has been on the plan for six months, calls on Saturdays will cost 10 cents a minute. Sunday rates are scheduled to rise to 10 cents a minute in mid-November.) Customers can often get lower rates by signing up and receiving bills over the Internet. Other plans offer frequent-flier miles or cash for signing up. Dialing 10-10 and a three-digit code at the beginning of a call saves money sometimes but can cost more on other calls. Monthly fees and fluctuating rates make comparisons difficult. And while there always seems to be a better deal out there, there are plenty of bad ones. "People fail to take action because they believe they have little hope of finding a better solution," Ms. Fraser said. Like Ms. Perl, many customers don't realize that they're paying more than necessary. Others say they believe the savings aren't worth the risk of signing up with a bad plan. And many customers prefer the predictability of the basic service they've always had with AT&T. "There's a bit of loyalty. They've always been here and always provided good service," said one lifelong AT&T customer, who asked not to be identified by name. Winston Brown, a retired technical salesman in Dallas, never thought to check his long-distance rates until he noticed high fees for vacation calls he'd made with his telephone credit card. When he called AT&T to ask about the charges, he realized he'd been overpaying for years. "I felt like I was being ripped off. They must have six plans they can put you on, but you'd never know it," Mr. Brown said. After analyzing his calling patterns and checking with other phone companies, he switched to a plan offered by MCI WorldCom. The Public Utility Commission of Texas compares rates for several Texas phone companies at its Internet site, www.puc.state.tx.us/rates/trates.htm. More help is available from the Telecommunications Research & Action Center, a nonprofit group, at www.trac.org. But customers don't need to be Internet-savvy to find a lower rate, said Leslie Kjellstrand, spokeswoman for the Public Utility Commission. "All you have to do is pick up the phone and say, `What can you do for me?"' ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #2 **************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Feb 2 22:03:06 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id WAA12115; Tue, 2 Feb 1999 22:03:06 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 22:03:06 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199902030303.WAA12115@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #5 TELECOM Digest Tue, 2 Feb 99 22:03:00 EST Volume 19 : Issue 5 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson New Chat Feature For Digest/Archives Users (TELECOM Digest Editor) Book Review: "Naked In Cyberspace", Carole A. Lane (Rob Slade") Telecom Update (Canada) #167, January 25, 1999 (Angus TeleManagement) T1 Cabling Between Demarc and Equipment Rack ("Lex") Re: Telemarketing by Playing Recordings (John R. Levine) Re: Telemarketing by Playing Recordings (Larry Conzett) Re: Telemarketing by Playing Recordings (Plex Inphiniti) Re: Telemarketing by Playing Recordings (Linc Madison) Re: Telemarketing by Playing Recordings (Anthony Argyriou) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-727-5427 Fax: 847-675-3140 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: TELECOM Digest Editor (ptownson@telecom-digest.org) Subject: New Chat Feature For Digest/Archive Users Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 20:00:00 CST I want to announce a new feature for readers of the Digest, the comp.dcom.telecom* newsgroups, TELECOM_Digest_Online, and users of telecom-digest.org. A new IRC-style chat is now available for telecommunications discussion. The other 'webchat' feature I had available is still there also, but it is a webpage based chat as those of you who have used it know, and not the most popular kind of chat software. What I installed over the last weekend is a java-based IRC-style chat which functions on a more 'interactive' basis (each person sees what the other persons type immediatly) with a list of users on line, the ability to open private rooms, 'whisper' to other users, etc. In other words, an IRC arrangement. You do need to have a java-enabled browser to use this feature and if it detects that you are not java-enabled it will redirect you to the existing chat program, which is now known as 'chat-2' in the archives main menu. The IRC server is operated by xoom.com, and they have no compunction against loading their pages with commercial advertising, and when you first log in they invite you to establish a user account with them, which you are free to ignore. The chat will work with only a user name; no password or real name is needed. When using the chat, you are NOT transferred to xoom.com, and you ARE staying on telecom- digest.org; if you want to check out my source on that page you will see an 'applet' which works with xoom.com's cgi-bin. When you exit chat, there are two ways to do it: one, you can use the logout button provided on the chat window, and this very thoughtfully drops you into a window from xoom.com where you will need to *close that window* to get back to telecom (the 'back' button on your browser will not get you back to telecom. Two, you can just exit the page; when the chat decides you are not around any longer after five or ten minutes it will drop you anyway. Just remember that a 'clean' logout will get you to xoom.com and you don't need to do this unless you are really concerned about your screen name hanging around for a few minutes after you have departed. If you *are already a member of xoom.com* you can use your existing name there and password. Since user names and passwords are shared across all the xoom.com chat rooms (they have hundreds of them, I am just running this one from here rather than on their site) by signing up with them (then ignoring their mountains of spam which begins arriving almost immediatly) you can select an unused user name and password protect it for use on this telecom chat. For instance if you try logging in as townsonp1 which is my admin name for the room, you are told that name requires a password. So if by chance you happen to grow fond of my little telecom chat room and want to establish a user name that won't get misappropriated, sign up with xoom.com using that username, and henceforth when you login to my chat room here, you will find your username is also password protected. It was either accept the advertising which appears on the bottom of the chat window (not that offensive), accept having users dropped off at their site when they make a clean logout from chat, and having them control the passwords server-wide for all chat rooms (meaning you will find a great many common names for which 'a password is required to use this name' -- or -- buy the generic software from them, sell my own ads for the space at the bottom (or go without ads) and most important find someone willing to install it in their cgi-bin for me ... and I haven't the heart to ask lcs.mit.edu to do much more for me than they are already doing. I do not think a java-based chat running on their site for people to use, abuse and misuse is in their plans for this year. So, live with it. Unlike IRC, commands begin with an asterisk * with the exception of /help. I'll appreciate your feedback and I hope this chat program is more useful than the old one which is also still around. http://telecom-digest.org/chatroom.html http://hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/chatroom.html Same difference, only the first one is shorter, or just do http://telecom-digest.org and look the whole thing over if you have not been around in awhile. Cute bug: do NOT however try http://massis.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives which is also the same difference except to the new IRC-style chat. The room, you see, had to be registered with xoom.com, and if the software there gets a call for my IRC channel from anyone other than 'hyperarchive' it lets out a screech about 'an imposter has taken over this room!' It will run the room, but keeps insisting that whoever is running the room on their web page is not authorized to do so. This even happens if 'massis' makes the call. I am going to see if I can register it to *.lcs.mit.edu but I am not sure if I can. Anyway that was my project this past weekend. If someone wants to purchase the software and run it at their site for me thus avoiding the advertisments, etc please do. I will name the room after you. :) remember: http://telecom-digest.org/chatroom.html PAT ------------------------------ From: Rob Slade Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 08:24:00 -0800 Subject: Book Review: "Naked In Cyberspace", Carole A. Lane Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca BKNKDCSP.RVW 981122 "Naked In Cyberspace", Carole A. Lane, 1997, 0-910965-17-X, U$29.95 %A Carole A. Lane %C 462 Danbury Road, Wilton, CT 06897-2126 %D 1997 %G 0-910965-17-X %I Pemberton Press Books/Online Inc. %O U$29.95 800-248-8466 203-761-1466 fax: 203-761-1444 %O johnb@onlineinc.com www.onlineinc.com/pempress %P 544 p. %T "Naked In Cyberspace: How to Find Personal Information Online" Oh, go and stand over in the corner with Senator Exon. Those reading the title (and the promotional reviews in many magazines) might be forgiven for thinking this was an examination of the state of privacy or personal information online. Those who get to the subtitle will probably think that this will tell you how to find personal information on the net. The second group will be a lot closer than the first, but won't really be correct either. Part one is a kind of general introduction to the topic: basically it seems to be a kind of promotional brochure. Chapter one states that information can be valuable (surprise), that information can be accessed in various ways via computers (double surprise), and gives a kind of randomized table of contents for the book. One point to be made is that the text seems to hold "cyberspace" and "online" as synonymous with "involves a computer," since chapter two starts talking about searching databases by emphasizing the importance of the speed of your computer. It goes on to talk about CD-ROMs, give a minimalist description of boolean logic, pass briefly over the fact that computer databases may contain mistakes (many estimates suggest that a quarter to a third of all such records are in error), and finishes by extolling the virtues of information brokers. The author is obviously not comfortable with searching for information on the Internet: we are told of all kinds of trivial information (nothing important) that can be found on the net, but never how, in chapter three. Chapter four suggests that you can find information about people from proprietary databases, and finishes with a hard-hitting, in-depth investigation of Ross Perot -- using the information found on his promotional Web site! The obligation to talk about privacy is given a token nod in chapter five, which primarily emphasizes the fact that information obtainable via computer could be obtained other ways so don't gimme no grief about this book, OK? Part two looks at what you might use record searching for. Chapter six looks at finding people, but almost as soon as it starts it admits that the options in this category are too many, and that it can only give you a random, and extremely limited, sampling. Pre-employment screening is discussed in chapter seven, but almost none of it relates to computer accessible records at all. Recruiting is limited to searching online (and usually commercial) resume banks in chapter eight. The job related newsgroups aren't mentioned at all, and there is no talk of using topical searches to find specialist skills. Tenant screening is limited to credit referencing (which it doesn't tell you how to do) in chapter nine. Chapter ten lists some proprietary databases where you might be able to find out about assets, and has a much longer section dealing with assets that you won't be able to find. "Competitive Intelligence" (aka "industrial espionage"?) again has nothing to say about computers (and very little to say at all) in chapter eleven. (Appropriate number, don't you think?) There are some proprietary databases, and even some publicly available resources, in chapter twelve for finding experts in different fields, although, again, only a tiny sample. How to find rich people to hit up for charity is minuscule in chapter thirteen. The review of private investigation doesn't give you any resources beyond how to contact PI professional groups. Part three looks at types of personal records. These include chapters on biographies, general indices, telephone directories, staff and professional directories, mailing lists, news, photographic images, quotations, bank records, credit and financial records, consumer credit records, criminal justice records, motor vehicles, death, tax records, medical and insurance records, public records, adoption, celebrity, genealogical records, political records, and demographic records. Most of the information is contained in proprietary databases, and much of it is not available via computer at all, let alone online. The best chapter, in terms of comprehensive and useful guidance combined with accessible data, is on genealogy. The remainder of the book is essentially appendices, listing related books, periodicals, organizations, and databases. Basically, this work spends a lot of time suggesting that you *can* find information out about people, and doesn't put much effort into telling you how you can. There is a heavy reliance on commercial information services, and, as noted, not all of the information sources are available to you from home, let alone via the Internet. A great deal of data relating to the topics covered *can* be found on the Internet, but the author does not appear to be aware of that. If you want to set yourself up as an information broker, this text might get you started. The contact information for the various database sources is useful, although you can find the same at your local library. Which may be available online. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1998 BKNKDCSP.RVW 981122 rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@sprint.ca robertslade@usa.net p1@canada.com Find virus, book info http://victoria.tc.ca/int-grps/techrev/rms.htm Mirrored at http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade/rms.htm Linked to bookstore at http://www97.pair.com/robslade/ Robert Slade's Guide to Computer Viruses, 0-387-94663-2 (800-SPRINGER) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 01 Feb 1999 11:46:29 -0500 From: Angus TeleManagement Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #167, January 25, 1999 ************************************************************ * * * TELECOM UPDATE * * Angus TeleManagement's Weekly Telecom Newsbulletin * * http://www.angustel.ca * * Number 167: January 25, 1999 * * * * Publication of Telecom Update is made possible by * * generous financial support from: * * * * AT&T Canada ............... http://www.attcanada.com/ * * Bell Canada ............... http://www.bell.ca/ * * Lucent Technologies ....... http://www.lucent.ca/ * * MetroNet Communications ... http://www.metronet.ca/ * * Sprint Canada ............. http://www.sprintcanada.ca/ * * Telus Communications....... http://www.telus.com/ * * TigerTel Services ......... http://www.citydial.com/ * * * ************************************************************ IN THIS ISSUE: ** Shareholders Approve BCT.Telus Merger ** PSINet Plans National Fiber Network ** Executive Shakeup at AT&T Canada ** Sprint Bundles LD and Internet ** International Licenses Issued ** Bell Offers to Change Operator Plan ** Cableco Internet Services Gain Ground ** Bell Proposes ADSL Compromise ** Cantel Extends "Local Calling" to Hong Kong ** CRTC Rejects Free Wireless Listing Trial ** InfoInterActive Patents Internet Call Waiting ** Comment Sought on New Affiliate Rules ** Telcos Need Not Provide Payphone Location List ** Oral Arguments in High-Cost Proceeding ** New-Media Final Arguments to Be Heard February 3 ** BC Tel Winback Promos: Win One, Lose One ** Access Telecom to Offer CPC Payphones ** NBTel Announces E-Commerce Products ** BCE Emergis Plans U.S. Acquisition ** Optel Hires Two Ex-Fonorola Execs ** Sprint Vs. Sprint ============================================================ SHAREHOLDERS APPROVE BCT.TELUS MERGER: On January 19, Telus shareholders voted 99.44% in favor of merger with BC Telecom. Two days later, the merger was approved by 99.99% of BC Telecom shareholders. The deal closes January 31. ** BC Telecom reports fourth quarter net earnings of $87.4 Million, a 23% increase from last year. Revenues rose 5.8% to $817 Million. PSINET PLANS NATIONAL FIBER NETWORK: Internet Service Provider PSINet says it will spend more than $100 Million to assemble a high-speed fiber network across Canada. On January 20, PSINet paid $12 Million for rights to a Vancouver-Seattle fiber link. EXECUTIVE SHAKEUP AT AT&T CANADA: Three senior executives left AT&T Canada last week: Carole Salomon, President, Residential Long Distance Services; Karen Jeisi, Senior VP, Law and External Relations; and Anil Amlani, Senior VP, Industrial Relations. SPRINT BUNDLES LD AND INTERNET: For $24.95 a month, Sprint Canada's new The Most Anytime plan offers residential customers Canadian long distance calling for 10 cents a minute anytime, and unlimited use of Sprint's Internet access service. INTERNATIONAL LICENSES ISSUED: The CRTC has already approved 78 international telecommunications licenses -- 48 Class A (providers which operate international facilities) and 35 Class B (no facilities). More approvals are expected shortly. http://www.crtc.gc.ca:80/eng/proc_rep/telecom/1999/8190/8190-99.htm BELL OFFERS TO CHANGE OPERATOR PLAN: Bell Canada says it will consider retaining majority ownership in the new company which is taking over its operator services business. The telco says that lower salary scales and a reduction in the number of call centers will be implemented gradually, not all at once. (See Telecom Update #166) CABLECO INTERNET SERVICES GAIN GROUND: The number of subscribers to Internet services offered by cablecos Shaw, Rogers, and Cogeco has roughly doubled since September. Most recent subscriber totals: Shaw, 81,000 (January 14); Rogers, 54,000 (December 31); Cogeco, 22,000 (January 15); Videotron, 8,500 (November 30). BELL PROPOSES ADSL COMPROMISE: Bell Canada is proposing to allow Internet Service Providers to share some of the facilities needed to provide ADSL, thus reducing the cost of providing the service to their customers. ** Some of the documents on the dispute can be found at http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/proc_rep/telecom/1998/8646/c51-01.html CANTEL EXTENDS "LOCAL CALLING" TO HONG KONG: Cantel AT&T Digital One Rate now includes calls to Hawaii, Alaska, and Hong Kong in its flat-rate long distance calling plans. CRTC REJECTS FREE WIRELESS LISTING TRIAL: The CRTC has turned down Bell Canada's plan to offer free white page listings to Bell Mobility subscribers. The telco described the plan as a market trial, but the CRTC said it was a promotion which discriminated against other wireless companies. http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/telecom/order/199/o9933_.txt INFOINTERACTIVE PATENTS INTERNET CALL WAITING: Halifax-based InfoInterActive has been granted a Canadian patent for its Internet call waiting service. Several Canadian telcos offer a competing service developed by Northern Telecom. COMMENT SOUGHT ON NEW AFFILIATE RULES: In Public Notice 99-3, the CRTC asks whether it should establish new rules to restrict local service resale by Stentor company affiliates, or international resale by Teleglobe affiliates. To comment, notify the Commission by February 19. http://www.crtc.gc.ca:80/internet/1999/8045/03/pn99-03.htm TELCOS NEED NOT PROVIDE PAYPHONE LOCATION LIST: The CRTC has turned down an application by Canquest to require Stentor telcos to provide the locations of their card-reader equipped public telephones. http://www.crtc.gc.ca:80/internet/1999/8045/04/o99-0032.htm ORAL ARGUMENTS IN HIGH-COST PROCEEDING: On Monday, January 25, the CRTC begins hearing oral final arguments on how to ensure that telephone service in high-cost serving areas is available and affordable. http://www.crtc.gc.ca:80/eng/proc_rep/telecom/1997/part7/pn97 -42.html NEW-MEDIA FINAL ARGUMENTS TO BE HEARD FEBRUARY 3: The CRTC will begin hearing oral final arguments in the New-Media proceeding (Broadcasting PN 1998-82-1/Telecom PN 1998-20-1) in Hull on February 3. Comments in the proceeding are posted at http://www.crtc.gc.ca:80/eng/proc_br/notices/1998-82e.htm and http://www.newmedia-forum.net/news/. http://www.crtc.gc.ca:80/internet/1998/8045/p98-20-1.html#dir BC TEL WINBACK PROMOS: WIN ONE, LOSE ONE: The CRTC has approved one BC Tel promotion aiming to win local business customers back, and turned down another. The Commission reiterates that telcos must not approach individual customers with winback offers within three months of their move to a local competitor. http://www.crtc.gc.ca:80/internet/1999/8045/04/o99-0060.htm http://www.crtc.gc.ca:80/internet/1999/8045/04/o99-0034.htm ACCESS TELECOM TO OFFER CPC PAYPHONES: Montreal-based Access Telecom Technologies will market Canada Payphone payphones and Internet terminals in Quebec. NBTEL ANNOUNCES E-COMMERCE PRODUCTS: NBTel has announced two additions to its Intellis suite of e-commerce products. Merchant enables Web-based sales; Internet Contact Services lets call center agents and customers converse on the Web. BCE EMERGIS PLANS U.S. ACQUISITION: BCE Emergis, formerly Mpact Immedia, has received $49 Million in equity investment from parent Bell Canada and plans to use it to acquire a U.S. e-commerce company. OPTEL HIRES TWO EX-FONOROLA EXECS: Competitive Local Exchange Carrier Optel Communications has appointed Mac Bargout as Senior Vice-President of Engineering and Russ La Rose as Senior Vice-President of Network Operations. Both previously held similar posts at Fonorola. SPRINT VS. SPRINT: In the January issue of Telemanagement, Ian Angus investigates a new long distance calling plan and finds a familiar carrier behind it. Also in Telemanagement #161: ** Rob Slade's "Bookshelf" provides a guide to Internet guidebooks. ** Henry Dortmans offers 10 questions that will show whether your telecom operations are "billing-error prone." To subscribe to Telemanagement, call 1-800-263-4415, ext 225, or visit http://www.angustel.ca/teleman/tm.html. ============================================================ HOW TO SUBMIT ITEMS FOR TELECOM UPDATE E-MAIL: editors@angustel.ca FAX: 905-686-2655 MAIL: TELECOM UPDATE Angus TeleManagement Group 8 Old Kingston Road Ajax, Ontario Canada L1T 2Z7 =========================================================== HOW TO SUBSCRIBE (OR UNSUBSCRIBE) TELECOM UPDATE is provided in electronic form only. There are two formats available: 1. The fully-formatted edition is posted on the World Wide Web on the first business day of the week at http://www.angustel.ca/update/up.html 2. The e-mail edition is distributed free of charge. To subscribe, send an e-mail message to majordomo@angustel.ca. The text of the message should contain only the two words: subscribe update To stop receiving the e-mail edition, send an e-mail message to majordomo@angustel.ca. The text of the message should say only: unsubscribe update [Your e-mail address] COPYRIGHT AND DISCLAIMER: All contents copyright 1999 Angus TeleManagement Group Inc. All rights reserved. For further information, including permission to reprint or reproduce, please e-mail rosita@angustel.ca or phone 905-686-5050 ext 225. The information and data included has been obtained from sources which we believe to be reliable, but Angus TeleManagement makes no warranties or representations whatsoever regarding accuracy, completeness, or adequacy. Opinions expressed are based on interpretation of available information, and are subject to change. If expert advice on the subject matter is required, the services of a competent professional should be obtained. ------------------------------ From: Lex Subject: T1 Cabling Between Demarc and Equipment Rack Date: Mon, 01 Feb 1999 08:11:44 -0500 Organization: Netcom Canada I want to use patch panels and 25 pair cable to link our equipment racks with the TELCO demarc point. At present we just string a CAT5 cable from the demarc to the piece of equipment in question (~30-40 feet). Needless to say the under floor gets pretty messy with all the cables. So, the question is can I use CAT5 25 pair to link the 2 patch panels or do I have to use 25 pair individually shielded pairs to avoid cross talk between the receiving and transmitting pairs? Thank you in advance. lvonader@netcom.ca ------------------------------ Date: 02 Feb 1999 20:54:37 -0500 From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: Telemarketing by Playing Recordings Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > I was under the impression that telemarketing machines that dialed you > and played a recording, with no human operator, had been banned. You are correct, give or take exceptions for non-profits. If you can figure out who was responsible for the robo-call, under 47 USC 227 you can sue them for $500, possibly tripled to $1500. This is the same law that forbids junk faxes. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 johnl@iecc.com, Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner, http://iecc.com/johnl, Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail ------------------------------ From: Larry Conzett Subject: Re: Telemarketing by Playing Recordings Date: Tue, 02 Feb 1999 04:43:16 GMT Organization: @Home Network "Michael A. Covington" wrote: > I was under the impression that telemarketing machines that dialed you > and played a recording, with no human operator, had been banned. I believe that is regulated on a state by state basis. In Tennessee, the TN Public Service Commission passed a state regulation over 10 years ago which requires that any company that wishes to use a mechanical device to announce information on a call made to you must first request your acceptance of that call by a person prior to allowing the device to announce its message. Busi- nesses breaking this regulation are subject to $500 per incident (phone call) fine. And they do prosecute when given enough information to investigate. This holds true even with automated announcers for volunteer fire member call outs, alarm company recordings or automated polling machines. It is broad enough to include "war dialers", as well, used by individuals, rather than companies. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Let me ask you how the Tennessee authorities expect an individual or business with a security alarm system installed in their home/business to possibly be able to request in advance of the police/fire/security alarm dispatch office permission to play the automated transmission announcing a fire or break-in at the premises, etc. At our bus station we have such a system from Ameritech Security Link. When the station is closed, the alarm is turned on. If someone breaks in or a fire starts, the system makes a call to the Ameritech dispatch office which in turn calls the police/fire department. If I or someone was here to first use the phone to 'request permission to play a recorded transmission' what need would I have for the alarm system? Are you certain in Tenessee that security alarms are not exempt from the requirement that a live person first get permission to play a message? What about an old person with one of those panic button things you can carry in your pocket within a range of a few hundred feet of the receiver which is hooked in the phone line? They have a heart attack and before they die they barely have time to reach in their pocket, grab the little device and press the button on it .. who is going to do their live talking for them? PAT] ------------------------------ From: plex_inphiniti@yahoo.com (Plex Inphiniti) Subject: Re: Telemarketing by Playing Recordings Date: Tue, 02 Feb 1999 00:29:34 GMT Organization: Frontier GlobalCenter Inc. On Tue, 26 Jan 1999 09:31:21 -0500, Michael A. Covington wrote: > I was under the impression that telemarketing machines that dialed you > and played a recording, with no human operator, had been banned. Just > now I got a call from one, an outfit called VPT that sells pagers. > The only identifying information given was the 800 number, > 1-800-388-2161, repeated many times. The Caller ID said only "out of > area." I was pretty sure those are illegal. They laws around it are I believe a human has to initiate the call and ask you personally if they can play a recording. I may be wrong. -= Plex Inphiniti =- ****plex_inphiniti@yahoo.com Email Address spam trapped. Remove **** for email reply. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 20:12:31 -0800 From: Telecom@LincMad.NOSPAM.com (Linc Madison) Subject: Re: Telemarketing by Playing Recordings Organization: LincMad Consulting There is a California state law that forbids such calls, but, of course, it only applies if the origin is within California. I got a couple of such calls, from the same telemarketing outfit, at 2:45 a.m. on Thanksgiving Day, and then at 4:45 a.m. on a Sunday. Yes, that's a.m. as in "wee hours of the morning," between midnight and dawn. The telco was absolutely unhelpful in giving me any way to deal with the problem, other than trying very aggressively to sell me Caller ID service, which I am 99.9% sure would be of no help in identifying the caller. ** Do not send me unsolicited commercial e-mail spam of any kind ** Linc Madison * San Francisco, California * Telecom@LincMad-com URL:< http://www.lincmad.com > * North American Area Codes & Splits >> NOTE: if you autoreply, you must delete the "NOSPAM" << ------------------------------ From: anthony@alphageo.com (Anthony Argyriou) Subject: Re: Telemarketing by Playing Recordings Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 08:08:38 GMT Organization: Alpha Geotechnical Reply-To: anthony@alphageo.com This is illegal in California, but I don't believe that it's illegal nationwide. California can't prosecute for calls which are legal in the state of origin. Anthony Argyriou ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #5 **************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Feb 2 22:53:48 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id WAA15098; Tue, 2 Feb 1999 22:53:48 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 22:53:48 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199902030353.WAA15098@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #6 TELECOM Digest Tue, 2 Feb 99 22:53:00 EST Volume 19 : Issue 6 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson The Web's Identity Crisis (Monty Solomon) Book Review: "TCP/IP Complete", Ed Taylor (Rob Slade) Re: Bell Canada Replaces Operators With U.S. Based Excell (Mark J. Cuccia) Star VM for Norstar (Jim) Does AT&T's Long Shadow Portend a Cable-Modem Monopoly? (Monty Solomon) Re: Ameritech's Call-Blocking Service Too Costly (Anthony S. Pelliccio) Re: Ameritech's Call-Blocking Service Too Costly (Ed Ellers) "Real" Telecommunication (oprempj@mail.ustrust.com) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-727-5427 Fax: 847-675-3140 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 03:45:13 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: The Web's Identity Crisis http://www.salonmagazine.com/21st/rose/1999/01/29straight2.html Intel's processor-I.D. gaffe shows how badly tech companies want to know who you are and where you live. BY SCOTT ROSENBERG | Who are you? (Yeah, you!) If you were reading this as a subscriber to a print magazine or a newspaper, I wouldn't need to ask that question: I'd know your name and where you live. I might even have your credit card number. Here on the Web, though, I truly don't know who you are. I can guess, and I can play some tricks with Internet addresses (IP numbers) and "cookies," and I can ask you to register to visit my site (with no assurance that the information you provide is accurate). But I can't honestly say I have any reliable information as to your identity. That ignorance stems from the architecture of the Internet itself, which was designed for openness, not security. If you keep this in mind as you follow the onslaught of Internet-news headlines, a lot of seemingly unrelated and confusing stories start to make a lot more sense. Consider this week's brouhaha over Intel's plan to build unique I.D. numbers into its next-generation Pentium III chip. Intel told the world that it aimed to enhance security for online transactions by giving Web users and merchants a trustworthy identity-verification system: Web sites and other Net-based software could query your processor to make sure you are who you say you are before providing access to, say, online account data or other "for your eyes only" information. Intel sells hardware, so Intel wants to build security into hardware. But the resulting scheme is phenomenally silly on the face of it: Who says I do all my Net-based work from a single computer? What if more than one person uses my computer? Aren't we moving away from the single-desktop-computer model toward a world of diverse Net-access devices, anyway? Isn't the point of Web-based businesses and services that you can access them from any available browser? What if I want to do my online banking from a public Net terminal in an airport or cafe? Privacy groups, which called for a boycott of the Pentium III under the banner "Big Brother Inside," raised other issues with Intel's numbering plan. If your processor cheerfully hands out your unique I.D. to any Web site that asks, those sites can begin to build a vast database of consumer information and behavior. The moment you provide Web merchants with your name and address to fulfill an order, they can link it to your processor I.D.; conceivably, groups of Web merchants could begin to pool their information and assemble the mother of all spam lists. While today's "cookie" files already give Web sites a chance to track you in limited ways, at least the files reside on your computer's hard drive and can be easily deleted (you can also set your browser to reject them). Intel's I.D. is indelible. Under public pressure, Intel quickly reversed course and declared that the I.D. system would be turned off by default on new computers -- you'd have to turn it on yourself for anyone to access your number. Unfortunately, such control is software-based, and thus bound to have holes that unscrupulous Web sites or creative hackers could exploit. The real problem with Intel's scheme goes beyond the technical details. The trouble is that Intel set out to design a scheme to defeat the anonymity that people take for granted on the Net -- without ever asking consumers whether they wanted it or liked it or would design it differently themselves. Intel isn't the only company or institution playing this game. A similar yearning to replace free-for-all online anonymity with controlled accountability lies behind such disparate phenomena as Microsoft's new software registration scheme and the Child Online Protection Act (COPA). Microsoft feels that, thanks to piracy, it's not making quite enough profits from sales of its Office software suite, so it has devised a new registration scheme for the software: Once you've paid your hundreds of dollars, if you wish to use your programs more than 50 times you will also have to obtain a code from Microsoft that is tied to the particular configuration of your computer's hardware. (For now the scheme will only be applied in certain foreign countries and for academic users in North America, but you can bet Microsoft would like to make it universal.) Like Intel's processor I.D., Microsoft's registration scheme aims to link your personal identity with your personal computer's identity; unlike Intel's plan, there isn't even a pretense here that there's any benefit to the user. Intel and Microsoft both want to know who you are; so, too, do the feds -- at least they want to know enough about you to check your age. In its wisdom, the U.S. government has decided that Web sites need to check visitors' I.D.s at the door before granting them access to material that anyone in any state of the union might consider "harmful to minors." Under the provisions of the Child Online Protection Act (which Salon, along with a group of other plaintiffs led by the American Civil Liberties Union, is now challenging in federal court), Web sites face $50,000-a-day fines and six-month prison terms if they fail to prevent underage visitors from accessing content that's "harmful to minors." Forget about the problem of defining that term; on a more mundane level, there's no way a Web site can card you or check your age if it doesn't know who you are. Credit card numbers alone aren't good enough -- minors can type them into a Web browser, too. That's why the COPA is such a ludicrous law. You're never going to be certain of the age of Web-site visitors until and unless you devise some kind of universal Internet I.D. scheme. And nobody wants that, right? Think again. The Intel chip I.D. tempest is a wake-up call for Net users -- a reminder that personal information is the ultimate asset in the online marketplace, and that if consumers don't defend it, companies across the board will grab it. It used to be that only Web sites with aggressive marketing schemes tried to compile detailed information on masses of users. Now we've got hardware giants like Intel and software giants like Microsoft doing the same thing. Don't doubt for a moment that the new hybrid service providers/content companies like America Online and @Home/Excite will join in, too: Unlike mere Web site operators, they know their customers' names and addresses, which helps explain why they have become Wall Street darlings. To be sure, anonymity isn't an unvarnished good. There are some online activities, like banking, where secure identities are vital. Inevitably, the online world will adopt new systems for ascertaining people's identity. The question worth fighting over is, in whose interests will the system be designed? The skyrocketing market valuations of today's big Internet companies is going to put ever greater pressure on them to deliver real profits, soon. It's a good bet that they will try to do so by gathering, using and even selling whatever information they can about the people who use their sites. As that pressure builds, don't be surprised if more ill-devised schemes like the Intel processor I.D. bubble up from the stewing Net industry. Ultimately, what consumers need is an I.D. plan that offers a good balance between the convenience of online services that know who you are and the privacy we all have a right to expect. (A good technology already exists that meets these criteria -- it's called public-key encryption, and we'd all probably be using it today except for the opposition of the FBI and other law-enforcement groups.) Companies that figure out how to deliver both convenience and privacy will win users' loyalty and prosper. Those that just try to cram I.D. schemes down the public's throat -- as Intel got caught doing this week -- will deserve all the black eyes they get. SALON | Jan. 29, 1999 - - - - - - - - - - - - E-mail Scott Rosenberg. ------------------------------ From: Rob Slade Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 08:13:37 -0800 Subject: Book Review: "TCP/IP Complete", Ed Taylor Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca BKTCPIPC.RVW 981119 "TCP/IP Complete", Ed Taylor, 1998, 0-07-063400-9, U$69.95 %A Ed Taylor edtaylor@aol.com zac0002@ibm.net %C 300 Water Street, Whitby, Ontario L1N 9B6 %D 1998 %G 0-07-063400-9 %I McGraw-Hill Ryerson/Osborne %O U$69.95 905-430-5000 fax: 905-430-5020 louisea@McGrawHill.ca %P 607 p. + CD-ROM %T "TCP/IP Complete" Chapter one gives a not always reliable background of TCP/IP (Transmission Control Protocol/Internet Protocol) consisting mostly of trivia with a bit of structure showing how the various parts interoperate. Address resolution and routing are the major concerns in chapter two, although it also looks at IP headers. TCP, UDP (User Datagram Protocol), and IP addressing get mentioned in chapter three. Chapter four gives brief explanations of some common Internet applications. There is a quick review of LAN design (and sinusoidal voltage graphs) in chapter five. Network component diagrams, more voltage diagrams, rack diagrams, UPS logs, net clouds, and an ad for a UPS manufacturer make up chapter six. Chapter seven finally gets into some detail on the current IPv4. This is extended into IPv6 in chapter eight, but that must itself be extended into chapter nine. Chapter ten gives extensive details on TCP while chapter eleven gives almost no information at all on UDP. X, the windowing system commonly used in a networked UNIX environment, gets a short description in chapter twelve. Chapter thirteen talks randomly about network management. Some mixed information about telnet is in chapter fourteen. There is a bit of an explanation of SNMP (Simple Network Management Protocol) in chapter fifteen, and other details in sixteen. Chapter seventeen reviews a number of proprietary network management products, concentrating primarily on network cloud diagrams. Chapter eighteen gets back to some TCP/IP basics with DHCP (Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol). This is followed up with DNS (Domain Name System) in chapter nineteen. The book is finished with RPC (Remote Procedure Call) in chapter twenty. The content of this text is random, poorly explained, and badly organized. There are many better books on the system, such as "Designing TCP/IP Internetworks" (cf. BKDTCPIP.RVW), the classic "Internetworking with TCP/IP" (cf. BKINTTCP.RVW), "TCP/IP Illustrated" (cf. BKTCPIPI.RVW), "IPng and the TCP/IP Protocols" (cf. BKIPNGTP.RVW), and even "TCP/IP with Windows NT Illustrated" (cf. BKTCPNTI.RVW). I really can't see any audience that would particularly benefit from this book over the others. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1998 BKTCPIPC.RVW 981119 rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@sprint.ca robertslade@usa.net p1@canada.com Find virus, book info http://victoria.tc.ca/int-grps/techrev/rms.htm Mirrored at http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade/rms.htm Linked to bookstore at http://www97.pair.com/robslade/ Robert Slade's Guide to Computer Viruses, 0-387-94663-2 (800-SPRINGER) ------------------------------ From: Mark J Cuccia Subject: Re: Bell Canada Replaces Operators With U.S. Based Excell Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 10:21:17 -0600 Organization: Tulane University Bell Canada's plan to turn its operator services over to (US-based) Excell Agency is more of a joint-management and labor/union/wage issue, rather than a telco network issue. My understanding, from reading the various online articles from Canadian news services, and asking people with Bell Canada, is that the current operators will be: - offered early retirement - offered other positions within Bell Canada - transferred into the *JOINT VENTURE* entity, owned by Excell and Bell Also, there *is* planned to be a certain amount of "network reconfiguration" regarding Bell Canada's Operator Services. Presently, Bell Canada has about twenty Operator Centers throughout Ontario and Quebec, where the actual operators and their DMS-200-TOPS Terminals are located. Bell intends to reduce the number of Operator Centers down to about five - two in Quebec and three in Ontario. The operator reached at these centers (when dialing '0', or cutting through to a live operator on 0+/01+ or 1-800-555-1111 "Canada Long Distance / Canada Direct" Access) will be an employee of the "joint venture" between Bell and Excell. Bell Canada's Operator Services are **NOT** going to be 'relocated' to Excell Agency's Arizona (USA) HQ's! Bell Canada will probably still maintain their twenty or so DMS-200-TOPS switching computers throughout Ontario and Quebec, although even these 'could' be consolidated some. AT&T in the US presently has about 35 #5E-OSPS switching computers in specific locations, and when one dials '00', 0+/01+ or one of several AT&T 800- access numbers, one routes to their "homing" OSPS machine. Yet when one needs to speak live to a real human being AT&T Operator, one can be routed to _ANY_ available operator anywhere in the (continental) US. I don't know how many Operator Centers AT&T presently has, but I'd read about a year ago that AT&T's ultimate intent is to consolidate and reduce the number down to JUST SIX centers. BTW, Excell in Arizona (USA) is the same company which AT&T has contracted with to provide "pseudo" directory services, rather than AT&T routing to the genuine local telco's directory operator. When one dials (US)NPA+555-1212 via the AT&T network these days, one does _NOT_ route to the real local telco directory operator in that dialed (US) Area Code. Instead, AT&T _TRAPS_ the call and routes it to Excell (which does NOT live up to their name) in Arizona. Other (US) long distance carriers are now doing the very same thing with one or another contract company. These contract directory companies (including Excell) are HORRIBLY out of date in their directory listings, and have all other kinds of erroneous or missing information. If one needs real local telco directory, some long distance carriers (LCI/Qwest still does at this time) still route to the real LEC directory operator of the dialed area code. I am _NOT_ going to use these contract companies, first paying for a directory call and only getting bogus information, and then paying toll to use that bogus info?! Where's the FCC and the FTC in this matter! Mark J. Cuccia ------------------------------ From: Jim Subject: Star VM for Norstar Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 15:47:25 -0600 Organization: SBTek, Inc. Is anyone using a voice mail system called Star VM made by Telephony Experts for the Norstsar key system? I'd like to hear from anyone that is regarding some problems I'm having such as disconnects during announcements, etc. Thanks, Jim Please remove the "extrajunk" in the address before replying. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 12:55:34 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Does AT&T's Long Shadow Portend a Cable-Modem Monopoly? Excerpt from The Industry Standard's Media Grok - February 02, 1999 Groundhog Day: Does AT&T's Long Shadow Portend a Cable-Modem Monopoly? Though the Baby Bells awoke on Groundhog Day with Ma Bell's shadow creeping over them in local phone service (via Time Warner's cable), most prognosticators predicted a few more years of techno-headaches until AT&T chewed into their monopolies. While the major outlets were trying to swallow the complex joint venture between AT&T and Time Warner, MSNBC's David Bowermaster was asking the relevant follow-up: Will Ma Bell now push TW's speedy cable-modem service Road Runner into a merger with AtHome (which AT&T will control through TCI)? One analyst told Bowermaster it was inevitable, and that "it makes no economic sense for the cable industry to have two high-speed data companies. All it really does is give you duplicative overhead and duplicative expenses." And AtHome CEO Tom Jermoluk hinted in an old interview with MSNBC that the combo was "compelling," but that, vaguely, "the business issues are significant." Bowermaster figures that once AT&T gets its IP act together, the Road Runner-AtHome merger might be more appealing. The Wall Street Journal emphasized the local phone market angle in a long piece by Leslie Cauley and Rebecca Blumenstein. Some markets, including New York, could see a 25-percent discount in local phone rates when AT&T pushes into service, said the company. The Baby Bells cried foul in the WSJ piece and gave every indication they'd run to the regulators for redress. Meanwhile, the New York Times fronted a second-day report from Seth Schiesel explaining the financial details of the AT&T-TW venture. The San Jose Mercury News' Jon Healey was upfront with caveats for consumers on savings: Only big spenders would get discounts, and there would be less choice. An AT&T spokesman admitted the promised 20 percent discount would only come by getting extra lines or features like caller ID or call waiting. Still, Healey found that competition in local phone service would likely bring lower rates for everyone, as competition has driven down long distance and wireless. But while AT&T's bringing some competition, it's also taking it away, according to Healey. "On the Time Warner networks, consumers will not be able to choose any local or long-distance phone service but AT&T's for the 20-year life of the joint venture, officials said." A High Speed Cable Colossus? http://www.msnbc.com/news/237286.asp Time Warner Joins With AT&T to Sell Local Phone Service http://www.nytimes.com/yr/mo/day/news/financial/att-time.html AT&T Steps Closer to Local Service Through Accord With Time Warner http://interactive.wsj.com/articles/SB917874681624942500.htm AT&T Joins Warner in Telephone, TV Venture http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPcap/1999-02/02/053r-020299-idx.html AT&T, Time Warner Teaming Up http://www.mercurycenter.com/business/top/058305.htm AT&T, Time Warner in Phone Deal http://cbs.marketwatch.com/news/current/telecom.htx ------------------------------ From: nospam.tonypo@nospam.ultranet.com (Anthony Steven Pelliccio) Subject: Re: Ameritech's Call-Blocking Service Too Costly, Trade Group Says Date: Tue, 02 Feb 1999 19:28:39 -0500 Organization: Providence Network Partners In article , tad@ssc.com says... > Jan. 5--If you've ever wondered what it would be worth to rid yourself > of pesky, dinner-interrupting telemarketers, Ameritech has the answer: > $3.95 a month. > Beginning today, Ameritech will roll out its new Privacy Manager > service in three Indiana cities -- Indianapolis, Gary and > Hammond. While the service costs $3.95 a month, it requires Caller ID > with Name to work, which costs an extra $9.50 a month. Gaaacckk! $9.50 for CLID/N? It's $4.95 here and I thought Bell Atlantic was gouging us. ------------------------------ From: Ed Ellers Subject: Re: Ameritech's Call-Blocking Service Too Costly, Trade Group Says Date: Tue, 02 Feb 1999 12:58:52 -0500 Organization: Posted via RemarQ, http://www.remarQ.com Discussions start here Tad Cook quoted from an Indianapolis Star story: > "Beginning today, Ameritech will roll out its new Privacy Manager > service in three Indiana cities -- Indianapolis, Gary and > Hammond. While the service costs $3.95 a month, it requires Caller > ID with Name to work, which costs an extra $9.50 a month. > "That's too much, says a telemarketing group, arguing that consumers > can get pretty much the same result by being firm with telemarketers > and asking to be removed from calling lists." I have to agree here -- if Privacy Manager presents a voice message to the called party, there's no reason to require Caller ID (with name or not) because the Caller ID display unit doesn't enter into the operation! ------------------------------ From: oprempj@mail.ustrust.com Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 11:24:58 -0500 Reply-To: oprempj@mail.ustrust.com Subject: "Real" Telecommunication Organization: IBM.NET I have been in this business for many years. I have come to the conclusion that, to the detriment of American business, we are a dying breed. It seems like there's no one left to defend our turf. I feel like Don Quioti. Case in point: The current state of "lan" communications is one of chaos. This only benefits the manufactures who are taking business on a roller coaster ride. Our choices are: ethernet, token-ring, fast ethernet, gigabit ethernet, and ATM. Think about this. What are these choices good for? Since when do we decide on the design before we know what the purpose is? For the LAN, none of these choices amounts to a hill of beans. Doesn't anyone know that?! The PURPOSE of a telecommunications network, specifically, the local area network is to facilitate communications among and between two or more "stations" or end nodes. This function is done best when the SYSTEM is transparent to protocols, applications, and media. Suppose you couldn't place a voice call unless you spoke English! This is exactly the state of voice communications over a hundred years ago in the USA. This is the current state data communications, specifically, local area network communications. Think about this: in order to "improve" or upgrade my local area network I must change my NIC, modify my applications, change my media type, swap out hubs, routers, switches, etc.......... This is stupid. The fact that computer types have won over the minds, the hearts, and the pocketbooks of corporate America is completely due to your ineffectiveness as a telecommunications profession. For the sake of American business and your careers, it is time to fight back! Let's put together a strategy to put telecommunications back in charge of telecommunications and networking in particular. If you feel as I do, let's start a dialog. P.S. I am NOT interested in arguing about computer people versus telecom people. This is not the puppies of this group. This group is for embattled telecommunications professions who want to work together for their own and the country's better interest. For the purposes of weeding out the "noise", i define a telecommunications profession as one who is well versed in the theory and practice of telecommunications principles. Anyone who uses the term "switching bridge" is automatically excluded. (:-D ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #6 **************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Feb 3 21:22:40 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id VAA10689; Wed, 3 Feb 1999 21:22:40 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 3 Feb 1999 21:22:40 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199902040222.VAA10689@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #7 TELECOM Digest Wed, 3 Feb 99 21:22:00 EST Volume 19 : Issue 7 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Wireless Dimension - Cell Phones and Wireless Phone Leader (Mike Pollock) 609 in New Jersey to Split (Carl Moore) What Has Happened to AT&T/NOS Nightmare (Brian Vita) Re: The Web's Identity Crisis (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Quicken Family Lawyer Banned in Texas (Monty Solomon) Re: T1 Cabling Between Demarc and Equipment Rack (Mel Beckman) Re: T1 Cabling Between Demarc and Equipment Rack (digger) Re: T1 Cabling Between Demarc and Equipment Rack (Stewart Irwin) Re: T1 Cabling Between Demarc and Equipment Rack (Matthew E. Pearson) New Telecom Chat Room Available in Archives (TELECOM Digest Editor) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-727-5427 Fax: 847-675-3140 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Mike Pollock Subject: Wireless Dimension - Cell Phones and Wireless Phone Leader Date: Wed, 3 Feb 1999 10:42:44 -0500 [TELECOM Digest Editor's note: The site discussed below functions in much the same way as the print publication {Consumer Reports} with a fairly unbiased look at phones, etc. Readers might want to check it out. PAT] The following site was mentioned today on Dave Ross' syndicated radio feature "Chip Talk" http://www.wirelessdimension.com/ Fact sheet POINTS OF DIFFERENCE Covering virtually every available wireless phone and service plan in the top 50 U.S. metropolitan areas, which include thousands of communities nationwide, Wireless Dimension is the most comprehensive one-stop, shopping service for wireless consumers: The only service allowing users to research, compare and buy wireless phones and service plans. The only service that lets consumers compare virtually all available wireless phones and service plans. The only intelligent shopping agent to recommend wireless products and services based on consumers individual needs. The only guide to cover analog, digital cellular and PCS phones. Identifies local authorized dealers and covers compatible accessories. A free, objective and anonymous service. Wireless Dimension is the most highly-targeted, one-to-one marketing resource for carriers and manufacturers: Targets pre-qualified consumers shopping for wireless products and captures their buying preferences. Reduces carriers customer acquisition costs (cost per gross addition) by more than 30 percent per transaction. The Dimension Select advertising system, unlike banner ads, bills advertisers on a per-delivery basis. TWO DIFFERENT WAYS TO USE WIRELESS DIMENSION Service Plan: In minutes, view virtually all service plans in your area, compare them side-by-side and view the local coverage map of each carrier shown. Phone: Research all available analog cellular, digital cellular and PCS phones, including those that match specific carriers and compare them side-by-side. Includes markets/phones and all standard air interfaces (AMPS, N-AMPS, GSM, CDMA, TDMA, iDEN). FEATURES AND FUNCTIONS Research tools: The only database offering virtually all available service plans and phones. An easy-to-read glossary of more than 800 telecommunications terms. Frequently asked questions on a variety of wireless categories. News and feature articles. Side-by-side comparison: A side-by-side comparison grid helps you quickly compare a selection of products and services from different manufacturers. Detailed product information: Once you identify a selection of specific service plans or phones, you can read detailed features and specifications information to narrow your choice. Buy now option: Once you identify service plans and phones of interest, you have the option to buy directly from a participating carrier online through Wireless Dimension. Find retailers and authorized dealers: Identify local authorized dealers through the Locate Retailer function. Coverage maps: View the coverage areas of local service plans. Shopping list: Use this personal portfolio to save and access information. You can print out product and service information, or proceed with an online purchase at any time. TARGET AUDIENCE Wireless consumers with Internet access. Marketing decision-makers for carriers, manufacturers and retailers targeting wireless consumers. PLATFORMS AND TECHNOLOGIES Wireless Dimension was built using the Microsoft Windows NT Server 4.0 operating system, Microsoft SQL Server 6.5 enterprise database development system, Microsoft Internet Information Server, and extensive custom server and client-side code. The system runs on multiple Compaq ProLiant and Dell PowerEdge servers. Must be viewed with Netscape Navigator 3.01 or higher and Microsoft Internet Explorer 3.02 or higher. Service is available 24 hours a day and designed to exceed 98 percent uptime. Complex query response times are held below 10 seconds and maintain an average of five seconds via a 14.4 Kb/s modem connection, despite extremely large data sets and high number of users. NTH DIMENSION MANAGEMENT TEAM Court Lorenzini, Co-Founder and Chief Executive Officer Doug DeSantis, Co-Founder, Publisher and President Paul Kowalski, Vice President, Finance Matthew Ellenthal, Vice President, Sales Thomas Gonser, Jr., Senior Vice President, Business Development Dave Cash, Executive Editor Andrew Pope, Director of Technology Peg English, Strategic Growth Manager ABOUT PARENT NTH DIMENSION CORPORATION Nth Dimension Corporation, an online publisher of comparison shopping services, was formed in 1995 by Chief Executive Officer Court Lorenzini, formerly with Cisco Systems, and President and Publisher Doug DeSantis, formerly with Microsoft. The company is headquartered in Bothell, Wash., near Seattle. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Feb 1999 15:04:48 EST From: Carl Moore Subject: 609 in New Jersey to Split KYW news-radio reports today that splitting 609 geographically has been approved. The new area code, not yet known, will go to the western part (Camden etc., near Philadelphia), and 609 will remain in the eastern part, including Atlantic City. I didn't catch where Trenton, the state capital, will end up. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 03 Feb 1999 08:16:37 -0500 From: Brian Vita Subject: What Has Happened to AT&T/NOS Nightmare Last summer, after having been a very satisfied AT&T customer since the beginning of time, our company was hosed by AT&T. We had been in a term contract with them for the previous 3 years that gave us a LD rate of $0.094/minute for all of our inbound and outbound traffic. The contract expired in March without us being immediately aware. Without warning, AT&T brought our rate up to $0.27/minute. Unfortu- nately this increase happened at a time that our business had also increased so the jump wasn't as immediately obvious as it might have otherwise been. In the past we had an account rep with them who contacted us every 6 months or so and compared the services that we had and were using with new or more current offerings. We hadn't seen her for over a year. When I tried to reach her I was told that her entire department (Small Business Development or something of the like) had been closed and that we now had to deal with a national customer service center. The national customer service center was virtually impossible to reach. If you called their "800" line you were only given options for repair or discussing a late payment on your bill, both of which dumped you into an automated device for telling you how much you owed or reporting a line outage. When I finally reached a service rep, she said that the new rate was $.17/minute, take it or leave it. After protesting and asking for a supervisor, I was finally offered a rate in the $0.15 range. I pushed harder and went through a couple of sales offices and, after several non-returned phone calls, was reluctantly offered a rate of $0.109/minute. We declined. We switched to a company called NOS Communications who presented themselves as a wholly owned subsidiary of Willtel. They offered me a rate of $0.079/minute and a $0.15/minute calling card rate. The first sign of trouble should have been the fact that they not only switched the lines that I authorized them to, but also every other line in my or my company's name. I read them the riot act on this and they corrected the problem. The next problem appeared when the first bill arrived and I found that they were billing me in TCU's and ECU's instead of minutes. Their call billing method is a Byzantine system that was deliberately set up to obfuscate the actual calling rate and cost. They send an explanation that is written in a very pale (non-repro) blue ink in 8 point type on a very small piece of paper in legal double talk. From what I could actually make out on the page, it appeared that we were actually paying a rate of $0.10 +/- /minute. Having bigger projects to deal with, I put aside the bills for later analysis. I've just completed an audit of the bill and it appears that we were actually paying about $0.25/minute. The rep that I have been dealing with at the company is suddenly no longer with the company. Needless to say, I'm leaving them as soon as I can switch all of my lines. I plan of filing complaints with the FCC Common Carrier Complaint Bureau and the Massachusetts AG's office for deceptive business practices. I would be interested in hearing from others, particularly in Mass that have had similar problems. At this time, the likely contender for our LD service appears to be Qwest Communications. I would be interested in hearing any feedback that users may have about them. I do not want to receive solicitations from independent agents or resellers. If you send me unsolicited email you will not get my business. Brian T. Vita, President Cinema Service & Supply, Inc. 75 Walnut St. Peabody, MA 01960-5626 (800)231-8849 - Sales (US & Canada) (800)329-2775 - Sales Fax (US & Canada) (978)538-7575 - Business Office (978)538-7550 - Business Office Fax www.cssinc.com ****Visit our new online web store!**** ------------------------------ Subject: Re: The Web's Identity Crisis Organization: Excelsior Computer Services From: joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Date: Wed, 03 Feb 1999 13:43:07 GMT > Intel sells hardware, so Intel wants to build security into hardware. > But the resulting scheme is phenomenally silly on the face of it: Who > says I do all my Net-based work from a single computer? What if more > than one person uses my computer? Aren't we moving away from the > single-desktop-computer model toward a world of diverse Net-access > devices, anyway? Isn't the point of Web-based businesses and services > that you can access them from any available browser? What if I want to > do my online banking from a public Net terminal in an airport or cafe? More to the point, you'll need software to transmit the information in the hardware. How hard will it be for me to spoof that information? I don't see the point. -Joel (joel@exc.com) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think the catch is, the 'average' user on the internet these days would not know how to spoof the information. You would, I probably could do it, and many readers here would figure it out. But all of us combined would be a very small percentage of the total number of users who attempt to defraud (for example) America Online in a year's time with bogus credit card and/or checking account information. That's not to say I approve of Intel's plan -- since abandoned I understand -- because I do not, but if they went through with it, then it, along with other techniques for online fraud prention/detection which a even just a decade ago would never have occurred to the security experts will trim the level of fraud back another notch or so. I really think in the case of AOL they bring on a lot of their own problems through their abysmal lack of security with user screen names. Let's consider the trivial issue of chatting on line. When one screen name becomes too polluted for whatever reason, a user just ditches it and starts another one. Because of the font style they chose to use for things like their Instant Message service, there is no difference at all between a lower case 'l' (el) and an upper case 'I' (eye). Users are forever harassing one another there by assuming look-closely-alike screen names of other users then acting out in an inappropriate way. One user bans another from sending messages so the banned user simply picks a new screen name and starts all over. At least with Compuserve, where screen names are also encouraged in chat, each user has an !absolute! unchangable user number as well which can be viewed at any time in a chat by issuing a certain command. So be whatever screen name you like and change it at will, but if you get on my case, I'll block the user *number* from any further transaction with me, or I'll treat the chat contents in the context of what I know about that number. I would not mind seeing each user of the net have a unique, difficult to create number assigned to them as long as identifying information as to name, address, type of computer, etc did not have to be associated except as the owner chose to do so at various web sites or on chat programs. I do not need your name and address to know that the last time you visited my web site you made a commotion and I had to forbid you to visit me in the future. As with Compuserve where the user ID numbers don't relate to anything another user can conven- iently deal with, they none the less are tamper proof ways of either establishing a good or bad reputation in the net community. I would assign the number to *users* rather than *computers* so that the fellow who uses a public terminal in the airport can get on line with no hassle. I'd make it part of the password; let's say the last eight or ten digits; it would be the only part of the password to travel around the net with the user. Either that, or maybe there could be a push for more use of encrypted signatures which anyone could verify through a place where the keys were kept. In other words, having a *little bit* of user identification for general security purposes is not a bad idea to me as long as the user's true identity and address, etc would not be known except where the user wanted them to be known. As always, so many of my ideas depends upon the ability and willingness of system admins to cooperate and work with each other on the theory 'a bad thing happened at site X, it could happen to me; I cannot prevent it without cooperation from admin X which means I have to cooperate with him in the same way.' Where unix admins, particularly in the .edu domain are concerned, you generally see that attitude. If a security hole is found, word travels around quickly and patches are implemented. If a user acts out at one place before long the others know of him. Unfortunatly, the internet today consists of .com by the carload, and everyone save his own skin and damn all the rest of you. A sad sight, this internet. :( PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 03:23:48 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Quicken Family Lawyer Banned in Texas http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,31783,00.html Judge bars Intuit legal software By Dan Goodin Staff Writer, CNET News.com February 1, 1999, 6:40 p.m. PT A federal judge has banned the sale or distribution of a legal software title in Texas, saying that the program violates a state statute barring the unauthorized practice of law. In a case brought by the committee responsible for enforcing the Texas statute, U.S. District Judge Barefoot Sanders in Dallas held that Quicken Family Lawyer (QFL), a program that aids users in filling out wills, leases, and other legal documents, goes well beyond the mere provision of factual information about the legal system. The decision could give Texas enforcers new ammunition in their investigation of Nolo Press and other companies that offer similar "self-help" legal products. "While no single one of QFL's acts, in and of itself, may constitute the practice of law, taken as a whole [the software goes] beyond publishing a sample form book with instructions, and has ventured into the unauthorized practice of law," Sanders wrote. In explaining his conclusion, the judge noted that the software, which is bundled with Intuit's Quicken Suite, customizes the content of more than 100 legal forms based on information supplied by the end user. "Parson's argument to the contrary notwithstanding, QFL is far more than a static form with instructions on how to fill in the blanks," Sanders wrote in his January 22 order. Parsons Technology is the publisher of Quicken Family Lawyer. Once owned by Intuit, the company is now a division of The Learning Company. An Intuit spokeswoman said the company licenses the Quicken name to Parsons. Sanders rejected Parson's arguments that the Texas statute violates Free Speech rights guaranteed under the U.S. and Texan constitutions, holding that the prohibition is content neutral and therefore subject to a more lenient level of scrutiny. Additionally, the ruling applies only to software that already has been published, so there is no prior restraint of speech, the judge contended. Nonetheless, critics of the ruling say it creates an unconstitutional chilling effect on publishers. "It's inconsistent with the First Amendment to prohibit the distribution of information about the legal system as a general matter," said Pete Kennedy, a George & Donaldson attorney representing Nolo Press as it is being investigated for distributing its Living Willmaker software in Texas. "I don't think the remedy of banning publications from Texas is anywhere near narrowly tailored enough to satisfy the very limited power of the government to regulate speech," he said. In addition to Nolo Press, Kennedy said, Texas is probing several other companies that offer similar products. Lawyers for Texas's Unauthorized Practice of the Law Committee and for Parsons could not be reached for comment. Other critics of the ruling said the biggest casualty of the ruling would be the public. "[The ruling] does create a chill and hurts the ability of the public to get needed legal information at a low cost," said Gerry Goldsholle, who heads the legal advice site Free Advice. Still, he added, the effect of the ruling is likely to be narrow. "Good publishers," he explained, "should be able to work around this ruling with cautions" and disclaimers displayed prominently on the product. Copyright ) 1995-99 CNET, Inc. All rights reserved. Privacy policy. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: For goodness sake yes, we better ban anything that is likely to cut in on the profits made and the control held by lawyers in the USA. I mean, look at how this sorry sight known as the Internet has turned so many things topsy-turvy in society in recent years. It was bad enough back in the 1980's when the Usenet newsgroups were so active, but at least it was only a relative handful of cranks and dissidents and anarchists making speeches. No one much had even heard of them. A fond memory: the early days of this Digest in 1981-83 when the telcos were absolutely aghast that anyone could get on here and print previously heretofore 'secrets' they preferred no public discussion on. Remember, this Digest was around even before divestiture, when AT&T was 'Ma Bell'. Fast forward a few years ... the print media has been quite concerned for awhile now about their gradual loss of control over what people write about and the advertising dollars that go with it. When you don't need the morning newspaper or the talking heads on television news to (as W.R. Hearst once put it) tell you what your opinions and beliefs are any longer then times are getting tough at places like Tribune Media Services. That is why the newspapers and television/ radio stations are so happy to tell Frightened Mothers everywhere about all the child porn on the net. Keep those kids away from the net! What are you trying to do, fix things so in the next generation or so we don't have any readers/television watchers left at all? Maybe we can use the copyrigtht laws to further muddy the waters. Now the relative handful of crackpots has grown to a huge number of citizens and not only are they posting idiotic messages everywhere exposing our corporations and government agencies, they are actually using free audio/video encoders and decoders like those given away by Real Player and Microsoft (Windows Media Player) to put on their own audio/video webcasts to do the same thing. There are actually millions of people watching and listening to them, and to think they did not have to clear it first with our network and its advertisers. Can't the police do something to stop it? Other than accusing them of having seventy-six thousand kiddy porn pictures on their computer and rounding up all the Frightened Mothers of course; that joke got stretched so thin that where netters used to laugh about it now they just ignore it totally ... I mean, that damned Internet has made hassles for the print and broadcast media; it has made it very difficult for government to work in secret; it has made locating and utilizing public records that were previously so obscure as to be useless quite easy; it has given our fine men and women in law enforcement countless headaches and heart- aches as they strive to lock up more and more of our citizens each year; and now, by God, can't someone do something to stop it before it sends America's legal beagles, shysters and mouthpieces to the poorhouse? What has the world come to if a lawyer won't be able to get away with charging two hundred dollars an hour for his 'services' any longer? All of our establishments are seeing major changes in what they can get way with and do in secret as a result of the Internet, because -- as freespeech.com phrases it ... 'the people know better ...' I think we can assume the lawyers and judges will do their best to save us from the tyranny of the internet. Others of our institutions may suffer, but the lawyers will do their best to keep it from happening to them. And don't forget: YOU can now do your own webcasting quite easily with very little hassle, plus a free player and audio encoder to assist you in your effort. Check out http://www.freespeech.org PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Feb 1999 07:10:07 -0800 From: Mel Beckman Subject: Re: T1 Cabling Between Demarc and Equipment Rack > I want to use patch panels and 25 pair cable to link our equipment > racks with the TELCO demarc point. At present we just string a CAT5 > cable from the demarc to the piece of equipment in question (~30-40 > feet). Needless to say the under floor gets pretty messy with all the > cables. > So, the question is can I use CAT5 25 pair to link the 2 patch panels > or do I have to use 25 pair individually shielded pairs to avoid cross > talk between the receiving and transmitting pairs? Ivonader, When you ask "can I use CAT5 25-pair to link the 2 patch panels" I'm guessing you actually mean regular 25-pair telco house cable, and not CAT5. Category-5 cable is a specific standard for four-pair wiring generally used in local area network (e.g. Ethernet) applications; it's not a telco wiring standard. I see your situation frequently, and telco installers are running into it much more often as T1's become ubiquitous. The short answer is: no. Spectrum management rules for in-house wiring of T1s usually don't allow more than two T1s in a pair of 25-pair cables. Note that's a _pair_ of 25-pair cables. The send and receive sides of the T1s must be carried in separate 25-pair cables (this is called diverse routing), and the two T1s transported in a 25-pair cable must be positioned physically as far apart as possible. If you try to run three T1s through a pair of 25-pair cable, it may or may not work, you may or may not take errors, and you might experience intermittent failures at any time. It's not worth the risk, in my opinion. You can carry a single T1 in a Cat-5 (four-pair) cable, up to 50 feet or so, as long as the other two pairs are not used and not grounded, or are grounded on only one end. Be sure to mark the cable as a "hi-cap", or high-capacity line, so that nobody decides to use the spare pares in the future. It's usually a mistake to try and go more than 50' in Cat5. Beyond that distance, you should use shielded cable (ground the shield at one end only). The common telco name for two-pair shielded cable (which has two pairs of wires, T1/T, R1/R, each pair shielded individually) is "D-Screen" (some telco people erroneously call this "T-Screen"). This cable is big and thick and hard to work with, but it has the low-loss characteristics necessary to accommodate the low-power T1 signal from a telco demarc. With D-Screen you can run perhaps 400 feet. I'm amazed how many people try to run T1s hundreds, or even thousands, of feet on Cat-5 or house cable. They run a couple of limited tests (e.g., make a single call on an ISDN PRI line), and then sign-off on the installation, thinking it's fine. Later, when a half-dozen calls or so go through the line, or the aggregate amount of data increases, the line takes errors (usually reported by a high CRC count in the CSU). There is no fix other than proper wiring. I've also seen a flaky T1 installation work fine until a second T1 is installed nearby, at which point both lines fail. Telco demarcs are designed to serve user equipment connected within a few feet. The Network Interface Unit that the telco provides strips off the driving current (about 140 volts) that carried the signal to your office. The signal coming out of the NIU can only run a short distance in ordinary Cat5 cable before suffering degradation. The T1 send and receive pairs are on RJ45 pins 1/2 and 4/5, respectively. It turns out that ordinary Cat5 Ethernet patch cable pairs are organized so that RJ45 pins 1/2 and 4/5 are carried on separate pairs without being split, so you can use ordinary Ethernet patch cables to connect your CSU to the demarc over short (5-50') distances. Anything beyond this is considered an "extended demarc" by the telco, and requires following the above rules. The most important step of installing an extended demarc is to stress-test it. On the cheap you can ask the telco to do this by putting a loop up at your CSU and having them run to it. They should run the test for at least ten minutes, using various bit patterns. There should be *zero* errors. Even a few errors is an indication of some kind of noise problem in your extension (assuming test run error-free to the NIU). If you do a lot of T1 work, invest in a TBird or other T1 test generator and measurement set. These are as cheap as $600 now from some vendors. Learn how to use it and you'll save yourself all kinds of headaches. - Mel Beckman ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 03 Feb 1999 07:58:35 -0800 From: xr-dude000@paralynx.com (digger) Subject: Re: T1 Cabling Between Demarc and Equipment Rack In article , Lex wrote: > I want to use patch panels and 25 pair cable to link our equipment > racks with the TELCO demarc point. At present we just string a CAT5 > cable from the demarc to the piece of equipment in question (~30-40 > feet). Needless to say the under floor gets pretty messy with all the > cables. > So, the question is can I use CAT5 25 pair to link the 2 patch panels > or do I have to use 25 pair individually shielded pairs to avoid cross > talk between the receiving and transmitting pairs? 25 pr will be fine, Cat 5 isnt really necessary unless there is a lot of noise in the room - radio transmitters, high current devices - pumps or airconditioners. (thats cat 3 25 pr) remove 000 from email address to reply ------------------------------ From: Stewart Irwin Subject: Re: T1 Cabling Between Demarc and Equipment Rack Date: Wed, 03 Feb 1999 07:50:35 -0500 Organization: Interpath Communications Inc. Yes you can use it for the most part, but you will have problems down the road. You should use a cable that is rated for T1. We are using LUCENT-D 613C 30/22 cable between our patch panel and the frame. tel;pager:1-800-331-7242 pin#516717 tel;cell:(919)630-3980 tel;fax:(919)856-2055 tel;home:(919)556-2178 tel;work:(919)856-2086 x-mozilla-html:FALSE adr:;;;;;; version:2.1 email;internet:stewart.irwin@interpath.net x-mozilla-cpt:;0 fn:Stewart W. Irwin end:vcard ------------------------------ From: Matthew E. Pearson Subject: Re: T1 Cabling Between Demarc and Equipment Rack Date: Wed, 3 Feb 1999 01:32:18 -0500 Organization: The Internet Access Company Should be just fine, thats how telco's usually put in their blocks around here. Matthew E. Pearson email: mpearson@tiac.net Sr. Network Engineer tel: (781) 932-2000 The Internet Access Company ------------------------------ From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: New Telecom Chat Room Date: Wed, 3 Feb 1999 20:00:00 CDT Be sure to check out the new chat room specifically for telecom topics which is part of the Telecom Archives. It seems to function much better than the older version which was available, and it functions like an IRC-style chat. http://telecom-digest.org/chatroom.html PAT ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #7 **************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Feb 5 19:51:03 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id TAA29655; Fri, 5 Feb 1999 19:51:03 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 5 Feb 1999 19:51:03 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199902060051.TAA29655@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #8 TELECOM Digest Fri, 5 Feb 99 19:51:00 EST Volume 19 : Issue 8 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Local Residential Competition Comes To Canada (Joey Lindstrom) UCLA Short Course: New Third Generation Cellular Digital PCS (B Goodin) Go Network Mulls Security Issue (Monty Solomon) Book Review: "HTML: The Definitive Guide", C Musciano/B Kennedy (R Slade) Re: Ameritech's Call-Blocking Service Too Costly (Steven J. Sobol) Re: Ameritech's Call-Blocking Service Too Costly (Al Varney) Re: T1 Cabling Between Demarc and Equipment Rack (Steve Pinkston) Re: T1 Cabling Between Demarc and Equipment Rack (digger) Re: The Web's Identity Crisis (Billy Harvey) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-727-5427 Fax: 847-675-3140 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Joey Lindstrom Date: Fri, 05 Feb 1999 10:32:21 -0700 Reply-To: Joey Lindstrom Subject: Local Residential Competition Comes To Canada The following article appeared in the Calgary Sun newspaper on Friday, February 5th 1999. It's probably also available somewhere on their website: http://www.canoe.ca Note the bits about LNP and no charges involved in switching. PHONE OPTIONS RING IN Sprint Hopes To Win Telus Customers By Wanda Ehlers Calgary Sun Calgary's phone market got a whole lot busier yesterday as Sprint Canada Inc. announced it will take on Telus in the local phone business. Calgary will be the first Canadian city to be offered alternative local telephone services for both business and residential customers, Sprint's parent firm said yesterday. Starting today, Call-Net Enterprises will begin an advertising and telemarketing blitz in an attempt to court Calgarians into switching service providers. Sprint's basic local service inside Calgary will be $22.61 per month and rise to as high as $30.61 in outlying regions. Those who buy local service and either internet or long distance from Sprint will get a $2 discount off the basic rate. The newly-merged BCT.Telus charges virtually identical rates in Alberta for basic service. But both providers say the real advantage will be in getting more bang for your buck with services like calling features, long distance and internet access. "For the first time in the 120-year history of telephone service in this country, there is now real local competition for business and residential customers," said Call-Net chief executive Juri Koor. AT&T Canada also weighed (sic) into the fray, quietly announcing plans to provide local service for business customers in up to seven major urban markets this year. Calling Calgary a strong market that's open and accepting to competition, Sprint Canada president Philip Bates said Cowtown was an obvious market to launch into the $8.5 billion local phone wars. The switch will be virtually seamless, Bates said, with no special equipment or charges involved in moving to the new provider. Customers will also be able to keep their existing phone numbers. Along with Calgarians, residents of Airdrie, Cochrane, Okotoks, and High River will have the option to choose Sprint Canada as their new local provider. Within three years, Sprint expects to be in 25 major Canadian markets, including Edmonton. The company will use its existing long-distance customer base of 1.3 million as a launching pad for local service and will be in a position to reach out to six or seven million households by the time the rollout is complete. Telus welcomed the competition, adding it's been ready to take on all comers since deregulation in 1994. "Last year, we actually increased our (long distance) market share," said spokesman Jeff Welke. -files from Sun News Services / From Joey Lindstrom Joey@GaryNumanFan.NU, joey@lindstrom.com / Visit The NuServer! http://www.GaryNumanFan.NU / Visit The Webb! http://webb.GaryNumanFan.NU / "640K ought to be enough for anybody." - Bill Gates, 1981 ------------------------------ From: Bill Goodin Subject: UCLA Short Course: New Third Generation Cellular Digital PCS Date: Fri, 5 Feb 1999 09:54:19 -0800 On May 3-6, 1999, UCLA Extension will present the short course, New Third Generation Cellular, Digital PCS, and Broadband Mobile Data - What Will Dominate?", on the UCLA campus in Los Angeles. The instructors are C. R. "Rick" Baugh, PhD, consultant, and Peter Rysavy, MSEE, consultant. The establishment of standards for several different third-generation cellular systems is underway, with completion scheduled for late 2000 and deployment shortly thereafter. While each of the alternative technologies has established its architectural foundation, third generation standards emphasize better voice quality, a wider range of services, and higher performing data capabilities than the deployed services. At the same time, current second generation cellular and PCS technologies are rapidly upgrading their enhanced services and high performance data capabilities to incorporate many third generation capabilities. Developers are now asking the question: will the second-generation cellular and PCS technologies evolve to match the new third generation cellular capabilities, or will the new third generation cellular prevail in the end? Concurrently over the last 5 years, the FCC has released over 3 GHz of spectrum for wireless services, by any measure an enormous amount. Furthermore, license holders have virtually no restrictions on what services they provide in this spectrum, setting the stage for a wide range of new wireless services, including broadband mobile data. Multiple wireless service providers will offer competing services, including a range of broadband mobile data capabilities. This raises yet another question: Will cellular be the broadband data service of choice, or will services other than cellular dominate this market? While on the surface many of the services may look similar, there are subtle but profound differences. It is critical to understand these differences and their impact on competition, service offerings, system performance, and customer acceptance. These differences occur in: Wireless coverage; Service capacity; Ease of deployment; Mobility and roaming; Security and privacy; Network interoperability protocols; Compatibility with legacy systems; Data rates and data response times; Architectural approaches for Internet access; Voice quality; Multimedia capacity; Standards-cellular, PCS, wireless data; Costs-deployment and usage; and Susceptibility to interference. Wireless connectivity and access is important, but this is only a partial answer for end-to-end solutions and applications. Integration and interoperability with legacy systems and traditional public voice and data networks is the key for successful businesses. This course should help service providers enhance and expand on their own choice of technologies as well as understand the differences between competing technologies. Users who attend the course should come to understand the distinctions among alternatives when qualifying service providers to meet their business needs and application requirements. And finally, manufacturers of equipment should benefit from the course in understanding the technical trade-offs between alternative technology characteristics and their associated impact on system performance. UCLA Extension has presented this highly successful short course since 1992. The course fee is $1395, which includes extensive course materials. These materials are for participants only, and are not for sale. For additional information and a complete course description, please contact Marcus Hennessy at: (310) 825-1047 (310) 206-2815 fax mhenness@unex.ucla.edu http://www.unex.ucla.edu/shortcourses This course may also be presented on-site at company locations. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Feb 1999 02:46:57 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Go Network Mulls Security Issue http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,31981,00.html By Sandeep Junnarkar Staff Writer, CNET News.com February 4, 1999, 5:20 p.m. PT Update: Disney's recently launched Go Network is charging ahead with a direct-email campaign aimed at drawing traffic from the media giant's affiliated sites. But in its effort to help users make a smooth transition from the affiliate sites, Disney included user names and passwords in the email messages, raising concern about the network's security. "Although I was told I would not get unsolicited mail, I got this email with my user name and password in a completely unsecure way," said Sanjay Mathur, a regular user of ESPN.com, one of Disney's online properties, along with ABCNews.go.com and Family.go.com. "What bothers me is that someone could possibly use that information to get my credit card information," Mathur added. "I do whatever I can to maintain security, and here is someone just piping it over the Internet." But the Go Network quickly noted that it is more of a customer satisfaction issue than a security problem, adding that there is no way to retrieve credit card information from their sites either over the Internet or by email. "The broadcast email that was sent to ESPN subscribers to inform them of their benefits on GO Network did not compromise the users' credit card information in any way," said Patrick Naughton, executive vice president of products at the Go Network. Even if credit card security is not vulnerable in the email messages, Disney could lose precious credibility and members simply because of the perception of risk. As hacks, free email breaches, and other security issues make regular headlines, those who are newer to the Net often are unsure where they are safe. And with entertainment, portal, and other companies locked in intense competition for members, there are plenty of choices for users looking to make a switch. No company knows that more than the image-conscious Disney. "If we find that many users feel more comfortable specifically requesting their password information be mailed to them, we'll adjust the content of our email messages to not contain this convenient information up front," Naughton said. The company said it had not yet received any complaints about the campaign but that it would look into the security issues involved. An ESPN.com spokesman said a call from a CNET News.com reporter was the first time he had heard that the direct email effort has raised concern. "I think it is a good call-out that it could be a security issue," said Barak Berkowitz, Go Network's senior vice president of worldwide marketing. "We are checking to make sure, but everyone believes you would not be able to get any credit card data with that user ID and password." The Go Network said several different emails have been sent out recently to users. Among them, one deals with parental notification when someone under 13 joins, while another is a confirmation email that a new subscriber receives when he or she registers for the service. Both contain user names and passwords, ESPN.com and Go confirmed. The Go Network pointed out, however, that only the last four digits of a credit card are listed in the account information. The letter that people like Mathur received was to inform members of new services available at the Go Network, which now has about nine million members. "What we are going to do is right now is a fairly quick security review," Berkowitz said. "If there is no clear benefit to keeping the password there, we should definitely get rid of it." Meanwhile, Mathur is not quite appeased. Although he sent a complaint to ESPN, he is still waiting for a response. "I actually am thinking about ending my membership," he said. "I don't want to reward them for that kind of behavior. And I can get enough [sports news] for free on their site anyway." Copyright 1995-99 CNET, Inc. All rights reserved. Privacy policy. ------------------------------ From: Rob Slade Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User Date: Thu, 4 Feb 1999 08:12:41 -0800 Subject: Book Review: "HTML: The Definitive Guide", Musciano/Kennedy Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca BKHTMLDG.RVW 981115 "HTML: The Definitive Guide", Chuck Musciano/Bill Kennedy, 1998, 1-56592-492-4, U$32.95/C$46.95 %A Chuck Musciano cmusciano@aol.com %A Bill Kennedy bkennedy@activmedia.com %C 103 Morris Street, Suite A, Sebastopol, CA 95472 %D 1998 %G 1-56592-492-4 %I O'Reilly & Associates, Inc. %O U$32.95/C$46.95 800-998-9938 fax: 707-829-0104 nuts@ora.com %P 608 p. %T "HTML: The Definitive Guide", 3rd edition If you are serious about designing documents and Web pages with HTML (HyperText Markup Language) then you *must* have this book. First of all, it *is* definitive. Many books, though much longer, don't begin to match the depth of this current work. Musciano and Kennedy cover the standard HTML up to 4.0, and, more importantly, include the non-standard extensions of Netscape and Internet Explorer. The basics, text, rules, multimedia, links, lists, forms, tables, frames and more are all thoroughly covered, point by point and attribute by attribute. There is even the SGML (Standard Generalized Markup Language) DTD (Document Type Definition) for HTML 4.0. (This must be definitive: it's the definition of the language.) Second, it *is* a guide, and a very good one. Lemay's "Web Publishing With HTML" (cf. BKWPHTML.RVW) still holds an edge as the most approachable beginner's introduction to Web page creation, but Musciano and Kennedy can easily welcome the newcomer as well. The structure is logical and the explanations are crystal clear. In spite of all this, the book contains even more. Web design is not given a separate section, but seamlessly permeates every section of the book. Readers are constantly reminded that while extensions may be fun, not everyone in the world has the same browser. Alternative methods are suggested for non-standard effects and functions. Shortcuts, suitable to only one browser or server, are recommended against in order to ensure the utmost compatibility with all systems. The authors no longer have coverage of CGI (Common Gateway Interface) programming, but they do explain the use of email to collect form data, which is much more useful for maintainers of small Web sites without access to extensive server functions. All this, and readable, too. The content is straightforward and lucid. While you might not read this book for laughs, it is not the tome to choose to put yourself to sleep at night, either. I can recommend this book, without reservation, to anyone who wants to learn HTML programming and use. It is, still, the definitive guide and the only one I find I need to keep on my shelf. (The fact that my review has been misquoted on the back cover of the last two editions of this book has had no influence at all on this review.) copyright Robert M. Slade, 1996, 1997, 1998 BKHTMLDG.RVW 981115 rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@sprint.ca robertslade@usa.net p1@canada.com Find virus, book info http://victoria.tc.ca/techrev/rms.htm Mirrored at http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade/rms.htm Linked to bookstore at http://www97.pair.com/robslade/ Robert Slade's Guide to Computer Viruses, 0-387-94663-2 (800-SPRINGER) ------------------------------ From: sjsobol@nstc.com (Steven J. Sobol) Subject: Re: Ameritech's Call-Blocking Service Too Costly, Trade Group Says Date: 4 Feb 1999 00:59:35 GMT Organization: North Shore Technologies Corp. 888.480.INET Rumor has it that nospam.tonypo@nospam.ultranet.com said > Gaaacckk! $9.50 for CLID/N? It's $4.95 here and I thought Bell Atlantic > was gouging us. I don't think it costs that much in Ohio, though I pay for it as part of a package, so the cost of CID alone isn't broken out on my phone bill. Steven J. Sobol - President, North Shore Technologies Corporation Founding Member & System Admin, The Forum for Responsible & Ethical E-mail www.nstc.com * sjsobol@nstc.com [<>] www.spamfree.org * sjsobol@spamfree.org I offer my services free of charge to people running Sendmail who have open relays and need to close them. E-mail me, or call 888.480.INET (4638) ------------------------------ From: varney@ihgp2.ih.lucent.com (Al Varney) Subject: Re: Ameritech's Call-Blocking Service Too Costly, Trade Group Says Date: 5 Feb 1999 00:22:09 GMT Organization: Lucent Technologies, Naperville, IL Reply-To: varney@lucent.com In article , Ed Ellers wrote: > Tad Cook quoted from an Indianapolis Star story: >> "Beginning today, Ameritech will roll out its new Privacy Manager >> service in three Indiana cities -- Indianapolis, Gary and >> Hammond. While the service costs $3.95 a month, it requires Caller >> ID with Name to work, which costs an extra $9.50 a month. >> "That's too much, says a telemarketing group, arguing that consumers >> can get pretty much the same result by being firm with telemarketers >> and asking to be removed from calling lists." > I have to agree here -- if Privacy Manager presents a voice message to > the called party, there's no reason to require Caller ID (with name or > not) because the Caller ID display unit doesn't enter into the > operation! Privacy Manager presents a voice message to UNIDENTIFIED calling parties, and then (assuming the caller persists) to the called party. Calling Name is used to: 1) show the name/number of most callers or 2) display the fact that the call has been intercepted by CALL MANAGER. I.e., "CALL MANAGER" appears in the calling name display. I think Ameritech was assuming most folks that wanted Privacy Manager ALSO wanted to know who was calling (on all calls, not just those handled by Privacy Manager). Without Calling Name, called party wouldn't know the identity of any IDENTIFIED caller. Is that useful by itself? Alternatively, they could "privacy manage" every incoming call, but that would cost more (more such calls per month) and annoy the mother-in-law. Al Varney - just my opinion ------------------------------ From: Steve Pinkston Subject: Re: T1 Cabling Between Demarc and Equipment Rack Date: 5 Feb 1999 16:14:50 GMT Organization: ADC Kentrox I've been following this discussion of T1 customer premises wiring for some time now, and watching the various responses. With the explosion of T1 deployments in recent years, a lot of people have done installations and their field experiences -- varied as they are -- are evident in the responses. My perspective is a little different. I work in the technical support department of a company that makes T1 CSUs and DSUs. I have spoken to thousands of field installers over the years and have seen just about everything that can go wrong in a T1 installation. I'll try to give you some bottom-line facts and observations. Most of Mel Beckman's observations are quite accurate. If you can only carry one type of cable to use for connecting CPE to CSU and CSU to NIU, use INDIVIDUALLY-SHIELDED TWISTED- PAIR cable. The drain wires of the shields should be grounded at one end only. Cat5 does not qualify because it is not shielded. So, why can you get away with using Cat5 a lot of the time? The unknown variable in the wiring equation is signal level. If two unshielded pairs are in close physical proximity to each other, and the signal levels are significantly different, crosstalk -- that is, the inductive coupling of the stronger signal into the weaker signal -- can occur. In our tests, we have shown that a signal differential of 7.5 dB or greater can cause crosstalk. In T1 applications, this results in BiPolar Violations (BPVs), which will also show up as CRC-6 errors in ESF receivers. The connection from the CPE to the CSU is not usually a problem, since this is limited to 655 feet; there is not enough loss over that distance to cause a crosstalk problem. Cat5 will not usually cause a problem. If the NIU regenerates the inbound signal -- this happens with devices like an HDSL unit, colocated M13 mux or 1/0 DCS -- then you could also use Cat5, unless you are going to extend the demarc a great enough distance that the received signal level at the CSU is -7.5 dBdsx0 or lower. The installations that are toughest are the ones that terminate in a true NIU or "smartjack." Although most NIUs can be optioned to regenerate the T1 signal toward the CPE, this is almost never done, and is often explicitly prohibited by the telco. In an installation like this, the received signal can be as low as -16.0 dBdsx0. If you connect the CSU to the NIU with Cat5 in this situation, you are almost guaranteed to have a BPV problem, and I have seen it happen in as little as 6 feet. To make matters worse, the telco often directs on-site personnel to help them check the line by putting a "hard loop" on the line -- that is, shorting the transmit pair to the receive pair. The passive RJ48X jacks often installed at the end of an extended demarc are usually set up to do this automatically if the RJ48 plug is withdrawn. And -- surprise! -- the line tests GOOD, even though the CSU takes massive BPVs when connected. This happens for two reasons. The most important is that putting the short at the end of the line equalizes the transmit and receive levels. The very mechanism of crosstalk is eliminated temporarily because there is no active driver at the end. The second reason is that the same line state exists on both sides of the the line at the same moment. Ones don't interfere with ones, and zeroes don't interfere with zeroes. I hope I have been clear in this article. If proper cabling were used on all T1 installations, my co-workers and I would take a lot fewer calls, and customers would get their networks into service a lot sooner. A few minor quibbles with Mel Beckman's excellent post: Mel Beckman wrote in article ... > You can carry a single T1 in a Cat-5 (four-pair) cable, up to 50 feet > or so, as long as the other two pairs are not used and not grounded, > or are grounded on only one end. Crosstalk can and does occur in Cat5 runs of 50 feet and less. It all hinges on the signal level. > With D-Screen you can run perhaps 400 feet. Again, signal level is everything. If the telco NIU is a regenerator, like an HDSL CPE unit, you might be able to go 2000 feet or more, depending on the receiver input sensitivity of the CSU. > The Network Interface Unit that the telco provides strips > off the driving current (about 140 volts) that carried the signal to > your office. The current you speak of is the simplex current, which has nothing to do with the T1 signal directly, but is used to power the repeaters in the line, and sometimes the NIU, as well. It used to also be used to power the CSU, but that is rare these days. Steve Pinkston ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 05 Feb 1999 10:31:01 -0800 From: xr-dude000@paralynx.com (digger) Subject: Re: T1 Cabling Between Demarc and Equipment Rack We've been running 3 t1's on the same cable for more than a year now, with no errors. It comes in on a 100pr 10year (or more) old entrance cable, with payphones, ordinary 1b lines running fax and modem etc. We use seperate 4pr cat5 cables running from the telco demarc to the switch (mitel sx-2000l) because there are also many 100mb ethernet hubs and routers in the same room, but it's been running the campus without a hitch so far - knock wood. Marty cableguy@twu.ca remove 000 from email address to reply ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 4 Feb 1999 18:00:58 -0500 Subject: Re: The Web's Identity Crisis From: Billy Harvey Dr. Joel M. Hoffman writes: > More to the point, you'll need software to transmit the information in > the hardware. How hard will it be for me to spoof that information? > I don't see the point. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think the catch is, the 'average' > user on the internet these days would not know how to spoof the > information. You would, I probably could do it, and many readers > here would figure it out. Pat, What you missed here is that if anyone can do it then everyone can do it. The software would hit the web and be available worldwide before the chip itself was. So what would be the recourse - the typical response by "concerned legislators" would be to make it illegal to have your computer put out false information, even if the individual is trying to protect his privacy. If it *can* be abused, it *will* be abused in the pursuit of profit. There are so many instances of commercial interest taking precedence over privacy that the fight to retain it is probably already well lost. Billy ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #8 **************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Feb 9 14:16:06 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id OAA22530; Tue, 9 Feb 1999 14:16:06 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 9 Feb 1999 14:16:06 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199902091916.OAA22530@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #9 TELECOM Digest Tue, 9 Feb 99 14:16:00 EST Volume 19 : Issue 9 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson It's No Time to Dial 9-1-1 (Monty Solomon) Public Service Commission May Alter Sarasota FL Area Code (Tad Cook) Telecom Update (Canada) #169, February 8, 1999 (Angus TeleManagement) Telecom Operations Testing (Michael Young) Re: Bell Canada Replaces Operators With U.S. Based Excell (Louis Raphael) Switchmode Power Supplies - Consultants (mmcintyr@swichtec.co.nz) History of Telco Mergers? (Erik Rauch) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 415-520-9905 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 8 Feb 1999 14:13:20 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: It's No Time to Dial 9-1-1 By Ronald Rosenberg It's open season on Bell Atlantic Corp. For years after the Baby Bells were spun off from AT&T Corp. in 1984, Bell Atlantic lumbered along, wielding its monopoly power over local phone service. A whiff of competition began after passage of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, which called for the Bell companies to open their local markets to rivals. Now, New York-based Bell Atlantic is under assault on seemingly all fronts - ranging from local calling and long-distance service to wireless communications and Internet access. In Massachusetts alone, Bell Atlantic faces 87 rivals. Four years ago, Nynex Corp., the former New England phone company that Bell Atlantic acquired in 1997, had just four competitors. ''This is a real transition year for Bell Atlantic,'' said Fred Voit, an analyst at The Yankee Group, the Boston market research and consulting firm. ''They're losing business customers to competitors, face some significant rivals for the first time in the residential market, and they need to get into long-distance services.'' Bell Atlantic's chief executive, 52-year-old Ivan G. Seidenberg, who joined the company in New York out of high school and rose from a cable splicer's assistant, maintains that the nation's largest regional phone carrier is prepared for the competitive assault arising from regulatory and technological changes sweeping the industry. ''We are seeing the telecommunications industry transition itself away from large regional players to a handful of stronger global players, and we want to be one of them,'' said Seidenberg, in a recent interview. Indeed, the company is taking significant steps to transform itself beyond a humdrum provider of local phone service in 13 East Coast states. Its immediate goal is to expand into long-distance service, initially in New York State. Like other Baby Bells, it is barred by the 1996 telecom act from entering the long-distance market until it proves to regulators it has opened up its local market. Meanwhile, Bell Atlantic also faces hurdles in gaining regulatory approval for its $52.9 billion proposed acquisition of GTE Corp., which would help give it a nationwide presence in local, long-distance, and wireless communications plus a wholesale Internet business. Still, rivals are closing in from many directions. Long-distance providers, most notably AT&T, are pressing to get into local calling. Cable television service providers, which have started to offer phone service over cable wires, represent a huge new threat to the Baby Bells. Increasing numbers of wireless carriers, both national and regional, are going after Bell Atlantic's customers. New independent carriers are offering high-speed Internet access. Just last week, several competitors announced initiatives that turned up the heat on Bell Atlantic. Suddenly Bell Atlantic's customers have more choices than ever before, which promises to bring lower prices and improved service. With all-out competition materializing this year, Bell Atlantic finds itself slugging it out on numerous battlefields: Local calling: Starting April 20, some residential Bell Atlantic customers in Massachusetts will begin to see competition for toll calls. Callers who dial 1+ any of the four Greater Boston area codes (617, 508, 978, and 781) will be able to choose an alternative - such as AT&T and MCI WorldCom - the way they pick a long-distance provider now. In some Boston suburbs, Bell Atlantic already faces another competitor: MediaOne Group, the state's largest cable TV service provider, whose coaxial cables can provide digital local phone service. Targeting consumers who make many local calls, MediaOne offers a flat-rate service in 27 Mass. communities for $26.95 per month. Just last week MediaOne obtained Time Warner's Bay State cable system in a swap that will give MediaOne over one million customers - 59 percent of the state's cable TV market - who are all potential local telephone customers. MediaOne is not alone. Also last week, AT&T, in a bold effort to challenge the Baby Bells in providing local residential phone service, cut a deal to offer phone service over Time Warner's cable lines in much of the country. That venture came on top of ATT's pending purchase of Tele-Communications Inc., the nation's number two cable television provider. AT&T already provides large businesses in New York and Boston with local telephone service through its subsidiary, Teleport Communications Group. Other Bell companies are looking to lock horns with Bell Atlantic on local service. SBC Communications, San Antonio-based Bell company, said last week it plans to enter the Boston market late this year or early next, initially for business customers. It would mark the first time a Baby Bell is invading the territory of another Bell company for local or long-distance services. In yet another assault on Bell Atlantic's local calling market, MCI WorldCom last week began offering residential service in New York State, at a 5 percent discount to Bell Atlantic rates or in flat-rate monthly packages. MCI WorldCom, the nation's second-largest long distance company, is leasing lines from Bell Atlantic. Long distance: With long distance considered the brass ring for nearly all regional Bell companies, Bell Atlantic's primary objective this year is to offer long-distance service in New York State - the single largest source in the United States for domestic and international calls. But it faces high hurdles in proving to federal and state regulators that it can meet the telecom act's requirement of freeing up local markets before being allowed to enter long distance. Bell Atlantic expects to complete federal and state requirements by the end of this month and clear all hurdles by the summer or early fall, according to Seidenberg. Already several other regional Bells, such as Ameritech, have tried and failed to gain regulatory approval to offer long-distance service. But many analysts maintain Bell Atlantic could become the first long-distance Bell company. ''I still have a rosy expectation of how it will all come out,'' said Seidenberg. He bristles at the more than 600 pages of requirements needed to prove that Bell Atlantic has the technology to switch customers who may want an alternative local phone carrier. ''In the last few years, we have not been permitted to have the kind of growth strategies that our competitors have because of government policies,'' he added, calling the requirements an ''anachronism.'' Massachusetts and Pennsylvania would follow New York as the next states where Bell Atlantic plans to offer long distance. The company says it seeks to apply in both states by year-end. Wireless: Although Bell Atlantic's overall revenue last year grew only 3 percent to $31.6 billion, its wireless business soared 25 percent. That success came despite competition from five wireless competitors in Greater Boston alone. Still, Bell Atlantic saw customer erosion as AT&T and Sprint PCS offered single-rate calling plans to business and residential customers that eliminated separate long-distance and roaming charges. Bell Atlantic responded with a similar plan last year. And while the pending merger with GTE will significantly expand its wireless operations to as far as California, Bell Atlantic was unsuccessful in its bid to acquire AirTouch Communications Corp., the nation's largest independent cellular telephone company. Bell Atlantic was outbid by Vodaphone Group PLC of Great Britain. The combination of GTE and AirTouch would have given Bell Atlantic wireless coverage in 44 states and enabled it to better compete against AT&T Wireless and Sprint PCS, which have coast-to-coast networks. Seidenberg said the loss of AirTouch was a ''missed opportunity, but not a critical loss,'' adding that the Bell Atlantic-GTE combination creates a large national wireless company nonetheless. Internet access: Later this month, Bell Atlantic plans to begin competing against MediaOne, RCN Corp., and other area cable TV service providers with Infospeed, a high-speed Internet service that uses the ubiquitous telephone wire. The new service, which will cost up to $99.95 per month compared to $50 per month or less for cable modem service, is expected to appeal to residential customers in Boston and communities not served by MediaOne or RCN. Some small- and medium-sized businesses are turning to other companies that offer the same high-speed Internet service over phone lines. These Internet service providers, such as Northpoint Communications Inc., say they can undercut Bell Atlantic's prices for high-speed telephone lines leased by businesses for Internet access. But some analysts believe it's the cable companies that have the upper hand in assembling a bundle of services that include Internet access, TV, and local dialing. But don't count the Baby Bells out. William P. Bane, a telecommunications analyst at Mercer Management Consulting, said Bell Atlantic is better positioned than the other Bells for the competitive new era. ''For Bell Atlantic this is the Olympics, where the best of the best are in the stadium,'' Bane said. ------------------------------ Subject: Public Service Commission May Alter Sarasota FL Area Code Date: Tue, 9 Feb 1999 00:30:05 -PST From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) By Phil Levine, The Bradenton Herald, Fla. Knight Ridder/Tribune Business News Feb. 6--SARASOTA, Fla.--In the regional battle over proposed changes to the 941 area code, all's quiet on the northern front. However, at a Public Service Commission hearing held Friday at Sarasota City Hall, battle lines were being drawn along the southern vanguard of Sarasota County. The proposal under consideration at the hearing would maintain the 941 exchange in Manatee, Sarasota and Polk counties. However, the proposed split would mean that residents of Englewood -- a town divided between Sarasota and Charlotte counties -- will be faced with two local area codes; and the rest of Charlotte and seven other counties would have a new area code. In an interview after the hearing, commission representative Ann Shelfer confirmed that the "permissive" first phase of splitting the current 941 area code will begin next month. This phase would allow callers in the affected region to use either 941 or the new, as yet unnamed area code. The mandatory final change is scheduled for September. The last change to the region's area code occurred in 1995, when 941 was introduced to Manatee, Sarasota and 11 other counties stretching south to Monroe County. At the time, officials didn't foresee a need to make further changes before the year 2012. However, growth in the use of cellular phones, pagers and other telecommunications devices has changed that timetable. During Friday's hearing, which drew about 25 people, few Manatee County voices were heard. One of the voices in attendance belonged to Roger Hill. As ranch manager at the Schroeder-Manatee Ranch -- home to the massive Lakewood Ranch development in East Manatee County -- Hill expressed satisfaction with the plan's intention to retain the 941 area code for both counties. However, vocal opposition from Englewood residents at the hearing caused Hill some concern. "I assume from the small Manatee turnout today that most people are confident the plan will succeed," he said. "I only hope their confidence is justified. As of now, it's in the hands of bureaucrats." Manatee Chamber of Commerce representative Rick Brown echoed Hill's appreciation of the plan and "reiterated our support for maintaining the area code in Manatee and Sarasota counties." Business owners and residents of Englewood were less than laudatory in their review of the plan. Linda Pierce, executive director of Englewood's Chamber of Commerce, adamantly opposed the plan. "On behalf of the 600 businesses our chamber represents," she said, "I implore you to reconsider the decision to split our area into two codes." Several other Englewood residents echoed those sentiments. Charlotte County business owner Lynn Flatt warned Public Service Commission members that the proposed split would have "an extreme effect" on area businesses. Speaking on behalf the commission, attorney Julie McKinney said those concerns would be expressed to commission board members and they would be addressed "if it's possible to do so." The commission, which has regulatory oversight, is sponsoring a series of public hearings before deciding on a final plan of action. To comment on the area code proposal, contact the Public Service Commission at 1-850-413-6236, send a fax to 1-850-413-6250, or write to 2540 Shumard Oak Blvd., Tallahassee, Fla. 32399. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Feb 1999 11:06:58 -0500 From: Angus TeleManagement Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #169, February 8, 1999 ************************************************************ * * * TELECOM UPDATE * * Angus TeleManagement's Weekly Telecom Newsbulletin * * http://www.angustel.ca * * Number 169: February 8, 1999 * * * * Publication of Telecom Update is made possible by * * generous financial support from: * * * * AT&T Canada ............... http://www.attcanada.com/ * * Bell Canada ............... http://www.bell.ca/ * * Lucent Technologies ....... http://www.lucent.ca/ * * MetroNet Communications ... http://www.metronet.ca/ * * Sprint Canada ............. http://www.sprintcanada.ca/ * * Telus Communications....... http://www.telus.com/ * * TigerTel Services ......... http://www.citydial.com/ * * * ************************************************************ IN THIS ISSUE: ** Sprint Launches Local Service in Calgary ** MetroNet Buys Starcom's Fiber ** Bell and Shaw Protest Exclusion From Developer's Trenches ** Internet Providers Slam Bell Offer ** U.S. Carrier Plans Fiber Through Canada ** Strike Looms at Bell Canada ** LNP Extended to Additional Cities ** SaskTel Allies With Netscape ** AlphaNet Goes Bankrupt ** Review of Policy Freezing Contribution Rates ** Excel Enters Canadian LD Market ** Cantel Cuts Overseas Rates ** BCI Raises $350 Million ** New Name for Tele-Direct ** MT&T Invests in Automated Customer Service ** NS Power Allies With Williams ** Bell, Cenosis Extend Digital Transport Test ** AT&T Canada Registers as CLEC ** AT&T (U.S.) Allies With Time Warner ** Paytel Signs Equess for Payphone LD ** Financial Reports Telus Rogers Cantel MTS MT&T Island Telecom ** How Are Telecom Carriers Coping With Y2K? ============================================================ SPRINT LAUNCHES LOCAL SERVICE IN CALGARY: On February 4, Sprint Canada launched local telephone service to residential and business customers in Calgary and said it will expand to Vancouver, Toronto, and Montreal later this year. Business rates are 14% below Telus. Residential customers who also use Sprint's Internet or LD services will save 10% on local rates. ** Blowing our own horn: Two months ago, Telecom Update #161 reported that Sprint would offer local service in Calgary in February. METRONET BUYS STARCOM'S FIBER: MetroNet Communications has purchased 48 fiber optic strands between Vancouver and Seattle, and related electronics, for $24 Million. The fiber was owned by Starcom Service Corp, now in receivership. MetroNet has hired key Starcom technical employees. ** As part of the deal, MetroNet sold 20-year indefeasible rights of use to PSINet (20 strands), Teleglobe (2), and BC Telecom (2). BELL AND SHAW PROTEST EXCLUSION FROM DEVELOPER'S TRENCHES: Metrus Properties has told Bell Canada and Shaw Cablesystems that Futureway Communications, a recent CLEC registrant, will have exclusive access to common utility trenches in a new subdivision in Richmond Hill, Ontario. Bell and Shaw have asked the CRTC to intervene. http://www.crtc.gc.ca:80/eng/proc_rep/telecom/1999/8690/b2-01.htm INTERNET PROVIDERS SLAM BELL OFFER: The Canadian Association of Internet Providers says Bell Nexxia has made a proposal to resolve the dispute over ADSL Internet access. CAIP President Ron Kawchuk said the plan, which would reduce the cost to ISPs from $200 to $35 per customer per month, is overpriced and dependent on a technology which doesn't yet exist. U.S. CARRIER PLANS FIBER THROUGH CANADA: Level 3 Communications, a U.S. carrier which is building a network based on Internet Protocol technology, plans to install fiber from Albany to Buffalo via Montreal. Level 3 says this will provide diverse routing for its U.S. network and "allow Level 3's future entry into the Canadian market." ** Worldwide Fiber Inc, which is building Level 3's Montreal-Buffalo route, recently completed an undersea fiber link between Vancouver and Seattle. STRIKE LOOMS AT BELL CANADA: Bell Canada's operators and technicians could be on strike by the end of February. Conciliation talks between Bell and the Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union broke down on February 4. LNP EXTENDED TO ADDITIONAL CITIES: On February 1, Local Number Portability in Calgary expanded to include the Airdrie, Cochrane, High River, and Okotoks exchanges. LNP is also now available in Winnipeg and Quebec City, and will be activated in Richmond, BC, on March 1. SASKTEL ALLIES WITH NETSCAPE: SaskTel has signed a three- year agreement with Netscape Communications, giving it access to Netscape's enterprise software and help in offering e-commerce and Internet applications. ALPHANET GOES BANKRUPT: Toronto-based AlphaNet Telecom Inc. has filed an assignment in bankruptcy. The company has sold its hospitality business unit, but was unable to obtain financing or a buyer for its overseas long distance business. AlphaNet's directors have resigned and PricewaterhouseCoopers has been appointed Trustee. REVIEW OF POLICY FREEZING CONTRIBUTION RATES: CRTC Public Notice 99-5 seeks comment on whether contribution revenues, driven by expansion in long distance traffic, have grown faster than could have been expected in early 1998 when fees were frozen, and if so what remedies are appropriate. To participate, notify the Commission by March 12. http://www.crtc.gc.ca:80/internet/1999/8045/03/pn99-05.htm EXCEL ENTERS CANADIAN LD MARKET: Excel Canada says it will launch residential LD service across the country on March 1, and may introduce Internet service and small business LD by year end. The multi-level marketing company, a subsidiary of Teleglobe, begins recruitment of independent representatives and customers today. CANTEL CUTS OVERSEAS RATES: Rogers Cantel has reduced overseas rates of its standard calling plans and established overseas rates for its prepaid plan. Sample postpaid/prepaid rates: UK 23 cents/75 cents; France 40 cents/75 cents; Japan 63 cents/$1. ** Cantel has added Amway and 7-Eleven stores to its distribution channels. BCI RAISES $350 MILLION: Nortel Networks will invest $150 Million in Bell Canada International convertible bonds in a deal that includes "equipment sales opportunities." In a related agreement, BCI will raise $200 Million from a separate bond issue. NEW NAME FOR TELE-DIRECT: Bell Canada's directory publishing arm, Tele-Direct, has been renamed Bell ActiMedia. MT&T INVESTS IN AUTOMATED CUSTOMER SERVICE: MT&T has taken a stake in Neuromedia, a California-based maker of "Virtual Service Representatives" that answer customer queries by text and pictures delivered via the Web. NS POWER ALLIES WITH WILLIAMS: Nova Scotia Power and Tulsa- based energy/telecom giant Williams have agreed to share information and "explore potential joint energy and telecommunications opportunities." BELL, CENOSIS EXTEND DIGITAL TRANSPORT TEST: Bell Canada and Montreal-based Cenosis Inc. are expanding their trial of a new digital data transport service for the graphics arts industry to 24 sites from four. The service uses a central server to facilitate exchange of very large files. AT&T CANADA REGISTERS AS CLEC: AT&T Canada has filed with the CRTC to become a Competitive Local Exchange Carrier and says it will offer business local service in up to seven urban centers later this year. AT&T (U.S.) ALLIES WITH TIME WARNER: AT&T Corp. is forming a joint venture with Time Warner to supply local phone service over Time Warner's cable systems in 33 states. AT&T aims to offer local service within five years to 40% of U.S. households through cable company facilities. PAYTEL SIGNS EQUESS FOR PAYPHONE LD: Paytel Canada, which hopes to install 10,000 competitive payphones this year, has signed Calgary-based Equess Communications to provide long distance. FINANCIAL REPORTS: The following results are for the fourth quarter: ** Telus reports profits of $59.5 Million, up from $35 Million last year. Revenue increased 1% to $696 Million; long distance revenue fell 11%. ** Rogers Cantel's net loss was $33 Million. Revenue was $324 Million, down 6% on the year but up 3% on the quarter. Rogers Communications' overall loss (excluding one-time items) was $55 Million, unchanged from last year. ** MTS recorded net income of $24 Million, up 13% from last year. Revenue was $163 Million, a 3% increase. ** MT&T's net income was $17 Million, up from $9.1 Million last year. Revenue increased 7% to $185 Million. ** Island Telecom reports net earnings of $2.8 Million, a 65% increase over last year. Revenue grew 2%. HOW ARE TELECOM CARRIERS COPING WITH Y2K? In the February issue of Telemanagement, representatives of four major telecom carriers weigh the hazard to their networks posed by the millennium bug and explain what they've done to cope with it. ** In the same issue, Henry Dortmans explains how telecom managers can go beyond "fire fighting" and draw up an action list for planned telecom improvements. ** To subscribe to Telemanagement, call 1-800-263-4415, ext 225, or visit http://www.angustel.ca/teleman/tm.html. ============================================================ HOW TO SUBMIT ITEMS FOR TELECOM UPDATE E-MAIL: editors@angustel.ca FAX: 905-686-2655 MAIL: TELECOM UPDATE Angus TeleManagement Group 8 Old Kingston Road Ajax, Ontario Canada L1T 2Z7 =========================================================== HOW TO SUBSCRIBE (OR UNSUBSCRIBE) TELECOM UPDATE is provided in electronic form only. There are two formats available: 1. The fully-formatted edition is posted on the World Wide Web on the first business day of the week at http://www.angustel.ca/update/up.html 2. The e-mail edition is distributed free of charge. To subscribe, send an e-mail message to majordomo@angustel.ca. The text of the message should contain only the two words: subscribe update To stop receiving the e-mail edition, send an e-mail message to majordomo@angustel.ca. The text of the message should say only: unsubscribe update [Your e-mail address] =========================================================== COPYRIGHT AND DISCLAIMER: All contents copyright 1999 Angus TeleManagement Group Inc. All rights reserved. For further information, including permission to reprint or reproduce, please e-mail rosita@angustel.ca or phone 905-686-5050 ext 225. The information and data included has been obtained from sources which we believe to be reliable, but Angus TeleManagement makes no warranties or representations whatsoever regarding accuracy, completeness, or adequacy. Opinions expressed are based on interpretation of available information, and are subject to change. If expert advice on the subject matter is required, the services of a competent professional should be obtained. ------------------------------ From: Michael Young Subject: Telecom Operations Testing Date: Mon, 08 Feb 1999 14:31:01 -0500 Organization: Bell Canada / Bell Nexxia I'm part of a group in Bell Canada's IS/IT department that tests the methods and procedures for the operational processes around a service. For a telco that's the business offices, sales channels, phone centres, repair desks (first level, and subsequent test desks), network maintenance, billing, customer enabling, and any links to third party maintenance. The service has usually gone through technical and/or field trial, with a limited group of user, but these processes are handled internally at that stage by the development team. However, before a full scale launch to REAL customers, it's imperative to ensure that all groups have documented,tested procedures to follow. This usually involves what we call an Operational Readiness Test -we select test users, and key people in each operational area, and run actual orders, troubles, and billing records through the system - end to end. This is done for almost all our projects (depending on size) and is clearly seen as a benefit both from the marketing group - looking for a smooth introduction with satisfied customers, and by the actual line groups - looking for a product they can easily support. I'm curious how involved other telcos are in this, and would like to exchange test philosophies and successes, nothing confidential/restric- ted of course. If this isn't your area, would you pass this on within your organization? Thanks, Michael Young IS/IT QA & Implementation Bell Canada ------------------------------ From: Louis Raphael Subject: Re: Bell Canada Replaces Operators With U.S. Based Excell Date: 7 Feb 1999 09:21:45 GMT Organization: Societe pour la promotion du petoncle vert Mark J Cuccia wrote: > Bell Canada's Operator Services are **NOT** going to be 'relocated' to > Excell Agency's Arizona (USA) HQ's! [Fortunately] it would be almost imposible for them to do this, because getting French-speaking operators in Arizona would be expensive at the very best. That being said, I'm sure that service will suffer greatly - currently, the Bell Operators are simply amazing, and I can't see anything run/operated by "Excell" even beginning to match what these people can do. This truly is a great shame and my heart goes out not only to the operators, but to the tradition of a bygone era of truly outstanding service that they represent. > These contract directory companies (including Excell) are HORRIBLY out > of date in their directory listings, and have all other kinds of > erroneous or missing information. If one needs real local telco > directory, some long distance carriers (LCI/Qwest still does at this > time) still route to the real LEC directory operator of the dialed > area code. I am _NOT_ going to use these contract companies, first > paying for a directory call and only getting bogus information, and > then paying toll to use that bogus info?! That's rather unpalatable, considering that the information is actually out there and available. Plus, even if the information were up to date, a local operator would still be much better, because they're able to handle a query like "I'm looking for a Mr. Albert Green, somewhere in the eastern part of downtown ..." (having a fix on the streets would likely narrow that down to only one or two possibilities). Louis ------------------------------ From: mmcintyr@swichtec.co.nz Subject: Switchmode Power Supplies - consultants Date: Mon, 08 Feb 1999 22:33:51 GMT Organization: Deja News - The Leader in Internet Discussion Fellow toilers: I would be grateful if some(any)one would advise the name(s) of reputable/recognized/better known consultants/analysts in the marketing/engineering aspects of switchmode power supplies (DC power) for the telecommunications industry. I realize this sounds a little vague but I'm feeling my way at present. Thank you, Myles McIntyre mmcintyr@swichtec.co.nz ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Feb 1999 18:34:42 EST From: Erik Rauch Reply-To: Erik Rauch Subject: History of Telco Mergers? Does anyone have a concise history of mergers of the various phone companies over the years? It would be interesting to compare the current spate of mergers with the ones from the late 19th/early 20th centuries that led to the formation of the AT&T monopoly. Erik Rauch Room 434, 545 Tech. Square rauch@mit.edu Cambridge, MA 02139 617-253-8576 http://www-swiss.ai.mit.edu/~rauch ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #9 **************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Feb 9 17:10:33 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id RAA03421; Tue, 9 Feb 1999 17:10:33 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 9 Feb 1999 17:10:33 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199902092210.RAA03421@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #10 TELECOM Digest Tue, 9 Feb 99 17:10:00 EST Volume 19 : Issue 10 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Year 2000 Glitch Meets People Problem: Possible Panic (Monty Solomon) Re: T-1 Cabling Between Demarc and Equipment Rack (Mel Beckman) Bad Email From MCI (James Bellaire) "Real" Telecommunication (John Kristoff) Terminal Emulation - Wyse, TI (Diller Ryan) Required: VOX File Player For DOS! (Peter Thomas) Winzip32.exe Missing From Computer (Trojanella Carter) What is a Prepaid Calling Card (David Vuong) Re: What Has Happened to AT&T/NOS Nightmare (Adam H. Kerman) M1 Tech Wages (Dan J. Rudiak) Advanced TSAPI/CSTA Development Help Urgently Needed (Anthony Uliano) Re: 609 in New Jersey to Split (Linc Madison) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 415-520-9905 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 9 Feb 1999 11:09:25 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Year 2000 Glitch Meets People Problem: Possible Panic http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/99/02/biztech/articles/09panic.html By BARNABY J. FEDER LOS ANGELES -- The early fears about the Year 2000 computer problem featured all sorts of machines driven haywire by their inability to read dates in the new year: computer networks that control power, water and phone systems freeze; railroads, airlines and trucks are idled as dispatch and traffic safety systems crash, and the financial universe, from stock markets to payroll systems to automated teller machines, goes on the blink. Jeff T. Green for The New York Times Larry Shook and his wife, Judy Laddon, of Spokane, Wash., stock their shelves in preparation for Year 2000 computer problems. That was before tens of billions of dollars were spent on computer repairs and upgrades. Now, a chorus of regulators, Year 2000 project managers and other authorities warn that Americans fearing the worst may end up inflicting more serious damage on themselves, their neighbors and the economy than anything the computers do. Planning experts say those scenarios could include bank runs, hoarding of food and gasoline, fires caused by misuse of newly acquired wood stoves and generators, and a rise in gun violence stemming from the surge in firearm sales to those fearing civil unrest. "As it becomes clear our national infrastructure will hold, overreaction becomes one of the biggest remaining problems," said John Koskinen, chairman of the President's Commission on Year 2000 Conversion. The challenge is to keep the computer repair work going and prudent preparations for disruptions on track while calming the most nervous citizens. While surveys show most Americans do not expect their lives to be severely disrupted, a significant minority say they are planning big investments of time or money to protect themselves. And the American Red Cross advises the public, as a precaution, to have enough food and other staples on hand to endure disruptions of several days to a week. At a meeting here today, the Year 2000 project committee of the National Retail Federation, endorsing the Red Cross recommendation, called for retailers and manufacturers to develop campaigns aimed at getting consumers to stock up gradually rather than trying to do so in the last few days of 1999. But the group declined to provide any examples of the kind of supplies it thought citizens should stock, fearing that being so specific would be too alarming. "Nobody wins if the public freaks out," said Cathy Hotka, the information technology specialist at the federation, a Washington trade group that includes virtually every major retailing company and trade association except Wal-Mart, the nation's largest retailer. "If the public reacts badly, you could take a potentially minor situation and make it a nightmare." Surveys show that almost half the nation's local governments have not started on Year 2000 repairs. Some sectors, like the banking industry, began addressing public fears months ago. The Federal Reserve, which supplies cash to the banking system, took the lead by announcing its intention to print $50 billion in extra currency -- lifting the total in circulation to $200 billion -- to assure consumers that banks will have plenty of paper for those who want to have extra cash on hand before the end of the year. Individual banks and industry associations have sponsored a wide variety of advertising suggesting that shifting money to the mattress leaves customers wide open to losing it to theft, fires and scam artists, not to mention the temptation to fritter it away on unnecessary luxuries. Some symbolic gestures have already been announced as well. Jane F. Garvey, head of the Federal Aviation Administration, has promised to be flying on New Year's Eve as a show of faith in the air traffic control system. British Airways announced that nearly all of its senior executives would also be aloft. Surveys show that almost half the nation's local governments have not started on Year 2000 repairs and contingency planning and that many small businesses lag just as badly. Multinational companies are bracing for disruptions in Russia and a number of Asian countries where Year 2000 work has been a low priority. Where the work has been done, at home or abroad, testing remains crucial because experience shows that computer system repairs inevitably introduce unanticipated glitches. Thus, President Clinton's only Year 2000 remarks in his State of the Union address homed in on the need to keep working to reduce the risks. Koskinen says complacency is still at least as big a concern as overreaction. "For some people, a certain amount of panic would help," Koskinen said. Pogo's Revenge Remembered The growing questions about behavior management highlight a paradox that computer programmers were among the first to realize: The Year 2000 computer problem, also known as the Millennium Bug and Y2K, probably should have been called something like the Pogo Syndrome after the old comic strip that observed "We have met the enemy and he is us." After all, humans seeded the Year 2000 problem into the technology landscape by using just two digits in programming dates, such as 99 for 1999, to save expensive memory in the 1960's and 1970's. Early on, computer workers began warning that some machines and software would malfunction because they would read 00 as 1900 instead of 2000 or as no date at all. But all too human foibles like sloth, greed and unfounded optimism that someone else -- or new intelligent machines -- would take care of the Year 2000 problem allowed it to grow into an expensive, potentially deadly global challenge. Now, as the race to minimize the machine risks enters its last months, the Year 2000 glitch may test people's trust in one another as much as the reliability of their machines. Do they believe that the repair work has been sound and that most of what is left to be done will be finished? Will workers have the skills and dedication to overcome whatever computer malfunctions do occur? Will citizens be neighborly, rather than selfish? Will political and business leaders step in effectively at the right moments? A tiny minority is already investing heavily in the belief that the answer to these questions is mostly no. Year 2000 alarmists, religious groups that see the computer problem as a pre-ordained divine punishment and survivalists fleeing for rural fortresses are producing measurable bounces in the sale of dehydrated foods, wood-burning stoves, home power generators and other goods at the fringes of the normal economy. Getting a Leg Up on Survivalists More telling though is the number of Americans saying they are considering moves that would clearly be unnecessary if the nation's computer networks end up being as reliable as regulators and industry leaders are projecting. Polls show that around 10 percent of citizens expect to withdraw most or all of their money from banks. A Gallup poll in December found that 17 percent expected to buy either a generator or a wood stove. YEAR 2000 CHECKLIST Efforts to prepare the public for possible disruptions from Year 2000 computer problems involve a delicate balance between encouraging prudence and preventing panic. Here are some of the steps that the American Red Cross is recommending: Check with makers of computer-controlled electronic equipment to see if the devices may be affected: alarm systems, thermostats, appliances, garage door openers, electronic locks and other equipment that might be controlled by an embedded computer chip. Stock disaster supplies to last several days to a week: nonperishable foods, stored water, and an ample supply of medications that you regularly use. As you would in preparing for a storm, have some extra cash or traveler's checks on hand in case transactions involving A.T.M. cards or credit cards cannot be processed. Withdraw money from your bank in small amounts well before Dec. 31. In case the power fails, plan to use alternative cooking devices. Have extra blankets, coats, hats and gloves to keep warm. Do not plan to use gas-fueled appliances, like an oven, to keep warm. Be prepared to relocate to a shelter for warmth and protection during a prolonged power outage or if local officials request or require that you leave your home for any other reason. Have plenty of flashlights and extra batteries on hand. As you would in preparation for a winter storm, keep your car's gas tank above half full. "It's reasonable to assume the population will get very nervous," said Douglass Carmichael, a Washington-based consultant who lectures community groups that public information on Year 2000 progress is too unreliable to justify putting off building substantial food stockpiles and other "safety nets." Dealing with mass nervousness is more art than science. Consultants and Government officials preach that the best way to calm nerves is to make sure that customers and consumers are inundated with the details of the work being done to reduce risks. And many of those organizing on the community level agree. "Statements have to be out there for people to jump on and research," said Margo King, one of a group of organizers who have helped make Boulder, Colo., a pacesetter in local preparedness planning. But John Steiner, Ms. King's husband and fellow organizer, adds that even with more information, many people will retain doubts that could prime them for panic. "On Vietnam, we listened to the people in charge for a long time and everything was going well, and then it wasn't," Steiner said. "The question is what is appropriate contingency planning if things don't turn out as we hope." While those like Steiner and Ms. King crave more details about repairs, most people are apparently not concerned enough to listen. Chase Manhattan Bank officials say consumer fears about the banking system leveled off at about 25 percent in the bank's monthly surveys in the last half of 1998, convincing them that it was too soon to publish extensive information about its Year 2000 work -- lest it be interpreted as an ominous sign rather than reassurance. One way to head off nervousness may be to encourage those most likely to be worried later this year to go ahead and acquire now the supplies that would make them comfortable. "There's sufficient information for people to say there's a substantial risk of disruption," said Charles Halpern, president of the Nathan E. Cummings Foundation, a New York-based foundation that has been providing funds for community preparedness efforts and lobbying other foundations to get involved in Year 2000 work. Halpern wants leaders from President Clinton on down to talk more often and more forcefully about Year 2000 risks. "Overreaction now is so much preferable to overreaction in November that it's a risk worth running," Halpern said. "People who want to lay in supplies of canned vegetables can do it now without disrupting anything." Community Groups Lead the Charge The drumbeat for early, locally based preparation to minimize risks and head off panic is coming from community groups, many of which have gone far beyond advocating stockpiling of necessities. Some suggestions have been ignored, as when Year 2000 organizers in Spokane, Wash., called for a "practice" day last month on which families were to do without such basics as electricity and running water to learn more about what they need to cope with worst-case scenarios. "I think we were the only people who did it," one of the Spokane organizers, Larry Shook, said of himself and his wife, Judy Laddon. Even other members of the organizing group ended up deciding they were "too busy," he said. But such organizers have been building links to local officials in some communities that could lead to broad preparedness efforts. Shook has been hired by Global Action Plan of Woodstock, N.Y., a nonprofit consultant to cities and towns on environmental and social issues, to write a manual on how cities can help citizens prepare for two-day, two-week and two-month disruptions. The manual, which is financed by the Cummings Foundation, is being developed in cooperation with the City of Portland, Ore., which hopes to distribute it to all the city's households this spring. It will also be available on the World Wide Web. Federal authorities are cautiously encouraging community groups like those in Spokane and Boulder, although they fear some of them may end up creating more alarm than preparation. Many have become distribution channels for planning materials such as those developed by the Red Cross and the Federal Emergency Management Agency, which expects to publish by the end of this month new advice tailored to the Year 2000 problem rather than to natural disasters. "People ultimately have a lot of common sense, so the real goal is to give them all the information we have," Koskinen said. Copyright 1999 The New York Times Company ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Feb 1999 00:13:37 -0800 From: Mel Beckman Subject: Re: T-1 Cabling Between Demarc and Equipment Rack On 5 Feb 1999 16:14:50 GMT, Steve Pinkston said: >> The Network Interface Unit that the telco provides strips >> off the driving current (about 140 volts) that carried the signal to >> your office. > The current you speak of is the simplex current, which has nothing > to do with the T1 signal directly, but is used to power the repeaters > in the line, and sometimes the NIU, as well. It used to also be used > to power the CSU, but that is rare these days. It's fantastic to have a Kentrox person with Steve's background contributing! There is so much black magic in T1 installation that you can never have too much good advice. When Steve talked about the equalization of a hard loop on the end of an extended demarc, I slapped my forehead. Dang! This is just the sort of test I do all the time, and I've seen the weird behavior Steve describes (errors disappearing) but could never understand it. That one tip is worth a free lunch! ;) Regarding the 140v phantom power, Steve is, of course, correct. My explanation was poorly worded. What I meant was that the repeaters in the span use the 140V phantom power to regenerate and re-drive the signal, but that the NIU, which may use this power to energize it's circuitry, doesn't regen the signal on true T1s. HDSL is a different animal, since the two-wire HDSL encoding must be converted to ordinary T1 encoding, which requires regeneration. However, even in HDSL NIUs I find that the signal level is much lower than the output of a repeater. (There are 4-wire HDSL circuits, which usually serve a shelf of four NIUs, and in that case I'm pretty sure that the HDSL NIU doesn't have enough available power to drive four full T1s). One last tidbit: the 140V phantom power on the wires leading to the NIU can zap you (and at 140 mA, it's enough to kill you). That's why hicaps have red insulated bridge clips -- they're warning you to stay clear. Mel Beckman ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 09 Feb 1999 09:32:55 -0500 From: James Bellaire Subject: Bad Email from MCI It looks like MCI has decided to break privacy as well. I just received an announcement from them about some change in their website, with 21 addresses on the TO line instead of using the BCC line. The email was sent from and contains the note: ****************************************************************** NOTE: Responses to this e-mail will not be answered. Please send inquiries via www.mci.com/service ****************************************************************** At least there were only 20 other customers on the TO line - this could have been worse. James [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But there were actually many such 'clusters' with 20-21 names on each. So your group of 21 knows about each other, the next group of 21 knows about each other, etc. Actually, I would not be too harsh on them; their problem is more one of ignorance than malicious intent. I get messages like that a lot, where everyone is loaded into the 'to:' line and you have to page through screen after screen of names before you get to the real intent of the email. They simply do not understand or know any better. In this Digest, readers via the mailing list will note that the Digest is 'mailed' to one person only: my name is in the 'to:' line; everyone else is in the 'bcc:' line. What I actually do is mail it to myself and the bcc: is to an alias which when it is triggered tells sendmail to :include: a carefully concealed script in a directory of mine at a site somewhere which has a few thousand email addresses in it. The stream comes along, looks in one of my directories and is told where to go look for the file in question. Don't get any smart ideas; the delivery of the stream is to a file of mine which is only read/writeable by user and group not by others. I am the user and the group consists of me, a couple aliases for Digest administration purposes and 'nobody', which is sendmail's name in case you did not know it. You did not think sendmail runs as root around here did you? It gets this file and sits there plodding along loading the lines of that file (an email address per line) until it gets through. Then it looks at me as a 'trusted user' (in unix/sendmail parlance) and allows me to set -f so the mailing actually appears to come from 'editor@telecom-digest.org'. The whole thing is then dropped in the mailq and off it goes. All the above is an automated script of course; I don't actually sit here and do these steps one by one. I just use the techniques any professional and effecient spammer would use. But I get mail from users at AO-Hell where I swear, the guy must have sat there all afternoon typing all the names in one after another in the 'to' line. And several years ago, I remember having problems with MCI Mail and this Digest of the very same nature as Jim describes in his note: I have a couple hundred users of MCI Mail on my mail list here. When MCI would get its single copy of the Digest and the list of names in the bcc: to whom it should distribute the mail, it would immediatly break up the list in little groups of twenty or so names each, pack them all in the 'to' line and send it out. Then if a *single* name in the newly (by them) created 'to' line was incorrect, they would bounce the entire mailing to those twenty names back to me without saying *which email address was the bad one* ... so nineteen good users did not get their copy of the Digest and I had no idea which name to remove. Then maybe the next issue to hit their gateway, they would regroup the names in other clusters of twenty, causing even more confusion. Finally for a while I had to take all MCI Mail readers and send them individual pieces of test mail with a code buried in the subject line so I could get individual items of bounced mail back and figure out who to remove. No Jim, I would say 'privacy violation' means the wholesale collec- tion and redistribution of email addresses for some kind of profit motive. I would not use the term to describe the handling of mail by some incompetent goofus running a mailing list or whatever. I put those in the same category as the people who try to dial a phone number, get the shakes and dial the wrong number by accident and then click off without so much as an apology or acknowlegement that they got a wrong number. An invasion of privacy? Yeah, but what would the world be like without them? PAT] ------------------------------ From: John Kristoff Subject: "Real" Telecommunication Date: Tue, 9 Feb 1999 10:44:21 -0600 Organization: Posted via RemarQ, http://www.remarQ.com - Discussions here! oprempj@mail.ustrust.com wrote in message ... > Think about this: in order to "improve" or upgrade my local area network > I must change my NIC, modify my applications, change my media type, swap > out hubs, routers, switches, etc .... This is stupid. I've often lamented over the lack of being able to simply plug in a network connection and it just works. However, there is an architec- tural difference between data networks and legacy telecommunications. This difference creates a big trade-off. The trade-off can be debated to the world's end, but just to point it out ... Traditional circuit-switched networks have all the intelligence built into the network so all the end devices can remain unchanged. I could keep my analog phone on my desk for years. To make improvements in the network, they are all done without having to visit the existing end user. Cellular phones are a good example. Packet switching however puts the burden at the end nodes. To improve the intelligence of this network, you have to change your end nodes. In addition, many of the points you made also have to do with bandwidth requirements. My bandwidth requirements for a voice call has never changed. The same cannot be said of data networking. Dialing up to a BBS 10 years ago generally required a lot less bandwidth than browsing the web today. 64Kbps isn't enough, 1Mbps isn't, 10Mbps isn't, 100Mbps isn't and so on. As the end application changes, more and more bandwidth all the way out to the end user increases, causing the network to change much more rapidly than we might like. John ------------------------------ From: dryan@slonet.org (Diller Ryan) Subject: Terminal Emulation - Wyse, TI Organization: SLONET Regional Information Access Date: Mon, 08 Feb 1999 23:06:51 GMT Is anyone aware of a terminal emulation package that runs under Linux and emulates a Wyse 60 or Texas Instrunents 924? Shareware or commercial; I'm limited to the above terminals; Thanks for any pointers, Diller ------------------------------ From: see-my-sig-for-real-e-mail-addy@nospam.demon.co.uk (Peter Thomas) Subject: Required: VOX File Player For DOS! Date: Tue, 09 Feb 1999 19:06:05 GMT The company I work for (a data capture company, which works with telephone audio responses) is in desparate need of a program for MS-DOS. Does anyone know of a program that can play .VOX files and can run with our data-entry applications (ie: stay in the background - TSR)? I've taken a web search, and found one program, which, alas is for Windows specific PCs only. If anyone does know of such a program for DOS, whether it be commercial, shareware or freeware, please let me know! Or, on the other hand, if you're a programmer, and can write such a program for us, do get in touch! Thanks a lot. Peter Thomas pete [at] prodge.demon.co.uk ------------------------------ From: Trojanella Carter Subject: Winzip32.exe Missing From Computer Date: Mon, 8 Feb 1999 22:08:58 -0800 Organization: gte.net Hi, I'm have Windows 98 completely installed on my system. In fact it came with it already along with the Y2K upgrades. But I'm having problems using files I've downloaded from the Internet. My system keep telling me that it cannot locate Winzip32.exe. If you have any advice it would be very helpful and very much appreciated. Thanks. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: winzip32.exe is a pretty common program and I am sure someone reading this will send you a copy, assuming there is none on your machine for some reason. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 09 Feb 1999 12:02:05 -0800 From: David Vuong Subject: What is a Prepaid Calling Card? I would like to know what is a prepaid calling card and how is it works. Thank you, Diana [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: A prepaid calling card is like a regular calling card, where calls you make are billed to a third number with one difference: You deposit a sum of money in advance with telco (or the card issuer if not the same) so they do not have to give you credit or trust that you will pay them when the bill comes due. In return for you loaning them money for their cash 'float' which may not have to be paid back by them in the form of services rendered for a long time, the card issuer expresses his appreciation for your advance payment by charging you sometimes twice as much per minute for a call as he does his customers with credit accounts and in many cases he adds on a service charge as well. Prepaid calling cards are BAD NEWS unless your credit is so bad that not a single telco anywhere (and traditionally they have very loose and liberal credit policies) will give you an account without money up front. Oh, I have heard all the excuses: I travel a lot and do not have a place to get bills in the mail; I use pay phones a lot and do not want to look around trying to get change for the coin box; I want my calls to be private with no audit trail of where I called. Only the last one gets any respect from me, and even then, if you do not know how to confuse the issue of where you called and from where and etc, then you are a very ill-equipped traveler indeed. The phone company would not have created loop arounds, call forwarding to and from cell phones and voicemail if they did not want travelers to benefit from them. As for a place to get mail, I would make an effort to find a mail drop somewhere where the proprietor minds his own business and expects you to do the same. For the most part, I think regular use of a cell phone turns out less expensive than most or all prepaid calling cards and is certainly more convenient. This reminds me of American Express Traveler's Cheques and money orders. Amex has stated in the past they have a float of about two million dollars per day based on Traveler's Cheques purchased but not yet redeemed. Two million per day! I wish someone would loan me a million dollars for a couple hours ... well that might be cutting things close, but let's say a day or two; I would return it with interest and have gobs of cash for myself as well. I suspect the telcos have some money laying around on prepaid calling cards also. Now in fact, cash is anonymous and once it is gone, its gone. With traveler's checks and money orders, in theory they are replaceable with Amex insuring their safety. But you can obtain the same results by using a cash card at an ATM machine, at least until January 1, 2000, taking only what you need each time. PAT] ------------------------------ From: ahk@chinet.chinet.com (Adam H. Kerman) Subject: Re: What Has Happened to AT&T/NOS Nightmare Date: 8 Feb 1999 13:26:07 -0600 Organization: chinet In article , Brian Vita wrote: > At this time, the likely contender for our LD service appears to be > Qwest Communications. I would be interested in hearing any feedback > that users may have about them. Based on a recommendation by Mark Cuccia (that calls to directory assistance are still routed to the directory assistance bureaus of the actual incumbent local exchange carrier for an area code), I tried to sign up for an account two months ago. As far as I can tell, the sales lady destroyed all evidence of my order and nothing was processed. I should beg to become a customer? Screw that. ------------------------------ From: Dan J. Rudiak Subject: M1 Tech Wages Date: Tue, 8 Feb 1999 12:01:06 -0700 Organization: Calgary Tri-West Soccer Hello All, After ten years in Tech Support at Nortel, I find myself in the job market. I have been afforded an opportunity with a local independent dealer to start up the M1 side of the business, pretty much writing my own ticket. Based on the market out there, what should I be pricing that ticket at? Thanks! Dan J. Rudiak ------------------------------ From: Anthony Uliano Subject: Advanced TSAPI/CSTA Development Help Urgently Needed Date: 8 Feb 1999 03:19:22 GMT Organization: EarthLink Network, Inc. We are developing a TSAPI/CSTA telephony server that interfaces with SAP R/3, and need urgent help. We are located in Richmond, VA, and are willing to work out great financial arrangements for the right developer. If you have practical experience with TSAPI/CSTA or a major CTI (Callpath, Genesys, etc.) as a developer, please drop me a note as soon as possible. Please use my auliano@amconsulting.com e-mail address. Thanks. Regards, Anthony Uliano auliano@amconsulting.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 04 Feb 1999 12:06:45 -0800 From: Telecom@ns2.downtown.com (Linc Madison) Subject: Re: 609 in New Jersey to Split Organization: LincMad Consulting In article , Carl Moore wrote: > KYW news-radio reports today that splitting 609 geographically has > been approved. The new area code, not yet known, will go to the > western part (Camden etc., near Philadelphia), and 609 will remain > in the eastern part, including Atlantic City. I didn't catch where > Trenton, the state capital, will end up. 609 will remain in Trenton, most of Burlington County, Atlantic City, and Cape May. The new area code will go to Camden, Cherry Hill, and Vineland. ** Do not send me unsolicited commercial e-mail spam of any kind ** Linc Madison * San Francisco, California * Telecom@LincMad-com URL:< http://www.lincmad.com > * North American Area Codes & Splits >> NOTE: if you autoreply, you must delete the "NOSPAM" << ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #10 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Feb 12 13:38:15 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id NAA11130; Fri, 12 Feb 1999 13:38:15 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1999 13:38:15 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199902121838.NAA11130@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #11 TELECOM Digest Fri, 12 Feb 99 13:38:00 EST Volume 19 : Issue 11 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson You Call, You Pay (Monty Solomon) Book Review: "Fighting Computer Crime", Donn B. Parker (Rob Slade) Book Review: "1999 Canadian Internet Handbook" (Rob Slade) Validating the Format of an International Telephone Number (Robert Bonomi) Early Y2K Casualty? (John N. Riggins) Re: Required: VOX File Player For DOS! (James Gifford) Re: Winzip32.exe Missing From Computer (David Clayton) Re: Winzip32.exe Missing From Computer (Al Varney) Re: Winzip32.exe Missing From Computer (Jeffrey M. Vinocur) Re: What is a Prepaid Calling Card? (Anthony Argyriou) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 415-520-9905 Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Reply-To: Monty Solomon From: "Monty Solomon" Subject: You Call, You Pay Date: Wed, 10 Feb 1999 15:29:13 -0500 http://www.wired.com/news/print_version/business/story/17843.html You Call, You Pay Reuters Federal telephone regulators are preparing to let wireless carriers charge people for making calls to cellular and PCS phones, hoping to boost competition with land-based local phone networks. Although the use of mobile phones has risen dramatically, few people have fully replaced their land lines with cellular or PCS units -- in part because under current rules, the phone owner pays both for calls made and calls received. Mobile phone use in the United States lags behind Europe. But Federal Communications Commission Chairman William Kennard said Tuesday that he had studied so-called 'calling party pays' system in use in Europe and was ready to move forward with a similar system for the United States. "It's time for us to find a way to implement a calling party pays system in this country," Kennard said in a speech at the Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association's annual conference in New Orleans. "Only 5 percent of all calls are now made on mobile phones. I think that number would increase dramatically with a calling party pays system." The FCC is likely to issue proposed rules in May or June for allowing wireless carriers to implement calling party pays systems, an FCC staff person said. However, two major issues are yet to be resolved, the staffer added. First, the agency needs to determine what notice a person calling a mobile phone customer would receive about the charges they are about to incur. Unlike calling another land-based number, which usually is covered by a customer's flat rate monthly charge, calling a wireless phone user could result in charges ranging anywhere from 10 cents to US$1 per minute. Also to be determined is how billing and collection will be structured for calling party pays. Some wireless carriers want the FCC to require local phone companies to do billing and collection for calling party pays, but others are willing to rely on third-party billing companies. "It's going to be a big proceeding, a difficult proceeding," the FCC staffer said. Copyright 1994-99 Wired Digital Inc. All rights reserved. ------------------------------ From: Rob Slade Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1999 10:19:41 -0800 Subject: Book Review: "Fighting Computer Crime", Donn B. Parker Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca BKFICMCR.RVW 981106 "Fighting Computer Crime", Donn B. Parker, 1998, 0-471-16378-3, U$34.99/C$49.50 %A Donn B. Parker dparker@sric.sri.com %C 5353 Dundas Street West, 4th Floor, Etobicoke, ON M9B 6H8 %D 1998 %G 0-471-16378-3 %I John Wiley & Sons, Inc. %O U$34.99/C$49.50 416-236-4433 fax: 416-236-4448 rlangloi@wiley.com %P 512 p. %T "Fighting Computer Crime: A New Framework for Protecting Information" Parker feels that too much of the data security field concentrates on technical answers to the problems of reliability, integrity, and availability of data, and doesn't pay sufficient attention to those people who are deliberately out to read, steal, or ruin your information and systems. Personally, I find it rather ironic that he defines "crimoids," in chapter one, as minor events promoted to much higher significance by the media, and public misperceptions. In the non-specialist realm, more people spend more time worrying about "hackers" than ever back up their drives. (I am reminded of a friend; an intelligent and educated person who started his career programming large and sophisticated information systems and who has now risen to the executive ranks; who has for years refused to get a modem for his home computer. In spite of his frequently expressed desire for access to the Internet, and my repeated assurances that with his current computer and operating system there is no hidden danger, he remains convinced that the mere attachment of a modem to his machine will allow someone to break into his computer and damage it.) Who, then, is this book written for? The author does not say, but what he does say in the preface seems to indicate that he is not writing for those whose business cards make reference to security. (I have neither argument nor inclination to dispute Parker's assertion that security "professionals" do not really deserve the designation.) But if this text is aimed at the general public, chapter one's emphasis on the dangers and lack of protection would seem more inclined to incite further panic, rather than a realistic and measured response. Chapter two is an interesting and useful examination of an often unasked question in the field: what is the nature of the information we are supposedly securing? There are valuable side points, such as both the danger and the opportunity in the security arena presented by the Year 2000 problem. At the same time, I have to note that an erroneous description of the Cascade virus is an example of Parker's asserting points that are just beyond the available facts, and, for me anyway, has an unfortunate effect on the trustworthiness of the work as a whole. The review of cybercrime, in chapter three, has more reference to journalism and other forms of fiction than to reality, but I have to agree with everything said there. Computer misuse and abuse is discussed in chapter four. (As if to make up for chapter two, the section on viruses is very good.) Network misuse is covered in chapter five, and although I still have trouble believing in the reality of salami attacks (Parker's sole example is said to have resulted in a conviction, but no citation is given) I am a bit more willing to accept his broader definition. Chapter six is extremely strong in portraying a realistic and broadly based analysis of characteristics of computer criminals. A similarly informed and balanced approach distinguishes chapter seven, regarding hacker culture, but there is also a universally condemnatory tone that is not wholly justified by the facts as presented. Chapter eight is a very helpful first step for those wanting to deal in the art of computer security. Chapter nine reviews the deficiencies in most current security practices, noting overprotection in some areas while ignoring loopholes in others, and a flowery jargon that serves mostly to hide the fact that security people just don't feel very comfortable with what is going on. However, Parker's new model of security, in chapter ten, while it is very clear and useful, does not extend recent work in, say, electronic commerce. On the one hand, this congruence does support the model, but on the other, one can't really say it is too novel. The popular, but demonstrably incomplete, risk assessment study is de-emphasized in favour of a more difficult, but more realistic, baseline security standard in chapter eleven. Details on how to conduct such a study are very helpfully given in chapter twelve, although the benchmark chart is going to be much harder to come by than is made clear in the text. Chapter thirteen provides a practical and useful set of criteria for determining control objectives. A number of security tactics are detailed in chapter fourteen. Chapter fifteen takes the larger strategic view. (I was delighted to see the inclusion of a section on corporate ethics in this chapter. Recently I contracted to produce a security document for an educational institution, and was told to take the section on ethics out.) Management of security, in chapter sixteen, includes provisions for training, policy, and other factors. Chapter seventeen finishes off with a look to the future. The material, while thought- provoking, is possibly more likely to generate arguments than solutions. Parker's stance on security in general definitely puts him in the camp of the professional paranoids. However, absent the first and last chapters, there is a lot of good, solid knowledge here to help educate any security practitioner. The material in the second half of the book is just as valuable to the security process as the more technical works such as "Practical UNIX and Internet Security" (cf. BKPRUISC.RVW) by Spafford and Garfinkel, albeit in quite a different way. An informed security policy is every bit as important as a good set of "access" controls. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1998 BKFICMCR.RVW 981106 rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@sprint.ca robertslade@usa.net p1@canada.com Find virus, book info http://victoria.tc.ca/techrev/rms.htm Mirrored at http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade/rms.htm Linked to bookstore at http://www97.pair.com/robslade/ Robert Slade's Guide to Computer Viruses, 0-387-94663-2 (800-SPRINGER) ------------------------------ From: Rob Slade Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User Date: Thu, 11 Feb 1999 08:33:10 -0800 Subject: Book Review: "1999 Canadian Internet Handbook" Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca BKCANINT.RVW 990109 "1999 Canadian Internet Handbook", Jim Carroll/Rick Broadhead, 1998, 0-13-974940-3 ISSN 1204-9034, C$27.95 %A Jim Carroll jcarroll@jimcarroll.com www.jimcarroll.com %A Rick Broadhead rickb@sympatico.ca www.rickbroadhead.com %C Scarborough, Ontario %D 1998 %G 0-13-974940-3 ISSN 1204-9034 %I Prentice Hall Canada %O C$27.95 800-576-3800 416-293-3621 www.phcanada.com %P 376 p. + CD-ROM %T "1999 Canadian Internet Handbook" Unlike the first five editions of this book, there is no tutorial or introductory material to help you get onto the net. This is, therefore, a fairly completely new book from those that have gone before, and addresses a new and different audience. In fact, it may be said to be four new books, since the structure divides the book into four quite significantly differing topics. Part one shows this departure from tradition by assuming not only that you are on the net, but that you have your own Web site, and need to evaluate it's effectiveness. Chapter one provides a checklist of some technical questions and tools you can use to review your own site. The points are fairly standard, but important. One topic which does not get much mention is a focus on the objective and aim of your site. Promotion is the aim of chapter two, and while it lists a number of tricks to get you listed favorably in search engines, there is no discussion of the many other ways you can use to net to get the word out. (No, I am *not* talking about spam. Sheesh.) A number of Webmasters are asked for advice in chapter three. The resulting deluge of points has interesting bits, and is generally well chosen, although it may look a bit chaotic. Part two deals with some security topics. Chapter four, on malicious software, seems to be somewhat disjointed. While I ultimately agreed with most of the specific material, the overall impression seemed a bit misleading, and I found few points which would be helpful in protecting the average computer user. Backup is important, of course, but chapter five looks at some tools for a very specific backup problem, that of copying your Web site itself. Privacy concerns expressed in chapter six may be legitimate, but are definitely inflated. Again, the material is not terribly helpful, for example, recommending the use of outside programs for cookie management without explaining the simple browser configuration steps that can be taken to eliminate the problem. Security is a complicated subject, and the coverage of system cracking in chapter seven is just too simplistic. Part three looks at making your net time more productive. Chapter eight is a grab bag of random tips. An overview of methods for increasing both real and apparent access speed is given in chapter nine. Chapter ten looks at some tools for managing mail and Web pages. Chapter eleven reviews remote access software and videoconferencing. Query management tools for a variety of Web search engines and directories are described in chapter twelve. Chapter thirteen looks at personalizable news services. Part four comes full circle in that it talks about enhancing the Web site that you assessed in part one. Chapter fourteen introduces e-commerce programs. Audio and video additions are discussed in chapter fifteen. A concluding chapter looks at the future of the net by extension from the popularity of the Linux operating system. From Alexander Graham Bell to Marshall McLuhan to X.25 to archie, Canadians have been in the forefront of communications technology. The question is, what makes this a specifically Canadian Internet book. The answer, unfortunately, seems to lie solely in the citizenship of the authors. Is it at least a handbook? Well, generally a handbook is noted either for completeness of coverage of a field, or small size and cogent facts. This book does not cover the Internet in scope, concentrating almost completely on the Web, rather than the net, and not even exhausting that. Nor is it an essential minimum of information. It doesn't even have much focus. There is good and useful information contained in the book. It is, however, very difficult to find a specific audience that would benefit from it. I note the assignment of an ISSN (International Standard Serial Number) to it: perhaps one should best consider this to be the latest issue of a magazine, presenting information that may be of interest, but in no particular arrangement. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1994, 1999 BKCANINT.RVW 990109 rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@sprint.ca robertslade@usa.net p1@canada.com Find virus, book info http://victoria.tc.ca/techrev/rms.htm Mirrored at http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade/rms.htm Linked to bookstore at http://www97.pair.com/robslade/ Robert Slade's Guide to Computer Viruses, 0-387-94663-2 (800-SPRINGER) ------------------------------ From: Robert Bonomi Subject: Validating the Format of an International Telephone Number Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1999 09:29:16 -0600 Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com I'm writing some software for, in-house use, that has to cope with international (full world-wide) telephone numbers. There is an issue of an unacceptly high rate of various kinds of data-entry error on non-NANP numbers -- mostly because the people doing data-entry don't know what all the 'foreign' numbers are "supposed" to look like. I've located material which lets me extract the 'country code" part -- now I just need to determine if the _rest_ is a valid number, IN THE CONTEXT of that country code. for instance: "state code" required -- if 1st digit is 1 thru 5, it's one digit long if 1st digit is 6 thru 8, it's two digits if 1st digit is 9, and second digit is 0 thru 6, it's 3 digits if second digit is 7 or 8, it's 4 digits second digit of 9 is not used first digit of '0' is unused 'city code' follows -- if 1st digit is 1 thru 8, it's two digits if 1st digit is 9, and 2nd digit is 0-7, it's three digits 2nd digit is 8, it's 4 digits 2nd digit of 9 is unused first digit of '0' is unused. 'local number' follows -- if 1st digit is 5 thru 9, it's 4 digits if 1st digit is 3 or 4, it's 5 digits if 1st digit is 2, it's 6 digits Is there a compendium of this kind of information,anywhere, for the WHOLE WORLD ?? Or, failing that, for anywhere? Most immediate need is Mexico (non-NANP), South America (all), various W. Europe, anc Central America. NOTE: I'm NOT trying to do a 'full' verify of the number -- to wit, for NANP, I just check number of digits, and make sure 1st one and 4th one are not '0' or '1'. -- whether the 'area code', or 'exchange prefix' (within *that* area-code, that is) is actually valid/in-use, I _don't_ worry about. robert bonomi @ .com ------------------------------ From: John N. Riggins Subject: Early Y2K Casualty? Date: Thu, 11 Feb 1999 22:42:47 -0600 Organization: Posted via RemarQ, http://www.remarQ.com - Discussions here! From the "Nashville Tennessean", February 9, 1999: "Y2K bug closes local call center" "A Nashville call center is one of the area's earliest casualties of the year 2000 technology bug, saying it will shut its doors Sunday after 15 years of operation, in part because a fix was too costly. "Bernard C. Harris Publishing Company, a White Plains, N.Y.-based alumni directory company, announced the shutdown of its regional call center on West End Avenue (Nashville, TN) in December ... 'We're on some fairly old technology here, and it's not Y2K compliant, nor will it be Y2K compliant. Our lease also expires at the end of February, and although our landlord has been very accommodating, they just can't extend it any more.' said Nashville call center manager Paul McCann. "He noted that cost projections for new equipment coupled with a move range from $1 million to $2 million." The article goes on to say that other regional call centers in Austin, Texas and Norfolk, Virginia will probably not be similarly affected. Obviously Y2K was not the only consideration leading to the closing but it appears to have been a major factor in the final decision. Anyone aware of any other examples of *actual* adverse effects due to the Y2K issue? -== JNR ==- [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: So a telemarketer goes out of business due to the Y2K bug ... isn't that a pity! I'll cry about it some other time maybe. I would say there is one real benefit we have overlooked; the fact that many shoestring operations which have major sources of annoyance in our lives for years now such as the dinner-hour callers trying to sell us something and the spammers who fill our email boxes with load of get-rich-quick schemes every day may find it too expensive to continue operations with the cost and work involved in upgrading their systems. PAT] ------------------------------ From: James Gifford Reply-To: gifford@ns.net Organization: Heinlein Central | CT Magazine Subject: Re: Required: VOX File Player For DOS! Date: Thu, 11 Feb 1999 22:22:26 GMT Peter Thomas wrote: > The company I work for (a data capture company, which works with > telephone audio responses) is in desparate need of a program for > MS-DOS. > Does anyone know of a program that can play .VOX files and can run > with our data-entry applications (ie: stay in the background - TSR)? Maybe if you explain the need a little more, someone here can help. I can't imagine a situation where you'd need a TSR .VOX player. Most of the audio editing apps have moved to Windows, but nearly all had DOS versions that may still be available. CoolEdit is one, I'm pretty sure. Another is Audio Toolbox, which I'm pretty sure is obsolete -- I have an unopened DOS version here on the shelf, but I don't know if it will do the sort of TSR job you need done. Dialogic may have some utility packages that support simple .VOX playing. Hope that is some help. | James Gifford | | Associate Editor, Computer Telephony Magazine | | = Speaking only for myself in this case = | ------------------------------ From: dcstar@acslink.aone.net.au (David Clayton) Subject: Re: Winzip32.exe Missing From Computer Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1999 07:11:31 GMT Organization: Customer of OzEmail/Access One Pty Ltd, Melbourne, Australia Reply-To: dcstar@acslink.aone.net.au Trojanella Carter contributed the following: > I'm have Windows 98 completely installed on my system. In fact it came > with it already along with the Y2K upgrades. But I'm having problems > using files I've downloaded from the Internet. My system keep telling > me that it cannot locate Winzip32.exe. If you have any advice it would > be very helpful and very much appreciated. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: winzip32.exe is a pretty common program > and I am sure someone reading this will send you a copy, assuming > there is none on your machine for some reason. PAT] Considering Winzip is shareware that should be paid for, this is probably not a good idea. There are many freeware zip programs about for Windows, "Enzip" springs to mind as a good one. Regards, David Clayton, e-mail: dcstar@acslink.aone.net.au Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. Still think the 20th century ends after 1999? Check this URL: http://riemann.usno.navy.mil/AA/faq/docs/faq2.html [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Actually, people who distribute shareware are usually happy to have assistance in distributing it. It is not that it should not be distributed, but rather, that the new user (of that shareware) should also make the suggested payment to the author. This Digest is an example of 'shareware' in that sense. I am more than happy to see people distribute it entirely or for that matter, cut and paste individual articles, etc to other places where there can be some benefit. I only ask that those who benefit make some token contribution to assist me. I think most shareware authors feel the same way. By all means, if our earlier correspondent gets a copy of winzip32.exe somewhere, all the licensing requirements which go with it should be obeyed. PAT] ------------------------------ From: varney@ihgp2.ih.lucent.com (Al Varney) Subject: Re: Winzip32.exe Missing From Computer Date: 12 Feb 1999 14:49:20 GMT Organization: Lucent Technologies, Naperville, IL Reply-To: varney@lucent.com In article , Trojanella Carter wrote: >.... My system keep telling me that it cannot locate Winzip32.exe. If > you have any advice it would be very helpful and very much appreciated. WINZIP is a commercial product of Nico Mak Computing, not part of "Windows 98". See . Al Varney ------------------------------ From: jmv16@cornell.edu (Jeffrey M. Vinocur) Subject: Re: Winzip32.exe Missing From Computer Date: Thu, 11 Feb 1999 17:10:20 -0500 Organization: Cornell University Look for it at http://www.winzip.com/ One of the few programs you don't need winzip to get at (otherwise it'd be a bit of a bootstrapping problem). Jeff Vinocur jmv16@cornell.edu ------------------------------ From: anthony@alphageo.com (Anthony Argyriou) Subject: Re: What is a Prepaid Calling Card? Date: Thu, 11 Feb 1999 01:52:47 GMT Organization: Alpha Geotechnical Reply-To: anthony@alphageo.com TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to David Vuong : > Oh, I have heard all the excuses: I travel a lot and do not have a > place to get bills in the mail; I use pay phones a lot and do not > want to look around trying to get change for the coin box; I want > my calls to be private with no audit trail of where I called. Only > the last one gets any respect from me, and even then, if you do not > know how to confuse the issue of where you called and from where and > etc, then you are a very ill-equipped traveler indeed. The privacy excuse also requires some work to keep up - apparently the FBI tracked Timothy McVeigh through a prepaid calling card he kept refilling. See the latest issue of 2600 for details. Of course, if he had just kept buying new ones at local liquor stores, they would not have been able to do this. Anthony Argyriou ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #11 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Feb 12 14:50:24 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id OAA14183; Fri, 12 Feb 1999 14:50:24 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1999 14:50:24 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199902121950.OAA14183@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #12 TELECOM Digest Fri, 12 Feb 99 14:50:00 EST Volume 19 : Issue 12 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Book Review: "Intrusion Detection", Terry Escamilla (Rob Slade) Lawsuits Challenge Search Engines' Practice of 'Selling' (Monty Solomon) Zero-Knowledge: Nothing Personal (Monty Solomon) Mystery Robocaller and the TCPA (Mark W. Schumann) Re: Bell Canada Replaces Operator Comments (Lou Jahn) What Has Happened to AT&T/NOS Nightmare - Revisited (Brian Vita) Re: What is a Prepaid Calling Card? (Daryl R. Gibson) DS3 Signalling (Baris Aksoy) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 415-520-9905 Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Rob Slade Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1999 08:33:14 -0800 Subject: Book Review: "Intrusion Detection", Terry Escamilla Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca BKINTRDT.RVW 990108 "Intrusion Detection", Terry Escamilla, 1998, 0-471-29000-9, U$39.99/C$56.50 %A Terry Escamilla %C 5353 Dundas Street West, 4th Floor, Etobicoke, ON M9B 6H8 %D 1998 %G 0-471-29000-9 %I John Wiley & Sons, Inc. %O U$39.99/C$56.50 416-236-4433 fax: 416-236-4448 rlangloi@wiley.com %P 348 p. %T "Intrusion Detection: Network Security Beyond the Firewall" Maybe my perception is skewed from having been involved with physical security as well as the computer kind, but I see intrusion detection as being part of security. There is no security system that cannot be penetrated or bypassed, and so detection is, in my view, simply a fact of security life. Isn't that what auditing, one of the main pillars of data security, all about? So I find the attempt to sell the idea of intrusion detection somewhat redundant. Then there is the emphasis on reviewing commercial Intrusion Detection Systems (IDS). Part one looks at what happens before intrusion detection: the traditional role and model of computer security. Chapter one provides a brief, but reasonably sound, overview of this classic paradigm, concentrating on defining most of the theoretical terms used. Some identification and authentication details from both UNIX and Windows NT start our chapter two, which then meanders through a few examples of password cracking, and finally ends with a look at ticket granting systems and other authentication improvements. A similar look at access control is provided by chapter three. Given the complexity of networking and network security, the number of topics covered in chapter four is unsurprising. Part two looks at intrusion detection by extending the traditional security design. Chapter five is fairly pivotal, as evidenced by the title "Intrusion Detection and Why You Need It." The "why" part comes first, with a rather weak example showing that security systems can have loopholes if you don't configure or program everything properly. Intrusion detection then seems to be defined as the usual game of find vulnerability-fix-repeat, only in automated form. A number of possible attacks are mentioned in chapter six, and then a promotion of the addition of an IDS layer to a system, without a corresponding reiteration of the warning, from chapter four, that layers in a system increase the possibility of loopholes. I was rather astonished that SATAN [Security Administrator's Tool for Analyzing Networks] was not included with the vulnerability scanners mentioned in chapter seven. Two more sophisticated products are reviewed in chapter eight. Chapter nine looks at the possibility of catching intruders by traffic analysis, although "catch" seems to be too strong a term to use here. Since most of the foregoing deals with UNIX, chapter ten looks at similar products for NT, although most of the material seems to concentrate on NT's own audit logs. Part three looks at dealing with an intrusion once you have detected it. Chapter eleven recommends being prepared well, detecting early, analyzing thoroughly, and deciding judiciously. In one useful piece of advice, it recommends against an attack on a system you may think is hitting on yours. Chapter twelve is a quick summary of the book. As the author admits, in the final chapter, that intrusion detection systems are not the final word in computer security, I am inescapably reminded of the battles in the antiviral field over the relative strengths of scanners, activity monitors, and change detection systems. What works best? A combination approach, of course. The price of a secure system is more budget for administration time and tools. This book does not present any radically new approach or technique for system security. In fact, with the emphasis on proprietary commercial products, the work will date quite quickly. For those who are looking to add an automated IDS to their current network, the volume could act as a kind of incomplete buyer's guide. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1999 BKINTRDT.RVW 990108 rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@sprint.ca robertslade@usa.net p1@canada.com Find virus, book info http://victoria.tc.ca/techrev/rms.htm Mirrored at http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade/rms.htm Linked to bookstore at http://www97.pair.com/robslade/ Robert Slade's Guide to Computer Viruses, 0-387-94663-2 (800-SPRINGER) ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1999 11:40:38 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Lawsuits Challenge Search Engines' Practice of 'Selling' http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/yr/mo/cyber/cyberlaw/12law.html By CARL S. KAPLAN Lawsuits Challenge Search Engines' Practice of 'Selling' Trademarks An Internet surfer seeking Playboy's Web site decides to get help from Excite, a major search engine. The prospector goes to Excite's home page and enters the word "Playboy" in the search box. Then a funny thing happens. A banner advertisement for an explicit pornographic Web site appears, high above the list of pages generated by the search. But that site has nothing to do with Playboy. Is it sneaky and illegal for Excite to display a non-Playboy advertisement to a user who enters the trademarked words "Playboy" or "Playmate?" Or is it fair play because search engines, like the Yellow Pages, naturally create the opportunity for advertising aimed at people seeking certain information? Last week Playboy Enterprises Inc. gave its answer to the question by filing an important lawsuit against Excite Inc. and Netscape Communications Corp., a licensee of Excite's search engine. The suit challenges their practice of having advertisements for pornographic sites appear whenever a user of the search engines enters one of Playboy's trademarks as a search term. This practice has "hijacked and usurped" Playboy's reputation, the company said in legal papers filed in federal court in Los Angeles last week. The case was recently transferred to federal court in Santa Ana, California. The lawsuit, which seeks an injunction and unspecified damages, claims that Excite and Netscape, by their "unauthorized use" of the Playboy trademarks to sell targeted banner ads, are committing trademark infringement, unfair competition and related offenses. The lawsuit also challenges the companies' practice of providing links to special directories of pornography sites along with the search results for "Playboy" or "Playmate." Those directories prominently feature the sites of advertisers, according to legal papers. Spokeswomen for Excite and Netscape declined comment on the lawsuit. A lawyer for Playboy, Jeffrey D. Neuburger, and a spokeswoman for Playboy, also declined to comment. The Playboy case is not the only lawsuit that challenges what some experts say is a common advertising practice at search engine companies. Last month three subsidiaries of the Estie Lauder Companies Inc. filed suit in federal court in New York against Excite Inc. and The Fragrance Counter Inc., an online seller of cosmetics and fragrances. In its lawsuit, Estie Lauder claimed, among other things, that when a consumer uses the Excite search engine or Webcrawler, which is owned by Excite, and types "Estie Lauder" as a keyword, a misleading Fragrance Counter banner ad appears that features the Estie Lauder name. Estie Lauder said that The Fragrance Counter is not an authorized retailer of its products. Spokeswomen for Estie Lauder and Excite declined to comment on the lawsuit. A spokesman for The Fragrance Counter, based in Brentwood, N.Y., said the case was without merit. Based on a recent look at the sites targeted by the suit, it appears that The Fragrance Counter has changed its ads so that they no longer contain Estie Lauder's trademarks. Online advertising experts say it is a common and lucrative practice for Internet search engines, many of which are now part of larger "portal" sites, to sell banner ads linked to particular search keywords, including trademarked terms. "I would estimate that 20 to 30 percent of a portal's ad revenues" are generated from such targeted banner ads, said Marissa Gluck, an analyst at Jupiter Communications, a New York research firm. Playboy said it did not object to tying a banner ad to a "neutral" search term, such as "baseball." Nick Copley, director of business development for Thomson & Thomson, a company based in Quincy, Mass., that tracks search engines, said that if courts hold that banner advertising triggered by trademark keywords may only be sold to the trademark holder, "it will have quite an effect on the business model of search engines." Playboy's lawsuit is much broader than the Estie Lauder case because it attacks the right of a search engine company to sell banner ads in this way. In essence, Playboy is arguing in its suit that a banner ad appearing with the results of a search for one of its famous trademark terms might confuse Web users, making them think that Playboy is a sponsor of, or somehow connected to, the banner ad buyer. But some legal experts dispute this argument. They claim that consumers are not likely to be confused about the relationship between a pornographic banner ad merchant and Playboy when they use the search term "Playboy." "I would compare this case to a drugstore, where you walk down the aisle looking for Tylenol and you spot it on the shelf next to a generic-brand pill," said Carl Oppedahl, an lawyer who specializes in Internet litigation. "That is not confusing to the consumer. And I don't think there is any confusion to Playboy consumers on the search engine Web site." Mark Lemley, a professor of law at the University of Texas, also believes that Playboy will have a difficult time proving that the ad practices in question cause consumer confusion, assuming that the banner ads that pop up don't falsely advertise Playboy products or photographs. He added that the Playboy case was interesting because it illustrated the way that the Internet can help companies target someone else's customers. "Outside cyberspace, we've always had purely comparative advertising -- 'My product is better than yours,'" he said. "But the Internet allows me to reach customers who are interested in my competitor's products without making a direct comparison." Banner ads keyed to certain search terms are just one means to accomplish the goal, he said. Lemley added that he was not surprised to see Playboy leading the charge on this issue. In recent years the company has challenged several Internet practices that it considers a form of piracy, including its competitors' use of the word "Playboy" in their domain names or in "meta tags," hidden code in a Web page that is designed to draw the attention of search engines. In its legal papers, Playboy said it did not object to tying a banner ad to a "neutral" search term, such as "baseball." But it claimed that a banner ad tied to another company's trademark was deceptive and unfair. Carl S. Kaplan at kaplanc@nytimes.com welcomes your comments and suggestions. Copyright 1999 The New York Times Company ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1999 01:39:46 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Zero-Knowledge: Nothing Personal http://www.wired.com/news/news/technology/story/17820.html In a world of ad banner targeting, cookies, and consumer "profiling," some have come to believe that total online privacy is a myth. Zero-Knowledge Systems is out to prove them wrong. The Canadian software start-up gave a demo of its Freedom 1.0, its so-called total privacy technology, on Tuesday at the Demo '99 conference in Indian Wells, California. "When you browse the Internet, your personal information is routinely collected and often distributed without your knowledge or consent," said Austin Hill, president of Montreal-based Zero-Knowledge Systems. "With Freedom, you can safely browse Internet sites, participate in public discussions, chat, and send email without revealing any of your personal information." Presently, Web users leave footprints every time they request a Web page or send an email. But by building in multiple layers of encryption and re-routing, Zero Knowledge Systems promises totally anonymous Web browsing and Net use. Freedom offers Net users a variety of pseudonyms -- online identities created for different, Internet-related tasks, such as shopping or online discussions. Users can assign each pseudonym a different email address, geographic location, and encryption key. Each alias allows a user to visit different Net sites under different identities. The privacy effect is that users can avoid profiling by Internet marketers. Public key cryptography scrambles the contents of any Internet-bound data from the user's PC, such as email, chat transmissions, and Web browsing. The crypto also hides the source and destination of Internet traffic routed through the service, which the company says will also block cookies and filter spam. Law enforcement agencies will likely find the prospect of totally untrackable Net use troublesome. The system may attract extortionists as much as it will appeal to those with a legitimate need to hide, including whistle-blowers, human-rights workers, and harassment victims. In testimony before the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on 4 February, FBI Director Louis Freeh said that strong crypto will be a boon to terrorists. "The continued widespread availability and increasing use of strong, non-recoverable encryption products will ... devastate our capabilities for fighting crime, preventing acts of terrorism, and protecting the national security." Hill built the Zero Knowledge Systems business model atop an increasingly uncertain public policy climate. Because the product uses very strong crypto, it may be subject to recently tightened global controls on crypto distribution. The Wassenaar Arrangement is expected to increase crypto restrictions in 33 countries, including Canada, the United States, and Great Britain. Any developer of super-strength cryptography, such as Zero-Knowledge, would need to obtain export licenses just as US crypto vendors do now. As a hedge, the company regularly exports the Freedom software code to an undisclosed offshore location. Should Canada's export policy on strong encryption change abruptly, Hill said he would ask his programmers to leave the country and continue development in a country free from the restrictions. Copyright 1994-99 Wired Digital Inc. All rights reserved. ------------------------------ From: catfood@apk.net (Mark W. Schumann) Subject: Mystery Robocaller and the TCPA Date: 12 Feb 1999 12:14:41 -0500 Organization: Akademia Pana Kleksa, Public Access Uni* Site Well, well, well. I seem to have caught a robocaller. An outfit calling itself "Community Development Home Services" robocalls me every few months with a sales pitch. I'm not complaining about their robo-DIALER, which is annoying but not illegal in itself; I'm saying that the first voice on the line when I answer is a recording. That's illegal under 47 USC Whatever, and I'm entitled to $500 per instance ... of which I've recorded three already. This last time I hit *69 and _actually_got_a_number_. I logged it and called the local public library for a lookup in the "criss-cross" phone directory. They turned up nothing. Likewise the Internet-based reverse lookup services failed. I needed to identify the business or a responsible person in order to bring my private action. Suing a John Doe might be satisfying, but John Doe doesn't write checks. So I called Ameritech's customer service, since the call came from Cleveland. They were able to tell me that the line was paid for on a residential account but that they were not allowed to disclose the accountholder's identity. How about that -- they say it's a privacy issue! I don't doubt the reasons for that regulation but it sure is ironic as well as annyoing in context. Anyway, I'd like to go forward with a small claims suit against these jerks. My statutory damages are $1,500, the federal law grants jurisdiction to local courts, and these calls originated and terminated in the city of Cleveland ... all of which point to jurisdiction in the Cleveland Municipal Court. (Good news: I'm 2-0 in pro se cases in that venue.) My whine and question for Telecom readers is this. What procedure short of a subpoena or discovery motion will get me the identity of my John Doe? It just occurred to me that I could wait for their next call and indicate interest in their offering. But is there a quicker way to track these bozos down? [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What do you get when you call that number? If it is a residential line operating out of a residence in your town, there is the distinct possibility it is going to be answered at some time or another when you ring it. And doesn't the outgoing message give some phone number or address you can use to contact them if interested in their service? Is Community Development Home Services listed in any phone directory? What about a business directory from the Chamber of Commerce? Have you done a corporate records search with your Secretary of State? What about a city or county business license search. Do they have that name registered as a DBA? (Doing business as). If they have a post office box, you can get the name and street address of the person(s) to whom the box is listed *provided the box is registered at the post office under the category 'box is used to solicit the public'*. If the post office says the box is registered to a private person and thus exempt from having applicant information revealed, you can point out that in fact the box number is quoted in commercial advertising messages, etc. Next time they call, also listen closely to their message, get what hints you can that way. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1999 14:37:07 -0500 From: Lou Jahn Subject: Re: Bell Canada Replaces Operator Comments Mark J Cuccia wrote: > These contract directory companies (including Excell) are HORRIBLY out > of date in their directory listings, and have all other kinds of > erroneous or missing information. If one needs real local telco > directory, some long distance carriers (LCI/Qwest still does at this > time) still route to the real LEC directory operator of the dialed > area code. I am _NOT_ going to use these contract companies, first > paying for a directory call and only getting bogus information, and > then paying toll to use that bogus info?! and in Vol 19 Issue 9 Louis Raphael wrote: > That's rather unpalatable, considering that the information is > actually out there and available. Plus, even if the information were > up to date, a local operator would still be much better, because > they're able to handle a query like "I'm looking for a Mr. Albert > Green, somewhere in the eastern part of downtown ..." (having a fix on > the streets would likely narrow that down to only one or two > possibilities). Our firm provides access to the LSSi National Directory Assistance DB for LECs, CLECs, small IXCs and AOSPs. Mr. Rapheal is correct in that this DB soon will have over 90% of the USA listings being directly fed from RBOCs and Independent LECs. At a "Major" LEC offering 411 Coast-to-Coast the LSSi DB along with the search engine and operators have been independently measured as correctly finding callers requested listings 95% of the time. In over six months of operation not one FCC complaint has been lodged. Some European carriers are beginning to use the system for their callers; a reverse search into Europe listings will be available later this year. We now have USA and Canada in production. The second part of Mr. Raphael's comments regarding new searches and services is also totally on mark. With an average of some 30+ new NPAs per year, millions of dollars are wasted each year by callers entering the wrong NPA-555-1212. There is a major infrastructure evolution going in as LECs offering National 411 service capture hundreds of millions of LD-information dollars from IXCs! With National DA a caller does not need to even understand NPAs -- all they need is the state and hopefully the location. The National 411 service will also move millions of MOU from the preselected IXC into the LECs IXC via call completion utilization. Meanwhile even the IXCs are cannibalizing each others revenues using National DA services. Small IXCs will not only lose revenues to LEC via national 411 service, but MCI's 10-10-9000 moves both the LD-information fees and millions of MOU off of the other IXCs via their free call completion. So why aren't the IXCs fighting back? Maybe their CFOs haven't been told of the ongoing massive revenue drain. IXCs need an answer and they need it yesterday! And who said the telecom industry isn't changing? Lou Jahn ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Feb 1999 22:52:55 -0500 From: Brian Vita Subject: What Has Happened to AT&T/NOS Nightmare - Revisited In the week that has passed since my original post a lot has happened. After the posting I received a number of responses from other readers. Some were folks genuinely trying to help. The others were very obviously LD reps trying to pose as folks trying to help - shame on you. Over the weekend I received yet another ridiculous bill from NOS that was at least twice what my bill was before them. I've been withholding payment for the past two months and one of their reps called and demanded payment overnight for continued service. I reminded them that I had placed a dispute on the bill last month and was promised a call back from a manager. This, of course, never came. I told the rep that no payment would be forthcoming until I received an adjusted billing (which would probably indicate that they owe me money). I brought to their attention that I had been quoted $0.079/minute. They claimed it was per TCU. I produced a letter that stated "cents per minute". No answer. I've checked some other telecom news groups and virtually all of them have a NOS horror thread. I decided to go ahead with Qwest on my primary outbound and inbound lines with AT&T handling some secondary lines and lesser "800" numbers. I've had both companies unblock all of the lines so that I can do a "1010xxx" dial around with either of them on all of the lines. A very strongly worded letter was faxed and sent overnight to NOS advising them in no uncertain terms that they were no longer our LD carrier and that any failure to surrender the RESPORG status of our 800 lines immediately would have strong legal repercussions. Despite what I expected from the horror stories that I had read, they surrendered them without a wimper within 24 hours. As of this writing the changes have all taken effect and now I'm gearing up to fight NOS for the overcharges for the past 6 months. A new twist on this episode occurred this afternoon when the Bell Atlantic bill came in. It seems that although we had PIC'ed all of the lines with Bell Atlantic to NOS when they were installed in November (we moved in December), they had failed to set one of the lines up in their computer. As a result, I received a billing on the BA bill from a company called USBI. They took what should have been about $30.00 worth of calls and billed me $997.92 for them at an average rate of $2.87/minute. These were for direct dialed 1+ calls on a line that had been PIC authorized to another carrier! USBI didn't want to talk about it claiming that they were just a billing agent for Worldcom and that I had to call them. I called them and got an automated attendant that claimed I had to call my carrier "Affinity" (the carrier that I just switched to - long after these calls were made). I called USBI back and they said that they had nothing to do with the billing. I called BA back and they agreed to remove the calls from my bill. I'm just waiting for a collection company for USBI to call me. Brian Vita, President Cinema Service & Supply, Inc. 75 Walnut St. Peabody, MA 01960-5626 USA Sales & Service ->(800)231-8849 US & Canada Sales & Service Fax ->(800)329-2775 Business Office -> (978)538-7575 Business Fax -> (978)538-7550 ***Visit Our Web Site at www.cssinc.com*** Check out our new online webstore for cinema supplies! ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1999 10:00:49 -0700 From: Daryl R. Gibson Subject: Re: What is a Prepaid Calling Card? TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to original posting: > and in many cases he adds on a service charge as well. Prepaid > calling cards are BAD NEWS unless your credit is so bad that not While basically, I agree with you, Wal-Mart's Sam's Club division is now selling 160 minute AT&T-branded prepaid calling cards for around 10 cents a minute ... it certainly beats either of my other calling cards Sam's Club was selling MCI/Worldcom-branded cards for 15 cents a minute until the new contract was signed a few weeks ago. Hopefully, there will be other firms that offer prepaid cards for a reasonable per-minute charge. Daryl "As you ramble through life, brother, no matter what your goal, keep your eye upon the doughnut, and not upon the hole" --Dr. Murray Banks, quoting a menu ------------------------------ From: Baris Aksoy Subject: DS3 Signalling Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1999 12:17:27 -0500 Organization: Alcatel Microelectronics Hello, I wonder is there any frames that can handle DS3 signals? I mean, @ DS1 signal rate we can use T1 frames. I saw somewhere that there is T3 frames. Is it only theoretical, or casn anybody use this type of frames? Actually, I expect that DS3 --> DS1 --> T1 frames a flow like that. But is it practical? Thank you all in advance for your answers. Baris ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #12 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Feb 12 18:12:12 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id SAA25834; Fri, 12 Feb 1999 18:12:12 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1999 18:12:12 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199902122312.SAA25834@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #13 TELECOM Digest Fri, 12 Feb 99 18:12:00 EST Volume 19 : Issue 13 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Telecom Update (Canada) #168, February 1, 1999 (Angus TeleManagement) Online Freedom Of Information Sparks Fears (Monty Solomon) Re: Telemarketing by Playing Recordings (Peter Corlett) Re: Telemarketing by Playing Recordings (James Gifford) Re: Telemarketing by Playing Recordings (Jim) Re: Bad Email from MCI (Brian A Doreste) Forwarding One Line Using Another? (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Can Arbitrary Tones be Detected With a Modem DSP? (Tinkerman) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 415-520-9905 Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1999 11:04:21 -0500 From: Angus TeleManagement Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #168, February 1, 1999 ************************************************************ * * * TELECOM UPDATE * * Angus TeleManagement's Weekly Telecom Newsbulletin * * http://www.angustel.ca * * Number 168: February 1, 1999 * * * * Publication of Telecom Update is made possible by * * generous financial support from: * * * * AT&T Canada ............... http://www.attcanada.com/ * * Bell Canada ............... http://www.bell.ca/ * * Lucent Technologies ....... http://www.lucent.ca/ * * MetroNet Communications ... http://www.metronet.ca/ * * Sprint Canada ............. http://www.sprintcanada.ca/ * * Telus Communications....... http://www.telus.com/ * * TigerTel Services ......... http://www.citydial.com/ * * * ************************************************************ IN THIS ISSUE: ** JDS Fitel in US$6-Billion Merger ** CRTC Okays Bell Business ADSL Rates ** BC Tel Proposes Expanded Vancouver Free Calling Area ** MetroNet Buys Netcom ** Bell, Hydro-Quebec Outsource Telecom Management ** Union Asks CRTC to Block Bell Operator Deal ** BC Tel, Bell Offer Internet Bundles ** Alberta Wireless Users Too Quick in 780 Conversion ** GTE to Sell InfoInterActive Software ** Wes Scott Named Bell Vice-Chairman ** MTS Plan Drops Time-of-Day Overseas Rates ** Telus Edmonton Stops Supplying Primary Sets ** New CIO at MetroNet ** Northwestel Consolidates Rate Groups ** NextWave to Market Canada Payphone in BC ** BCE Results ** "Dial 'O' for Outraged" ============================================================ JDS FITEL IN US$6-BILLION MERGER: JDS Fitel of Nepean, Ont, will merge with Uniphase Corp. of San Jose, California, through an exchange of shares valued at US$6.1 Billion. The two companies, of about equal size, make fiber optic components and modules. CRTC OKAYS BELL BUSINESS ADSL RATES: CRTC Telecom Order 99- 68 approves Bell Canada's proposed rates for ADSL service to business customers. The decision rejects objections made by the Canadian Association of Internet Providers because they "relate principally to the retail Internet services provided by Bell's unregulated affiliate." http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/telecom/order/1999/o9968_0.txt BC TEL PROPOSES EXPANDED VANCOUVER FREE CALLING AREA: CRTC Public Notice 99-4 invites comments on BC Tel's proposal to introduce free calling throughout the Greater Vancouver Region by May 1, 2000. To participate, notify the Commission by February 19. http://www.crtc.gc.ca:80/internet/1999/8045/03/pn99-04.htm METRONET BUYS NETCOM: MetroNet Communications has agreed to buy 51% of Netcom Canada, Canada's fifth-largest Internet Service Provider, from ICG Communications. The other 49% will be purchased by a U.S. venture capital firm, Providence Equity Partners. ** MetroNet operates fiber networks in 11 Canadian cities, and will add six more this year, giving it access to 70% of Canadian business access lines. BELL, HYDRO-QUEBEC OUTSOURCE TELECOM MANAGEMENT: Bell Canada and Hydro-Quebec have created Connexim, a new company which will manage their internal telecom networks and offer similar services to other companies in Quebec. The company begins operations with about 250 employees from Bell and a similar number from Hydro. UNION ASKS CRTC TO BLOCK BELL OPERATOR DEAL: The union that represents Bell Canada operators has asked the CRTC to order Bell to drop its plan to outsource operator services. (See Telecom Update #166) The Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union says the plan is contrary to Canadian telecom policy objectives and the public interest. BC TEL, BELL OFFER INTERNET BUNDLES: ** BC TEL has the CRTC's okay to offer Residential Additional Line Bundle, which includes a second residential access line, 120 hours of Internet access, and a SmartTouch service. Price: $40-$49/month. (Telecom Order 99-71) http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/telecom/order/1999/o9971_0.txt ** Bell Sympatico has increased hours of access for its Internet plans: $24.95 now brings 200 hours of monthly access, or 250 hours for Bell FirstRate long distance customers. ALBERTA WIRELESS USERS TOO QUICK IN 780 CONVERSION: Many Telus Mobility customers in Alberta who sought to convert cellphones on the new 780 Area Code's first day of operation January 25 lost service for up to 12 hours when paperwork fell behind. Customers have until May 18 to make the change. (See Telecom Update #165) GTE TO SELL INFOINTERACTIVE SOFTWARE: GTE will make InfoInterActive's Internet Call Manager available to its 23 million U.S. customers. WES SCOTT NAMED BELL VICE-CHAIRMAN: Bell Canada has named Wes Scott, formerly Nortel Networks CFO, as Vice-Chairman responsible for finance, human resources, strategy planning, and other fields. Nortel's new CFO is Frank Dunn. MTS PLAN DROPS TIME-OF-DAY OVERSEAS RATES: MTS First Rate customers can now call overseas for per-minute rates that do not change by time of day. Calls to the UK are 24 cents; to Japan, 64 cents. TELUS EDMONTON STOPS SUPPLYING PRIMARY SETS: Telus has CRTC approval to stop supplying phones to its Edmonton residential customers. The sale of terminal equipment by Telus-Edmonton is now deregulated. (Telecom Order 99-69) http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/telecom/order/1999/o9969_0.txt NEW CIO AT METRONET: MetroNet Communications has appointed Harold Teets, formerly MCI WorldCom's Vice-President for IT, as Senior Vice-President and Chief Information Officer. NORTHWESTEL CONSOLIDATES RATE GROUPS: CRTC Telecom Order 99- 75 approves uniform local rates across Northwestel territory as of February 1. Individual lines are $20.33 (residence) and $38.70 (business). The multiline rate is $47. ** The decision also approves a 15 cent per minute promotional rate for residential toll calling within Canada from 3pm Saturday to 8am Sunday, each weekend in 1999. ** Three Commissioners opposed the decision because it includes local rate increases for many customers. http://www.crtc.gc.ca:80/internet/1999/8045/04/o99-0075.htm NEXTWAVE TO MARKET CANADA PAYPHONE IN BC: NextWave Wireless Solutions will offer Canada Payphone pay telephone and Internet terminals to location site owners in Greater Vancouver. BCE RESULTS: ** BCE reports net earnings before one-time items of $1.6 Billion in 1998, a 25% increase over 1997. Excluding Nortel, revenues rose 6% to $27.5 Billion. Despite a 7% drop in LD and network revenue, Canadian telecom earnings grew 27%. ** BCE Mobile's customer base grew 19%, but revenue increased only 3%, and profits fell to $212,000 from $71 Million. ** Bell Canada International now has almost 3 million wireless subscribers abroad. Revenues for 1998 rose 71%; losses also rose, to $66 Million. ** Nortel Networks, 42% owned by BCE, reports that 1998 sales rose 16% to US$17.6 Billion. Profit before one-time items was valued at $1.07 Billion, a 33% increase. ** CGI Group, which merged last year with Bell Sygma, reports that net earnings more than tripled in 1998 to $18.2 Million. BCE owns 43% of CGI. "DIAL 'O' FOR OUTRAGED": In the February issue of Telemanagement, available this week, Ian Angus examines how Bell Canada's decision to outsource operator services led to a "public relations disaster" and suggests that the decision may not have been in Bell's best interests. ** Also in Telemanagement #162: "Y2K in Telecom: Canadian Carriers Say They've Covered All the Bases." ** To subscribe to Telemanagement, call 1-800-263-4415, ext 225, or visit http://www.angustel.ca/teleman/tm.html. ============================================================ HOW TO SUBMIT ITEMS FOR TELECOM UPDATE E-MAIL: editors@angustel.ca FAX: 905-686-2655 MAIL: TELECOM UPDATE Angus TeleManagement Group 8 Old Kingston Road Ajax, Ontario Canada L1T 2Z7 =========================================================== HOW TO SUBSCRIBE (OR UNSUBSCRIBE) TELECOM UPDATE is provided in electronic form only. There are two formats available: 1. The fully-formatted edition is posted on the World Wide Web on the first business day of the week at http://www.angustel.ca/update/up.html 2. The e-mail edition is distributed free of charge. To subscribe, send an e-mail message to majordomo@angustel.ca. The text of the message should contain only the two words: subscribe update To stop receiving the e-mail edition, send an e-mail message to majordomo@angustel.ca. The text of the message should say only: unsubscribe update [Your e-mail address] =========================================================== COPYRIGHT AND DISCLAIMER: All contents copyright 1999 Angus TeleManagement Group Inc. All rights reserved. For further information, including permission to reprint or reproduce, please e-mail rosita@angustel.ca or phone 905-686-5050 ext 225. The information and data included has been obtained from sources which we believe to be reliable, but Angus TeleManagement makes no warranties or representations whatsoever regarding accuracy, completeness, or adequacy. Opinions expressed are based on interpretation of available information, and are subject to change. If expert advice on the subject matter is required, the services of a competent professional should be obtained. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Feb 1999 13:32:49 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Online Freedom Of Information Sparks Fears [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: File this under the 'What Else is Old News' category, and see my commens following the article. PAT] http://www.nytimes.com/techweb/TW_Online_Freedom_Of_Information_Sparks_Fears.html By Mary Mosquera for TechWeb, CMPnet WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Posting disaster information over the Internet from 66,000 hazardous-materials facilities could provide a road map for terrorists, some lawmakers said Wednesday. The Internet's ability to make information public and transmit it quickly and universally raises concerns among law-enforcement agencies that terrorists and criminals could use it against the communities trying to protect themselves from possible disasters. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is set to release in June worst-case scenarios, such as number of deaths and amount of damage, related to disasters at chemical facilities around the country. The Clean Air Act requires facilities that produce lethal agents, such as anthrax and sarin gas, have risk-management plans and that they be published as part of the Freedom of Information Act, so communities can prepare for emergencies. The House Commerce Committee heard emergency, law-enforcement, and government witnesses testify about the quandary of fulfilling the public-information mandate while trying to protect communities from becoming a terrorist target. Posting the sensitive information online could empower terrorists to pinpoint attacks on neighborhoods and towns," said Commerce Committee Chairman Thomas Bliley, (R-Va.), who is prepared to propose legislation to make it more difficult for terrorists to gain access to the information. The FBI believes there are legitimate law-enforcement concerns about the potential misuse of the sensitive disaster files, said Robert Burnham, the FBI's chief of the domestic terrorism section. The EPA and the FBI have proposed that the most sensitive information -- the consequence analysis of a disaster -- be separated from the overall risk-management plan, said Timothy Fields Jr., the EPA's acting assistant administrator. Although the risk-management plans will be transmitted as planned in a national database of the 66,000 facilities, the worst-case data could be available to only the affected states in a closed, secure system. That closed system could require special passwords and follow-up queries to the user. However, the problem is still there if someone who accesses the worst-case data wants to share it on the Internet. The government is also looking at developing technology for a read-only CD-ROM that will not let a file be duplicated or loaded on the Internet, Fields said. The fears of potential terrorists need to be balanced with the public's right, said Paul Orum, coordinator of the Working Group on Community Right-to-Know, a public-advocacy group. Over a 10-year period, the government recorded nearly 1 million chemical accidents. "By comparison, we don't have much information on chemical accidents caused by sabotage, let alone any examples involving the Internet," said Orum. Civil-liberties groups urged Bliley not to retreat from gains made in ensuring that citizens have access to public information. "Rather than taking advantage of the Internet's democratic potential to provide public access to this public information, these proposals view the Internet and its power to distribute information as a threat," said Ari Schwartz, policy analyst at the Center for Democracy and Technology in Washington, D.C. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Somehow they think it is a newsworthy item to say that law enforcement dislikes and is frightened by the internet. Gee, I would have never guessed that the government in general and its various law enforcement agencies in particular wanted to keep 'certain kinds of information' (actually, the more the better) off the internet, would you? . First it was child porn, then copyright issues, and now let's try guilt tripping everyone with the possibility of terrorist attacks. PAT] ------------------------------ From: abuse@verrine.demon.co.uk (Peter Corlett) Subject: Re: Telemarketing by Playing Recordings Date: 12 Feb 1999 20:07:41 GMT Organization: B13 C*b*l TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to Larry Conzett : > [...] If I or someone was here to first use the phone to 'request > permission to play a recorded transmission' what need would I have > for the alarm system? Are you certain in Tenessee that security > alarms are not exempt from the requirement that a live person first > get permission to play a message? [...] I expect that the permission doesn't have to be granted in the same call that initiates the transmission. It would certainly make more sense this way than any daft requirement for there to be a human being present at the time of playout. I've set up my employer's computer to phone my mobile whenever various links fail. Now although this is more of a rhetorical question, being based in the UK, but would this be allowed by said law, given there'll be nobody in the office at 3am when it decides there's a fault? Peter Corlett, Moseley, Birmingham, England. Tel. +44 7050 603311 Usenet Millenium in 34 days: Will October arrive at last? ------------------------------ From: James Gifford Reply-To: gifford@ns.net Organization: Heinlein Central | CT Magazine Subject: Re: Telemarketing by Playing Recordings Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1999 02:50:34 GMT Linc Madison wrote: > There is a California state law that forbids such calls, but, of > course, it only applies if the origin is within California. > I got a couple of such calls, from the same telemarketing outfit, > at 2:45 a.m. on Thanksgiving Day, and then at 4:45 a.m. on a Sunday. > Yes, that's a.m. as in "wee hours of the morning," between midnight > and dawn. The telco was absolutely unhelpful in giving me any way > to deal with the problem, other than trying very aggressively to > sell me Caller ID service, which I am 99.9% sure would be of no > help in identifying the caller. I've been getting them a couple of times a week, after not hearing any for years. Did a law expire somewhere? Did some other loophole open up? As far as identifying the culprit ... wouldn't listening to the message long enough to get the contact info work? | gifford@ns.net * See http://www.ns.net/~gifford for the | | Heinlein FAQ & _Robert A. Heinlein: A Reader's Companion_ | ------------------------------ From: jyoull@hotmail.com (Jim) Subject: Re: Telemarketing by Playing Recordings Date: 12 Feb 1999 06:39:12 GMT Plex Inphiniti wrote: > On Tue, 26 Jan 1999 09:31:21 -0500, Michael A. Covington > wrote: >> I was under the impression that telemarketing machines that dialed you >> and played a recording, with no human operator, had been banned. Just >> now I got a call from one, an outfit called VPT that sells pagers. >> The only identifying information given was the 800 number, >> 1-800-388-2161, repeated many times. The Caller ID said only "out of >> area." > I was pretty sure those are illegal. They laws around it are I believe > a human has to initiate the call and ask you personally if they can > play a recording. I may be wrong. Sorry to be late with this comment but I guess I have relevant info. The telemarketing activity you're discussing -- calls initiated using a recording -- seems to be covered by Federal law, 47USC227 -- part of the Communications act of 1934 as currently amended -- the same law that blocks junk faxes. I am not a lawyer, I just like this law. The nice part about where this falls within the statute is that the same private right of action that applies to junk faxes also applies to telephone calls initiated with a recording. Emergency calls and "prearranged" calls are exempted of course. Automated calls are also exempted for "noncommercial purpose ... that does not include transmission of advertising". This seems to pertain mostly to calls to residential lines. Go get your $500 :) Here's the relevant segment: This is excerpted from 47USC227(b)(1): (b) RESTRICTIONS ON THE USE OF AUTOMATED TELEPHONE EQUIPMENT.-- (1) PROHIBITIONS.--It shall be unlawful for any person within the United States-- (A) to make any call (other than a call made for emergency purposes or made with the prior express consent of the called party) using any automatic telephone dialing system or an artificial or prerecorded voice-- (i) to any emergency telephone line (including any ''911'' line and any emergency line of a hospital, medical physician or service office, health care facility, poison control center, or fire protection or law enforcement agency); (ii) to the telephone line of any guest room or patient room of a hospital, health care facility, elderly home, or similar establishment; or (iii) to any telephone number assigned to a paging service, cellular telephone service, specialized mobile radio service, or other radio common carrier service, or any service for which the called party is charged for the call; (B) to initiate any telephone call to any residential telephone line using an artificial or prerecorded voice to deliver a message without the prior express consent of the called party, unless the call is initiated for emergency purposes or is exempted by rule or order by the Commission under paragraph (2)(B); (C) to use any telephone facsimile machine, computer, or other device to send an unsolicited advertisement to a telephone facsimile machine; or (D) to use an automatic telephone dialing system in such a way that two or more telephone lines of a multi-line business are engaged simultaneously. (2) REGULATIONS; EXEMPTIONS AND OTHER PROVISIONS.--The Commission shall prescribe regulations to implement the requirements ofthis subsection. In implementing the requirements of this subsection, the Commission-- (A) shall consider prescribing regulations to allow businesses to avoid receiving calls made using an artificial or prerecorded voice to which they have not given their prior express consent; (B) may, by rule or order, exempt from the requirements of paragraph (1)(B) of this subsection, subject to such conditions as the Commission may prescribe-- (i) calls that are not made for a commercial purpose; and (ii) such classes or categories of calls made for commercial purposes as the Commission determines-- (I) will not adversely affect the privacy rights that this section is intended to protect; and (II) do not include the transmission of any unsolicited advertisement; and (C) may, by rule or order, exempt from the requirements of paragraph (1)(A)(iii) of this subsection calls to a telephone number assigned to a cellular telephone service that are not charged to the called party, subject to such conditions as the Commission may prescribe as necessary in the interest of the privacy rights this section is intended to protect. (3) PRIVATE RIGHT OF ACTION.--A person or entity may, if otherwise permitted by the laws or rules of court of a State, bring in an appropriate court of that State-- (A) an action based on a violation of this subsection or the regulations prescribed under this subsection to enjoin such violation, (B) an action to recover for actual monetary loss from such a violation, or to receive $500 in damages for each such violation, whichever is greater, or (C) both such actions. If the court finds that the defendant willfully or knowingly violated this subsection or the regulations prescribed under this subsection, the court may, in its discretion, increase the amount of the award to an amount equal to not more than 3 times the amount available under subparagraph (B) of this paragraph. ------------------------------ From: bdoreste@copland.udel.REMOVE_THIS.edu (Brian A Doreste) Subject: Re: Bad Email from MCI Date: Wed, 10 Feb 1999 06:29:56 GMT Organization: University of Delaware On Tue, 09 Feb 1999 09:32:55 -0500, James Bellaire wrote: > It looks like MCI has decided to break privacy as well. > I just received an announcement from them about some change in > their website, with 21 addresses on the TO line instead of using > the BCC line. > The email was sent from and contains > the note: > ****************************************************************** > NOTE: Responses to this e-mail will not be answered. > Please send inquiries via www.mci.com/service > ****************************************************************** > At least there were only 20 other customers on the TO line - > this could have been worse. [snip] Yeah, I got this crap also ... I immediately logged onto MCI's Online Customer Service and changed my email address to 'bdoreste@127.0.0.1' Problem solved. -------------------- Want to know who has been calling you and hanging up when you answer the phone? Visit http://216.71.16.113/hangup.htm to find out. Brian A Doreste school email: bdoreste 'at' copland.udel.edu 74 E Cleveland Ave #2 work email: bdoreste 'at' mail.dot.state.de.us Newark, DE 19711-2247 USA Univ of Delaware Civil Engineering Undergraduate Usual disclaimers apply Delaware Dept of Transportation - Traffic Ops/Mgmt ------------------------------ Subject: Forwarding One Line Using Another? Organization: Excelsior Computer Services From: joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1999 15:35:38 GMT I have two lines (voice and fax) and on the voice line, I have two numbers (RingMate, IdentiRing, etc.). I use the second number for private calls. Bell Atlantic can forward the main voice number, but not the second number, which is really all I want. So I was thinking: Is there a simple machine that I can use to forward incoming calls on line one to a second number, using line two to do the forwarding? Joel [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: A device from Radio Shack can listen to the ringing cadence on an incoming call and then send only those calls you want (identified by the ringing cadence of the second number) to a separate instrument. You put the device at the very head of the line where the line enters your premises. You plug your line into this device then take the output from it to a separate unit to be discussed in a moment. What the Radio Shack device does is (after listening to a couple of rings) take the line off hook, i.e. the call is answered, and then it in turn sends ringing voltage through the output to whatever is out there. Traditionally, that would mean a fax machine, answering machine, etc. But you get yourself a call extender device instead, and feed Radio Shack's identified (by ringing cadence) output to that call extender. The call extender sees the incoming ring and thinks it is getting an incoming call. It proceeds to do its thing and forward the call to wherever. It won't answer the incoming call until it is in a position to patch it to the party it is forwarding to. Use your fax line for the call extender's outgoing side. So, a person calls your line. If they dial the first number they get forwarded before the Radio Shack device even has a chance to deal with it. Even if you did not forward that line via telco call-forwarding the Radio Shack device would ignore it and just let it ring forever. If the calling party dials your second (or distinc- tive ring) number, the Radio Shack device notices that, and after two (or sometimes only one) of the 'distinictive rings' starts its work. The calling party hears telco ring twice (or once), hears a slight click then a totally different sounding ring, the ring back tone from the Radio Shack box. He will hear a few of these ring sounds while the Radio Shack box is nudging the call extender box trying to wake it up. The call extender will out dial to wherever and typically send a 'beep tone' to alert the answering party that a call is coming via forwarding. When it hears a human voice on the other end, it opens its front end to patch it through. On the opening of its front end, the Radio Shack device says 'well I woke him up and got him to answer me' and it in turn lets the original caller through. So you need two devices: one to identify the type of call you desire and begin handling it, and a second device to forward to wherever what the first device hands off to it. Expect that the person calling will hear six to eight rings before he gets you on the line, ie one or two while the Radio Shack device decides if this is a call for it, and another four or five of the Radio Shack-originated ringback tones while it and the call extender are communicating and the call extender is trying to get you on the line. The usual caveat-emptors apply when you allow an anonymous person on the other end access to your phone lines, but since the call extender does NOT open its front end until long past the stage where someone could seize your dial tone, you probably are pretty secure. A far easier method in my opinion is to reverse the purpose and intent of the two numbers on one line. Keep the first line -- the one that telco can forward -- as your private line, and have the distinctive ring line be the 'public' listed number. Telco will list either of them for you. Have them list the second number, with distinctive ring, and send it all the time to an answering machine whether you are home or not. There is no rule that says the distinctive ring number has to be your private one; make the first one serve that purpose instead. Now you can forward your 'personal' line to wherever and as for the distinctive (and from what you say) non-user-forwardable number, let *it* fall in an answering machine or something. An answering machine would never pick up the line anyway based on the one short ring that is sent out as part of the call forwarding process. This confused me at one point also. I had distinctive ringing and call forwarding on the same line. I would call forward my line, and callers to the first number were forwarded. When someone called the second number it was as though the call- forwarding instruction was ignored totally. It would just ring through anyway. The reason is, all outgoing calls (including the administrative command to forward calls) is associated with your first, main number. There is no way when dialing out to make the telco switch somehow think it is talking to your second number. But even then, there is an exception, but boy, is it a tricky one. Have telco put call forwarding capability on your second number. They will argue and resist and say you won't be able to use it. But you persist, having them associate that feature with your distinctive ringing number also. How do you acess it you say? Good question! The *only* way is to then use 'remote call forwarding', the feature where you dial into a 'gateway number' at the telco switch, give it your password for the number assigned to the distinctive ring, and activate it that way. I might add the only way you will ever get call forwarding cancelled on that line is via remote call forwarding also. For instance, in the Chicago-Franklin CO in downtown Chicago, to use remote call forwarding (let's say you left home, realized you forgot to forward your line and want to do it now), you dial xxx-xxxx. A voice tells you to enter your password, enter the number to be forwarded, then press *72-number or *73 to cancel forwarding on the line in question. Most folks just enter their number. You would enter your distinctive ringing number instead. By the way, I have been asked recently how to use call screening from telco across a rotary hunt group of numbers without having to purchase call screening for each line as telco tries to make you do. If your only listed number -- the only number you ever publish or give out is the fist number in the hunt group, you can get call screeing on that line only and it WILL work even if a call hunts to somewhere else. The reason is, in the CO switch, the decision to screen is made *before* the decision to hunt. If the caller is screened and sent to treatment, it will never reach the hunt group. If the caller dials direct into one of your back lines, then this won't work. Ditto having to purchase caller-id for each line in a hunt group. The decision on whether or not the information is to be passed to the called party is made *before* the decision to 'hunt him down'. Once the decision is made to pass the information, it gets sent once a line somewhere is found on which to hand the call off to you. There is nothing special about a line equipped for caller id; if the subscriber has that feature, the data gets pushed to him. For all I know, you could have a tin can and a string on one of your hunt lines. Again, this will not work if the caller dials into a back line direct. So get one caller id display unit and one of those little gimmicks from Radio Shack which takes either of two ringing lines and sends it to an answering machine in common -- only you send the output to a caller id box in common. :) It works about ninety percent of the time; the little box wakes up in time (usually by the middle of the first ring) to have gotten itself connected before the data stream starts immediatly at the end of the first ring. You may occassionally get corrupted (or no) data if the switch box is slow. I think the order in which decisions are made by the switch go like this: 1) who is this calling? let's find out. 2) now that we know who is calling, did the subscriber ever give us instructions about this caller? a) make his phone ring a special way to let him know in advance its his boss. b) get rid of the caller, our subscriber does not want to talk to him. c) no instructions either way. 3) are we supposed to tell the subscriber in advance who is calling? if so, let's get that data ready to be transmitted between the first and second ring. 4) were we told not to disturb the subscriber right now or to send his calls to some other place? where is that? 5) subscriber's line is busy, what are are we supposed to do now? we were told if line one was busy to put calls on line two automatically or line three/four, etc.) 6) okay now we are ready to hand him his call and the data that goes at the start of it ... over here is one of his lines we can use, let's send it now. There is a bit more than that, but that is the basic idea. Special features need to only be bought and paid for one time assuming all incoming calls are funneled through the lead number. PAT] ------------------------------ From: tinkerman97@usa.net (Tinkerman) Subject: Can Arbitrary Tones be Detected With a Modem DSP? Reply-To: tinkerman97@usa.net Organization: Tinkerman Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1999 03:05:04 GMT Hello Netfriends, I know that modems have DSP support to detect standard DATA and FAX carriers, as well as detect DTMF tones (voice modems can for sure), but is there any modem technology that can detect ANY ARBITRARY TONE with it's builtin DSP firware? I know voice modems can generate arbitrary tones, but detecting is a completely diffrerent story! Thanx for any help offered. Thanks and best regards, T-man ## Note: when Replying, please email me directly in addition to posting here, so I don't miss any responses. Don't forget to remove the "97" from my email address inserted as an anti-spam counter measure...:-) ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #13 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Feb 16 14:31:24 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id OAA14741; Tue, 16 Feb 1999 14:31:24 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 16 Feb 1999 14:31:24 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199902161931.OAA14741@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #14 TELECOM Digest Tue, 16 Feb 99 14:30:00 EST Volume 19 : Issue 14 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson AT&T Fights for Control in Struggle Over Internet Access (Monty Solomon) Ticketmaster and Microsoft Settle Linking Dispute (Monty Solomon) Book Review: "I Love the Internet But I Want My Privacy Too" (Rob Slade) Telecom Update (Canada) #170, February 15, 1999 (Angus TeleManagement) SS7 Release Link Trunk Info Sources? (Simon Chapman) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 415-520-9905 Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 15 Feb 1999 22:44:03 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: AT&T Fights for Control in Struggle Over Internet Access http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/99/02/biztech/articles/15net.html AT&T Fights for Control in Struggle Over Internet Access By SAM HOWE VERHOVEK SEATTLE -- It is an unusual movement, one that mixes populist and free-market appeals with the high-technology abbreviations of the age, like ISP and DSL, and so far, anyway, it seems to have taken hold mostly in the well-wired cities of the Pacific Northwest. But in the legal debate over the future of Americans' high-speed connections to the Internet, some public figures clearly think they have found a potent political issue. -------------------- Larry Davis for The New York Times AT&T's acquisition of Tele-Communications Inc. is making it a cable giant. In Seattle, a worker strung new cable for the TCI system. -------------------- "This is a pipe, a pipe for critically important information, and we're simply taking the position that no one should be allowed to monopolize it," said King County Executive Ron Sims, a likely Democratic contender next year for U.S. Senate. Sims is describing cable-television lines, which can provide Internet access up to 100 times faster than what most consumers now get through conventional phone lines. On Wednesday, a committee of the County Council here voted unanimously to reject the transfer of the county cable franchise to AT&T. Members said they believed AT&T would have a monopoly on cable access to the Internet and should instead be forced to open the cable lines to other Internet service providers, much as the telecommunications giant was once required to lease its telephone lines to competing long-distance c arriers. The same condition has already been imposed by city and county officials in Portland, Ore., which recently became the first place in the nation to develop such "open access" requirements for cable lines. That move prompted a legal challenge from AT&T, and a similar fracas is expected here if the County Council votes on Tuesday to adopt its committee's recommendation. County and AT&T officials said this weekend that they hoped to reach a compromise that would leave the access issue open for future negotiation and avoid a lawsuit. The fight over access to the cable lines is taking place amid a lobbying blitzkrieg, pitting AT&T and the huge cable company it is planning to acquire, Tele-Communications Inc., known as TCI, against local phone companies and an array of Internet competitors, including America Online and dozens of smaller Internet service providers. But it is also raising a core philosophical issue, one that is already being debated in other communities around the country and that will become all the more consequential as Americans increasingly use their cable lines to connect to the Internet for work, education, shopping and entertainment. Should the cable lines, in which private companies have invested billions of dollars, be treated like public rights-of-way? To AT&T, which ultimately plans to pay for cable upgrades in nearly half the nation's homes, the notion is outrageous. In addition to suing Portland, the company has pointedly said that it can hardly move "as aggressively" to improve cable service where it may be forced to lease its lines to competitors. AT&T also points out that under its plan, cable consumers will indeed be able to connect to any Internet provider they want, though they will have to go through the company's Internet affiliate, known as At Home, to get there. In AT&T's depiction, that is hardly different from the common procedure now, in which a consumer pays the phone company for a line and pays another company, such as America Online, for content and access to the Internet. Still, in many ways, AT&T may face an uphill battle in the future to keep total control over its cable lines. For one thing, it is hard to be on the other side of a debate in which public officials are using terms like "share" and "open access" and railing against monopolies. In endorsing the rejection of AT&T's license, Jane Hague, the chairwoman of the Metropolitan King County Council budget committee, said: "Approval of the merger would place control of local cable and high-speed Internet access in the hands of one mega-company. Our proposal would protect the public from predatory pricing." For another, in acquiring or contracting with cable-television providers around the country, AT&T, which has a relatively good reputation for customer service, is now allied with some companies that consumers -- and politicians -- love to revile. Here in Seattle, for instance, TCI is already embroiled in a major dispute with both the city and the county over delays in promised improvements in cable lines and is also the subject of numerous complaints over customer service. At a public hearing before the Seattle City Council this month on how to punish the company for failing to meet its deadlines for the improvements, angry residents unloaded numerous complaints about TCI service. One man called the company "unconscionably bad, totally irresponsible, arrogant," a comment that drew sustained applause. No one doubts that cable access to the Internet is a huge and promising field, in which customers may soon be able to pull up World Wide Web pages with the ease and immediacy they now enjoy as they retrieve television channels. Roughly half a million Americans now have high-speed Internet access at home through cable or phone lines; by 2002, according to Forrester Research Inc., that number is expected to grow to 16 million, about 80 percent through cable. "It's like a fire hose as opposed to an eye dropper," said Gary Gardner, executive director of the Washington Association of Internet Service Providers (ISPs), a Seattle-based group of Internet companies around the state that want access to the cable lines. AT&T rejects the notion that it is developing any sort of monopoly on hookups to the Internet anyway. "Cable-modem technology is an attractive way of providing high-speed access, but it is by no means the only way," said Scott Morris, an AT&T vice president in charge of negotiations with Seattle officials. "The sooner At Home is deployed, the more aggressively local phone companies will roll out DSL, and the more reasonably they will price it." DSL technology, named for digital subscriber lines, is used for high-speed access over standard telephone lines. Clearly, the company has prevailed for now in hundreds of communities that have granted approval for it to take over their local cable franchises from TCI, but regulators in many of those places say they eventually want to impose "open access" rules on cable. Here in Seattle, the City Council, also due to vote on license approval Tuesday, appears ready to say yes, with the general understanding that it may negotiate access rules later. "It does absolutely no good for anybody in Seattle to have TCI and AT&T not invest money here, to have them stop because they're stuck in litigation," said Tina Podlodowski, a former Microsoft executive who is now chair of the City Council's public safety, health and technology committee, which oversees cable matters. Federal regulators have taken much the same position for now, saying they don't want to do anything that would deter companies like AT&T from upgrading cable lines. AT&T also says that even providing for "open access" would be far more complicated and expensive than opening up its long-distance lines was, a contention that other Internet companies reject. "Feasibility, schmeasibility," said Chris Miller, an employee of Mindspring, a rival Internet service provider, at the recent City Council hearing. Morris, of AT&T, said new regulations would hamper access for everybody and were unnecessary. "The whole point here is, the Internet is morphing even as we speak," he said in an interview. "Yesterday's Internet is not today's, and it certainly won't be tomorrow's." But that has not stopped hundreds of people here, in an impassioned campaign partly whipped up by AT&T's Internet competitors, from flooding city and county officials with letters and e-mail messages, imploring them to require open access for cable lines. Sims, the county executive, shared many of those e-mails, including one in rhyme: "I need to pick my own Web provider," wrote one of his constituents, "not limited by a cable service monopolizer." Copyright 1999 The New York Times Company ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Feb 1999 22:42:51 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Ticketmaster and Microsoft Settle Linking Dispute http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/99/02/cyber/articles/15tick.html By BOB TEDESCHI Ticketmaster Corp. has settled its closely-watched lawsuit against the Microsoft Corp., the chief executive of Ticketmaster Online-CitySearch said Thursday, with the ticketing giant prevailing in the dispute over whether one Web site can freely link to pages deep within another site. According to Charles Conn, Ticketmaster Online's chief executive, Microsoft agreed not to link from its Sidewalk city guides to pages deep within the Ticketmaster site. Instead, the guides will point visitors interested in purchasing tickets to the ticketing service's home page. Tom Pilla, a Microsoft spokesman, said the settlement terms included a non-disclosure agreement. But Conn said that in the settlement, Microsoft "agreed not to do that kind of deep linking anymore. So they can link, but not to deep pages." The case was expected to establish a legal precedent regarding the intellectual property rights of Internet companies, as no similar lawsuit has been fully resolved in court. But as a result of the settlement, Web publishers will remain without legal guidelines on the practice of so-called "deep linking." The distinction is important, as commercial sites such as Ticketmaster Online often generate substantial revenue by selling advertising on their front pages, typically the most highly-visited pages of any site. In early 1997, Microsoft had created links from its Seattle Sidewalk site to pages within the Ticketmaster Online site, meaning that users could potentially buy tickets without even noticing that they had left the Microsoft site. Ticketmaster filed suit on April 28, 1997 in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, arguing that Microsoft had "pilfered" its content and therefore diluted its value. At the time it filed suit, Ticketmaster had recently signed an agreement with CitySearch, which, like Microsoft's Sidewalk guides, provides local news and information about merchants and entertainment in various cities. Through the agreement, CitySearch essentially paid Ticketmaster for the right to do what Microsoft was doing for free. Ticketmaster's online division merged with CitySearch in September; the company is a subsidiary of USA Networks. Microsoft, meanwhile, argued that Ticketmaster's stance breached an unwritten Internet code, whereby any Web site operator has the right to link to anyone else's site. In addition, Microsoft offered a defense based on its stated First Amendement right to publish public information. The outcome of the case was eagerly awaited by Internet and First Amendment scholars, as no legal precedent existed in this area. But with the settlement, filed in court on January 22, those looking for guidance were dismayed. "I'm sure it's in the best interest of the parties, but for the purpose of providing meaningful guidance to the Internet community, this is the worst news I've heard all day," Jeffrey Kuester, an Internet law specialist and a partner in the Atlanta law firm Thomas, Kayden, Horstemeyer & Risley, said when told of the settlement. "We were hoping to hear some good, broad, general language from the court," Kuester said. "Now, do we know if deep linking is bad? Is linking to a main home page O.K.? Is it just not O.K. to link? We don't know." In the wake of the settlement, Microsoft has reverted to a policy of offering links to Ticketmaster Online's home page for Sidewalk users who want to buy tickets. According to Martin Samson, a partner with the law firm Phillips Nizer in New York, it is a "rational" outcome. "There's definitely merit to Ticketmaster's position," Samson said. "If I've got three nuggets of real value on my site, and they drive ad revenue, I should be allowed to say that you've got to come through my front door to see them." Pilla, of Microsoft, declined to comment on the case, aside from saying that the parties reached "mutually agreeable terms. But I don't know why they're talking about it, since part of the agreement was to not talk about it." One person familiar with the agr