From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed May 26 17:52:15 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id RAA27185; Wed, 26 May 1999 17:52:15 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 17:52:15 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199905262152.RAA27185@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #101 TELECOM Digest Wed, 26 May 99 17:52:00 EDT Volume 19 : Issue 101 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: World's First Video Cell Phone Debuts in Japan (Kim Brennan) Canadian CLECs (gmorriso@telcordia.com) Re: Judge Freezes Funds In Internet Scam (Bob Goudreau) Re: Bell Atlantic Service Problem Inquiry (William Brownlow) Re: Using V&H to Calculate Distance (Fred Goodwin) Re: Siemens 2420 (the_spectre@my-dejanews.com) Re: Consulenza per aziende (Bob Natale) Re: Consulenza per aziende (John R. Levine) Re: Consulenza per aziende (Jacob Sterling) Re: Consulenza per aziende (Kim Brennan) So We Agree it is Probably Spam? (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 networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 765 Junction City, KS 66441-0765 Phone: 415-520-9905 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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: 26 May 1999 17:56:32 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com From: kim@aol.com (Kim Brennan) Subject: Re: World's First Video Cell Phone Debuts in Japan Arthur Ross scribed: > This seems to be a phenomenon that recurs with a cycle time of about one > generation -- takes that long for the old generation of enthusiastic > engineers and marketing folks to forget about the last attempt, and to try > to sell the picturephone again. ... > Seems like it must be the Japanese' turn to find this out. One thing that should be considered before blanket generalizations be thrown around is that different cultures have different desires and will accept different situations. Extrapolating AMERICAN marketing experiences to a non-American culture can sometimes (not always) go astray. Japanese specifically prefer small compact objects (in general). Small cars. Small TVs, Small computers. They tolerate things to an extent that certain objects don't have a market elsewhere. An example are computers with very small keyboards (80% or smaller of the size of a regular keyboard). Some of this is by necessity because most Japanese live in very small/compact homes. But not all. Some of it is simply a love for small things. It is entirely possible that a video phone WILL go over well in Japan, when it wouldn't work in the US. Kim Brennan (kim@aol.com) Duo 2300c, PB 2400, VW Fox Wagon GL, Corrado SLC, Vanagon GL Syncro http://members.aol.com/kim Duo Info Page: http://members.aol.com/kim/computer/duo ?'s should include "Duo" in subject, else they'll be deleted unread. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 15:47:12 -0400 From: grm Subject: Canadian CLECs Do you have any info on who the fast moving Canadian CLECs are? Thanks, Jerry gmorriso@telcordia.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 11:20:09 -0400 From: goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com (Bob Goudreau) Subject: Re: Judge Freezes Funds In Internet Scam tls@panix.com (Thor Lancelot Simon) wrote, in what may well have been a troll: >>> Rather than have the FTC pursue >>> individual perpetrators taking advantage of this confusion, it seems >>> like it would be highly preferable for the FCC to dictate the use of >>> the international dialing prefix and country code for calls to the >>> Caribbean. >> But under what criteria? If you're going to disqualify the non-US >> NANP countries from being dialed from the US via 1+NPA dialing, then >> why not Canada as well? What distinguishes Canada from, say, Jamaica >> in this respect? Pricing, perhaps (the fact that lots of US long > Oh, to my mind that's *very* simple. Canada is well-behaved, and the > Carribean countries which harbor these telephonic scams are not. I note that "simple" explanations are often wrong. What makes Canada "well-behaved" in contrast to various Caribbean countries? AFAIK, phone sex lines exist in Canada and even in the US, not just in the Caribbean. If it's the higher settlement rates to some of the Caribbean nations that make them not "well-behaved", then why weren't you advocating kicking them out of the NANP years ago, when the rates were as high as they are now or even higher (as indeed were virtually *all* international rates)? > Certain nations, it seems to me, should be put on notice that their > free ride in country code 1 will soon be over -- shape up or they'll > be kicked out for bad behaviour. The FCC could mandate that direct > dialing end, the NANPA administrator could deallocate the codes, and > that would, by and large, be that. And the East Bumf**k Board of Dogcatching and Mosquito Abatement could also stamp its feet, beat its fists on the walls, and order NANPA to remove the United States from Country Code 1, to equal effect, since neither it nor the FCC runs NANPA. > No more scam artists hiding behind the illusion that they were in the > United States. No more sponging off the country code 1 international > gateways, either. What does the latter refer to? Every international telco I've ever heard of will route calls to the NANP based on at least the first 4 digits (+1-NPA). In fact, it used to be 6 digits for calls to the old NPA 809 (each +1-809-NX routed to a particular island). > So the ITU would throw a fit. So what? The ITU is, by and large, a > bunch of bureaucrats in eternal servitude to the European > telecommunications equipment vendors. It'd be well worth it just to > see them have to do something fast for once, instead of screwing up > others' hard work very, very, *very* slowly. Sorry, but I doubt that most people in the US would be willing to eliminate completely their ability to place phone calls to over a dozen Caribbean countries (which is what your plan would do, since those countries have no separate country codes of their own), just to tweak a bunch of ITU bureaucrats. Bob Goudreau Data General Corporation goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com 62 Alexander Drive +1 919 248 6231 Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, USA ------------------------------ From: wbrownlo@my-dejanews.com (William Brownlow) Subject: Re: Bell Atlantic Service Problem Inquiry Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 16:08:07 GMT Organization: Deja.com - Share what you know. Learn what you don't. In article , wfeidt@cpcug.org (Bill Feidt) wrote: > The problem continues, mainly in the mornings. As I noted, calling > the main problem reporting 800 number does little good, since by the > time the technician was dispatched, the problem had disappeared. The > BA "customer advocate" group did follow up with me, however. They put > me in touch with the area Supervisor, who seems to be very customer > oriented and serious about trying to solve the problem. She gave me > her direct office phone and told me to report outages there. This > morning when the problem occurred again, I called and left a message. > She returned my call early this afternoon with the news that they had > been able to monitor the line while it was out of order and had > localized the difficulty. She promised send a tech out to deal with it > tomorrow at the latest (today they're busy catching up on thunderstorm > related outages). If this woman is typical of BA's field supervision > staff, they're hiring the right people. At this point, I'm most > encouraged that the problem will finally be resolved. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Do let us know if she is for real, or > was just put on the line as a buffer for your calls. PAT] Pat, Hell Titanic is trying to improve their image. They are/have invested lots of time and money in retraining their customer service people to actually perform customer service. For the most part, all of their reps that deal with the public actually do try to be friendly and resolve any reported problems. William "Bill" Brownlow "While my employer has their opinions, I have mine. Occasionally they converge" ------------------------------ From: Fred Goodwin Subject: Re: Using V&H to Calculate Distance Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 08:35:47 -0500 The ten should be included under the radical: rate distance = sqrt[(V1-V2)^2+(H1-H2)^2/10] Fred Goodwin, CMA Associate Director -- Technology Program Management SBC Technology Resources, Inc. 9505 Arboretum, 9th Floor, Austin, TX 78759 fgoodwin@tri.sbc.com (512) 372-5921 (512) 372-5991 fax > sqrt((V1-V2)^2+(H1-H2)^2)/10 where (V1,H1) is the V&H for one end of a > call, and (V2,H2) represents the other end of a call. > What's wrong here? Is the formula I have dated? -- hmmmmm... Could the original presentation of the formula have an omitted term? ------------------------------ From: the_spectre@my-dejanews.com Subject: Re: Siemens 2420 Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 12:16:18 GMT Organization: Deja.com - Share what you know. Learn what you don't. In article , bakie@my-dejanews.com wrote: > In article , support@sellcom.com > wrote: >> The 2402 is very nice, but a giant step backwards from the 2420. For >> those who already have a sophisticated voice mail system it could be >> real handy and I suppose it could be located in a more ideal position >> for extra range since it would not need to be so accessible. I dunno, >> time will tell. Everything I have seen Siemens make has been excellent. > Any idea of what the price will be on the new 2402 or when it will > really be available? Does call bridging fix the annoying extension > problem (for residential use) that the 2420 has? I think I want the > 2402. Yes, bridging makes it act like an extension. The 2402 should be available within weeks. I hear they began shipping to distributors already. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 10:23:50 -0400 From: Bob Natale Subject: Re:Consulenza per aziende Hi Pat, > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This came in the mail to the Digest. > Would someone please read it to me and tell me what it says. It's a (respectable) pitch from a company providing telecom consulting, sales, and integration services to businesses in Italy. > I hope it is not spam of some kind :( Close ... but saved (IMHO) by being reasonably germane to the topic of the list ... at least for a subset of its readers. I'll repeat the original contact info ... just in case anyone wants to follow up with "la signorina Giussani" now that they konw the basic intent of her message: > Barbara Giussani > SEPI Srl > via della Betulla 11/13 > 20035 Lissone (MI) > bgiussani@sepi.it > http://www.sepi.it/ > tel. 039 2456390 > fax 039 460611 Cordially, BobN ------------ ISO 9001 Registered Quality Supplier ----------- Bob Natale | ACE*COMM | 301-721-3000 [v] Dir, Net Mgmt Prod | 704 Quince Orchard Rd | 301-721-3001 [f] bnatale@acecomm.com| Gaithersburg MD 20878 | www.acecomm.com ------------- Free downloads at www.winsnmp.com ------------- ------------------------------ Date: 26 May 1999 10:48:28 -0400 From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: Consulenza per aziende Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA It's spam, advertising their most wonderful and unbiased new telecom consulting business. http://babelfish.altavista.com does automated translation between, among other languages, Italian and English. It does a pretty poor job but it's quite adequate to decode messages like this. The \354 and the like are vowels with accents over them, by the way. 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: Jacob_Sterling@mastercard.com Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 11:13:06 -0500 Subject: Re: Consulenza per aizende Pat, the message is translated as follows. (By the way, the numbers must indicate an extended character set, since the substituted characters are accented vowels -- not the acute ones, but grave (down and to the right) -- little seen outside of Italian and French, I believe. ... begin original message ... SUBJECT: Consulting for businesses SEPI srl is an organization with more than 20 years' experience in the technology industry. Spurred on by the ever-tighter links between telecommunications and computers, SEPI is now offering a new service in the field of business telephony. The liberalization [deregulation] of telephony fees has produced new and substantial savings possibilities; however, choosing the best service option becomes more complex every day. The new consultation service consists of identifying the best service options for fixed and mobile telephony, based on the individual client's business characteristics. Thanks to sophisticated software, the consultation supplies the solution that is most convenient and best suited to the specific needs and behaviors of the client's telecommunications traffic. SEPI can guarantee its impartiality, because it is funded totally independently of any telecommunications providers. For information contact... etc. ... end original message ... So unfortunately it *IS* what I would define as spam, but perhaps valuable for some readers. Of course, I assume this only applies in the Telecom Italia - Deutsche Telekom service areas. Thanks, Jake Sterling ------------------------------ Date: 26 May 1999 18:11:32 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com From: kim@aol.com (Kim) Subject: Re: Consulenza per aziende One resource on the web is AltaVista's Babelfish translator (http://babelfish.altavista.digital.com/cgi-bin/translate?) It doesn't always make perfect sense in the translation, but it sometimes is useful enough to give you a general feel for the original. Unfortunately in this case, it is of limited value. The translation (at least to me) is only marginally clearer than the original (which I assumed was Italian.) --------------------- SEPI srl (350) one societ(340) specialized give beyond a ventennio in the computer science field dell. Stimulated from the tie always pi(371) tightened between telecommunicationses and computer, it has determined hour to offer a new one sevizio in the field of the telephony for companies. The liberalizzazione of the telephone rates has produced new and substantial possibilit(340) of saving, however the choice of the best one contracted becomes than day in day always pi(371) complex. The advising baby attivit(340) consists to nell(222)individuare, thanks to a sophisticated software, the best one contracted than fixed and mobile telephony on the base of the characteristics of the customer, supplying the solution pi(371) convenient and pi(371) adapted to qualit(340) the detailed lists of its telephone traffic. To guarantee of seriet(340), SEPI emphasizes the own total independence from all the suppliers of mobile and fixed telephony. Kim Brennan (kim@aol.com) Duo 2300c, PB 2400, VW Fox Wagon GL, Corrado SLC, Vanagon GL Syncro http://members.aol.com/kim Duo Info Page: http://members.aol.com/kim/computer/duo ?'s should include "Duo" in subject, else they'll be deleted unread. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 10:54:28 +0100 From: TELECOM Digest Editor Organization: TELECOM Digest Subject: So We Agree it is Probably Spam? This is what I got out of Babel Fish with the help of someone who went through it word by word with me; also each phrase: (My helper says): Smells like Spam to me. Written by someone pretty clueless, judging by all the 8-bit characters. ------------------ > SEPI srl (350) una societ(340) specializzata da oltre un ventennio nel > settore dell informatica. SEPI Ltd is a company which has specialised in IT for 20 years > Stimolata dal legame sempre pi(371) stretto tra telecomunicazioni e > computer, ha ora deciso di offrire un nuovo sevizio nel campo della > telefonia per aziende. Because of the ever-stronger links between telecoms and computing, it has now decided to offer a new telecoms service to businesses. > La liberalizzazione delle tariffe telefoniche ha prodotto nuove e > sostanziali possibilit(340) di risparmio, tuttavia la scelta del miglior > contratto diviene di giorno in giorno sempre pi(371) complessa. Liberalization of telecom tariffs has produced new and significant opportunities for saving money, but choosing the best contract becomes more complex day by day. > La neonata attivit(340) di consulenza consiste nell(222)individuare, > grazie ad un sofisticato software, il miglior contratto di telefonia > fissa e mobile sulla base delle caratteristiche del cliente, fornendo > la soluzione pi(371) conveniente e pi(371) adatta alle qualit(340) > specifiche del suo traffico telefonico. Our newborn consulting service consists of using sophisticated software to work out the best land/mobile contract based on the client's usage patterns etc. etc. etc. > A garanzia di seriet(340), SEPI sottolinea la propria totale indipendenza da > tutti i fornitori di telefonia mobile e fissa. SEPI _must_ be sound, because it's independent of all fixed and mobile telephony providers. -------------------- The overblown yet content-free style is typical of Italian business correspondence. I spent too many years translating this stuff. (End of my helper's comments) So, there you have it. As a reader noted above, apparently spam, but not the worst kind, and if it is of interest to readers of the Digest in Italy, please contact the original message sender. Having looked over that Babel Fish thing, it occurs to me it might be sort of fun to publish this Digest in one hundred different languages each day. {Readers Digest} publishes in about that many languages, and my content is at least of the same Enduring Significance, -- as Readers D. used to say -- as theirs. PAT ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #101 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu May 27 02:37:23 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id CAA16068; Thu, 27 May 1999 02:37:23 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 02:37:23 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199905270637.CAA16068@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #102 TELECOM Digest Thu, 27 May 99 02:37:00 EDT Volume 19 : Issue 102 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Here is Why Email Has Gotten So Spam-Ridden (TELECOM Digest Editor) Re: Smartjack and CSU ("Kevin") Re: Reciprocal Compensation (was Re: Strange Problems) (John McHarry) Lucent Sells Sales Group - Comments? (Janet Petrunti) 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 networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 765 Junction City, KS 66441-0765 Phone: 415-520-9905 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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: Wed, 26 May 1999 17:30:18 EDT From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Here is Why Email Has Gotten So Spam-Ridden Attached are portions of a spam mailing which I get about once per week, praising the value of 'free' email as a cost-effective way to sell things. His message is indented; my remarks as we go along are flushed to the left margin. From: mrichards@royal.net Received: from 98AA9945.ipt.aol.com (98AA9945.ipt.aol.com [152.170.153.69]) by insrv01.eifel.net (NTMail 3.03.0017/16.aaal) with ESMTP id ta103005 for ; Tue, 18 May 1999 21:19:38 +0200 Date: Tue, 18 May 99 11:26:03 EST To: receiver@planetmail.com Subject: Re: how is your business doing? I have no idea who 'planetmail.com' is, or why I would be a 'reciever' at that place. Probably just a collection of names for spam purposes. I did not write him, yet he REplies to me. I have no 'business'. Dear Commercial Website Owner, Would you be interested in increasing your Online Business Sales by up to 400% through a NEW form of Internet Advertising for FREE? So, four hundred percent of zero is still zero, but let's read on. -------- ------- ------ ----- ---- --- -- - - *** Like MOST Online Businesses, you have tried it all... *** Banners, Search Engines, Newsgroups, Classified Ads, etc... No, I have not tried it all. I do not believe in banners, and I do not go around polluting newsgroups. I do occassionally ask Infoseek and AltaVista to correctly index http://telecom-digest.org which they never get around to doing, so then I go back and ask them to correctly index hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu://telecom-archives/archives and they sometimes get that part okay. I *hate* seeing five-year old dead links in Infoseek to messages here that no longer exist where the link points, but try telling them to fix it. --- -- - - CONGRATULATIONS! You have made Web Site Hosting, Marketing and Advertising Companies RICH!! They have YOUR MONEY and could care less whether or not your business succeeds on the Internet! Isn't that GREAT? They don't have my money, and from what I hear, quite a few of the 'web site hosting, marketing and advertising companies' on the net are struggling financially. Some, I hear, have finally learned that the majority of netters just do not feel such things are welcome here. As for what they care or care less about, I am different. I *do* care what happens to them. I hope they all go belly-up, get off the net and eventually return the net back to the people it belongs to. -------- ------- ------ ----- ---- --- -- - - Did you know that OVER 10,000,000 Businesses on the Internet are currently marketing with the SAME methods as YOUR BUSINESS? Only ten million? ---- --- -- - - ** When YAHOO was introduced as one of the first search engines on ** the Internet, it was an instant hit with the public! ** When AMAZON BOOKS came out as the first major online book store ** on the Internet, they became an instant success! Yahoo provides some very good, worthwhile and productive resources on the net. I will grant you there have been times I thought they were a bunch of yahoos with their software, but they are the only service of its kind on the net that provides a genuine news-ticker feed to your desktop that carries not a single advertisment. Totally user-defined, with local weather, etc. I give them an eight or nine out of ten. ---- --- -- - - Now... there are HUNDREDS of copycat companies trying to be just like them! They are all FAILING! Why? ====> BECAUSE THEY ARE ALL TRYING TO DO THE SAME THING! -------- ------- ------ ----- ---- --- -- - - You mean they are all trying to spam people at the same time? I do not see much productive out of any of them, but then I do not go looking usually. The SAME Principles Apply when Promoting YOUR Business! ** If you want YOUR Company to SUCCEED on the Internet, YOU NEED ** to do something your COMPETITION isn't doing! Did you know that the average Internet User makes in excess of $60,000 a year? Internet Users have a FORTUNE in DISPOSABLE INCOME that they would love to spend on your company! Is that a factoid? I think you ripped that line off from a similar brochure I received in the snail mail several years ago. Now companies have discovered the internet; back then they had just discovered the gay community. So back then guys like you were extolling the virtues of fashioning one's business ventures to go after gay men who lived in a committed relationship with another guy: You called them 'DINKS', meaning 'double-income, no kids' ... meaning lots of money left over after paying the landlord and the utilities each month to spend on your foolishness. So after the gay guys would not take the bait, now the nerds get their turn to be hassled all the time, eh? => But how can they buy from you... If they don't know you exist? Until recently, there has never been such a dramatically COST-FREE method of advertising your business to such a HUGE amount of the Internet population for FREE! For free, you say? Oh my, let me guess what medium we might be talking about ... ummm ... could it be email by chance? Nah, you would not be that crude would you ... ----- ---- --- -- - - "Apart from creating a Web Page for your company, there's another do-it-yourself method of online advertising that has powerful potential. I'm speaking of bulk email, a method of targeting appropriate online readers by the thousands or even millions and, with a simple click of your mouse, send them your marketing letter via email." - ENTREPRENEUR MAGAZINE I guess you would be that crude and ignorant. Remember this name, dear readers: 'Entrepreneur Magazine' ... a print publication which would no doubt scream to the high heavens if they got bombarded with all the useless trash most netters have to wade through everyday. "Many business people are finding out that they can now advertise in ways that they never could have afforded in the past. The cost of sending mass e-mail is extremely low, and the response rate is high and quick." - USA TODAY I would expect *USA TODAY*, which has always been run by a bunch of whores out for an easy buck to say something like this. Remind them of this quote the next time you get asked to subscribe to 'The Nation's Newspaper', that you do not support people who support or encourage spam. "Targeted direct email advertising is the wave of the future. By no other means can you effectively reach your market so quickly and inexpensively" - ONLINE PROFITS NEWSLETTER I have never heard of this bunch before. --- -- - - [COMPARISON OF INTERNET ADVERTISING METHODS]: ================================================================== => A 1/20 Page Web Site Banner Link to 5,000,000 People on the Internet will cost you about $100,000. => A 5 Page Targeted Direct Mailing to 250,000 People through the Postal Service will cost you about $150,000. => A 50 Page Targeted Broadcast Emailing to 50,000,000 People through the Internet will cost you $0. ..Which advertising method sounds most appealing to you? Well, let's see ... duh ... gawrsh ... I bet the last choice is the right answer, but let's read on and see. ================================================================== Only a HANDFUL of Companies on the Internet have Discovered Targeted Broadcast Email! You can be one of the FIRST! If only a 'handful' have managed to turn the net into the god-awful mess it is these days, what happens when everyone gets in on it? "Bulk email is simply using the net for what it does best.. communicating a message. ...it is a valid tool in the Internet marketer's toolbox, and smart marketers will experiment with it" - BOB SCHMIDT, MARKETING CONSULTANT, PROVIDER MARKETING GROUP If anyone ever discovers who this 'Bob Schmidt' person is, will you please go put him out of his misery for me? He is deluded, he is a false prophet of the worst sort. Now, let's read about Kate Richardson, who obviously has a lot better luck with her mailing software and mailqueue than I do. My mailings *never* get finished in less than a couple hours, and I only have a few thousand names on my list; but look at how well Kate handles things: --- -- - - [EXAMPLE OF A PERSONALIZED/TARGETED BROADCAST EMAIL]: ---------- --------- -------- ------- ------ ----- ---- --- -- - - ** Below is 1 of 247,890 Personalized/Targeted Broadcast Emails ** sent by Kate Richardson on January 10th, 1999. => With Broadcast Email Software, she was able to send to all => 247,890 individuals with less than 2 minutes of time invested. ----- ---- --- -- - - From: kate@cat-lovers-inc.com To: mary@commtom.net Subject: Regarding your cat... Dear Mary, I saw your posting in the cats newsgroup and thought you may have some interest in a 25% off sale we are currently having on all cat toys. If you are interested in taking a look at what we have, feel free to visit our web site at: http://www.cat-lovers-inc.com I think that you and your cat will find many of the unique toys we offer to be quite fun and exciting! Thanks for your time and have a great day! With regards, Kate Richardson President of The Kitty Catty Company -- - - Dear Kate Richardson, if you exist, and others like you, my belief is you should be sacrificed for the good of the net if necessary. No one really wants to hear anything about your company or any of the other companies for that matter. And for those of you who cannot take a hint and vanish, at least for gawds sake put up halfway decent web pages with a bunch of links that are not all broken, okay? [NOTE]: The email example above was created to demonstrate how easy it is to send broadcast email to thousands of people. The email did not actually take place and the email addresses and web sites used are for example purposes only and are non-existent. Just as most of the return addresses you fools use are non-existent, and we already know how easy it is to send -- what did you call it? -- oh yeah, 'broadcast email' ... i.e. spam. ---- --- -- - - With Broadcast Email Software, you can send a Personalized & Targeted Broadcast Email, like the one above to up to 250,000 People every single day for FREE! The recipients of your Broadcast Email Advertisement will have no idea that the same personalized message they received from you, was sent to MILLIONS and MILLIONS of people ALL OVER THE WORLD! Oh really? No one will figure it out, huh? Yeah, most netizens are really pretty stupid; you sure will pull the wool over everyone's eyes. ---- --- -- - - "Consider this: My $1,000 PC is now a personal broadcasting station that reaches more people than the CBS affiliate in Washington D.C. I can get more local viewers with a single e-mail posting to the Internet than Sally Jessy Raphael can get in sweeps month." - INTERNET FOR DUMMIES, 3RD EDITION Remember the folks who publish the 'Dummies' book series also in your prayers ... all my 'Dummy' books are going in the trash can later today. "It has become prevalent on the Internet because, simply, the Internet offers a cheap, fast and effective way to reach 81 Million Americans who use e-mail on a daily basis." - PRESS DEMOCRAT NEWSPAPER Here is a newspaper who I suspect needs to have its fax machine, 800 number and email clogged up with worthless trash every day, but I have no idea where it is located. Maybe some reader knows. Of course they will probably tell you they something special, something different, and that you have no right to pollute their gateways. Sure, a lot of things in life would be 'cheap, fast, and effective' if you could get someone else or some major institution to pay the bills for you. It might even be 'free' in that case. ---- --- -- - - You can expect A HUGE AMOUNT of orders within minutes of sending out your first Broadcast Email Advertisement! What you can expect is a huge amount of complaints to be sent to the 'abuse' box at your ISP within minutes. You can expect to have your account cancelled if your ISP is any sort of good netizen at all, and you can expect that if some people I could mention ever were able to physically locate you, all of your fingers would get broken and your little toy computer would be smashed in a dozen pieces. * According to a recent FIND/SVP Survey, 41% of people check their email daily! "When you reach people with e-mail, they're in a work mode, even if they're not at work. They're sitting up, they're alert. You catch them at a good moment, and if you do it right, you have a really good shot of having them respond." - WILLIAM THAMES [Revnet Direct Marketing VP] With Broadcast Email, we are talking INSTANT ORDERS! No, we are talking 'instant spam', instant complaints to your ISP, and if some had their way, instant death to the perpetrator, although some would probably be more merciful about the latter than others. ================================================================== => If you send a Broadcast Email Advertisement to 10,000,000 => people and just 1 of 5,000 people respond, you will generate => 2,000 EXTRA ORDERS! How much EXTRA PROFIT is this for you? ================================================================== And how much extra expense is it for the sites which transport the stuff, and how much extra time is spent by the other 4999 people who have better things to do? --- -- - - "A gold mine for those who can take advantage of bulk email programs" - THE NEW YORK TIMES --------- -------- ------- ------ ----- ---- --- -- - - As FEATURED in: "THE BOSTON GLOBE" (05/29/98), "PRESS DEMOCRAT" (01/08/99), and "ANVIL MEDIA" (01/29/98): ================================================================== ** [Neuport Internet Marketing]: BROADCAST EMAIL SOFTWARE PACKAGE Another newspaper run by a bunch of deluded idiots and that fine little fiction magazine published every day in Boston ... what a bunch of references. Maybe New York Times, Boston Globe, USA Today and the Press Democrat will be true to their word -- not likely! -- and provide a few open mail relays to serve the community. Maybe they could make their own on-line phone and email directories public so the spammers could get a few more addresses. Not very likely, is it? *Of course* you would expect the print media to strongly support and encourage anything which led to the further degradation of the net. Once people get tired of wading through all the spam on the net each day, the hope is they will put their computer on a shelf in the closet along with their CB radio and go back to reading the daily newspapers where what you read and what you say can be more closely controlled by the publishers. This internet has long been a thorn in the side of the newspapers anyway; i.e. what do you mean, no more editorial control (read 'censorship') of those people who expose our advertisers, etc ... ================================================================== SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS: A PC with Windows or a MAC with SoftWindows --- -- - - It also helps if the owner is an idiot. => BROADCAST EMAIL SENDING SOFTWARE: Our Broadcast Email Sending Software gives you the ability to send out a Personalized, Targeted Broadcast Email Advertisement to over 100,000,000 People on the Internet at the rate of up to 250,000 People per day automatically for FREE! What a liar! => TARGETED EMAIL EXTRACTOR SOFTWARE: With our Targeted Email Extractor Software, just put in a few keywords relating to your business and it will automatically navigate through up to 50,000 Newsgroup Categories, each with a readership of up to 100,000 People each and extract up to 500,000 Fresh, Personalized and Targeted Email Addresses directly from the Internet every single day! You can extract by Location, Hobbies, Employment, etc..! The software also extracts email addresses from web site pages and most Mailbox/ Database/Miscellaneous files! => 10,000,000+ PRE-EXTRACTED FRESH EMAIL ADDRESSES: 300,000 Opportunity Seekers, 17,000 Webmasters, Thousands of Investors, Business Owners, Golfers, Etc..! MILLIONS of the NEWEST and FRESHEST Targeted Email Addresses are ALL YOURS! => STEP BY STEP BROADCAST EMAIL SOFTWARE PACKAGE INSTRUCTIONS: You will be guided through the entire process of sending out Targeted Broadcast Email to MILLIONS of people and Extracting MILLIONS of Targeted Email Addresses! Even if you have NEVER used a computer before, these instructions make it easy as 123! => THE BROADCAST EMAIL HANDBOOK: The Broadcast Email Handbook will describe to you in detail everything you ever wanted to know about Broadcast Email! Learn how to write a SUCCESSFUL Advertisement, how to manage the HUNDREDS of NEW ORDERS you could start receiving, what sells BEST via Broadcast Email, etc... This Handbook is a NECESSITY for ANYONE involved in Broadcast Email! => UNLIMITED CUSTOMER & TECHNICAL SUPPORT: If you ever have ANY questions, problems or concerns with ANYTHING related to Broadcast Email, we include UNLIMITED Customer & Technical Support to assist you! Our #1 GOAL is CUSTOMER SATISFACTION! => ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Our Broadcast Email Software Package contains so many features, it would take five additional pages just to list them all! Duplicate Removing, an Automatic Remove List, and Stealth Encoding, are just a few of the HUNDREDS of additional features included with our software! ** You Will Receive EVERYTHING Above for ONLY: $395.00! ================================================================== => BUT WAIT!!! If you order by Friday, May 21st, as a May Sales Promotion, you will receive our ENTIRE $395.00 Broadcast Email Software Package for ONLY $149.00!! ================================================================== You will NEVER encounter any additional charges ever again! Our Broadcast Email Software can send an email advertisement, like this one, for your company, to up to 250,000 People a Day/90,000,000 People a Year for a LIFETIME for FREE! We are so confident about our Broadcast Email Software Package, that we are giving you 90 DAYS to evaluate it for FREE!! If you are not 100% COMPLETELY SATISFIED, just tell us within 90 Days of your purchase, and we will issue you a FULL REFUND, No Questions Asked! Best of ALL, if you decide to keep our Broadcast Email Software Package, it can be used as a 100% TAX WRITE OFF for your business! --- -- - - See what users of our Broadcast Email Package have to say.. ================================================================= Read this testimonial from a satisfied fellow idiot and spammer ... (Many other testimonies omitted because of space considerations) "I recently started a new business online. I stripped the email addresses of the AOL and CIS classifieds, I sent out 3,407 e-mail letters and got over 400 people to join my company in 5 days!" = DAVID SHEENHAM - Dallas, TX How many letters to abuse@ did your ISP recieve? How many ISPs have you gone through in order to get that much response? How come you did not include your real email address in your testimonial, David? ... oh, you knew better than that, didn't you. Let's cut to the chase: [TO ORDER BY PHONE]: To order our Broadcast Email Software Package by phone with a Credit Card or if you have any additional questions, feel free to call our Sales Department, toll-free in the United States at: ==> (888)6-NEUPORT / (888)663-8767 or (707)665-9184 Please make a note of the first two numbers; forget the last one. ------- ------ ----- ---- --- -- - - [TO ORDER BY FAX]: To order our Broadcast Email Software Package by fax with a Credit Card, please print out the order form at the bottom of this email and complete all necessary blanks. Then, fax the completed order form to: ==> (707)665-9185 Can we fax other items of interest as well?? ------- ------ ----- ---- --- -- - - [TO ORDER BY POSTAL MAIL]: Neuport Internet Marketing 6585E Commerce Blvd. Suite #281 Rohnert Park, CA 94928 United States of America I suspect the above address is just a mail drop. I think someone once before told me the address was a fraud-hive. Make certain that you, and the users at your site do not receive this sort of trash in email. Call and provide each and every email address you own. We Respect YOUR Privacy and Honor ALL Remove Requests. To have Your Email Address(es) Removed from our PRIVATE Database, feel free to call us toll-free at our expense at: (888)352-5443. --------------------------------- And some people wonder why there is so much spam ... eliminate this outfit and help make a dent in the volume. Do not forget to get your name off of their mailing list, and let them know that people like them have made the net what it is today, and how pleased you are when you read your email each day, and how you have lots of time to spend figuring out one filter rule after another to keep them out of your sight. To the USA readers, have a great Memorial Day holiday weekend! To the rest of you, have a nice weekend anyway! PAT ------------------------------ From: Kevin Lundy Subject: Re: Smartjack and CSU Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 23:46:27 GMT Organization: @Home Network To all who helped ... We think we have it solved. It was cabling ... but not the house cable. It was the cross connect cable between the smart jack and the house cable. Or the slot the smart jack was on. When we put the Tbird on both monitor (CPE and net) ports, we saw occasional slips. So then we just monitored the CPE side and saw that we weren't seeing the "timing return" consistantly from the CPE. Test the CPE at the CPE and timing return signal was fine. So we just walked the cable back thru each connection until we lost the signal. To minimize the down time, the tech wired a new slot on the mux. When we moved the smart jack to that new slot, the return signal was fine. So it was either the slot or the cross connect cable. Since this has been a 3 week battle, I'm not convinced yet, but at least this time the techs actually observed the problem. Thanks to all. ------------------------------ From: mcharry@erols.com (John McHarry) Subject: Re: Reciprocal Compensation (was Re: Strange Problems) Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 01:20:08 GMT On Tue, 25 May 1999 18:31:45 GMT, Eli Mantel wrote: > Let's remember that the issue of reciprocal compensation doesn't > directly affect what consumers pay for service. By the somewhat > arcane rules in effect, reciprocal compensation is paid only on local > calls, but classifying certain calls as long distance doesn't mean > that consumers will be charged for those calls. It only affects what > the phone companies involved pay each other. It puts a per-minute charge on the call that includes a toll to local subsidy. > It's probably the case that the incumbent local phone companies, such > as PacBell, made a tactical error in lobbying for reciprocal > compensation, with the result that the competing local phone companies > took advantage of the opportunity this created by signing up > businesses to use their service for phone lines that made few or no > outgoing calls, hence making them eligible to receive reciprocal > compensation. They made their bed; let them sleep in it. I guess they could try to compete for the ISP business, if they were willing to settle for competitive rates. > That mistake aside, payment of reciprocal compensation on calls > included in flat-rate service is extremely arbitrary, since both phone > companies involved carry the call part of the way, and neither one > receives any usage-sensitive charges from the consumer. Perhaps, but otherwise the party terminating the call gets nothing at all from the party placing it, yet the call uses its capital investment. If the two companies are of equal size and call mix, it is a wash transaction. Reciprocal compensation is intended as a means of settling the difference. Of course the BOCs figured on a small number of CLEC customers calling mostly BOC customers. > Whether or not charges for local phone service will go up if > reciprocal compensation continues to be paid or ISP charges go up if > reciprocal compensation is dropped is somewhat speculative... If the CLEC has to pay the long distance interconnect rate, cents per minute, it will have to pass that charge to the ISPs. ISPs will have to recover those costs, probably in per minute connect fees. I think most of the BOCs are under rate cap regulation. They need to play "root hog or die" on this one. Of course they have the best Congress money can buy to bail them out. ------------------------------ From: Janet Petrunti Organization: @Home Network Subject: Lucent Sells Sales Group - Comments? Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 02:46:19 GMT In late April Lucent announced that it was selling it's small and midsize business' direct sales group. This unnamed company (as of yet) will become the largest convergence reseller in the U.S. with 1998 revenue of 850 million dollars and over 2,000 sales and support staff. I would be curious to hear any general comments people have about this move, especially the long-term prospects for the market segment that this new company will target, that is businesses with under 250 employees. Has there been any "insider" (telecom) buzz generated by this move? Anyone care to guess about the potential for this company going forward? Thanks for any answers. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #102 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu May 27 15:22:31 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id PAA14482; Thu, 27 May 1999 15:22:31 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 15:22:31 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199905271922.PAA14482@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #103 TELECOM Digest Thu, 27 May 99 15:22:00 EDT Volume 19 : Issue 103 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Reciprocal Compensation (Christopher M. Arfaa) More on "Number Portability" Charges (The Old Bear) Australia Admits part in Echelon (Babu Mengelepouti) The FCC's Money-Go-Round (Monty Solomon) FCC Tries to Limit New Area Codes (Monty Solomon) GR-303 Test Set? (Nate Duehr) Consumer Choice (Monty Solomon) Seeking DSL Carrier (John Coleman) Re: Using V&H to Calculate Distance (Alan Fowler) Re: Judge Freezes Funds In Internet Scam (Thor Lancelot Simon) 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 networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 765 Junction City, KS 66441-0765 Phone: 415-520-9905 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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: christopher.m.arfaa@bellatlantic.COM (Christopher M. Arfaa) Subject: Reciprocal Compensation Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 10:08:30 -0400 To the Editor: There is a lot of confusion surrounding the issue of reciprocal compensation for ISP-bound traffic. First, the fact that the FCC has ruled that such traffic is not "local" does not necessarily mean that CLECs serving ISPs are entitled to _no_ compensation; it depends on their interconnection agreements with the ILEC. Second, the fact that ISP-bound traffic is not local does not meen that CLECs necessarily pay access charges on that traffic under their interconnection agreements. The Massachussets Department of Telecommunications and Energy recently applied the FCC ruling to an interconnection agreement between MCI WorldCom and Bell Atlantic. The DTE held that under the terms of that particular agreement, reciprocal compensation was not payable on ISP-bound traffic. The DTE directed the CLECs and Bell Atlantic to negotiate a solution to the issue of compensation for the traffic. The order can be found at: http://www.magnet.state.ma.us/dpu/telecom/97-116-c/97-116-c.htm In addition to ruling on the specific dispute, the DTE made some particularly detailed and thoughtful observations on the nature of competition and the role of regulators supervising competition in a regulated industry, which are reproduced below: The many comments filed in this case, asserting the importance of requiring reciprocal compensation for ISP-bound traffic to advance toward the policy goal of promoting competition in the local exchange, make clear that it is necessary for this Department to express to the negotiators its views on what competition really means. Much futile debate in public utility regulation, especially in the current environment of developing markets, revolves around unexamined or sometimes distorted use of the terms "competition" and its derivative "competitive". Loose, misleading, or self-serving meaning often underlies disputes and sows confusion. It underlies this dispute as well. In so saying, we do not prejudge any formal renewal or prosecution of the dispute before us last October, where such a renewal might rest "on contractual principles or other legal or equitable considerations," as distinct from general policy arguments. But, as the parties and commenters in this docket will be negotiating, we believe it would be useful to highlight, in general terms, how the Department views underlying policy and economic issues. Otherwise, the parties must negotiate in a vacuum. In addition, certain of the interconnection agreements are coming due for renewal, e.g., MediaOne's agreement. The unqualified payment of reciprocal compensation for ISP-bound traffic, implicit in our October Order's construing of the 1996 Act, does not promote real competition in telecommunications. Rather, it enriches competitive local exchange carriers, Internet service providers, and Internet users at the expense of telephone customers or shareholders. This is done under the guise of what purports to be competition, but is really just an unintended arbitrage opportunity derived from regulations that were designed to promote real competition. A loophole, in a word. There is, however, and we emphasize this point, nothing sinister or even improper about taking advantage of an opportunity such as the one presented by our October Order. One would not expect profit-maximizing enterprises like CLECs and ISPs, rationally pursuing their own ends, to leave it unexploited. Create an opportunity and inventive enterprise will seize upon it. It was ever thus. But regulatory policy, while it may applaud such displays of commercial energy, ought not create such loopholes or, once having recognized their effects, ought not leave them open. Real competition is more than just shifting dollars from one person's pocket to another's. And it is even more than the mere act of some customers' choosing between contending carriers. Real competition is not an outcome in itself--it is a means to an end. The "end" in this case is economic efficiency, which Baumol and Sidak have defined as "that state of affairs in which, as the specialized literature of welfare economics recognizes, no opportunity to promote the general welfare has been neglected. Such an opportunity is defined as the availability of a course of action that will benefit at least some individuals, in their own estimation, in a way not achieved at the expense of others." Toward Competition in Local Telephony, at 24 (emphasis added). Failure by an economic regulatory agency to insist on true competition and economic efficiency in the use of society's resources is tantamount to countenancing and, to some degree, encouraging waste of those resources. Clearly, continuing to require payment of reciprocal compensation along the lines of our October Order is not an opportunity to promote the general welfare. It is an opportunity only to promote the welfare of certain CLECs, ISPs, and their customers, at the expense of Bell Atlantic's telephone customers and shareholders. The Department has consistently rejected attempts over the years to make some customers and competitors better off at the expense of others, all in the name of promoting competition. For example, when the propriety of stranded cost recovery was being debated for the electric industry, the Department (with the sanction of the Supreme Judicial Court and of the General Court) found that electric companies should have an opportunity to recover all of their prudently-incurred, non-mitigable stranded costs. This decision was (and still is) opposed by some on the claim that it purportedly reduces the benefits of competition; but the Department has rejected the notion that the mere shifting of costs to other customers or shareholders can be considered a "benefit" of competition. Similarly, in its recent decision in the natural gas unbundling docket, the Department stated: "Our role is not to guarantee the success of entrants. Rather, our role is to put in place the structural conditions necessary for an efficient competitive process -- one where marketplace decisions of both producers and consumers are made on the basis of incremental costs. An efficient, unbundled gas industry framework would allow customers to compare the LDCs'[local distribution companies] incremental costs to marketers' incremental costs. However, this comparison cannot be made if historic cost commitments are imposed asymmetrically on the LDCs. In other words, if LDCs must include the inefficient costs of past commitments in their prices, while marketers are not required to include those costs for customers who choose to migrate, then marketplace decisions, at least in the near term, are being made on the basis of an asymmetric allocation of historic cost responsibility, not on the basis of incremental costs. This does not lead to efficient competition." Gas Unbundling, D.T.E. 98-32-B, at 30 (1999) (footnote omitted). As the FCC has noted, reciprocal compensation payments for ISP-bound traffic are probably not cost-based. Internet Traffic Order at 29. The revenues generated by reciprocal compensation for that incoming traffic are most likely in excess of the cost of sending such traffic to ISPs. ISP-bound traffic is almost entirely incoming, so it generates significant reciprocal compensation payments from Bell Atlantic to CLECs, an imbalance which enables CLECs to increase their profits or to offer attractive rates and services to Internet service providers, or to do both. Not surprisingly, ISPs view themselves as beneficiaries of this "competition" and argue fervently in favor of maintaining reciprocal compensation for ISP-bound traffic. However, the benefits gained, through this regulatory distortion, by CLECs, ISPs, and their customers do not make society as a whole better off, because they come artificially at the expense of others. Where an increase in income results from regulatory anomaly, rather than from greater competitive efficiency in the marketplace, a regulator is well advise to take his thumb off the scale. We do so today. Arguing that we should not correct the distortions created by reciprocal compensation payments because they benefit ISPs and their customers is much like saying that one should not encourage people to quit smoking, and so avoid adverse personal and public health consequences, merely because some members of society make a living growing tobacco. Decisions like this should be driven by concerns for overall societal welfare and not by concern for preserving the hothouse environment of an artificial market niche. Chris Arfaa (Views expressed are solely my own.) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 12:33:27 -0400 From: The Old Bear Subject: More on "Number Portability" Charges As reported in Newscan (http://www.newsscan.com/) for May 26, 1999: CONSUMER ACTIVISTS CRITICIZE BELL-ATLANTIC CHARGE Consumer activists on the east coast are complaining about a new 23-cent monthly phone fee that Bell Atlantic is charging customers to pay for network changes necessary for "local number portability," so that people can keep their phone numbers if they decide to switch phone companies. Gene Kimmelman of the Consumers Union says, "The regulators aren't doing their jobs. There seems to be an endless price spiral that the FCC was supposed to be offsetting with price reductions." But Lawrence Strickling of the Federal Communications Commission says that spreading the costs of portability across the industry is the fairest way to ensure competition: "It all stems from the notion that everybody will be better off in a competitive environment. It seems quite fair to us that everybody ought to share the costs of creating that competitive environment." source: Washington Post (27 May 99) http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/business/daily/may99/phones27.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 09:43:07 -0700 From: Babu Mengelepouti Reply-To: dialtone@vcn.bc.ca Organization: US Secret Service Subject: Australia Admits Part in Echelon http://www.theage.com.au/daily/990523/news/news3.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 13:08:50 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: The FCC's Money-Go-Round http://www.thestandard.net/articles/mediagrok_display/0,1185,4708,00.html Which is more important: hooking up libraries and schools to the Internet, helping multinational corporations gobble one another up at the fastest possible rate, or making sure the nation doesn't run out of telephone area codes? The duty of multitasking those weighty duties falls on the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), the beleaguered regulatory agency that never seems to satisfy today's technology giants and their political friends. On the eve of the FCC's Thursday meeting, two influential Republican Senators proposed to eliminate the agency's power to review almost all telecommunications mergers. Looking at recent blurry moves by the likes of AT&T and Microsoft, the average American might reasonably conclude that the state of mergers is healthy indeed; Senators John McCain and Orrin Hatch know better. Though none of the nation's big newspapers have yet picked up this story, a Reuters dispatch dryly noted that the bill emerged "after some companies with mergers pending before the FCC complained the agency was taking too long to assess their deals." Faster, FCC, faster! But not too fast: At the same time, leading Republican members of Congress are griping about today's expected FCC vote to wire the nation's schools and libraries to the Net. The money comes from the "e-rate," a $1 billion fee tacked onto telephone bills; the GOP has begun labeling the e-rate a "Gore tax." On this issue, Republicans finds less support from tech mammoths, in part because the government contracts go to firms like Cisco Systems, IBM, Apple and Novell. Besides, as Wired News's Declan McCullagh observes in a first-rate roundup, "Congress has only itself to blame. The FCC's power to levy e-rate taxes comes from the universal service portions of the 1996 Telecommunications Act, a law that had broad bipartisan support." About the only thing the FCC can do to keep everyone happy is change the way it assigns phone numbers. The explosion of mobile phones, Internet use and pagers has created a number shortage, leading some to predict that the United States will run out of phone numbers and area codes in a decade. One proposed solution, as the Wall Street Journal reports, is moving to a 10-digit phone number system. Does that sound like bone-headed bureaucrats at work? Relax: The FCC contracts out phone-number allocation duties to a division of Lockheed Martin. Our phones rest safely in the cradle of the private sector. GOP Heads Call for End to FCC Merger Review http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,37112,00.html?st.ne.fd.tohhed.ni The Price of Wiring Schools http://www.wired.com/news/news/politics/story/19909.html FCC to Propose Phone-Number Changes to Prevent a Shortage of Area Codes http://interactive.wsj.com/articles/SB927761210818782282.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 14:01:01 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: FCC Tries to Limit New Area Codes WASHINGTON (May 27, 1999 11:55 a.m. EDT http://www.nandotimes.com) - Federal regulators will move Thursday to ease the area code crunch that has confused and outraged telephone consumers who are increasingly required to dial 10 digits to make a local call. The number of area codes in the United States has more than doubled in the past few years owing to the proliferation of cellular phones, pagers and competitive local phone carriers. On Thursday, the Federal Communications Commission plans to propose a series of steps, including doling out numbers to new companies in smaller blocks, that would reduce the need for new area codes. http://www.techserver.com/noframes/story/0,2294,53437-85640-608038-0,00.html ------------------------------ From: Nate Duehr Subject: GR-303 Test Set? Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 01:15:18 -0600 Organization: NateTech I'm looking for a TR-303/GR-303 switch protocol analyzer/test set/bulk call generator. Currently we use the Abacus products that do this, and they work fairly well. (Only complaint is that they have this little flashing red light in the corner of the screen for a heartbeat, and flashing red lights in a switch room are generally a no-no.) I've spoken with Ameritech and they're not supporting GR-303 yet. Anyone else know of any other test gear for this protocol yet? I'll check the newsgroup, but please CC: me in e-mail as well! Thanks! Nate Duehr, Technical Service Engineer Carrier Access Corporation (303) 218-5587 Desk Phone ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 05:21:56 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Consumer Choice Passed along FYI to Digest readers: Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 20:40:19 -0700 (PDT) From: Audrie Krause Reply-To: audrie@netaction.org To: undisclosed-recipients:; Dear Friends, I am writing to let you know about Consumer Choice, a new Internet advocacy project which may be of interest to U.S.-based readers of the Micro$oft Monitor. The goal of Consumer Choice is to promote meaningful choices for consumers in telecommunications services. Details are available at: . Interested readers are invited to subscribe to the Consumer Choice Action Alert Mailing List to stay informed. The list will be used to alert subscribers to opportunities to speak out in support of public policies that provide consumers with a choice of local telephone service providers. By now, it is apparent to almost everyone who uses a telephone that the much-touted Telecommunications Act of 1996 hasn't produced the results Congress was looking for. We were promised local phone competition; instead, we've got one Baby Bell merger after another. We were promised lower prices for phone services; instead, prices are rising. In most parts of the nation, residential phone customers are no closer to having a choice of local phone service providers than they were three years ago. That's why it is important for consumers to speak out on this issue. Federal regulators are presently considering two important issues where consumer voices can make a difference -- the proposed takeover of Ameritech by SBC and reduction of the interstate access charges which long distance phone companies must pay to local phone companies for use of the local networks to complete long distance calls. The FCC will be making decisions on both of these issues within the next few months, possibly sooner. Consumer Choice makes it easy for U.S. Internet users to get involved. The site includes background information, links to other resources, and contact information for the Federal Communications Commission. The associated mailing list will keep you informed of new developments and opportunities to speak out on this issue. Subscription information is included below, and is also available on the web site at: : To subscribe to the list, send a blank message to: To subscribe from an address other than the address you are presently using, contact the list owner at: General questions or comments about the Consumer Choice campaign should be sent to me at: audrie@consumerchoice.org. I look forward to working with many of you on this new Internet advocacy campaign. Sincerely, Audrie Krause Consumer Choice! Email: audrie@consumerchoice.org Web: http://www.consumerchoice.org Mail: 601 Van Ness Ave. #631 San Francisco, CA 94102 Phone: (415) 775-8674 Fax: (415) 673-3813 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 09:30:48 -0400 From: John Coleman Reply-To: john_coleman@bigfoot.com Subject: Seeking DSL Carrier I'm looking for a DSL carrier - any help? Thanks. John Coleman ------------------------------ From: amfowler@melbpc.org.au (Alan Fowler) Subject: Re: Using V&H to Calculate Distance Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 11:03:42 GMT Organization: Melbourne PC User Group Inc, Australia fadden@netcom.com (Andy McFadden) wrote: > In article , Charlie C. > wrote: >>> Within North America, rate distance is calculated using the "V&H" system. >>> V stands for "vertical" (north-south position) and H for "horizontal" >>> (east-west position). Each exchange is represented by a location expressed >>> as a V&H co-ordinate. A rate distance can be calculated from two V&H >>> co-ordinate sets based on Pythagorean Theorem, i.e. rate distance = >>> sqrt((V1-V2)^2+(H1-H2)^2)/10 where (V1,H1) is the V&H for one end of a >>> call, and (V2,H2) represents the other end of a call. Wouldn't it be fairer to calculate the great circle distance? Regards, Alan ------------------------------ From: tls@panix.com (Thor Lancelot Simon) Subject: Re: Judge Freezes Funds In Internet Scam Date: 27 May 1999 09:49:42 -0400 Organization: PANIX -- Public Access Networks Corp. Reply-To: tls@rek.tjls.com In article , Bob Goudreau wrote: > tls@panix.com (Thor Lancelot Simon) wrote, in what may well have been > a troll: >>>> Rather than have the FTC pursue >>>> individual perpetrators taking advantage of this confusion, it seems >>>> like it would be highly preferable for the FCC to dictate the use of >>>> the international dialing prefix and country code for calls to the >>>> Caribbean. >>> But under what criteria? If you're going to disqualify the non-US >>> NANP countries from being dialed from the US via 1+NPA dialing, then >>> why not Canada as well? What distinguishes Canada from, say, Jamaica >>> in this respect? Pricing, perhaps (the fact that lots of US long >> Oh, to my mind that's *very* simple. Canada is well-behaved, and the >> Carribean countries which harbor these telephonic scams are not. > I note that "simple" explanations are often wrong. What makes > Canada "well-behaved" in contrast to various Caribbean countries? > AFAIK, phone sex lines exist in Canada and even in the US, not just > in the Caribbean. If it's the higher settlement rates to some of > the Caribbean nations that make them not "well-behaved", then why > weren't you advocating kicking them out of the NANP years ago, when > the rates were as high as they are now or even higher (as indeed were > virtually *all* international rates)? I was. As for why Canada is "well-behaved" whereas various Carribean nations are not, I would suggest that the rule of law -- particularly as regards this type of fraud perpetrated on U.S. citizens -- is better established in Canada and the U.S. than elsewhere in the NANP. >> Certain nations, it seems to me, should be put on notice that their >> free ride in country code 1 will soon be over -- shape up or they'll >> be kicked out for bad behaviour. The FCC could mandate that direct >> dialing end, the NANPA administrator could deallocate the codes, and >> that would, by and large, be that. > And the East Bumf**k Board of Dogcatching and Mosquito Abatement > could also stamp its feet, beat its fists on the walls, and order > NANPA to remove the United States from Country Code 1, to equal > effect, since neither it nor the FCC runs NANPA. U.S. telco relations to the ITU run through the State Department, which, like the FCC, is part of the Executive Branch. Furthermore, the FCC could almost certainly order U.S. IXCs not to allow direct-dial calls to the areas in question, and make it stick. And NANPA was, last I checked, run under a contract let out by the U.S. telcos, which are, of course, subject to FCC regulation ... Will this happen? No. But I can always wish. Thor Lancelot Simon tls@rek.tjls.com "And where do all these highways go, now that we are free?" ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #103 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu May 27 17:58:10 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id RAA22080; Thu, 27 May 1999 17:58:10 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 17:58:10 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199905272158.RAA22080@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #104 TELECOM Digest Thu, 27 May 99 17:58:00 EDT Volume 19 : Issue 104 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Here is Why Email Has Gotten So Spam-Ridden (Joseph T. Adams) Re: Here is Why Email Has Gotten So Spam-Ridden (Matthew Black) Re: Here is Why Email Has Gotten So Spam-Ridden (Andrew Green) Re: Here is Why Email Has Gotten So Spam-Ridden (Art Walker) Re: Unsolicited FAX Spamming (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Re: Smartjack and CSU (Nate Duehr) Re: Canadian CLECs (Peter Hope-Tindall) Re: Using V&H to Calculate Distance (Larry Finch) Re: Do You Feel Like a Number? (Steve Cogorno) Re: Airtouch in NYC? (Jon Solomon) Last Laugh! Spam, All Spam, Nothing But Spam (Massimiliano Scagliarini) 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 networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 765 Junction City, KS 66441-0765 Phone: 415-520-9905 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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: joe@apk.net (Joseph T. Adams) Subject: Re: Here is Why Email Has Gotten So Spam-Ridden Date: 27 May 1999 11:47:43 GMT Organization: Quality Data Division of JTAE TELECOM Digest Editor (ptownson@telecom-digest.org) wrote: > No, we are talking 'instant spam', instant complaints to your ISP, > and if some had their way, instant death to the perpetrator, although > some would probably be more merciful about the latter than others. If I were in charge they'd be treated like any other thief: (a) fourfold restitution for the first offense (and this can be MILLIONS of dollars for a big enough spam); (b) prison or close monitoring, until the debt is paid; (c) penalty doubles for each subsequent offense. If it could be proven that the person acted willfully and could never make adequate restitution -- as would be true of most spammers - then the second offense would result in the death penalty. Stealing is only a slower form of murder -- if you steal my time, or my money (which is equivalent to time), you are stealing what my life is made of, and if you steal the time of millions of people, it is similar to murder in terms of its impact on society. I see no reason why the penalty should be any less. Of course, all people, even spammers, are entitled to due process of law, meaning they need to be proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt before any criminal penalties could be applied. So "instant death" is probably not appropriate. Eventual death, after guilt is proven, very well may be. Joe ------------------------------ From: black@csulb.edu (Matthew Black) Subject: Re: Here is Why Email Has Gotten So Spam-Ridden Date: 27 May 1999 14:48:59 GMT Organization: Your Organization In article , ptownson@telecom- digest.org says ... '[original message edited for brevity --matt 990527] > [TO ORDER BY POSTAL MAIL]: > Neuport Internet Marketing > 6585E Commerce Blvd. Suite #281 > Rohnert Park, CA 94928 > United States of America > I suspect the above address is just a mail drop. I think someone once > before told me the address was a fraud-hive. Pat-- I'm told the US Postal Service will soon implement new rules regarding private mailbox companies. Users will no longer be permitted the use of "Suite" to imply a business presence. Rather, private mailbox users must indicate something like "PPO BOX" instead of "Suite" so customers will know that there is no business presence at the location. The USPS will also force the private mailbox operator to keep a photocopy of the box owners' drivers license on file for public inspection. The law provides that anyone can ask for the box user's registration information (drivers license). While these rules will help stop marketing scams similar to your message, it takes away individual privacy. [to send me e-mail, remove something obvious from my reply-to address] ------------------------------(c) 1999 Matthew Black, all rights reserved-- matthew black | Opinions expressed herein belong to me and network & systems specialist | may not reflect those of my employer california state university | network services SSA-180E | e-mail: black at csulb dot edu 1250 bellflower boulevard | PGP fingerprint: 6D 14 36 ED 5F 34 C4 B3 long beach, ca 90840 | E9 1E F3 CB E7 65 EE BC ------------------------------ From: Andrew Green Subject: Re: Here is Why Email Has Gotten So Spam-Ridden Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 11:39:47 -0500 First of all, for the record... > From: mrichards@royal.net > Received: from 98AA9945.ipt.aol.com (98AA9945.ipt.aol.com > [152.170.153.69]) by insrv01.eifel.net (NTMail 3.03.0017/16.aaal) > with ESMTP id ta103005 for ; > Tue, 18 May 1999 21:19:38 +0200 > Date: Tue, 18 May 99 11:26:03 EST This appears to have originated from AOL, and has no apparent connection to royal.net, the easily-forged From line notwithstanding. TELECOM Digest Editor notes: >> To: receiver@planetmail.com >> >> Subject: Re: how is your business doing? > I have no idea who 'planetmail.com' is, or why I would > be a 'receiver' at that place. Probably just a collection > of names for spam purposes. I'd say it's just some third party's address, and you were listed in the BCC: field. >> "Many business people are finding out that they can now >> advertise in ways that they never could have afforded in >> the past. The cost of sending mass e-mail is extremely low, >> and the response rate is high and quick." - USA TODAY > > I would expect *USA TODAY*, which has always been run > by a bunch of whores out for an easy buck to say something > like this. Remind them of this quote the next time you get > asked to subscribe to 'The Nation's Newspaper', that you do > not support people who support or encourage spam. Oh, come now, Pat; you correctly poke holes in everything the spammer has said up to this point, but then a "quote" from USA Today comes along and you swallow it, hook, line and sinker? I see no more reason to believe that this undated "quote" ever existed than any other nonsense also presented here. >> "Consider this: My $1,000 PC is now a personal broadcasting >> station that reaches more people than the CBS affiliate in >> Washington D.C. I can get more local viewers with a single >> e-mail posting to the Internet than Sally Jessy Raphael can >> get in sweeps month." - INTERNET FOR DUMMIES, 3RD EDITION > Remember the folks who publish the 'Dummies' book series also > in your prayers ... all my 'Dummy' books are going in the trash > can later today. Again, I see no reason to believe this is accurate (I don't have that book handy), but note that this quote appears to be more of a refer- ence to a Usenet newsgroup posting anyway. Certainly the "Dummies" publishers would never endorse this junk, as John R. ("Internet for Dummies") Levine would probably agree. >> Neuport Internet Marketing >> 6585E Commerce Blvd. Suite #281 >> Rohnert Park, CA 94928 >> United States of America > I suspect the above address is just a mail drop. I think someone > once before told me the address was a fraud-hive. These idiots are long-time spammers, usually listing that address. Left unspoken is the fact that they need to do their advertising via throwaway accounts at other providers, since obviously anyone who actually _uses_ their advertising method is nuked in short order. This is something that would be demonstrated to their potential purchasers if they were to solicit email responses instead of faxes or phone calls: suckers trying to respond to an email address would find it mysteriously unavailable. I imagine they bank on the fact that the dimwits they're selling to won't notice the irony: A company advertising about doing business on the Internet is not actually conducting _their_ business on the Internet. Andrew C. Green (312) 853-8331 Datalogics, Inc. 101 N. Wacker, Ste. 1800 http://www.datalogics.com Chicago, IL 60606-7301 Fax: (312) 853-8282 ------------------------------ From: Art.Walker@onesourcetech.com (Art Walker) Subject: Re: Here is Why Email Has Gotten So Spam-Ridden Organization: Recovering Nebraskans Clinic - Denver, CO Reply-To: Art.Walker@onesourcetech.com Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 15:53:02 GMT On Wed, 26 May 1999 17:30:18 EDT, Our Esteemed Moderator wrote: > And some people wonder why there is so much spam ... eliminate this > outfit and help make a dent in the volume. Better yet, change the pricing structure for Internet e-mail to a "charge per message" policy (with mandatory digital signatures for billing authentication), and the economic incentive for 'spam' would be gone. Art [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think that is what it is going to come to eventually; users being 'charged' some nominal amount to send email, with ISP's contributing to a pool according to some formula and receiving pay-outs from the same pool according to some other formula. It may be totally transparent to users who see no difference at all with each ISP giving each user some allotment of email traffic outbound at no extra charge as part of their membership, but if the user pays (as an example) twenty dollars per month for service, the ISP puts a dollar of it in the pool with other ISPs getting seventy-five cents of it perhaps and the first ISP getting back twenty-five cents, or whatever. The only problem with any sort of 'back office billing function' like this however -- despite the obvious technical ones -- is that IMO it tends to 'legitimatize' trafficing in spam. It gives the spammer a reason to continue since he can rightfully claim he is 'paying his way on the net'. A better approach is to attempt to isolate the spammers. Positively refuse connectivity to ISPs who refuse to take action against spammers or who have too many unaccountable 'incidents' with spammers due to negligence. Perhaps this function could be assigned to whoever handles domain name/number assignments from one year to the next. Let them work for some of the money they charge to register your site. :) When an ISP expells a user, he will be required to report the matter to the issuing authority, who in turn will run a mailing list sort of thing telling other ISPs; i.e. Spamford Wallace got cut by ISP 'X'; other guys are not to take him on unless they want the same thing to happen to them. Trouble is, ISPs need to be convinced somehow to work together on mutual problems. Even AT&T works with Sprint and MCI on matters of mutual concern such as extreme examples of toll fraud or network abuse. You old guys, who have been around since the Internet was 'invented' know the routine in the 1980's: maybe you were what was called a 'Unix shell collector' ... you had guest account status at various universities like I did (still do) ... a couple shells at berkeley.edu, maybe one at lcs.mit.edu, perhaps one at toronto.edu, and a couple in Florida somewhere. Maybe you even had root on a couple of work stations along the way because you were trusted and knew what you were doing. And if you acted-out in an offensive way using your priviledges, not only did the sysadmin close your account, tar your directories and send you packing, but the next day all the sysadmins knew about it, and what you had done, and you were lucky if a couple other shells weren't gone the next time you went telnetting over to use them, to say nothing of root passwords getting changed before you could blink your eyes. Well, the net was smaller and more closely-knit in those days, and such fast and cohesive responses to problem users are not as likely now. But the idea still has merit I think. If you screw up one place, you are welcome in no places. If one sysadmin catches you spamming, then you are out -- on your ass! You go on a 'hot list' and stay there for a year or so; come back and see us in a year and let's try to discover what you have learned, if anything; how therapeutic the enforced silence has been for you. If you get caught 'on the net' during the enforced silence period (sort of like driving while your license is suspended) then prosecution will be recommended, for whatever such a recommendation would accomplish. Of course this would require diligent cooperation between ISPs; and I am not at all sure they would work together. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Unsolicited FAX Spamming Organization: Excelsior Computer Services From: joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 16:55:31 GMT In article , John R. Covert wrote: > You thought Title 47 of the U.S. code would stop unsolicited FAX > spamming, didn't you? Well, unfortunately, you were wrong. > See http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/47/227.text.html and note that in > the section for faxes, the award is due even for a single call, with no > need to say "stop" and wait for another call. I've been hit by the same thing, but the calls are all going to my VOICE number. I went away for a week, and returned to find my voice mailbox full of fax messages. Then I got a fax at 2:15 in the morning, and from another company at midnight. Do I have any recourse? From the URL above, it looks like it's only illegal to send faxes to a fax machine. Is it legal to keep pestering me this way? Thanks, Joel ------------------------------ From: Nate Duehr Subject: Re: Smartjack and CSU Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 01:11:11 -0600 Organization: NateTech Kevin Lundy wrote: > Is there any recommended maximum distance from the smartjack to the > CSU? I have a new T1 voice service that is giving me hell. It's an > intermittent problem - slips, dropped calles, static, etc. Kevin, One other thing to check with intermittent problems on SmartJack installations, is to MAKE SURE that the installer used the correct connectors for the RJ45 at the patch panel. We see this messed up in the field quite often. There are different types of connectors for stranded and solid wire cables, and we regularly get calls from customers describing problems like you've had where eventually someone takes a good hard look at the RJ45 connector and finds that it's wrong. Stranded wire connectors "pierce" the wire, and typically have two "teeth" that do this. Solid wire connectors "grab" the wire and typically look like a "slot" with two connectors on one side and a third in the middle on the other, some people say they look like paper-clips, but I don't like that description. Often, the tech installing the SmartJack has a box of RJ45's, doesn't know the difference, and starts crimping. If the connectors were for stranded wire, eventually they work loose inside the connector housing but the shield of the cable is still held solidly by the back end of the plug, causing intermittent problems. I'm wondering if the "bad jack" you described is really a bad connector on the cross-connect cable from the SmartJack to whatever your cable is terminated on if it's not crimped directly onto your cable. In general, my opinion about SmartJacks is mixed. I like their flexibility when done correctly, but good old wirewrap works better if you have the time and are good at it. Good luck! Nate Duehr, Technical Service Engineer Carrier Access Corporation (http://www.carrieraccess.com) (303) 218-5587 -- Desk Phone ------------------------------ From: Peter Hope-Tindall Subject: Re: Canadian CLECs Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 11:47:38 -0400 Organization: XL Consulting Reply-To: peter@hope-tindall.com The CRTC requires CLECs to register in Canada. A Current listing may be obtained from a link on the following page: http://www.crtc.gc.ca/ENG/PROC_REP/TELECOM/1999/8180/8180-8-99.htm Regards, Peter Hope-Tindall President - XL Consulting peter@hope-tindall.com (416) 410-0240 ------------------------------ From: Larry Finch Subject: Re: Using V&H to Calculate Distance Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 14:23:13 -0400 Organization: AT&T WorldNet Services Reply-To: LarryFinch@worldnet.att.net "Charlie C." wrote: > Scott Prugh wrote: >> I found the following in TELECOM Digest: >> Within North America, rate distance is calculated using the "V&H" system. >> V stands for "vertical" (north-south position) and H for "horizontal" >> (east-west position). Each exchange is represented by a location expressed >> as a V&H co-ordinate. A rate distance can be calculated from two V&H >> co-ordinate sets based on Pythagorean Theorem, i.e. rate distance = >> sqrt((V1-V2)^2+(H1-H2)^2)/10 where (V1,H1) is the V&H for one end of a >> call, and (V2,H2) represents the other end of a call. >> Seems pretty easy. So I pulled out my LERG and took the switch coordinates >> for two switches: >> SW1 = 'PSWYNJPIDS5' (v1,h1) = (5080,1444) -- PISCATAWAY >> SW2 = 'ACMEWAXARS1' (v2,h2) = (6102,8901) -- SEATTLE >> And plugged away: >> rd = sqrt( (5080-6102)^2 + (1444-8901)^2 )/10 >> rd = sqrt( -1022^2 + -7457^2)/10 >> rd = sqrt( 1044484 + 55606849)/10 >> rd = sqrt( 56651333)/10 >> rd = 7526/10 >> rd = 752 >> This is obviously wrong, since Seattle is more that 752 miles from >> Piscataway. >> What's wrong here? Is the formula I have dated? > Math looks good to me. I notice that the result is off by a factor > of about 3.1416 -- hmmmmm... Could the original presentation of the > formula have an omitted term? It's actually off by the sqrt of 10; the 10 belongs within the sqrt. If you make that change you get 2380 miles. Still off, because V & H coordinates assume a flat earth. But a lot closer. Larry Finch ::LarryFinch@worldnet.att.net larry@prolifics.com ::LarryFinch@aol.com PDCLarry@aol.com ::(whew!) N 40º 53' 47" W 74º 03' 56" ------------------------------ From: Steve Cogorno Subject: Re: Do You Feel Like a Number? Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 11:36:03 PDT TELECOM Digest Editor said: > In these times, the phrase 'public servant' translates into 'public > master', and surely they must be in their glory about now. Maybe with > some effort, we can get Congress to repeal this law, but don't count > on it. George Orwell was only a few years off in his book '1984', when > Big Brother was just a teen-ager. Now he is coming of age. Perhaps it is a generational thing, but I am not concerned at all about being asked to furnish my SSN. Why the panic about government stalking? Steve cogorno@netcom.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, as Big Brother once pointed out, 'if you have nothing to hide, what do you care if they want to search your premises, ask you a lot of personal questions or audit all your comings-and-goings?' My answer to that is this: because in these times, and for quite a few years now, there are so many laws on the books that *everyone* is guilty of something or another. There are sufficient 'catch-all' laws around to insure that you could be arrested and sent to prison no matter who you are or what you were doing at the time. Since police prosper on distorting and taking out of context whatever you tell them -- as does much of the government -- therefore you are best telling them nothing at all, or as little as possible. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Airtouch in NYC? From: Jon Solomon Date: 27 May 1999 15:26:43 -0400 Patrick, I was the person in Boston who you tried this with ... You are correct about what you have said, except for the the following: When you told me what to dial ... (312) xxx-ROAM ... that's when the phone you were using rang. I was able to access my phone dialing locally with area code, but when I dialed Chicago roam service, back when it was in use, your phone rang. I don't believe Cell-One uses roam service like that any more. It was fun (and innocent in this case, I was prepared to pay the charges if I were billed for it.) Just thought I would give my 2c worth. --jsol [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Your two cents is always welcome. I had forgotten that you first dialed into xxx-ROAM and then your cellular number when we did that experiment. In any event, it was fun seeing how easily in those days the cellular carriers could be decieved; just program your cellphone to some number, that's all that mattered back then. I have not heard anything at all about xxx-ROAM for many years and do not know if any carrier is using it any longer. I know that Ameritech prides itself on being able to locate any subscriber anywhere, anytime. As soon as any tower on God's green earth -- or it seems like it -- sees you out there, right away the Ameritech computer is told about it. And no more monkeying around reprogramming the cell phone to a new number for those occassions of midnight madness either. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 17:31:40 +0200 From: Massimiliano Scagliarini Subject: Last Laugh! Spam, All Spam, Nothing But Spam Hi! I'm sorry to inform you, Mr. Moderator, that this piece of mail from Italy is in fact a spam of the most common type. They are just trying to sell a consulting service: (I'm translating) "The new consulting service consists in determing, using a sophisticated software (LOL: maybe an Excel sheet? :))))), the best calling plan (fixed and cellular) based on the user characteristics, giving the cheapest options and the most suitable for his needs". --------------------- And the worst part is that there isn't even a toll-free number to call ;) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I just realized what a brilliant way this would be to spam all the moderated newsgroups ... just send it in some foreign language the moderator cannot read, then he has to publish it and ask his readers to try and figure it out. :) Then as everyone on the mailing list reads it together, suddenly they realize they are getting spammed; but too late, they have already read it. And to think I spent all that time trying to rewrite the backslashes in order to not lose any possible meaning or misspell any words while at the same time humoring sendmail into accepting it without tossing a few thousand mails back in my box with a stern warning that eight-bit characters cannot be used in a two-bit digest, or sent to a seven-bit site, for that matter. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #104 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri May 28 12:49:35 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id MAA26864; Fri, 28 May 1999 12:49:35 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 28 May 1999 12:49:35 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199905281649.MAA26864@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #105 TELECOM Digest Fri, 28 May 99 12:49:00 EDT Volume 19 : Issue 105 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: FCC Tries to Limit New Area Codes (Roy McCammon) Re: FCC Tries to Limit New Area Codes (Art Kamlet) Re: Judge Freezes Funds In Internet Scam (Art Kamlet) It Goes Two Ways, was Re: Sex Sites Getting Screwed (wkyr0xwb@my-deja.com) PBX or Hybrid? (Ron Walter) Does Somebody Know the DRS (Digital Reference Sequence)? (Carlos L.) Re: Using V&H to Calculate Distance (John McHarry) Re: Using V&H to Calculate Distance (David Esan) Re: Unsolicited Fax Spamming (David Esan) Re: Here is Why Email Has Gotten So Spam-Ridden (John R. Levine) Re: Here is Why Email Has Gotten So Spam-Ridden (John David Galt) Re: Here is Why Email Has Gotten So Spam-Ridden (Joey Lindstrom) Re: Here is Why Email Has Gotten So Spam-Ridden (Jon W.) Re: Here is Why Email Has Gotten So Spam-Ridden (Bill Godfrey) Re: Do You Feel Like a Number? (John R. Levine) 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 networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 765 Junction City, KS 66441-0765 Phone: 415-520-9905 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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: Roy McCammon Subject: Re: FCC Tries to Limit New Area Codes Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 15:50:42 -0500 Organization: 3M-Telecom Systems Division Reply-To: rbmccammon@mmm.com Monty Solomon wrote: > WASHINGTON (May 27, 1999 11:55 a.m. EDT http://www.nandotimes.com) - > Federal regulators will move Thursday to ease the area code crunch > that has confused and outraged telephone consumers who are > increasingly required to dial 10 digits to make a local call. > The number of area codes in the United States has more than doubled in > the past few years owing to the proliferation of cellular phones, > pagers and competitive local phone carriers. > On Thursday, the Federal Communications Commission plans to propose a > series of steps, including doling out numbers to new companies in > smaller blocks, that would reduce the need for new area codes. I'd much rather add digits on the other end. I'd have my base number, add 1 for my pager, 2 for my cell phone, etc. ------------------------------ From: kamlet@infinet.com (Art Kamlet) Subject: Re: FCC Tries to Limit New Area Codes Date: 27 May 1999 16:06:23 -0400 Organization: InfiNet Reply-To: kamlet@infinet.com In article , Monty Solomon wrote: > The number of area codes in the United States has more than doubled in > the past few years owing to the proliferation of cellular phones, > pagers and competitive local phone carriers. > On Thursday, the Federal Communications Commission plans to propose a > series of steps, including doling out numbers to new companies in > smaller blocks, that would reduce the need for new area codes. I assume this means there will now be a Number Pooling Standard? Or will these be rules that make assumptions about what the industry's number pooling standard will -- or will have to -- contain? Sounds like the FCC got a but impatient with footdragging on the Number Pooling standard as well as Local Number Portability implementation, and are plowing forward. If so, this would tell the industry to stop stalling and do it. Phone companies have been charging customers for their eventual LNP costs, so they really have no good policically correct excuse. And if the FCC or consumer groups can make the public aware of the number pooling issue, without telephone companies adding a N-P charge to phone bills :^) they might get N-P working as early as this year. I wouldn;t mind seeing that, now. Art Kamlet Columbus, Ohio kamlet@infinet.com ------------------------------ From: kamlet@infinet.com (Art Kamlet) Subject: Re: Judge Freezes Funds In Internet Scam Date: 27 May 1999 16:00:12 -0400 Organization: InfiNet Reply-To: kamlet@infinet.com In article , Thor Lancelot Simon wrote: > U.S. telco relations to the ITU run through the State Department, Ah, for the days of the old Department of Commerce! > which, like the FCC, is part of the Executive Branch. Not so. The FCC and several other commissions are not under the executive branch. They are funded like any other government agency, their commissioners are nominated for fixed terms by the president with the advice and consent of the Senate, but unlike the Secretary of State, who can be fired by the president, the FCC commissioners can be removed only by impeachment or expiration of their term of office. True, their budget can be cut if they act uppity, but they are not actually part of the executive branch. Their "judges" are not part of the judicial branch either, but decisions of FCC judges may be appealed directly to the Washington DC federal circuit court, which is one level up from your usual US District courts. The Federal Circuit/Supreme court also act as the other restraining power on the FCC. > the FCC could almost certainly order U.S. IXCs not to allow > direct-dial calls to the areas in question, and make it stick. And > NANPA was, last I checked, run under a contract let out by the > U.S. telcos, which are, of course, subject to FCC regulation ... > Will this happen? No. But I can always wish. Under the order of Modified Final Judgment of 1982, the federal district court for District of Columbia, Judge Harold Greene presiding, ruled that AT&T would keep control of Western Electric but spin off the regional into ten companies (currently eight -- PacTel merging into SBC and NYNEX merging into Bell Atlantic, going towards seven when SBC & Ameritech merge) and that that an organization to coordinate NANP and National Emergency communications would be created, orginally called Bellcore (later LockheedMartin/BCR later Telcore). I don't believe any of the subsequent communications acts passed by Congress removed Bellcore's role in that regard. I'm old fashioned enough to still think of them as Bellcore, but they do work with both international and UN organizations as well as the FCC on establishing standards. What I cannot speak for is how a Bellcore, greatly diminished in power and influence, can still carry out this function and how much influence they have in resisting an FCC whose current chairman speaks loudly and carries a big stick. Art Kamlet Columbus, Ohio kamlet@infinet.com ------------------------------ From: wkyr0xwb@my-deja.com Subject: It Goes Two Ways, was Re: Sex Sites Getting Screwed Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 21:56:34 GMT Organization: Deja.com - Share what you know. Learn what you don't. Let's have a little balance by seeing some of the ways that the sex site purveyors screw the customers. 1. Using a credit card to check age. How can they say this with a straight face? Even if a CC number did this, an expired number would do this just as well. However, they want a currently valid one. The real reason is that, altho they say they won't charge the card, they will later try to think of reasons to charge it. 2. Read the fine print on how to cancel a continuing agreement. Some of the sites require you to go thru the process twice or more, several days apart. The stated reason is to give you another chance to consider. Of course, if you forget to go back to the site a second time to recancel, or you're away from a terminal, you're stuck. 3. There was the recent story about a major sex site CC fraud. There were several components, so I'm not sure if this was one fraud or several. In any case, they included: - charging customers for an extra cycle after they canceled, - fraudulently charging 400,000 CCs, perhaps randomly generating the numbers to charge, and - transferring the money offshore to hide it. Remember that once you've given one of these services (sexy or not) a number, you have to be alert for years after for fake charges. One internet service started charging me monthly charges, for the first time, years after I'd canceled the free trial, and over a year after I'd canceled the CC. Few people realize that when you cancel a CC, your account may stay open for a year or more for any delayed charges to be posted. Of course, I protested these charges, and the bank reluctantly reversed them, but I don't need the hassle. What I need to make me comfortable here is an electronic money order or electronic cash. I need something that does not give the recipient any means to debit me any more money than I sent him. I'm aware of some initial efforts like this, but don't trust their operators not to take my money and run, like BCCI, the Bank of Sark, Bernie Cornfeld, Robert Vesco's IOS, etc, etc. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 17:42:48 -0500 From: Ron Walter Subject: PBX or Hybrid? Is there a standard definition for when a phone system is no longer a hybrid and is instead a full PBX? Can a full PBX also be known as a hybrid? Any input on this would be a great help to me. Thank you. Ron Walter Capitol City Telephone Lincoln NE ------------------------------ From: carlosl@marte.cinv.iteso.mx Subject: Does Somebody Know the DRS (Digital Reference Sequence) ? Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 23:00:08 GMT Organization: Deja.com - Share what you know. Learn what you don't. Hi ! I want to know the bytes that specify the DRS (Digital Reference Sequence) used in digital communications (T1). Any reference is appreciated. Best, Carlos ------------------------------ From: mcharry@erols.com (John McHarry) Subject: Re: Using V&H to Calculate Distance Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 23:30:32 GMT On Thu, 27 May 1999 11:03:42 GMT, amfowler@melbpc.org.au (Alan Fowler) wrote: > fadden@netcom.com (Andy McFadden) wrote: >> In article , Charlie C. >> wrote: >>>> Within North America, rate distance is calculated using the "V&H" system. ... > Wouldn't it be fairer to calculate the great circle distance? Not by enough to make any difference. The V&H coordinates are based on a Lambert conformal projection that yields straight line distances that vary from the great circle distance by a couple miles or so, worst case. ------------------------------ From: davidesan@my-deja.com (David Esan) Subject: Re: Using V&H to Calculate Distance Date: Fri, 28 May 1999 14:37:18 GMT Organization: Deja.com - Share what you know. Learn what you don't. In article , LarryFinch@worldnet.att. net wrote: >> Math looks good to me. I notice that the result is off by a factor >> of about 3.1416 -- hmmmmm... Could the original presentation of the >> formula have an omitted term? > It's actually off by the sqrt of 10; the 10 belongs within the sqrt. > If you make that change you get 2380 miles. Still off, because V & H > coordinates assume a flat earth. But a lot closer. I don't think the V&H coordinates assume a flat earth -- I think this calculation assumes a flat earth. The routine that I have always used, derived from ATT FCC #10 (or did they move it to #1 now ???) has a fudge factor multiple that is built in. One calculates the difference in the V coordinates and the difference in the H coordinates, divides by 10 and then squares the result ((v1-v2)/10)**2. Add the two results together. If the total is > 1777, divide the delta-V and delta-H by 10, square that result, readd. Repeat if needed. Then having a number less than 1777, multiply by a fudge factor that ranges from .9 to over 53,000. I think that this will solve the round earth problem. ------------------------------ From: davidesan@my-deja.com (David Esan) Subject: Re: Unsolicited FAX Spamming Date: Fri, 28 May 1999 14:27:33 GMT Organization: Deja.com - Share what you know. Learn what you don't. In article , joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) wrote: > In article , John R. Covert > wrote: >> You thought Title 47 of the U.S. code would stop unsolicited FAX >> spamming, didn't you? Well, unfortunately, you were wrong. >> See http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/47/227.text.html and note that in >> the section for faxes, the award is due even for a single call, with no >> need to say "stop" and wait for another call. > I've been hit by the same thing, but the calls are all going to my > VOICE number. I went away for a week, and returned to find my voice > mailbox full of fax messages. Then I got a fax at 2:15 in the > morning, and from another company at midnight. > Do I have any recourse? > From the URL above, it looks like it's only illegal to send faxes to > a fax machine. Is it legal to keep pestering me this way? How about if you hook a fax machine to your voice phone at night? Then you could find out who is calling you. I would bet this is not a spam fax, but rather a misprogrammed machine. By finding out who sent the fax, you may be able to persuade them to fix the problem. [I am sure that PAT is going to remind us about the German couple and First Chicago Bank, or at least point us to the telecom archives.] [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You already gave the reminder, so I do not need to. Thanks, and yes, see the archives for an interesting account of a bank's fax machine that was misprogrammed to the extent that international authorities, AT&T and a local telco had to get involved in correcting the problem. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: 27 May 1999 21:14:26 -0400 From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: Here is Why Email Has Gotten So Spam-Ridden Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > "Consider this: My $1,000 PC is now a personal broadcasting > station that reaches more people than the CBS affiliate in > Washington D.C. I can get more local viewers with a single > e-mail posting to the Internet than Sally Jessy Raphael can > get in sweeps month." - INTERNET FOR DUMMIES, 3RD EDITION Actually, this is a real quote from the original preface to Internet for Dummies, written in 1993, long before spam was a problem, which we stopped using several years ago. It's completely out of context here -- he was referring to regular legitimate mailing lists and usenet, not spam. This shows up in a lot of spam, and when we can figure out who the spammer is, we wave a lawyer at them to make them stop using the quote. > Remember the folks who publish the 'Dummies' book series also in > your prayers ... all my 'Dummy' books are going in the trash can > later today. Oh, humph, I'll send you nice new ones. In Croatian. 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: John David Galt Organization: Diogenes the Cynic Hot-Tubbing Society Subject: Re: Here is Why Email Has Gotten So Spam-Ridden Date: Fri, 28 May 1999 05:08:48 GMT Quoth Matthew Black : > I'm told the US Postal Service will soon implement new rules regarding > private mailbox companies. Users will no longer be permitted the use > of "Suite" to imply a business presence. Rather, private mailbox > users must indicate something like "PPO BOX" instead of "Suite" so > customers will know that there is no business presence at the > location. The USPS will also force the private mailbox operator to > keep a photocopy of the box owners' drivers license on file for public > inspection. The law provides that anyone can ask for the box user's > registration information (drivers license). While these rules will > help stop marketing scams similar to your message, it takes away > individual privacy. The new rules have already been enacted and were supposed to take effect April 26, but they have been postponed six months. Details at: http://www.usps.gov/feedback/cmra_faq.htm John David Galt ------------------------------ From: Joey Lindstrom Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 18:18:27 -0600 Reply-To: Joey Lindstrom Subject: Re: Here is Why Email Has Gotten So Spam-Ridden On Thu, 27 May 1999 17:58:10 -0400 (EDT), Andrew Green wrote: > These idiots are long-time spammers, usually listing that address. > Left unspoken is the fact that they need to do their advertising via > throwaway accounts at other providers, since obviously anyone who > actually _uses_ their advertising method is nuked in short order. This > is something that would be demonstrated to their potential purchasers > if they were to solicit email responses instead of faxes or phone > calls: suckers trying to respond to an email address would find it > mysteriously unavailable. I imagine they bank on the fact that the > dimwits they're selling to won't notice the irony: A company > advertising about doing business on the Internet is not actually > conducting _their_ business on the Internet. Or how about the ultimate irony ... you could pay for their spamware with your credit card, and then dispute the charge when it comes in ... / From the messy desktop of Joey Lindstrom / Email: Joey@GaryNumanFan.NU or joey@lindstrom.com / Phone: +1 403 313-JOEY / FAX: +1 413 643-0354 (yes, 413 not 403) / Visit The NuServer! http://www.GaryNumanFan.NU / Visit The Webb! http://webb.GaryNumanFan.NU / / Ever notice how irons have a setting for permanent press? I don't get / it... --Steven Wright ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 14:59:27 CDT From: jonw@ripco.com (Jon W.) Subject: Re: Here is Why Email Has Gotten So Spam-Ridden Oh Pat, Pat, Pat. As a Chicagoan, an old-time BBS'er and internet enthusiast, I have long appreciated the work you do. But you have fallen for one of the oldest tricks of spammers: sending your email address to their "remove" resources always results in any new addresses they didn't already have being ADDED to their next list. So then they can increase the number in their promotional garbage for next time. Good Luck JRW ------------------------------ From: Bill Godfrey Subject: Re: Here is Why Email Has Gotten So Spam-Ridden Date: Thu, 27 May 99 21:28:35 TELECOM Digest Editor writes: > ** You Will Receive EVERYTHING Above for ONLY: $395.00! Strange definition of free. > We Respect YOUR Privacy and Honor ALL Remove Requests. To have > Your Email Address(es) Removed from our PRIVATE Database, feel > free to call us toll-free at our expense at: (888)352-5443. Hmmm ... I wonder if they would accept removal requests of "Please remove all email addresses ending in 'bacchae.demon.co.uk'" If they won't do that, I'd have to resort to listing each one individually. "a@bacchae.demon.co.uk. b@bacchae.demon.co.uk... zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz@bacchae.demn.co.uk" I have a speech synthesiser and a C compiler. I'm not afraid to use them. Anyway, I live in England, and that would cost be international rates. Ah well! But before any of you consider responding to junk mail removal requests, try a little expriment. 1. Get an email account at a free email service. 2. Via your new email account, write to as many removal request addresses as you can find. 3. Wait a week. 4. Check your email. (Woah, what a lot of spam!) Odd, isn't it. There is no way that new address could have got onto the spammers list except by the removal request. Gosh, you don't think they just add those addresses to their main list of people to spam, do you? 5. Delete the new account. Don't waste resources. Bill, likes having unlimited email addresses. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: One reason I opened the service at http://telecom-digest.org/postoffice was to provide as many email addresses as needed for *legitimate* use, to combat spam or whatever the user's requirements were. If you have some business that needs to be taken care of, you are welcome to username@telecom-digest.zzn.com as a blind address. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: 27 May 1999 21:18:43 -0400 From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: Do You Feel Like a Number? Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > Perhaps it is a generational thing, but I am not concerned at all about > being asked to furnish my SSN. Why the panic about government stalking? Because it makes it much easier to build large, intrusive, easily correlated databases. I'm not too worried about the legitimate functions of government, but I'm quite worried about $19,000/yr file clerks who find that selling visits to the database to their sleazy friends is a quick way to make a few extra bucks. On the other hand, I haven't been able to find any confirmation of this particular horror story anywhere else, so it's probably an urban legend. 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 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #105 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri May 28 13:51:14 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id NAA29498; Fri, 28 May 1999 13:51:14 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 28 May 1999 13:51:14 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199905281751.NAA29498@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #106 TELECOM Digest Fri, 28 May 99 13:51:00 EDT Volume 19 : Issue 106 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Book Review: "Teach Yourself Microsoft Exchange Server" (Rob Slade) (NPA) NXX-ROAM Access Availability (Eric Morson) EU-US Talks Close to Collapse - Web Privacy War Ensues? (Monty Solomon) Save Those Area Codes (Monty Solomon) Myterious Intercept Message (Bill Phillips) Re: Reciprocal Compensation (The Old Bear) Re: Bell Atlantic Service Problem Inquiry (Bill Feidt) Use of Star/Pound in Number Expansion? (Bob Ponce) Help Me With Data Switch Like ATM, FR (cychenyan) Re: Canadian CLECs (Brian F. G. Bidulock) 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 networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 765 Junction City, KS 66441-0765 Phone: 415-520-9905 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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, 28 May 1999 08:36:48 -0800 Subject: Book Review: "Teach Yourself Microsoft Exchange Server 5.5" Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca BKTYMES5.RVW 990407 "Teach Yourself Microsoft Exchange Server 5.5 in 10 Minutes", Patrick Grote, 1999, 0-672-31556-4, U$12.99/C$18.95/UK#10.99 %A Patrick Grote pgrote@i1.net %C 201 W. 103rd Street, Indianapolis, IN 46290 %D 1999 %G 0-672-31556-4 %I Macmillan Computer Publishing (MCP) %O U$12.99/C$18.95/UK#10.99 800-858-7674 http://www.mcp.com %P 292 p. %T "Teach Yourself Microsoft Exchange Server 5.5 in 10 Minutes" This is unfair, really. Exchange is a multifunctional communications system. It isn't supposed to be learned in ten minutes. However, I do not know why authors find it so hard to say what Microsoft Exchange actually is. Part one of this book is intended to give us an overview. Chapter one is supposed to provide concepts, but only talks about interrelated boxes, not what the system actually does. Features are listed in chapter two, but the basics are not explained. Ironically, we learn more about the server through the list of clients presented in chapter three. Chapter four looks at the information you would want before installing Exchange, but for the large system described initially, much more planning would be needed. Part two discusses installation. Chapter five assumes that all will go well as you proceed through the dialogue boxes. A blizzard of configuration options are listed in chapter six. Having looked at all the other clients previously, chapter seven outlines Outlook 98 in a bit more detail. Chapter eight mentions gateways and connections to other servers. Since Internet mail is of greater interest, chapter nine goes into a little more detail on installation of the Internet Mail Service. The Mail Connector, for working with older MS Mail systems, is in chapter ten. Part three reviews administration. Chapter eleven presents the user management functions, primarily listing contact information. Public folders, for groupware functions, are described in chapter twelve. Directory replication setup is in chapter thirteen. Backup issues are discussed in chapter fourteen, but some important aspects are passed over rather quickly. Part four deals with trouble. Chapter fifteen lists some quick checks for common problems the client may encounter, while sixteen looks at the server. Part five talks about advanced tools. Chapter seventeen briefly describes some encryption key management functions. Exchange forms are covered in chapter eighteen. Some considerations for making your system more reliable are in chapter nineteen. Those who are familiar with Exchange may find this to be a handy short guide to functions they do not deal with often. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1999 BKTYMES5.RVW 990407 ====================== (quote inserted randomly by Pegasus Mailer) rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@sprint.ca slade@victoria.tc.ca p1@canada.com I'll never be an American. When Americans think of Russia, they think of war. When Canadians think of Russia, they think of hockey. - Michael J. Fox http://victoria.tc.ca/techrev or http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade ------------------------------ From: Eric@AreaCode-Info.com (Eric Morson) Date: Fri, 28 May 1999 10:38:21 -0400 Subject: (NPA) NXX-ROAM Access Availability Most cellular carriers still have these "roamer ports" in place. In CT BAM area, you can dial 856-ROAM and hear a dial tone. Enter the 10 digit number and it immediately rings thru. There is a FABULOUS cellular resource called THE CELLULAR TRAVEL GUIDE, published by Telecom Publishing in Seattle. www.TelecomPublishing.com TelPub@aol.com. The guide is in its 5th edition, and has A-band and B-band maps for nearly every American & Canadian coverage area, as well as international cellular information for North American Subscribers, lists of MSAs and RSAs, and a complete listing of EVERY System Identifier (SID) in the WORLD, including PCS and NEXTEL SIDs. It does list roamer port numbers for nearly every service area. Try this one in your home service area: Dial *511 ... if you get a dialtone, you have found the roamer port from cellular access points. Enter the 10 digit number you are calling, and it will ring thru ONLY IF the phone you are calling is also powered on in the same SID area at the same time. Another tidbit: if you dial the roamer access number *511, it is likely a free airtime call. whatever you dial after that has no bearing since the call you dialed, *511, already "answered". Tidbit #3: Dial your potentially free call to *511, and enter your OWN 10 digit cellular number. Like any other incoming call you don't answer, it will go into voice mail if you have it ... CONGRATULATIONS ... now you can check your voice mail FREE of airtime charges or allowance usage. Voice mail retrieval in this fashion only works in your home SID. *511 may not be the access number in your area, but give it a try. If anyone knows what it is for the B-Side Bell Atlantic NY Metro area, PLEASE let me know. Eric B. Morson Co-Webmaster AreaCode-Info.com EMail: Eric@AreaCode-Info.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 May 1999 00:39:47 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: EU-US Talks Close to Collapse - Web Privacy War Ensues? Posted 27/05/99 9:44am by John Lettice Privacy talks between the US and Europe are close to collapse, according to US sources, and Web database hell could ensue. An EU directive last autumn banned export of personal data covering EU citizens to countries whose standards aren't deemed sufficient by Europe, and this includes the US. Nobody's been busted so far, as the two sides have been in a deep huddle and trying to avoid lighting the touch-paper, but lots of you people (The Register included, unfortunately, but that's another story) out there are currently breaching EU law by holding personal records on EU citizens. If a deal can't be reached, the likelihood of banana- or hormone beef-style escalation will increase. Plenty US, and some non-EU, companies already hold data on EU citizens, and the number of 'offences' will increase vastly as more and more business is conducted on the Web. Any registration of a product with a US company (hello Microsoft), for example, would probably be an offence unless the bare minimum of data was collected. Comments about business partners (checked the fields in the groupware you're using recently?) could also be offences. And if a deal isn't done soon, someone, somewhere, is going to press the button. The noises coming out of the US may however involve a certain amount of spinning. Negotiators are due to meet in Brussels tomorrow with a view to stitching up a deal in time for a US-European summit late next month, and we Europeans can't help noticing that US negotiating teams tend to turn up the volume just before crunch meetings. But it's a sticky one, just the same. The basic dispute is about how privacy is actually protected, rather than whether or not (or to what extent) it should be protected. The EU goes for legislation and the use of agencies to enforce standards, while the US wants to stick with voluntary codes of conduct. Letting industries regulate themselves has of course been the inclination of UK governments for the past 20 years or so, but we suspect this may be connected with why our trains (among other things) don't work. At the moment the US team seems to be digging its heels in, even suggesting that it ought to be OK if companies just made formal commitments to privacy protection principles. This doesn't seem likely to play in Brussels, so failing an extremely dubious fudge, we could be headed for a privacy war. The Register and its contents are copyright 1999, Situation Publishing. All rights reserved. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 May 1999 00:50:26 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Save Those Area Codes http://www.wired.com/news/news/business/story/19912.html Reuters 9:30 a.m. 27.May.99.PDT WASHINGTON -- Federal regulators will move to ease the area code crunch that has outraged telephone consumers who increasingly have to dial 10 digits to make a local call. The number of area codes has more than doubled in the past few years because of the skyrocketing use of cellular phones and pagers, along with the growth of competitive local phone carriers. On Thursday, the Federal Communications Commission plans to propose a series of steps -- including doling out numbers to new companies in smaller blocks that would reduce the need for new area codes. Under the current system, when a new telephone company needs phone numbers in a particular area code for its customers, it receives 10,000 numbers at once -- from 862-0000 to 862-9999 for example. But the company may not have that many customers. Using new technology that allows phone switching centers to connect local calls more easily, the FCC plans to propose handing out numbers in blocks of 1,000. And the agency will propose limiting a company from getting a new block of numbers until it has used a certain percentage of its existing pool. The proposals will be issued for comment after Thursday's session and could be altered prior to adoption. Some state regulators have asked the FCC to go farther and grant them discretion to take more radical actions. The need for 10-digit dialing to make local calls -- a practice that particularly irks consumers -- has risen dramatically as regulators have added new area codes to the same geographic boundaries of an existing code. Known as an overlay, the practice can result in next-door neighbors having different area codes. Some state regulators, seeking to avoid an overlay, would like to segregate users of wireless or pager services into new area codes, leaving numbers in the older area code for landline customers. FCC officials say they plan to address state concerns specifically in a few months. But they add that because wireless phones will increasingly compete with landline phones to provide basic local service, they are likely to oppose area code assignments that are not technologically neutral. From the 1960s through the 1980s, new area codes were added at a rate of about one every two years. But in the last four years, the pace has increased to 20 to 25 new codes per year. In California alone, which had just 13 area codes in 1992, regulators project a need for 41 codes in 2002. The FCC Thursday is also expected to continue the lengthy and complicated process of reforming the system of subsidies that keep local phone service affordable in rural and high-cost areas. The agency's latest proposal, which affects about US$225 million of the billions of dollars of subsidies, would help determine which states are eligible for federal subsidies due to high costs of providing residential service. The FCC previously issued a computer model to determine each state's costs and a national average. States above the average by a certain, yet-to-be-determined amount would get subsidies. On Thursday, the FCC will issue for comment a list of hundreds of factors that will go into the model, ranging from the cost of buried telephone cables to the cost of borrowing to build telephone infrastructure. The entire plan to reform the $225 million high-cost fund, which goes largely to the regional Bells and GTE, is expected to be made final in September and go into effect in January 2000. Copyright 1999 Reuters Limited. ------------------------------ From: wfp@ziplink.net (Bill Phillips) Subject: Myterious Intercept Message Organization: ShoeString Projects, Cambridge, MA Reply-To: wfp@ziplink.net (Bill Phillips) Date: Fri, 28 May 1999 08:30:21 GMT My wife and her mother have this arrangement: my wife phones her mother every Tuesday and Thursday evening, and my M-in-L phones my wife every Sunday morning. This has been going on for years. Suddenly, within the past few weeks (I'm afraid I don't know exactly), my M-in-L claims she is no longer able to call our number. She lives in Queens, NY and her number is (718) 441-NNNN. Last I heard, she had MCI (having been slammed from AT&T some years ago and deciding it wasn't worth the hassle to get it changed back). We live in Cambridge, MA and our number is (617) 876-NNNN. Our LD carrier is and always has been AT&T . We are both Bell Atlantic customers. My M-in-L says that when she dials our number she gets a recording saying approximately the following: "It (or probably "This number") is not on [the/our] network. Please call the head office." This is all we can get out of her, This evening, my wife had her try this several times, to see if she could give us any more details ... however, she couldn't seem to remember the latter part of the message. I should mention that she is 84, dotty, and technophobic -- she is still using a 40+ year-old rotary phone. I have searched telecom archives high and low, to no avail, so I am now turning to you gurus: Do you have any idea at all what this message could mean, where it comes from, or anything whatever that might help? The poor woman is utterly confused by this (as are we!), and it's causing her great stress -- she is a worrier -- so any help you can give is appreciated! ------------------------------ From: oldbear@arctos.com (The Old Bear) Subject: Re: Reciprocal Compensation Date: Fri, 28 May 1999 02:07:06 -0500 Organization: The Arctos Group - http://www.arctos.com/arctos christopher.m.arfaa@bellatlantic.COM (Christopher M. Arfaa) writes: > To the Editor: > There is a lot of confusion surrounding the issue of reciprocal > compensation for ISP-bound traffic. First, the fact that the FCC has > ruled that such traffic is not "local" does not necessarily mean that > CLECs serving ISPs are entitled to _no_ compensation; it depends on their > interconnection agreements with the ILEC. Second, the fact that > ISP-bound traffic is not local does not meen that CLECs necessarily pay > access charges on that traffic under their interconnection agreements. > . . . The unqualified payment of reciprocal compensation for ISP-bound > traffic, implicit in our October Order's construing of the 1996 > Act, does not promote real competition in telecommunications. > Rather, it enriches competitive local exchange carriers, Internet > service providers, and Internet users at the expense of telephone > customers or shareholders. This is done under the guise of what > purports to be competition, but is really just an unintended > arbitrage opportunity derived from regulations that were designed > to promote real competition. A loophole, in a word. I am not sure if Chris Arfaa views as expressed are solely his own (as he states) or more reflective of his role at Bell Atlantic. Bell Atlantic likes to use the term "loophole" when discussing reciprocal compensation and has managed to get the Massachusetts Department of Telecommunications and Energy (Mass DTE) to even use it in their decision. But by this manner of thinking, all regulation is a "loophole" for someone or another. As yet, we do not have wide-spread competition and for many telephone users (including those many users who are paying for second telephone lines for use with their home computers) there is no rational for the the Mass DTE to see a personal data call as being any more or any less than a personal voice call. Most businesses terminate many more calls than they originate. The DTE does not choose to treat the classified ad department at the Boston Globe, or the reservation lines at Logan Airport, or "What's Showing" recording at the local cinema as different just because they receive much more incoming call traffic than they originate. In fact, one can see the impending demise of dial-up internet in a few years when broadband connections become the standard. So at most, this distortion (if there really is a distortion) is transitory. Why, one must ask, has this become such a cause for Bell Atlantic and the other RBOC incumbent local exchange carriers? Can there be more to the agenda than a couple of years of cash flow imbalance while the market undergoes a predictable sea change? Bell Atlantic has magnanimously translated this DTE ruling into a "cost savings" that will allow Bell Atlantic to reduce the 98-cent per month surcharge on their DTMF touch-tone residential customers to 49-cents. Without questioning why there should be any additional fee for DTMF signalling in this day and age, one has to ask why the soon-to-be foregone 49-cents of the charge was levied for the past 25 plus years and can now be eliminated with this ruling even though the ISP-CLEC issue only appeared on the telecom landscape within the last couple of years? Bell Atlantic is hot to roll out its xDSL service as a first step to getting into the lucrative (and unregulated) broadband side of the business -- head-to-head with the cable companies. There is no mystery about Bell Atlantic's desire to become a player in home entertainment and home shopping products. No, despite the lofty words, this is a very simple play to control and maintain the playing field -- not to level it. I'm very much in favor of competition once there are some competitors. At the moment, it's looking a lot like competition is only OK if the incumbent can make and change the rules to make sure nobody else competes too hard. Cheers, The Old Bear ------------------------------ From: wfeidt@cpcug.org (Bill Feidt) Subject: Re: Bell Atlantic Service Problem Inquiry Date: Fri, 28 May 1999 10:30:38 GMT Organization: Heller Information Services Wednesday (5/26) morning I observed the problem again. At 5:00 AM I called the supervisor's office number and left a message on her machine. At 11:00 AM both supervisor and technician appeared on my doorstep. The supervisor told me that they had been able to observe the line during failure and thereby locate the point of failure (as Pat suggested they would). They had found a crossed line three blocks away which they had already repaired. In addition, the tech told me that the pair had been shorting to ground at that point. He claimed the bundle shrank overnight, compressing the pairs and causing the short. The heat of the day caused expansion, resulting in a fix. For good measure, they also installed new wire from the pole all the way to my inside NID. They also installed an outside NID (I now have one both inside and outside). I have not seen a recurrence of the problem for two very cool mornings now. Thanks again to Pat and the comp.dcom.telecom readers who offered excellent advice and morale support. Kudos too to Bell Atlantic for hiring some really good people. Bill wfeidt@cpcug.org ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 May 1999 01:42:16 -0500 From: Bob Ponce Subject: Use of Star/Pound in Number Expansion Instead of making local areas that endure splits and overlays dial ten numbers for what they still think of as local calls, why can't the local companies use star and pound to at least keep these calls to eight digits? [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Because star and pound, or asterisk and 'octothorpe' already have other functions assigned to them. The former is used as a flag that indicates the couple digits following are not part of a telephone number, but are a service code for some feature such as call-forwarding. The 'octothorpe' or # on the other hand usually sits on the end of a 'short string' of numbers as a way to signal the switching equipment not to wait for anything further, but to process, in context, what it has already received. I should think involving * and # in any number expansion scheme would be dreadfully hard to program to say nothing of difficult to teach to telephone users. However, there is always the old A,B,C, and D keys from Autovon days; remember those? It might be fun to see what could be done with a system which gave every person four telephone 'numbers', i.e. the same number but with A,B,C, or D on the end. Those four tones were part of the standards set many years ago. I might be inclined to change the *names* of those keys to something like F,D,V, and X as in 'fax', 'data', 'voice' and 'extra line', but keeping the same tone frequencies. Then for every four numbers in a residence somewhere, three of the four could be recovered, and people would dial eight digits on local calls, with calls most often ending with 'V'. I had an old Autovon phone a while back and plugged it in to see how it would work. The twelve 'regular' buttons worked fine, but as soon as the network heard one of the other four regardless of where they were positioned in the dialing string, the switch sent back a fast reorder tone. In any place where there were phone lines devoted to fax or data or 'a second voice line' do readers feel the recovery of up to three out of the four numbers presently assigned would accomplish much, while also considering trade-offs with user convenience and learning a new system, etc? PAT] ------------------------------ From: cychenyan Subject: Help Me With Data Switch Like ATM,FR Date: Fri, 28 May 1999 15:12:54 +0800 Organization: The news server of Changzhou TeleCom Who can tell me the details of the data switches like ATM,FR,x.25,etc. Thanks. ------------------------------ From: Brian F. G. Bidulock Subject: Re: Canadian CLECs Date: Fri, 28 May 1999 04:14:12 -0500 Organization: Brian F. G. Bidulock, P. Eng. How about Calgary (er... Toronto) based MetroNet? When I worked for Stentor, they were the ones in the news. Check out Angus Reid: he's the most influential telecommunications industry analyst and consultant (and professional witness) in Canada. grm wrote: > Do you have any info on who the fast moving Canadian CLECs are? > gmorriso@telcordia.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #106 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri May 28 14:29:04 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id OAA01376; Fri, 28 May 1999 14:29:04 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 28 May 1999 14:29:04 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199905281829.OAA01376@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #107 TELECOM Digest Fri, 28 May 99 14:29:00 EDT Volume 19 : Issue 107 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Libel Law Has Bark, and Bite (Monty Solomon) DSL Beats Cable in Net Speed Services Test During 'Rush Hour' (M. Solomon) AOL Conditions For Giving Cops Info (Monty Solomon) Re: Airtouch in NYC? (Stanley Cline) Re: Help Needed Researching Polish Telecom (Will Roberts) Employment Opportunity: Data Warehouse/I.T. Professionals (Thomas Baer) Reed Solomon Coding (Rob Heaton) 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 networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 765 Junction City, KS 66441-0765 Phone: 415-520-9905 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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, 28 May 1999 00:48:48 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Libel Law Has Bark, and Bite http://www.wired.com/news/news/politics/story/19894.html Libel Law Has Bark, and Bite by Matt Friedman 12:00 p.m. 26.May.99.PDT MONTREAL -- A rarely invoked Canadian law may send an Ontario man to jail for shooting his mouth off in cyberspace. Gregory Barrett was arraigned in Guelph, Ontario late last week on criminal libel charges stemming from an online campaign he has waged against a Toronto-area dog breeder since 1994. Barrett finally removed the materials from his Central America-based Web site on Wednesday. "It's mental torture," said Darla Lofranco, a breeder of rare Hungarian Kuvasz herding dogs and the target of Barrett's wrath. "I'm probably the top breeding Kuvasz kennel in the world, but if Barrett had kept this up much longer, I would have been finished." On his Web site, Barrett accused Lofranco of "depraved" practices, business irregularities, and lax animal care. Among other things, Barrett claimed that a dog he had purchased from Lofranco in 1993 suffered from crippling hip dysplasia and had to be put down. Barrett did not return phone calls. Lofranco flatly denies Barrett's allegations, but after five years of defending her reputation to prospective clients and competitors, she said she finally lost her patience. She printed out the offending Web page and in March took them to the Provincial courthouse in Guelph, requesting that criminal charges be filed. Under Canadian criminal law, in addition to civil actions, a libel defendant may face criminal prosecution, which carries a maximum penalty of five years in prison. Lofranco said she rejected the idea of pursuing a civil action because she didn't believe she would collect damages. Barrett sued her over the hip-dysplasia incident and lost three times, but she was unable to collect legal fees from those suits. Besides, she said, the dispute has lasted long enough. "The impact has been unbelievable," she said. "My competitors have jumped on it, and Barrett's allegations are often the first thing that buyers knows about me." A law professor at the University of Ottawa said that the statute in question is rarely used, but was only recently upheld by the Supreme Court of Canada. "The court said the law was necessary for just this kind of case, where the complainant can't seek redress through civil law," said Michael Geist, who specializes in Internet law. While there have been numerous civil libel actions over Internet content in Canada and elsewhere, Geist said that there have been very few criminal libel cases. "The Internet provides the opportunity to respond directly to the person you believe is defaming you, so it usually doesn't escalate to this point," Geist said. Lofranco concedes that she never took advantage of that opportunity. Aside from lawyers' letters and one email from Barrett in which he said he would delete the offending material from his site if she agreed to withdraw the complaint, the breeder has had no direct contact with her alleged defamer. "I was frightened and embarrassed by all the things he was saying," she says. "I didn't particularly want to talk to him." Fearing litigation, Barrett's original Web host, Magma Communications of Nepean, Ontario, yanked his site in February -- but he soon relocated it to a server in El Salvador. Though Barrett finally removed the offending material from the Web on Wednesday morning, Geist says that the case shows that existing Canadian laws can work in virtual space. "This case merely illustrates that we have to apply existing laws even if an act occurs online. The Crown has a responsibility to bring charges where they are warranted, and they appear to be warranted." Geist added that Canadian courts have dealt with crimes that are viewed as being committed outside of Canada, but have asserted jurisdiction where a portion of the act occurred in Canada or was closely tied to Canada. Even information freedom advocates like Jim Carroll, author of The Canadian Internet Handbook, agree. "The thing here is that we have enough laws," Carroll said. "The fact is that the Net doesn't need or deserve special treatment. If it's libel, then it's libel no matter where it's published. People have to get the idea out of their heads that the Net is a free-flowing anarchist paradise." Copyright 1994-99 Wired Digital Inc. All rights reserved. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 May 1999 01:23:22 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: DSL Beats Cable in Net Speed Services Test During 'Rush Hour' http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/1999/05/24/BU101464.DTL Deborah Solomon, Chronicle Staff Writer Monday, May 24, 1999 copyright 1999 San Francisco Chronicle When it comes to getting on the Information Superhighway, the phone company may provide a faster on-ramp than the cable company. In an independent test performed by an Internet consulting firm, Pacific Bell's digital subscriber lines provided a slightly faster pipeline to the Internet than a cable connection from AtHome Corp. Keynote Systems in San Mateo tracked the two high-speed Internet services and found that during peak traffic hours, DSL users were able to access the Internet faster than those with cable modems. Cable modems were faster during the day, but that's when fewer people are trying to access the Internet, so those results have less significance for home-users. DSL allows users to connect to the Internet over traditional telephone wires at speeds up to 50 times faster than a traditional, dial-up modem. DSL uses a special digital modem and requires a visit from the phone company to install service. Cable modem service from AtHome transmits data via cable TV lines at speeds up to 100 times faster than traditional modems. In the Bay Area, customers get the AtHome service through TCI Cable. Both DSL and cable modems cost about $40 per month. The Keynote study found that in the evenings, when most people are tooling around on the Net, Pac Bell's DSL service was 11 percent faster than AtHome. However, neither technology operated anywhere near their advertised maximum speeds, said Gene Shklar, vice president of marketing for Keynote. Using a DSL line in the evenings, Shklar said, Keynote was able to download Web pages in an average of 3.55 seconds. With a cable modem, the average was 3.97 seconds. The study found that cable modem service did perform more quickly than DSL during business hours. But in the evening when usage peaks, "our figures showed that cable modem service got 8 percent slower," Shklar said. One reason for the slowdown is that cable modems share access. Instead of a dedicated line per user, as with DSL, hundreds of cable modem customers can access the Internet using the same line or 'node.' The more people on the node, the slower the service goes. The number of people watching cable TV doesn't affect the speed. One reason cable was faster during the day is that cable modem service is used primarily by residential customers, not businesses. Many businesses don't get cable and don't have cable modems. The cable pipe largely is unused during the daytime when people are at work. In the evenings, when more people log on, it slows down. Cable companies are working on ways to upgrade their systems so that shared access is not as much of a problem. Although DSL outperformed cable in this test, industry watchers said it should not signal the demise of cable modems. "Both are pretty good, and there's going to be an ecosystem where multiple technologies -- DSL, cable, wireless, are all going to coexist," said Jeannette Noyes, a researcher with International Data Corp. Noyes said that while speed is important, what's going to drive consumers to one technology over the other in the short term is availability. Not everybody can get DSL or cable modems yet. Cable companies are in the process of upgrading their cable lines to handle high- speed data. About 41 communities in the Bay Area can get AtHome. DSL has distance limitations that restrict who can get the service. A customer must be within three miles of the phone company's central switching office to get DSL. By the end of the year, about five million Californians should be able to get DSL from Pac Bell. "If only one is available, that's what a customer is going to choose. After that, you get into issues like price, performance and content," Noyes said. copyright 1999 San Francisco Chronicle Page B1 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 May 1999 00:38:20 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: AOL Conditions for Giving Cops Info http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/tech/1999/may/27/052700248.html Las Vegas SUN Today: May 27, 1999 at 15:14:04 PDT ASSOCIATED PRESS Some of America Online's conditions for releasing information on customers to investigators: -No disclosure except under "valid legal process" such as search warrant, subpoena or other court order. -Under a search warrant, AOL may turn over any relevant e-mail, similar content and personal identifying information. -AOL says it generally keeps unread e-mail in its own system for 28 days; e-mail that has been read for two days. Customers have the option of storing it longer on the server, as well as keeping it in their own computers. In the case of a Virginia customer charged with possessing child pornography, images sent by e-mail over nearly six months were found, the FBI says. -In civil cases, AOL won't release e-mail but may give out personal identifying information in response to a subpoena or other court order. The member whose information is to be disclosed is given two weeks notice in case he or she wishes to contest the order. -Public chat rooms are monitored for inappropriate content and AOL has a detailed process for handling complaints and terminating service to members who violate rules. -AOL does not keep records of member passwords. -The FBI keeps a database containing customer complaints that have been forwarded to the bureau by AOL, federal officials say. Customers who see child pornography online may complain to AOL. When an AOL screen name is identified in an FBI investigation, the database is checked to see if any complaints exist. All contents copyright 1999 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ------------------------------ From: roamer1@pobox.com (Stanley Cline) Subject: Re: Airtouch in NYC? Date: Fri, 28 May 1999 03:01:01 GMT Organization: how, with all the spam? Reply-To: roamer1@pobox.com On 27 May 1999 15:26:43 -0400, Jon Solomon wrote: > Patrick, I was the person in Boston who you tried this with ... You are > correct about what you have said, except for the the following: > When you told me what to dial ... (312) xxx-ROAM ... that's when the then PAT wrote: > mattered back then. I have not heard anything at all about xxx-ROAM > for many years and do not know if any carrier is using it any longer. Roamer access numbers are still quite common in the 800 MHz cellular world. Virtually all 800 MHz carriers have roamer access numbers. Most carriers don't advertise them, though. Some rural 800 MHz carriers, especially those in Alaska and the Rocky Mountain states such as CommNet (A-side systems only!) and various small carriers, are STILL NOT part of the NACN or GTE TSI's Follow-Me Roaming Plus (FMR+) systems; people roaming on such systems can be called ONLY via roamer access numbers. (For those who remember my tirades against US Cellular a few years ago -- all their systems are now part of the NACN or FMR+. :) ) And sometimes call delivery doesn't work correctly; I was in northwest Tennessee a couple of weeks ago, roaming on Yorkville Telephone/New Wave Cellular (I could not call out on GTE for some reason) with my Powertel phone (Powertel offers analog roaming) and call delivery FAILED TO WORK. It's also failed when roaming on Bell Atlantic in northeast Georgia. In these areas anyone calling me would HAVE to dial a roamer access number to reach me ... :( Telecom Publishing, formerly Communications Publishing, in Seattle recently published a new edition of the _Cellular Travel Guide_, which lists coverage information and roamer access numbers, among other things, of all 800 MHz systems in the US, Canada, and selected other countries. All that said, the new PCS (1900 MHz) wireless carriers, such as Sprint PCS and all US GSM carriers (Powertel, VoiceStream, etc.), generally do not have roamer access numbers for their systems. The GSM standard doesn't even *SUPPORT* roamer access numbers! AT&T doesn't even have roamer access numbers for their 1900 MHz systems in Chicago, Atlanta, etc., either. Customers of PCS carriers that offer analog/dual-mode roaming can still be reached by roamer access numbers *when analog roaming*, of course. But then again, the need/demand for roamer access numbers on 1900 MHz systems is decreased because many/most 1900 MHz carriers bundle long-distance in with airtime. (One exception: many GSM users who roam in Europe and elsewhere outside North America are *demanding* a solution to double international LD charges when a person in the country the GSM user's visiting dials the GSM user's number. There's movement in the GSM community toward more intelligent routing of calls, as well as **possibly** roamer access numbers.) > I know that Ameritech prides itself on being able to locate any > subscriber anywhere, anytime. As soon as any tower on God's green > earth -- or it seems like it -- sees you out there, right away the > Ameritech computer is told about it. And no more monkeying around The old *18 (Follow-Me Roaming) mess is still around too. Again, it's mainly CommNet (B-side only!) and small carriers where it's required. -SC [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have noticed that *18 still seems to work, although it is not needed. The opposite condition, *19 is still available also, and it is one way to avoid roaming charges if you are out of your home area do not really want to accept any calls. If you do *19 to cancel 'Follow Me' then you do have to use *18 to get it turned back on however. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 May 1999 01:07:34 -0400 From: Will Roberts Subject: Re: Help Needed Researching Polish Telecom In TELECOM Digest (Volume 19, Issue 90), Steffen Beil wrote: > As you can see, I am a trainee in Tokyo, working for the German > HypoVereinsbank. I am working on collecting information about the East > European Telecom market, especially Poland, Hungary and Czech Republic. > Your homepage is definitely the largest and covers so much information > -- great. I've searched through it, but couldn't find anything on the > Polish market. I'm pretty good supplied with info about the other two > countries, but I still have a lack on Poland. I am sure one reason is > the underdevelopement compared to other European countries. > Do you have any information on this topic? Can you help me out? Or do > you know where I can find any information. I've checked the Polish > homepage, the largest Telecom companies. I am looking for figures > concerning future expectations, size and development of the market so > far and of companies in it. Governmental stockholding on such > companies, just any information would be fine. You may find the Polish Ministry of Posts and Telecommunications to be a useful starting place. They maintain a web site in English at < http://www.ml.gov.pl/english/e_index.htm >. One of the most comprehensive lists of online resouces about Eastern and Central Europe is maintained by the law library at Gonzaga University in Spokane, Washington USA. Take at look at "CEESource: Central and East European Legal, Political, Business and Economics WWW Resources" at < http://law.gonzaga.edu/library/ceeurope.htm >. There are lots of useful links there. A few years ago, I was approached by a consultant friend who was working with a major international bank in the evalutation of emerging capital markets in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union. I was puzzled about what I could contribute until I learned that these countries have no traditional business press, and when capitalism arrived, it arrived at the same time as the internet. Hence, much information which one would find in print in Western Europe and the US is instead being published for the first time via electronic media, either available without charge from government and public interest organizations, or for a fee from a new breed of business and economic "publishers". As an "internet guru" with a business background, I was retained to spend several weeks documenting the online resources of a dozen countries with emerging capital markets. During my work on this project, I had the pleasure of meeting George Mueller, one of the co-founders of Internet Securities Inc ("ISI") which is one of the first for-profit companies to provide market intelligence on the developing free markets in that part of the world. George and his brother had worked on a summer research project in Poland in 1994 while they were students at M.I.T. and at the Harvard Business School. They discovered that market intelligence and basic business information in Poland was available only by using good old-fashioned shoe leather and going out and meeting with business people, government officials, bankers, etc. And they figured that they could form a business providing this kind of market intelligence to clients such as your employer. And to them, back in 1994, the internet seemed like the most cost effective method of publishing and distributing information. George explains that ISI may be one of the first companies with a business model shaped by the sudden shift in computer and telecom technology from costly point-to-point leased circuits and large mainframe computers to widely-available internet connections and distributed information storage and retreival. For ISI to set up an office in a small, emerging market required only a few thousand dollars worth of desktop computers, one or two savvy local researchers/reporters, and a connection to the public internet. The incumbent competitor, Reuters, would dispatch a highly-paid bureau manager, large staff, expensive mini-computer and costly satellite uplink -- all located in prime office space. ISI was able to open its original offices in Warsaw, Budapest and Prague -- and use the internet to back-up data from one office to the other, rather than ship information to a centrally located mainframe as had been the practice of the business infomation establishment. George Meuller estimated that ISI set up its original offices at a cost of about $35,000 each -- compared with the $600,000 or more which it would have cost Reuters. Hence ISI could go into emerging markets where the economics would not justify investment by their more established competitors. Since 1994, ISI has grown and been acquired by a more established company which could provide the resources to grow. ISI's web site is at http://www.securities.com and they may be able to help you in your project. I'm sending this reply to TELECOM Digest (as well as to you directly) because this is a very interesting story of how telecommunications technology is changing the economic landscape in many parts of the world. One reads how wireless telephone is less expensive in many developing countries than wireline because there is no existing wireline infrastructure and wireless is less costly to construct when you're starting from scratch. The same is true in information publishing: the new telecom technologies are being adopted with amazing speed in the emerging markets. Regards, Will Roberts The Arctos Group Chestnut Hill, Massachusetts USA ------------------------------ From: Indego/CTC Subject: Employhment Opportunity: Data Warehouse/I.T. Professionals Date: Fri, 28 May 1999 08:00:43 -0400 Organization: AT&T WorldNet Services Indego/CTC is actively seeking to fill DATA WAREHOUSE positions we have in Virginia, Maryland, Kentucky, and Seattle. We are actively seeking quality designers, developers, modelers, programmers, architects, and trainers. If you are interested please send your resume in word format and contact me immediately to setup an interview. Indego is one of the fastest growing I.T. firms in the Washington DC/Maryland/Virginia area. Our firm specializes in meeting unique I.T. client requirements. Our professional background and clientele are as follows: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office - Data Warehouse U.S. Department of Commerce - Data Warehouse Cannon Corporation of America - CTI/Telephony Target Retail Store - Customer Service CTI System U.S. Coast Guard - Information Systems Security/Computer Security U.S. Navy - Y2K, Training Development, Customer Care Systems We are family owned and operated. Leadership and professionalism is foremost with Employee Satisfaction being our number one priority. If you would be interested in learning more about this position, our firm, or other professional opportunities we have available contact us immediately at the (703) 626-9797 or email at: indego-tb@worldnet.att.net. This position will be filled by the right person only who is dedicated, loyal, and a consummate professional .... Call today so that we can talk. Regards, Mr. Thomas A. Baer Exec. VP, Indego/CTC (703) 626-9797 ------------------------------ From: Rob Heaton <114671.1317@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Reed Solomon Coding Organization: CompuServe, Inc. (1-800-689-0736) Date: 28 May 1999 14:17:15 -0400 Does anyone know of any public domain software that inplements a Reed Solomon Coder and Decoder. If you can help I would be most grateful. Regards, Rob H. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #107 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat May 29 01:48:08 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id BAA26500; Sat, 29 May 1999 01:48:08 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 29 May 1999 01:48:08 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199905290548.BAA26500@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #108 TELECOM Digest Sat, 29 May 99 01:48:00 EDT Volume 19 : Issue 108 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Additions to Telecom Archives (TELECOM Digest Editor) Re: Use of Star/Pound in Number Expansion (J.F. Mezei) Re: Use of Star/Pound in Number Expansion (Jack Hamilton) Re: Do You Feel Like a Number? (Adam H. Kerman) Re: Do You Feel Like a Number? (Javier Henderson) Re: Judge Freezes Funds In Internet Scam (Eli Mantel) ADSL and DSL, What is the Difference and Why? (J.F. Mezei) How to Throw the Book at Automated Recording-Only Sales Call? (T. Byfield) Re: Reed Solomon Coding (Billy Harvey) Re: Smartjack and CSU (Steve Pinkston) Call Filter Needed (Dale Neiburg) WTB 14.4 Modems (das@schmo.org) Re: Big Banks Move on Net Security - Consumer Advice! (Jason Fetterolf) 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 networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 765 Junction City, KS 66441-0765 Phone: 415-520-9905 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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 Subject: Telecom Archives Additions Date: Sat, 29 May 1999 00:00:00 EDT Changes in the Telecom Archives http://telecom-digest.org as of this date are as follows: 1. All back issues of Telcomine Magazine are now on line in a directory by that name off of the main root directory. 2. A large number of new links were added to the 'other resources' area including Linc Madison, John Cropper and Eric Morson, Judith Oppenheimer, the FCC web site, Lockheed-Martin, and others. See if I missed any: http://telecom-digest.org/linkspage.html 3. The top main page was rewritten somewhat to more correctly identify some of the internal pages and their links. I also added some cross-references on the top page to some external links to make research a bit easier. For instance, the FCC section of the archives now has a pointer to the FCC web site cross-referenced from the starting page. The 'area codes' file points to the old archived historical files in the arch- ives, but also suggests to users that newer references will be found at lincmad.com and areacode-info.com I also added the weather forecast to the starting page via a form where your zip code or city (airport) code is entered. 4. Although the newest archives search engine got off to a bit of a rough start by not completely scanning all of the older files that has now been cured. All files are scanned totally, I feel certain. Also, although the search engine is a cgi-bin operation by whatuseek.com, I had been using a little javascript entrance to it until I was reminded that users with Lynx browsers were unable to use it that way. So, I rewrote it using HTML and forms. It looks exactly the same as it did before, but Lynx users can now use that service also. I would appreciate a review of both the 'other resources' page as well as the polishing done to the main page with feedback on new links to be added, dead links found, etc. Have a happy holiday weekend! PAT ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 May 1999 18:54:10 -0400 From: J.F. Mezei Subject: Re: Use of Star/Pound in Number Expansion Date: Fri, 28 May 1999 18:53:37 -0400 TELECOM Digest Editor Noted: > recovery of up to three out of the four numbers presently assigned > would accomplish much, while also considering trade-offs with user > convenience and learning a new system, etc? PAT] I think that we are going through a transition period where we are bouncing from technology to technology until something good is found. First it was fax. But quality was bad and you couldn't work with received documents. Then pagers, but you couldn't reply, and they were useless if you "disapeared" in a tunnel for a few minutes. Then cellphones. Then internet via modem. But now, we are at the stage where modern digital phones make the pager irrelevant. We are at the stage where cable modems *(and dsl service) and making modems irrelevant. We are also starting to see internet-email eclipse the FAX. The minute that ISPs will start to grant permanent IP adresses to residential customers using cable or DSL, then it *may* make the actual analogue phone quite irrelevant. You may start to see phones that plug into the ethernet backbone to which the cable modem is attached in your house. Far fetched you say? Look at how quickly technologies are being adopted ... heck, my artist sister has ethernet at home because she has a cable modem. Who would have though that ethernet would be used for folks at HOME so soon? So, when you look at the potential for market penetration on cable and DSL modems, it may releive some strain on phone numbers. And as the cost of cell phones drops, I think that we will see the end of pagers. Again, some savings. And, already, some cellphone companies in Canada (Clearnet) are advertising on TV that folks could drop their land-phone in favour of the much more versatile cell phone with voice mail etc etc , a phone you can bring with you everywhere you go. My biggest worry is the next generation Internet. It better come quickly because it is also under a lot of strain. In the future, IT will be the one connecting everyone in the world and the phone as we know it may become as obsolete as the telex is today and as the fax will be in 5 years. ------------------------------ From: jfh@acm.org (Jack Hamilton) Subject: Re: Use of Star/Pound in Number Expansion Date: Sat, 29 May 1999 00:03:07 GMT Organization: Copyright (c) 1999 by Jack Hamilton Reply-To: jfh@acm.org > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Because star and pound, or asterisk > and 'octothorpe' already have other functions assigned to them. The > former is used as a flag that indicates the couple digits following > are not part of a telephone number, but are a service code for some > feature such as call-forwarding. The 'octothorpe' or # on the other > hand usually sits on the end of a 'short string' of numbers as a way > to signal the switching equipment not to wait for anything further, > but to process, in context, what it has already received. I should > think involving * and # in any number expansion scheme would be > dreadfully hard to program to say nothing of difficult to teach to > telephone users. One possible scheme is this: 1-916-555-1212A Reaches the old number without the 'A' 1-916-555-1212# Same as above 1-916-555-1212 Same as above, but waits a second or two to see if another digit is dialed (similar to how calls to non-NANPA are currently handled) 1-916-555-1212B Second alternate number for owner of base number 1-916-555-1212C Third alternate number for owner of base number 1-916-555-1212D Fourth alternate number for owner of base number This method has the advantage that no one would have to learn anything new, but people who *could* learn would have their calls go through faster. I suppose number portability would be required within the group; 1-916-555-1212 might go to my PacBell landline phone, but 1-916-555-1212B would go to my Sprint PCS phone. PacBell probably wouldn't like that. > However, there is always the old A,B,C, and D keys from Autovon days; > remember those? It might be fun to see what could be done with a > system which gave every person four telephone 'numbers', i.e. the same > number but with A,B,C, or D on the end. Those four tones were part of > the standards set many years ago. I might be inclined to change the > *names* of those keys to something like F,D,V, and X as in 'fax', > 'data', 'voice' and 'extra line', but keeping the same tone > frequencies. I wouldn't hardcode meanings into the "digits". Who knows, maybe we won't be using faxes in 20 years. And different people might want to use the extra lines for different things -- home phone, business phone, cell phone, fax phone for a person, but business phone, fax phone, data phone, emergency night phone for a business. Jack Hamilton Broderick, CA jfh@acm.org ------------------------------ From: Adam H. Kerman Subject: Re: Do You Feel Like a Number? Organization: Chinet - Public Access UNIX since 1982 Date: Sat, 29 May 1999 01:48:02 GMT In article , Hillary Gorman wrote: > On Sun, 23 May 1999 05:12:34 +0100, wrote: >> How do (or will) these various organisations across the US (banks, >> educational institutions, state governments, and airlines) cope with people >> who (like myself) don't have a Social Security Number? >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Then you will have to get a number or >> the bank won't be able to work with you. PAT] > I found this at the ssa.gov website: > I do not have work permission from the INS. I need a Social > Security number. Can I get one? > ANSWER: Yes. > The operative word is need. > You can get a non-working Social Security Card when you are required > to have one by law. If you are not allowed to be employed in the US, there are no laws that require you to have a Social Security Number. > This means that if you are in the U.S. legally and someone says you > "must" have a social security number, ask for proof that you are > legally required to have one. You should submit this proof along with > your SS-5 Social Security Card Application. > This number is not valid for employment. If you ever use this number > for employment, the Social Security Administration can advise the > Immigration Service. You must show Social Security a valid reason for > this number. Reasons include identification for school or to open bank > accounts. You can change the number to a working number when you get > work permission from the INS. No law requires you to have a Social Security Number to register for school or open a bank account. You are required to have one to receive federal financial aid for college, so schools will need it for tracking grants and loans. But foreigners are never eligible for the ordinary financial aid programs. Any college aid a foreigner receives is through the State Department (Fulbright scholarships?) or private sources at the college itself. > In practice, the Social Security Admnistration will seldom, if ever, > give out non-working numbers. The SSA's position is that an Individual > Taxpayer Identification Number (ITIN) takes care of the needs of any > non-working Canadians. > The ITIN is a nine digit number issued by the IRS to people who need a > number, but who cannot get a social security number. If a foreigner opens a bank account that pays interest, he needs one of these numbers if he is ineligible for a Social Security Number to avoid backup witholding. I'd love to know what circumstances there were that someone was required to obtain a non-employable Social Security Number. Who would voluntarily demand to obtain yet another identification number for himself? ------------------------------ From: Javier Henderson Subject: Re: Do You Feel Like a Number? Date: 28 May 1999 11:35:56 -0700 Organization: Completely Disorganized TELECOM Digest Editor writes: > But the best it seems, is yet to come. Starting October 2, 2000 you > will need to present your SSN to *board any airplane or purchase any > airplane ticket* What about the millions of tourists that visit the US every year? Are they going to be required to obtain a non-working SSN or a TIN from the IRS? -jav ------------------------------ From: Eli Mantel Subject: Re: Judge Freezes Funds In Internet Scam Date: Fri, 28 May 1999 19:29:52 GMT Bob Goudreau (goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com) wrote: > I doubt that most people in the US would be willing to eliminate > completely their ability to place phone calls to over a dozen > Caribbean countries (which is what your plan would do, since those > countries have no separate country codes of their own)... You must have missed the original suggestion that calls to countries other than the U.S. and Canada should require the use of the international dialing prefix. If you're placing an international call, isn't is reasonable to expect that you would use the international dialing prefix? The primary rationale for doing this is jurisdictional. If phones within the U.S. are being used for fraud, the FCC or the FTC can take enforcement action. If phones in the Caribbean are used for fraud, enforcement is far more difficult, if it's possible at all. Canada is a little on the iffy side. I expect there's both more phone traffic between the U.S. and Canada as well as a good deal more cooperation between law enforcemenet in the U.S. and Canada than there is between the U.S. and Caribbean countries, so the benefits from requiring people to dial some extra digits to reduce fraud are less compelling. ------------------------------ From: J.F. Mezei Subject: ADSL and DSL, What is the Difference and Why ? Date: Fri, 28 May 1999 18:59:50 -0400 A few years ago, the "dream" was that telcos would roll out ADSL and compete against cable. ADSL comes out and starts to be rolled out, but all of a sudden, DSL comes out and goes to comsumers. Here in Bell Canada territory, it seems that commercial customers get ADSL whereas consumers get DSL. What is the basic difference between the two? Why would telcos not choose a single technology? ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 May 1999 19:27:57 -0400 From: T. Byfield Subject: How to Throw the Book at Automated Recording-Only Sales Call? Greetings, I recently received an automated recording-only sales call from someone who I was able to *69 and reverse-lookup on anywho.com. Moreover, s/he's quite nearby and in the same jurisdiction for just about any purpose you can think of (Manhattan, NYC), and his/her phone has been *solidly busy* during civil hours for the last week, and ring-no-answer at uncivil hours, so it's pretty safe to assume s/he's been war-dialing for ~twelve hours/day for at least seven days. I'd really like to go after this person. any *specific* suggestions about what agencies to call and so on would be much appreciated. Bell Atlantic, of course, is absolutely useless: repeated calls to various departments has resulted in zero useful information. Cheers, Ted ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 May 1999 21:05:35 EDT Subject: Re: Reed Solomon Coding From: Billy Harvey Rob Heaton writes: > Does anyone know of any public domain software that inplements a > Reed Solomon Coder and Decoder. If you can help I would be most > grateful. Check out Phil Kern's work at http://people.qualcomm.com/karn/code/ . Billy ------------------------------ From: steve_pinkston@adc.com (Steve Pinkston) Subject: Re: Smartjack and CSU Date: Sat, 29 May 1999 02:21:41 GMT Organization: ADC Telecommunications Reply-To: steve_pinkston@adc.com I'm not sure why my original post wasn't picked up. Here it is again: On Sat, 22 May 1999 22:22:38 GMT, Kevin Lundy wrote: > Is there any recommended maximum distance from the smartjack to the > CSU? Not really. Everything has to do, ultimately, with signal levels. Most CSUs can sync up properly on a signal as low as -22.5 dBdsx0. The telco can provide a signal that comes OUT of the smartjack at a level anywhere from 0 dBdsx0 down to -16 dBdsx0. Any CPE wiring ("extended demarc") will attenuate the signal more. > I have a new T1 voice service that is giving me hell. It's an > intermittent problem - slips, dropped calles, static, etc. That you mention "slips" is significant. Slips (or "controlled slips") generally indicate a timing conflict between your CPE and the line. Check to see if your PBX (or channel bank, or whatever) is set to derive its timing (clock) from the T1 line. If it set for internal timing, or "free-run," it could cause the problems you are reporting. A line that is heavily errored due to near-end crosstalk (NEXT) could also cause the problems you report. A telltale symptom would be that the CSU was reporting large numbers of BPVs (Bipolar Violations). > Every time we have a problem, the techs can loop up the smart jack and > stress test error free. They loop the CSU, and they see errors. So > we replace the CSU, and problem is still there. This much is > repeatable. Which to me indicates a problem of some sort with the > cable between the CSU and smartjack. A grounding problem, a distance > problem, a flakey termination, etc. But then the techs come on site > and put a test pack on the cable at my CSU and it tests fine. Everything you mention in the preceding paragraph is consistent with controlled slips, and might be consistent with a NEXT problem. > Any thoughts of wisdom out there? I don't know if it counts as wisdom or not, but I will say that a big part of troubleshooting is paying close attention to the TYPE of errors one is receiving. Slips, BPVs, and CRC-6 errors can indicate various error mechanisms. In combinations, they point to still further syndromes. A lot of the devices we hook up are very smart, but it sometimes takes a little research to be able to use all the data they give you! - steve ------------------------------ From: Dale Neiburg Subject: Call Filter Needed Date: Fri, 28 May 1999 13:56:28 -0400 Way back in issue 94, "The Bug Hunter" wrote: > For a long time, I've had what I considered a neat product idea for > controlling intrusive telemarketing calls. I didn't pursue it although > I was sure that somebody someday would come up with a *low cost* > implementation for the consumer market. > Well, maybe I didn't look hard enough, I haven't seen the product show > up in the consumer market. [snip!] And PAT replied: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Actually, your product was developed > and sold on the market about fifteen years ago under the name > 'Privecode'. It functioned almost identically to your description. It > sat on the line and answered instantly when a call was put on your > line. Your own phone never even rang. It would tell the caller, 'Enter > your privecode number please', and this would be a three digit number > you had programmed in. If the person entered the correct number, the > privecodebox would warble at you; you would pick up any phone and > speak. If the person did not enter the correct number, they went > straight to the answering machine. You could also assign a three digit > code which always went to the answering machine as well. It was > manufactured about 1975-80 by a company called 'International Mobile > Machines' in Bala Cynwyd, PA. It sold for about $200. PAT] This is exactly what I've been looking for (without success) for an application I have. Does anyone know a current source for such a unit? Dale Neiburg ** NPR Satellite Operations ** 202-414-2640 "For I do not know who would be so stupid as to engage in arms when others are engaging in music; or to go about the streets dancing a morris dance.... I think surely no gentleman who is not a complete fool would do such things." --Baldassare Castiglione, The Book of the Courtier ------------------------------ From: das schmo Subject: WTB 14.4 Modems Date: Sat, 29 May 1999 03:33:59 GMT I need 2 modems, external style, 14.4Kbs with power supply. I prefer USR, or any good brand. I can't seem to find any at a reasonable price (> $30 each) tgsi@bellatlantic.net ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 May 1999 22:52:13 -0400 Reply-To: jason@itw.com From: Jason Fetterolf Subject: Re: Big Banks Move on Net Security - Consumer Advice! Well, this article was really about secure web sites for online banking, but Pat's colorful experiences have called me to express my views on these sprawling oligopolistic titans like the freshly fed Bank One ... Pat's responses in brackets: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I can tell you that Bank One is having > a *horrible* problem right now with their 'online banking' since their > merger with First Chicago. First Chicago customers were able to see > all their accounts and do various things with a very high degree of > security. First Chicago insisted on browsers having 128 encryption, > and their software took complete control of the user's browser while > connected; i.e no use of history buttons or address bar allowed. > Starting May 12, Bank One took over, and First Chicago customers have > been mostly locked out, only rarely able to get through. Many of the > accounts that were previously shown on line are no longer available > that way. Most results to get through to the 'online banking' at Bank > One get stalled due to the volume of business they are trying to > handle. **There is little or no security**. If you know how to cut > and paste URLs you can roam around on all sorts of 'deep pages' at > their site.] Online banking has grown tremendously in the last few years, and there are several online (internet only) banks that, as a consumer advocate, I would recommend to Pat or anyone who is fed up with traditional brick and mortar banks. The standard behemoths such as Bank One/First Chicago, Wells Fargo, Nationsbank, etc, etc ... have impersonal, shoddy customer service, pitiful interest rates, excessive fees to get access to YOUR money, and want to charge your for online account access and online bill payment when both of those services actually cost them much less than standard processing methods. > [Most of last week, Bank One's 'Online Banking Unit' simply refused > to answer the phone at all. After endless busy signals, if you > finally reached their customer service at 800-482-3675 you got just > a recorded message saying 'time on hold will be at least six minutes' > with a lot of condescending advice on how to apply for a mortgage > or to be sure and include the 'payee phone number' when you made an > online bill payment. The 'six minutes on hold' turned into at least > 45 minutes on three separate occassions,] ... To this tale, I say, call Telebank, @ http://www.telebankonline.com/ or Netbank, @ http://www.netbank.com/ and start earinnig 3% on your checking, and up to 5% on your Money Market account ($100 balance is ALL you need at Netbank; Telebank is a little steep on balance). Telebank and NetBank offer FREE checks, FREE, online banking, and FREE bill payment in addition to their premium rates ... and Telebank has always answered the phone promptly for me (30 secs max hold time according to their propaganda.) Why settle for a measly .5 % interest from the "Mountain" (or whomever) when you can have the same FDIC insured peace of mind from a real "online" bank that *wants* your business? Why waste time by physically visting a branch when Telebank and others refund 4 ATM withdrawal fees monthly and provide free mail-in deposit envelopes? No, I dont work for either bank, just a consumer advocate that hates to see fellow consumers get "sucked in" due to the decreasing banking choices out there. I will be glad to see those brick and mortar branches erode away at the big bank's net revenue. Oh, and how are these "interent banks" doing financially? Are they getting customers? Check the stock prices (TBFC and NTBK) and news stories about them, and ye shall see .... Happy Banking! [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Maybe I will check out those two that you mentioned. I have had an account with First Chicago (formerly First National Bank of Chicago) since about 1975 -- yes, I know I sued them a year or so before that and won the case -- and they seemed pretty decent usually. They were the first bank in Chicago to offer Visa debit cards which I find quite useful, but slowly and surely things began decaying a few years ago. A regular source of income for me is the grant from ITU which is automatically sent through from Bank Suisse to my account at First Chicago every three months by wire transfer. Then they started playing games, and not making the wire transfer available for several days after it arrived. They would blame Bank Suisse for playing a 'no value' on the wire for a few days, and the bank in Switzerland would deny it totally. Then they started nipping into it for fifteen dollars at a time when it would arrive, again blaming some other bank like Morgan in New York, or the Swiss people, all of whom would deny having anything such thing happen. First Chicago, assuming they were talking to a dummy would tell me that 'the fifteen dollars was taken by the correspondent bank in the process of paying us. I would remind them that they corresponded directly with Bank Suisse and had no middle- man in New York in that case. I send them copies of faxes from Bankers in New York as well as Morgan denying it all ... and First Chicago just says tough luck. Then they got to where they would not make deposited funds available to anyone the next day as they had always done before. In fairness to the bank, they always treated me quite well in the past and honored any number of checks I wrote and 'got around to paying for later' ... one person there always okayed paying my checks even if they had to sit on them awhile ... so I cannot complain too much. Of course I paid for that priviledge also, so what the heck ... One day downtown I ran into an old friend from 35 years ago (he is older than me, and quite old now) who was employed for many years as a vice-president at First Chicago. That title basically mean nothing in banks; banks have as many vice-presidents as most large companies have supervisors or department managers. He cautioned me on a few things to watch for: when a bank suddenly quits making wire transfers immediatly available, and holds on to them a day or two before allowing draws against them; when a bank starts taking longer than before to clear checks or won't pay its own cashier's checks on presentation; when suddenly you get a little charge on your account everytime you even speak to a teller or someone in customer service; that means the bank needs money ... ie. has gotten a little 'under the weather' financially. Taking an extra day or two to pay on a check or clear a wire transfer gives the bank an extra day or two of float, which, said Old Friend, I was beginning to notice about the time I left the bank. (Now he does some kind of consulting work for the Federal Reserve). You or I would be in jail in a minute if we carried off some of the highjinks the banks routinely get away with. I may have to sue First Chicago again one of these days. Twenty- five years ago it was because their mailroom clerks were stealing cash out of the mail. This time, I dunno, we live in a more modern era. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #108 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat May 29 04:42:05 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id EAA00705; Sat, 29 May 1999 04:42:05 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 29 May 1999 04:42:05 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199905290842.EAA00705@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #109 TELECOM Digest Sat, 29 May 99 04:42:00 EDT Volume 19 : Issue 109 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Search Warrants Make 'Online Privacy' an Oxymoron (Monty Solomon) Re: Reciprocal Compensation (was Re: Strange Problems) (Michael Sullivan) Re: ADSL and DSL, What is the Difference and Why? (Steven J. Sobol) Re: Big Banks Move on Net Security - Consumer Advice! (Steven J. Sobol) New Rules For Mail Drops (was: Here is Why Email Has Gotten) (Adam Kerman) Re: Ma Bell Doesn't Live There Any Longer (Thomas P. Brisco) 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 networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 765 Junction City, KS 66441-0765 Phone: 415-520-9905 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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: Sat, 29 May 1999 00:30:29 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Search Warrants Make 'Online Privacy' an Oxymoron http://www.techserver.com/noframes/story/0,2294,53760-86129-611709-0,00.html Copyright 1999 Nando Media Copyright 1999 Associated Press * Recent cases involving online investigations * America Online's privacy rules By CALVIN WOODWARD LEESBURG, Va. (May 28, 1999 2:20 p.m. EDT http://www.nandotimes.com) - Go for a walk, drive a car or dance in the moonlight and chances are, no one notices. Journey on the Internet, and a trail is left. And police are hot on that trail in a growing number of criminal investi- gations. Armed with search warrants, police are looking into the online activities of suspects, and sometimes victims, by seizing evidence from Internet service providers and finding material that people online never dreamed would end up in the hands of the law. Private e-mail between lovers. The threatening missives of haters. The true identities of people hiding behind screen names in a medium they thought was the essence of secrecy. "Ultimately, if you break the law, it can be traced," said investigator Ron Horack of the Loudoun County, Va., sheriff's department. Horack helps police around the country apply for search warrants to get material from the county-based America Online, the world's largest Internet service provider with 18 million customers. "I know who you are and where you live," an anonymous hatemonger e-mailed a 12-year-old girl in Lancaster, Pa. By peeking into the accounts of Internet providers, police can often say the same thing: They know who the threatening people are and where they live. This week federal authorities said they had charged a northern Virginia pediatrician with possessing child pornography after investigating his AOL account and finding at least 22 explicit images sent to him via e-mail over the course of nearly six months. They said they then found more child pornography on his computer. The doctor could not immediately be reached for comment. With a warrant, law enforcement authorities can look at the electronic mail and other online communications of people suspected of a range of serious crimes, getting information not just from a home computer but often the company that provides the Internet, e-mail or chat service. They can do the same with victims, in the process seeing mail from people who corresponded with them but had nothing to do with a crime. Everything from humdrum to-do lists to love letters from illicit digital dalliances becomes potential evidence, and eventually a matter of public record. "It is a growing risk to privacy," said Marc Rotenberg, executive director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, who says police should stick to traditional methods such as stings, informants and forensic evidence, which don't invade people's communications. Said Horack: "If they're going to use the Internet for their crime, we're going to use the Internet to catch them." Authorities turned to AOL to see some of the online activities of the two high school students who killed 13 other people and themselves in Littleton, Colo., last month. They've used it to try to track down some of the copycat threats that have closed many schools since. They took the same route, thus far with inconclusive results, after a woman in Pennsylvania was told in a chat room, "I guarantee you I will hurt you if you don't listen to me," and when a man in New York was charged with attempted murder of his wife, who, police say, was having a passionate online encounter her husband happened to see. "AOL is extremely law-enforcement friendly," Horack said. "They don't hold anything back." America Online tells its nearly 18 million customers it won't read or disclose private communication or personal identifying information except under a "valid legal process." Other major Internet service providers, or ISPs, as well as separate online e-mail services and Internet hubs like Hotmail and Yahoo, say much the same, although the disclaimers may be hard to find in screens of small print. "We have a long-standing policy of cooperation with law enforcement," said AOL spokesman Rich D'Amato. Communications such as e-mail are disclosed only in criminal investigations and with a warrant, he says. In response to orders in civil cases, AOL may give out information allowing someone's real name to be matched to a screen name. So if a spouse is found to be having an online affair with someone known only as Heart4U, the identity of that cyberlover might eventually be uncovered in a divorce proceeding. Raytheon Inc. obtained subpoenas to identify 21 people, most of them employees, said to have been spreading corporate secrets and gripes in an anonymous online chat room. It then dropped a lawsuit it had brought against the 21, each identified as "John Doe," indicating to privacy experts that the company had gone to court in the first place only to learn the identities of the chatters. Four employees quit; others entered corporate "counseling." Privacy advocates worry that authorities could go on increasingly invasive fishing expeditions. "There are simply many more events that are recorded (online) that would not be recorded in the physical world," said Rotenberg. "I think it is going to become an enormous problem as people become more and more dependent on ISPs." Meanwhile, tools continue to be developed to protect anonymity - a site called anonymizer.com, for one, will relay e-mail, stripping out the sender's identifying information. So far, at least, few warrants going to AOL look like goose chases, an impression formed after a review of the more than 100 that have been filed in Leesburg this year. Most involve alleged pedophiles, stalkers and harassers who have used the Internet to find prey and left evidence of their intentions with victims or undercover police. Horack prepares warrant applications for police from other parts of the country, some so new to digital detective work they need their children's help to get online. Once they are approved by a magistrate, he takes them to AOL and retrieves the information. It's almost a full-time job, offered by the sheriff because the company gives such a big boost to the county. The warrants are especially effective against child pornographers, Horack says. "Pedophiles are pack rats. They don't throw away anything." Even when they do delete material from their computer, it might be found at the service provider. In the case of the 12-year-old Pennsylvania girl, nothing turned up in the AOL search. Most of the time, something does. For example, police in Hendersonville, Tenn., turned to AOL to see the Internet activity of Dennis Wayne Cope, 47, shot and found dead in a crawl space of his home in February. In an affidavit seeking access to Cope's e-mail, "buddy list content" and other online activities, police said he had been corresponding online with the estranged wife of suspect Robert Lee Pattee. They also say Pattee's hand print was found at the scene. Pattee has been charged with first-degree murder. Copyright 1999 Nando Media ----------------------------- [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Note one of the lines early in this report: 'AOL is extremely friendly to law-enforcement'. Gee, what did I say here five years ago, two years ago, last year and just recently? 'Friendly' isn't the word for it. I think a person has to be awfully foolish to use AOL for much more than maybe checking the local weather forecast and maybe checking the sports headlines. Want to have some fun and raise a little hell in the process? Go find yourself a kiddie porn picture somewhere, and spam it to several thousand mailboxes at AOL ... take the necessary precautions of course in how you send it. Be sure to include as many Frightened Mothers as possible, and of course screen names known to belong to AOL employees. Then contact the Federal Bureau of Inquisition, or the county sheriff in Louden under some other alias and tip them off to a 'massive child porn ring at AOL'; why, it even involves quite a few employees, etc ... make it so your mail shows up about the same time the Sheriff gets there. Maybe spam them two or three days in a row with different pictures each time; that way the Sheriff will know the stuff did not just 'accidentally' get there; why those depraved perverts must have been trading it among themselves, etc. It would help if you fix up your sendmail.cf to make it look like they were all sending it back and forth to each other, then of course ditch that sendmail.cf, restore your regular one and cleanse your syslogs of any evidence. Name your machine 'xxx.aol.com' when you spam them. See, here is all the proof we need, says one country bumpkin sheriff to the other investigators. A press release naturally to all the papers the day of the raid, announcing that child pornography was found on the computers of many employees at AOL. Indeed, it would have been found there. Maybe someone could set up a very popular web site; so popular it was getting many thousands of hits daily, and in the process of taking each call, slip a little kiddie porn down the pipe in an innocuous way to the user's cache, some dinky little .jpg which took only a second or two to get to where you wanted it. Note the IP address for each person and then call the local Sheriff and tell him about the 'massive kiddie porn ring' ... 'why, it is estimated ninety-six percent of all internet users have it downloaded on their computer. Have you checked out this one (IP address) yet?' Maybe make sure that you spam as many school teachers, priests and rabbis as possible, and whisper in the sheriff's ear about the time you are sending it out via your appropriately named computer and properly configured sendmail, or web site, etc. Remember that prank spam a few years ago allegedly sent by some poor hapless guy in Queens, NY offering child porn to everyone who wrote him? Law enforcement fell for that one hook, line and sinker. It was a couple days before they decided it must have been a prank. I am sure that properly done, you could have everything and everyone at AOL in an uproar for a week, pointing their fingers at each other. They need to be broken of their bad habits one way or another, that is for sure. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Michael D. Sullivan Reply-To: Michael D. Sullivan Subject: Re: Reciprocal Compensation (was Re: Strange Problems) Date: Sat, 29 May 1999 05:15:26 GMT On Thu, 27 May 1999 01:20:08 GMT, John McHarry wrote: > On Tue, 25 May 1999 18:31:45 GMT, Eli Mantel > wrote: >> Let's remember that the issue of reciprocal compensation doesn't >> directly affect what consumers pay for service. By the somewhat >> arcane rules in effect, reciprocal compensation is paid only on local >> calls, but classifying certain calls as long distance doesn't mean >> that consumers will be charged for those calls. It only affects what >> the phone companies involved pay each other. > It puts a per-minute charge on the call that includes a toll to local > subsidy. No. The FCC has not decided that there must be a per-minute charge on ISP traffic, and it has not ruled that such traffic is toll or "interexchange." It has only ruled that it is mostly interstate, for jurisdictional purposes. It has also said that it will be governed by existing interconnection agreements and is subject to state supervision. >> It's probably the case that the incumbent local phone companies, such >> as PacBell, made a tactical error in lobbying for reciprocal >> compensation, with the result that the competing local phone companies >> took advantage of the opportunity this created by signing up >> businesses to use their service for phone lines that made few or no >> outgoing calls, hence making them eligible to receive reciprocal >> compensation. Agreed. > They made their bed; let them sleep in it. I guess they could try to > compete for the ISP business, if they were willing to settle for > competitive rates. Most, if not all, ILECs offer ISPs rates that do not charge for incoming traffic. Business lines are typically not charged for incoming local calls. ILECs may not offer free interconnection to ISPs or pay the ISP for incoming calls, but they don't offer these features to other business subscribers, including those with heavy inbound traffic. > If the CLEC has to pay the long distance interconnect rate, cents per > minute, it will have to pass that charge to the ISPs. ISPs will have > to recover those costs, probably in per minute connect fees. I think > most of the BOCs are under rate cap regulation. They need to play > "root hog or die" on this one. Of course they have the best Congress > money can buy to bail them out. The FCC has not authorized or required payment of access charges (the "long distance interconnect rate") by ISPs. In fact, it has reiterated that they are exempt from such charges. ------------------------------ From: sjsobol@NorthShoreTechnologies.net (Steven J Sobol) Subject: Re: ADSL and DSL, What is the Difference and Why? Date: 29 May 1999 06:29:10 GMT Organization: North Shore Technologies Corp. 888.480.INET On Fri, 28 May 1999 18:59:50 -0400, jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca allegedly said: > A few years ago, the "dream" was that telcos would roll out ADSL and > compete against cable. > ADSL comes out and starts to be rolled out, but all of a sudden, DSL > comes out and goes to comsumers. > Here in Bell Canada territory, it seems that commercial customers get > ADSL whereas consumers get DSL. > What is the basic difference between the two? Why would telcos not > choose a single technology? DSL comprises many different technologies: ADSL - Asynchronous Digital Subscriber Line (more bandwidth down than up, good for consumers surfing the web, is cheaper than SDSL) SDSL - Synchronous DSL (same bandwidth both ways, more economical than a T-1) IDSL - Don't know much about this one. Has something to do with DSL over ISDN lines... There are a couple more ... Steve Sobol, President, North Shore Technologies Corporation 815 Superior Avenue, Suite 610 - Cleveland, Ohio 44114-2702 sjsobol@NorthShoreTechnologies.net * www.NorthShoreTechnologies.net 888.480.INET (4638) - 877.480.PAGE (7243) System Admin and Founding Member, FREE - http://www.spamfree.org ------------------------------ From: sjsobol@NorthShoreTechnologies.net (Steven J Sobol) Subject: Re: Big Banks Move on Net Security - Consumer Advice! Date: 29 May 1999 06:36:08 GMT Organization: North Shore Technologies Corp. 888.480.INET On Fri, 28 May 1999 22:52:13 -0400, jason@itw.com allegedly said: > The standard behemoths such as Bank One/First Chicago, Wells Fargo, > Nationsbank, etc, etc ... have impersonal, shoddy customer service, > pitiful interest rates, excessive fees to get access to YOUR money, > and want to charge your for online account access and online bill > payment when both of those services actually cost them much less than > standard processing methods. Check out Huntington, www.huntington.com. I've been a customer of the mortar-and-brick branches for almost four years and am very happy, and the web site is great, and their customer service people are great both on the phone, in person and on the Net (Yes, they DO answer e-mail!) When I was with Bank One several years ago, the customer service was top-notch, but it may have gone way downhill since then with all the mergers. And the fees have always been excessive. NationsBank is now part of Bank Of America, so who knows how they're going to turn out ... > Why settle for a measly .5 % interest from the "Mountain" (or whomever) > when you can have the same FDIC insured peace of mind from a real > "online" bank that *wants* your business? Why waste time by physically > visting a branch when Telebank and others refund 4 ATM withdrawal fees > monthly and provide free mail-in deposit envelopes? One of these days, I'm going to try one of the online banks. My Huntington statement savings account yields a piddling 4% (I think). I wouldn't use the online banks for checking, but for savings, they might be worth it. > No, I dont work for either bank, just a consumer advocate that hates to > see fellow consumers get "sucked in" due to the decreasing banking > choices out there. I will be glad to see those brick and mortar > branches erode away at the big bank's net revenue. Likewise, I don't work for any of the banks listed above, nor am I a shareholder, or a vendor. I am a satisfied customer of Huntington, and I am interested in seeing them succeed ... that's it. :) TELECOM Digest Editor noted: > everytime you even speak to a teller or someone in customer service; > that means the bank needs money ... ie. has gotten a little 'under > the weather' financially. Unless it's a Bank One or another similar bank. I am convinced that Banc One Corp finances its mergers through checking account fees. :) I've never known them to be anything other than healthy, either. Steve Sobol, President, North Shore Technologies Corporation 815 Superior Avenue, Suite 610 - Cleveland, Ohio 44114-2702 sjsobol@NorthShoreTechnologies.net * www.NorthShoreTechnologies.net 888.480.INET (4638) - 877.480.PAGE (7243) System Admin and Founding Member, FREE - http://www.spamfree.org ------------------------------ From: Adam H. Kerman Subject: New Rules For Mail Drops (was: Here is Why Email Has Gotten ...) Organization: Chinet - Public Access UNIX since 1982 Date: Sat, 29 May 1999 06:56:16 GMT In article , John David Galt wrote: > Quoth Matthew Black : >> I'm told the US Postal Service will soon implement new rules regarding >> private mailbox companies. Users will no longer be permitted the use >> of "Suite" to imply a business presence. Rather, private mailbox >> users must indicate something like "PPO BOX" instead of "Suite" so >> customers will know that there is no business presence at the >> location. The USPS will also force the private mailbox operator to >> keep a photocopy of the box owners' drivers license on file for public >> inspection. The law provides that anyone can ask for the box user's >> registration information (drivers license). While these rules will >> help stop marketing scams similar to your message, it takes away >> individual privacy. > The new rules have already been enacted and were supposed to take effect > April 26, but they have been postponed six months. Details at: > http://www.usps.gov/feedback/cmra_faq.htm Er, no. The new rules are in effect. The only thing that is postponed is the use of PMB [for Private Mail Box] to write to a box holder. You may read the Federal Register notice for yourself at: http://ribbs.usps.gov/files/fedreg/usps99/99-7352.txt In the standards in the Domestic Mail Manual D042.2.5, 2.6, and 2.7, mail drops are formally called commercial mail receiving agencies. These rules are tough. The toughest aspect is the new addressing requirement to send mail to a private box holder: ABC Company PMB 234 519 W. Central Ave., Ste. 314 Anytown, USA Currently, a boxholder doing business might use put his box number after the word "suite" or an individual might use "apartment". These are specifically not allowed after October 26. If either appears on the mailpiece, the post office will return it to sender. Please notice the inconvenience of putting PMB on a separate line, an entirely new style of addressing which will require software that manages mailing lists to be reprogrammed. And senders will not be able to figure this out since mail is not normally addressed this way. To become a CMRA, the owner must show the Postmaster two pieces of his ID and the Postmaster may photocopy the picture ID. No, it is optional for the CMRA photocopy the boxholder's picture ID. The current standard already required him to notify the post office of the two types of identification and the ID numbers. No, the application with the ID numbers and addresses is not shown to a member of the public unless the boxholder has notified the CMRA that he's doing business with the public or soliciting business. So an individual receiving personal mail will not have his application disclosed. The other tough new requirement: When a boxholder leaves the CMRA, the CMRA must put new postage on all mail and forward it for six months. After six months, the agent may refuse First-Class Mail and give it back to the post office to be returned to sender. However, there's no way to force the boxholder to give the CMRA his new address. This is in conflict with another provision that requires the CMRA not to do business with any boxholder who refuses to disclose his proper address or keep his current address updated. That would imply that if the CMRA does not have a correct address for the boxholder, he need not pay to forward the mail. There are companies, like shared office suites or a Kinko's, that do more for a customer than simply receive mail and shipments. Nevertheless (according to the Q&A cited above) they can fall under the CMRA definition if they hold mail in a private box for a customer even though they provide numerous other office services. But shared suites are not CMRAs if the customer has his own space -- a desk or a small office -- so he can be said to be the actual occupant. The Q&A used the excuse for PMB that automatic addressing software (including what the post office itself uses) tends to convert the word "Box" into "PO Box" which misdirects the mail. However, it is quite common for students to have boxes in college mail rooms. They will not use the PMB designation since colleges aren't CMRAs. The problem isn't solved. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 May 1999 13:24:31 +0000 From: Thomas P. Brisco Organization: American Interactive Media Subject: Re: Ma Bell Doesn't Live There Any Longer PAT: honestly; I think you _should_ put such a thing together. Pull on the resources of the TELECOM Digest regulars, put most (all?) of the proceeds towards the funding of the Digest. Your fame and glory could come from the lecture circuit ;-). Personally; I can't claim to know much about Telecom (hell, definately _not_, compared to some of the regulars on the list), however I'd be happy to offer my eyeballs as a reader and tech checker (I've done a lot with the data side of things in telecom, since about 1984). Let me (us!) know if you're going to be moving forward on this. I don't think you'll find any shortage of volunteers ... > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: "Ma Bell Doesn't Live Here Any Longer: > The Decay of the USA Telephone Network Since 1984." Subtitled, > "One Hundred of the Best Horror Stories About Telephone Service Which > Appeared in TELECOM Digest" ... I dunno, does someone want to help me > write it? PAT] Thomas P. Brisco (v) 212 539 0706 Network Architect (f) 212 538 8380 American Interactive Media tbrisco@featfirst.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thanks for your kind thoughts. I will think about it, but I will not promise anything right now. I have *so many* things I would like to do, and so few resources and so little time. :( One of my favorite poets, John Milton, expressed my sentiments exactly in a poem, 'My Mind to Me a Kingdom is' when he said, 'Oppressed I am by things undone, oh that my dreams and deeds were one ... '. Later ... PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #109 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon May 31 03:38:11 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id DAA12721; Mon, 31 May 1999 03:38:11 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 31 May 1999 03:38:11 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199905310738.DAA12721@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #110 TELECOM Digest Mon, 31 May 99 03:38:00 EDT Volume 19 : Issue 110 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Now I Really Need Help in the Archives (TELECOM Digest Editor) AT&T Now Charges For Place Name; Raises Other Charges (Babu Mengelepouti) Bell Atlantic Use of Reserved 555-01xx Numbers (Daniel Norton) UCLA Summer Short Course on "Wavelength-Division Multiplexing" (B. Goodin) TDA/SUPERCOMM99 - Invitation To Business Opportunities Lunch (P. Robinson) Number to Cause Phone to Ring Back (Richard Sobocinski) Re: Bell Atlantic & V-SPAN Allianced (Art M) Re: Canadian CLECs (Erling Lassesen) Re: PBX or Hybrid? (Erling Lassesen) Re: World's First Video Cell Phone Debuts in Japan (steven@primacomputer) Re: ADSL and DSL, What is the Difference and Why? (Arthur Ross) Re: It Goes Two Ways, was Re: Sex Sites Getting Screwed (Leonard Erickson) 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 networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 765 Junction City, KS 66441-0765 Phone: 415-520-9905 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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, 31 May 1999 03:00:06 EDT From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Now I Really Need Help in the Archives After the mostly in jest comment the other day about language translations I got to thinking that in keeping with my own commitment of making the archives web site http://telecom-digest.org as accessible as possible to as many people as possible some foreign language translation there would not be a bad idea. We also talked about Babel Fish, the product from AltaVista which tries to interpret what it sees to and from various lang- uages. Babel Fish is included automatically in Internet Explorer 5 and there are patches available to allow it to be added to lesser versions of IE as well as all the later versions of Netscape and other browsers. For the past several days, the number of hits at the archives web site has been higher than ever. After removing hits to GIF images, sounds and things like that, the daily count still numbers in the thousands. If I remove the known search engines from the log before analyzing it, I still get about three thousand actual users each day. What I found out was that someone trying to be helpful submitted the web site to one of those 'we will submit you to 1500 search engines all at the same time' places, and indeed, all 1500 of those search engines are now prowling around the archives. Many of them I have never heard of before, and many are from countries in Europe and Asia. This same person also then went to a couple of the biggies here in the United States -- Infoseek, AltaVisa, DejaNews, etc -- and asked them to re-index telecom. That's all fine with me; I appreciate the efforts made. Now, with the above in mind, here are some assumptions I made, and how I need some quick help: Assumption One: All those search engines from other countries are going to bring people around who either do not read English or perhaps read it as a second language. Assumption Two: When those readers land at http://telecom-digest.org they are going to have at least some difficulty reading what has been written in English. Assumption Three: Those who have some installation of Babel Fish on their browser, or know of its URL otherwise, will seek assistance in reading the page. Is there anything else other than AltaVista's partnership with the Babel Fish Company at the present time doing that sort of 'on the fly' translations? Now with the above three assumptions which may be correct or may be incorrect, I worked all day Sunday with some hasty patches on my end to be as accomodating as I can be ... I wrote a small script, actually just an HTML Form, which sends anyone who uses it straight over to Babel Fish's cgi-bin. At the top of each of the 'primary web pages', ie -- http://telecom-digest.org http://telecom-digest.org/search http://telecom-digest.org/linkspage.html http://telecom-digest.org/postoffice is now a single line suggesting to the user, 'translate this page?' and the option choices are (from default English) into French, German, Italian, Portugese, and Spanish, which are the five languages Babel Fish can deal with at present. If the user 'submits' the form, I send it straight to Babel Fish's cgi-bin with the URL value for that page, and the translation desired. Babel Fish tosses a screen at the user to confirm the choice, but the user need not enter any URL information; I sent that on already. The user confirms the choice, and Babel Fish a few seconds later sends back the translated page. All the user has to do is select a language from the drop down box, and punch 'translate'; off it goes and comes back with the page in the language requested. By the way, Babel Fish *does* encourage webmasters and others to include on their pages a template they provide for that purpose; I just did not like their ugly template and decided to write my own instead, making it a lot easier for users than the one they are giving out. =============================== Where you all fit into the picture: *read it to me* ... I am afraid that I can read write and speak in every possible language known in the history of man except Greek: and when you ask me to read/write or speak in some language other than native Chicago-ese, my response is "that's Greek to me ..." ... If you read or understand either Italian, French, German, Portugese or Spanish, *please* (on my hands and knees begging) go to the telecom web site http://telecom-digest.org, click on one or more of the translations, review it and let me know your findings. Of particular concern are index.html (which you should land on by default) and /linkspage.html ... I reviewed them to the best of my ability but a couple of them seemed they might be outrageous. /postoffice and /search are also important, but not as much as the first two. If the rendered translations are useless, or outrageous -- and you who read the languages will have to decide that -- then I may just remove my little script and go back to English only. I will grant you the same people can come along and push the Babel Fish button on their browser and accomplish the same thing, but then the onus is on Babel Fish if the page looks totally ignorant, rather than on me! :) As it is set up now with my 'push this button to translate' feature, it appears *I* am encouraging the use of the feature. I would rather let Babel Fish get the bum rap for it if the output is nonsensical, etc. I did not offer translation to /chat or /TELECOM_Digest_Online; the latter would involve hacking the source code for Hypermail, and then recompiling a new executable. So read the default English version first, then try whatever trans- lations you can deal with, and see if those translations have me saying more or less what I said in English. Then let me know! PAT PS: Do the same thing for http://internet-history.org please. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 30 May 1999 13:50:29 -0700 From: Babu Mengelepouti Reply-To: dialtone@vcn.bc.ca Organization: US Secret Service Subject: AT&T Now Charges For Place Name; Raises Other Charges I recently received a page to an unfamiliar area code, and wanted to know where it was. So I called an AT&T operator to find out; they're usually pretty accurate with that information and they've always provided it through their operators. The moment I asked for name of place, the operator pressed a button indicating "I'm sorry, that information is now provided by AT&T '00' directory assistance." When I asked whether there would be a charge for this information, the operator indicated that the call would be billed as a regular directory assistance call. This means that to find out where a number is, using AT&T at least, potentially could cost several times more than the amount of the call. Additionally, with the recent proliferation of new area codes, it's difficult to know where something is. I will be filing a complaint with my state Utilities and Transportation commission, since AT&T recently won the right to carry intralata traffic. I think that they should be forced to provide this information for intralata traffic at least. AT&T has jacked up other charges as well as instituting new ones. The rate for coin calls no longer changes based on the time of day, and it is over $3 for the first 3 minutes and about 50 cents each additional minute for all ACTS-routed AT&T calls. You still have to pay the full 3 minute charge even if you get an answering machine. It is now $19.95 for an interstate emergency interrupt, which AT&T is still the only company to provide. The collect call surcharge is $3.45, or $4.95 if operator handled. Asking for time and charges on a 1 minute call will result in a charge of $5.50, and the rate is 55 cents per minute! Person-to-person calls are billed at a surcharge of $9.95, plus a "special" rate of "only" 55 cents per minute. And when billing a call to a third number there is also $5.50 surcharge, plus the rate of 55 cents per minute. Unfortunately, AT&T is not alone in this practice. I've given one of my lines to MCI, in exchange for 10,000 frequent flier miles (reminds me of the $100 checks I used to get from AT&T!). However, they have problems of their own. For instance, they billed me for several calls to a number which was busy, and vehemently insisted that their computer could never possibly bill me for such a call. Only when I threatened to terminate my account with MCI did they issue a credit -- for a whopping 25 cents, which was all I was complaining about in the first place (I'll be terminating that account as soon as they are no longer giving me frequent flier miles). Sprint has always been awful about giving credits for improperly billed items, but they've gotten even worse. When someone stole my calling card -- which I had never previously used -- and placed about $600 worth of calls from abroad, Sprint vehemently insisted that I must have made the calls or at least authorized them. This vehemence evaporated -- but only reluctantly -- when I pointed out that the majority of the calls were to New York City, I didn't know anyone there, and my call details would prove that I don't call there. Something about mentioning New York City along with fraud shuts Sprint up in a hurry, I guess. Long distance companies seem increasingly desparate to squeeze every penny of possible revenue out of consumers. However, this attitude is self-defeating. I almost never call long distance anymore, since I can use email or online chat to stay in contact with people. And charges such as these encourage me to use long distance networks even less. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Mark Cuccia reported this same thing last week here, but you had a few additional details in your report. You might try switching to one of the very small -- but ethical and experienced -- carriers who want your business. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Daniel@DanielNorton.net (Daniel Norton) Subject: Bell Atlantic Use of Reserved 555-01xx Numbers Date: Sun, 30 May 1999 17:17:37 GMT Bell Atlantic (BA) seems to be violating the North American Numbering Plan (NANP) by directing calls in the reserved range at 555-01xx to their own directory assistance service, for which they charge $0.45 to $0.95 per call. These numbers are reserved for "fictitious use" and may be called inadvertently or by curiosity seekers and are used frequently in film and on TV and could have considerable commercial value -- others may wish to have these numbers that are strictly reserved but that BA is hoarding for their own use. According to the NANP Administrator, "Calls to these numbers ... will not complete." If these numbers aren't actually reserved, shouldn't other directory information services have access to them? Who is responsible for regulating and enforcing the NANP and COC assignments? Background: cf. 47 CFR 52.15 http://www.nanpa.com/number_resource_info/555_numbers.html Daniel Norton ------------------------------ From: Bill Goodin Subject: UCLA Summer Short Course on "Wavelength-Division Multiplexing" Date: Sun, 30 May 1999 17:07:16 -0700 This summer, UCLA Extension will present the following short course on the UCLA campus in Los Angeles. July 7-9, 1999, "Wavelength-Division Multiplexed Systems and Technologies". The instructor is Alan E. Willner, PhD, Professor, Department of Electrical Engineering, University of Southern California, $1195. For additional information and a complete course description, please visit our website, http://www.unex.ucla.edu/shortcourses/, or contact Marcus Hennessy at: (310) 825-1047 (310) 206-2815 fax mhenness@unex.ucla.edu This course may also be presented on-site at company locations. ------------------------------ From: Peter.J.Robinson@interport.net Date: Sun, 30 May 1999 18:00:00 Reply-To: info@assist-intl.com Subject: TDA/SUPERCOMM99 - Invitation To Business Opportunities Lunch The United States Trade and Development Agency (TDA) invites you to a Special Business Briefing Luncheon highlighting presentations from senior executives of private telecom companies and officials from national telecom carriers in the Czech Republic and Slovenia. The purpose of this briefing is to introduce U.S. telecom operators and manufacturers of equipment to the export and business opportunites available as these countries prepare to modernize and expand their telecom operations in the near future. Take a Break Join TDA and these eight key decision-makers from the Czech Republic and Slovenia in a two-hour business briefing. Meet one-on-one with these project sponsors to discuss your company's expertise and interest in the region. Learn first-hand about millions of dollars in export and business opportunities. Join us at the Business Opportunities Briefing on Wednesday, June 9, 1999 from 12 noon to 2:00 pm at the Barrington Room of the Omni Hotel at CNN Center. Lunch is complimentary. Space is limited so RSVP by return email TODAY - to info@assist-intl.com or visit us at the International Business Center at SUPERCOMM in Hall A at the Georgia World Congress Center. Please response with the following information: The person(s) attending the TDA Business briefing on Wednesday, June 9th will be: (Please give name and title) Name: Title: Company: Address: Country: Telephone: Fax: Email: Regards Peter Robinson Assist International The United States Trade and Development Agency assists in the creation of jobs for Americans by helping U.S. companies pursue overseas business opportunities. Through the funding of feasibility studies, orientation visits, specialized training grants, business workshops, and various forms of technical assistance, we enable American businesses to compete for infrastructure and industrial projects in middle-income and developing countries. ------------------------------ From: Richard Sobocinski Subject: Number Which Causes Phone to Ring Back Date: Sun, 30 May 1999 21:54:57 -0400 Organization: University of Pittsburgh There was once a number that one could dial into a telephone to make that phone ring. I think it was something that phone service men used to test the ringer. Any idea what that number is or if there is a similar thing? TIA Rich sobocinski@starmail.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: They are all over; it varies from one telco territory to another. The only thing they have in common is that telco tries to keep them secret (they are now usually seven or ten digit numbers; ie. in Chicago it is always 200-xxx-xxxx) and as soon as they become common knowledge, telco changes them. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 30 May 1999 23:20:36 -0400 From: Art M Organization: Never My Love Subject: Re: Bell Atlantic & V-SPAN Allianced Allianced?? ALLIANCED??? Done too many drugs, haven't you? Your brain's completely shot now :*( [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Don't shoot the messenger. That's the way they had it written up when the press release went out. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Erling Lassesen Subject: Re: Canadian CLECs Date: Sun, 30 May 1999 22:37:52 -0700 Organization: Uniserve Reply-To: adtech@uniserve.com grm wrote: > Do you have any info on who the fast moving Canadian CLECs are? > gmorriso@telcordia.com We have one operating in our area who shall remain nameless. They shut down one customer's phones for four hours and for my customer, removed a cross-connect from a Mitel switch to a room. Not impressed. Better to leave service to the Telco's. ------------------------------ From: Erling Lassesen Subject: Re: PBX or Hybrid? Date: Sun, 30 May 1999 22:40:04 -0700 Organization: Uniserve Reply-To: adtech@uniserve.com Ron Walter wrote: > Is there a standard definition for when a phone system is no longer a > hybrid and is instead a full PBX? Can a full PBX also be known as a > hybrid? Any input on this would be a great help to me. Thank you. Hybrid as a term has been used to describe the Panasonic digital switches, as the integrate both analog and ditital telephones. ------------------------------ From: steven@primacomputer.com (Steven) Subject: Re: World's First Video Cell Phone Debuts in Japan Date: Sun, 30 May 1999 23:52:21 +0800 Organization: Prima Computer Being the proud owner of oodles of little Japanese gadgets I feel qualified to comment on this. Yes, the Japanese are infatuated with small things. They've got pocket versions of nearly every office device. Unfortunately (for video phone makers) the video phone never caught on as an office device, or home device, so its pretty much doomed to failure in its pocket version. Steven In article , kim@aol.com says... > Arthur Ross scribed: >> This seems to be a phenomenon that recurs with a cycle time of about one >> generation -- takes that long for the old generation of enthusiastic >> engineers and marketing folks to forget about the last attempt, and to try >> to sell the picturephone again. >> Seems like it must be the Japanese' turn to find this out. > One thing that should be considered before blanket generalizations be > thrown around is that different cultures have different desires and > will accept different situations. > Extrapolating AMERICAN marketing experiences to a non-American culture > can sometimes (not always) go astray. > Kim Brennan (kim@aol.com) > Duo 2300c, PB 2400, VW Fox Wagon GL, Corrado SLC, Vanagon GL Syncro > http://members.aol.com/kim > Duo Info Page: http://members.aol.com/kim/computer/duo > ?'s should include "Duo" in subject, else they'll be deleted unread. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 31 May 1999 06:22:22 GMT From: Arthur Ross Subject: Re: ADSL and DSL, What is the Difference and Why? sjsobol@NorthShoreTechnologies.net (Steven J Sobol) wrote: > DSL comprises many different technologies: > ADSL - Asynchronous Digital Subscriber Line (more bandwidth down than > up, good for consumers surfing the web, is cheaper than SDSL) > SDSL - Synchronous DSL (same bandwidth both ways, more economical than > a T-1) > IDSL - Don't know much about this one. Has something to do with DSL > over ISDN lines... > There are a couple more ... Indeed. Generally these things are some form of DMT - Discrete Multitone Modulation - multiple carriers, up to as high a frequency as they can get away with (or want to pay for), QAM Modulated, with sophisticated adaptive receivers. Latest one seems to be VDSL - Very high speed DSL. Claims are made for > 50 Mbps downstream. The asymmetry is that other old idea -- humans are slower than computers, so upstream doesn't need to be as fast as downstream. For those of you who are saying "... but telco BW is 3 khz - how can this be?" ... the difference is whether the signal goes through the switch or not. The legendary 3 khz bandwidth is an artificial restriction, set by the various forms of processing used in old-fashioned switch fabric and channel banks - Nowdays digital PCM, FDM microwave radio in the old days. Real bandwidth in the metallic pairs is not so restricted, although the transmission function at the higher frequencies is ugly, highly variable from loop to loop, and subject to ingress interference from unrelated nearby radio transmitters (particularly hams in residential neighborhoods). The sophisticated DSP that is now readily available and cheap has made it possible to cope with all the ugliness and come up with something that works in near-remarkable ways. The DSL modem at the CO sits between the metallic pair and the switch. Generally they separate the voice service from the IP traffic at that point. Voice goes to the switch, as always; IP goes to a pre-subscribed service provider, completely bypassing the switch. I've been told there is a market trial of that 50 Mbps thing by US West somewhere here in Phoenix, but don't know anything about it. That's enough for full motion video, suitably coded. To read more: IEEE Communications Magazine, April 1999 (www.comsoc.org). -- Best -- Arthur -- Dr. Arthur Ross 2325 East Orangewood Avenue Phoenix, AZ 85020-4730 Phone: 602-371-9708 Fax : 602-336-7074 ------------------------------ From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) Subject: Re: It Goes Two Ways, was Re: Sex Sites Getting Screwed Date: Mon, 31 May 1999 01:59:06 PST Organization: Shadownet wkyr0xwb@my-deja.com writes: > Let's have a little balance by seeing some of the ways that the sex > site purveyors screw the customers. > 1. Using a credit card to check age. How can they say this with > a straight face? Even if a CC number did this, an expired number > would do this just as well. However, they want a currently valid one. > The real reason is that, altho they say they won't charge the card, > they will later try to think of reasons to charge it. They can say it with a straight face because this is what the *law* says. The law *explicitly* states that paying via a credit card is "proof" that a caller is of legal age. The law in question being the one regulating telephone sex lines. Given that there aren't any internet specific rules, the sex sites are figuring that if they obey the sex line rules, they've got a decent defense. Blame Congress for writing such stupid laws. Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow) shadow@krypton.rain.com <--preferred leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com <--last resort ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #110 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon May 31 04:46:05 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id EAA14905; Mon, 31 May 1999 04:46:05 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 31 May 1999 04:46:05 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199905310846.EAA14905@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #111 TELECOM Digest Mon, 31 May 99 04:46:00 EDT Volume 19 : Issue 111 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Something Odd About Babel Fish (TELECOM Digest Editor) Re: Data Cabling Book (Herb Stein) Re: Reed Solomon Coding (Arthur Ross) Re: ADSL and DSL, What is the Difference and Why? (Barry Margolin) Re: ADSL and DSL, What is the Difference and Why? (Arthur Ross) Re: Search Warrants Make 'Online Privacy' an Oxymoron (Lisa Hancock) Re: Judge Freezes Funds in Internet Scam (Robert A. Rosenberg) Re: Call Filter Needed (B C Leonard) Re: Use of Star/Pound in Number Expansion (Adam H. Kerman) Re: Use of Star/Pound in Number Expansion (John Temples) Re: New Rules For Mail Drops (was: Here is Why Email Has Gotten) (J. Hines) Re: New Rules For Mail Drops (Derek Balling) Re: How to Throw the Book at Automated Recording-Only Sales Call (J Covert) 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 networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 765 Junction City, KS 66441-0765 Phone: 415-520-9905 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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, 31 May 1999 03:55:34 EDT From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Something Odd About Babel Fish In the last issue, I asked for help by people who can speak various languages in looking over the translated pages at http://telecom-digest.org and I hope that sometime Monday I will begin getting replies. I have noticed a couple of very odd things: Consider on http://telecom-digest.org/search -- The first item is the relatively new intra-site search engine from whatuseek.com and for all I know, Babel Fish does okay repeating my English message. But then where the template appears at the bottom of the paragrah, there are two 'radio' buttons. The first one is 'search this site' and it is the default. The second button is 'search the web'. In several of the Babel Fish translation efforts, it *reverses the description of the two radio buttons* referring to the intra-lata button as 'search the web' and the button for searching the web as the one to use for telecom-archives. It does not change the default condition; the first radio button is still the one offered by default. This seems to happen in every translation except German, in which the text for each radio button remains as it was in English regards the placement. Why might that be happening? Another thing I have noticed is that sometimes Babel Fish will find some entirely different place in a line of text to use as an anchor instead of the words at the start of the line as I had them in English. The anchor appears to go to the right place, it just is elsewhere in the string than where I placed it. Finally, for this time around, what does Babel Fish mean by the expression (with asterics around it) **** TIME OUT **** which sometimes appears in a sentence. I hope all of you foreign language speakers can help with this. I really do want to provide the service to the non-American users of the web unless Babel Fish is too crazy in its translations. PAT ------------------------------ From: herb@herbstein.com (Herb Stein) Subject: Re: Data Cabling Book Date: Sun, 30 May 1999 15:11:48 GMT Organization: newsread.com ISP News Reading Service (http://www.newsread.com) Entering "rs232" (for instance) in the Altavista search engine produces a lot of pointers. In article , Fred Atkinson wrote: > I was wondering if any of the T. D. readers would know of a > good reference manual to document the data about various types of > cables/interfaces? Example, look up RS232 to find the pin outs, the > electrical and mechanical (type of connector, etc.) specifications, > and the maximum length an RS-232 cable can reliable be and still work. > This is the type of information I'm looking for, preferably a small > 'quick reference' guide. Then, look up the same type of info for > V.35, RS449/422, etc. Herb Stein The Herb Stein Group herb@herbstein.com 314 215-3584 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 30 May 1999 08:51:46 -0700 From: Arthur Ross Subject: Re: Reed Solomon Coding Rob Heaton <114671.1317@CompuServe.COM> wrote: > Does anyone know of any public domain software that inplements a > Reed Solomon Coder and Decoder. If you can help I would be most > grateful. If you don't mind doing a little work, a very accessible discussion can be found in "Theory and Practice of Error Control Codes," by Richard Blahut, Addison-Wesley, 1983. See Fig. 7-8, et seq. BCH codes, of which R-S is a subset, and decoders therefore, are hard to understand, but not very hard to implement. You might have some fun, and learn something in the process from Dick Blahut's excellent book! -- Best -- Arthur -- Dr. Arthur Ross 2325 East Orangewood Avenue Phoenix, AZ 85020-4730 Phone: 602-371-9708 Fax : 602-336-7074 ------------------------------ From: Barry Margolin Subject: Re: ADSL and DSL, What is the Difference and Why? Organization: GTE Internetworking, Cambridge, MA Date: Sun, 30 May 1999 17:47:22 GMT In article , Steven J Sobol wrote: > ADSL - Asynchronous Digital Subscriber Line (more bandwidth down than > up, good for consumers surfing the web, is cheaper than SDSL) > SDSL - Synchronous DSL (same bandwidth both ways, more economical than > a T-1) Are you sure? I thought A and S stood for Asymmetric and Symmetric, referring to the bandwidth provided in each direction. Barry Margolin, barmar@bbnplanet.com GTE Internetworking, Powered by BBN, Burlington, MA *** DON'T SEND TECHNICAL QUESTIONS DIRECTLY TO ME, post them to newsgroups. Please DON'T copy followups to me -- I'll assume it wasn't posted to the group. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 31 May 1999 07:26:24 GMT From: Arthur Ross Subject: Re: ADSL and DSL, What is the Difference and Why? sjsobol@NorthShoreTechnologies.net (Steven J Sobol) wrote: > DSL comprises many different technologies: > ADSL - Asynchronous Digital Subscriber Line (more bandwidth down than > up, good for consumers surfing the web, is cheaper than SDSL) > SDSL - Synchronous DSL (same bandwidth both ways, more economical than > a T-1) Pat - Missed something in previous mail - The "A" and "S" are "asymmetric" and "symmetric," not asynchronous and synchronous. They're all synchronous signals, basically. --A ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) Subject: Re: Search Warrants Make 'Online Privacy' an Oxymoron Date: 30 May 1999 15:07:12 GMT Organization: Net Access BBS > "Ultimately, if you break the law, it can be traced," said > ... In response to orders in civil cases, AOL may give out > information allowing someone's real name to be matched to a screen name. > Raytheon Inc. obtained subpoenas to identify 21 people, most of them > employees, said to have been spreading corporate secrets and gripes in > an anonymous online chat room. It then dropped a lawsuit it had > brought against the 21, each identified as "John Doe," indicating to > privacy experts that the company had gone to court in the first place > only to learn the identities of the chatters. Four employees quit; > others entered corporate "counseling." One could argue a legitimate reason for searching (with _legitimate_ and realistic probable cause) online accounts for criminal activity. But AOL also will give _civil_ case information out. That's a completely different situation. If someone is cheating on their spouse, that's sad, but there is no public interest in violating that person's privacy. Frightening. More frightening is how Raytheon (cited above) sought out disgruntled employees. Here we have a case of people doing absolutely nothing wrong nor immoral, yet their privacy was violated. (BTW, a few years ago Proctor & Gamble demanded and received _home_ telephone records of employees to search out who was talking to newspaper reporters). When I am in my employer's workplace, they have a legal right to tap my telephone (it is really _their_ phone not mine), go through my desk or computer, or put microphones in the bathroom. And a lot of employers are doing just that. (The euphemism is "loss prevention"). But when I leave the factory gates, my life is now my own. Clearly employers are not satisfied with that. A friend of mine liked to call his wife at lunchtime every day. He went to a payphone across the street from his office. His boss saw this and said my friend didn't have to use the payphone, but was welcome to use his desk phone, even for a personal call. On the surface that seemed nice, but my friend was wary when the suggestion was frequently repeated. My friend had noted that a list of all calls made came out and he simply didn't want his personal calls appearing on that list. He also wondered if his boss was suspicious of his private calls. > Privacy advocates worry that authorities could go on increasingly > invasive fishing expeditions. As I said in a prior note, I think there's a bigger threat from the private sector -- your employer, your bank, etc. Say you apply for a car loan. The banker pulls up your credit history and finds all sorts of nasty little _personal_ things about you. True things -- maybe you had a fight with a former boss and lost your temper. Maybe you cheated on your spouse. Stuff beyond normal finances. Anyway, the banker declares you a credit risk, but will grant you the loan for two more percentage points of interest. Legalized blackmail. (And since all banks use databases, all would have the same info.) This could happen on a job search. You need a job. You apply and are interviewed. Your prospective employer declares you've had some problems in the past and are a risk. They'll still hire you, but at a longer probationary period and a lower rate of pay. Again, legal blackmail. > "There are simply many more events that are recorded (online) that > would not be recorded in the physical world," said Rotenberg. It's not only the events are _recorded_, but can be _easily_ obtained and disseminated. Paper files have always existed, but were very difficult to search and share. Computer files, esp with the web, are easy to share. TELECOM Digest Editor Noted: > Want to have some fun and raise a little hell in the process? Go find > yourself a kiddie porn picture somewhere, and spam it to several > Remember that prank spam a few years ago allegedly sent by some poor > hapless guy in Queens, NY offering child porn to everyone who wrote > him? Yes. What about someone doing this maliciously? We know you were kidding about AOL, but suppose some malcontent gets tired of writing viruses and tries something else? ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 30 May 1999 14:32:50 -0400 From: Robert A. Rosenberg Subject: Re: Judge Freezes Funds in Internet Scam At 15:22 -0400 on 05/27/99, editor@telecom-digest.org [quoting tls@panix.com (Thor Lancelot Simon)] wrote about TELECOM Digest V19 #103: > U.S. telco relations to the ITU run through the State Department, > which, like the FCC, is part of the Executive Branch. Furthermore, > the FCC could almost certainly order U.S. IXCs not to allow > direct-dial calls to the areas in question, and make it stick. And > NANPA was, last I checked, run under a contract let out by the U.S. > telcos, which are, of course, subject to FCC regulation ... What does the ITU have to do with it? Do not Remove the Carribean countries from Region 1. Just require that ANY attempt to dial them from the US as 1+ be intercepted by US IXCs. To dial them from a US IXC you would need to dial the Foreign Prefix (011?) and THEN 1+. This will make it obvious that it is NOT a US (or Canadian) Area Code but one into one of the Carribean countries (PR and VI would not be subject to this Foreign Prefix requirement and would still be dialed as 1+). ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 30 May 1999 10:55:00 -0500 From: B C Leonard Subject: Re: Call Filter Needed Dale Neiburg asked about filtering incoming calls: I have a box called the ATDI 3000 Call Management System that does exactly what you want. ATDI is located at 620 Ella Grasso BL, New Haven CT 06519. Phone 203-865-2834. It scarfs up Caller ID or uses a caller-entered 4 digit number to route calls to its internal answering machine (only 7 minutes capability), the ringer (5 different rings), or dev/null. Can't find the invoice now, but I know I bought it out of Nuts & Volts magazine about five years ago for about $50.00 On Fri, 28 May 1999 13:56:28 -0400, Dale Neiburg wrote: >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Actually, your product was developed >> and sold on the market about fifteen years ago under the name >> 'Privecode'. It functioned almost identically to your description. It >> sat on the line and answered instantly when a call was put on your >> line. Your own phone never even rang. It would tell the caller, 'Enter >> your privecode number please', and this would be a three digit number >> you had programmed in. If the person entered the correct number, the >> privecodebox would warble at you; you would pick up any phone and >> speak. If the person did not enter the correct number, they went >> straight to the answering machine. You could also assign a three digit >> code which always went to the answering machine as well. It was >> manufactured about 1975-80 by a company called 'International Mobile >> Machines' in Bala Cynwyd, PA. It sold for about $200. PAT] > This is exactly what I've been looking for (without success) for an > application I have. Does anyone know a current source for such a unit? > Dale Neiburg ** NPR Satellite Operations ** 202-414-2640 ------------------------------ From: Adam H. Kerman Subject: Re: Use of Star/Pound in Number Expansion Organization: Chinet - Public Access UNIX since 1982 Date: Sun, 30 May 1999 18:55:46 GMT In article , > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: > However, there is always the old A,B,C, and D keys from Autovon days; > remember those? It might be fun to see what could be done with a > system which gave every person four telephone 'numbers', i.e. the same > number but with A,B,C, or D on the end. . . . Please explain: I thought you'd said that such phones were only used over military voice networks and that A, B, C, and D were used to prioritize calls for purposes of national security. For instance, D, highest priority, was used to notify the General that his tee time was available ... I digress. Were such phones ever used for civilian uses or behind PBXs? > In any place where there were phone lines devoted to fax or data or > 'a second voice line' do readers feel the recovery of up to three out of the > four numbers presently assigned would accomplish much, while also considering > trade-offs with user convenience and learning a new system, etc? I would gladly trade the inconvenience of learning a new system for the convenience of dialing fewer digits. In fact, I'd like to see alpha-numeric dialing! Just think how short phone numbers could be ... In article , J.F. Mezei wrote: > The minute that ISPs will start to grant permanent IP adresses to > residential customers using cable or DSL, then it *may* make the > actual analogue phone quite irrelevant. IP addresses are inappropriate for this use since they aren't meant to be reassignable from network to network. No, we'd need to use domain names. Ah, think of the new fun in divorce proceedings: "You can have the kids. I want the domain name!" ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Use of Star/Pound in Number Expansion Organization: Gulfnet Kuwait From: john@kuwait.net (John Temples) Date: Sun, 30 May 1999 22:22:51 GMT In article , > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: In any place where there were phone lines > devoted to fax or data or 'a second voice line' do readers feel the > recovery of up to three out of the four numbers presently assigned > would accomplish much, while also considering trade-offs with user > convenience and learning a new system, etc? PAT] It certainly seems like a reasonable idea, but I think the biggest and most impractical "trade off" would be the obsolescence of hundreds of millions of phones. Having those new phone numbers wouldn't be very practical if no one could call them. John W. Temples, III ------------------------------ From: jhines@enteract.com (John B. Hines) Subject: Re: New Rules For Mail Drops (was: Here is Why Email Has Gotten) Date: Sun, 30 May 1999 11:43:19 GMT Organization: US Citizen, disabled with MS, speaking solely for myself. Adam H. Kerman wrote: > Please notice the inconvenience of putting PMB on a separate line, an > entirely new style of addressing which will require software that > manages mailing lists to be reprogrammed. And senders will not be able > to figure this out since mail is not normally addressed this way. That is the way the PO has done it for a long time. An address is hierarchal in nature, and read bottom up. Country, State, city, street address, and then what ever further sub-dividing is done, usually department or internal mail drop, but now made official. The PO's optical scanners will handle the human conventions of putting things in different orders, but that is what they would like. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 31 May 1999 07:43:22 GMT From: Derek Balling Subject: Re: New Rules For Mail Drops What is to stop an enterprising Kinko's operator from simply changing their method of business. Instead of being a "mail drop", why not rent out space? Space is DEFINITELY at a premium these days in many big cities, so it is entirely possible to charge exorbitant amounts for small quantities (say 1 cu. ft.) Make the customer sign a lease, etc. etc. At that point the customer is a TENANT. :) Replacing the word "Suite" with "Department" instantly allows them to circumvent the intent of the rule entirely. Then the only problem remaining is: How do you get the mail from the postman's hands into the storage units? Simple. We've all seen ads for some magazine, say "Time" ... if you see the ad in say the NYTimes, it might have the same address with "Dept NYT", and if you see it in the Tribune, it might have "Dept. CT".... that's all you're doing now, is targeted sorting of mail. Admittedly, there's probably a couple bugs in this theory to be worked out, but I'm sure that some enterprising individuals armed with a lawyer or two to check things out could probably make a nice living circumventing silly-ass laws like this. :) D ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 30 May 1999 16:56:45 -0400 From: John R. Covert Subject: Re: How to Throw the Book at Automated Recording-Only Sales Call? Delivering commercial messages by pre-recorded voice is against the law. See http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/47/227.text.html Here's what I'm trying; just put into the mail on Wednesday: Statement of Small Claim Trial Court of Massachusetts and Notice of Trial Small Claims Session Plaintiff's Name...blahblahblah Defendant's Name...blahblahblah Plaintiff's Claim. The defendant owes $500 plus $19.00 courts costs for the following reason: On 19 May 1999 at approximately noon, defendant caused a machine to initiate a telephone call to my residential telephone line, blahblah, using a pre-recorded voice to deliver a commercial message without my prior express consent. This is a violation of USC 47 Sec 227(b)(1)(B). USC 47 Sec 227(b)(3)(B) provides for a private right of action to receive $500 damages for each such violation. /s/ 26 May 1999 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #111 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon May 31 15:02:16 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id PAA05136; Mon, 31 May 1999 15:02:16 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 31 May 1999 15:02:16 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199905311902.PAA05136@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #112 TELECOM Digest Mon, 31 May 99 15:02:00 EDT Volume 19 : Issue 112 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Telecom Update (Canada) #185, May 31, 1999 (Angus TeleManagement) Re: ADSL and DSL, What is the Difference and Why? (Steven J. Sobol) Re: ADSL and DSL, What is the Difference and Why? (Sethu Rathinam) Re: Use of Star/Pound in Number Expansion (David Clayton) Re: Use of Star/Pound in Number Expansion (Leonard Erickson) Re: Use of Star/Pound in Number Expansion (Tony Pelliccio) Re: Number Which Causes Phone to Ring Back (MCSMAN) Re: Number Which Causes Phone to Ring Back (Bill Levant) Re: Here is Why Email Has Gotten So Spam-Ridden (Craig Macbride) Re: Here is Why Email Has Gotten So Spam-Ridden (Dan Gillmor) Re: Payphone Quality - Honolulu Airport (Leonard Erickson) 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 networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 765 Junction City, KS 66441-0765 Phone: 415-520-9905 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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, 31 May 1999 11:56:26 -0400 From: Angus TeleManagement Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #185, May 31, 1999 ************************************************************ * * * TELECOM UPDATE * * Angus TeleManagement's Weekly Telecom Newsbulletin * * http://www.angustel.ca * * Number 185: May 31, 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: ** Ottawa Sets Broadband Spectrum Auction ** Nortel to Offer Meridian PBX on a LAN ** FCC to Examine Area Code Crisis ** Ledcor Says It Is So a Carrier ** MacDonald Leaves Bell ** Stephenson to Head Lucent Canada ** CAIP Hires President from Cable Industry ** Telus TV Trial Extended ** Iridium Wins Another Debt Extension ** Telecom Networks Pass Y2K Tests ** CRTC Deregulates Fixed Satellite Services ** Price Caps for QuebecTel and Telebec ** Steinmetz Buys Tucows ** MetroNet Shareholders Okay AT&T Merger ** Failed ISP Sues MetroNet ** AirIQ Offers Combined Cellular/GPS Antenna ** Olivetti Wins Telecom Italia Bidding War ** Petro-Canada to Sell Cantel Prepaid Airtime ** Telus Moves East ============================================================ OTTAWA SETS BROADBAND SPECTRUM AUCTION: An auction of broadband wireless spectrum in the 24 and 38 GHz frequency bands will be held in Canada this fall, beginning in early October. To participate, companies must submit completed applications with financial deposits to Industry Canada by August 6. Details on the auction procedure are posted at http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/SSG/sf01797e.html. ** Potential bidders include the telephone and cable companies, which until now were not permitted to hold wireless broadband licenses. NORTEL TO OFFER MERIDIAN PBX ON A LAN: Over the next year, Nortel Networks will port its Meridian 1, Norstar, Matra and MSL100 PBX systems to open IP-LAN servers. Details will be revealed on June 8, when the company introduces 15 new IP telephony products. FCC TO EXAMINE AREA CODE CRISIS: As Telecom Update #180 reported, North America may run out of three-digit area codes by 2007. On May 27, the U.S. Federal Communications Commission issued a "Notice of Proposed Rulemaking" to consider measures which may delay the need for a major numbering system change. ** Ian Angus analyzes causes of the Area Code crisis (and possible cures) in the June issue of Telemanagement, now available. LEDCOR SAYS IT IS SO A CARRIER: Ledcor Industries denies the City of Vancouver's claim that the company is not a "Canadian carrier" as defined by the Telecom Act and thus has no right to apply to the CRTC for access to Vancouver rights-of-way (see Telecom Update #184). Ledcor says it meets the definition, since it owns transmission facilities over which Sprint Canada provides public telecom services. MACDONALD LEAVES BELL: John MacDonald, President and Chief Operating Officer of Bell Canada, is leaving the company June 1 "to pursue other opportunities in emerging communications technology and spend more time with my family." His duties have been assumed by Bell CEO Jean Monty. STEPHENSON TO HEAD LUCENT CANADA: On July 15, former Stentor president Carol Stephenson will join Lucent Technologies Canada as President and CEO. Most recently, Stephenson has been President and CEO of the Business Services Division of Bell Satellite Services. ** Lucent Canada's current President and CEO, Jim Schram, has been transferred to the United States. CAIP HIRES PRESIDENT FROM CABLE INDUSTRY: Jay Thomson, for 10 years Legal and Regulatory Affairs Vice-President of the Canadian Cable Television Association, has been hired as President of the Canadian Association of Internet Providers. Thomson will replace Ron Kawchuk, who will stay with CAIP in another capacity. TELUS TV TRIAL EXTENDED: The CRTC has okayed Telus's application for a one-year extension of its multimedia trials in Calgary and Edmonton. The telco must limit the trial to 2,000 customers in Calgary and 1,400 in Edmonton. IRIDIUM WINS ANOTHER DEBT EXTENSION: Iridium's creditors have given the satellite telephone provider until June 30 to prove it can meet customer and revenue targets. Iridium is trying to negotiate a restructuring of its debt. TELECOM NETWORKS PASS Y2K TESTS: The Canadian Year 2000 Telecom Industry Forum says its program of 1,000 tests "revealed no errors or problems associated with processing calls across multiple networks." Tests of billing systems are still pending. CRTC DEREGULATES FIXED SATELLITE SERVICES: CRTC Telecom Decision 99-6 deregulates Telesat Canada's Fixed Satellite Services as of March 1, 2000, when Telesat's monopoly ends. The Decision defines a transitional regulatory regime, including price caps, for the intervening period. (See Telecom Update #163) http://www.crtc.gc.ca/internet/1999/8045/02/d99-06.htm PRICE CAPS FOR QUEBECTEL AND TELEBEC: CRTC Public Notice 99-15 invites comments on the appropriate timing for implementing a price cap regime for Quebec-Telephone and Telebec, as well as on rate rebalancing and the target contribution rate to be used in setting their going-in rates. To participate, notify the Commission by June 9. http://www.crtc.gc.ca:80/internet/1999/8045/03/pn99-15.htm STEINMETZ BUYS TUCOWS: A consortium headed by Israeli-based Steinmetz Technology Holding International has bought 85% of Toronto-based Tucows Interactive Limited, which operates Tucows.com. METRONET SHAREHOLDERS OKAY AT&T MERGER: Shareholders of MetroNet Communications have voted to approve MetroNet's merger with AT&T Canada. MetroNet says the merger will result in savings of $1.8 Billion over five years. FAILED ISP SUES METRONET: Puterdudes Internet Services is suing MetroNet for losses resulting from missed deadlines and for "negligent and unworkmanlike" equipment installation. Founded last fall, the London-based ISP no longer provides service. MetroNet says the suit is without merit. AIRIQ OFFERS COMBINED CELLULAR/GPS ANTENNA: AirIQ says it will offer a credit card-sized combined cellular/GPS antenna which allows quick, hidden installation of the company's vehicle tracking technology, and reduces interference which often results when two antennas are close together. OLIVETTI WINS TELECOM ITALIA BIDDING WAR: Italy's Olivetti has paid US$33 Billion for a majority stake Europe's fourth- largest telecom company, Telecom Italia, blocking Telecom Italia's planned merger with Deutsche Telecom. PETRO-CANADA TO SELL CANTEL PREPAID AIRTIME: Cantel AT&T Pay As You Go cards can now be purchased at Petro-Canada service stations across Canada. TELUS MOVES EAST: The June issue of Telemanagement, now available, features a report on Telus's plans to build a Canada-wide fiber network and enter the Ontario market by fall. Also: Cisco Plans a Revolution in Telecom; Running Out of Numbers; What Municipalities Want for Their Rights-of-Way. http://www.angustel.ca/teleman/tm99c-06.html ** Until June 30, new subscribers to Telemanagement will receive "Tips, Tricks and Traps: Managing Business Telecom Today," an anthology of 22 recent Telemanagement articles that focuses on solving practical problems of telecom management. ** To subscribe 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: sjsobol@NorthShoreTechnologies.net (Steven J Sobol) Subject: Re: ADSL and DSL, What is the Difference and Why? Date: 31 May 1999 15:49:08 GMT Organization: North Shore Technologies Corp. 888.480.INET On Mon, 31 May 1999 07:26:24 GMT, a.ross@ieee.org allegedly said: > Missed something in previous mail - The "A" and "S" are "asymmetric" > and "symmetric," not asynchronous and synchronous. They're all > synchronous signals, basically. Yep. My fault. Steve Sobol, President, North Shore Technologies Corporation 815 Superior Avenue, Suite 610 - Cleveland, Ohio 44114-2702 sjsobol@NorthShoreTechnologies.net * www.NorthShoreTechnologies.net 888.480.INET (4638) - 877.480.PAGE (7243) System Admin and Founding Member, FREE - http://www.spamfree.org ------------------------------ From: none@noplace.nom (Sethu Rathinam) Subject: Re: ADSL and DSL, What is the Difference and Why? Date: 31 May 1999 17:45:05 GMT There is an infomative whitepaper on xDSL at: http://www.3com.com/solutions/dsl/dsl_technical.html that gives basic technical information including capabilities and limitations. Sethu Rathinam rathinam AT netins PERIOD net rathinam AT att PERIOD worldnet PERIOD net ------------------------------ From: dcstar@acslink.aone.net.au (David Clayton) Subject: Re: Use of Star/Pound in Number Expansion Date: Mon, 31 May 1999 09:03:27 GMT Organization: Customer of Connect.com.au Pty. Ltd. Reply-To: dcstar@acslink.aone.net.au Adam H. Kerman contributed the following: > In article , >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: >> However, there is always the old A,B,C, and D keys from Autovon days; >> remember those? It might be fun to see what could be done with a >> system which gave every person four telephone 'numbers', i.e. the same >> number but with A,B,C, or D on the end. . . . > Please explain: I thought you'd said that such phones were only used > over military voice networks and that A, B, C, and D were used to > prioritize calls for purposes of national security. For instance, D, > highest priority, was used to notify the General that his tee time was > available ... I remember seeing Siemens PABX handsets in the early 1980's with the ABCD keys. Regards, David Clayton, e-mail: dcstar@acslink.aone.net.au Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. Dilbert's words of wisdom #18: Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. ------------------------------ From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) Subject: Re: Use of Star/Pound in Number Expansion Date: Mon, 31 May 1999 05:42:52 PST Organization: Shadownet Adam H. Kerman writes: > In article , >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: >> However, there is always the old A,B,C, and D keys from Autovon days; >> remember those? It might be fun to see what could be done with a >> system which gave every person four telephone 'numbers', i.e. the same >> number but with A,B,C, or D on the end. . . . > Please explain: I thought you'd said that such phones were only used > over military voice networks and that A, B, C, and D were used to > prioritize calls for purposes of national security. For instance, D, > highest priority, was used to notify the General that his tee time was > available ... > I digress. Were such phones ever used for civilian uses or behind PBXs? I don't know about that but the touch tone (DTMF) standard *includes* them. And many modems will dial them! Here's what a *full* touch tone keypad looks like. 1 2 3 A 4 5 6 B 7 8 9 C * 0 # D As far as I know, the common tone decoder chips recognize all 16 combos. And I think the standard DTMF *generator* chips will generate all of them. You just need the extra key contacts, and possibly one more crystal. I've seen a lot of "butt sets" with the 4th column, but not any desk phones. Of course, I haven't *looked* for any either. :-) Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow) shadow@krypton.rain.com <--preferred leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com <--last resort [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What happens when people in other countries want to call someone in the USA who has an A,B,C or D as part of their 'number'? I was thinking also that instead of using those letters on the end, to give everyone 'four telephone numbers for the price of one' those letters could also be used as 'meta area codes' with the USA divided in four parts, A,B,C, and D, thus allowing the existing area codes to be eventually repeated four times around. So instead of your phone number being 123-456-7890-B it might be B-123-456-7890. PAT ------------------------------ From: nospam.tonypo1@nospam.home.com (Tony Pelliccio) Subject: Re: Use of Star/Pound in Number Expansion Organization: Providence Network Partners Date: Mon, 31 May 1999 15:50:22 GMT In article , john@kuwait.net says: > In article , >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: In any place where there were phone lines >> devoted to fax or data or 'a second voice line' do readers feel the >> recovery of up to three out of the four numbers presently assigned >> would accomplish much, while also considering trade-offs with user >> convenience and learning a new system, etc? PAT] > It certainly seems like a reasonable idea, but I think the biggest and > most impractical "trade off" would be the obsolescence of hundreds of > millions of phones. Having those new phone numbers wouldn't be very > practical if no one could call them. Here's where the ILEC's could make a bundle. If they're WE 2500 sets it's a simple modification to enable A,B,C & D. Charge the customer $25 bucks a phone. But seriously, what happened to all those real WE 2500 sets? Are they warehousing them somewhere? == Tony Pelliccio, KD1S formerly KD1NR == Trustee WE1RD [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Does anyone remember when touch tone phones only had *ten* keys, ie. no # or *, those were just blank spots with nothing there. Then one day the phone man came around to each house and swapped out the old key pad for a new one with all twelve buttons. When asking him why he was doing that, he said 'one of these days those keys will be used for special functions.' At that time of course, pressing them did nothing, or possibly caused a reorder tone but nothing else. That would have been in the late 1960's or early 1970's. Occassionally, rarely, you still see a ten button touch tone phone. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: 31 May 1999 13:44:13 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com From: mcsman@aol.com (MCSMAN) Subject: Re: Number Which Causes Phone to Ring Back > There was once a number that one could dial into a telephone to make > that phone ring. I think it was something that phone service men used > to test the ringer Here in GTE-land, we just dial the number assigned to the phone, wait, and get a recording "the number you have dialled is on your party line. Please hang up and allow sufficient time for them to answer", even if you are not on a party line (is anybody, anymore?). [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: If you never take the receiver off the hook again, does it just go on ringing forever, or does it time out at some point? PAT] ------------------------------ From: Wlevant@aol.com (Bill Levant) Date: Mon, 31 May 1999 09:57:27 EDT Subject: Re: Number Which Causes Phone to Ring Back > There was once a number that one could dial into a telephone to make > that phone ring. I think it was something that phone service men used > to test the ringer. Any idea what that number is or if there is a > similar thing? Here in suburban Philadelphia, it always varied from CO to CO. When I was a kid, about twenty-five years ago, it was either 579 (wait for dial tone) 6 (and hang up) or, less often 531 (wait) 6 (hang up). Both of those codes are now legitimate NXX's in this area, and for a while, they were using 550. I dunno what they are using, but I know that 958-xxxx is reserved here for various telco purposes. Could be something in that range. Bill [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: 579 - wait for dial tone - 6 was the way it happened here for many years. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Here is Why Email Has Gotten So Spam-Ridden From: craig@glasswings.com.au (Craig Macbride) Organization: Nyx Public Access Internet Date: Mon, 31 May 1999 08:49:01 GMT Our editor wrote: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think that is what it is going to > come to eventually; users being 'charged' some nominal amount to > send email This is just not going to work. Some of the big ISPs and free email places already have the same effect by simply limiting the number of email messages that may be sent by one person over a period of time. The vast majority of UCE that I receive comes inserted into the net through some misconfigured machine which is allowing email forwarding from unknown sources, or has been inserted by some fake user at some small ISP. The email charge would, in most cases, never even be able to find its way to the actual spammer. If it lands on the lap of a small ISP which can't afford to pay and also can't find the perpetrator, then what? Of course, were such a system to be set up within America, the spammers would continue to find and abuse machines that will relay email and would move (even more of) their operations overseas. Already, we are starting to see various net abuse coming out of various places in South East Asia where the sys admins are too cretinous to even set up DNS properly, thus making even the task of _tracking_ the source of the abuse harder, let alone actually do something about it. Craig Macbride --------------------http://amarok.glasswings.com.au/~craig--------------- "It's a sense of humour like mine, Carla, that makes me proud to be ashamed of myself." - Captain Kremmen [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Nothing is perfect. A combination of approaches simply helps reduce the problem. Would you like to know how to send letters through the US Postal Service for free? There is one technique which works quite well: Usually, you put your return address as the sender in the upper left corner on the front of the envelope, the addressee information in the center of the front of the envelope, and your postage stamp in the upper right hand corner. Put your name and address in the center. Put the name and address of the person it is going to in the upper left corner. Forget about the postage stamp totally. Drop it in a mailbox. They will take the letter to the other person, thinking him to be the sender, and tell him he forgot to put a stamp on his mail. Only occassionally they will bring it to you as the 'addressee' and ask if you are willing to pay, but of course you refuse, telling them to get the money from the person who wrote you. The 'sender' (but really the intended recipient) will get the letter 'back' in his box with a notice to start over with the correct postage. It actually works, and years ago someone had a 'business report' they used to sell which was entitled, 'How to Reduce Your Postage Costs' with the above information on a single sheet of paper which they mailed to anyone who sent them ten dollars to *their* post office box. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 31 May 1999 10:08:27 PDT From: Dan Gillmor Subject: Re: Here is Why Email Has Gotten So Spam-Ridden Pat, I loved your piece deconstructing that spam, but I'd bet any amount of money that most or all of those "quotes" from major/minor newspapers and other publications were either forged or taken totally out of context. This is a standard trick. In fact, I'm going to be doing a column on how spammers not only make up quotes but sometimes make up publications (i.e. " 'A great product, says the New York Times Tribune.' ") or, in the case of stock fraud email, "research firms" ("Rated AAA by XYZ Research of Palo Alto, California"). Dan Gillmor, Tech Columnist San Jose Mercury News 750 Ridder Park Drive San Jose, CA 95190 Voice: +1-408-920-5016 Fax: +1-408-920-5917 www.mercurycenter.com/svtech/columns/gillmor ------------------------------ From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) Subject: Re: Payphone Quality - Honolulu Airport Date: Mon, 31 May 1999 03:47:27 PST Organization: Shadownet JF Mezei writes: > I have a pocket organizer with modem and an accoustic coupler. I limit > the modem to 2400 baud (with compression). > I have very few problems connecting from Australian pay phones back to > my server in Canada via long distance. > And in the past, I had no problems connecting at Honolulu airport. Well, it's a minor miracle that you *ever* got it to work. Acoustic couplers are generally *barely* adequate for 300 bps. There were a few made for 1200 bps Racal-Vadic. But I've *never* heard of them being reliable at 2400. Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow) shadow@krypton.rain.com <--preferred leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com <--last resort ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #112 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon May 31 16:38:30 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id QAA09644; Mon, 31 May 1999 16:38:30 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 31 May 1999 16:38:30 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199905312038.QAA09644@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #113 TELECOM Digest Mon, 31 May 99 16:38:00 EDT Volume 19 : Issue 113 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Use of Star/Pound in Number Expansion (Art Kamlet) Re: AT&T Now Charges For Place Name; Raises Other Charges (Art Kamlet) Re: How to Throw the Book at Automated Recording-Only Sales Call? (J. Knox) Re: PBX or Hybrid? (Jan Ceuleers) Re: Search Warrants Make 'Online Privacy' an Oxymoron (Art Kamlet) Re: Do You Feel Like a Number? (Hillary Gorman) Telco Unlimited Local Calls (chuck@xyz.nl) Re: Number Which Causes Phone to Ring Back (Joel B. Levin) Archives Links to Telecom-Related Sites (TELECOM Digest Editor) Re: New Rules For Mail Drops (Art Kamlet) UCLA Summer Short Course on Satellite Communication Design (Bill Goodin) 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 networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 765 Junction City, KS 66441-0765 Phone: 415-520-9905 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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: kamlet@infinet.com (Art Kamlet) Subject: Re: Use of Star/Pound in Number Expansion Date: 31 May 1999 14:45:09 -0400 Organization: InfiNet Reply-To: kamlet@infinet.com In article , Adam H. Kerman wrote: > In article , >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: >> However, there is always the old A,B,C, and D keys from Autovon days; >> remember those? It might be fun to see what could be done with a >> system which gave every person four telephone 'numbers', i.e. the same >> number but with A,B,C, or D on the end. . . . > Please explain: I thought you'd said that such phones were only used > over military voice networks and that A, B, C, and D were used to > prioritize calls for purposes of national security. For instance, D, > highest priority, was used to notify the General that his tee time was > available ... Well, on the autovon phone I had, it worked the other way round. If I tried a high priority call to the general and he was busy, I would just get a busy. But if the general wanted to call me and I was busy, the call I was on would be dropped and the general would come on. So it allowed the general to make a high priority interrupt of my call but didn't allow me to make other than a normal low priority call to him. This dates me, however, to about circa 1967. Today, intelligent network protocols allow businesses to set up VPNs (virtual private networks -- networks with nifty features that actually piggyback physically on other networks, but appear to the business as if there is a single dedicated netwrok.) In a VPN, these types of autovon priority interrupts can be programmed for the phone line and also by using passcodes, the company president who is visiting a low ranking peon or is in the company dining room can call a colleague using a high priority interrupt and passcode. (Do presidents really know how to make phone calls or do their secretaries do all that for them?) No matter -- the technology is now available to build an IN VPN that can outdo the autovon features. But autovon was also a separate, secure, redundant physical network, and the software INs may get you 1/3 or 2/3 of those today. > I would gladly trade the inconvenience of learning a new system for > the convenience of dialing fewer digits. In fact, I'd like to see > alpha-numeric dialing! Just think how short phone numbers could be ... Or just voice dialing: "Call Home." That's here today. Art Kamlet Columbus, Ohio kamlet@infinet.com ------------------------------ From: kamlet@infinet.com (Art Kamlet) Subject: Re: AT&T Now Charges For Place Name; Raises Other Charges Date: 31 May 1999 14:57:49 -0400 Organization: InfiNet Reply-To: kamlet@infinet.com In article , Babu Mengelepouti wrote: > The moment I asked for name of place, the operator pressed a button > indicating "I'm sorry, that information is now provided by AT&T '00' > directory assistance." When I asked whether there would be a charge for > this information, the operator indicated that the call would be billed > as a regular directory assistance call. > AT&T has jacked up other charges as well as instituting new ones. The > rate for coin calls no longer changes based on the time of day, and it > is over $3 for the first 3 minutes and about 50 cents each additional > minute for all ACTS-routed AT&T calls. You still have to pay the full 3 > minute charge even if you get an answering machine. It is now $19.95 > for an interstate emergency interrupt, which AT&T is still the only > company to provide. The collect call surcharge is $3.45, or $4.95 if > operator handled. Asking for time and charges on a 1 minute call will > result in a charge of $5.50, and the rate is 55 cents per minute! > Person-to-person calls are billed at a surcharge of $9.95, plus a > "special" rate of "only" 55 cents per minute. And when billing a call > to a third number there is also $5.50 surcharge, plus the rate of 55 > cents per minute. I really don't think AT&T wants to make money on these operator handled services. I think they want to charge so outrageously high costs that no one will use those services, and they will then petition to have those services closed down, no longer provided. They will use actual decreases in calling volume to justify discontin- uing those services, and will piously state that the calling public no longer wants them either. Then they can eliminate whatever remaining operator jobs still exist. If I'm right it means that collect and bill to third party and emergency interupt and similar operator handled services are money losers. Drop them. The old pre-divestuture AT&T (Pre 1984) stressed service. Operators were measured on service. So were installers, and others. "Service" as the goal of all employees somehow disappeared in the post divestiture market and money took its place. I'm not so sure money is a bad goal in our society, but I do miss the days when service was actually important -- the most important thing. Art Kamlet Columbus, Ohio kamlet@infinet.com ------------------------------ From: Jaquelyn Knox Subject: Re: How to Throw the Book at Automated Recording-Only Sales Call? Date: Mon, 31 May 1999 12:59:44 -0500 Organization: U S WEST Interprise John Covert wrote about a claim he is pursuing. Here are some things to watch for (I am by no means associated or knowledgeable of the legal system, but if I can come up with this, I'm certain their legal team can do the same or better): * "defendant caused a machine to initiate a telephone call to my residential telephone line" Can you prove that a machine initiated the call? A person may have initiated the call and activated the recording. * It is not illegal for a machine to initiate a call. Per USC 47 Sec 227(a)(1)(A) an "automatic telephone dialing system" can "store or produce telephone numbers to be called, using a random or sequential number generator" Can you prove the number they dialed was randomly or sequentially stored or produced? The point here is that they may have gotten your number from a database. The Code does not prohibit this because it is not randomly or sequentially generated. * "using a pre-recorded voice to deliver a commercial message" Well, it's possible it was prerecorded and not a person that wouldn't shutup. It could also be a commercial message, depending on the content. Do you have a copy of the message? * The caller may be covered by Sec 227(a) Definitions (3) term "telephone solicitation" (B) "to any person with whom the caller has an established business relationship" If you've been in their store, purchased anything, had them act as an agent on your behalf, sold something to them, subscriptions, services such as phone or utilities, financials such as savings & checking accounts, mortgages, auto loans, etc., this will constitute a "established business relationship." * The caller may also try Sec 227(b)(2)(C) claim they were calling a number they thought was a cellular number, "calls to a telephone number assigned to a cellular telephone service that are not charged to the called party" * They may try to counter by saying the number on their list gave their consent. This could be by application, contest entry, or the person submitting the request made a typo or was malicious or fraudulant (this could be posed as an explanation without having to prove it), the data entry introduced a problem. * Since it was a single call, it does not constitute harassment. The best you can probably expect is to have them comply with your request to remove your name from their list. However, there is no regulation that they cannot buy another database list from the same, or different, source which contains your number again. "John R. Covert" wrote: > Delivering commercial messages by pre-recorded voice is against the law. > See http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/47/227.text.html > Here's what I'm trying; just put into the mail on Wednesday: > > Statement of Small Claim Trial Court of Massachusetts > and Notice of Trial Small Claims Session > Plaintiff's Name...blahblahblah > Defendant's Name...blahblahblah > Plaintiff's Claim. The defendant owes $500 plus $19.00 courts costs > for the following reason: > On 19 May 1999 at approximately noon, defendant caused a machine to > initiate a telephone call to my residential telephone line, blahblah, > using a pre-recorded voice to deliver a commercial message without my > prior express consent. > This is a violation of USC 47 Sec 227(b)(1)(B). USC 47 Sec 227(b)(3)(B) > provides for a private right of action to receive $500 damages for each > such violation. ------------------------------ From: Jan Ceuleers Subject: Re: PBX or Hybrid? Date: Mon, 31 May 1999 19:54:47 +0200 Organization: the Experimenter Board Reply-To: jan.ceuleers@computer.org Erling Lassesen wrote: > Hybrid as a term has been used to describe the Panasonic digital > switches, as the integrate both analog and ditital telephones. I beg to differ. A hybrid system is a system that acts as both a PBX and a key system. In other words: external telephone connections can either be set up by dialing a prefix in order to seize a trunk (PBX functionality), or by pressing a dedicated key on the telephone set in order to do so (key system functionality). Jan ------------------------------ From: kamlet@infinet.com (Art Kamlet) Subject: Re: Search Warrants Make 'Online Privacy' an Oxymoron Date: 31 May 1999 14:22:10 -0400 Organization: InfiNet Reply-To: kamlet@infinet.com In article , Lisa Hancock wrote: > More frightening is how Raytheon (cited above) sought out disgruntled > employees. Here we have a case of people doing absolutely nothing > wrong nor immoral, yet their privacy was violated. Last year, a major telecommunications equipment company, the one who makes the things that makes communications work or something like that, notified all employees who accessd the company netwrok from the outside that every time they accessed the network, the company would examine the contents of their PCs. Why? To make sure (make sure?) all of the programs were y2k compatible. Needless to say many employees didn't think much of this idea, and after a week or two of trying to justify it, the company backed down and said only those who connect from the outside at more than ISDN rates would have their PCs searched. The company still searches the contents of internal PCs that log onto the internal network but that's probably going to continue and employees just have to watch what's on their PCs. One positive reason given is to be able to periodically download the new VirusScan files to all PCs. And it got used and got some positive publicity when Melissa and friends came along. From what I hear there is still much mistrust, and people who ordinarily do lots of work from home and used to contribute to the efficiency of the company, will no longer use their own PCs to call into the company. Others insist they will not work from home unless the company issues them a laptop or PC to use at home, as they will never connect to the company network with their own (or their spouses or friends) PC. Art Kamlet Columbus, Ohio kamlet@infinet.com ------------------------------ From: hillary@hillary.net (Hillary Gorman) Subject: Re: Do You Feel Like a Number? Date: 31 May 1999 18:38:02 GMT Organization: Debugging our net or deworming your pet... On Sat, 29 May 1999 01:48:02 GMT, wrote: > In article , Hillary Gorman > wrote: >> I found this at the ssa.gov website: >> I do not have work permission from the INS. I need a Social >> Security number. Can I get one? >> ANSWER: Yes. >> The operative word is need. >> You can get a non-working Social Security Card when you are required >> to have one by law. > If you are not allowed to be employed in the US, there are no laws that > require you to have a Social Security Number. Hey, don't tell me -- tell the people who wrote the FAQ at ssa.gov! Apparently they think there ARE such laws, and they "infrequently" issue SSN #s to non-citizens because of them. hillary gorman...........Official Token Female..........hillary@netaxs.com "So that's 2 T-1s and a newsfeed....would you like clues with that?" hillary@hillary.net: for debugging your net or deworming your pet Net Access...The NSP for ISPs....The NOC that rocks around the clock. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Does anyone remember the old Negro Spiritual song, the one which went, 'sometimes I feel like a motherless child' ??? Perhaps in a few years a new set of words can be found for it to the title, 'sometimes I feel like a NUMBERLESS child' ... PAT] ------------------------------ From: chuck@xyz.nl (Chuck) Subject: Telco Unlimited Local Calls Date: 31 May 1999 18:42:50 GMT Organization: EuroNet Internet Hi, I live in Europe and was under the impression no US local telcos offer free local calls. A colleague says that many include free, unlimited local calls as part of the basic subscription. Could someone settle this? If free calls are still possible, how widespread is this? Please reply to this group as I am afraid to use a real email address. Thanks for your help. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yes, 'Chuck', lots of USA telcos offer unlimited calling at no extra charge in the subscriber's local area. In smaller towns and villages, usually the entire thing is included. In larger cities, some segment of the city surrounding the subscriber will be part of his basic area in some cases. For example, in Chicago the basic area is a distance of eight miles in any direction, or normally, the subscriber's central office and the offices next adjacent to him in any direction. The calls are not 'free'; but they are untimed. As an example, for about three or four cents you can make such a call and talk as long as desired, where calls to places beyond the local or basic area are timed, at three or four cents for each timed interval. This applies in Chicago to residential subscribers only. Business subscribers get no basic or local area: they pay three or four cents for each timed interval regardless of where the called party is located within the 'local area' or LATA. In many smaller towns, there is no business versus residential dis- tinction made; your monthly charge allows unlimited use of the phone to call anywhere in the local area, which typically means the town in which you are located. More important question of you: why are you 'afraid to use a real email address'? If spam, or an invasion of privacy is your main concern, that is the reason we have http://telecom-digest.org/postoffice so that you can be who you want to be with no further concern. Quite a few people have signed up just in the past week. No obligation of any sort, and no identification required to open a new email box. PAT] ------------------------------ From: levinjb@gte.net (Joel B Levin) Subject: Re: Number Which Causes Phone to Ring Back Organization: On the desert Reply-To: levinjb@gte.net Date: Mon, 31 May 1999 19:14:59 GMT In , Wlevant@aol.com (Bill Levant) wrote: > Here in suburban Philadelphia, it always varied from CO to CO. When I > was a kid, about twenty-five years ago, it was either 579 (wait for > dial tone) 6 (and hang up) or, less often 531 (wait) 6 (hang up). > Both of those codes are now legitimate NXX's in this area, and for a > while, they were using 550. I dunno what they are using, but I know > that 958-xxxx is reserved here for various telco purposes. Could be > something in that range. Much of New England used to be (and still is, I think) 981-xxxx where xxxx is the last number of the number you're calling from. Dial-tone would be returned, at which point you would dial a digit ( 5 or 6 ) or flash the hook -- this varied from town to town -- receive a response (stutter or a different tone) and hang up. /JBL Nets: levin/at/bbn.com | or jbl/at/levin.mv.com| or levinjb/at/gte.net | "I gotta go." ARS: KD1ON | -- I. Shoales ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 31 May 1999 16:23:02 EDT From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Archives Links to Telecom-Related Sites I guess I mentioned a couple days ago that the repository or collection of telecom-related links in the archives has been recently purged of bad links, and about a dozen new links added. Many of those I have added in turn have links to lots of additional places. One, which leads to a netizen at the University of Michigan in turn has links to *several hundred* telecom-related web sites and publications, both print media and online e-journals. I am going to be added an automated 'submit a new telecom site' form to that page in the near future, so that links you find which are not already included can be quickly added. This form will also be a way of deleting, after confirmation, a link on the page which is dead. http://telecom-digest.org/linkspage.html PAT ------------------------------ From: kamlet@infinet.com (Art Kamlet) Subject: Re: New Rules For Mail Drops Date: 31 May 1999 16:19:52 -0400 Organization: InfiNet In article , Derek Balling wrote: > What is to stop an enterprising Kinko's operator from simply changing > their method of business. I would assume the law prevents private mailbox agents from going off willy nilly doing whatever they want, if they want the Postal Service to deliver mail to them? Otherwise, why are they complying with the new PMB standard now? > Then the only problem remaining is: How do you get the mail from the > postman's hands into the storage units? Simple. We've all seen ads for > some magazine, say "Time" ... if you see the ad in say the NYTimes, it > might have the same address with "Dept NYT", and if you see it in the > Tribune, it might have "Dept. CT".... that's all you're doing now, is > targeted sorting of mail. The Dept XYZ thingies do not direct the mail elsewhere -- they are used to tell the recipient where the ad was read -- it identifies the mazagine or city where the ad appeared, and measures the effectiveness of advertising in that magazine or city. Art Kamlet Columbus, Ohio kamlet@infinet.com ------------------------------ From: Bill Goodin Subject: UCLA Summer Short Course on Satellite Communications Design Date: Mon, 31 May 1999 13:27:44 -0700 This summer, UCLA Extension will present the following short course on the UCLA campus in Los Angeles. July 21-23, 1999, "Satellite Communications Design and Engineering". The instructors are Bruce R. Elbert, MSEE, MBA, Senior Vice President, Business Development, Hughes Space and Communications International; and Robert C. Perpall, MSEE, Satellite Engineer, Socit Europenne des Satellites (SES), Luxembourg, $1195. For additional information and a complete course description, please visit our website, http://www.unex.ucla.edu/shortcourses/, or contact Marcus Hennessy at: (310) 825-1047 (310) 206-2815 fax mhenness@unex.ucla.edu This course may also be presented on-site at company locations. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #113 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Jun 2 22:38:35 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id WAA09183; Wed, 2 Jun 1999 22:38:35 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 2 Jun 1999 22:38:35 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199906030238.WAA09183@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #114 TELECOM Digest Wed, 2 Jun 99 22:38:00 EDT Volume 19 : Issue 114 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Book Review: Dictionary of Multimedia & Internet Applications (Rob Slade) Cisco/MIND CTI Press Release (Andrea Dray) High Finance, High Intrigue (Monty Solomon) Cops Covet DNA Chip (Monty Solomon) PacBell Drops StarTac Phones (Mike Pollock) 212 Overlay Has 7D Intra-NPA Dialing? (Robert McMillin) Seeking a PABX (mcastle@hotmail.com) I Need an ATM Card That Does AAL1 (Tony Esporma) 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 networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 765 Junction City, KS 66441-0765 Phone: 415-520-9905 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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: Wed, 2 Jun 1999 08:22:54 -0800 Subject: Book Review: "Dictionary of Multimedia and Internet Applications" Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca BKDCMMIA.RVW 990415 "Dictionary of Multimedia and Internet Applications", Francis Botto, 1999, 0-471-98624-0 %A Francis Botto %C 5353 Dundas Street West, 4th Floor, Etobicoke, ON M9B 6H8 %D 1999 %G 0-471-98624-0 %I John Wiley & Sons, Inc. %O 416-236-4433 fax: 416-236-4448 rlangloi@wiley.com %P 362 p. %T "Dictionary of Multimedia and Internet Applications" It might be thought that the title is just an attempt to jump on the latest bandwagon. However, the material does seem to concentrate on terms related to network based multimedia applications and standards. On the other hand, I had a full page of error notes before I got out of the "A"s. Frankly, the cover's insistence on "total accuracy" is a bit misplaced, since the best you can say about some of the material in the book is that it isn't verifiably wrong, mostly because of the difficulty in determining just exactly what the passage is supposed to mean. Your humble reviewer, world's worst copy editor that he is, even found some typos. Caxton invented the printing press? Vannevar Bush helped found the Internet? Many entries have bits and pieces of relevant information, but are not really complete. "Absolute addressing" speaks only of CD-ROM blocking, there is no entry for the associated concept of relative addressing, and the definition for "address" itself is rather confusing in its jumps from topic to topic. Under 2B+D, the D (data) channel seems to be identified as the ISDN link, while "ISDN" itself starts with a BRI (Basic Rate Interface) of two 64 kbps B channels (ignoring the North American standard and the D channel) and then, without transition, talking about the full T-1 PRI (Primary Rate Interface) bandwidth. "BRI" is defined (somewhat, but not entirely, better) but there is no listing for PRI. There is an entry for "Java Unicode" (which talks about it being "used exclusively by Windows NT at the system level"), but not Unicode itself. Some inclusions are bizarre and rather pointless. There is an entry for "15 in," citing it as a "standard display size." "1000" tells us that it is "The number of bits transferred in one second, using the unit Kbps." Another listing reads, in its entirety, "AAAS (American Association for the Advancement of Sciences) An American organization dedicated to the sciences." The material is extremely biased in favour of Microsoft. "Cabbing" gets a listing (compression into .CAB files), but not archiving or compressing. There is, for crying out loud, an entry for "ActiveX security!" (Of course, it isn't very long.) For those in the know it is fairly obvious, but the definition of "Active Desktop" never mentions Microsoft at all, making it seem to be an accepted standard. "ActiveX" is defined as a reincarnation of OCX, while "OCX" is stated to be a forerunner of ActiveX. There is more detail on ActiveX, mostly a list of pedestrian guidelines for developing ActiveX controls. Some definitions, while not exactly wrong, seem to miss the essential point. For example, the entry for "Architecture" seems to imply that two of the most important considerations are whether multimedia functionality is built in and how big the internal cache is. Others use terms in ways that simply do not make sense in the context of the technology under discussion. "Bookmark" ignores its use as a personal directory of Web pages in Netscape. In talking about cryptography, we are told, of the mathematical underpinnings of public key encryption, that it is "achieved through a one-way function which describes the difficulty of determining input values when given a result." Certainly all of those concepts belong in cryptology, but the sentence itself does not use them properly. The standard mistakes are all there, such as crediting Grace Hopper with the invention of the term "bug." (Hopper herself only said it was the first *recorded* case of an *actual* bug being found as a cause.) Moore's Law initially stated that the number of components would double every eighteen months, and has subsequently been updated to nine months. It never stood at one year. (And "a single silicon" what?) The listing for viruses starts out well by mentioning propagation, but then degenerates. "Known viruses are said to be `in the wild'." (Many known viruses have never been `in the wild'.) "Michelangelo [...] alters the size of the DOS COMMAND.COM file." (Michelangelo is a boot sector infector.) "[V]iruses may be removed from a system or DSM ..." (DSM apparently means disk: digital storage media.) Email attachments are apparently "removable media." It is refreshing to see, for once, a work that is not specifically US-centric. It is disappointing to note that authors outside of the States can be every bit as provincial as the worst of their American colleagues. References to outside sources are few: so few that the author can't seem to keep to a consistent format. URLs (Uniform Resource Locators) are included in such a manner as to be confused with internal links to other terms in the dictionary. Book citations are in a wide variety of formats, and even different typefaces. (Of those few texts that are mentioned, an astonishing number seem to be written by one "Botto, F.") While quite up to date, in some areas, the material in this text is neither complete enough, nor reliable enough, to recommend as a sole source. Despite its age, Stevens' "Quick Reference to Computer Graphics Terms" (cf. BKQRFGRP.RVW) remains a much more useful guide if you want to know about multimedia. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1999 BKDCMMIA.RVW 990415 ====================== (quote inserted randomly by Pegasus Mailer) rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@sprint.ca slade@victoria.tc.ca p1@canada.com Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes hurtling down the highway. - Andrew Tanenbaum http://victoria.tc.ca/techrev or http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade ------------------------------ From: Andrea Dray Subject: Cisco/MIND CTI Press Release Date: Wed, 2 Jun 1999 15:08:13 +0300 MIND Announces Two Customer Wins Deploying Combined Cisco Systems and MIND VoIP Solution NexBell Communications, World Wide Net Telecom Successfully Deploy Solution Yoqneam, Israel - June 2, 1999 - MIND CTI Ltd. today announced that US VoIP start up Nexbell Communications, LLC. and Australian ITSP, World Wide Net Telecom have succcessfully deployed the MIND-iPhonEX IP Telephony Billing and Customer Care system along with Cisco AS5300/Voice Gateways. Important to these customers' decision was the close collaboration between MIND and Cisco to ensure interoperability for prepaid voice services. "As a new IP telephony infrastructure provider with ambitious plans, including local presence in 132 major US and international markets by the beginning of next year, gateway and billing system performance as well as time to market were critical for us," said Andre Temnorod, president & CEO of Nexbell . "The simplicity of installation and integration of the products was very important. We also like the direction that MIND and Cisco are taking with regards to prepaid solutions." "In continuing our close working relationship with MIND, we have the opportunity to provide our customers with real time, flexible solutions for VoIP service," said Larry Lang, vice president of marketing for the Service Provider Line of Business at Cisco Systems. "Cisco is committed to working with members of the New World Ecosystem program to deliver best-in-class end-to-end solutions. We value MIND as a New World Ecosystem member that delivers billing and customer care solutions within the Cisco Open Packet Telephony framework. Cisco and MIND will continue to cooperate closely in the development of industry leading, scalable VoIP solutions for customer success." "With the high performance Cisco AS5300/Voice Gateway and the MIND-iPhonEX Billing & Customer Care system, we have a reliable, robust solution," said Gennady Volchek, Managing Director of WWN Telecom. "We can easily manage our day to day customer care service and perform advanced billing functions, and this has helped in putting us ahead of our competitors. We look forward to expanding the services we can provide to our rapidly growing subscriber base by using the prepaid solution from MIND and Cisco." "Our alliance with Cisco, the worldwide leader in networking for the Internet, will enable MIND to maintain our leading position in VoIP Billing," said Monica Eisinger, president & CEO at MIND CTI. "MIND's solutions for billing and management compliment Cisco's whole range of products, those aimed at the enterprise market as well as those for ISPs and the Next Gen Telcos." Cisco's New World Ecosystem is an open and flexible program composed of partners committed to working with Cisco to create profitable and integrated solutions for the service provider, their customers and suppliers. About MIND-iPhonEX MIND-iPhonEX deploys a real time, carrier grade billing system supporting millions of customers, that provides a scalable, highly reliable solution. MIND provides web interfaces that allow for easy customer care, registration and subscriber verification of real time balances and call details. MIND-iPhonEX Support Systems for call management, traffic analysis and fraud detection provide the tools to analyze call and network activity and implement effective strategies. About MIND CTI: MIND CTI, the market leader for VoIP billing solutions, supplies the telecom industry with software for billing and management. With over one hundred customers worldwide, MIND CTI has the largest install base in IP Telephony Billing. MIND CTI was the first to release a real time VoIP billing and customer care product integrated with all major gateway and gatekeeper vendors. For information on MIND and its products visit the company web site: http://www.mindcti.com About World Wide Net Telecom In June 1998 WWN Telecom launched its first link between Melbourned, Australia and Los Angeles in the USA using Cisco platforms. In August the same year the company opened new POPs in Moscow (Russia) and Odessa (Ukraine). The full project presently accounts for over 26 POPs worldwide. Information is available at wwn@wwntelecom.com.au About Nexbell Communications, LLC. Nexbell Communications, LLC is a new start up VoIP company based in Aurora, Ohio. Nexbell offers low cost domestic and international IP calls to small and medium size business customers, enterprise customers and residential customers. At the present time they have points of presence in 32 major cities throughout the US. For more information contact: Barbara Frank MIND CTI Ltd. Tel: +972-4-993-6666 Fax: +972-4-993-7776 barbara@mindcti.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 1 Jun 1999 23:43:02 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: High Finance, High Intrigue http://www.wired.com/news/news/business/story/19938.html by Polly Sprenger 2:35 p.m. 28.May.99.PDT It's the case that has twisted and turned more times than Chubby Checker. It all started when Christian Curry, who worked for Morgan Stanley Dean Witter in New York, was fired last August soon after being featured in the buff on the cover Playguy, a gay man's magazine. The company said they axed him for playing loose with his expense reports. He in turn threatened the company with a discrimination suit. Curry, who is black, also allegedly started searching for someone to help him plant phony email messages that made derogatory comments about blacks and gays in the company's computer system. He supposedly approached one Joseph Luethke about the conspiracy, who then told employees at Morgan Stanley and the police about the plot. Curry was arrested after he allegedly tried to hire an undercover cop for the task. But last week, letters between Morgan Stanley and Luethke outlining a US $10,000 payment to the would-be cracker surfaced. The company admitted sending the letter, and charges against Curry were dropped. Now it's Morgan Stanley's turn to be back on the defensive. As soon as he was cleared of the charges, he re-filed his suit, asking for higher damages than before. The company, saying it made an error in judgment in offering Luethke the money, this week suspended with pay two members of its legal staff, and handed the internal investigation over to an outside law firm. Morgan Stanley representatives declined to comment on whether or not the two employees suspended Thursday played a part in delivering the $10,000 payment to Luethke, relying on their public statement. Morgan Stanley said the law firm of Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton, and Garrison which is now handling the investigation, will make public comments about developments in the case as they arise. Copyright 1994-99 Wired Digital Inc. All rights reserved. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 1 Jun 1999 23:44:45 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Cops Covet DNA Chip http://www.wired.com/news/news/technology/story/19878.html by Vince Beiser 12:10 p.m. 1.Jun.99.PDT Cops may soon be able to analyze the DNA of crime-scene blood or hair without having to send it to the lab, and that power is scaring civil libertarians. Testing begins this summer on a postage-stamp-sized chip being developed by Nanogen, a San Diego biotech company. The chip is designed to perform DNA analysis within minutes on drops of saliva, semen, or other left-behind human remnants. A portable computer unit can then look for matches from the FBI's national database of felons' DNA. As almost anyone with a TV knows, a person's deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA), which is detectable in everything from saliva to hair to a semen stain on a blue dress, contains a unique genetic "fingerprint." Nanogen is one of several companies working on developing fast, chip-based DNA testing for law enforcement, backed by millions of dollars in federal grants. In June, Nanogen is sending its system to the Bode Technology Group -- one of the nation's largest forensic labs -- for testing. Nanogen hopes to get it on the streets within the next few years, according to company vice president Kieran Gallahue. An effective chip would be a boon to police, cutting the time for DNA testing from weeks to minutes and the cost to a fraction of its current level. The use of DNA in criminal justice also got a boost last October, when the FBI's national DNA database went online. The National DNA Index System already contains roughly 150,000 genetic profiles of convicted offenders as well as DNA samples from the scenes of over 8,000 unsolved crimes. The FBI says its database has helped to solve hundreds of cases while a similar system in England, online since 1995, has linked nearly 30,000 suspects to crime scenes. But DNA use has been hobbled by the slow, expensive process of testing samples. State law enforcement agencies have already collected 620,000 samples from various lawbreakers, but have analyzed fewer than half. Money is a major bottleneck: Testing crime-scene evidence costs an average of US$1,200, according to Chris Asplen, executive director of the National Commission on the Future of DNA Evidence. "With chips, those numbers will go down incredibly," says Asplen. "We'll be able to do more, faster and cheaper." Privacy advocates, however, see instant DNA testing as a further acceleration of government intrusiveness. "DNA harbors our most intimate secrets," says Barry Steinhardt, associate director of the American Civil Liberties Union. "It contains the markers for over 4,000 diseases and might be able to indicate a predisposition to being gay or [to being] a substance abuser. In the wrong hands, it can and will lead to abuse and discrimination." Gallahue argues that Nanogen's chip, like the FBI's database, reads only tiny sections of the DNA molecules called short tandem repeats, or STRs. Like fingerprints, the 13 sets of STRs logged for each tested individual provide only identifying information, without revealing anything else about the person such as health status or genetic predisposition. But the capacity to obtain more DNA data only seems to whet the authoritarian appetites of many in law enforcement. Howard Safir, a New York City police commissioner, recently recommended that anyone arrested for a crime -- whether subsequently convicted or not -- should have to provide a DNA sample. Louisiana already allows this kind of DNA testing, and other states take samples from juvenile offenders and parolees. Involuntary DNA collecting has been unsuccessfully challenged in the courts at least three times in recent years. But the technology can work the other way too. Since the late 1980s, criminal investigators have used DNA testing to exonerate at least 56 wrongfully convicted people in the United States, including 11 on death row. Still, technology, no matter how advanced, won't make the process foolproof. According to DNA expert Barry Scheck, a law professor who served on O. J. Simpson's defense team, DNA evidence is lost or destroyed 70 percent of the time. Evidence can also be easily mishandled or contaminated, especially when it's being analyzed on the street. "We've identified a significant lack of training of law enforcement around this DNA stuff," Asplen said. "The greatest impediment now to the expansion of coerced testing is cost," says Steinhardt. "As these chips bring that down, we fear the expansion of these programs." But Nanogen's Gallahue trumpets the possibility of reducing crime as worth the investment. "When you think about the power of this to identify repeat criminals and get them off the streets and to release innocent individuals, it's a very powerful argument for doing testing." Copyright 1994-99 Wired Digital Inc. All rights reserved. ------------------------------ From: Mike Pollock Subject: PacBell Drops StarTac Phones Date: Tue, 1 Jun 1999 12:01:16 -0400 LOS ANGELES (AP) Motorola Inc.'s StarTac cellular phones have been plagued by severe technical glitches, prompting Pacific Bell Wireless to quietly stop selling the popular phones for several months. Motorola said the problems which include dropped calls and the phone abruptly shutting off are limited to the StarTac 7000 model, which uses digital technology known as global system for mobile communications, or GSM. PacBell Wireless, the largest GSM carrier in the country, and Motorola refused to disclose exactly how many of the phones were affected. Neither company would say how many model 7000s are in use. The companies also never told customers about the problems and only admitted the problems to customers who complained. PacBell and Motorola officials said they have worked closely to fix the problems by replacing the phones' software when customers bring them in for service. ``We're taking this very seriously, and we've taken steps to make sure that StarTac customers have a phone that will perform up to par,'' said PacBell Wireless vice president Steve Krom. Motorola, meanwhile, has upgraded PacBell Wireless' entire inventory of StarTac 7000s with the new software, said Denise Gibson, vice president and general manager for Motorola's U.S. strategic operations. The problems come as Motorola tries to regain market share lost to rivals Nokia and Ericsson when phones shifted from analog technology to digital. The StarTac has been a key part of Motorola's rebound. Copyright 1999 Associated Press. All rights reserved. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 01 Jun 1999 08:05:42 -0700 From: Robert McMillin Organization: Now with 25% more Evil! Ask Me How! Subject: 212 Overlay Has 7D Intra-NPA Dialing? If I read the NANPA planning letter correctly, the 212 overlay will feature 7-digit dialing within the same NPA. I think that makes it a first, to my knowledge. Robert McMillin | Slackin' at home, agin' | rlm@netcom.com "I'm sorry, Bill, I'm afraid we can't build that." -- Development team, Windows 2001 ------------------------------ From: mcastle@hotmail.com Subject: Seeking a PABX Date: Wed, 02 Jun 1999 23:53:41 GMT Organization: @Home Network Canada Does anyone know of a 1024 port pabx with a good price? ------------------------------ From: Tony Esporma Organization: evil genii for world domination Subject: I Need an ATM Card That Does AAL1 Date: Wed, 02 Jun 1999 22:45:46 GMT That's my problem folks (amongst others). The FORE card we got, an HE622 Forerunner does not do AAL1. At least that's what I was told by FORE. I'm looking for an ATM card that will plug into a Sun Workstation (PCI, S-Bus) that will do at least OC3 and allow me to create PVCs that use AAL1. This is because I need to support CES. Do any of you have any idea where I can get such a card? And I need it PRONTO! Thanks a priori, Tony Esporma esporma@pacbell.net ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #114 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Jun 2 23:29:18 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id XAA11132; Wed, 2 Jun 1999 23:29:18 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 2 Jun 1999 23:29:18 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199906030329.XAA11132@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #115 TELECOM Digest Wed, 2 Jun 99 23:29:00 EDT Volume 19 : Issue 115 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson NANP-Caribbean Now Supposedly All Unique in its NPAs (Mark J Cuccia) Sobering News for Drunk Drivers (Monty Solomon) Sex Sites Stiffed in Credit-Card Wrangle (Monty Solomon) Re: PBX or Hybrid? (Wrong Number) Re: Myterious Intercept Message (Alan Boritz) Re: AT & T New charges (Ken M.) Re: Judge Freezes Funds In Internet Scam (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Re: ADSL and DSL, What is the Difference and Why? (Robert Berntsen) Re: Payphone Quality - Honolulu Airport (James Wyatt) Re: Using V&H to Calculate Distance (Russell Blau) Re: Number Which Causes Phone to Ring Back (Robert A. Rosenberg) Re: Number Which Causes Phone to Ring Back ("bob") 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 networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 765 Junction City, KS 66441-0765 Phone: 415-520-9905 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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, 1 Jun 1999 15:23:40 CDT From: Mark J Cuccia Reply-To: Mark J Cuccia Subject: NANP-Caribbean now supposedly all unique in its NPAs Well, it is now Tuesday 1-June-1999. St.Vincent/Grenadines in the (non-US) NANP-Caribbean (+1) has "supposedly" gone mandatory with its 784 NPA code. Dialing any 809-NXX which _USED_ to be for St.Vincent, via AT&T, goes to an AT&T new-NPA-mandatory recording (male voice again), from the Cedar Knolls NJ #4ESS (CDKNNJCK04T, 127-T). On Monday nite, I dialed (via AT&T) the St.Vincent 784 NPA test validation recording number, 784-485-TEST, but used 809 instead of 784. 809-485 USED to be a "valid" NPA+c.o.code for St.Vincent. But I got the AT&T "intercept" indicating that 784 is now mandatory. Via Qwest (101-0432+1+_809_-485-TEST), I went thru to the NPA Test announcement in St.Vincent. Unfortunately, their test-number SUPES for billing! :-( One of our list members in Toronto last nite three-wayed 1+ to 809-485-TEST via Sprint-Canada, and got thru to the SUPING test number. It will probably take a little while before all carriers involved make 784 "mandatory". But I do wonder if there are any carriers routing 809-NXX codes to non-DR locations! BUT ... on PAPER at least, Telcordia-TRA, NANPA, AT&T, and I guess the ITU, considers there NOW to be _NINETEEEN_ UNIQUE NPA CODES for EACH of the NINETEEN individual geo-political locations of the NANP-Caribbean, with 809 and the Dominican Republic to be perfectly IDENTICAL - 809 is EXCLUSIVELY the Dominican Republic. Directory Assistance calling to the NANP-Caribbean is a different matter, though ... Even though 809-555 "should" indicate GTE-Codetel's Directory operator in Santo Domingo DR "only" (who would ask in English? Spanish? "what city"), AT&T and some other carriers might still be routing to an AT&T OSPS switch thus attaching an AT&T OSPS Operator, with the auto-prompt, "AT&T, What Island, Please?" ... AND, _SOME_ (non-US) NANP-Caribbean NPA's + KL.5-1212 (via AT&T and some other carriers), while they "should" have unique "inward" directory operator locations in specific NANP-Caribbean countries, might still route to "AT&T, What Island, Please?". Reason ... some C&W or GTE-Codetel TOPS systems are combined local/toll/inward operator _AND_ Directory operator. However the operator might not have an indication on her TOPS terminal that the directory request came in from off the island or out of the country. She might then offer to complete a call to the requested number (as a directory operator) for an "extra whatever island/country currancy amount", which couldn't really be charged back to the calling US/Canada customer! AND that US/Canada calling customer is only paying the flat directory cost to NPA+KL.5! By having an AT&T (or maybe Bell Canada / Teleglobe) operator ANNOUNCE the call, the C&W or GTE-Codetel operator KNOWS that the directory request is coming from off the island! Here is a summary (numerically) of the NPAs for the (+1) NANP-Caribbean: 242 Bahamas 246 Barbados 264 Anguilla 268 Antigua and Barbuda 284 British Virgin Islands 340 U.S.Virgin Islands - US/Domestic rated with the (continental) US 345 Cayman Islands 441 Bermuda (not actually "Caribbean", but _was_ part of +1-809) 473 Grenada and Carriacou 649 Turks and Caicos Islands 664 Montserrat (whatever still is left since the volcano errupted) 758 St.Lucia 767 Dominica 784 St.Vincent and the Grenadines 787 Puerto Rico - US/Domestic rated with the (continental) US 809 Dominican Republic ONLY (was all of the NANP Caribbean; GTE-Codetel is the incumbent LEC rather than Cable & Wireless or an affiliate) 868 Trinidad and Tobago 869 St.Kitts and Nevis 876 Jamaica Many of the numericals for the above NPAs were chosen to "spell out" the name of the island or its capital city ... i.e. 758= 'SLU' for St.Lucia. This is outlined in many NANP-Caribbean articles I had posted to TELECOM Digest in the 1995-1997 timeframe. The _OLD_ (pre-mid-80's) 809-NNX ranges for the NANP-Caribbean were as follows ... 809-29X Bermuda 809-3NX Bahamas (except - at that time - 809-38x, 39x) 809-4NX "British West Indies" (British Virgin Islands down to Grenada) 809-5NX, 809-68X Dominican Republic 809-6NX (62X thru 670, but not 68X nor 69X) Trinidad & Tobago 809-7NX (except 77X) and 809-8NX Puerto Rico 809-77X U.S.Virgin Islands 809-9NX Jamaica, with 947/8/9 Cayman Island and 946 (inlcuding later 941) Turks & Caicos Further details on the history of Caribbean numbering/routing/etc. can also be found in posts I sent to TELECOM Digest in the 1995-97 timeframe, and can be obtained from the TELECOM Archives. Some additional history and specifics on the NANP-Caribbean: AT&T "reserved" or "assigned" the 809 area code for the Caribbean area, particularly for the US possessions of Puerto Rico and the (US) Virgin Islands, back in 1958. While I don't really have much in the way of "specific" historical documentation on this, I have been told that the intent was for 809 was to cover _ALL_ of the Caribbean, as far back as 1958 when the concept of a Caribbean area code was conceived. At that time, this would probably have included Cuba and Haiti, as well as some additional French and Dutch islands in the Caribbean. For various political and "cultural" identity reasons, those other islands have since been assigned their own ITU/CCITT _COUNTRY_ codes. But in 1958, the ITU/CCITT had _NOT_ yet developed a worldwide country code scheme for international/overseas dialing. It wasn't until 1960 when a European / North African / Middle Eastern and Southern Asian Country Code scheme was coneceived! The idea of a WORLDWIDE country code format was finalized in 1964. The other areas of the "non-NANP" Caribbean, with their CCITT/ITU Country Codes include: +297-8- Aruba (prior to circa 1986, Aruba was both politically and telephonically a part of Dutch Antilles as +599-8-) +508- St.Pierre & Miquelon (actually off the coast of +1-709, Newfoundland Canada. In the 1970's, AT&T and Canada reached St.Pierre & Miquelon via the St.John's NF Inward Operator as 709+121; the first reference to its own CCITT/ITU country code was by 1984) +509- Haiti (the first reference to its own CCITT/ITU country code was by 1976) +53- Cuba (In the CCITT/ITU list of 1964, Cuba did have its own Country Code) +590- Guadeloupe (French Antilles) +596- Martinique (French Antilles) (The first reference to these CCITT/ITU country codes was by 1976) +599- Dutch Antilles (the first reference to its own CCITT/ITU country code was by 1968) The French Antilles also includes the islands of St.Barthelemy and the French side of St.Martin, all of which are geographically grouped with the "upper" Dutch Antilles. I've seen these smaller French islands at different times as part of either country code +590- or +596. The Dutch Antilles are geographically separated into two groups- The "upper" Dutch Antilles includes: +599-3- St.Eustacius +599-4- Saba +599-5- St.Maarten (Dutch side; the French side is spelled St.Martin and is part of +590- or +596-) The "lower" Dutch Antilles (off the coast of Venezuela) includes: +599-6,7- Bonaire +599-9- Curacao (and prior to circa 1986, +599-8- was for Aruba, until it became politcially and telephonically independent, and is now +297-8-) And while Greenland isn't part of the Caribbean, it is close to Canada in North America, and has its own CCITT/ITU Country Code of +299-, since circa 1984. MARK_J._CUCCIA__PHONE/WRITE/WIRE/CABLE:__HOME:__(USA)__Tel:_CHestnut-1-2497 WORK:__mcuccia@mailhost.tcs.tulane.edu|4710-Wright-Road|__(+1-504-241-2497) Tel:UNiversity-5-5954(+1-504-865-5954)|New-Orleans-28__|fwds-on-no-answr-to Fax:UNiversity-5-5917(+1-504-865-5917)|Louisiana(70128)|cellular/voicemail- ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 1 Jun 1999 23:47:39 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Sobering News for Drunk Drivers http://www.wired.com/news/news/technology/story/19900.html by Dan Cox 3:00 a.m. 27.May.99.PDT An at-home breathalyzer offers corrections officers a cheaper way to monitor the behavior of repeat drunken drivers. The monitoring device, developed by SecurityLink, a division of Ameritech, promises to reduce corrections agencies' expenses and alleviate overcrowded jails. Ameritech said that jail costs corrections agencies between US$40 and $50 per inmate per day. Its system, however, cuts the cost by two-thirds. The company said one-third of those arrested for drunk driving are repeat offenders. Offenders are required to blow into an alcohol-sensitive straw several times per day to prove they are staying sober. The system uses a modem to transmit a snapshot of the offender, plus the time of day and blood alcohol level to SecurityLink, which reports offenders whose levels exceed .08 to the corrections agency. Corrections officers in Wells County, Indiana, started using the service this week to remotely monitor 11 offenders. The monitoring tool could also be used to watch the behavior of offenders who have just come out of jail. "Being able to monitor offenders 24 hours a day gives corrections agencies a way to ensure that an offender stays clean if he or she is released" said Ed Maier, director of SecurityLink's electronic monitoring solutions group. The technology could save lives as well as reduce costs. According to Derse Smith Todd, executive director of Business Against Drunk Drivers, the technology could help slow the rate of fatalities caused by drunk driving, which account for up to 40 percent of all road deaths. "We need stricter enforcement for repeat offenders. It would be better to incarcerate these people at home or on the job, than not at all," Todd said. Todd noted that state laws vary in their severity, which could prevent widespread deployment of the system. "There is no uniformity in the 50 states' legal stance toward drunk driving offenses, they'll have to overcome a logistic nightmare." Copyright 1994-99 Wired Digital Inc. All rights reserved. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 1 Jun 1999 22:36:37 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Sex Sites Stiffed in Credit-Card Wrangle May 28, 1999 By Lessley Anderson Are online billing firms stiffing the porn industry? DMR, a third-party processing company that handles credit-card transactions between adult sites and Visa, has imposed fines and new customer billing rules that have its adult-site clients fuming. http://www.thestandard.com/articles/display/0,1449,4729,00.html ------------------------------ From: Wrong@home.net (Wrong Number) Subject: Re: PBX or Hybrid? Date: 2 Jun 1999 03:42:37 GMT Organization: Your Organization Reply-To: badams@infi.net In today's world it is almost impossible to get a true "KEY" or "PBX" system. Virtually everything is "hybrid" systems ... just because you only use it as a key or PBX makes no difference ... it is still a hybrid. Bill ------------------------------ From: aboritz@CYBERNEX.NET (Alan Boritz) Subject: Re: Myterious Intercept Message Date: Tue, 01 Jun 1999 23:42:59 -0400 In article , wfp@ziplink.net (Bill Phillips) wrote: > My wife and her mother have this arrangement: my wife phones her > mother every Tuesday and Thursday evening, and my M-in-L phones my > wife every Sunday morning. > This has been going on for years. Suddenly, within the past few weeks > (I'm afraid I don't know exactly), my M-in-L claims she is no longer > able to call our number. > She lives in Queens, NY and her number is (718) 441-NNNN. Last I > heard, she had MCI (having been slammed from AT&T some years ago and > deciding it wasn't worth the hassle to get it changed back). > We live in Cambridge, MA and our number is (617) 876-NNNN. Our LD > carrier is and always has been AT&T . > We are both Bell Atlantic customers. > My M-in-L says that when she dials our number she gets a recording > saying approximately the following: "It (or probably "This number") is > not on [the/our] network. Please call the head office." I've heard a similar intercept on the horrible long distance service that my office uses. They were blocking all calls to new AT&T Wireless PCS numbers in the Boston market, when that system went on line last year. However, in my case, I was able to reach an additional intercept that identified a Cambridge tandem office as the source. Your mother-in-law may have been slammed again. She should try dialing 00 to see which LD company's operator picks up. There's a chance that it may not be MCI (1-700-555-5151 may not be enough, since not all carriers identify themselves). ------------------------------ From: Ken M. Subject: Re: AT&T New charges Date: Wed, 02 Jun 1999 07:20:25 -0400 Organization: Netcom Reply-To: pobox-dc@ix.netcom.com R. Derr wrote: > Today I received a letter from AT&T that my monthly phone bill > will be increased $3.00 for AT&T charges; whether or not I use AT&T > has nothing to do with it. > If I do use their services, for example $2.50 per month,then the > added charge will be 50 cents. > I am served by Bell Atlantic, do not use AT&T for anything because > their rates are excessive, any long distance calls I make are by one > of the 10 cent per minute carriers. > There is no way out of these AT & T charges, there are options, but > all are to the benefit of AT & T, with the customer getting the shaft > as usual. > How do they get away with this banditry? if all the phone customers > in the US get the same charges, AT&T will have to get a fleet of > tractor trailers to carry the money to the bank. > Maybe time for a class action suit against these greedy corporate bandits. Blame the FCC. They wanted to deregulate everything, including cable prices, and you should see my cable TV bill rising every year! I have avoided all this by using prepaid calling cards for my long-distance calls. They are available at Sam's Club and the rate is 10 cents per minute ... and my intrastate calling is now much cheaper, too. When you can find a REAL bargain, let me know. (ken) See some sample photos taken with my Olympus digital camera at: http://www.theupperdeck.com/digitcam/ [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Uh, excuse me here a minute ... We in the Digest did not get the original of this letter that I am aware of, unless I was asleep when it got approved, and I have seen or heard nothing of some mandatory AT&T charge for all phone customers everywhere. Perhaps 'R. Derr' or 'Ken M.' would not mind sending along a copy of the actual letter or notice received. Has anyone here on the mailing list heard of such a thing? PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Judge Freezes Funds In Internet Scam Organization: Excelsior Computer Services From: joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Date: Wed, 02 Jun 1999 12:02:55 GMT >> I doubt that most people in the US would be willing to eliminate >> completely their ability to place phone calls to over a dozen >> Caribbean countries (which is what your plan would do, since those >> countries have no separate country codes of their own)... > [...] If you're placing an international call, isn't is reasonable > to expect that you would use the international dialing prefix? If it were up to me, I would require that telco's charge roughly the same rates (say +/- 25%, maybe even 50%) to every area within an area code, or warn the customer about charges when a call is more expensive. I don't expect a call to Zurich to cost 10 times what a call to Geneva does, so would should a call to +1 cost 20 times what another call to +1 does? Telco's could then charge $.10/min or so to the Caribbean (the way they do with ENGLAND now!) or warn the customer of higher rates. It's pretty simple, doesn't require changing the NANP, and doesn't single out the and doesn't single out the Caribbean unless rates are exceedingly high. -Joel ------------------------------ From: Robert Berntsen Subject: Re: ADSL and DSL, What is the Difference and Why ? Date: Wed, 2 Jun 1999 15:23:28 +0200 J.F. Mezei wrote in message ... > What is the basic difference between the two? Why would telcos not > choose a single technology? ADSL stands for Asymmetric Digital Subscriber Line xDSL is Digital Subscriber Line technologies -- ADSL, DSL-lite, HDSL/SDSL, VDSL -- that use twisted copper pair to support broadband transmission rates. So DSL must be one of these. ADSL has lower up-stream speed than down-stream (towards customer). Can be 0,.6 Mbit/s and 2 Mbit/sec as an example, again dependant on distance. Other DSL versions are symetric. Regards R. ------------------------------ From: James Wyatt Subject: Re: Payphone Quality - Honolulu Airport Date: Wed, 2 Jun 1999 11:59:06 -0500 Organization: Fastlane Communications (using Airnews.net!) On Mon, 31 May 1999, Leonard Erickson wrote: > JF Mezei writes: >> I have a pocket organizer with modem and an accoustic coupler. I limit >> the modem to 2400 baud (with compression). [ ... ] > Well, it's a minor miracle that you *ever* got it to work. Acoustic > couplers are generally *barely* adequate for 300 bps. There were a few > made for 1200 bps Racal-Vadic. But I've *never* heard of them being > reliable at 2400. A 300/1200bps modem sould easily get to 2400b with *compression*. They are still sending 300/1200bps data, it just has all the air squeezed-out. 8{) The only true 2400b modems I know were Bell 201 *Bisync* modems. (Actually Sync modems w/Bisync protocol) When converting EDI gateways two years ago during a railroad merger, we found a customer with one! It was so reliable that their personnel hadn't used the (forgotten) manual fall back in 3-5 years ... When they (frequently) needed to order railcars, their console operator would hand-dial our 800-number, put the handset in the cradle, and hit 'start'. When the lights stopped blinking, they would hang-up. Sometimes you turn-over a rock and find some new (or old and forgotten) species in the IT world. Sometimes it's best to smash it with that rock so it never shows-up again ... Jy@ ------------------------------ From: Russell Blau Subject: Re: Using V&H to Calculate Distance Date: Tue, 01 Jun 1999 11:45:27 PDT Scott Prugh wrote: > I found the following in TELECOM Digest: > Within North America, rate distance is calculated using the "V&H" system. > V stands for "vertical" (north-south position) and H for "horizontal" > (east-west position). Each exchange is represented by a location expressed > as a V&H co-ordinate. A rate distance can be calculated from two V&H > co-ordinate sets based on Pythagorean Theorem, i.e. rate distance = > sqrt((V1-V2)^2+(H1-H2)^2)/10 where (V1,H1) is the V&H for one end of a > call, and (V2,H2) represents the other end of a call. > Seems pretty easy. So I pulled out my LERG and took the switch > coordinates for two switches: > SW1 = 'PSWYNJPIDS5' (v1,h1) = (5080,1444) -- PISCATAWAY > SW2 = 'ACMEWAXARS1' (v2,h2) = (6102,8901) -- SEATTLE > And plugged away: > rd = sqrt( (5080-6102)^2 + (1444-8901)^2 )/10 > rd = sqrt( -1022^2 + -7457^2)/10 > rd = sqrt( 1044484 + 55606849)/10 > rd = sqrt( 56651333)/10 > rd = 7526/10 > rd = 752 > This is obviously wrong, since Seattle is more that 752 miles from > Piscataway. > What's wrong here? Is the formula I have dated? > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It is not a matter of the formula being > 'dated', since mathematical truths remain true regardless of when they > are pronounced. Two plus two has always equalled four. And I do not > really the earth has expanded *that much* if at all since the above > formula was given. Perhaps some readers can look it over and examine > your work to detirmine what went wrong. PAT] Yes, our world is getting smaller every day, but not *that* small. :-) Here's my non-expert but simple explanation of what went wrong -- a missing set of parentheses. Here's Scott's calculation with my correction shown by square brackets: rd = sqrt [( (5080-6102)^2 + (1444-8901)^2 )/10] rd = sqrt [( -1022^2 + -7457^2)/10] rd = sqrt [( 1044484 + 55606849)/10] rd = sqrt [( 56651333)/10] then sqrt(5665133.3) = 2380.15...; since airline mileages always get rounded *up* to the next integer, the answer is 2381, which sounds like it is in the right ballpark. Scott mistakenly based his calculation on a unit of .1 miles, which is understandable since the article he used as his reference got it wrong. You can't get from Piscataway to Seattle by going 102.2 miles in one direction and then 745.7 miles at a right angle to that. The actual unit is the square root of 0.1 miles, or about 0.316 miles per "coordinate." ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 1 Jun 1999 14:24:32 -0400 From: Robert A. Rosenberg Subject: Re: Number Which Causes Phone to Ring Back At 15:02 -0400 on 05/31/99, Wlevant@aol.com (Bill Levant)wrote: >> There was once a number that one could dial into a telephone to make >> that phone ring. I think it was something that phone service men used >> to test the ringer. Any idea what that number is or if there is a >> similar thing? > Here in suburban Philadelphia, it always varied from CO to CO. When I > was a kid, about twenty-five years ago, it was either 579 (wait for > dial tone) 6 (and hang up) or, less often 531 (wait) 6 (hang up). > Both of those codes are now legitimate NXX's in this area, and for a > while, they were using 550. I dunno what they are using, but I know > that 958-xxxx is reserved here for various telco purposes. Could be > something in that range. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: 579 - wait for dial tone - 6 was the > way it happened here for many years. PAT] When I lived in the Bronx (NYC) in the 50s and early 60s (and had a 212-882 exchange), it was: 660 (wait) 6 (hang up) Looks like the number to get the section differed in the COs but the Function (6) was the same once you accessed it. There was also another Function (I think off the same menu) to have the phone number read back to you (used to make sure that the new line was assigned the correct number). ------------------------------ From: bob Subject: Re: Number Which Causes Phone to Ring Back Date: Wed, 2 Jun 1999 16:19:21 -0400 Ah yes, bill memories of driving my parents crazy in Delco ... Five Seven Nine, Dialtone Six!! [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What did you do, dial that, then run and hide while your mother had to run out of the shower to try and get the phone 'before it stopped ringing' only to find out that no one was there ... ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #115 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Jun 3 00:27:23 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id AAA14553; Thu, 3 Jun 1999 00:27:23 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 3 Jun 1999 00:27:23 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199906030427.AAA14553@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #116 TELECOM Digest Thu, 3 Jun 99 00:27:00 EDT Volume 19 : Issue 116 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Use of Star/Pound in Number Expansion (Andy Yee) Re: Use of Star/Pound in Number Expansion (Ed Ellers) Re: Telco Unlimited Local Calls (Anthony Argyriou) Re: World's First Video Cell Phone Debuts in Japan (Doc Wonmug) Re: Payphone Quality - Honolulu Airport (Thomas Reuben James) Re: Number Which Causes Phone to Ring Back (Eric Morson) Re: Number Which Causes Phone to Ring Back (Steve Uhrig) Re: Number Which Causes Phone to Ring Back (MCSMAN) Re: Number Which Causes Phone to Ring Back (L. Winson) Re: AT&T Now Charges For Place Name; Raises Other Charges (L. Winson) Re: AT&T Now Charges For Place Name; Raises Other Charges (Joel Hoffman) Re: New Rules For Mail Drops (Derek Balling) Re: Here is Why Email Has Gotten So Spam-Ridden (Anthony Argyriou) Re: It Goes Two Ways, was Re: Sex Sites Getting Screwed (Anthony Argyriou) Re: How to Throw the Book at Automated Recording-Only Call (R. Rosenberg) Re: How to Throw the Book at Automated Recording-Only Call (S. Pinkston) 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 networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 765 Junction City, KS 66441-0765 Phone: 415-520-9905 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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: AXYXeXeX@XjXaXsXcX.XcXoXmX (Andy Yee) Subject: Re: Use of Star/Pound in Number Expansion Organization: Jasc Software, Inc. Date: Tue, 01 Jun 1999 16:42:17 GMT In article , nospam.tonypo1@nospam.home. com(Tony Pelliccio) wrote: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Does anyone remember when touch tone > phones only had *ten* keys, ie. no # or *, those were just blank spots > with nothing there. Then one day the phone man came around to each > house and swapped out the old key pad for a new one with all twelve > buttons. When asking him why he was doing that, he said 'one of these > days those keys will be used for special functions.' At that time of > course, pressing them did nothing, or possibly caused a reorder tone > but nothing else. That would have been in the late 1960's or early > 1970's. Occassionally, rarely, you still see a ten button touch tone > phone. PAT] Yes. My parents in Minneapolis, MN had such a phone downstairs. Our main phone in the kitchen however, had the 12 key pad. Andy Yee Corporate E-Mail: See Above Software Engineer Coporate Web Page: http://www.jasc.com Jasc Software, Inc. Personal E-Mail: nde@yuck.net Personal Web Page: http://www.visi.com/~nde Question authority...and the authorities will question YOU! ------------------------------ From: Ed Ellers Subject: Use of Star/Pound in Number Expansion Date: Tue, 1 Jun 1999 19:56:39 -0400 Pat, the TELECOM Digest Editor, noted: "The 'octothorpe' or # on the other hand usually sits on the end of a 'short string' of numbers as a way to signal the switching equipment not to wait for anything further, but to process, in context, what it has already received." It was also used in the Picturephone system to prefix a call -- pressing # first told the switch to set up all three connections (voice and two video pairs), while if you just dialed as usual you got only a voice connection. Western Electric made a few Touch-Tone pads in the 1960s with the octothorpe key -- marked V in this case -- but not the * key, for use in the Picturephone sets. Also, in the custom calling market trial on the Succasunna ESS in 1965-66 they had special 1500-type sets with a * key but not a # key! I believe 12-button 2500 sets were available back then at an extra charge for those who needed them for special applications; there were also external 12-key pads that could be added to a rotary dial phone to allow tone signaling in an area where Touch-Tone wasn't being offered yet. (Another adjunct was a Touch-Tone Card Dialer unit which, again, attached to a rotary phone for use in areas where Touch-Tone wasn't available; Western Auto had Touch-Tone Card Dialer phones in its stores for credit card authorization, and in non-Touch-Tone areas they had rotary Card Dialer sets with Touch-Tone Card Dialer adjuncts that were the same size as the phones themselves!) ------------------------------ From: anthony@alphageo.com (Anthony Argyriou) Subject: Re: Telco Unlimited Local Calls Date: Wed, 02 Jun 1999 01:17:57 GMT Organization: Alpha Geotechnical Reply-To: anthony@alphageo.com chuck@xyz.nl (Chuck) wrote: > I live in Europe and was under the impression no US local telcos offer > free local calls. A colleague says that many include free, unlimited local > calls as part of the basic subscription. > Could someone settle this? If free calls are still possible, how > widespread is this? Please reply to this group as I am afraid to use a > real email address. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yes, 'Chuck', lots of USA telcos offer > unlimited calling at no extra charge in the subscriber's local area. > In smaller towns and villages, usually the entire thing is included. > In larger cities, some segment of the city surrounding the subscriber > will be part of his basic area in some cases. > For example, in Chicago the basic area is a distance of eight miles in > any direction, or normally, the subscriber's central office and the > offices next adjacent to him in any direction. The calls are not 'free'; > but they are untimed. As an example, for about three or four cents > you can make such a call and talk as long as desired, where calls to > places beyond the local or basic area are timed, at three or four > cents for each timed interval. This applies in Chicago to residential > subscribers only. Business subscribers get no basic or local area: > they pay three or four cents for each timed interval regardless of > where the called party is located within the 'local area' or LATA. In PacBell Land (Oakland, California, to be specific), you can get "Residence Flat Rate Service", which costs $11.25/month. All calls within "Zone 1 & 2" (which is about a 12 mile CO to CO radius) are "Included in your Flat Rate Service". Zone 3 includes the entire LATA (which extends from Campbell to Crescent City along California's Coast), and calls are priced by the minute, with first minute higher. Our "Flat Rate Service" sounds a better deal than Ameritech's equivalent. Anthony Argyriou ------------------------------ From: Doc Wonmug Subject: Re: World's First Video Cell Phone Debuts in Japan Date: Tue, 01 Jun 1999 17:58:26 +0900 Organization: Wonmug's World Steven wrote ... > Being the proud owner of oodles of little Japanese gadgets I feel > qualified to comment on this. Yes, the Japanese are infatuated with > small things. They've got pocket versions of nearly every office > device. Unfortunately (for video phone makers) the video phone never > caught on as an office device, or home device, so its pretty much > doomed to failure in its pocket version. Not so fast. Recalling the recent PuriKura fad here in Japan, and watching the young kids everywhere walking or even biking around with their little cellular phones, I fully expect them to adopt the pocket video phones as their next Big Thing. Although my 14-year-old daughter disagrees. Americans wrote off the video; the Japanese turned it into a regular part of daily life. History will repeat itself. Doc Wonmug, Tokyo http://wonmug.com ------------------------------ From: trj1@Ra.MsState.Edu (Thomas Reuben James) Subject: Re: Payphone Quality - Honolulu Airport Date: 1 Jun 1999 13:04:45 GMT Organization: Mississippi State University Leonard Erickson (shadow@krypton.rain.com) wrote: >> I have a pocket organizer with modem and an accoustic coupler. I limit >> the modem to 2400 baud (with compression). > Well, it's a minor miracle that you *ever* got it to work. Acoustic > couplers are generally *barely* adequate for 300 bps. There were a few > made for 1200 bps Racal-Vadic. But I've *never* heard of them being > reliable at 2400. There's a company out there called Konexx that's selling a portable accoustic coupler "for travelers" nowdays at $128, and they claim that it can connect at 26000bps (look at http://xcom.site.yahoo.net/xcom/konaccoup.html). The problem with this is that even though the coupler CAN handle going this fast, America, specifically the payphones that most travelers might be using to connect cannot support things going this fast. In the US, the couplers rarely get to 2400bps, and as you said, are only reliable up to 1200. In the limited experience that I've had connecting from Europe, however, I have always been able to connect at 26000bps. I'm told that the fault in the American phone system is due to the use of carbon-packed diaphrams in the handset of the payphones, and that the European phones and their handsets are all digital. --------------------- |Thomas Reuben James| |trj1@ra.msstate.edu| |Cogito, ergo doleo.| --------------------- ------------------------------ From: Eric@AreaCode-Info.com Date: Tue, 01 Jun 1999 09:26:51 -0400 Subject: Re: Number Which Causes Phone to Ring Back In SNET Connecticut-land, you dial 991, 992, or 994 depending on your local NXX, followed by your own XXXX. For example, for your number 768-2564 you would dial 991-2564. You will hear a dial tone. Then FLASH the switch-hook. A higher frequency single note tone will remain on the line. Hang up. Your phone will ring back, and when you answer you will again hear the single-note tone. Hang up again to cancel the procedure. Eric B. Morson Co-Webmaster AreaCode-Info.com EMail: Eric@AreaCode-Info.com ------------------------------ From: Steve Uhrig Subject: Re: Number Which Causes Phone to Ring Back Date: Tue, 1 Jun 1999 18:46:09 -0400 Organization: bright.net Ohio MCSMAN wrote: >> There was once a number that one could dial into a telephone to make >> that phone ring. I think it was something that phone service men used >> to test the ringer > Here in GTE-land, we just dial the number assigned to the phone, wait, > and get a recording "the number you have dialled is on your party > line. Please hang up and allow sufficient time for them to answer", > even if you are not on a party line (is anybody, anymore?). > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: If you never take the receiver off the > hook again, does it just go on ringing forever, or does it time out > at some point? PAT] Pat, It times out just like normal ring. The Office no longer allows any line to ring indefinitely. That includes normal calling as well. I think the time-out value is somewhere around three minutes. ------------------------------ Date: 01 Jun 1999 22:51:44 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com From: mcsman@aol.com (MCSMAN) Subject: Re: Number Which Causes Phone to Ring Back > Here in GTE-land, we just dial the number assigned to the phone, wait, > and get a recording "the number you have dialled is on your party > line. Please hang up and allow sufficient time for them to answer", > even if you are not on a party line (is anybody, anymore?). > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: If you never take the receiver off the > hook again, does it just go on ringing forever, or does it time out > at some point? PAT] I believe it just times out after about thirty seconds. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It had to be longer than thirty seconds. My mother was never able to get out of the shower to answer the phone in that little time. :) PAT] ------------------------------ From: lwinson@bbs.cpcn.com (L. Winson) Subject: Re: Number Which Causes Phone to Ring Back Date: 01 Jun 1999 23:21:46 GMT Organization: The PACSIBM SIG BBS > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: They are all over; it varies from one > telco territory to another. The only thing they have in common is > that telco tries to keep them secret (they are now usually seven or > ten digit numbers; ie. in Chicago it is always 200-xxx-xxxx) and > as soon as they become common knowledge, telco changes them. PAT] Why does the telco keep them secret? In the old days perhaps, but now since we have to service our own phones and need to test them ... [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Not only do they keep them secret, if you use that as an excuse to get a ringback ('I have to fix my own phone') most telco repair clerks offer to help by calling you back themselves. PAT] ------------------------------ From: lwinson@bbs.cpcn.com (L. Winson) Subject: Re: AT&T Now Charges For Place Name; Raises Other Charges Date: 01 Jun 1999 23:20:45 GMT Organization: The PACSIBM SIG BBS > this information, the operator indicated that the call would be billed > as a regular directory assistance call. > I will be filing a complaint with my state Utilities and Transportation > commission, since AT&T recently won the right to carry intralata > traffic. I think that they should be forced to provide this information > for intralata traffic at least. I agree that the information should be available for free as it used to be. But I don't think AT&T should be obligated to provide it unless ALL carriers, large and small, are required to provide free (IMHO they should be.) > AT&T has jacked up other charges as well as instituting new ones. Everyone says competition has lowered long distance rates tremendously. Apparently that is not true. If we had true competition (in the economic sense), another player would step in and offer those services at a cheaper price. But I doubt that will happen. IF others offer those services, I suspect they'll be at the same price as AT&T. IMHO we consumers were better off before so-called "competition". Every time I make this claim I get flamed about the great bargains available now and the horrible conditions under the old Ma Bell. But the examples of the original post show it isn't true. > Unfortunately, AT&T is not alone in this practice. > Long distance companies seem increasingly desparate to squeeze every > penny of possible revenue out of consumers. Need I say more? ------------------------------ Subject: Re: AT&T Now Charges For Place Name; Raises Other Charges Organization: Excelsior Computer Services From: joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Date: Tue, 01 Jun 1999 02:23:43 GMT > If I'm right it means that collect and bill to third party and > emergency interupt and similar operator handled services are money > losers. Drop them. Though I've said it before, this is a perfect case in point, and so I'll repeat myself: This is the problem with thinking that telco service should be commercially viable. Telco service should be part of the infrastructure that a government provides its people, along with such items as a transportation network, law-enforcement, border defense, and so forth. Imagine if someone started complaining that, say, the fire department was losing money and so it would first be privatized and then deregulated, so that consumers could choose the fire-fighters of their choice! How would that be different than the current telco fiasco? -Joel [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It would not be a lot different, except perhaps for the immediacy of the circumstances if your neighbor's house caught on fire and he had never bothered to select some fire department to respond. Obviously you would have to call yours instead, and then attempt to get him to pay the bill for it later. I strongly and sincerely believe the *ONLY* legitimate function of government is to perform those services which the people being governed would find too inconvenient or impractical to perform for themselves. Protection against fires is one such task and other natural disasters. I would place most utility services in this same category. Arrangements for water, electrical and gas distribution on an individual basis would be very difficult or impossible. I am almost ready to say telephone networks should be in that category, but if telephones, then why not ISPs, the computer equivilent of the 'phone company'? But as things are going now, it may not be long before ISPs are in fact regulated in much the same way telcos are regulated by federal and state agencies. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 02 Jun 1999 11:26:11 -0700 From: Derek Balling Subject: Re: New Rules For Mail Drops > I would assume the law prevents private mailbox agents from going off > willy nilly doing whatever they want, if they want the Postal Service > to deliver mail to them? > Otherwise, why are they complying with the new PMB standard now? Because until now, there's never been any reason to NOT tell the USPS to go to hell. :) >> Then the only problem remaining is: How do you get the mail from the >> postman's hands into the storage units? Simple. We've all seen ads for >> some magazine, say "Time" ... if you see the ad in say the NYTimes, it >> might have the same address with "Dept NYT", and if you see it in the >> Tribune, it might have "Dept. CT".... that's all you're doing now, is >> targeted sorting of mail. > The Dept XYZ thingies do not direct the mail elsewhere -- they are > used to tell the recipient where the ad was read -- it identifies the > mazagine or city where the ad appeared, and measures the effectiveness > of advertising in that magazine or city. Agreed, but to do that there must be some sort of sorting or counting mechanism in place. And frequently it IS used for sorting (where Dept S might be subscriptions, and department C might be collections, but all sharing the same physical address). Regardless, it becomes a method that the lessor of storage space can use to allow his tenants to continue to receive mail. :) D ------------------------------ From: anthony@alphageo.com (Anthony Argyriou) Subject: Re: Here is Why Email Has Gotten So Spam-Ridden Date: Wed, 02 Jun 1999 23:31:24 GMT Organization: Alpha Geotechnical Reply-To: anthony@alphageo.com John David Galt wrote: > Quoth Matthew Black : >> I'm told the US Postal Service will soon implement new rules regarding >> private mailbox companies. Users will no longer be permitted the use >> of "Suite" to imply a business presence. Rather, private mailbox >> users must indicate something like "PPO BOX" instead of "Suite" so >> customers will know that there is no business presence at the >> location. This sounds eminently reasonable - it's just a truth-in-labelling law. >> The USPS will also force the private mailbox operator to >> keep a photocopy of the box owners' drivers license on file for public >> inspection. The law provides that anyone can ask for the box user's >> registration information (drivers license). While these rules will >> help stop marketing scams similar to your message, it takes away >> individual privacy. This is scary -- not only does it violate individual privacy, it also gives the USPS an unfair competitive advantage. Under current PO Box rules, the post office has to give out the names of businesses which have PO Boxes, but they will not give out the information on private individuals without a court order. Anthony Argyriou ------------------------------ From: anthony@alphageo.com (Anthony Argyriou) Subject: Re: It Goes Two Ways, was Re: Sex Sites Getting Screwed Date: Wed, 02 Jun 1999 23:38:17 GMT Organization: Alpha Geotechnical Reply-To: anthony@alphageo.com wkyr0xwb@my-deja.com wrote: > One internet service started charging me monthly charges, for the > first time, years after I'd canceled the free trial, and over a year > after I'd canceled the CC. The Microsoft Network tried that with me -- I signed up after getting a modem for my shiny new Windows 95 computer, and never managed to stay connected for long enough to cancel after I had given them my CC#. It took several complaints to the bank, a letter disclaiming any further authorization, and a threat to Microsoft to sic the local DA on them for fraud to get it to stop. Anthony Argyriou ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 1 Jun 1999 14:30:04 -0400 From: Robert A. Rosenberg Subject: Re: How to Throw the Book at Automated Recording-Only Sales Call? At 16:38 -0400 on 05/31/99, Jaquelyn Knox > John Covert wrote about a claim he is pursuing. Here are some things > to watch for (I am by no means associated or knowledgeable of the > legal system, but if I can come up with this, I'm certain their legal > team can do the same or better): > * Since it was a single call, it does not constitute harassment. The best > you can probably expect is to have them comply with your request to > remove your name from their list. However, there is no regulation that > they cannot buy another database list from the same, or different, > source which contains your number again. If I remember correctly, the law requires them to parse all lists against "Do not Call" lists. Thus they are allowed to call you ONCE (or until you say to remove your name). Once you make the request, they are in violation if you are called again even if the number came from a new list they acquired not the one used to place the original call. ------------------------------ From: steve_pinkston@adc.com (Steve Pinkston) Subject: Re: How to Throw the Book at Automated Recording-Only Sales Call? Date: Wed, 02 Jun 1999 15:49:53 GMT Organization: ADC Telecommunications Reply-To: steve_pinkston@adc.com On Sun, 30 May 1999 16:56:45 -0400, John R. Covert wrote: > Delivering commercial messages by pre-recorded voice is against the law. > See http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/47/227.text.html I have no desire to make a federal case out of a petty annoyance. However, I'm not against having a little bit of anarchic fun with it. Here's what I do: Once the pitch starts, I start recording the pitch using the MEMO function of my answering machine. When the pitch stops, and the machine is waiting for my response, I quickly rewind and start playing back the pitch to them. The idea is that the marketers will listen to their tape, find the outgoing pitch where they expect to find a sucker's response, and they will take the machine offline for a little while, thinking it's malfunctioning! Yeah, they will be back on line soon, but I like thinking "made ya look!" - steve ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #116 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Jun 3 01:37:11 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id BAA17175; Thu, 3 Jun 1999 01:37:11 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 3 Jun 1999 01:37:11 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199906030537.BAA17175@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #117 TELECOM Digest Thu, 3 Jun 99 01:37:00 EDT Volume 19 : Issue 117 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: AT&T New Charges (Derek Peschel) Re: Something Odd About Babel Fish (Steve Cogorno) Re: ADSL and DSL, What is the Difference and Why? (Jerry Mendes) Re: ADSL and DSL, What is the Difference and Why? (Brian F.G. Bidulock) Making The Phone System Tell You YOUR Number (Eric Morson) Re: Judge Freezes Funds In Internet Scam (Bob Goudreau) Re: Telco Unlimited Local Calls (Tony Toews) Re: Telco Unlimited Local Calls (Al Iverson) Re: Search Warrants Make 'Online Privacy' an Oxymoron (John David Galt) Re: Search Warrants Make 'Online Privacy' an Oxymoron (Alan Boritz) Re: Online Privacy? (Eric Florack) CSU and PBX Compatibilty Issues (Kevin Lundy) 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 networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 765 Junction City, KS 66441-0765 Phone: 415-520-9905 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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: dpeschel@u.washington.edu (Derek Peschel) Subject: Re: AT&T New charges Date: 3 Jun 1999 04:18:12 GMT Organization: University of Washington, Seattle In article , Ken M. wrote: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Uh, excuse me here a minute ... We in > the Digest did not get the original of this letter that I am aware > of, unless I was asleep when it got approved, and I have seen or > heard nothing of some mandatory AT&T charge for all phone customers > everywhere. Perhaps 'R. Derr' or 'Ken M.' would not mind sending > along a copy of the actual letter or notice received. Has anyone here > on the mailing list heard of such a thing? PAT] Yes. I got the same letter. I'm pretty sure I threw it away but I can check later tonight. In my case the letter is more justified since AT&T is my long-distance carrier. Note I said "more justified", not "justified". Also in the envelope came a sign-up sheet allowing me to choose from AT&T's various payment plans (flat-fee, non-flat-fee, etc.) The letter clearly explained the $3 charge with examples. It ought to have also said, "Choosing a payment plan will not affect the $3 minimum charge in any way," but I don't believe it did. Because of the lack of that statement, the combination of the sign-up sheet and the letter could mislead a very gullible person, it seems to me. I should also note that the letter offered no real explanation of the purpose of the policy or who benefits. The charge could be banditry but I would also call it a subsidy. Derek [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This is a charge for EVERYONE who is a phone subscriber? I do not believe that part of it. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Steve Cogorno Subject: Re: Something Odd About Babel Fish Date: Wed, 2 Jun 1999 12:59:16 PDT TELECOM Digest Editor said: > The first item is the relatively new intra-site search engine from > whatuseek.com and for all I know, Babel Fish does okay repeating > my English message. But then where the template appears at the bottom > of the paragrah, there are two 'radio' buttons. The first one is > 'search this site' and it is the default. The second button is > 'search the web'. In several of the Babel Fish translation efforts, > it *reverses the description of the two radio buttons* referring to > the intra-lata button as 'search the web' and the button for searching > the web as the one to use for telecom-archives. It does not change > the default condition; the first radio button is still the one > offered by default. > This seems to happen in every translation except German, in which the > text for each radio button remains as it was in English regards the > placement. Why might that be happening? I suspect this is because it is confused about the word order. In most European languages, the order of adjectives and nouns is opposite English. Babel Fish is probably reading both of those buttons as a single sentence and reversing the words. German uses the same ordering as English, so that might explain why German looks OK. > Another thing I have noticed is that sometimes Babel Fish will find > some entirely different place in a line of text to use as an anchor > instead of the words at the start of the line as I had them in > English. The anchor appears to go to the right place, it just is > elsewhere in the string than where I placed it. This is again probably is related to word order issues. ------------------------------ From: Jerry Mendes Subject: Re: ADSL and DSL, What is the Difference and Why? Date: 02 Jun 1999 23:28:08 PDT Organization: DataComm Insights Barry Margolin wrote: > In article , Steven J Sobol > wrote: >> ADSL - Asynchronous Digital Subscriber Line (more bandwidth down than >> up, good for consumers surfing the web, is cheaper than SDSL) >> SDSL - Synchronous DSL (same bandwidth both ways, more economical than >> a T-1) > Are you sure? I thought A and S stood for Asymmetric and Symmetric, > referring to the bandwidth provided in each direction. The difference is essentially in the modulation and coding schemes used to send data over the telco cables. xDSL is based on the premise that data transmission speeds in the megabit range are possible over the existing local loop plant (the UTP cables going to everyone's house and office) by using relatively new, innovative ways of driving the cable. There are many types of xDSL: ADSL, RADSL, VDSL, IDSL, SDSL, HDSL, and DSL Lite. None are line compatible with the others. Best place to read about the different types is at the ADSL Forum: http://www.adsl.com/site.html And then go to the glossary you find there. Jerry Mendes, Principal Consultant Voice: (415) 381-5500 DataComm Insights FAX: (415) 381-5502 150 Seminary Drive Email: mendes@datacomm-insights.com Mill Valley, California 94941 http://www.datacomm-insights.com ------------------------------ From: Brian F.G. Bidulock Subject: Re: ADSL and DSL, What is the Difference and Why? Date: Wed, 02 Jun 1999 01:56:48 -0500 Organization: Brian F. G. Bidulock, P. Eng. The `A' stands for Asymmetrical. Other DSL's are symmetrical (in uplink and downlink speeds) and do not rate the `A'. "J.F. Mezei" wrote: > A few years ago, the "dream" was that telcos would roll out ADSL and > compete against cable. > ADSL comes out and starts to be rolled out, but all of a sudden, DSL > comes out and goes to comsumers. > Here in Bell Canada territory, it seems that commercial customers get > ADSL whereas consumers get DSL. > What is the basic difference between the two? Why would telcos not > choose a single technology? Brian F. G. Bidulock, P. Eng. bidulock@dallas.net ------------------------------ From: Eric@AreaCode-Info.com (Eric Morson) Date: Wed, 02 Jun 1999 09:28:38 -0400 Subject: Making The Phone System Tell You YOUR Number > From ANY phone in Connecticut, dial 970#, or 970 and wait.... The system will play an automated recording telling you the number you are calling FROM. Does this work anywhere else? If so, what is the dialing procedure? Eric B. Morson Co-Webmaster AreaCode-Info.com EMail: Eric@AreaCode-Info.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: In the Chicago area, it is one of the various 200-xxx-xxxx numbers telco uses for testing, ringbacks, etc. Like its ringback relative, it stays in secret. Try looking over the tech's shoulder as he dials it when working at your demarc, etc ... that's all I can suggest. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 2 Jun 1999 11:39:58 EDT From: Bob Goudreau Subject: Re: Judge Freezes Funds In Internet Scam Eli Mantel wrote: >> I doubt that most people in the US would be willing to eliminate >> completely their ability to place phone calls to over a dozen >> Caribbean countries (which is what your plan would do, since those >> countries have no separate country codes of their own)... > You must have missed the original suggestion that calls to countries > other than the U.S. and Canada should require the use of the > international dialing prefix. No, actually, I didn't miss that (see my earlier articles), though it appears that you have missed the subsequent development of this thread. The poster I was responding to above had specifically suggested that the NANP Caribbean countries be completely kicked out of the NANP, area codes deallocated by NANPA, etc. This would render such countries uncallable from anywhere else in the world, until the ITU allocated new country codes to them. > If you're placing an international call, isn't is reasonable to > expect that you would use the international dialing prefix? Except that people who keep making this argument seem to feel that Canada doesn't qualify as "international", and have never met my earlier challenge of enumerating exactly what objective criteria should be used for deciding which NANP countries should be dialable using 1+10D and which should not. Absent such clear rules, the only fair thing to do would be to require 011-1- on calls to *all* international destinations, Canada included. Yet for some reason, some people seem to feel that it would be a Bad Thing to make it as difficult to dial those rich white Canadians as it they'd like for it to be when dialing those poorer, predominantly-black NANP countries in the Caribbean. I find the attitude somewhat remin- iscent of the way that certain long distance carriers disable calling-card calls to specific countries when the calls originate from certain "red-lined" ethnic neighborhoods. > Canada is a little on the iffy side. I expect there's both more phone > traffic between the U.S. and Canada Not surprising, since the US has most of the NANP's population, and Canada has a majority of the remainder. But on a percentage-of- total-outgoing-international-call-minutes basis, I suspect that some of these Caribbean countries would even outrank Canada, since the US tends to be far more important a trading partner to them than it is even to Canada. > as well as a good deal more cooperation between law enforcemenet > in the U.S. and Canada than there is between the U.S. and Caribbean > countries Again, another slippery, non-objective criterion, and one that is probably false for many of those Caribbean nations anyway. As far as law enforcement goes, remember that some of these countries actually request that US law enforcement authorites (Coast Guard and DEA, IIRC) patrol their own territorial waters to help limit the flow of drug traffic. And the prime minister of one Carribbean NANP country (Eugenie Charles of Dominica) was the leader of the delegation of Caribbean leaders who asked the US to invade Grenada after the coup there in the early 1980s. I don't think that even Canada, great friend and partner though it is, matches that level of "cooperation". Bob Goudreau Data General Corporation goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com 62 Alexander Drive +1 919 248 6231 Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, USA [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Interesting you brought up the redlining comparison; I was thinking the same thing myself. I think the only way to legitimatly phrase this argument would be to say that almost every other country in the world has its own 'country code'; even very tiny places; so why should the USA have to share a country code, and let it go at that. If you start getting into the 'Canada is okay, but those people in the Caribbean have got to go elsewhere' you are going to have people looking sort of askance at your suggestion. It would come off sounding like 'the south side of Chicago should have a different area code for 'whatever' reason. A way to solve a couple problems at one time might be to sub-divide '1' into a few parts. With '12' through '19' not only would the USA get a few more ways of solving its area code crunch (recall my mention here awhile back of dividing us into two or three 'zones' allowing all existing area codes on each side to be duplicated on the other side -- or what the heck, give us four zones 12, 13, 14, 15 -- with Canada getting 16 and those warm-weather trouble makers on the little islands getting 17. Now, all the 'ones' would be in North America just as the 'threes' are mostly in Europe, etc. People now become alert to additional charges because 'that is in a different zone than I am'; so you have both a warning flag on the one hand and a huge expansion of area codes on the other. I would avoid '10' and '11' because of the confusion with 011+, 01+, 1010xxx, 0, 00, and 911. People would dial seven digits locally as now, ten or eleven digits for an area code within their zone, and 011-12-AC-xxx-xxxx for any call outside their 'zone' but in the NANPA. The only people who would see anything extra to dial would be the folks calling long distance *outside their zone*. People who make a lot of international calls would see no difference at all. Very few programming changes would have to be made, and no hardware mods at all I don't think. PAT] ------------------------------ From: ttoews@telusplanet.net (Tony Toews) Subject: Re: Telco Unlimited Local Calls Organization: Me, organized? Not a chance. Date: Tue, 01 Jun 1999 05:17:04 GMT chuck@xyz.nl (Chuck) wrote: > I live in Europe and was under the impression no US local telcos offer > free local calls. A colleague says that many include free, unlimited local > calls as part of the basic subscription. Here in Canada, and I'm talking from personal experience, in the provinces Ontario, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta, British Columbia and the North West Territories, all local calling is free and unlimited. Unlike Pat's description of eight miles for local calling this is the total city such as Edmonton and out to all the suburbs. Now some of the suburbs can't call each other unless they're physically adjacent or "nearby". We pay an additional $.30 or $.50 called "Extended Flat Rate Calling" for this privilege. $1 if it's a business line. Vancouver is a bit different but even there the "nearby" suburbs, I think within 50 miles of the shoreline, are all local calls. In my small town I can call villages 20 miles north, 15 miles east and 30 miles west at no extra charge. However villages 25 miles north east and north west are long distance. What is also interesting is that I have free incoming calls from my clients are in a nearby big city outside that EFRC zone. There is one village of 400 people who have this EFRC to both that city and my small town. The provincial telco setup a call forwarding line in that village which forwards all calls to my phone here. In essense they have forfeited a bunch of long distance revenue for my fixed monthly fee for that call forwarding line. Do note that phone calls in the North West Territories outside your town/village are charged upwards of $3 per minute and sometimes use radio. The quality on some of those calls is obviously terrible. What is also interesting is looking at the phone book for some of the villages. Once you strip out the national companies ads, such as Air Canada, banks and whomever, the local RCMP, the local nursing station, and the telco bumpf, all you're left with is "Chiefs house". Message posted to newsgroup and, if appropriate, emailed. Tony Toews, Independent Computer Consultant Microsoft Access Links, Hints, Tips & Accounting Systems at http://www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm VolStar http://www.volstar.com Manage hundreds or thousands of volunteers for special events. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Speaking of skinny phone books, that reminds me of Nevada Bell, which had almost the entire state in one fairly small book, for a number of years, sometimes with four or five communities all on the same page. After all, the only two entries for the place may be 'toll station 1' and 'toll station 2'. In a slightly bigger example, the phone book for Junction City, KS is about 80 pages in total, including a dozen nearby smaller towns in their own separate sections, of sometimes a single page. And of those 80 or so pages, more or less in the middle is one single 'subscriber' -- Fort Riley, a large military base -- with 39 consecutive pages of listings for every department, every facility, every barracks, etc, including their dialing instructions, procedures for that telephone exchange, etc, but only for military numbers. 'Tenants' at Fort Riley are listed in the Junction City part of the book, with 'FTR' given as part of their address, and '784' being the main clue to their location. PAT] ------------------------------ From: radparker@radparker.com (Al Iverson) Subject: Re: Telco Unlimited Local Calls Organization: See sig before replying Date: Thu, 03 Jun 1999 01:15:40 GMT In article , chuck@xyz.nl (Chuck) wrote: [snip] > Thanks for your help. Telecom Digest editor wrote: > More important question of you: why are you 'afraid to use a real > email address'? If spam, or an invasion of privacy is your main Uh ... what? chuck@xyz.nl looks perfectly real to me. I went to http://www.xyz.nl and it's there. I assume that it's an ISP in the Netherlands. Al Iverson radparker.com Al Iverson -- Web: http://al.radparker.com/ -- Home: Minneapolis, USA Visit the Radparker Relay Spam Stopper at http://relays.radparker.com. STOP! Include SWANKY99 in email replies or they may be tagged as spam. Send me no unsolicited advertising, as I will always return it to you. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: All I was doing was quoting from his letter. Apparently however, a lot of people like the idea of a new anonynmous email address; http://telecom-digest.org/postoffice has seen a large number of subscribers in the past week. PAT] ------------------------------ From: John David Galt Organization: Diogenes the Cynic Hot-Tubbing Society Subject: Re: Search Warrants Make 'Online Privacy' an Oxymoron Date: Thu, 03 Jun 1999 01:23:13 GMT > Raytheon Inc. obtained subpoenas to identify 21 people, most of them > employees, said to have been spreading corporate secrets and gripes in > an anonymous online chat room. It then dropped a lawsuit it had > brought against the 21, each identified as "John Doe," indicating to > privacy experts that the company had gone to court in the first place > only to learn the identities of the chatters. Four employees quit; > others entered corporate "counseling." This sounds like an open-and-shut case of invasion of privacy, misuse of legal process, and maybe even malicious prosecution. I hope these people have a good lawyer. John David Galt ------------------------------ From: aboritz@CYBERNEX.NET (Alan Boritz) Subject: Re: Search Warrants Make 'Online Privacy' an Oxymoron Date: Wed, 02 Jun 1999 22:50:53 -0400 In article , hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) wrote: >> "Ultimately, if you break the law, it can be traced," said >> ... In response to orders in civil cases, AOL may give out >> information allowing someone's real name to be matched to a screen name. >> Raytheon Inc. obtained subpoenas to identify 21 people, most of them >> employees, said to have been spreading corporate secrets and gripes in >> an anonymous online chat room. It then dropped a lawsuit it had >> brought against the 21, each identified as "John Doe," indicating to >> privacy experts that the company had gone to court in the first place >> only to learn the identities of the chatters. Four employees quit; >> others entered corporate "counseling." > One could argue a legitimate reason for searching (with _legitimate_ > and realistic probable cause) online accounts for criminal activity. > But AOL also will give _civil_ case information out. That's a completely > different situation. If someone is cheating on their spouse, that's sad, > but there is no public interest in violating that person's privacy. > Frightening. Simple economics. If AOL defied the enraged complainants, they'd be constantly fighting expensive lawsuits. However, if they abuse some of their customers, they'll just lose a little income when they leave. AOL has little to lose by abusing their customers, since they're able to attract many replacements for ones they chase away. > More frightening is how Raytheon (cited above) sought out disgruntled > employees. Here we have a case of people doing absolutely nothing > wrong nor immoral, yet their privacy was violated. Raytheon is a government contractor with powerful influence. With AOL's eager please-don't-sue-me corporate policy, it's a natural match. > (BTW, a few years ago Proctor & Gamble demanded and received _home_ > telephone records of employees to search out who was talking to > newspaper reporters). Proctor & Gamble is another company with powerful government influence. It took some heavy influence to convince them to give up the idea of building a new corporate headquarters on one of the most photographed scenic areas in the US, in Scottsdale, Arizona. > When I am in my employer's workplace, they have a legal right to tap > my telephone (it is really _their_ phone not mine), go through my > desk or computer, or put microphones in the bathroom. And a lot of > employers are doing just that. (The euphemism is "loss prevention"). There are differing legal opinions on that issue. One hold that since the phone belongs to the employer, and the employee may be on employer's time, then the conversation belongs to the employer, too. another holds that the employee is entitled to reasonable privacy and therefore the conversation can not be recorded without the employee's permission. ------------------------------ From: Eric Florack Subject: Re: Online privacy? Date: Wed, 2 Jun 1999 19:40:10 -0400 > Last year, a major telecommunications equipment company, the one who > makes the things that makes communications work or something like > that, notified all employees who accessd the company network from the > outside that every time they accessed the network, the company would > examine the contents of their PCs. > Why? To make sure (make sure?) all of the programs were y2k > compatible. > Needless to say many employees didn't think much of this idea, and > after a week or two of trying to justify it, the company backed down > and said only those who connect from the outside at more than ISDN > rates would have their PCs searched. This has nothing at all to do with privacy, I suspect, but has more to do with the amount of time needed to execute the inspection routines and send the data back through a 28.8kb connection. The users generally don't scream too loud about 'invasion', as much as they do about the length of time it takes to run a login script. We ran into the same sitrep at Xerox where I was employed until a couple years ago. > The company still searches the contents of internal PCs that log onto > the internal network but that's probably going to continue and > employees just have to watch what's on their PCs. One positive reason > given is to be able to periodically download the new VirusScan files > to all PCs. And it got used and got some positive publicity when > Melissa and friends came along. You're overblowing this whole thing, just like the various virus attacks which few people ever see anymore in this country. (You, in the editorial sense.) The fact is that the 'inspection" routine is likely as not, an off the shelf package such as Clicknet, or Asset Insight, which get used to collect config information, as well as serial number info from the PC's BIOS (Inventory control) and software config. Makes it easier to develop inhouse software solutions if you have some idea of what the equipment population is like. And that's about all such things are going to get. I've used several over the last few years ... I've been in PC/Lan support for several years. Sorry, I simply don't see this as as big an issue as it's being made into. ------------------------------ From: Kevin Lundy Subject: CSU and PBX Compatibility Issues Date: Wed, 02 Jun 1999 22:55:49 GMT Organization: @Home Network Has anyone ever heard of compatibility issues between a CSU and PBX equipment? I've always thought a CSU was a CSU (features, programma- bility, price ignored). But I seem to have an issue with a Lucent T1 DS card and an ADTRAN CSU, that seems to point at compatibility. Any thoughts? ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #117 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Jun 3 13:47:06 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id NAA12284; Thu, 3 Jun 1999 13:47:06 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 3 Jun 1999 13:47:06 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199906031747.NAA12284@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #118 TELECOM Digest Thu, 3 Jun 99 13:47:00 EDT Volume 19 : Issue 118 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson VoIP via Cable Runs Into QOS (John Stahl) What is favicon.ico ??? (TELECOM Digest Editor) Acoustic Couplers (was Re: payphone is HNL) (David Scheidt) Now That I'm Paying For it, Where is it? (Number Portability) (Someone) Cable Telephony (Ed Ellers) High Court Tunes Out CNN Ride-Along Appeal (Monty Solomon) Another Entry For the Business Directory (David Chessler) Looking For Business Usage Statistics (Lance Ware) Employment - You're Invited! (Michael MacDonald) Re: ADSL and DSL, What is the Difference and Why? (Isaac Wingfield) Re: Payphone Quality - Honolulu Airport (Alan Fowler) Re: Telco Unlimited Local Calls (Joseph T. Adams) Re: World's First Video Cell Phone Debuts in Japan (Arthur Ross) Re: Number Which Causes Phone to Ring Back (Daniel Norton) Re: Number Which Causes Phone to Ring Back (Jeremy Pickett) Re: Unsolicited FAX Spamming (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Re: AT&T Now Charges For Place Name; Raises Other Charges (Brian C. Kohn) 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 networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 765 Junction City, KS 66441-0765 Phone: 415-520-9905 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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: Thu, 03 Jun 1999 09:43:17 From: John Stahl Subject: VoIP via Cable Runs Into QOS The following telecom related article describes the status of QOS on the companies who are contemplating providing telephone (VoIP) via their cable tv systems to the vast multitude of potential customers. Seems the VoIP advocates who propose to use cable to get to their potential customers have found QOS ("Five nines") life-line requirements a definite challenge when related to their system's components from the switch to the customer modem. According to this article from Inter@ctive magazine, even AT&T, with it's recent multi-billion dollar acquisitions of TCI and Media One, is rethinking their approach to this service proposal. AT&T should know what the 'standards' for life-line service are! Wonder if the cable telecom advocates will ever be able to meet the same standards as the incumbent telco's? --------------------------- Cable Reaches For A Voice Service Lifeline By Fred Dawson, Special To Inter@ctive Week May 27, 1999 4:37 PM ET The cable industry is being forced to rethink the all-or-nothing approach to launching Internet Protocol telephony services amid increasing evidence that something in between will be the only option for service rollouts next year. Not only have engineers determined that the most immediately available voice-over-Internet Protocol (IP) architecture will not meet the reliability standard for first-line service set by Telcordia Technologies (formerly Bell Communications Research) and endorsed by AT&T, but service planners also recognize that the power requirements of modems to be used to connect voice subscribers to the packet cable channel stand in the way of meeting first-class performance metrics. Observers say it will take another two generations of silicon for those power requirements to come down to meet those metrics. "It will take roughly another 18 months before we see external modems that consume only one [watt] or two watts of power, which is the power level you need if you're going to be able to back up voice-over-IP in providing a lifeline service," says Rouzbeh Yassini, executive consultant to Cable Television Laboratories, the testing arm of the cable industry. Settle down Industry insiders say vendors are working on compromises that would toggle down modem functions to accommodate lower power consumption at something less than first-class performance levels during power outages, thereby allowing battery backup power to keep lifeline service operating. This would leave just enough wiggle room for cable companies to offer first-line services in residential markets. With the newly released specifications for version 1.1 of the Data Over Cable Service Interface Specification (DOCSIS) cable modem standard, operators will be able to deliver quality-of-service (QOS), multiple lines and enhanced features for IP telephony that match or surpass today's residential analog toll service, Yassini says. A growing number of cable operators plan to begin trials of IP voice services before the year is out, with commercial launches following in early 2000, says John Burke, vice president of marketing for the advanced networks and telecommunications systems group at cable equipment maker General Instrument. GI recently signed a deal with Telcordia that will make Telcordia's call control and other operations management technologies available over GI's hardware. "There are some operators who want to move as quickly as they can and will deploy services in advance of completion of some of the formal standards," Burke says. "Our intention is to move very quickly to commercial availability by the end of the year." GI's DOCSIS 1.1 modem, based on chips from Broadcom, is set to ship toward the end of next month, even though software needed for full compliance with the DOCSIS 1.1 standard isn't available yet. "We believe the software will be available for downloading in the third quarter," Burke says. CableLabs expects to begin certification testing for DOCSIS 1.1 modems this fall, with the first vendors likely reaching compliance in April 2000, Yassini says. Because the key interoperability issues are software-related, cable operators can deploy precertified modems and then download software to achieve DOCSIS 1.1 compliance later, he says. Back and forth at AT&T The realization that IP telephony technology won't be fully toll-service-compliant until sometime in 2001 has affected planning at AT&T. While AT&T Chief Executive C. Michael Armstrong clearly wants to offer first-line quality service that's scalable to millions of users before moving to the IP platform, he has stressed the need to begin making the transition to IP in 2000, away from the much more expensive circuit-switched proprietary systems used to deliver cable telephony. AT&T's preferred IP telephony architecture - known as Distributed Open Signaling Architecture - is incompatible with the Multimedia Gateway Control Protocol (MGCP) approach that is likely to be ready for deployment before DOSA. "MGCP offers an easy path to getting started in IP telephony, but it may not be the architecture that would allow us to evolve as our market base expands and we add new services," says Chuck Kalmanek, an engineering executive at AT&T Labs. "You want to be able to offer the customer the benefits of functionalities offered from the network side, where we can do things in a more cost-effective manner. But you have to be in a position to give the user a choice between network-based and premises-based functionalities." DOSA offers a means for end-user authentication that protects against fraud in a more robust fashion than is possible with MGCP, Kalmanek says. AT&T wants to make sure that when users take advantage of special QOS parameters, they can't bypass the registration of such use with the network management system. AT&T also is seeking to make dynamic allocation of QOS an element of DOCSIS 1.1, says Dave Bukovinsky, director of the CableLabs Packet Cable initiative, which is responsible for setting the specifications for IP telecommunications. Dynamic allocation, in which QOS is assigned based on the requirements of a particular application when that application is in use, should be defined as part of the 1.1 draft specs within the next two months, he says. Packet Cable has made DOSA a part of its phase-one specifications agenda and plans to issue most of the specs in August, Bukovinsky adds. "AT&T has had the effect of accelerating the inclusion of solutions in the specifications that we otherwise would have addressed later," he says. Bukovinsky acknowledges, however, that DOSA is trailing the MGCP-based architecture in the development process. Given the breadth of industry commitment to MGCP and the speed with which DOCSIS 1.1 implementations are coming to market, it appears that even AT&T won't be willing to sacrifice a year or more in the waiting process to begin the transition to IP telephony, even if the first iteration isn't everything the carrier is hoping for. ----- submitted by ------ John Stahl Aljon Enterprises Telecom/Data Consultant email: aljon@worldnet.att.net ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Jun 1999 04:04:19 EDT From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: What is favicon.ico ??? Something about the telecom-digest.org website has bugged me for awhile now; maybe someone knows the answer ... I review the error logs each day, seeking errors on links, and people looking for things that no longer exist (like older messages from TELECOM_Digest_Online which have been moved around or removed, etc) as well as visits from bots of one kind or another. Every now and then, maybe 2-3 times per week, I will see someone looking for something totally off-the-wall, a file I do not have at all, never did have, etc ... and I assume they just plugged in the URL, went to look for it, found their error and went on their way, etc. One that shows up quite often is 'favicon.ico', always called by different sites, never so far as I can tell the same place ... and sometimes the error report says they looked for it in the root directory, or sometimes in one of the archives sub-directories. I thought nothing much of it, but Wednesday I pulled the error log specifically to look for my own entries, having had sort of a hard time gettting a couple of things placed where I wanted them, etc ... and guess what? The error log had *me* trying to pull 'favicon.ico' six or eight times! I have never heard of such a file, never had it on line here, and I know for a fact what I did and did not type in this morning that created some of my own errors. In my case, it had me looking for favicon.ico about five or six times over a two or three minute period. What runs things in the background at lcs.mit.edu is Netscape 1.1 server. I did a search using Infoseek for 'favicon.ico' figuring maybe some site with a collection of freeware icons or similar might have such a thing. All Infoseek came up with was five or six websites in total, none of which, let's say, appealed to me. Even scanning a couple of them, I saw no apparent reference to 'favicon.ico'. As I actually edit this to go out early Thursday afternoon, another quick check of the log shows it appearing a couple times today also. Suggestions, ideas? PAT ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 02 Jun 1999 19:55:20 CDT From: David Scheidt Subject: Acoustic Couplers (was Re: payphone is HNL) Leonard Erickson writes: > JF Mezei writes: >> I have a pocket organizer with modem and an accoustic coupler. I limit >> the modem to 2400 baud (with compression). > Well, it's a minor miracle that you *ever* got it to work. Acoustic > couplers are generally *barely* adequate for 300 bps. There were a few > made for 1200 bps Racal-Vadic. But I've *never* heard of them being > reliable at 2400. You haven't been keeping up. Acoustic couplers are alive and well, if useful for a somewhat limited market segment. I used to have one I travelled with. It worked very well to 9600 bps, as long as the line was good. One of the catalogs of over-priced stuff for travelers that I get had one that claimed to be able to do 28.8 Kbps. David Scheidt dscheidt@enteract.com "[C]ows are extremely mammalian." -- Dr I. A. York ------------------------------ From: "Someone" Subject: Now That I'm Paying For it, Where is it? (Number Portability) Date: Wed, 02 Jun 1999 20:01:34 -0700 Organization: Posted via RemarQ, http://www.remarQ.com - Discussions here! I see that beginning 3/15/99, US West is charging all telephone subscribers 53 cents per line for "Service Provider Number Portability." Great! Now that I'm paying for it, where can I get it? There are no alternative companies from which I can get dialtone! Is this just another "hidden tax?" We are compelled to pay the phone company as a de-facto tax-collection arm of the federal government, while getting nothing in return. ------------------------------ From: Ed Ellers Subject: Cable Telephony Date: Wed, 2 Jun 1999 19:59:21 -0400 J.F. Mezei (jfmezei@videotron.ca) wrote: > You may start to see phones that plug into the ethernet backbone to which > the cable modem is attached in your house. The plan that cable companies are talking about involves a separate box, attached to the cable TV drop line, that then provides one or two RJ-11 jacks to connect to normal telephone devices. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 2 Jun 1999 22:49:07 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: High Court Tunes Out CNN Ride-Along Appeal By Jonathan Ringel Fulton County Daily Report June 2, 1999 The U.S. Supreme Court has turned a deaf ear to CNN's attempt to undo a lower court ruling exposing it to liability for invading a Montana couple's privacy. In part two of a closely watched case dealing with media ride-alongs, the justices on Tuesday denied the cable network's request for certiorari from a 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decision. CNN v. Berger, No. 97-1914 (U.S. June 1, 1999). http://www.lawnewsnet.com/stories/A1949-1999Jun1.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 02 Jun 1999 17:54:59 -0400 From: David Chessler Subject: Another Entry for the Business Directory [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: David Chessler sends along still another entry for the 'Telecom Digest Business Directory' that I published here a couple months ago. Do these things never come to an end? PAT] ------------------ Attached find a SPAM. This is the third or fourth I've received from this bunch, judging by the phone number (only the extension is different). I generally call about 11 at night from a payphone and leave a nice, long message on their voicemail, one message for each new extension, so I haven't actually talked to these people. Received: from 210.161.155.2 [208.157.20.10] by nm195 via mtad (2.6) with ESMTP id 796DFBsFd0012M19; Wed, 02 Jun 1999 18:05:30 GMT Message-ID: <79402.62880@210.161.155.2> From: sandra12547@postchi.com Bcc: Reply-To: Subject: YOU KNOW ITS TIME (178371) Date: Wed, 02 Jun 1999 13:52:45 -0400 (EDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > ACCEPT CREDIT & DEBIT CARDS OVER THE INTERNET, HOME, OR OFFICE > - NO SET-UP FEES - > Good Credit/Bad Credit/No Credit You will still get a merchant account. > ***FAST AND EASY*** > You will summons you customer's impulse buying through a secured service. > They will simply enter their credit card information and will > receive an a pproval within 5 seconds. > That's all there is to it!!! > From that point on the sale is complete and the money will be > directly deposited into your checking account within 24 to 48 hours. > LIQUID CASH! > Call the following number NOW and Get Started > Guaranteed!! 1-800-242-0363 Ext 1675 ************************************************************* 90737 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Oh great! Just what we need, a little more credit card fraud on the net. We don't have enough of that already? It is going to get to where no one believes anything anyone says online, or has it already gotten that way? Follow the routine for him please. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Lance Ware Subject: Looking For Business Usage Statistics Date: Wed, 02 Jun 1999 17:09:20 -0700 Can anyone point me to some general business phone usage statistics? Spefically, I'm looking for the average cost (per employee would work) on local and long distance calls. I realize it will change significantly per industry, and would love to see those numbers, but I'm looking for a baseline. I've seen the FCC report that has some numbers on residential usage, but that doesn't help. Thanks, Lance ------------------------------ From: global35@iname.com (Michael MacDonald) Subject: Employment - You're Invited! Date: Thu, 3 Jun 1999 12:14:24 GMT [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, here is a new variety of spam I don't think I have seen before. Notice how he 'saw my presence on the Internet' ... Lord, I would hope he saw it, I have been around long enough. Do you think his thing below is for real, or is it just a way of verifying a few more addresses or spam purposes? PAT] ------------------------ Hello, Employment - You're Invited! My name is Michael MacDonald, manager of 3-DNET. I noticed your presence on the Internet. Massive layoffs and downsizings of the early 1990's may be behind us, but rightsizing is here to stay. Did you know that the average employee remains in his/her job just for 2-3 years ! It would be an honour to include your background on our active database. If interested in further details please let me know via global35@iname.com Please do NOT send your resume YET. Membership in 3-DNET is by invitation ONLY ! Thank you, Michael [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: By invitation only! My, aren't we the lucky ones, to have been invited! PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Jun 1999 08:57:32 -0700 From: Isaac Wingfield Subject: Re: ADSL and DSL, What is the Difference and Why? J.F. Mezei asked about it on Fri, 28 May 1999 18:59:50 ... > A few years ago, the "dream" was that telcos would roll out ADSL and > compete against cable. > ADSL comes out and starts to be rolled out, but all of a sudden, DSL > comes out and goes to comsumers. > Here in Bell Canada territory, it seems that commercial customers get > ADSL whereas consumers get DSL. > What is the basic difference between the two? Why would telcos not choose > a single technology? DSL stands for "Digital Subscriber Line (or Loop)". The "A" means "Asymmetric"; that is, different data rates to and from the subscriber. High bandwidth delivery to you, lower bandwidth return. There are so many flavors of DSL that you often see "xDSL" as a generic descriptor. There may be underlying technology differences, but that's not the fundamental reason for the various names. I have a suspicion that consumers didn't like having the low-bandwidth upstream rate made so obvious, so the telco simply stopped saying it. All of the DSL schemes use sophisticated modulation techniques and serious signal processing to jam a high bitrate onto a standard telco loop. To some extent, what you use for one direction gets taken away from what you can use in the other -- there's only a certain amount of "room" on the wire. They all use frequencies well above the voice range, so they work on an existing pair without compromising the "POTS" function -- you can add DSL onto your existing analog service, on the same pair. The telcos are still trying to figure out which technology give them the best performance on the worst lines at the lowest cost, not at all an easy analysis, especially with signal processing power getting cheaper every day. Isaac Wingfield ------------------------------ From: amfowler@melbpc.org.au (Alan Fowler) Subject: Re: Payphone Quality - Honolulu Airport Date: Thu, 03 Jun 1999 10:35:56 GMT Organization: Melbourne PC User Group Inc, Australia James Wyatt wrote: > The only true 2400b modems I know were Bell 201 *Bisync* modems. > My recollection is that the NASCOM data network for the Apollo Project > were all 2400 bit/s 4-wire modems using 800 symbols/s with three > bits/symbol. I thought the ones we used were Western Electric not Bell. Regards, Alan ------------------------------ From: joe@apk.net (Joseph T. Adams) Subject: Re: Telco Unlimited Local Calls Date: 3 Jun 1999 12:02:45 GMT Organization: Quality Data Division of JTAE Tony Toews (ttoews@telusplanet.net) wrote: > Here in Canada, and I'm talking from personal experience, in the > provinces Ontario, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta, British Columbia > and the North West Territories, all local calling is free and > unlimited. > Unlike Pat's description of eight miles for local calling this is the > total city such as Edmonton and out to all the suburbs. We have the same thing in the greater Cleveland, Ohio area. The city, all of its older suburbs, and many of the newer suburbs in outlying counties all are in one more or less free, unlimited local calling area - among the largest yet remaining if I understand correctly. (Cleveland with its suburbs is a little less than half the size of Toronto or Chicago - about a thousand square miles and 2-3 million people.) We also have a relatively sane area code split: 216 inside city limits and most adjacent suburbs, 440 for everything else north of a geographical line, and 330 for everything south of that line. Thus far, no overlays. A few suburbs such as Parma are split between 216 and 440. People within the metro area but outside the area local to Cleveland can extend their local calling area to include it for a monthly fee of (I think) US $20 or so. On the negative side: no DSL; no cable modem access in the city or inner suburbs (to my knowledge); switching facilities are 50 years old and don't consistently support high-speed modems, and it's a nightmare to try to get any of the the telcos (Ameritech, GTE, and Alltel) to install new capacity. Joe ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Jun 1999 07:09:10 -0700 From: Arthur Ross Subject: Re: World's First Video Cell Phone Debuts in Japan Doc Wonmug wrote: > Not so fast. Recalling the recent PuriKura fad here in Japan, and > watching the young kids everywhere walking or even biking around with > their little cellular phones, I fully expect them to adopt the pocket > video phones as their next Big Thing. Although my 14-year-old daughter > disagrees. > Americans wrote off the video; the Japanese turned it into a regular > part of daily life. History will repeat itself. Can't resist ... This reminds me of the hot stock market tip from one of Peter Lynch's books. He's the guy who made something like $20 billion as manager of the famous Fidelity Magellen Fund (not to be confused with David Lynch, who is the director of strange movies). He suggests, as a clue as to which retailers are going to make it big, "Follow your teenager around the mall." Best, Dr. Arthur Ross 2325 East Orangewood Avenue Phoenix, AZ 85020-4730 Phone: 602-371-9708 Fax : 602-336-7074 ------------------------------ From: Daniel@DanielNorton.net (Daniel Norton) Subject: Re: Number Which Causes Phone to Ring Back Date: Wed, 02 Jun 1999 20:36:33 GMT On 31 May 1999 13:44:13 GMT, mcsman@aol.com (MCSMAN) wrote: > ...even if you are not on a party line (is anybody, anymore?). Today it's re-marketed as "distinctive ring", but generally only wired into a single household. ------------------------------ From: Jeremy Pickett Subject: Re: Number Which Causes Phone to Ring Back Date: Wed, 02 Jun 1999 18:15:56 -0400 Organization: MindSpring Enterprises At one time in several northeast Florida area BellSouth exchanges, we used 551-XXXX (the last four digits of the number you're calling from), waited for second dial tone, depressed hookswitch, waited for a third dial tone, then hung up the phone. Within a few seconds the phone would ring. However, now since moving to northeast Georgia, in ALLTEL-land, I've been unable to determine the code. The telco, for obvious reasons, will not give out this code. If anyone else has had any luck with an ALLTEL switch (Greater Jackson-Banks Counties), please post here, or send via email. Thanks, Jeremy jer76@hotmail.com ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Unsolicited FAX Spamming Organization: Excelsior Computer Services From: joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Date: Thu, 03 Jun 1999 02:14:14 GMT >> I've been hit by the same thing, but the calls are all going to my >> VOICE number. I went away for a week, and returned to find my voice >> mailbox full of fax messages. Then I got a fax at 2:15 in the >> morning, and from another company at midnight. >> Do I have any recourse? > I would bet this is not a spam fax, but rather a misprogrammed machine. I know it's more than one number, because just in the past week, two have come up on caller id, and a third hasn't. One of the companies told me they got my "fax" (really, voice) number by buying a list from a company they refused to disclose. I believe them, because all of sudden lots of people are trying to fax me stuff. So the question is, is it illegal to fax unsolicted material via an automatical dialer to a voice number? I thought the automatic dialer part might make it illegal. I'd like to be able to call the company back and tell them that in return for giving me the company from which they bought my number I'll do them the favor of not suing them. Joel ------------------------------ From: bicker@nospam.com (Brian Charles Kohn) Subject: Re: AT&T Now Charges For Place Name; Raises Other Charges Reply-To: Brian Charles Kohn Date: Wed, 02 Jun 1999 21:05:19 GMT Organization: Road Runner On 31 May 1999 14:57:49 -0400, in comp.dcom.telecom, kamlet@infinet.com (Art Kamlet) wrote in : > The old pre-divestuture AT&T (Pre 1984) stressed service. It also stressed increasing cost, since profit was regulated to be directly proportional to cost. > "Service" as the goal of all employees somehow disappeared in the > post divestiture market and money took its place. You say this as if it is a surprise; I don't believe it should be. Previously, AT&T was a regulated monopoly, operating under the auspices of the federal regulators who, ostensibly exerted their control in the public interest. After the marketplace and the courts insisted that AT&T abandon that model and operate on a competitive model, it should be not-at-all surprising that AT&T operates just like any other for-profit enterprise. just bicker ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #118 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Jun 3 17:49:05 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id RAA23682; Thu, 3 Jun 1999 17:49:05 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 3 Jun 1999 17:49:05 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199906032149.RAA23682@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #119 TELECOM Digest Thu, 3 Jun 99 17:49:00 EDT Volume 19 : Issue 119 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Newly Opened Webpage About Mauritius Phonecards (Joseph) Autovon (was Re: Use of Star/Pound in Number Expansion) (Arco1@aol.com) Analog and Digital Line Differences (alcazar3@my-deja.com) Re: Now I Really Need Help in the Archives (Massimiliano Scagliarini) Re: Now I Really Need Help in the Archives (Robert Bonomi) Re: Now I Really Need Help in the Archives (user@telecom-archives.org) Re: Now I Really Need Help in the Archives (John David Galt) Re: Now I Really Need Help in the Archives (Clive Dawson) 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 networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 765 Junction City, KS 66441-0765 Phone: 415-520-9905 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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: Joseph Subject: Newly Opened Webpage About Mauritius Phonecards Date: Thu, 03 Jun 1999 13:20:02 GMT Organization: Deja.com - Share what you know. Learn what you don't. I am writing to inform you that I have opened recently a new webpage about phonecards of Mauritius. There you will be able to find information about the phonecards of my country including pictures of the phonecards. You will also be able to find phonecards on sale mint and used. A discount of 5% is given to whoever comes from WPD and refers to it. Other discounts are also offered. Please come and visit my webpage you will not be disappointed. http://www.geocities.com/rodeodrive/outlet/4690/ I am a Mauritian, of Chinese origin. My birth country Mauritius is an island situated in the Indian Ocean near Malagasy, and also near Reunion island. My country has many beautiful beaches. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This message comes close to being Spam, but I think it is the first time I've ever received correspondence to the Digest from this far-away land, and because phone cards are a topic of interest to many, I decided to publish it here. Obviously before ever sending your browser to any geocities location, be sure to turn on your 'pop-up windows' filter; use some kind of software to kill pop-ups dead on sight, because you sure will get plenty of them. I honestly would love to visit Mauritius sometime, like so many other places in the world I will probably never see. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Arco1@aol.com Date: Thu, 3 Jun 1999 11:14:54 EDT Subject: Autovon (was Re: Use of Star/Pound in Number Expansion) > However, there is always the old A,B,C, and D keys from Autovon > days; remember those? I have an old touchtone pad somewhere that had the designations FO, F, I, and P on the four extra buttons. "Flash-Override," "Flash," "Immediate," and "Priority," were the hierarchy of priorities for the Autovon. Most central-office equipment and much other touch-tone equipment recognizes the higher frequency tone of the last column, and most are programmed to give some sort of "reject" message when they receive it. Seems like we ought to fix the real problem: An enormous amount of unused numbers being reserved by phone service providers (and users) at very low cost to them and at very high cost to the other telephone network users/subscribers/PAYERS. Jim ------------------------------ From: alcazar3@my-deja.com Subject: Analog and Digital Line Differences Date: Thu, 3 Jun 1999 07:10:08 GMT Organization: Deja.com - Share what you know. Learn what you don't. What is the difference between analog and digital data lines? I mean both of them transmit thru analog signals don't they? Another unrelated question: What is bursty loss? ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 03 Jun 1999 12:17:38 +0200 From: Massimiliano Scagliarini Subject: Re: Now I Really Need Help in the Archives Mr. Moderator, I just had a look at the Italian translation of the Telecom Archives ... well, I think they are just useless that way. Unfortunately Italian is a very difficult language, and can't be effectively translated by electronic programs. I suggest you to remove the translation entirely. For example: > First of all, with millions of places available to visit on the World > Wide Web these days, thank you very much for choosing to stop in and > share with me. (is translated) Irstdi F di tutti, con milioni di posti disponibili da visitare sul World Wide Web attualmente, grazie molto per la scelta arrestarsi dentro e la parte con me. (which, back in English means) the part "arrestarsi dentro", which should be the equivalent for "to stop in", is also very hilarious: it means that you should be making attention to your ass :)))))))))))) I suggest you to remove the translation entirely. Yours, m ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Jun 1999 07:35:50 CDT From: Robert Bonomi Subject: Re: Now I Really Need Help in the Archives Organization: Not Much In article TELECOM Digest Editor writes: > After the mostly in jest comment the other day about language > translations I got to thinking that in keeping with my own commitment > of making the archives web site http://telecom-digest.org as > accessible as possible to as many people as possible some foreign > language translation there would not be a bad idea. We also talked > about Babel Fish, the product from AltaVista which tries to interpret > what it sees to and from various languages. Babel Fish is included > automatically in Internet Explorer 5 and there are patches available > to allow it to be added to lesser versions of IE as well as all the > later versions of Netscape and other browsers. > Is there anything else other than AltaVista's partnership > with the Babel Fish Company at the present time doing that > sort of 'on the fly' translations? *LOTS* go to somewhere like yahoo.com, and plug in 'on-line language translation'. Last time I did this (I needed Finnish -> English) I found at least a dozen alternatives to babelfish [.. snip ..] > If the rendered translations are useless, or outrageous -- and you > who read the languages will have to decide that -- then I may just > remove my little script and go back to English only. I will grant > you the same people can come along and push the Babel Fish button > on their browser and accomplish the same thing, but then the onus > is on Babel Fish if the page looks totally ignorant, rather than > on me! :) As it is set up now with my 'push this button to translate' > feature, it appears *I* am encouraging the use of the feature. I > would rather let Babel Fish get the bum rap for it if the output is > nonsensical, etc. I have *NOT* checked out your pages, but, in general babelfish translates lots of stuff _badly_. It is *especially* bad on anything "technical". > So read the default English version first, then try whatever trans- > lations you can deal with, and see if those translations have me > saying more or less what I said in English. Note: I'll suggest that this is a 'non-issue'. anybody who gets -to- your site, *particularly* through a foreign search engine, =must= have a 'minimal' knowledge of English -- otherwise they can't read the 'pointer' description as returned by the search-engine. > Finally, for this time around, what does Babel Fish mean by the > expression (with asterics around it) **** TIME OUT **** which > sometimes appears in a sentence. It means _exactly_ that. the actual word/phrase look-up is being handled by a -separate- machine than the web-server. There was no response from the look-up engine in a sufficiently timely manner for the word/phrase being examined. Hence a time-out occured. ------------------------------ From: user@telecom-digest.org Date: Thu, 03 Jun 1999 12:29:21 EDT Subject: Re: Now I Really Need Help in the Archives [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Name withheld at user's request, but comment is important in evaluating Babel Fish. PAT] PAT, [NOT FOR PUBLICATION - JUST FYI] I can only speak for the French translation ... honestly, it's gawd-awful (the best description I can find for it is the somewhat pejorative "immigrant-talk", although most of it is still somewhat understandable -- for the reader who speaks no English, it would make it possible to guess as to what is going on quite well. SYSTRAN does a similar job translating from French to English, BTW, so that might be a good way for you to find out the style of the output ... I suggest that you try looking at a bilingual page (try http://www.gov.on.ca, http://www.sympatico.ca, http://www.ville.mont-royal.qc.ca and http://www.bell.ca for pages that are likely to be bilingual) -- that way, you'll be able to look at the English, and at the translated French-to-English, to get an idea of what SYSTRAN does to it. Let me just say that I wouldn't drop out of a translation course on account of the results, but the system *is* useful regardless. If you like, I could compose a small message for you (in French) explaining that the translation is done by Babel Fish, and may leave something to be desired, etc). That being said, it's quite thoughtful of you to put in provisions for translating the page - people will appreciate it regardless of how well it works, considering what it's like to navigate the Internet without speaking English (nearly impossible). I'd guess that most people looking at the page would probably speak at least basic English, which I'm saying as someone who lives in a non-English- speaking [part of a] country. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thanks very much for your detailed comments. So far, I have heard nothing *good* about the translations, and several things which were bad. I feel sort of in a pinch here, between a rock and a hard place as the saying goes ... the Internet is by and large an American creation, with huge amounts of the net written by Americans serving other Americans (or sometimes just self-serving the author of the page, if you want my opinion, but you did not ask for my opinion so I will keep it to myself; I mean, talk about the world's largest vanity press operation ... with every author and creator on the web certain that at least *his* pages could stand alone and pay their own way, even if network resources and email -- especially email! -- were not 'free' or dirt-cheap to all. I feel the same way about telecom, so hey, I should talk huh? Alright, I will. Talk, I mean ...) As much as we Americans are fond of saying that 'when foreigners come to this country, they should learn to speak our language and get a job and pull themselves up by their bootstraps', etc and how 'if I went to their country I would learn to speak their language and get a job and not go on welfare ...' the fact is that Americans land in other (non English-speaking, unfamiliar cultures) countries then sit there and expect to be waited on hand and foot, just as we accuse the 'foreigners' of doing when they get here. I would like to try being a citizen of the world first, and a citizen of the USA second. And we do, after all, call it the 'World Wide Web', not the 'USA-web'. With that in mind, automatic page translation would seem to be an admirable goal. But if the translation is so bad that it would be better not to be done at all, then I do not know where to turn next with it. Maybe I will see if Yahoo's service is better, and if it is, can I push the page directly into their cgi-bin as I have been doing with AltaVisa/Babel Fish. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 02 Jun 1999 18:54:53 -0700 From: John David Galt Organization: Diogenes the Cynic Hot-Tubbing Society Subject: Re: Now I Really Need Help in the Archives [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Responses by me to his specific comments are flushed to the left side, interspersed with his remarks which are indented. PAT] Here's what I see in French: - The dialog boxes asking your name, and whether you want to hear music, come up in English (and are repeated even though I got there _from_ http://telecom-digest.org/ and already set those options). The music option is part of the script which gets passed through each time the page is loaded, whether you load the page from massis.lcs.mit.edu or whether you load the page from AltaVisa's cgi-bin. Each time the script reaches that 'on confirm then music' (meaning confirm has a positive value because you clicked okay) you will get that question. The cookie setter/collector also activates each time you go past that part of the script, and it looks on your end for the presence of a cookie from 'the host I am running on' and the values associated with it. If 'telecom-archives' is running the script, it sees you have a cookie from same, and uses the values. But when you come out of the AltaVisa cgi-bin, then 'telecom-archives' is not supplying you the page any longer, and the cookie looks for a cookie from 'cgi-bin' and not finding one, assumes you have never been around before. I have also seen this happen sometimes when viewing the page via a search engine which directed me there, or if I reached telecom through a 'target=_blank' link from someone else's page, where the cookie somehow thought the other guy was supplying this page. - Most boxed text such as "Telecom Digest and Archives" translates properly, but subtitles such as "Patrick A. Townson, Editor/ Publisher" are in English. I think it does okay with 'editor/publisher' in most cases; but my name is my name. I noticed that in a link to John Cropper the Spanish translation referred to him as Juan; I do not know what the various translations do to my name. The ones I have seen do nothing. - The two lines beginning "Good Evening" are in English. Sure, because they are added to the page after the fact. They are added using 'document.write', a javascript thing which says gather up the present circumstances, whatever those may be, and when you see this page coming past, add whatever. The script at that point literally says, document.write('greeting') and 'greeting' was assigned its value based on parsing values it found in the clock in the user's computer. For those people who have asked me 'how do you know what time zone I am in?' my answer is I do not care what zone you are in or what time it is; the script looks at *your* computer and you tell me what time it is, then I respond on the page. Test this by setting your computer clock to whatever time you like or date, etc, then call http://telecom-digest.org if you say it is midnight on January 18, that's fine with me. So by the time we get around to document.write the greeting, the page has long since left Babel Fish in its new language. - Where lines begin with a fancy capital, Babelfish does not treat it as part of the word that follows it. Thus "First" becomes "Irst de F", which is gibberish, rather than the literal translation "Premier(e)" or the more reasonable "Ensuite". Every paragraph of the main text has this problem. And I love 'fancy capitals' to start the paragraphs there don't I ... - Buttons such as "Weather" are in English; and of course, image files such as the Matthew Shepard icon are unchanged. - A few words such as "non-commercial" and "Webmaster" are left in English. The buttons and icons never get changed, but if there are a few options one can change in the form of 'radio' buttons, Babel Fish frequently will label those however it wants. - The lines "Latest Digest Released 12/31/69 16:00:00 _read_it_now_" and "This page last updated 12/31/69 16:00:00" read as shown, in English. Oddly enough, other text in that typeface is in French. Any 'document.write' entries on the page occur after the page has left Babel Fish and on its way back for display. Javascript can look at the date and time a file was created and display that information on the page with the command 'document.write(document.last.modified)' and that is how you get the item at the bottom giving the date and time the page was last updated. How I get it to document.write when the last issue of the Digest was released is very simple. I just tell the script to: document.write("'Latest Digest Released: '+document.last.modified+'<a href='+'http://hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/back.issues/recent.single.issues/latest-issue.html'+'>'+' read it now'+'</a>'") The presence of XMP in brackets above and the cancellation of XMP is to prevent what I wrote above from being acted on by people who read this Digest in HTML. In HTML, an e'XMP'le is never acted on but begins quoting literally what follows it until it is cancelled. The XMP does not go in the script itself. What I said above was to add to the printed page that the latest issue of the digest was released at (time) and then provide a hyperlink to where it is located if someone wants to read it. As to how it knows when the latest issue was released, well, I cheat a little. I have a little script I to push these messages out to comp.dcom.telecom (I call it 'nntpxmit' which basically telnets around to several sites around the world on their NNTP socket where I have posting privileges; I rattle at that socket, and when answered proceed to tell the site IHAVE telecom.number; he says 'send it' or 'seen it'; I dump my load and move on to the next site on my list.) Part of the process is to then to tell sendmail where my secret list is hidden, to fetch it and start the mailing. One of the 'names' on the mailing list is merely a pipe to a script of my creation which takes the stream and places it where I want it as an archives file. All I did was add one little extra step in the process: I also tell the computer, 'touch /common/pub/telecom-archives/index.html' and we all know that 'touch' is unix parlance for stamping the current date and time on a file. Since 'http://telecom-digest.org' is just an alias which points to '/common/telecom-archives/index.html' at this site, the next time the page gets passed to someone, the javascript happily tells the visitor/ viewer that it just got updated, only instead of saying that the page got updated, I tell it to lie and say 'latest digest issued' instead, offering a hyperlink. If you read all the way to the very bottom of the page and the tiny print at the bottom, bingo, 'by coincidence' the page itself was 'last updated' at the same time, but no one ever reads that far down the page ... :) Now when you get the page back via cgi-bin from Babble Mouth, for whatever reason 'document.last.modified' looks at Babble to find out what it should say, I guess because that is who is 'hosting' the page at the moment. The reason it says 'last updated' (or 'latest digest released' earlier) is 12/31/69 16:00:00 is because we all know that the Internet was invented on January 1, 1970 at zero hours Greenwich Mean Time, and apparently AltaVista has their site set up with an 0800 GMT offset. - As soon as you follow any link away from the main page, you're back in English. Thus archived messages are not translated. I do not keep sending additional pages to the translator. The user needs to ask for it on each page. In order to add that option to each page (or message) in the archives, I guess I would have to hack the Hypermail code, then recompile it so that statement would occur at the top of each page ... hmmm ... not a bad idea. - The music is nice, but it stops if you leave the main page. The only way that I know of around that problem of the music stopping when you leave the page is to work with frames. Your main frame would have 100 percent of the space, and the music frame would get zero percent of the space; in other words be invisible. The user would always work from the frame which had all the space. Trouble is, when he left my site totally and went on to go visit some other site, my music would still be looping repeatedly. I could fix it where one frame had one percent of the space and the other frame got 99 percent of the space. In the tiny frame, put a little 'control panel' to start and stop the music. But I do *not* like frames! And when you get them, it is hard to get rid of them if the webmaster does not leave you a way to close the frame totally. Too much bother for me. May I suggest that you put the language question in the name-entry dialog box, and save the answer in a cookie? Not a bad idea, but I am sorta thinking the translation thing is going to be gone totally after I finish this issue and do some editing work on the archives. I am getting too many reports I don't like. John David Galt ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Jun 1999 06:21:26 CDT From: Clive Dawson Subject: Now I Really Need Help in the Archives Hi Pat, In response to your request, I took a look at the Spanish translations of a couple of TELECOM Digest pages using the Babel Fish translator. My basic assessment is that while the Babel Fish translations are not totally useless, they *are* pretty outrageous. If you would like to get some feel for what I'm talking about, try an experiment: Cut and paste some of the translation output back into Babel Fish, and ask for a translation back to English. You'll see what I mean. In my experience, the Altavista translation service is good for individual words or short phrases, but comes up short when you feed it more extensive text. I'm sure you've heard the old joke: What do you call somebody who speaks three languages? (Answer: Tri-lingual.) What do you call somebody who speaks two languages? (Answer: Bi-lingual.) What do you call somebody who speaks one language? (Answer: American.) So here's what I would add to your assumptions: Assumption Four: Most readers from other countries who would have occasion to access the Telecom pages probably know English better than you think, and/or are already well familiar with the Altavista translation service. My bottom-line suggestion is: Let Babel Fish take the rap and don't bother with this. Now if you decide to keep the feature (other languages may fare better) then I suggest that you modify your script so that the invitation to translate does not appear in English. At the very least, the menu should say Francais, Deutsch, Italiano, Portugese, Espanol. Better would be for these words to appear on the page without the need to click, so that non-English speakers can spot the name of their language and get a clue about what to do. Or even: Traduction a/Ubersetzung zu/Traduzione a/Traducao a/Traduccion a : (I did not include an assortment of diacritics and special characters in the above; just feed "Translation to" to the translator for the correct versions.) Let me also say that I would be happy to produce a good Spanish translation of selected Telecom pages for you. The downside of this is that you would probably want to do the same for other languages, and would then be dependent on a bunch of people for changes every time you updated the pages. So here's another suggestion: You could produce a page entitled "Greetings to our xxxx-speaking Readers". After some suitable words of welcome and basic description of the site, you could make mention of the Altavista translation service, apologize for its inadequacy but hope it is at least of some use, etc. etc. This would be a static page which seldom, if ever, required updates. Then you obtain good translations into various languages (not just limited to the five above) which would omit the translation reference if not relevant. I would be happy to supply the Spanish translation for such a page. Hope this helps! Regards, Clive Dawson Austin, TX [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Regards Spanish, on the bottom of the main page was (I have since removed it) a picture of the Three Stooges with a message saying 'visit these links' ... I translated the page into Spanish, then from the translated Spanish page back into English. The comment about the Stooges in English -- when it came back to me via Babel Fish from English to Spanish to English made some comment about the 'Revolutionary Army' ... In the next issue of the Digest, an answer to the question, 'what or who is favicon.ico ...' and my intentions for it. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #119 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Jun 3 21:48:06 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id VAA03678; Thu, 3 Jun 1999 21:48:06 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 3 Jun 1999 21:48:06 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199906040148.VAA03678@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #120 TELECOM Digest Thu, 3 Jun 99 21:48:00 EDT Volume 19 : Issue 120 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson So Now I'm a Racist? Says Who? (Joey Lindstrom) Death of GSM in Washington D.C. (Kim Brennan) Caller-ID and Answering Machine Together; Screening Wish List (B Templeton) Where Do I Sign Up? (Richard Shockey) Re: AT&T Now Charges For Place Name; Raises Other Charges (Brian C. Kohn) Re: AT&T New Charges (Tony Pelliccio) Re: 10-10- Dial-Around Company List? (Dennis Metcalfe) Re: Seeking a PABX (rodeocomm@aol.com) Re: Do You Feel Like a Number? (Bill Godfrey) Re: Telco Unlimited Local Calls (Roger Fajman) All About favicon.ico - Readers Respond (TELECOM Digest Editor) Re: What is FAVICON.ICO? (Toby Nixon) 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 networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 765 Junction City, KS 66441-0765 Phone: 415-520-9905 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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: Thu, 03 Jun 1999 12:36:50 -0600 Reply-To: Joey Lindstrom Subject: So Now I'm a Racist? Says Who? On Thu, 3 Jun 1999 01:37:11 -0400 (EDT), Bob Goudreau wrote: >> If you're placing an international call, isn't is reasonable to >> expect that you would use the international dialing prefix? > Except that people who keep making this argument seem to feel that > Canada doesn't qualify as "international", and have never met my > earlier challenge of enumerating exactly what objective criteria > should be used for deciding which NANP countries should be dialable > using 1+10D and which should not. Absent such clear rules, the only > fair thing to do would be to require 011-1- on calls to *all* > international destinations, Canada included. This was, in fact, planned at one point, or at least a variation on it - according, that is, to an old friend (who I've since lost touch with) who worked at the local telco here in Calgary, Alberta (Canada). The long-range plan, which obviously was later abandoned, was to, iirc, dial Canadian numbers as 1-2-NPA-NXX-XXXX, and US numbers as 1-1-NPA-NXX-XXXX. That particularly dialing plan is now precluded for several reasons, but I see nothing wrong with going to 011 dialing between the two countries. > Yet for some reason, some people seem to feel that it would be a Bad > Thing to make it as difficult to dial those rich white Canadians as it > they'd like for it to be when dialing those poorer, predominantly-black > NANP countries in the Caribbean. I find the attitude somewhat remin- > iscent of the way that certain long distance carriers disable > calling-card calls to specific countries when the calls originate from > certain "red-lined" ethnic neighborhoods. Oh, get bent. I've been following this thread and never once did it occur to me that there might be any racist intent -- and that IS what you're accusing people of. The issue is SOLELY one of excessive rates charged to unsuspecting people. Think it through: if I read an ad in the paper and it tells me to dial a particular phone number, with an area code I'm not familiar with, I likely won't have a clue where it is. And if I live in the USA, then apparently (according to Mark Cuccia) I'm going to have to pay a buck just to find out -- assuming I'm savvy enough to even suspect that such a step is necessary. Most people (that don't subscribe to this list) don't even know that these Caribbean countries have "regular" NANPA area codes and automatically assume that the number dialed will be in the USA, or possibly Canada - but they're certainly not expecting to pay 1-900 like rates for the call. 011 serves as a "toll alert" of sorts -- if you preface your call with 011, you KNOW you're calling outside your country, and you're far more likely to look up the rates before calling if you're not familiar with them. Calls to Canada are more expensive (from the USA) than are calls within the USA, but GENERALLY speaking the price increase isn't that huge, and it's certainly quite reasonable when you think about it -- so Canada therefore "deserves" to share the same national dialing plan as the USA. But calls to some of these Caribbean nations, which APPEAR to most people to be calls within the USA, can be as high as 5000% of the cost of a within-the-USA call. That's simply too great a disparity. That's the only issue here, Bob. The skin colour of the people being called isn't the issue -- and I think it could be argued that most of the scam operators who do operate these Caribbean-based sex-lines and whatnot are, in fact, rich AMERICAN white people. You have chosen to make a connection between our resentment towards paying these usurioius rates and the fact that lots of "po' black folk" happen to live in these countries. If you're going to make that connection, then you better be prepared to back it up, because you are making a VERY serious charge. Bob, I remember in my old FidoNet days, we only had two rules. You shall not be excessively annoying, and you shall not be too easily annoyed. Both were grounds for removal from FidoNet. You have CLEARLY fallen into the both categories -- you've as much as accused us all of being closet racists. Some people here may indeed be racists -- hell, I'm no mind reader -- but some others of us resent the accusation. In fact, I resent it quite a lot. I'm not advocating your removal from our presence, but I do believe you owe us all an apology. From the messy desktop of Joey Lindstrom Email: Joey@GaryNumanFan.NU or joey@lindstrom.com Phone: +1 403 313-JOEY FAX: +1 413 643-0354 (yes, 413 not 403) Visit The NuServer! http://www.GaryNumanFan.NU Visit The Webb! http://webb.GaryNumanFan.NU I went to a fancy french restaurant called "Deja Vu." The headwaiter said, "Don't I know you?" --Steven Wright [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Even though '011' should serve as a very good toll alert, there are still ways to parse a fourteen, fifteen or sixteen digit resulting number in such a way as to trick the average user. Consider those guys who run the hot chat bridges in the Netherland Antilles, Guyana and other places (or at least that's how it appears; I don't know how AT&T actually disposes of the calls). They run their ads depicting scenes from whatever it is the callers will chat about when they call in, and they stress the point that the service is free. 'FREE! All you pay is toll charges' and b'golly, people fall for that all the time. They will display the number as 1010288-0-11-535-2941-36 and that is enough to confuse even hardened old-time telephone people like us, let alone some innocent kid home alone after school who wants to meet some new friends, etc. AT&T should absoutely insist that the conference bridges they are co-branding (and that is essentially what it amounts to; they get some guy who wants a cash cow and let him run the bridge in his name while they route the calls, and kick back to him a few cents for every caller/minute people spend on the bridge) have to be labeled honestly as to the location of the bridge and the amount per minute the 'free' service will cost. So while 011 is no guarentee people will know what they are calling, it might help. If it happens though, watch the charletans start parsing it up in funny ways to add more confusion to the mess already out there. PAT] ------------------------------ From: kim@aol.com (Kim Brennan) Date: 03 Jun 1999 23:25:03 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Subject: Death of GSM in Washington D.C. The {Washington Post} had an article in today's paper (Thursday 3 June, 1999) about Sprint converting all of their Sprint Spectrum (GSM) users over to Sprint PCS (CDMA) by November 1999. More information is available on Sprint Spectrum's web page (http://www.sprintspectrum-apc.com.) Of course, Sprint's take on this is that it's an "upgrade." I tend to disagree. While I'm not intimately familiar with the Sprint PCS capabilities I do know that my current GSM phone converage works far down the Shenandoah Valley (a drive I do on weekends), and is local coverage. The coverage maps of the SprintPCS don't come anywhere near that Virginia landmark. A miniscule line mentions that this conversion is due to a "class action suit." Somehow my inclusion(?) in that class action wasn't reported to me. I'll probably go with Sprint PCS, due to a number of factors (keeping my existing telephone number, ability to continue using a Motorola Startac) but primarily because the alternative AT&T is hardly attractive. Kim Brennan (