From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon May 13 02:01:34 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id CAA07699; Mon, 13 May 2002 02:01:34 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 13 May 2002 02:01:34 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200205130601.CAA07699@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #251 TELECOM Digest Mon, 13 May 2002 02:00:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 251 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Technologies Enabling the Telecoms Industry (Anthony E. Seigman) Re: Economics, was Re: Huge Amount of Spam Received (John Higdon) Re: Payphone Fee Scams (Steven Lichter) Re: Identifying "Out of Area" Calls Using ANI? (John Higdon) Re: Phone Won't Stop Ringing (DMSTRANS) DMS FCDRSRCH Q (DMSTRANS) Re: Need Help Toshiba PBX Perception (NOSPAM) Phone in Colors Other Than Black? (Roy Smith) Re: Setting Modem String (John David Galt) Study: Telemarketers Lose Voices (Ed Ellers) LSU Sues Law Student Over Web Site (ptownson@lcs.mit.edu) Recent News Items on Fraud, Identity Theft (Monty Solomon) ID Thieves Mine For Gold on Jail Sites (ptownson@lcs.mit.edu) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRII. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Anthony E. Seigman Subject: Re: Technologies Enabling the Telecoms Industry Date: Sat, 11 May 2002 19:25:15 -0700 Organization: Stanford University In article , John McHarry wrote: > Burt Renolds wrote: >> Could anybody give me some good resources for completing a >> presentation on technologies that enable the telecoms industry?? > Bankruptcy? Look under author Jeff Hecht on amazon.com. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 May 2002 19:25:53 -0700 Subject: Re: Economics, was Re: Huge Amount of Spam Received Recently From: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows In article telecom20.249.13@telecom-digest.org, Danny Burstein wrote: > I personally take all e-mail from that place, as well as its brethren, > and kick it into a spam box. I also filter out e-mail that asks me to > reply to one of those addresses. Does spam (other than the promotions Yahoo recently sent out that drew major criticism) REALLY come from Yahoo, or do the spammers simply forge Yahoo email addresses in the From: line? > Perhaps one piece in 50 is real. That sender, if I'm up to it, gets a > note saying "sorry, if you want your note read by a human use a real > ISP, not one whose business model assists spammers." A perusal of the headers of spam that has ostensibly come from Yahoo email addresses reveals that it originated elsewhere ... and Yahoo had nothing to do with it at any point along the route. You can hardly hold Yahoo responsible for spammers who make up Yahoo addresses and put them on their email. > Similarly, if ISPs and the gateways adopted a simple change in their > pricing schemes, then spam would drop dramatically and it would be much > easier to filter out the few remaining problems. Really serious spammers don't use ISPs at all. They buy raw bandwidth and provide their own services. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | Silicon Valley, CA | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 http://www.anntec.com/realpoop.html ------------------------------ From: stevenl11@aol.com (Steven Lichter) Date: 12 May 2002 02:48:02 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Subject: Re: Payphone Fee Scams > Now if he was calling spammers that have 800 numbers, he would be > doing mankind a favor. > So close, yet so far. Maybe we can persuade Texas to give the death penalty for spammers, they like executing people!! Apple Elite II 909-359-5338. Home of GBBS/LLUCE, support for the Apple II 24 hours 2400/14.4. An OggNet Server. The only good spammer is a dead one!!! Have you hunted one down today? (c) Kill Spammers, Inc. A Hope You Roast In Hell Company. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 May 2002 19:48:53 -0700 Subject: Re: Identifying "Out of Area" Calls Using ANI? From: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows In article telecom20.250.4@telecom-digest.org, was written: > Caller calls line A and is automatically forwarded to line B (which is > associated with my 800 #). Unfortunately the ANI that gets recorded > is the phone number of line A, not the orginal caller's number. Is > there a way to forward a call so the original ANI stays intact? > Would a call diverter work? Are there any other ways to determine an > "out of area" number without involving the telco? Short answer: no. ANI data does not travel the same highway as Caller ID information. Caller ID (an SS7 "CLASS" feature) will pass through a forwarded number as if the phone in the middle did not exist. As a matter of fact, that is almost true as far as the call setup by the STP is concerned. ANI data, on the other hand, is part of trunk-side signaling, and is never passed to customers, unless they have trunk-side connections. What you see in your Caller-ID display is never ANI, but Caller-ID, generated and passed as part of the SS7 protocol. (Sometimes IXCs will generate a CID field where none existed from the original caller and place the phone number of the caller, derived from ANI, into that field. You will then see that number on your display AND from that point on, that number would be passed through forwarding. But the few carriers that do this only do it when CID is not already present from the originating number.) I'm amazed that after a multi-year hiatus from participation in TELECOM Digest, some of the same old misconceptions linger on. At the top of the list is confusion of ANI with Caller-ID. If you always bear in mind that the purpose and implementation of each is not related to the other, it is easier to see why expected call-forwarding behavior does not occur. Think about this: if ANI were passed through a forwarded number, it would create some very disturbing effects. If your neighbor forwarded his phone to Tokyo, and you called your neighbor to chat, you certainly wouldn't want YOUR ANI passed to his long distance company, now would you? That mushi-mushi would bill to you and not him if it did! John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | Silicon Valley, CA | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 http://www.anntec.com/realpoop.html [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well John, I said this before, but it *is* good you are back. And we have so many relatively new readers/ participants in this forum, I'm not surprised to see many of the old topics getting rehashed for the benefit of newcomers. I suspect it will go on that way. PAT] ------------------------------ From: markmollig@aol.com (DMSTRANS) Subject: Re: Phone Won't Stop Ringing Date: 11 May 2002 21:14:28 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ google@fasttrackmonkey.com (CS) wrote in message news:: > Hi all, > Perhaps someone here can help me with this problem. I got a new phone > line about one month ago, and since I've had it, it rings a little > "half-ring" about once an hour. The ring is so short that caller-id > doesn't register anything. *69 doesn't return anything either. > I called Verizon, and they basically tried to sell me call-block > (which they said might not work because the calling number may not > register) or call intercept. They sent me to repair, and they > verified that it wasn't the local switch doing it's periodic "line > testing". > I don't want to pay more money to fix what must be a simple problem > ... Does anyone have any ideas short of changing my number? I'm not > even convinced it's necessarily a real call, but some screw-up at the > CO. I'm not aware of any services on my line that would cause this. > It would be cool if voicemail could ring a little reminder, but the > rep says nothing I have would account for this behaviour. It sounds like the telco is running an ALIT Automatic Line Insulation Testing. This is normally run at night, and when it tests capacitance on the line, it will somtimes cause a "phantom" ring to occur. I would ask the telco to remove your line from their ALIT run routine. dmstrans ------------------------------ From: markmollig@aol.com (DMSTRANS) Subject: DMS FCDRSRCH Q Date: 11 May 2002 21:29:25 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ This is somthing that has been bugging me for awhile, appreciate any suggestions. When we need to run a trace of the called number in our OCC Active file, I will use the SRCHFIL OCC ACTIVE & SETKEY CALLEDNO NPA.NXX.XXXX EXECSCRCH >. Anyway, when I DISPLAY the actual call records I find it very frustrating trying to figure out when the call actually takes place. There is no military time given. I will get ORIGTIME 31786 and a DISCTIME 31805. I know this is in second increments, but then to figure out how many seconds from 12:00 to figure out when the call occured drives me crazy! Is there any easy formula or way I can look at these call results and get the time the call took place easier? BTW they also have this numbering on the ORIGDATE 156. Any comments from other Translations Techs would be appreciated! Thanks! DMSTRANS ------------------------------ From: NOSPAM Subject: Re: Need Help Toshiba PBX Perception Organization: Prodigy Internet http://www.prodigy.com Date: Sun, 12 May 2002 17:56:31 GMT This site might be useful: http://www.toshiba-phones.com Do you have the login and password? Or, are you trying to program with a 20 button display set? Ray wrote in message news:telecom20.250.8@telecom-digest.org: > I have a Toshiba Perception PBX. I need help loging into the system to > change system settings. Anyone out there with experience with this > system please help me. ------------------------------ From: Roy Smith Subject: Phone in Colors Other Than Black? Date: Sun, 12 May 2002 18:01:45 -0400 Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC I watched the movie "61" this afternoon. It's about Roger Maris's attempt to break Babe Ruth's single-season home run record in 1961. Now, call me a geek, but I was surprised when the phone in the Maris's house was light blue, not black. At one point, another phone shows up in a shot with some other non-black color. Wasn't 1961 a little early for decorator color phones? [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I do not know when they started for sure; all I know is what I had. In early 1962 I lived in an apartment- hotel in Chicago, and had a two-line, turn-button, 'Palmolive Green', rotary-dial phone in my apartment. Actually two, one for my living room and one for the bedroom. Both had 25 foot green cords, and green cords from the phone to the wallbox. One side of the turn button was my personal line, HYDe Park 3-3714. The other side of the turn button was the building switchboard line. Down on the first floor in the dining room for the building they had a six-button, five line phone with a blank faceplate, since it was served entirely by the switchboard for the building. The building manager had a phone like that in her office also, but her phone had a dial on it like mine since she also had a private direct line with outside dialtone not served from the switchboard. PAT] ------------------------------ From: John David Galt Subject: Re: Setting Modem String Date: Sun, 12 May 2002 18:35:27 -0700 Organization: Diogenes the Cynic Hot-Tubbing Society Robert, A., Fink, "M. D." wrote: > I have attempted to set up a new dialup connection in DUN, but it is > not clear to me *where* I need t type in the modified modem string in > order to force the modem to connect only at v.34 or lower. Windows 98's Dial-Up Networking stores all the modem command strings it uses in the Windows Registry. To view and edit them, click the Start button, select Run, and type in REGEDIT as the program to run. Then open these folder icons (keys) in regedit's left pane: My Computer HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE System CurrentControlSet Services Class Modem 0000 If you have installed more than one modem driver on your system, the first one will have the above name, and the rest will have 0001, 0002, and so on in place of 0000. All the subkeys under 0000 (or whichever one your v.34 device is) will contain the AT command strings the driver sends to the modem. To edit a string, highlight it in the right pane and hit Return. Be sure to take notes of what you change, so that you can undo any changes if they don't work. ------------------------------ From: Ed Ellers Subject: Study: Telemarketers Lose Voices Date: Sun, 12 May 2002 21:58:37 -0400 CHICAGO (AP) -- Telemarketers are losing their voices, new research suggests. That could mean fewer interrupting phone calls at dinnertime, but the news isn't good for people whose paychecks depend on their voices. In a survey by University of Nebraska scientists, telemarketers were twice as likely to report vocal problems as non-telemarketers. About a third reported their work was hampered by an average of five symptoms, including loss of voice, hoarseness, voice-cracking and dry throat. http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A7804-2002May12?language=printer ------------------------------ From: ptownson@lcs.mit.edu Subject: LSU Sues Law Student Over Web Site Date: Sun, 12 May 2002 21:48:08 CDT http://www.newsbytes.com/news/02/176519.html LSU Sues Law Student Over Web Site By Michael Bartlett, Newsbytes BATON ROUGE, LOUISIANA, U.S.A., 10 May 2002, 4:11 PM CST Douglas Dorhauer has a tiger by the tail. The second-year student at Louisiana State University's law school is the target ... he has a web page using a name similar to a web site run by the university. They think *he* should have to get rid of his web site, because people might be confused. Go to the link at the start of this report above. 2001 Post Newsweek Tech Media Group ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 12 May 2002 23:48:21 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Recent News Headlines of Interest About Identity Theft Vulnerability Is Discovered in Security for Smart Cards By JOHN MARKOFF SAN FRANCISCO, May 12 - Two University of Cambridge computer security researchers plan to describe on Monday an ingenious and inexpensive attack that employs a $30 camera flashgun and a microscope to extract secret information contained in widely used smart cards. The newly discovered vulnerability is reason for alarm, the researchers said, because it could make it cost-effective for a criminal to steal information from the cards. Smart cards are used for dozens of different applications, including electronic identity protection, credit and debit cards and cellular phone payment and identity systems. The Cambridge researchers said they had discussed their discovery with a number of card manufacturers, and several had acknowledged the vulnerability. One company reported that its security testing teams had already considered types of attacks similar to the one mounted by the Cambridge team and that they believed their products were not vulnerable. http://www.nytimes.com/2002/05/13/technology/13SMAR.html May 13, 2002 Credit Card Theft Thrives Online as Global Market Losses Grow By MATT RICHTEL Tens of thousands of stolen credit-card numbers are being offered for sale each week on the Internet in a handful of thriving, membership-only cyberbazaars, operated largely by residents of the former Soviet Union, who have become central players in credit-card and identity theft. The marketplaces - where credit card prices fluctuate with supply and demand in a sort of black stock market - offer a window into a crime that costs the financial system $1 billion or more a year. They also show how readily personal information is being stolen and traded in the computer age. But the same Internet technology that has enabled the theft and sale of credit cards also provides a veritable transcript of the criminal activity, and a real-time peephole into the attitudes, ethic - and sometimes honor - among the thieves. The chat forums indicate as well that several dozen of the top participants recently have discussed gathering at a credit-card reseller's conference in Odessa, Ukraine, at the end of this month. http://www.nytimes.com/2002/05/13/technology/13CARD.html Large-scale identity theft is painful reminder of risk By Bruce Mohl, Globe Staff, 5/12/2002 Ford Motor Credit Co. recently sent 13,000 people certified letters warning them that an unauthorized inquiry had been made on their credit reports and that they were now at risk for credit fraud and identity theft. The letters not only were a shock to the recipients but another painful reminder of how prevalent identity theft has become. It is the fastest-growing white-collar crime in America and is being conducted on a scale unthinkable just a few years ago. Federal agencies offer all sorts of tips on how to help consumers protect their personal information to prevent identity theft, but here was a case where the thieves broke into a credit reporting agency and downloaded the files of 13,000 potential targets. ------------------------------ From: ptownson@lcs.mit.edu Subject: ID Thieves Mine For Gold on Jail Sites Date: Sun, 12 May 2002 21:22:34 -0700 ** ID thieves mine for gold on jail sites ** If keeping Social Security numbers off the Internet is a bit like trying to plug holes in a leaky dam, the U.S. justice system has left a floodgate open. http://www.msnbc.com/modules/exports/ct_email.asp?/news/750428.asp ------------------------------ 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-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-870-9697 Fax : 775-255-9970 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! 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 * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. 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. End of TELECOM Digest V20 #251 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon May 13 13:00:10 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id NAA17190; Mon, 13 May 2002 13:00:10 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 13 May 2002 13:00:10 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200205131700.NAA17190@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #252 TELECOM Digest Mon, 13 May 2002 12:59:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 252 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Telecom Update (Canada) #332, May 13, 2002 (Angus TeleManagement) Re: Telecom Update (Canada) #324, March 18, 2002 (Carl Moore) Re: Payphone Fee Scams (David L) Re: Phone in Colors Other Than Black? (Ed Ellers) Re: Cable vs DSL for IP telephony (Phil McKerracher) Re: Number Portability For Residences (Carl Moore) Re: Information Request (Carl Moore) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRII. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 13 May 2002 10:01:39 -0400 From: Angus TeleManagement Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #332, May 13, 2002 ************************************************************ TELECOM UPDATE ************************************************************ published weekly by Angus TeleManagement Group http://www.angustel.ca Number 332: May 13, 2002 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 ** GROUP TELECOM http://www.gt.ca ** LUCENT TECHNOLOGIES CANADA http://www.lucent.ca ** PRIMUS CANADA: http://www.primustel.ca ** Q9 NETWORKS: http://www.Q9.com ** TELUS: http://www.telus.com ** UNISPHERE NETWORKS: http://www.unispherenetworks.com ************************************************************ IN THIS ISSUE: ** AT&T Debtholders Seek to Replace Board ** Bell Names New CFO ** Teleglobe Layoffs and Bankruptcy Predicted ** Nipissing Towns to Get DSL ** Competitors Say Telcos Defying CRTC Directive ** GT Says Aliant Violating Tariffs ** Bell Offers Wireless Access to Desktop Resources ** RFP for Contribution Fund Administrator ** Directory Company Signs Consent Order ** Rogers Offers TV-Internet Bundles ** Sympatico Byte-Caps Start in June ** New Area Code Set for 519 ** Navigata Buys Co-Location Centres ** Financial Results Cisco Group Telecom Microcell Primus ** Pond to Head iMagic ** Is Your Data Network Ready for Voice? ============================================================ AT&T DEBTHOLDERS SEEK TO REPLACE BOARD: Holders of $458 million of AT&T Canada's debt have asked an Ontario court for the right to replace AT&T's current Board, which, they say, has been "oppressive and unfairly prejudicial" to their interests. AT&T says the application is groundless and without merit. BELL NAMES NEW CFO: After "a joint selection process conducted by both SBC and Bell," former Bell ExpressVu President David McLennan has been named Chief Financial Officer of Bell Canada. He replaces Jon Klug, who is returning to SBC. ** SBC, which owns 20% of Bell Canada, has the right to name Bell's CFO. Some observers believe McLennan's appointment reflects a decision by SBC to distance itself from Bell. ** Tim McGee, former Chief Legal Officer at Bell Canada, is now President of Bell ExpressVu. Richard Mannion is Bell's new CLO. TELEGLOBE LAYOFFS AND BANKRUPTCY PREDICTED: An unconfirmed report in the May 9 Washington Post says that Teleglobe Inc. will soon lay off 800 employees and file for bankruptcy protection. Industry rumours say that attempts to find a buyer have failed, and that the company may be liquidated. NIPISSING TOWNS TO GET DSL: The Nipissing Integrated Community Network (NipNet) and Bell Canada are partnering -- with funding from the Northern Ontario Heritage Fund and FedNor -- to extend Bell Sympatico high-speed service to 13 small towns in the North Bay area this year. ** The current issue of Telemanagement examines this and four other northern broadband initiatives. COMPETITORS SAY TELCOS DEFYING CRTC DIRECTIVE: AT&T Canada charges that Bell Canada and Telus are not providing unbundled loops to competitors within the time frames ordered by the CRTC (see Telecom Update #323). The CRTC says AT&T's application "raises serious issues" and has asked for comments. http://www.crtc.gc.ca/PartVII/Eng/2002/8622/a4-19.htm GT SAYS ALIANT VIOLATING TARIFFS: Group Telecom believed it had won a competitive tender to Memorial University in Newfoundland, but lost it when Aliant improved its bid. GT says it believes Aliant's new pricing is below-tariff and would not pass an imputation test. http://www.crtc.gc.ca/PartVII/Eng/2002/8622/g7-03.htm BELL OFFERS WIRELESS ACCESS TO DESKTOP RESOURCES: Using technology from Vancouver-based Motivus Software, Bell Mobility now offers access to desktop files, e-mails, and attachments from a wireless PDA or laptop. RFP FOR CONTRIBUTION FUND ADMINISTRATOR: The Canadian Portable Contribution Consortium has issued a Request for Proposals for a vendor to serve as the Administrator of the National Contribution Fund from 2003 through 2005. Proposals are due by June 28. To receive the RFP, call Stephen Whitehead at 613-236-3882, or e-mail whitehead@johnstonbuchan.com. DIRECTORY COMPANY SIGNS CONSENT ORDER: The Competition Bureau says that Phone Directories Company Inc. has paid a $5,000 penalty and consented to a 10-year order requiring it not to make false or misleading claims. Businesses in the Kamloops and Okanagan Valley areas of B.C. complained that the U.S.- based company misled them about publication dates, number of copies distributed, and distribution area. ROGERS OFFERS TV-INTERNET BUNDLES: Rogers Cable has begun offering various combinations of digital TV channels bundled with Hi-Speed Internet for $99.95 a month, or with "Hi-Speed Lite" for $79.99, to customers who own or purchase a digital set-top box. SYMPATICO BYTE-CAPS START IN JUNE: Bell Canada says that new options on Sympatico Internet service -- including controversial charges for usage above preset monthly limits -- will be introduced in mid-to-late June. The changes were first described publicly in Telecom Update #330. ** The Toronto Star quotes Rogers Cable VP Alex Krstajic as saying the cableco will implement a similar byte cap this summer. NEW AREA CODE SET FOR 519: The North American Numbering Plan administrator has assigned 226 as the second area code in 519, to be introduced in 2005. (See Telecom Update #330) NAVIGATA BUYS CO-LOCATION CENTRES: Navigata Communications, formerly RSL Com Canada and now a unit of SaskTel, has bought co-location facilities in Vancouver and Calgary from BridgePoint International. (See Telecom Update #318) FINANCIAL RESULTS: ** Cisco Systems reports sales of US$4.8 billion for the quarter ended April 27, about the same as the previous quarter and 2% more than last year. Net income was $729 million, 10% more than the previous quarter. The day following this announcement, Cisco shares rose 24%. ** Group Telecom's first quarter sales were $57.6 million, 19% more than last year but 6% less than the previous quarter. The EBITDA loss was $10.8 million, compared to $24.8 million last year. ** Microcell Telecommunications had first quarter sales of $140 million, 17% more than last year; its net loss was $95.3 million. Microcell added 26,566 net subscribers, compared to 56,339 last year. Three days before Microcell's report, Moody's reduced the cellco's debt rating. ** Primus Telecom Canada had first quarter net revenue of $66.1 million and EBITDA of $15 million. This is the first time that the wholly owned unit of Virginia-based Primus Telecom has reported financial results. POND TO HEAD IMAGIC: Gerry Pond has been named CEO of iMagicTV, whose software delivers TV signals over phone lines. Until December 2001, Pond was EVP of Aliant, a part-owner of iMagic. IS YOUR DATA NETWORK READY FOR VOICE? In the May issue of Telemanagement, Jay Brandstadter analyzes the hidden cost of many Voice over IP installations: complex and expensive LAN/WAN upgrades. Also in Telemanagement #195: ** Speech Recognition Software Put to the Test ** First Steps in Disaster Planning ** Lessons from a Continent-Wide Multimedia Call Centre Single copies of Telemanagement #195 are $75 each -- call 905-686-5050 ext 500 and charge to Visa, American Express, or Mastercard. Save 49% with a 10-issue subscription -- go to http://www.angustel.ca/teleman/tm-sub.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 2. The e-mail edition is distributed free of charge. To subscribe, send an e-mail message to: TelecomUpdate@add.postmastergeneral.com To stop receiving the e-mail edition, send an e-mail message to: TelecomUpdate@remove.postmastergeneral.com Sending e-mail to these addresses will automatically add or remove the sender's e-mail address from the list. Leave subject line and message area blank. We do not give Telecom Update subscribers' e-mail addresses to any third party. For more information, see http://www.angustel.ca/update/privacy.html. =========================================================== COPYRIGHT AND CONDITIONS OF USE: All contents copyright 2002 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 500. The information and data included has been obtained from sources which we believe to be reliable, but Angus TeleManagement makes no warranties or representations whatsoever regarding accuracy, completeness, or adequacy. Opinions expressed are based on interpretation of available information, and are subject to change. If expert advice on the subject matter is required, the services of a competent professional should be obtained. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 May 2002 09:54:07 EDT From: Carl Moore Subject: Re: Telecom Update (Canada) #324, March 18, 2002 I found this: > TIW PULLS OUT OF BRAZIL: Telesystem International Wireless > says it is withdrawing from the Brazilian market in order to > concentrate on its wireless holdings in Czechoslovakia and > Romania. Czechoslovakia? Why does it not account for split of that country into Czech & Slovak republics? ------------------------------ From: davidlind@my-deja.com (David L) Subject: Re: Payphone Fee Scams Date: 13 May 2002 06:30:22 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ aes wrote in message news:: > In article , Tom Williams > wrote: >> A talk show radio show host started his program tonight by talking >> about an interesting payphone scam. It seems that some clever folks >> installed payphones in their houses. They then proceeded to call as >> many toll free 800 type numbers as possible, collecting the 24 cent >> fee from each. One guy racked up over $5,000,000! Now they're >> starting to be indicted. > Why is this a "scam", exactly? I've long wondered if I could do this, > and then sit around at odd hours dialing back to all the 800 numbers > of all the b-----ds who send me spam faxes. Might be nasty -- but > what rules does it violate? I don't know how they would ever find a jury, let alone get one to convict someone of calling junk faxers. I've called some Fax spammers back on payphones. It's strangely satisfying. David ------------------------------ From: Ed Ellers Subject: Re: Phone in Colors Other Than Black? Date: Mon, 13 May 2002 11:49:53 -0400 Roy Smith wrote: > I watched the movie "61" this afternoon. It's about Roger Maris's attempt > to break Babe Ruth's single-season home run record in 1961. > Now, call me a geek, but I was surprised when the phone in the > Maris's house was light blue, not black. At one point, another > phone shows up in a shot with some other non-black color. Wasn't > 1961 a little early for decorator color phones? Not at all. AFAIK, general availability of other colors in the Bell System was in the mid-1950s, with some non-black phones having been available on a custom basis as far back as the 1930s (white 202 sets can be seen in a number of old movies). One goof I have been seeing in films and TV shows is that modular phones (made in the 1970s-1980s) are often used in scenes that take place before the mini-modular system was introduced; while the 500, 554 and other phones look basically the same, the cords look different. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I do not know when they started for > sure; all I know is what I had. In early 1962 I lived in an apartment- > hotel in Chicago, and had a two-line, turn-button, 'Palmolive Green', > rotary-dial phone in my apartment. Actually two, one for my living > room and one for the bedroom. Both had 25 foot green cords, and green > cords from the phone to the wallbox. One side of the turn button was > my personal line, HYDe Park 3-3714. The other side of the turn button > was the building switchboard line. Down on the first floor in the > dining room for the building they had a six-button, five line phone > with a blank faceplate, since it was served entirely by the switchboard > for the building. The building manager had a phone like that in her > office also, but her phone had a dial on it like mine since she also > had a private direct line with outside dialtone not served from the > switchboard. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Phil McKerracher Subject: Re: Cable vs DSL for IP telephony Date: Mon, 13 May 2002 13:07:25 +0100 Chip G wrote in message news:telecom20.249.2@telecom-digest.org: > The keys to successful use of VoIP are many. In general, I think you > will have the same experiences whether you are using DSL or cable > modem. Some considerations: [Lots of good stuff snipped] > ...3. Minimal lost packets (while e-mail and web traffic can be pretty > forgiving, voice and video need reliable streams of data. That is why > you generally see them implemented via UDP instead of TCP. If too many > packets are lost, the conversation can become unintelligible ... I think you might be misunderstanding this. If UPD packets lost they stay lost, whereas with TCP they get retransmitted until they arrive intact. UDP is unreliable, TCP is reliable. UDP is generally used for VoIP because the occasional lost packet is preferable to a delay while retransmission takes place. Phil McKerracher www.mckerracher.org ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 May 2002 09:40:41 EDT From: Carl Moore Subject: Re: Number Portability For Residences It came to my attention that special services like call forwarding were lost when I had my phone service moved to my present home, and this happened later when I took up the then Conectiv-Communications local-calling plan, ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 May 2002 09:51:35 EDT From: Carl Moore Subject: Re: Information Request Delaware, where I no longer live, went to countywide calling areas some years ago, but there is noise at least at the New Castle-Kent county line, because the Smyrna exchange, whose area of service is apparently MOSTLY in Kent County, does spill over into far southern New Castle County. ------------------------------ 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-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-870-9697 Fax : 775-255-9970 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! 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 * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. 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. End of TELECOM Digest V20 #252 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed May 15 21:03:52 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id VAA04192; Wed, 15 May 2002 21:03:52 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 21:03:52 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200205160103.VAA04192@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #253 TELECOM Digest Wed, 15 May 2002 21:00:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 253 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Adminsitrivia: Some Messages Lost in Transit (editor@telecom-digest.org) Re: Best Way to Keep Children Safe on the Net (lizard@saurasite.com) Local Governments Sue FCC Over Cable Ruling Losses (Monty Solomon) Attack of the Phone Cloners (Marcus Didius Falco) Rural Telecoms Voice Support For Breaux-Nickles Broadband (Marcus Falco) Re: Phone in Colors Other Than Black? (Tom Brown) Re: Legitimate Enhanced Cell Phone Antenna? (Marcus Didius Falco) Defnity R 9.5 R-10 Software (vivek) Re: Change Local Service, Keep My Number? (maryjane@oblivian.net) Re: Phone Won't Stop Ringing (Steve Michelson) Re: Economics, was Re: Huge Amount of Spam Received Recently (Geof Welsh) Re: Economics, was Re: Huge Amount of Spam Received Recently (C. Zwanzig) Last Laugh! Sorry, Wrong Number (1999 Story) (Carl Moore) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRII. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: editor@telecom-digest.org (TELECOM Digest Editor) Date Wed, 15 May 2002 00:00:00 CDT Subject: Administrivia: Some Messages Lost in Transit On Tuesday, May 14 I recieved a larger than usual amount of virus messages and spam. Most days there are around 75-100 virus messages and the same number of spam messages. In the process of sweeping it all into the bit bucket, about a dozen good messages got tossed also. (Sorry). It was impossible to recover them. What you see in this issue is the remains of what was available to me as of about 7 pm, Wednesday. If your message is not here, you will need to resubmit it with my apologies for the mishandling. ------------------------------ From: lizard@saurasite.com Subject: Re: Best Way to Keep Children Safe on the Net Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 22:47:14 +0200 On Mon, 06 May 2002 21:05:31 -0700, in comp.dcom.telecom you wrote: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But the use of .com internationally > usually is done like this: somesite.com.uk or somesite.com.ca. And Pat, while it's nice to see you back, it's NOT nice to see you so confused. Uk would be "somesite.co.uk" for example, and a similiar site in S.Africa would be "somesite.co.za" ... However, having said that, there is no problem registering a South African (or presumably from almost any other coutry) site as a .com .... I have one myself, and I'm in Cape Town. > Tell me this: if the year was 1975 or 1980 and the suggestion was made > to hook all, or a major portion of the homes in the USA with computers > all wired together through a network, how many objections and reasons 1975 ?? I would probably have wondered about your sanity. 1980 ?? I would have thought you were a visionary -- I was just one of many who were just starting to dream of things like that by 1980. Of course overexposure to good SF probably had a lot to do with that! [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well okay, it is 2002 and you may either question my sanity or consider me a visionary; your choice. You can either shape up and do it right, or the government will see to it that you don't do it at all. Substitute 'do it' and 'don't do it' with the verbs of your choice. I am **not** a fan of big government (or any government at all, as I believe the ONLY legitimate purpose of government is to do what we cannot conveniently do for ourselves, i.e fire protection, street/sewer/water repairs, etc). But you may be assured, most assuredly, the government is looking at the internet with hungry eyes. One more big, juicy, good thing to regulate. We've already seen hints of the government power involved. Best get your acts together, even if some of you sysadmins need to put in some overtime on the job. Begin tacking and taping up the electronic 'no minors allowed' signs. Do everything in your power to make entry into 'adult' establishments on the net as difficult as possible. Remember, nothing works perfectly. Just get your corner swept out and in order, and encourage your nearby net neighbors to do the same. Just as you have seen the net go from nothing to everything in twenty years, assume twenty years from now this place will be crawling with all sorts of new people looking for ways to break social rules and get away with it. You are correct; in other than USA sites, the 'com' locations are expressed as 'co.uk' or 'co.ca' etc. (In other words the 'commercial' phrase comes in the middle and the country name is the suffix, and the /m/ is elimiated in com.) PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 18:46:35 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Local Governments Sue FCC Over Cable Ruling Losses By Christina Ling WASHINGTON, May 14 (Reuters) - Groups representing the nation's local governments on Tuesday said they were suing the Federal Communications Commission in federal court over a ruling they say will cost them $300 million in revenues from lost cable fees this fiscal year alone. The lawsuit concerns the FCC's March decision to insulate high-speed Internet services offered by cable companies like AOL Time Warner Inc (NYSE:AOL) and AT&T Broadband (NYSE:T) from extensive regulations. The FCC tentatively concluded that, under the law, local authorities are not allowed to charge a fee for the cable Internet service like the fee currently charged for video programming offered by the cable operators. http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=27169812 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 20:42:53 -0400 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Attack of the Phone Cloners NewsScan Daily, 14 May 2002 ("Above The Fold") ATTACK OF THE PHONE CLONERS A team of engineers from IBM and the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology have found a way to capture the data necessary to "clone" a cell phone in 60 seconds. Previous methods used to copy the identifying data that enables calls to be charged to another person's phone took about eight hours. The researchers found that they could gain valuable information about the numerical "key" a phone uses to uniquely identify its owner by timing how long the phone's chip took to complete certain tasks and by measuring changing current flows across the chip. Taken together, the information revealed what was being done to the numerical key. The researchers say that chips can be protected against this type of espionage by making sure all computational tasks take the same amount of time, or by changing the way a chip carries out certain computations. (BBC News 14 May 2002) http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_1984000/1984887.stm SMART CARDS REVEAL ALL DURING CAMERA FLASH A flash of light can cause sensitive information stored on a smart card microprocessor to be revealed, say UK researchers at Cambridge University, who've found that firing light from an ordinary camera flash at parts of a smart card chip can assist a thief in determining the sensitive information stored on the card, including the cryptographic key used to secure financial transactions. The attack is described as "semi-invasive," as only part of a chip's protective covering must be removed in order to "flash" it. Meanwhile, another group at Cambridge has developed a microchip design that would resist this technique, using a more complex "asynchronous" microprocessor that would not respond in the same way to light interference. (New Scientist 13 May 2002) http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99992273 Direct replies are unlikely to be read. To reply use the address below: falco_marcus_didius yahoo.co.uk ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 20:48:55 -0400 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Rural Telecoms Voice Support For Breaux-nickles Broadband CQ Daily Monitor Midday Update 5-14-02 RURAL TELECOMS VOICE SUPPORT FOR BREAUX-NICKLES BROADBAND BILL Executives from 62 rural telephone companies wrote to Sens. John B. Breaux, D-La., and Don Nickles, R-Okla. today supporting legislation (S 2430) the pair cosponsored that would direct the Federal Communications Commission to put telephone companies on equal regulatory footing with their cable counterparts for high-speed Internet services. Telephone companies, notably the regional Bells, are restricted by the 1996 telecommunications law (PL 104-104) from offering broadband services until they have demonstrated they have opened their local markets to competition. They also must lease their lines to rivals at FCC-regulated rates. Cable providers, which have almost 70 percent of the broadband market, are not subject to such regulations. The rural companies said the bill would help to lower their costs, which are on average higher than the rest of the industry. The measure is opposed by Commerce Chairman Ernest F. Hollings, D-S.C., who has introduced competing legislation (S 2448) that would authorize billions in grants and loan guarantees to speed broadband deployment in rural and underserved areas. Direct replies are unlikely to be read. To reply use the address below: falco_marcus_didius yahoo.co.uk ------------------------------ From: kibri@eudoramail.com (Tom Brown) Subject: Re: Phone in Colors Other Than Black? Date: 14 May 2002 20:27:03 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Ed Ellers wrote in message news:: > Roy Smith wrote: >> I watched the movie "61" this afternoon. It's about Roger Maris's attempt >> to break Babe Ruth's single-season home run record in 1961. >> Now, call me a geek, but I was surprised when the phone in the >> Maris's house was light blue, not black. At one point, another >> phone shows up in a shot with some other non-black color. Wasn't >> 1961 a little early for decorator color phones? > Not at all. AFAIK, general availability of other colors in the Bell > System was in the mid-1950s, with some non-black phones having been > available on a custom basis as far back as the 1930s (white 202 sets > can be seen in a number of old movies). As A followup to Pat and Roy's comments. I was just at the Telco Museum in San Francisco at the Fromer Pac Bell HQ (Pioneers museum) they have a sample case with sample plastic phone colors (miniature phones) in tan, deep brown, green (avocado), Gray, red, P. Blue and Yellow. These are for 1950's Phones. In my collection I have 500 desk sets in gray, brown, red, lt. blue, dark blue (at&t), black, orange, avocado, tan, white (500 type dial sets). If you count ITT and Stromberg Carlson type 500 sets there are even more colors (I forgot Pink). I just today repaired a 1960 Princess Rose Beige (Pink) near mint phone for a local antique dealer, she also hav a 1960 Powder Blue with original box! They all are tested and working, the princess is so old it needs a wall ringer (no bell inside, only a lead slug). For Pat, on a related topic, I have a WE Touch tone that has the switch on the faceplate, In addition, it hs the left switch hook that lifts up to a second position when the receiver is off the hook, Like a data phone, any comments or insights on what it might have been for (a hint) it has the silver metal connector rather than standard one, and 8 pins are soldered with wires in the connector. All of my colleagues know it is a mulit line phone, no one has any idea of the reason for the odd arrangement. Thanks for your help folks! Tom (Please No Spam) Yes, I am still looking for Autovon Stuff too (Phone Sets) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That lifted-out left plunger on the phone hook was the equivilent of an 'exclusion key'. You've heard of that, I assume. Those took a two-pair (or larger) cable coming in from the telco central office. That phone instrument was the first one on the line, with other, 'extension' phones following on the same number. The phone pair came into the premises on one pair, was split inside the phone by lifting that plunger and forcing two metal clips inside the phone apart from each other, thus splitting the connection. Then the second pair in the phone cable coming in was used to take the same connection back out to other extension phones on the premises. When the user on the 'master phone' (the first one on the line, with the splitter) wanted privacy in his calls he merely had to lift the left plunger and the other phones down the line would go dead. Once that user would hang up, the other phones would come back to life. If privacy was not needed, he simply would not raise the plunger up all the way. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 00:16:27 -0400 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Re: Legitimate Enhanced Cell Phone Antenna? At 04:17 PM 5/8/2002, editor@telecom-digest.org noted in response to rock_spambust_violin@yahoo.com (Tom Hansen) who said: > I have a Nokia 5165, and there are spots in my home where I just can't > get a signal. > I know that the antenna on my unit is replaceable. Are there > LEGITIMATE replacement antennas that can improve reception? (I'm NOT > TALKING those totally fake "cell phone antenna booster" things that > are advertised on cable.) > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have two Nokia 5165 phones and do not > know how to 'replace the antenna'. I know Mike Sandman (mike@sandman.com) > has a pretty good external antenna that stands in the corner on a pole > and attaches externally to the Nokia antenna stub. He also knows the > source for an external (rooftop or side of building) antenna that you > point in the direction of the cell site which then comes on a cable to > inside your building where a booster unit retransmits the signal to > the cell phone's own antenna. Ask Mike what advice he would give on > this. PAT] I did a google search some weeks ago and found a number of cell phone linear amplifiers and antennae. However, they connect directly to the cell phone. There are some that are "passive," but they are designed for use in the car, and connect through the windshield. There is supposedly a good brand (which I've forgotten). An amplifier or antenna that connects directly to the phone will keep you from moving around. If you're looking for backup service in case of natural disaster, you should know that the recent tornado in La Plata, MD (a force 4, downgraded from force 5), took out enough cellular towers so that there was no cellular service in town. Direct replies are unlikely to be read. To reply use the address below: falco_marcus_didius yahoo.co.uk ------------------------------ From: vivek Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 23:50:58 +0530 Subject: Definity R9.5 R-10 Software Hi, all you need to go for voip on your existing Definity is to go for R 9.5 or R 10 software and buy a clan and a medpro card. Being a part of Avaya India, I would recommend you to go for R 10 as you will get some features better than existing in R 9.5 ... cya, vivek ------------------------------ From: maryjane@oblivian.net Subject: Re: Change Local Service, Keep My Number? Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 13:41:00 GMT Organization: Cox Communications You can go back and forth all you want (at least in California you can) but you must not issue a disconnect order. It must be a transfer-of-carrier order with no interruption in service. That is the protocol for retaining your number. Carl Moore wrote: > Before I write of my own situation, what prompted the comment > about changing from Cavalier back to Verizon? > My own local service is currently thru Cavalier, because it picked up > (from Conectiv Communications, affiliated with my local electric > supplier) the local-service plan which included northern Delaware, and > I do have some traffic going from my phone into Delaware. This plan > was made available in the Elkton and North East exchanges way up in > the northeastern corner of Maryland, and the calling areas going back > to C&P have no local service to Delaware, even from Elkton to Newark. > In changing the local service from Verizon to Conectiv (and then > having Cavalier pick it up) my number stayed the same, and I don't > know what would become of my number if I changed back to Verizon. ------------------------------ From: Steve Michelson Subject: Re: Phone Won't Stop Ringing Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 13:24:11 -0400 Organization: ITS - NetNews One reason a "half-ring" would occur is if you have activated call forwarding. Whenever a call comes in, it gets forwarded to the new number, and the phone at the location of the actual dialed number gets a little "chirp" of a ring to remind you that the feature is active. If you are getting calls regularly, then it's possible that your line has selective call forwarding that is activated for one or more numbers. Perhaps the previous "owner" of the number had set that up? Find out what the deactivation code for call forwarding is, and dial it. See if that fixes the problem. CS wrote in message news:telecom20.246.12@telecom-digest.org: > Hi all, > Perhaps someone here can help me with this problem. I got a new phone > line about one month ago, and since I've had it, it rings a little > "half-ring" about once an hour. The ring is so short that caller-id > doesn't register anything. *69 doesn't return anything either. ------------------------------ From: Geoffrey Welsh Subject: Re: Economics, was Re: Huge Amount of Spam Received Recently Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 15:00:49 -0400 Organization: Bell Sympatico John Higdon wrote: > Does spam (other than the promotions Yahoo recently sent out that drew > major criticism) REALLY come from Yahoo, or do the spammers simply > forge Yahoo email addresses in the From: line? Although Yahoo is a popular domain to use when forging "From" addresses, at work I see several spam a day that really do come from/through Yahoo servers (verified that the IP addresses of the servers connecting to mine are registered to Yahoo at ARIN.) I don't know what changed not too long ago to make it practical for spammers to send bulk mail via Yahoo accounts -- and Yahoo still delivers only a fraction of the spam that we receive -- but something has changed and made Yahoo a significant spam delivery mechanism. > Really serious spammers don't use ISPs at all. They buy raw > bandwidth and provide their own services. For hosting web sites, cgi scripts, and even their own DNS servers, yes ... but the spam is customarily sent via throwaway ISP accounts so that it doesn't matter to the spammer that the account may be canceled within hours. Sending from an unrelated account gives spammers the opportunity to tell the companies that host their web sites or provide connectivity that they were innocent bystanders and not connected with the bulk e-mail. As ISPs became more likely to dismiss such claims quickly, spammers were even hosting their spamvertised web sites on dial-up accounts and only using their 'permanent' connectivity to operate DNS servers so that they could move the web site as soon as the dial-up account was cancelled. It's difficult to convince most ISPs to act quickly to disconnect a customer on the basis that they are operating a DNS service that facilitates moving web sites quickly so that they can continue to profit from spamming even as other companies' abuse desks disconnect their web servers. Today many spammers host in China, where complaints currently seem to fall on deaf ears (much as they had done in the past in other places such as Russia or Costa Rica ... but what internet transit provider is going to entertain appeals to disconnect China Telecom because they host spammers' web sites ... and, if they do, where will the next spammer-friendly hosting haven be? The spammers will continue to play this game indefinitely because it doesn't cost much to play and there's always another sucker to be found. So, what is needed to curtail spam? First and foremost, internet service and access providers need to take it seriously and invest in enforcing anti-spam policies, something that I do not expect to happen while the companies are giving higher priority to reducing expenses such as payroll rather than conserving bandwidth. Much of the spam distribution channel would be rendered nonfunctional if more internet service providers blocked incoming connections to proxy servers and outgoing connections to mail servers other than their own (already a common practice) and access providers included -- and enforced -- a clause requiring their customers to secure their mail and proxy servers. Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.361 / Virus Database: 199 - Release Date: 07/05/2002 ------------------------------ From: zbang@Radix.Net (Carl Zwanzig) Subject: Re: Economics, was Re: Huge Amount of Spam Received Recently Date: 15 May 2002 19:39:42 GMT Organization: RadixNet Internet Services NOSPAM wrote: > Once we stop UCE, we should all go after all of the businesses that > send out millions of tons of paper to our US Post mail boxes which > ultimately becomes millions of tons of paper in our land-fills and > millions of dead trees in our forest. At the same time, go after all of the people not recycling those mailers, and the municipalities that don't have easy recycling programs. z! ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 17:24:38 EDT From: Carl Moore Subject: Last Laugh! Sorry, Wrong Number (1999 Story) I noticed this but it's from 3 years back: Sorry, wrong number -- Mixed-up callers take their O.J. Simpson anger out on local lawyer. Boston Globe, March 21, 1999 ------------------------------ 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-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-870-9697 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! 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 * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. 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. End of TELECOM Digest V20 #253 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri May 17 00:38:00 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id AAA24700; Fri, 17 May 2002 00:38:00 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 00:38:00 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200205170438.AAA24700@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #254 TELECOM Digest Fri, 17 May 2002 00:37:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 254 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Economics, was Re: Huge Amount of Spam Received (Barry Margolin) Blocking Clients From Non-ISP Mail Servers? Bad idea. (Joey Lindstrom) Technology and Costs Involved in Setting Up Call Card Operation (Sid S.) Re: Phone in Colors Other Than Black? (BV124@aol.com) Telcordia Certification? (Ray) Global Positioning / Accuracy is Addictive (Monty Solomon) Re: Legitimate Enhanced Cell Phone Antenna? (James Gifford) Re: Backup Phone Service (Colin Sutton) AT&T Sparkletone(sm) (Jack Dominey) Re: Phone in Colors Other Than Black? (Tom Brown) Question on Avaya Legend (Aaron Anodide) Toll Free 800 Needed for UK Termination (Judith Oppenheimer) Telecom Bait-n-Switch: How to Fight? (Yuri Victorovich) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRII. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Barry Margolin Subject: Re: Economics, was Re: Huge Amount of Spam Received Recently Organization: Genuity, Woburn, MA Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 01:04:16 GMT In article , Geoffrey Welsh wrote: > John Higdon wrote: >> Does spam (other than the promotions Yahoo recently sent out that drew >> major criticism) REALLY come from Yahoo, or do the spammers simply >> forge Yahoo email addresses in the From: line? > Although Yahoo is a popular domain to use when forging "From" > addresses, at work I see several spam a day that really do come > from/through Yahoo servers (verified that the IP addresses of the > servers connecting to mine are registered to Yahoo at ARIN.) > I don't know what changed not too long ago to make it practical for > spammers to send bulk mail via Yahoo accounts -- and Yahoo still > delivers only a fraction of the spam that we receive -- but something > has changed and made Yahoo a significant spam delivery mechanism. Maybe this stuff is actually coming from Yahoo and their affiliates. Yahoo has an account option for whether you're willing to get mail from them and their affiliates offering services, and a few weeks ago they blanket-changed all their members' options to "Yes". So now all the people who haven't gone in and changed their settings back are presumably getting all these advertisements. Barry Margolin, barmar@genuity.net Genuity, Woburn, 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. ------------------------------ From: Joey Lindstrom Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 19:54:53 -0600 Reply-To: Joey Lindstrom Subject: Blocking Clients From Non-ISP Mail Servers? Bad Idea. On Wed, 15 May 2002 21:03:52 -0400 (EDT), Geoffrey Welsh wrote: > So, what is needed to curtail spam? First and foremost, internet > service and access providers need to take it seriously and invest in > enforcing anti-spam policies, something that I do not expect to happen > while the companies are giving higher priority to reducing expenses > such as payroll rather than conserving bandwidth. Much of the spam > distribution channel would be rendered nonfunctional if more internet > service providers blocked incoming connections to proxy servers and > outgoing connections to mail servers other than their own (already a > common practice) and access providers included -- and enforced -- a > clause requiring their customers to secure their mail and proxy > servers. I have to object to this idea of preventing users (dial-up, DSL, whatever) from connecting their mail clients to mail servers other than that of the ISP. A LOT of people have a legitimate need to connect to another mail server, maybe the company mail server or something like that. NetZero started doing that here in Calgary - three people that I know of left them for that reason. I myself have dedicated DSL connectivity and host several domain names on behalf of friends and a few business clients: they need to be able to connect to MY mail server. Your proposal would prevent this. / From the desk of Joey Lindstrom / When in danger or in doubt, run in circles, scream and shout. / -- Dr. Richard Ames, "The Cat Who Walks Through Walls" / (Robert Heinlein) ------------------------------ From: nysharan@yahoo.com (Sid S.) Subject: Technology and Costs Involved in Setting up Calling Card Operation Date: 15 May 2002 19:29:13 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Hello there, I am looking for detailed and complete information on technology, costs, resources, companies that would have expertise on setting this up. For a basic acceptable system what would typical costs be? How much time are we looking at here to set this up? Are there any resources on the Internet that I could look up? Any information/leads/links etc. are greatly appreciated. Thanks, SS ------------------------------ From: BV124@aol.com Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 22:52:48 EDT Subject: Re: Phone in Colors Other Than Black? I believe that the "pull up" button on the left side (or the switch hook on the wall version) also acted as a 'hold' key. I.E., if you were talking on Line#1 and Line#2 rang, you "pulled up" the button (or switch hook) and it "answered" the 2nd line. Then you could use the face place button to switch back and forth between the two lines. When you pushed the "hook/button" back to its "rest" position, it released the other line. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That is correct, and there was a *third* position for the turn button as well. In addition to being able to turn it one way or the other while switching lines (using the plunger/hook in the upright position to hold the call on the other line), you could also momentarily press down on the button to connect mementarily another pair of contacts. This allowed for a buzzer in some other extension phone, informing the person there to pick up the incoming call on line one or (twist the button) line two. Or you could put the incoming call on hold (raise the plunger) and consult with a person on the other line (twist the button, dial the other number) or twist the button, then momentarily depress it and consult with another person on a direct-connect style line. Those phones had several standard ways of using the colored wire pairs. Red/green was pair one, yellow/black was pair two, and blue/white was pair three. That blue/ white pair three could be used different ways, depending on how it was wired. Momentarily connected, it would serve to buzz a 'buzzer' on the other end. Momentarily sent to ground, it was used for a coin-bypass mechanism on old fashioned payphones where money was required to get a dialtone or an operator's response. I dunno how many of you remember hearing my experience *many years ago* wiring up a coin by-pass on the payphone in my uncle's Walgreen drugstore so he could get his local calls free. In general practice, if the phone was a two-line turn button model, then the raised left plunger was to hold the other line and if there was no turn-button for a second line then it was used as an 'exclusion key'. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Ray Subject: Telcordia Certification? Organization: BELLSOUTH.net Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 23:16:27 -0400 I was wondering if anyone that frequents this group is Telcordia certified in SS7? If so, are there study guides available like there are for MS certification? My experience with SS7 is mostly ISUP Call processing and TCAP AIN 0.1 Office Triggers. I can imagine there's a lot more needed for certification. What study material is available? If you are certified, did it help you with your career? Thanks, Ray ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 23:57:36 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Global Positioning / Accuracy is Addictive From The Economist print edition The invention of GPS married ideas from quantum mechanics and relativity with the need to track Russian satellites. Most remarkable of all, the concept-now the basis of a $12 billion industry-was put together over a single weekend. http://www.economist.com/science/tq/displayStory.cfm?story_id=1020779 ------------------------------ From: James Gifford Subject: Re: Legitimate Enhanced Cell Phone Antenna? Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 22:07:56 -0700 Organization: Nitrosyncretic Press Marcus Didius Falco wrote: > If you're looking for backup service in case of natural disaster, you > should know that the recent tornado in La Plata, MD (a force 4, > downgraded from force 5), took out enough cellular towers so that > there was no cellular service in town. Having seen more than one really, really ugly infestation of celltoweritis, I'd bet there are towns that would pay the tornado a bounty. :) | James Gifford - Nitrosyncretic Press | | http://www.nitrosyncretic.com for the Heinlein FAQ & more | | Tired of auto-spam... change "not" to "net" for replies | ------------------------------ From: Colin Sutton Subject: Re: Backup Phone Service Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 13:15:44 GMT Organization: BigPond Internet Services (http://www.bigpond.net.au) Marcus Didius Falco wrote in message news:telecom20.253.7@telecom-digest.org: [...] > If you're looking for backup service in case of natural disaster, you > should know that the recent tornado in La Plata, MD (a force 4, > downgraded from force 5), took out enough cellular towers so that > there was no cellular service in town. The bush fires south of Sydney last Christmas did the same. For 3 days we had no power, no phone, the only access road was blocked, so no way to buy food or candles. Luckily we had a gas barbeque and slowly melting food in the freezer. The weather at least was hot, but a pity about all those ashes falling on the beach. The mobile phone returned to service after the landline. Colin Sutton ------------------------------ From: Jack Dominey Subject: AT&T Sparkletone(sm) Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 11:33:12 -0400 Organization: The Maynard G. Krebs Memorial Work(!?)station Reply-To: look@my.sig In response to moderator PATs query about the AT&T Sparkletone(sm), I got the following from AT&T Network Services: "The Sparkletone will not interfere with fax machines or modems because it will play during that brief instant before the call is answered at the distant end. Fax machines and modems synchronize with each other after the connection has been established and the call is answered. "To further validate this point, AT&T has played a Sparkletone on the calls of more than 20 million customers during the past couple of years without a single problem with a fax machine or modem." The Sparkletone is a new feature for the AT&T Unlimited calling plan, but has been used for some time on AT&T Calling Card calls. Jack Dominey AT&T High Availability and Security Services ------------------------------ From: kibri@eudoramail.com (Tom Brown) Subject: Re: Phone in Colors Other Than Black? Date: 16 May 2002 08:57:55 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ kibri@eudoramail.com (Tom Brown) wrote in message news:: Ed Ellers wrote in message news:: Pat -- Thanks for the comments on the odd phone I mentioned, you are the first person who could explain exactly what it was and what it did. I have been wondering about that phone for almost a year. I knew it was multi line, I did not know about the exclusion switch. In looking at other phones in the collection, I see that feature on one other 5 line key phone, and on my 5 line autovon key phone also. Many thanks! Tom > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That lifted-out left plunger on the > phone hook was the equivilent of an 'exclusion key'. You've heard > of that, I assume. Those took a two-pair (or larger) cable coming in > from the telco central office. That phone instrument was the first > one on the line, with other, 'extension' phones following on the > same number. The phone pair came into the premises on one pair, > was split inside the phone by lifting that plunger and forcing two > metal clips inside the phone apart from each other, thus splitting > the connection. Then the second pair in the phone cable coming in > was used to take the same connection back out to other extension > phones on the premises. When the user on the 'master phone' (the > first one on the line, with the splitter) wanted privacy in his calls > he merely had to lift the left plunger and the other phones down the > line would go dead. Once that user would hang up, the other phones > would come back to life. If privacy was not needed, he simply would > not raise the plunger up all the way. PAT] ------------------------------ From: anodide@hotmail.com (Aaron Anodide) Subject: Question on Avaya Legend Date: 16 May 2002 10:53:03 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Hello, I am working on custom auto attendant software that will (hopefully) integrate to the Legend. It seems to have a behavior that is causing me considerable trouble. The steps to see this are: 1) receive a call on an analog voice mail port; 2) flash to put the incoming party on hold; 3) call a third party on an outside line; 4) have the third party hang up on you; 5) Legend *automatically* takes the original incoming party off hold - no hook flash required. The automatic behavior in step 5 happens when the outside line hangs up. The call progress analysis on my dialogic card (which is plugged into the analog voice mail port) seems to get seriously confused in the case of a quick pick up and hang up. Extra detail here might get in the way of my real question ... Can this behavior given in step 5 above be turned off? I would like the Legend configured such that once a party is placed on hold, a hook flash is mandatory to bring them back. If someone can help, it would be extremely appreciated. If someone can direct me to professional services that might be able to help, I'd also be thankful. If the answer if "that's the way the Legend works and there's nothing you can do", I'd also like to know so I can spend my time tweaking Dialogic, instead of investigating the Legend. Aaron ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 14:37:47 -0400 From: Judith Oppenheimer Subject: Wanted: US 800s to Terminate on UK Landlines I've been queried by a company that wants to offer its UK customers a US toll free number that terminates on a UK landline. Can anyone help these folks out? tia - Judith Oppenheimer http://JudithOppenheimer.com http://ICBTollFreeNews.com 212 684-7210, 1 800 The Expert ------------------------------ From: yuri@tsoft.com (Yuri Victorovich) Subject: Telecom Bait-n-Switch: How to Fight? Date: 16 May 2002 20:27:13 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ I was using RSL-Com international service. I was making international calls to Netherlands and the rate was good. Than I had to start calling cellphone there. I called the company beforehand and asked if the rate is going to be different. And the lady nicely told me: no, rate is the same regardless of if it's cell or not. Fine, I started calling this number. After a month I got a bill with 9 times higher rate because cellphone in Netherlands is actually lot more expensive. Agency (I figured out that it was an agency with whom I signed up) says: yes, we made a mistake. But we can not make an adjustment so you have to pay and than don't call there any more. Or call the billing company (RSL). RSL tells: no, please give it to us in writing that agency gave you the rate or settle with agency which is separate company. But I never got in writing anything from any of them -- agency or company -- except bills. Now they are saying: you have to pay or we file to collection. But why should I pay if I agreed to the different (much lower) rate and they told me the different rate? It was their inadvertent mistake, but not mine. So why should I be responsible. They just pointing to each other, no single point of responsibility. PUC tells: we don't deal with international issues. So how to fight those Mickey Mouse companies covering each other? ------------------------------ 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-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-870-9697 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! 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 * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. 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. End of TELECOM Digest V20 #254 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat May 18 22:17:31 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id WAA29237; Sat, 18 May 2002 22:17:31 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 18 May 2002 22:17:31 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200205190217.WAA29237@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #255 TELECOM Digest Sat, 18 May 2002 22:16:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 255 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Economics, was Re: Huge Amount of Spam Received Recently (J. Higdon) Re: Wanted: US 800s to Terminate on UK Landlines (Chuck Till) Re: Wanted: US 800s to Terminate on UK Landlines (Joseph Singer) Re: Wanted: US 800s to Terminate on UK Landlines (Len Stewart) Re: Phone Won't Stop Ringing (Pete Weiss) Domain Naming Conventions For Business in Various Countries (B. Goudreau) Echo With Cell Phones (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Re: Telecom Bait-n-Switch: How to Fight? (Denis Mcmahon) Re: Telecom Bait-n-Switch: How to Fight? (Marcus Didius Falco) Re: Cable vs DSL for IP Telephony (Chip G) Competition? (John Higdon) Re: Blocking Clients From Non-ISP Mail Servers? Bad Idea. (Al Iverson) Cellphone Chats, Courtesy of the Television Airwaves (Monty Solomon) AT&T Outage Makes "Top Ten" List (Gordon S. Hlavenka) Re: Receiving Emergency Alert Messages via SMS/Email to Celfon (Hoffman) Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? (Monty Solomon) Re: So Much Junk Mail (Carl Moore) 1-800-CALLLAT (JimWeiss@aol.com) Re: Last Laugh! Peoria AZ Jails People Who Don't (Gordon S. Hlavenka) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRII. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 23:27:35 -0700 Subject: Re: Economics, was Re: Huge Amount of Spam Received Recently From: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows In article telecom20.254.1@telecom-digest.org, Barry Margolin wrote: > Maybe this stuff is actually coming from Yahoo and their affiliates. > Yahoo has an account option for whether you're willing to get mail > from them and their affiliates offering services, and a few weeks ago > they blanket-changed all their members' options to "Yes". So now all > the people who haven't gone in and changed their settings back are > presumably getting all these advertisements. Yes, I was aware of this. But just for your dining and dancing pleasure, here are ten examples of what I'm talking about in terms of forgery. (I could find no legitimate email from yahoo.com in today's log.) 1. Sender claims to be: jennymooreus@yahoo.com Connecting server claims to be: "server3.baires.web.com" Server is actually: unknown on DATAMARKETS (Buenos Aries) network 2. Sender claims to be: PCoba2507@yahoo.de Connecting server claims to be: "cpimssmtpa16.msn.com" Server is actually: host245-109.pool21759.interbusiness.it 3. Sender claims to be: customersupportrep23783@yahoo.com Connecting server claims to be: "wetware.wetware.com" Server is actually: wetware.wetware.com 4. Sender claims to be: kkk5012@yahoo.co.kr Connecting server claims to be: "yahoo.co.kr" Server is actually: unknown (on hananet.net network) 5. Sender claims to be: sentto-6438852-72-1021564803-diane=marleys.r.us.com@returns.groups.yahoo.com Connecting server claims to be: "bolero.rahul.net" Server is actually: bolero.rahul.net 6. Sender claims to be: customersupportrep24318@yahoo.com Connecting server claims to be: "ecom1" Server is actually: ll-61-56-194-7.ll.sparqnet.net 7. Sender claims to be: ucandoit320858v83@yahoo.com Connecting server claims to be: "yahoo.com" Server is actually: c210.h061013104.is.net.tw 8. Sender claims to be: mikeoconner@yahoo.com Connecting server claims to be: "jw.dpc.hebnet.gov.cn" Server is actually: unknown (on china-netcom.com) 9. Sender claims to be: blackpaperpublishing@yahoo.com Connecting server claims to be: "211.184.29.2" Server is actually: unknown (on unitel.co.kr network) 10.Sender claims to be: Jennifer0760l20@yahoo.com Connecting server claims to be: "yahoo.com" Server is actually: host.18.54.23.62.rev.coltfrance.com All I did was grep today's log for "yahoo" and took the first ten entries in order of occurrence. Note that NOT ONE is legitimately from either yahoo.com or from a legitimate yahoo.com user. From my standpoint, I would say that anyone making a fuss about Yahoo being guilty of spamming is giving the company a bad rap. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | AIM: plodder5 | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 http://www.anntec.com/realpoop.html [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Does anyone remember about ten years ago when that goofy guy in Staten Island, NY (or maybe it was Queens) was selling magazine subscriptions over the net by impersonating a female college student (she was non-existent) who was writing everyone to tell them that she and her fellow students (from whatever country they were in) had found 'these great deals on US magazines they all enjoyed reading' and how 'just as a favor', mind you, she was passing along the subscription details, and the magazine subscription company's fax number so the rest of us could benefit from her wisdom in selecting magazines for us to read. I've forgotten his name, but he was *so* funny. Someone here in this Digest suggested that local New Yorkers could dial up the fax machine, use a mobius loop of all black paper to go around->around->around in his fax machine until his paper ran out or the little light in the scanner burned out. I guess that happened a couple times, because the next email letter from the 'lady going to school in the foreign country' suggested that when we contacted the company fax machine it should be during the day 'when they are there in the office' because they 'turn off the fax machine when they go home for the night'. Someone here reading this Digest had another solution: he polled the computer of the New York State divison of Driver's Records on the goofy one and published his record of traffic accidents, occassional tickets received for parking in no parking zones, etc. and the fact that there was no record of insurance for his Machine. The goofy one retaliated by contacting individually the Trustees of Northwestern University in Evanston, IL where this Digest was located temporarily. He actually called them one by one *at their home numbers*. Ah, the good old days of the early nineties, when we had a useable Usenet/Internet, and we all thought spam was a passing fad with Spam King and a few others including the goofy one. PAT] ------------------------------ From: ctill@nc.rr.com (Chuck Till) Subject: Re: Wanted: US 800s to Terminate on UK Landlines Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 10:58:44 GMT Organization: Road Runner - NC > I've been queried by a company that wants to offer its UK customers > a US toll free number that terminates on a UK landline. The UK site could get a Universal International Freephone Number, with a country code of 800. US callers would dial 011 800 xxxxxxxx. Unfortunately many US callers would suspect this would still be billed to them, because public awareness in the US of UIFN is very low -- inform the US callers that the calls are truly free. ------------------------------ From: Joseph Singer Subject: Re: Wanted: US 800s to Terminate on UK Landlines Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 05:34:26 -0700 Organization: Drizzle Reply-To: joeofseattle@yahoo.com I've been queried by a company that wants to offer its UK customers a US > toll free number that terminates on a UK landline. > Can anyone help these folks out? http://www.kall8.com will terminate calls to any destination including international locations. The rate per minute varies depending on the destination. For terminating on a ring to number in the UK it's 10 cents/minute for normal land lines and 35 cents/minute to mobiles. Personal replies most likely will not be read. Please reply in the newsgroup ------------------------------ From: Len Stewart Subject: Re: Wanted: US 800s to Terminate on UK Landlines Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 15:15:24 UTC Organization: www.TelcoSupport.net Judith, This shouldn't be much of a problem at all. The company I worked for previously offered the service (they have since gone bankrupt). The call is picked up by the LEC and passed to the LD carrier who translates the number as it normally would be done, but instead of translating it to a US number, it is translated to an international number and sent off. Having been involved in the technical end of this, I had 800/0800/Toll Free numbers in many European countries which all pointed to my US number. A piece of cake. Len S. ------------------------------ From: pete-weiss@psu.edu (Pete Weiss) Subject: Re: Phone Won't Stop Ringing Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 13:16:01 -0400 Organization: Penn State University -- Office of Administrative Systems On Wed, 15 May 2002 13:24:11 -0400, Steve Michelson wrote: > Find out what the deactivation code for call forwarding is, and dial > it. See if that fixes the problem. If this fixes the problem, then the subscriber would never have successfully received any calls that were more than 1/2 ring long. Right? Pete ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 11:51:27 PDT From: bobgoudreau Reply-To: BobGoudreau@nc.rr.com Subject: Domain Naming Conventions For Businesses in Various Countries PAT wrote: > You are correct; in other than USA sites, the 'com' > locations are expressed as 'co.uk' or 'co.ca' etc. (In other words > the 'commercial' phrase comes in the middle and the country name > is the suffix, and the /m/ is elimiated in com.) PAT] This still isn't quite right. I think his point was that the conventions, or lack thereof, are completely up to each country. So, as mentioned above, British businesses will often be found under *.co.uk. But the convention in Australia is *.com.au; and in Canada, there is no "commercial phrase" at all, just top-level *.ca domains. Of course, most decent-sized non-US companies usually will nevertheless also attempt to get a plain old *.com domain alongside any "national" domain. Thus, nortel.com gets you to the same page as nortel.ca; likewise with telstra.com.au and telstra.com; and with bt.co.uk and bt.com. Bob Goudreau Cary, NC ------------------------------ Subject: Echo With Cell Phones Organization: Excelsior Computer Services From: joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 19:39:55 GMT Friends of mine just got a set of three Verizon cell phones (one for each family member) and they tell me that they only get echo when they call my landline. Is this possible? I thought echo-cancellation was on the calling side. Any thoughts? Thanks, Joel ------------------------------ From: Denis Mcmahon Subject: Re: Telecom Bait-n-Switch: How to Fight? Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 20:55:17 +0100 Organization: E-Menu Ltd Reply-To: denisrt@pickaxe.net yuri@tsoft.com (Yuri Victorovich) wrote: > Agency (I figured out that it was an agency with whom I signed up) > says: yes, we made a mistake. But we can not make an adjustment so you > have to pay and than don't call there any more. Or call the billing > company (RSL). Agency screwed up, your case is against the agency, not RSL. Write to the agency, pointing out that they screwed up and that you hold them responsible for the difference between the rate they advised you and the rate you have been charged. You can't blame RSL for the agency screwup, it wasn't an RSL screwup. Rgds, Denis McMahon / +44 7802 468949 / denis@pickaxe.net sulfnbk is not a virus, see the symantec virus encyclopaedia! Now restocking killfile, new entrants welcome: trolls, spam, xpost cascades, OT ads, top posters & terminally clueless! ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 17:39:48 -0400 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Re: Telecom Bait-n-Switch: How to Fight? yuri@tsoft.com (Yuri Victorovich) wrote: > Agency (I figured out that it was an agency with whom I signed up) > says: yes, we made a mistake. But we can not make an adjustment so you > have to pay and than don't call there any more. Or call the billing > company (RSL). > RSL tells: no, please give it to us in writing that agency gave you > the rate or settle with agency which is separate company. But I never > got in writing anything from any of them -- agency or company -- > except bills. Now they are saying: you have to pay or we file to > collection. > But why should I pay if I agreed to the different (much lower) rate and > they told me the different rate? It was their inadvertent mistake, but > not mine. So why should I be responsible. > They just pointing to each other, no single point of responsibility. > PUC tells: we don't deal with international issues. > So how to fight those Mickey Mouse companies covering each other? Write to the FCC. The FCC has jurisdiction over international issues. Or let it go to collection. When it goes to collection, then the first time the collection company sends a letter, offer the collection company the amount you think you owe. Don't negotiate, don't bargain, and if they start yelling, hang up. Do give them an explanation that you were told the rate by the agency, and any attempt to collect any other amount will go to court (which they will suspect will be sympathetic). If they accept your offer, then don't let them write a "telecheck." You write a check, and put on the front and the back (just above the space where they endorse), that this is "Payment in Full on Account No. XXXXX." I went through such a scenario with MCI, and all worked out, except that the lousy collection agent didn't mark the account "paid in full," so now, once a year, I get a letter from a new collection agency. I have to call them, utter the words "consumer fraud," and they mark the account "customer denies any money is owed." Then I wait another year. (So far I've had to say "consumer fraud" to two collection agencies.) The new collection agencies tell me to call MCI, but, since MCI refused to negotiate (I would have negotiated to "split the difference" and MCI would have been a LOT better off, even neglecting the collection agent's cut), I don't bother. I just keep my records handy. Direct replies are unlikely to be read. To reply use the address below: falco_marcus_didius yahoo.co.uk ------------------------------ From: Chip G Subject: Re: Cable vs DSL for IP Telephony Organization: AT&T Broadband Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 23:29:41 GMT Phil McKerracher wrote in message news:telecom20.252.5@telecom-digest.org: > Chip G wrote in message > news:telecom20.249.2@telecom-digest.org: >> The keys to successful use of VoIP are many. In general, I think you >> will have the same experiences whether you are using DSL or cable >> modem. Some considerations: > [Lots of good stuff snipped] > >> ...3. Minimal lost packets (while e-mail and web traffic can be pretty >> forgiving, voice and video need reliable streams of data. That is why >> you generally see them implemented via UDP instead of TCP. If too many >> packets are lost, the conversation can become unintelligible ... > I think you might be misunderstanding this. If UPD packets lost they > stay lost, whereas with TCP they get retransmitted until they arrive > intact. UDP is unreliable, TCP is reliable. > UDP is generally used for VoIP because the occasional lost packet is > preferable to a delay while retransmission takes place. Thanks for clarifying my statement Phil. After re-reading, I can see how it could have been misleading. I agree with you that UDP is "unreliable" and TCP is "reliable". That is actually part of my point. The nature of TCP ensures that all of the packets arrive ... regardless of the sequencing. TCP provides for retransmission if some packets are lost. Of course, in the context of real-time media streams this makes no sense. It does little good to receive and playback the third word in a sentence before playing the first two. Voice can sustain some lost packets and still be intelligible ... hence the use of UDP. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 17:14:50 -0700 Subject: Competition? From: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Over the past couple of days, the newspapers have been a-buzz with the latest California PUC decision lowering the rates SBC can charge so-called competitors who want to resell local telephone service. The decision is hailed as the beginning of "real competition" in California. What nonsense! It is ALL SBC service, straight from SBC central offices. The only distinction is that instead of paying SBC directly for the service they receive, customers can choose to pay a middleman to take a cut for doing absolutely nothing. Boy, that will sure spur competitive advances! If there is a major outage, I can imagine which customers will "come back up" first. Competitive customers will have to report service problems to their "phone company" who will then (at its leisure) pass the report to SBC. But the long distance companies (who have been itching to resell local telephone service) will find that the sword cuts both ways. With robust "competition" present, the PUC will be forced to sign off on a request by SBC to offer long distance service in the state. In the meantime, the true facilities-based competitors will find their job that much harder, with the resellers competing against them with service priced below cost. Since the resellers bring nothing to the party except the act of moving money around, their costs of operation will be negligible. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | AIM: plodder5 | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 http://www.anntec.com/realpoop.html ------------------------------ From: al56g@radparker.com (Al Iverson) Subject: Re: Blocking Clients From Non-ISP Mail Servers? Bad Idea. Organization: Please don't email replies Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 20:23:42 -0500 In article , Joey Lindstrom wrote: > On Wed, 15 May 2002 21:03:52 -0400 (EDT), Geoffrey Welsh wrote: >> So, what is needed to curtail spam? First and foremost, internet >> service and access providers need to take it seriously and invest in >> enforcing anti-spam policies, something that I do not expect to happen >> while the companies are giving higher priority to reducing expenses >> such as payroll rather than conserving bandwidth. Much of the spam >> distribution channel would be rendered nonfunctional if more internet >> service providers blocked incoming connections to proxy servers and >> outgoing connections to mail servers other than their own (already a >> common practice) and access providers included -- and enforced -- a >> clause requiring their customers to secure their mail and proxy >> servers. > I have to object to this idea of preventing users (dial-up, DSL, > whatever) from connecting their mail clients to mail servers other > than that of the ISP. A LOT of people have a legitimate need to > connect to another mail server, maybe the company mail server or > something like that. A lot of people used to have legitimate reasons to use open relaying mail servers, and spammers ruined those too. Give it up, the "I deserve to connect to any mail server I want" war is long since lost. BTW actually most users don't need it. I use AOL when travelling. They redirect SMTP to their rate-limiting server. It worked just fine. I could even connect to the company mail server with pop3 just fine. On the various servers I've administrated for various entities over the years, I've always recommended blocking SMTP access from sites that aren't supposed to be running mailservers. It stops spammers from inside your network, and it stops spammers from outside your network relaying spam through a network box (often I'd find an old Solaris box running a ghastly old Sendmail that nobody knew about). Internet access isn't a right; it's a private service contracted between you and the ISP. If you don't like the terms of that contract, vote with your feet. If you don't like that your ISP blocks port 25, find a different provider. If you don't like that other sites block connections from you on port 25 because you're on a dynamic IP and listed in a spam stopping list like Gordon Fecyk's PDL, then you're pretty much out of luck; you don't own or have any say over the servers that choose to use those lists. Al Iverson -- http://www.radparker.com -- Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA Support Minnesota Jazz -- Disclaimer: All of my opinions are mine alone. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 May 2002 00:30:24 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Cellphone Chats, Courtesy of the Television Airwaves By ROY FURCHGOTT WHO says television is useless? Someday it may help eliminate the phrase "Can you hear me now?" from the cellphone lexicon. A company in Ridgeland, Miss., is developing technology that would send and receive cellphone calls on a little-used part of a broadcast television signal. If used to augment current cellphone sites, it could mean fewer dead spots in reception at a comparatively low cost. It might also help usher countries without widespread cell networks into the wireless age. The company, SIGFX, is testing a prototype phone system on an experimental one-kilowatt station. http://www.nytimes.com/2002/05/16/technology/circuits/16NEXT.html ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 May 2002 01:54:23 -0500 From: Gordon S. Hlavenka Organization: Crash Electronics, Inc. Subject: AT&T Outage Makes "Top Ten" List OK, it's not really a "Top Ten" list, but it is a list of ten. Anyway, Technology Review has published a list of Technology disasters, and number 8 is the AT&T outage: http://www.techreview.com/articles/scigliano0602.asp?p=9 (The full article is http://www.techreview.com/articles/scigliano0602.asp ) Gordon S. Hlavenka O- nospam@crashelex.com My hovercraft is full of eels. ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Receiving Emergency Alert Messages via SMS/Email to Celfons Organization: Excelsior Computer Services From: joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Date: Sat, 18 May 2002 14:11:22 GMT >>> Set up instructions are described here >>> http://208.184.24.125/rc202903.html >> Ah, but how do you enter the phone number for SMS? I don't see that >> anywhere on their site. I would recommend against giving out the e-mail address of your cell If spammers get it, you'll have to change your cell phone number, which is a real pain. Better would be to get a different e-mail address that allows forwarding, and use that one, forwarded to your phone. If spammers get the forward-only e-mail address, just change it. (And from the "Subject:" line, it looks like this is for emergencies? I've found SMS to be very unreliable during ordinary peak hours. I would not rely on it for emergencies.) Joel ------------------------------ Subject: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 09:05:43 -0400 From: Monty Solomon From: Geoff Gariepy Subject: The FCC's Coming for Your Radar Detector ... Because You're Going to use it to Steal Gasoline. Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 13:09:30 -0400 Apparently, ChevronTexaco Corporation has filed an endorsement with the FCC on new regulation that would apply to radar detectors because the 25 million devices in use interfere with high-tech payment systems now becoming popular at the gas pump. ... http://www.politechbot.com/p-03544.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 10:25:28 EDT From: Carl Moore Subject: Re: So Much Junk Mail I do get some (junk) emails about a new game and even about new virus-finding tools, and they have the attachment removed by virus-detection at this end. Incoming mail to cmoore@arl.army.mil is sent to two places: Unix mail and Lotus notes. ------------------------------ From: JimWeiss@aol.com Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 16:57:56 EDT Subject: 1-800-CALLLAT Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 16:51:51 -0400 From: "cgbnews" Subject: CGB NEWS The Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau has recently posted a consumer alert on what has become known as *fat finger dialing*. Fat finger dialing is a new scheme that can result in consumers paying sever al times more than expected. The scheme goes something like this: You place a collect call from a public phone or payphone, intending to use a service like 1-800-CALL-ATT or 1-800-COLLECT. But you misspell or hit an incorrect button when dialing. You accidentally dial something like 1-800-CALLLAT. You get connected to the party you wished to call, but the phone company that connects you is not the one you thought you were using. Instead, it is a company that secured 800 numbers similar to well-known ones (i.e., a company secures the number *800-CALLLAT*). The company is banking on the possibility that you might accidentally misdial your intended number. If this happens, you are probably unaware you are using a different phone carrier than the one you intended to use because you don*t know you misdialed. Often, the co mpany won*t identify itself to you or the person receiving the collect call before connecting the call. See our consumer alert online at http://www.fcc. gov/cgb/consumerfacts/carelessdialing.html If you suspect you*re a victim of this scheme, contact the phone company that charged you for the call in question. The company*s number should be list ed on your phone bill. In some cases, FCC rules may also protect you. We have simplified our complaint procedures with a new Web page entitled Filing a Complaint with the FCC is EASY at http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/complaintfiling.html. You are currently subscribed to fcc-consumer-info@info.fcc.gov as: NBJimWeiss@aol.com To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-fcc-consumer-info-12886L@info.fcc.gov If you need assistance with your subscription to this list, or if you have questions or comments, please reply to this message. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 May 2002 02:13:15 -0500 From: Gordon S. Hlavenka Organization: Crash Electronics, Inc. Subject: Re: Last Laugh! Peoria AZ Jails People Who Don't Take Down Lights This is not really telecom-related, but is a followup to a thread back in February. Anyway apparently this idiocy is not limited to Arizona. Carpentersville, IL officials threatened to fine a local woman for displaying a lighted American Flag which they said was in violation of their holiday decorations ordinance. Now, they're backpedaling: "The ordinance is for Christmas decorations, so people don't have them up all year long," [Community Development Director Patrick] Grill said. "The fact that they haven't heard from us since the first letter, it means we're likely not pursuing it. Flag decorations are fine." "...[L]ikely not pursuing it." Har! Read the whole story at: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chicago/chi-0205170160may17.story (You could create an account at the Tribune website to access this story. Or, you could just be "johnqpublic" with a password that's "easytoremember" :-) Gordon S. Hlavenka O- nospam@crashelex.com My hovercraft is full of eels. ------------------------------ 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-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-870-9697 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! 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 * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. 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. End of TELECOM Digest V20 #255 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon May 20 00:21:01 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id AAA17548; Mon, 20 May 2002 00:21:01 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 00:21:01 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200205200421.AAA17548@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #256 TELECOM Digest Mon, 20 May 2002 00:20:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 256 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Fingerprint Readers Fooled with Gelatin Molds (Marcus Didius Falco) Call Display On 2nd Phone Not Working (w00t) Mobile Amplified Headset? (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Which Prepaid Int'l GSM SIM Card is the Best? (Prof. Shurajit Gopal) Help with Tie Mod Key 16 (DONSHADDIX@aol.com) Re: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? (Denis Mcmahon) Re: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? (John Higdon) More on Radar Detectors; Other News Headlines of Interest (Monty Solomon) Re: Neighborhood Local Dial Tone and Long Distance From MCI (Saab Guy) Re: Wanted: US 800s to Terminate on UK Landlines (Robert Woolley) Re: Huge Amount of Spam Received Recently (Colin Sutton) Re: Blocking Clients From Non-ISP Mail Servers? Bad Idea. (John Higdon) Re: Echo With Cell Phones (John Higdon) Re: Economics, Re: Huge Amount of Spam Received Recently (Geoffrey Welsh) Bob Epstein of Sybase at ERN on June 12 (EntreSource) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRII. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 19 May 2002 15:37:39 -0400 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Fingerprint Readers Fooled with Gelatin Molds of If memory serves, the guy who did this experiment, Tsutomu Matsumoto, is the fellow who caught Kevin Mitnick a couple of years ago. Obviously, he's not a guy to mess with! :-) * Original: FROM..... Dave Farber ------ Forwarded Message From: Chris Hoofnagle Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 08:30:49 -0400 Subject: Fingerprint Readers Fooled with Gelatin Molds of *Latent* Prints Dear Dave, This is from Bruce Schneier's Crypto-Gram. (http://www.counterpane.com/crypto-gram.html) Thought it would be of interest. Regards, Chris http://www.counterpane.com/crypto-gram-0205.html#5 Fun with Fingerprint Readers Tsutomu Matsumoto, a Japanese cryptographer, recently decided to look at biometric fingerprint devices. These are security systems that attempt to identify people based on their fingerprint. For years the companies selling these devices have claimed that they are very secure, and that it is almost impossible to fool them into accepting a fake finger as genuine. Matsumoto, along with his students at the Yokohama National University, showed that they can be reliably fooled with a little ingenuity and $10 worth of household supplies. Matsumoto uses gelatin, the stuff that Gummi Bears are made out of. First he takes a live finger and makes a plastic mold. (He uses a free-molding plastic used to make plastic molds, and is sold at hobby shops.) Then he pours liquid gelatin into the mold and lets it harden. (The gelatin comes in solid sheets, and is used to make jellied meats, soups, and candies, and is sold in grocery stores.) This gelatin fake finger fools fingerprint detectors about 80% of the time. His more interesting experiment involves latent fingerprints. He takes a fingerprint left on a piece of glass, enhances it with a cyanoacrylate adhesive, and then photographs it with a digital camera. Using PhotoShop, he improves the contrast and prints the fingerprint onto a transparency sheet. Then, he takes a photo-sensitive printed-circuit board (PCB) and uses the fingerprint transparency to etch the fingerprint into the copper, making it three-dimensional. (You can find photo-sensitive PCBs, along with instructions for use, in most electronics hobby shops.) Finally, he makes a gelatin finger using the print on the PCB. This also fools fingerprint detectors about 80% of the time. Gummy fingers can even fool sensors being watched by guards. Simply form the clear gelatin finger over your own. This lets you hide it as you press your own finger onto the sensor. After it lets you in, eat the evidence. Matsumoto tried these attacks against eleven commercially available fingerprint biometric systems, and was able to reliably fool all of them. The results are enough to scrap the systems completely, and to send the various fingerprint biometric companies packing. Impressive is an understatement. There's both a specific and a general moral to take away from this result. Matsumoto is not a professional fake-finger scientist; he's a mathematician. He didn't use expensive equipment or a specialized laboratory. He used $10 of ingredients you could buy, and whipped up his gummy fingers in the equivalent of a home kitchen. And he defeated eleven different commercial fingerprint readers, with both optical and capacitive sensors, and some with "live finger detection" features. (Moistening the gummy finger helps defeat sensors that measure moisture or electrical resistance; it takes some practice to get it right.) If he could do this, then any semi-professional can almost certainly do much much more. More generally, be very careful before believing claims from security companies. All the fingerprint companies have claimed for years that this kind of thing is impossible. When they read Matsumoto's results, they're going to claim that they don't really work, or that they don't apply to them, or that they've fixed the problem. Think twice before believing them. Matsumoto's paper is not on the Web. You can get a copy by asking: Tsutomu Matsumoto Here's the reference: T. Matsumoto, H. Matsumoto, K. Yamada, S. Hoshino, "Impact of Artificial Gummy Fingers on Fingerprint Systems," Proceedings of SPIE Vol. #4677, Optical Security and Counterfeit Deterrence Techniques IV, 2002. Some slides from the presentation are here: My previous essay on the uses and abuses of biometrics: Biometrics at the shopping center: pay for your groceries with your thumbprint. Chris Hoofnagle, Legislative Counsel +1.202.483.1140 (tel) Electronic Privacy Information Center +1.202.483.1248 (fax) 1718 Connecticut Ave., NW Suite 200 hoofnagle epic.org Washington, DC 20009 USA http://www.epic.org/ http://www.privacy.org/ For archives see: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/ Direct replies are unlikely to be read. To reply use the address below: falco_marcus_didius yahoo.co.uk ------------------------------ From: bonka27@hotmail.com (w00t) Subject: Call Display On 2nd Phone Not Working Date: 19 May 2002 15:49:14 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ I've haven't been able to get in contact with any Telus tech support reps (my phone company) so maybe you guys can help me out. I am subscribed to their Call Display service. Our main phone, which is a cordless phone with a caller id device, works flawless with incoming calls. However, I recently purchased a GE (corded) slimline phone w/ built-in call display, so I can have the call display function in my room. Anyways, this is the phone that's been giving me all the trouble. I've exchanged the phone 3 times already so the one I have now should work fine. The call display almost NEVER seems to work. 99% of the time, when a call is coming in, I get a "NO DATA" message on the display. Of that 1% left, those were the 2 calls that did manage to show up on the phone. According to the GE manual, "NO DATA" means "no caller id signal has been detected, or caller id service has not been activated". When I move the corded phone around the house trying it on different wires, I still get the same message. However, one thing is that my house only has 1 phonejack outlet (that is activated) for all the phones in the home. I used a 3-line modular triplex jack to split the single line so there is 1 phone in the living room, 1 in my mom's and 1 in mine. Could this be a phonejack problem? Remember, my phone did manage to get 2 calls to display, so that leaves me thinking. My house is pretty damn old so the equipment could be dying, but our caller id device works dandy. ------------------------------ Subject: Mobile Amplified Headset? Organization: Excelsior Computer Services From: joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Date: Sun, 19 May 2002 00:58:39 GMT Ihave a Plantronics over-the-head headset ("portable hands free"). But while sometimes it works fine, sometimes I have trouble hearing. I have the same problem using this headset with my 2.4GHz phone at home. So, does anyone know of a battery-powered amplified headset? Or another solution? I have good hearing, so I can't be the only person with this problem. I'll be grateful for any help. Many thanks. Joel (joel@exc.com) ------------------------------ From: Prof. Shurajit Gopal Subject: Which Prepaid Int'l GSM SIM Card is the Best? Date: Sun, 19 May 2002 20:28:54 -0400 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Hello there! Can someone tell me which International GSM "Prepaid" SIM Card is the most economical and the best (preferably with a US number)? Thanks and regards, Prof. Shurajit Gopal Department of Mass Communication North Greenville College PO Box 1892 Tigerville, SC 29688, USA Phone: 864-414-1812 Fax: 815-364-3365 E-mail: ShurGopal@AOL.COM ------------------------------ From: DONSHADDIX@aol.com Date: Sun, 19 May 2002 19:32:38 EDT Subject: Help With Tie Mod Key 16 I need to find a place in the east that repairs or sales a Mod Key 16/60006a units. I used Aztec East Inc in Norwalk CT, but they have gone out of business. Have any ideas? Thanks, DAS ------------------------------ From: Denis Mcmahon Subject: Re: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? Date: Sun, 19 May 2002 17:54:50 +0100 Organization: E-Menu Ltd Reply-To: denisrt@pickaxe.net Monty Solomon wrote: > Apparently, ChevronTexaco Corporation has filed an endorsement with > the FCC on new regulation that would apply to radar detectors because > the 25 million devices in use interfere with high-tech payment systems > now becoming popular at the gas pump. Did I get that right? A radar detector, which is basically a sensitive receiver, screws up the pumps? Do we have to turn off our FM radios in petrol stations now? Sounds like, smells like .... Rgds, Denis McMahon / +44 7802 468949 / denis@pickaxe.net sulfnbk is not a virus, see the symantec virus encyclopaedia! Now restocking killfile, new entrants welcome: trolls, spam, xpost cascades, OT ads, top posters & terminally clueless! ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 19 May 2002 13:48:36 -0700 Subject: Re: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? From: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows In article telecom20.255.16@telecom-digest.org, Monty Solomon wrote: > Apparently, ChevronTexaco Corporation has filed an endorsement with > the FCC on new regulation that would apply to radar detectors because > the 25 million devices in use interfere with high-tech payment systems > now becoming popular at the gas pump. Interesting. Radar detectors are merely receivers, not transmitters. Sounds like a redesign of the pay at the pump systems might be in order. Besides, radar detectors were around first. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | AIM: plodder5 | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 http://www.anntec.com/realpoop.html [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: First, as Denis McMahon says in the message before this one, and as you note, they are RECEIVERS, not transmitters, but all receivers do have very tiny transmitters in them to handle the IF (intermediate frequency) conversions, etc. That being said, if radar detectors make that much of a difference, then all radios should be banned, especially the kind that make positive, purposeful, transmissions; i.e. CB radios, police radios, etc. But that is not the point. The joke is on you. Remember a few months ago, or maybe it was a year ago, they were on the same tangent about cell phones at petrol stations? Only instead of diddling the meters in the pumps, the allegation was they would produce a tiny spark and the fumes would start a major fire at the petrol station. They got no where with that one, so now the emphasis is on radar detectors, another bane in a police officer's existence. The FCC should realize radar detectors *already, and always have been* a violation of the communications laws. You are entitled to *listen* to almost any radio band anytime (you 'listen' in this case when the radar detector apparatus 'listens' for the presence of police radar), but you are not permitted to act upon, or benefit from *what you hear* on the radio*, especially a police transmission. You act upon or benefit from the transmission which was not intended for yourself when you reduce your automobile speed or otherwise watch for police activity in the immediate area. You benefit by not getting a speeding ticket or being taken to jail. I suppose if you could convince the authorities that you were merely listening out of intellectual curiosity to the signals and that you did not act upon what you heard (did not slow down your driving speed) and did not benefit from what you heard (that is, did not care if you were taken away to jail), then I would guess you could have a radar detector device and use it lawfully. But since the only purpose is to 'listen' to police transmissions and respond to your own benefit, then how could they be legal under existing FCC rules? What makes these devices any different than listening to verbal communication on a police radio for example, about a bank robbery then relaying the information to the bank robbers who are in your car or hiding nearby? Admittedly, this business about radar detectors/cell phones causing some problems at the gas station is just a crock. And you are not going to see police radios turned off at gas stations or banned when police are driving their cars anytime soon. Meanwhile, you are just a 'civilian'; you will follow the rules and obey. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 May 2002 22:35:29 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: More on Radar Detectors; Other News Headlines of Interest Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 23:32:17 -0400 From: Alan Dixon These guys are blowing this out of proportion. The "bottom line" below is ludicrous. This pending FCC proposal (ET Docket 01-278 [FCC 01-290]) seeks only to regulate radar detectors manufactured in the future. Existing detectors would remain exempt from certification. In fact, having radar detectors certificated in the future could possibly give manufacturers and consumers some leverage in court when fighting state and local bans on these devices. Certification would provide clear evidence that such bans would definitely be contrary to federal objectives. Also, many, though not all, state-of-the-art radar detectors have substantially reduced IF emissions to avoid detection by VG-2Ó devices. (At least two alternative methods are used for this purpose, as well.) http://www.politechbot.com/p-03547.html May 18, 2002 Curb the Endless Ringing of the Telemarketers By JOHN J. MILLER WASHINGTON It happened again the other night: I was bottle-feeding the baby when the phone rang, just out of reach. I put the baby down -- he immediately started to squawk -- rose from my chair and picked up the receiver. The caller wasn't my wife saying when she'd be home or my editor wondering when I'd file. It was a tape-recorded message from a local window dealer offering a free estimate. By the time I had hung up, my little boy was in a full-blown cry. A few days later, at a weekly strategy meeting for conservatives, I listened to the usual presentations from candidates, think tanks and interest groups. Toward the end, a representative from the telemarketing industry bad-mouthed a proposed Federal Trade Commission rule change that he said would expand government power and throttle small business -- the sort of thing that normally reminds me of why I'm a right-winger. http://www.nytimes.com/2002/05/18/opinion/18MILL.html Why hackers are a step ahead of the law By Greg Sandoval Staff Writer, CNET News.com May 14, 2002, 4:00 a.m. PT The nightmare for Ecount, an online gift certificate service, began last year when a hacker broke in to the company's system and stole personal information belonging to its customers. Nine months later, the criminal is still at large. The thief has brazenly taunted executives with repeated e-mails while staying ahead of investigators, deftly wiping away his electronic fingerprints and covering his tracks at every turn. http://news.com.com/2009-1017-912708.html ------------------------------ From: Saaby@MyRealBox.com (Saab Guy) Subject: Re: The Neighborhood Local Dial Tone and Long Distance From MCI Date: 18 May 2002 20:48:28 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ I don't know if we ever made a final decision os this one but I found the real catch ... the other people you call have to be enrolled in the Neighborhood or have local service from MCI ... real bummer because if every single person in the US CHOOSE to sign up it would be considered a monopoly and be shut down, just like if we all CHOOSE to use Microsoft products they must be checting and have to split up. ------------------------------ From: Robert Woolley Subject: Re: Wanted: US 800s to Terminate on UK Landlines Date: Sun, 19 May 2002 11:07:44 +0100 Organization: posted via Easynet On Fri, 17 May 2002 05:34:26 -0700, Joseph Singer wrote: > I've been queried by a company that wants to offer its UK customers a US >> toll free number that terminates on a UK landline. >> Can anyone help these folks out? > http://www.kall8.com will terminate calls to any destination including > international locations. The rate per minute varies depending on the > destination. For terminating on a ring to number in the UK it's 10 > cents/minute for normal land lines and 35 cents/minute to mobiles. Except it's now going up to 35 cents a minute to uk landlines as of 1 May. rob at robertwoolley dot co dot uk ------------------------------ From: Colin Sutton Subject: Re: Huge Amount of Spam Received Recently Date: Sun, 19 May 2002 13:21:24 GMT Organization: BigPond Internet Services (http://www.bigpond.net.au) John Higdon wrote in message news:telecom20.255.1@telecom-digest.org... > In article telecom20.254.1@telecom-digest.org, Barry Margolin wrote: >> Maybe this stuff is actually coming from Yahoo and their affiliates. >> Yahoo has an account option for whether you're willing to get mail >> from them and their affiliates offering services, and a few weeks ago >> they blanket-changed all their members' options to "Yes". So now all >> the people who haven't gone in and changed their settings back are >> presumably getting all these advertisements. See the article "More on Klez" in http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/22.07.html#subj9 *Some* of the yahoo addresses could come from klez. > 4. Sender claims to be: kkk5012@yahoo.co.kr > Connecting server claims to be: "yahoo.co.kr" > Server is actually: unknown (on hananet.net network) yahoo.co.kr resolves to kr.yahoo.com, the Korean yahoo site, for me. Colin Sutton ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 19 May 2002 09:24:21 -0700 Subject: Re: Blocking Clients From Non-ISP Mail Servers? Bad Idea. From: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows In article telecom20.255.12@telecom-digest.org, Al Iverson wrote: > Internet access isn't a right; it's a private service contracted between > you and the ISP. If you don't like the terms of that contract, vote with > your feet. If you don't like that your ISP blocks port 25, find a > different provider. If you don't like that other sites block connections > from you on port 25 because you're on a dynamic IP and listed in a spam > stopping list like Gordon Fecyk's PDL, then you're pretty much out of > luck; you don't own or have any say over the servers that choose to use > those lists. If I find myself out in the field unable to access my own mail servers (the only ones I will EVER use for email) due to some over-exuberant ISP who feels the need to become the net police by blocking outbound port 25, I simply use an SSH tunnel to reach the server. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | AIM: plodder5 | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 http://www.anntec.com/realpoop.html ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 19 May 2002 09:35:09 -0700 Subject: Re: Echo With Cell Phones From: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows In article telecom20.255.7@telecom-digest.org, Dr. Joel M. Hoffman wrote: > Friends of mine just got a set of three Verizon cell phones (one for > each family member) and they tell me that they only get echo when they > call my landline. Is this possible? I thought echo-cancellation was > on the calling side. This is probably due to a poor hybrid on your phone that allows received audio to be turned around and sent back to the caller. With the advent of digital coding on most cellphone calls, the transmit/receive delay accentuates poor isolation. The cellphone side is a four-wire circuit; your phone is two wire and depends on a hybrid to sort it out on your end. If this is done poorly, no amount of "echo suppression" can compensate without introducing intolerable artifacts into the conversation. Try using a different phone on your end and see if that makes a difference. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | AIM: plodder5 | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 http://www.anntec.com/realpoop.html ------------------------------ From: Geoffrey Welsh Subject: Re: Economics, was Re: Huge Amount of Spam Received Recently Date: Sun, 19 May 2002 15:01:43 -0400 Organization: Bell Sympatico John Higdon wrote: > (I could find no legitimate email from yahoo.com in today's log.) > From my standpoint, I would say that anyone making a fuss about Yahoo > being guilty of spamming is giving the company a bad rap. Well, since I wrote that it was so (not so much that Yahoo was a spammer, but that spam was coming through Yahoo), I guess it behooves me to offer up the proof. I apologize in advance to anyone who might be offended by the spam, which is presented verbatim below. ARIN says that the IP which sent us this spam (216.136.172.133) belongs to Exodus, but is suballocated to Yahoo. As I wrote earlier, I see these regularly, so it appears to have become practical for spammers to use Yahoo servers. --- Today's spam example follows --- Received: from web14103.mail.yahoo.com ([216.136.172.133]) by mail.markham.insystems.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id LC455BM7; Fri, 17 May 2002 03:59:57 -0400 Message-ID: <20020517080001.46946.qmail@web14103.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [209.29.81.54] by web14103.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 17 May 2002 01:00:01 PDT Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 01:00:01 -0700 (PDT) From: Daigoro Daveda Subject: See me and my friends having fun at: To: inkblot@usa.pipeline.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-619217967-1021622401=:46882" --0-619217967-1021622401=:46882 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii --0-619217967-1021622401=:46882 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii --0-619217967-1021622401=:46882-- Yo man, wanna see some nice girls with animals, etc? Click HERE to see. If the site doesn't appear the first time, try it again.


Do You Yahoo!?
LAUNCH - Your Yahoo! Music Experience --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.362 / Virus Database: 199 - Release Date: 07/05/2002 ------------------------------ From: EntreSource Subject: Bob Epstein of Sybase at ERN on June 12 Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 11:41:07 -0700 Reply-To: EntreSource [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Some of our Bay area readers may wish to attend this event and if EntreSource is there, tell him/her/it that normally I do not like to run these notices, but like my competitor the *New York Times*, I always print all the news that fits, and early this Monday morning, I did not have that much to use. PAT] JUNE EVENT Networking, speaker, hors d'oeuvres, and no-host cocktails Place: Spenger's Restaurant in Berkeley (directions below) Sponsor: The Entrepreneurs Resource Network www.EntreSource.org Date: Wednesday, June 12 Time: 6 to 8 pm; Introductions at 6:15 sharp. Cost: $20 covers lavish hors d'oeuvres, pay for your own drinks RSVP: No reservations needed. Non-members welcome! Please invite your friends and colleagues to attend! Attendees are encouraged to bring lots of business cards plus promotional materials to be set out on the tables! SPEAKER: BOB EPSTEIN, CO-FOUNDER OF SYBASE Bob Epstein will speak about practices that worked in launching Sybase and in launching his current company, GetActive and how it is not enough to have a great product, you need to start a great company to have a successful product launch. Dr. Bob Epstein co-founded Sybase, GetActive Software, Zight (formerly Colorado Microdisplay), Britton-Lee, and Environmental Entrepreneurs. Currently, he is working with GetActive, a software company for membership-based organizations to use for active, on-line members. Bob is also a trustee of the Natural Resources Defense Council, the leading US environmental organization influencing state and national policy. bob@bobepstein.to www.GetActive.com www.e2.org SPENGER'S: OUR PERMANENT HOME! Monthly networking events are now being held at Spenger's Restaurant in Berkeley on the second Wednesday of every month. And there is a lavish buffet of hors d' oeuvres and a no-host full bar. We must charge $20 per person admission fee to cover the cost of the food, room rental, bar set up, taxes, and gratuity. Please bring cash or a check made out to ERN. Mark your calendar for second Wednesdays! JULY SPEAKER SBA - The Small Business Administration. Arthur Washington will talk about how to get financing from the SBA. Locally, the SBA is known as the EBSBDC and is one of the Entrepreneurs Resource Network's generous co-sponsors. www.ebsbdc.org CO-SPONSORS Bay Area Regional Technology Alliance (BARTA) www.barta.org East Bay Small Business Development Center (EBSBDC), www.ebsbdc.org ENTREPRENEURS RESOURCE NETWORK The Entrepreneurs Resource Network is a nonprofit corporation providing resources, seminars and networking opportunities for entrepreneurs, startups and expanding businesses. For more information about us, see our Web site at www.EntreSource.org DIRECTIONS TO OUR VENUE: SPENGER'S Spenger's Restaurant is at the corner of University Avenue and Fourth Street, one block from the 580/80 freeway. Take the 580/80 freeway to Berkeley. Take the University exit and head east on University Avenue (toward the Berkeley Hills). Turn right at the first signal light onto Sixth Street. Turn right at the first block: Addison. Travel two blocks and turn right again at Fourth Street. Spenger's is ahead, just after the overpass. Park on the street for free. Parking in the lot is free for the first 1.5 hours. If this isn't clear, visit www.MapQuest.com and enter Spenger's address: 1919 Fourth Street, Berkeley. Spenger's was purchased by the same restaurant group that owns Kuleto's in San Francisco. They made minor renovations to the interior, keeping the charm of the old wood rooms with nautical decor. The menu was completely changed. No longer the home of deep fried prawns, the new Spenger's has a very upscale menu with fabulous food. Plan to stay for dinner with your new friends! ------------------------------ 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-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-870-9697 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! 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 * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. 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. End of TELECOM Digest V20 #256 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon May 20 12:50:02 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id MAA26755; Mon, 20 May 2002 12:50:02 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 12:50:02 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200205201650.MAA26755@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #257 TELECOM Digest Mon, 20 May 2002 12:49:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 257 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Blocking Clients From Non-ISP Mail Servers? Bad Idea (Jack) Re: Blocking Clients From Non-ISP Mail Servers? Bad Idea (H Peter Anvin) Re: Huge Amount of Spam Received Recently (Marcus Didius Falco) Re: Neighborhood Local Dial Tone and Long Distance From MCI (Bob Natale) Re: Which Prepaid Int'l GSM SIM Card is the Best? (Jeremy Lee) Re: Wanted: US 800s to Terminate on UK Landlines (Joseph Singer) EchoStar Loses Bid to Offer Local TV Beyond Market (Monty Solomon) Metromedia Fiber Network files for Chapter 11 (Monty Solomon) Re: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? (Ed Ellers) Re: Cable vs DSL for IP Telephony (Barry Margolin) Re: Help With Tie Mod Key 16 (Gerry Belanger) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRII. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jack Subject: Re: Blocking Clients From Non-ISP Mail Servers? Bad Idea. Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 01:55:40 -0400 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com On Fri, 17 May 2002 20:23:42 -0500, al56g@radparker.com (Al Iverson) wrote: > In article , Joey Lindstrom > wrote: [...snip...] >> I have to object to this idea of preventing users (dial-up, DSL, >> whatever) from connecting their mail clients to mail servers other >> than that of the ISP. A LOT of people have a legitimate need to >> connect to another mail server, maybe the company mail server or >> something like that. > A lot of people used to have legitimate reasons to use open relaying > mail servers, and spammers ruined those too. Give it up, the "I > deserve to connect to any mail server I want" war is long since lost. Ummm, I don't think he was saying he should be able to connect to any mail server he wants. He wants to connect to one he is authorized to use. There is a big difference. > BTW actually most users don't need it. I use AOL when travelling. They > redirect SMTP to their rate-limiting server. It worked just fine. I > could even connect to the company mail server with pop3 just fine. Still, people may have legitimate reasons for not wanting to use an ISP's mail server. It's a well known fact that the system administrator can read all mail passing through the server. I can think of a lot of reasons that might not be desirable, that have nothing to do with spam. > On the various servers I've administrated for various entities over > the years, I've always recommended blocking SMTP access from sites > that aren't supposed to be running mailservers. It stops spammers from > inside your network, and it stops spammers from outside your network > relaying spam through a network box (often I'd find an old Solaris box > running a ghastly old Sendmail that nobody knew about). > Internet access isn't a right; it's a private service contracted between > you and the ISP. If you don't like the terms of that contract, vote with > your feet. If you don't like that your ISP blocks port 25, find a > different provider. If you don't like that other sites block connections > from you on port 25 because you're on a dynamic IP and listed in a spam > stopping list like Gordon Fecyk's PDL, then you're pretty much out of > luck; you don't own or have any say over the servers that choose to use > those lists. You know, I'm trying to figure out how this is any different from a local telephone company saying "you can't use any long distance company except ours." Well, with one big exception -- an ISP isn't a common carrier. A few stunts like this, however, and ISP's could suddenly find themselves the target of increased government regulation. It's easy to say "vote with your feet" if you live in an area with multiple choices in ISP's. But what you may be forgetting is that there are many rural areas where there is only one local dialup ISP, and there places all over the country (in both rural and metropolitan areas) where there is only one option for broadband access. I really hate the idea of any increased federal regulation over the Internet, but the exception to that would be if it becomes a widespread practice for ISP's to start deciding on their own which ports at which sites people can and cannot access. At the very least, they should have to state up front (in their advertising, not just in the fine print of some document you don't receive until AFTER you've signed up) that they're not offering true Internet access, but only partial access instead. To me, it doesn't seem much different from buying phone service and then finding out that you're not allowed to call certain perfectly valid numbers (or certain entire exchanges) because your phone company doesn't want to send traffic to them (yes, that's happened, and in one case the phone company in question got slapped by the state PSC). Now, just so everyone is perfectly clear about what I'm objecting to, I am NOT saying that you cannot or should not restrict your mail server so that it's only useable by your customers (or by others at certain "trusted" fixed IP addresses, if you wish). What I am saying is that if you wanted to allow your brother-in-law (employee, girlfriend, whatever) on the other side of the country to send mail though your web server, and you've set up a rule that allows connections from his IP address, the ISP that HE uses should not be intercepting that traffic. It's a given that you feel differently about this, and maybe you would never give access to anyone else outside your own IP block. But, that is your choice. Up until now, one of the strengths of the Internet has been that one control freak can't block off legitimate communications without going to extraordinary lengths (probably something only a dictator of a non-democratic country could pull off). I'm sure I hate spam as much as you do, if not more, but I'm not so sure that restricting e-mail in every which way possible isn't doing more harm than good. Now, what I really wish is that the folks who set the standards for the Internet would come up with a new type of e-mail that kind of a cross between regular e-mail and instant messaging. The problem with IM is that the recipient assumes you want an immediate response, and that's not always the case. What I envision is a new kind of e-mail that would go direct from machine to machine, using the server only as a backup (like instant messaging). The big advantage to this is that spammers can keep changing their e-mail addresses, but most don't have unlimited access to IP blocks, so it would be a lot easier to reject communications from spammers, and also you'd have better security of e-mail. Unfortunately, if it's not free, people won't use it (sorry, "postage people", but free e-mail is one of the big reasons people use the net and IMHO you're spitting into the wind if you think any scheme that involves payment for even an initial e-mail will work), and if there's not one standard that everyone uses, it will be useless because people would have to run multiple e-mail clients. But I wish some of the people who develop these peer-to-peer file sharing applications would put some effort into coming up with peer-to-peer e-mail, that gives you guaranteed delivery to the recipient's system (or as close as it can get), encryption built-in and transparent to the user, and the ability to easily and positively block further communications from anyone who tries to spam - in fact, the client could be set up on kind of a "voting" system, where each time a message is flagged as spam by a user, that information is shared with the other clients, and if an IP address starts accumulating a high number of spam complaints it's automatically locked out (the clients automatically reject mail from that address) for a certain length of time (configurable by the user, not some central administrator type, but with a default of perhaps seven days). The big problem with e-mail today is that most users have no way to reject it until it's already in their mailbox. In my vision, users would have full control over who they want to receive e-mails from, and a spammer would never even be allowed to connect to most systems. Also, the fact that your system connects with each recipient individually would slow you down plenty if you were a spammer - no more connecting to some negligent admin's server and dumping a gazillion spam messages on him, that he then tries to deliver. I suspect that about 80% of the code needed to do this is already present in instant messaging clients and servers and/or file sharing programs - the biggest thing that needs to be done would be to design a client that looks like an e-mail client rather than an IM client. Anyway, just a thought that will probably never see the light of day beyond this forum. Jack [Spammers finally found the last "throwaway" e-mail address I used, so it's no longer valid. Hopefully this one will last a bit longer, but can be discarded just as easily!] ------------------------------ From: H. Peter Anvin Subject: Re: Blocking Clients From Non-ISP Mail Servers? Bad Idea. Date: 19 May 2002 21:44:17 -0700 Organization: Transmeta Corporation, Santa Clara CA John Higdon wrote in : > If I find myself out in the field unable to access my own mail servers (the > only ones I will EVER use for email) due to some over-exuberant ISP who > feels the need to become the net police by blocking outbound port 25, I > simply use an SSH tunnel to reach the server. Also, many mail clients support SMTP over SSL (normally on port 465.) Also, if you control the mail server, there is nothing that keeps you from opening up a different port than port 25 ... hpa at work, in private! "Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot." http://www.zytor.com/~hpa/puzzle.txt ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 00:54:28 -0400 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Re: Huge Amount of Spam Received Recently Colin Sutton wrote about Re: Huge Amount of Spam Received Recently > John Higdon wrote in message > news:telecom20.255.1@telecom-digest.org... >> In article telecom20.254.1@telecom-digest.org, Barry Margolin wrote: >>> Maybe this stuff is actually coming from Yahoo and their affiliates. >>> Yahoo has an account option for whether you're willing to get mail >>> from them and their affiliates offering services, and a few weeks ago >>> they blanket-changed all their members' options to "Yes". So now all >>> the people who haven't gone in and changed their settings back are >>> presumably getting all these advertisements. > See the article "More on Klez" in > http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/22.07.html#subj9 > *Some* of the Yahoo addresses could come from klez. >> 4. Sender claims to be: kkk5012@yahoo.co.kr >> Connecting server claims to be: "yahoo.co.kr" >> Server is actually: unknown (on hananet.net network) > yahoo.co.kr resolves to kr.yahoo.com, the Korean yahoo site, for me. I filter a lot of my spam, so it doesn't actually get to me. Indeed, the address from which I post is a "spam trap." However, I've been noticing an enormous amount of spam from Chinese addresses these days, particularly stuff giving "remove" addresses at "hanmail.com." Six months ago the spammers were using arabia.com, and a year ago it was an African address. However, I have to say I've been getting a lot of spam from Yahoo lately, often with Yahoo's advertising on the bottom, and with Yahoo all over the headers. > In article telecom20.255.12@telecom-digest.org, Al Iverson wrote: >> Internet access isn't a right; it's a private service contracted between >> you and the ISP. If you don't like the terms of that contract, vote with >> your feet. If you don't like that your ISP blocks port 25, find a >> different provider. If you don't like that other sites block connections >> from you on port 25 because you're on a dynamic IP and listed in a spam >> stopping list like Gordon Fecyk's PDL, then you're pretty much out of >> luck; you don't own or have any say over the servers that choose to use >> those lists. > If I find myself out in the field unable to access my own mail servers (the > only ones I will EVER use for email) due to some over-exuberant ISP who > feels the need to become the net police by blocking outbound port 25, I > simply use an SSH tunnel to reach the server. Actually, if it's your own private server, there's no earthly reason to use port 25. Use any port you want on the server and configure your Emailer accordingly. Direct replies are unlikely to be read. To reply use the address below: falco_marcus_didius yahoo.co.uk ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 01:46:31 -0400 From: Bob Natale Subject: Re: The Neighborhood Local Dial Tone and Long Distance From MCI Saaby@MyRealBox.com (Saab Guy) wrote: Hi, > I don't know if we ever made a final decision on this one but I found > the real catch ... the other people you call have to be enrolled in the > Neighborhood or have local service from MCI Do you have a reference for this claim? I can't detect that from scanning the info at www.TheNeighborhood.com. Thanks, BobN ------------------------------ From: J3r3my L33 Subject: Re: Which Prepaid Int'l GSM SIM Card is the Best? Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 09:50:00 -0400 Organization: University of Maryland, Baltimore County It depends on the roaming agreements and where you would like to use it. I'm not sure what roaming agreements VS or ATT have for their Prepaid SIM but I do know the most economical and wide roaming card is the Swisscom SIM but you have a EU number, and is very expensive to use in the US. Not sure what your calling pattern is going be like, but if you buy an unlocked phone, get a basic VS account for the US, then get a Swisscom for travel. The Swisscom is good for a year of prepaid units without having to recharge it. Hope it helps. Jeremy Prof. Shurajit Gopal wrote in message news:telecom20.256.4@telecom-digest.org: > Can someone tell me which International GSM "Prepaid" SIM Card is the most > economical and the best (preferably with a US number)? > Thanks and regards, > Prof. Shurajit Gopal > Department of Mass Communication > North Greenville College > PO Box 1892 > Tigerville, SC 29688, USA > Phone: 864-414-1812 > Fax: 815-364-3365 > E-mail: ShurGopal@AOL.COM ------------------------------ From: Joseph Singer Subject: Re: Wanted: US 800s to Terminate on UK Landlines Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 08:14:12 -0700 Organization: Drizzle Reply-To: joeofseattle@yahoo.com On Sun, 19 May 2002 11:07:44 +0100, Robert Woolley wrote: > On Fri, 17 May 2002 05:34:26 -0700, Joseph Singer > wrote: >>> I've been queried by a company that wants to offer its UK customers a US >>> toll free number that terminates on a UK landline. >> http://www.kall8.com will terminate calls to any destination including >> international locations. The rate per minute varies depending on the >> destination. For terminating on a ring to number in the UK it's 10 >> cents/minute for normal land lines and 35 cents/minute to mobiles. > Except it's now going up to 35 cents a minute to uk landlines as of 1 > May. You read the rates changes wrong. The rate to point to regular numbers in the UK is still 10 cents/minute. Calls to "special services" which means/includes mobiles is 35 cents/minute. When you access their rates page a window pops up with the new rates for certain countries plus "special services." The UK is not among the adjusted rates. Rates to regular UK numbers are still 10 cents/minute. Personal replies most likely will not be read. Please reply in the newsgroup. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 11:12:47 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: EchoStar Loses Bid to Offer Local TV Beyond Market WASHINGTON, May 20 (Reuters) - EchoStar Communications Corp. (NASDAQ:DISH) lost a bid to broadcast a local television channel beyond that market when the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday refused to hear the satellite television provider's appeal of a lower court ruling. http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=27247876 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 11:14:16 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Metromedia Fiber Network Files For Chapter 11 NEW YORK, May 20 (Reuters) - Metromedia Fiber Network Inc. (NASDAQ:MFNXE) said on Monday it filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection, becoming the latest high-speed communications network operator to buckle under a heavy debt load and stiff competition. The company, which is backed by Verizon Communications Inc. (NYSE:VZ), said it will continue to operate during its restructuring. It hired Impala Partners to assist during the reorganization and UBS Warburg to advise on strategic alternatives. http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=27248295 ------------------------------ From: Ed Ellers Subject: Re: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 11:29:21 -0400 John Higdon wrote: > Besides, radar detectors were around first. You should know better than that. Part 15 unintentional radiators (such as superhet receivers) aren't allowed to cause interference, and have to be shut down if they do. ------------------------------ From: Barry Margolin Subject: Re: Cable vs DSL for IP Telephony Organization: Genuity, Woburn, MA Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 15:44:35 GMT In article , Chip G wrote: > Phil McKerracher wrote in message > news:telecom20.252.5@telecom-digest.org: >> UDP is generally used for VoIP because the occasional lost packet is >> preferable to a delay while retransmission takes place. > The nature of TCP ensures that all of the packets arrive > ... regardless of the sequencing. TCP provides for retransmission if > some packets are lost. Of course, in the context of real-time media > streams this makes no sense. It does little good to receive and > playback the third word in a sentence before playing the first > two. That wouldn't happen with TCP. It also ensures that all the packets are processed by the receiving application in the order that they were originally sent by the sending application. If the packet containing the first two words is lost, the one with the third word will be held in a buffer until that packet is retransmitted. What you would hear is a brief pause followed by what was said. > Voice can sustain some lost packets and still be intelligible ... > hence the use of UDP. However, phone lines are also used for some non-voice applications, such as touch-tone menus. This is why most VoIP protocols include a special way to encode DTMF tones, which includes receipt confirmation. Barry Margolin, barmar@genuity.net Genuity, Woburn, 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. ------------------------------ From: wa1hoz@qsl.net (Gerry Belanger) Subject: Re: Help With Tie Mod Key 16 Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 16:07:48 GMT In article , DONSHADDIX@aol.com wrote: > I need to find a place in the east that repairs or sales a Mod Key > 16/60006a units. I used Aztec East Inc in Norwalk CT, but they have > gone out of business. Have any ideas? What used to be Aztec East has gone through several ownership/management changes. It's current incarnation is Aztec Capital, LLC, Orange CT. You can call them at 866-607-1179. Gerry Belanger,Newtown, CT. To reply, make the obvious mods to wa1hoz_at_qsl (dot) net ------------------------------ 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-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-870-9697 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! 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 * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. 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. End of TELECOM Digest V20 #257 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed May 22 18:32:17 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id SAA12802; Wed, 22 May 2002 18:32:17 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 18:32:17 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200205222232.SAA12802@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #258 TELECOM Digest Wed, 22 May 2002 18:31:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 258 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Blocking Clients From Non-ISP Mail Servers? Bad Idea. (Richard Cox) Re: Blocking Clients From Non-ISP Mail Servers? Bad Idea. (F Goldstein) Re: Blocking Clients From Non-ISP Mail Servers? Bad Idea. (Al Iverson) Re: Blocking Clients From Non-ISP Mail Servers? Bad Idea. (Walter Dnes) Re: Huge Amount of Spam Received Recently (Dave Garland) Re: Huge Amount of Spam Received Recently (John Higdon) Re: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? (John Higdon) Re: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? (Tony Pelliccio) Re: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? (Dave Grebe) Re: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? (Stretch) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRII. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 18:36:27 +0100 From: Richard D G Cox Subject: Re: Blocking Clients From Non-ISP Mail Servers? Bad Idea. Organization: Mandarin Technology Limited On Mon, 20 May 2002 05:55 UT, Jack, who claimed to be "unspammable-4719@workbench.net", wrote: > I don't think he was saying he should be able to connect to any mail > server he wants. He wants to connect to one he is authorized to use. > There is a big difference. There is indeed. But how does the network administrator KNOW that the server he is trying to connect to, is one that he is authorised to use? What authority has he -- or can he produce? The authority he should have is embedded in the SMTP Auth protocol, and uses a different port number -- for which the remote SMTP server should have made proper provision. In many cases they won't have, and mostly this is because the administrator doesn't understand the differences between a message SUBMISSION and a message TRANSFER. If you want an ISP to validate credentials and provide access for one specific user to one specified SMTP server that they are "authorised" to use, that's fine too ... but that takes skill and effort and neither of those come for free. Are you prepared to pay the REAL cost of that? > people may have legitimate reasons for not wanting to use an ISP's mail > server. It's a well known fact that the system administrator can read > all mail passing through the server. Sure. As can the government (in most countries). In fact they can read all your mail *if they want to* regardless of whether or not it is being stored on their mailserver. The ISP has access to everything, so if you don't trust the ISP, don't use their network! > You know, I'm trying to figure out how this is any different from a local > telephone company saying "you can't use any long distance company except > ours." Well, with one big exception -- an ISP isn't a common carrier. Big difference. With Telcos, customers (usually) PAY for Long Distance. Email, on the other hand, more usually comes postage-due. The only benefit an ISP gets from insisting you do not use other mail servers, is that they do not get blamed for the likely abuse that WILL occur if they allow access (generally) elsewhere. > A few stunts like this, however, and ISP's could suddenly find themselves > the target of increased government regulation. If certain ISPs continue to allow abuse from their networks, then THEY are likely to find themselves on the receiving end of government regulation. (Are you listening, US Sprint?) Particularly, right now, in China, since the Chinese government discovered just how extensively their IP addresses are blocked worldwide as a result of their failing to curb abuse. > What I am saying is that if you wanted to allow your brother-in-law > (employee, girlfriend, whatever) on the other side of the country to > send mail though your web server, and you've set up a rule that allows > connections from his IP address, the ISP that HE uses should not be > intercepting that traffic. They are NOT intercepting it, provided the connection is set up correctly. As you will find, if you research the concept of "MAIL SUBMISSION AGENT". > The big problem with e-mail today is that most users have no way to reject > it until it's already in their mailbox. Again, everything is possible but there is a cost and that means a price. If you research www.spamcop.net you will find that exactly the service you want is available, and at a very *modest* price! > In my vision, users would have full control over who they want to receive > e-mails from, and a spammer would never even be allowed to connect to most > systems. That's a vision a lot of us share. It doesn't work with existing software or protocols. Considerable Research and Development work will be required and SOMEONE will have to pay for it. Since a certain vendor now gives away mail (client) software for free, it is difficult to assess what the market might be for such enhanced mail software - and at what price it might then be available. Richard D G Cox Penarth, UK: 029 2031 1111 (To reply, take out the office) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 13:37:18 -0400 From: Fred R. Goldstein Subject: Re: Blocking Clients From Non-ISP Mail Servers? Bad Idea. Jack on Mon, 20 May 2002 01:55:40 sed, > Now, what I really wish is that the folks who set the standards for > the Internet would come up with a new type of e-mail that kind of a > cross between regular e-mail and instant messaging. The problem with > IM is that the recipient assumes you want an immediate response, and > that's not always the case. What I envision is a new kind of e-mail > that would go direct from machine to machine, using the server only as > a backup (like instant messaging). The big advantage to this is that > spammers can keep changing their e-mail addresses, but most don't have > unlimited access to IP blocks, so it would be a lot easier to reject > communications from spammers, and also you'd have better security of > e-mail. What you're asking for is the NORMAL type of email that prevailed on the Internet before the days of the Winsock! The Internet (and its TCP/IP protocol suite) are inherently peer-to-peer. And so is mail. The native mail protocol is SMTP, and you send mail end to end without any involvement in the middle. The mail reader on the end system reads the mail off of the local spool that the SMTP daemon delivered it to. You don't remember this because most modern clients are on PC-type machines, which are not assumed to be up and running on the net 7x24 the way SMTP nodes are. Back when was at DEC a decade ago, I had a VAXstation in my office running all the time, with an SMTP address. Mail arrived whenever it did. I didn't poll a server. I didn't use a relay. But with PCs, we aren't assumed to always be up. So we delegate the SMTP-receipt function to a POP or IMAP server, at our ISP or belonging to our employer/organization, and poll it when we're on line. The send-without-relay function is more an OS decision. Windows chooses to not implement an SMTP relay agent, like sendmail; instead, most clients just pass the mail to a relay server which does. Lots of Linux and other Unix workstation users run their own mail relay, be it sendmail, postfix, qmail, or something else. > But I wish some of the people who develop these peer-to-peer file > sharing applications would put some effort into coming up with > peer-to-peer e-mail, that gives you guaranteed delivery to the > recipient's system (or as close as it can get), encryption built-in > and transparent to the user, and the ability to easily and positively > block further communications from anyone who tries to spam - in fact, > the client could be set up on kind of a "voting" system, where each > time a message is flagged as spam by a user, that information is > shared with the other clients, and if an IP address starts > accumulating a high number of spam complaints it's automatically > locked out (the clients automatically reject mail from that address) > for a certain length of time (configurable by the user, not some > central administrator type, but with a default of perhaps seven days). If you run your own SMTP, you can do your own filtering; again, many Unixheads do. And there are "blackhole" lists out there which suggest which originators are most likely spammers. This tends to be tricky to administer -- you think it's easy to stay ahead of the spammers? -- which is one reason many end users don't want to do their own peer to peer mail. ------------------------------ From: al56g@radparker.com (Al Iverson) Subject: Re: Blocking Clients From Non-ISP Mail Servers? Bad Idea. Organization: Please don't email replies Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 19:30:12 -0500 In article , Jack wrote: >> BTW actually most users don't need it. I use AOL when travelling. They >> redirect SMTP to their rate-limiting server. It worked just fine. I >> could even connect to the company mail server with pop3 just fine. > Still, people may have legitimate reasons for not wanting to use an > ISP's mail server. It's a well known fact that the system > administrator can read all mail passing through the server. Who could just as easily sniff your SMTP traffic. If that's a concern, it's ssh tunnel time. Al Iverson -- http://www.radparker.com -- Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA Support Minnesota Jazz -- Disclaimer: All of my opinions are mine alone. ------------------------------ From: Walter Dnes Subject: Re: Blocking Clients From Non-ISP Mail Servers? Bad Idea. Reply-To: waltdnes@waltdnes.org Date: 21 May 2002 23:54:25 -0400 On Mon, 20 May 2002 01:55:40 -0400, Jack, wrote: > Still, people may have legitimate reasons for not wanting to use > an ISP's mail server. It's a well known fact that the system > administrator can read all mail passing through the server. I > can think of a lot of reasons that might not be desirable, > that have nothing to do with spam. In which case, you have no business whatsoever sending it over the net in cleartext where *ANYBODY* with a sniffer can read it. > I really hate the idea of any increased federal regulation over > the Internet, but the exception to that would be if it becomes > a widespread practice for ISP's to start deciding on their > own which ports at which sites people can and cannot access. > At the very least, they should have to state up front (in their > advertising, not just in the fine print of some document you > don't receive until AFTER you've signed up) that they're not > offering true Internet access, but only partial access instead. The sad fact is that open relays, and direct-to-MX via port 25 have been grossly abused by spammers. Unwilling recipients of these spams find that refusing to accept any email from sites that allow these practices greatly reduces the amount of spam, with comparitively little loss of legitimate email. My former ISP, Sympatico, found that out. At one point, with a bit over half-a-million customers, they were right up there on the SpamCop statistics with multi-million subscriber outfits like AOL/MSN/Hotmail/Yahoo etc. They were being blocked by a lot of small lists, and RBL was being rumored. Sympatico rolled out port-25 blocking, and they dropped off the radar as far as the count of spam complaints was concerned. > Now, just so everyone is perfectly clear about what I'm objecting to, > I am NOT saying that you cannot or should not restrict your mail > server so that it's only useable by your customers (or by others at > certain "trusted" fixed IP addresses, if you wish). What I am saying > is that if you wanted to allow your brother-in-law (employee, > girlfriend, whatever) on the other side of the country to send mail > though your web server, and you've set up a rule that allows > connections from his IP address, the ISP that HE uses should not be > intercepting that traffic. You seem to be forgetting a very important fact here. The vast majority of people use ISP's that provide *DYNAMIC* IP addresses. As soon as you hang up, it's available for the next person to use. This allows an ISP to have 10 or 20 customers per IP address; not everybody is going online at the same time. This effectively anonymizes the sender. The ISPs that do provide static IP addresses generally allow them outbound port-25. > I'm sure I hate spam as much as you do, if not more, but I'm not so > sure that restricting e-mail in every which way possible isn't doing > more harm than good. Otto von Bismarck once said that a man who states he believes an idea "in principle" has no intention whatsover of implementing it. I'm getting rather tired of the bleeding-heart liberal types who wring their hands over the spam problem, but yell and scream about anybody who tries to do something about the problem. You may view some of the self-defense measures against spam as evil. But they're the lesser of two evils, versus doing nothing. Deal with it. > What I envision is a new kind of e-mail that would go direct > from machine to machine, using the server only as a backup (like > instant messaging). The big advantage to this is that spammers > can keep changing their e-mail addresses, but most don't have > unlimited access to IP blocks, so it would be a lot easier to > reject communications from spammers, and also you'd have better > security of e-mail. [...deletia...] > But I wish some of the people who develop these peer-to-peer file > sharing applications would put some effort into coming up with > peer-to-peer e-mail, that gives you guaranteed delivery to the > recipient's system (or as close as it can get), encryption built-in > and transparent to the user, and the ability to easily and positively > block further communications from anyone who tries to spam You're effectively talking about asking every net newbie to be a sysadmin and run a server that's accepting connections from the internet 24x7. Do you realize the implications? Hint; experienced veterans who follow security newsgroups religiously still get their machines cracked. Having every AOL'er and MSN'er and everybody's grandmother running a server will be the end of the internet. Walter Dnes I'm not repeating myself; I'm an X Window user, I'm an ex-Windows user ------------------------------ From: Dave Garland Subject: Re: Huge Amount of Spam Received Recently Organization: Wizard Information Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 23:50:18 -0500 It was a dark and stormy night when Marcus Didius Falco wrote: > I've been > noticing an enormous amount of spam from Chinese addresses these days, As have I. Since it is known that the Chinese government monitors email to Chinese addresses (with technological help from assorted US companies such as Cisco), I think that complaints will be most effective if they involve thank-yous for contributions to Falun Gong, acknowledgements of messages regarding the struggle to free Tibet, Vietnamese plans to invade China, Taiwanese plans to assert control over a newly "reunited" China, encrypted messages, and the like (use your imagination). If we make Chinese ISPs nervous about accepting spammer accounts, if we waste the Chinese secret police's time monitoring suspicious emails and questioning the recipients, that's all to the good. And if a spammer gets taken out and shot, well, that's a little harsh, but it's still a win-win situation. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 10:28:04 -0700 Subject: Re: Huge Amount of Spam Received Recently From: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows In article telecom20.256.11@telecom-digest.org, Colin Sutton wrote: >> 4. Sender claims to be: kkk5012@yahoo.co.kr >> Connecting server claims to be: "yahoo.co.kr" >> Server is actually: unknown (on hananet.net network) > yahoo.co.kr resolves to kr.yahoo.com, the Korean yahoo site, for me. But but the actual IP address of the connecting host (in my case) did not have any rev. resolution and was (according to APNIC) on another network completely. Anyone can put "yahoo.co.kr" in the HELO. In this case, it was bogus, as were all my other examples of email supposedly originating from Yahoo. No offense, but since I didn't include the IP address of the spam host, how could you know to what it resolved? I'm sure that the IP resulting from a lookup of "yahoo.co.kr" would resolve back to that canonical name. In article telecom20.257.3@telecom-digest.org, Marcus Didius Falco wrote: > Actually, if it's your own private server, there's no earthly reason > to use port 25. Use any port you want on the server and configure your > Emailer accordingly. And that, of course, is effectively what an SSH tunnel does ... over a secure link, at that. Naturally, port 25 still has to work in the clear since one of the primary duties of my mail server is to receive email from others. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | AIM: plodder5 | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 http://www.anntec.com/realpoop.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 14:36:28 -0700 Subject: Re: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? From: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows In article telecom20.257.9@telecom-digest.org, Ed Ellers wrote: > John Higdon wrote: >> Besides, radar detectors were around first. > You should know better than that. Part 15 unintentional radiators > (such as superhet receivers) aren't allowed to cause interference, and > have to be shut down if they do. I would want to see some very convincing data that the miniscule radiation from a radar detector's local oscillator interferes with POS data equipment. I look at this complaint in the same light as the nonsense that cellphones can cause fires and explosions at gas stations. Without some sort of compelling evidence backing up these urban legend events, we could end up with the war of mythical disturbances and interactions firmly encoded into legislation and regulation. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | AIM: plodder5 | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 http://www.anntec.com/realpoop.html ------------------------------ From: Tony Pelliccio Subject: Re: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? Organization: The Ace Tomatoe and Cement Company Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 21:51:17 GMT In article , denisf@pickaxe.net says: > Monty Solomon wrote: >> Apparently, ChevronTexaco Corporation has filed an endorsement with >> the FCC on new regulation that would apply to radar detectors because >> the 25 million devices in use interfere with high-tech payment systems >> now becoming popular at the gas pump. > Did I get that right? > A radar detector, which is basically a sensitive receiver, screws up > the pumps? > Do we have to turn off our FM radios in petrol stations now? > Sounds like, smells like .... A receiver has an oscillator present that generates the IF for the received signal. Yes, this is known to radiate a little bit and could potentially mess with an RF based reader system. Tony ------------------------------ From: Dave Grebe Subject: Re: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 23:31:18 -0400 Organization: MindSpring Enterprises I use a radar detector myself, and a big source of false alarms is other peoples' radar detectors. Like any other superhet radio the local oscillators can interfere with each other. So if the FCC decides to act on this these things *may* happen: - Radar detectors will get more expensive. Maybe prohibitively so, maybe not. - False alarms from other detectors will be reduced / eliminated. - Radar detector detectors used in areas where the detectors are illegal will either stop working entirely or be reduced in effectiveness. Ed Ellers wrote: > You should know better than that. Part 15 unintentional radiators > (such as superhet receivers) aren't allowed to cause interference, and > have to be shut down if they do. ------------------------------ From: Stretch Subject: Re: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 02:05:05 GMT Organization: Road Runner - Texas John Higdon wrote: > In article telecom20.255.16@telecom-digest.org, Monty Solomon wrote: >> Apparently, ChevronTexaco Corporation has filed an endorsement with >> the FCC on new regulation that would apply to radar detectors because >> the 25 million devices in use interfere with high-tech payment systems >> now becoming popular at the gas pump. > Interesting. Radar detectors are merely receivers, not transmitters. Sounds > like a redesign of the pay at the pump systems might be in order. Besides, > radar detectors were around first. Most radio receivers use a technique called superheterodyne, which involves generating a frequency similar to the one being recieved, and using the interference between the two as an "amplifier" of sorts. I'm not an RF guru, but I bet any ham could explain it better. Virgiina police have used this (the small leakage from radar detectors) to fine motorists who violate the state's ban on the units. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: First, as Denis McMahon says in the > message before this one, and as you note, they are RECEIVERS, not > transmitters, but all receivers do have very tiny transmitters in > them to handle the IF (intermediate frequency) conversions, etc. That > being said, if radar detectors make that much of a difference, then > all radios should be banned, especially the kind that make positive, > purposeful, transmissions; i.e. CB radios, police radios, etc. > But that is not the point. The joke is on you. Remember a few months > ago, or maybe it was a year ago, they were on the same tangent about > cell phones at petrol stations? Only instead of diddling the meters > in the pumps, the allegation was they would produce a tiny spark and > the fumes would start a major fire at the petrol station. They got no > where with that one, so now the emphasis is on radar detectors, > another bane in a police officer's existence. > The FCC should realize radar detectors *already, and always have been* > a violation of the communications laws. You are entitled to *listen* > to almost any radio band anytime (you 'listen' in this case when the > radar detector apparatus 'listens' for the presence of police radar), > but you are not permitted to act upon, or benefit from *what you hear* > on the radio*, especially a police transmission. You act upon or benefit > from the transmission which was not intended for yourself when you > reduce your automobile speed or otherwise watch for police activity in > the immediate area. You benefit by not getting a speeding ticket or > being taken to jail. I suppose if you could convince the authorities > that you were merely listening out of intellectual curiosity to the > signals and that you did not act upon what you heard (did not slow > down your driving speed) and did not benefit from what you heard (that > is, did not care if you were taken away to jail), then I would guess > you could have a radar detector device and use it lawfully. But since > the only purpose is to 'listen' to police transmissions and respond to > your own benefit, then how could they be legal under existing FCC > rules? What makes these devices any different than listening to verbal > communication on a police radio for example, about a bank robbery then > relaying the information to the bank robbers who are in your car or > hiding nearby? Uhh ... I have to admit I haven't had too many bank robbers hide in my car lately. Two courts in my area have been forced to admit that many thousands of speeding tickets handed out for years are entirely bogus, and that the municipalities knowingly operated highly profitable business operations, with the complicity of both the police and the courts, to fine motorists who were breaking no law. Five officers equipped with one radar gun can generate over $10,000 per hour, and you can pay up, "or else". No used-car salesman or three-card monte dealer could hold a candle to this bunch. I know that the whole "burden of proof" thing is a silly concept (as did the court: 24 hours after each summons was issued, they mail out an arraignment notice, with a return address of "COLLECTIONS DEPARTMENT" on the envelope, with six different ways to pay the fine, but not one single word about the right to question the charge. This is the court, mind you, not the police department.) In a personal case, I used the opportunity to take note of my own radar detector going off to make obsevations about the circumstances, which forced even that same court to conclude that the charge of speeding could not be supported when questioned. (I'm being diplomatic about that part.) > Admittedly, this business about radar detectors/cell phones causing > some problems at the gas station is just a crock. And you are not > going to see police radios turned off at gas stations or banned when > police are driving their cars anytime soon. Meanwhile, you are just a > 'civilian'; you will follow the rules and obey. PAT] I take the rules exactly as seriously as the people enforcing them do. :-) ------------------------------ 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-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-870-9697 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! 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 * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. 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. End of TELECOM Digest V20 #258 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed May 22 22:26:31 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id WAA16119; Wed, 22 May 2002 22:26:31 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 22:26:31 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200205230226.WAA16119@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #259 TELECOM Digest Wed, 22 May 2002 22:26:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 259 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Cops Fret About Being Targets of Cellphone Surveillance (Joe Wineburgh) Telecom Update (Canada) #333, May 21, 2002 (Angus TeleManagement) Wanted: Incoming Call Timer (Mark Gibson) Looking For a Needle in a Haystack! Help! (Kim Fuller) Where to Buy Northern Telecom Phones For Home Use? (john63401@yahoo.com) High Court Says States Can Be Sued In Federal Court (Marcus D. Falco) Looking For 800 Service for UK and Australia Callers (onshore@netcom.ca) Re: Echo With Cell Phones (Michael D. Sullivan) Rapid Rise in U.S. Mobile Telephone Usage - Survey (Monty Solomon) New Hotmail Account Information Causes Confusion (Marcus Didius Falco) More Businesses Want to Give You Information (David B. Horvath, CCP) Re: Neighborhood Local Dial Tone and Long Distance From MCI (Saab Guy) Surfing On the Computers at Work?? How Safe Are You? (offers.com.jp) Re: Best Way to Keep Children Safe on the Net (Bill Horne) Last Laugh! Another Worldcom Long-distance Horror Story (Tom Betz) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRII. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Joe Wineburgh Subject: Cops Fret About Being Targets of Cellphone Surveillance Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 12:52:27 -0400 Found this quite intriguing... #JOE -----Original Message---- Subject: Cops Fret About Being Targets of Cellphone Surveillance Date: Sat, 18 May 2002 20:20:43 PDT From: Nick Santucci Subject: Cell Phones Snoop on Cops (fwd) Drug gang members are going high tech :) Forwarded from a law enforcement newsletter NEW GENERATION CELL PHONE 'AUTO-ANSWER' COULD TIP OFF POTENTIAL SUSPECTS It has been brought to our attention that many new generation cellular phones have an 'auto-answer' feature that allows the phone to answer a call automatically without the user's physical contact. Apparently, this feature is designed for 'hands free' operation for disabled individuals, and individuals operating their phones while driving. Further, it was posted in a Louisiana State Police Special Bulletin (dated May 2) that DEA contacts in New York have received reports from agents that their CI's know of drug gang members who are indeed aware of this feature and use it to gather intelligence from law enforcement. "They will allow themselves to be picked up and then 'leave' a phone in their vehicle to gather intelligence from them later or they will secretly hide a phone in an officer's vehicle or in a spot that they know that law enforcement gathers at to glean intelligence," the bulletin reads. Further, an April 2 edition of the bulletin detailed a scenario involving one of these cellular phones, but at the time the Louisiana State Police were unable to confirm the origin of the scenario. However, representatives from the department told Xxxxxx that they have since been contacted by the Phelps County (Missouri) Sheriff's Department identifying that department as the origin for the scenario. The scenario featured a Nextel phone, in particular, that was found in a truck that officers were searching. There were 65 pounds of marijuana in the sleeper. During the search, the cellular phone began ringing while it sat in the holster on the dashboard. When the phone stopped ringing, the officers assumed that voicemail kicked in, however, they learned later that the phone was set in auto-answer. The caller was the intended recipient of the marijuana. Incidentally, he was able to overhear the officers during their search of the vehicle. Not only did this give away details of the search to the individual on the phone, but it also potentially jeopardized the safety of the officers. Louisiana State Police has confirmed the details of the auto-sound feature through Nextel. The feature can be accessed by pressing the * key and then the # key. Then hit the arrow key until you see the auto-answer option. You can also find out whether or not the feature is actually on, and you can program how many rings it will take to activate it, or to ring silently. As stated in the Louisiana State Police Special Bulletin, April 2 edition: "This is a potentially serious threat to agents especially in a controlled delivery environment. Always check cell phones to make sure what kind they are. Be especially careful of Nextel phones when found and make sure the auto-answer feature is turned off or at least no one says anything near it that can be heard and tip off a potential suspect." We have sent this warning out strictly to inform you of the POTENTIAL danger you could face if you find yourself in a similar situation. The phone itself poses no threat, but as with any device featured in our Weapons Warnings, in the hands of the wrong people it could be used in a potentially dangerous way. Specifically, these phones could be used as a communication device that could release official law enforcement information to a potential suspect. POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice. To subscribe to Politech: http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/ Declan McCullagh's photographs are at http://www.mccullagh.org/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 11:14:20 -0400 From: Angus TeleManagement Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #333, May 21, 2002 TELECOM UPDATE published weekly by Angus TeleManagement Group http://www.angustel.ca Number 333: May 21, 2002 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 ** GROUP TELECOM http://www.gt.ca ** LUCENT TECHNOLOGIES CANADA http://www.lucent.ca ** PRIMUS CANADA: http://www.primustel.ca ** Q9 NETWORKS: http://www.Q9.com ** TELUS: http://www.telus.com ** UNISPHERE NETWORKS: http://www.unispherenetworks.com ************************************************************ IN THIS ISSUE: ** Teleglobe Creditors May Sue BCE ** Blouin Replaces Edwards at Emergis ** Nortel Files Plan to Raise US$2.5 Billion ** Supreme Court to Hear Utility Pole Dispute ** Juniper Buys Unisphere Networks ** Call-Net Says Bell Violating Winback Rules ** Rogers AT&T Signs Purolator for Parcel Tracking ** MTS Tests TV Over DSL ** Aliant Files Memorial U. Centrex Tariff ** CRTC Turns Down Centrex Contract Changes ** Aliant "Unlimited Features" Proposal Denied ** Telus Announces Digital Expansion ** Entourage Buys Videotron Technical Services ** Peer 1 Appoints CFO ** Yak Dial-Around LD to Use Telus Network ** Financial Results Look Communications Minacs Worldwide ** Dortmans to Lead Call Centre Seminar ============================================================ TELEGLOBE CREDITORS MAY SUE BCE: As Telecom Update reported in an Extra edition on May 15, an Ontario court has granted Teleglobe bankruptcy protection under the Companies' Creditors Arrangement Act. A group of Teleglobe bondholders says it is considering legal action against BCE Inc. for cutting financial support to the company. ** Bell Canada says that it is arranging for network backup from AT&T, Equant, Sprint, Telstra, and others to carry overseas traffic if necessary. BLOUIN REPLACES EDWARDS AT EMERGIS: Pierre Blouin has been named CEO of BCE Emergis, replacing Brian Edwards, who has resigned. Blouin was previously CEO of Bell Mobility; his replacement has not been named. ** In other changes, John Sheridan, President of Bell Canada, has been named Bell's Chief Operating Officer as well. Stephen Wetmore, Bell Canada's Vice-Chair, Corporate, is now also Executive VP of BCE. NORTEL FILES PLAN TO RAISE US$2.5 BILLION: Nortel Networks has told Canadian and U.S. regulators that it plans to raise up to US$2.5 billion over the next 25 months through sale of various forms of securities. ** Nortel has signed a five-year contract to supply U.S. Cellular, the eighth-largest wireless carrier in the U.S., with CDMA 1X wireless equipment worth US$320 million to $375 million. SUPREME COURT TO HEAR UTILITY POLE DISPUTE: The Supreme Court of Canada has agreed to hear a Canadian Cable Television Association appeal of last year's Federal Court ruling that the CRTC cannot set rates for cableco use of hydro poles. ** In 1999, the CRTC set a rate of $15.89/month for cableco use of hydro poles; the hydro utilities, which want to charge more, appealed to the Federal Court (see Telecom Update #202, 292). JUNIPER BUYS UNISPHERE NETWORKS: Juniper Networks has agreed to pay about US$740 million in cash and stock to buy Massachusetts-based Unisphere Networks, a Siemens subsidiary that makes edge routers. Siemens will own 10% of the merged company. CALL-NET SAYS BELL VIOLATING WINBACK RULES: Call-Net charges that Bell Canada continues to call Call-Net local customers within the first three months -- in some cases before the customer transfer has taken place -- to persuade them to return to Bell, despite CRTC rules prohibiting such action (see Telecom Update #315). http://www.crtc.gc.ca/PartVII/Eng/2002/8622/C25-16.htm ROGERS AT&T SIGNS PUROLATOR FOR PARCEL TRACKING: Purolator Courier has agreed to use the Rogers AT&T GSM/GPRS network to provide mobile data services to more than 6,000 Symbol Technologies handheld computers used by Purolator employees across Canada. ** Rogers' BlackBerry e-mail devices can now send files over the Internet to a printer or fax machine using a service from PrinterOn. MTS TESTS TV OVER DSL: Manitoba Telecom has begun a trial of digital TV delivered via DSL over phone lines. The trial, with 200 participants, will run six to eight months. (See Telecom Update #302) ALIANT FILES MEMORIAL U. CENTREX TARIFF: On May 7, Aliant Telecom filed a tariff for the Centrex rates ($20.53/line in a three-year contract) it offered Memorial University earlier in April. GT Telecom had complained to the CRTC that the Memorial proposal was below tariff (see Telecom Update #332). http://www.crtc.gc.ca/8740/eng/2002/a53.htm#21 ** In its reply to GT's complaint, Aliant says that it made a "billing error" -- now corrected -- by supplying modem lines to Memorial University at residential rates. http://www.crtc.gc.ca/PartVII/Eng/2002/8622/g7-03.htm CRTC REJECTS CENTREX CONTRACT CHANGES: Telecom Orders 2002- 196, 2002-198, and 2002-199 deny applications by Aliant and Bell Canada to revise Minimum Contract Period terms for Centrex service. The Commission says incumbent telcos' use of MCPs is under review in the price caps decision, to be released shortly. http://www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Orders/2002/o2002-196.htm http://www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Orders/2002/o2002-198.htm http://www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Orders/2002/o2002-199.htm ALIANT "UNLIMITED FEATURES" PROPOSAL DENIED: Telecom Order 2002-197 turns down an application by Aliant to offer residence customers up to 11 features at a flat rate of $12/month. The Commission was not satisfied that this rate would cover costs. http://www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Orders/2002/o2002-197.htm TELUS ANNOUNCES DIGITAL EXPANSION: Telus Mobility says that it now offers digital wireless service to an additional 5.4 million Ontario and Quebec residents, thanks to network buildouts and its digital roaming agreement with Bell Mobility. ENTOURAGE BUYS VIDEOTRON TECHNICAL SERVICES: Entourage Technology Solutions has finalized its agreement to buy Videotron's TV and Internet installation and repair services. (See Telecom Update #323) PEER 1 APPOINTS CFO: Vancouver-based Peer 1 Network, which provides international Internet access and server co-location services, has named James P. Taylor, formerly of Chicago Aerosol, as CFO. YAK DIAL-AROUND LD TO USE TELUS NETWORK: Telus has signed a $100 million, five-year deal to supply wholesale long- distance to Toronto-based Yak Communications, which claims 300,000 recurring customers of its dial-around long distance service. FINANCIAL RESULTS: In the first quarter: ** Look Communications had sales of $15.6 million, 30% less than last year but 5% more than the previous quarter. Look said it gained a net 1,000 business customers in the quarter. Net income: $1.3 million. ** Minacs Worldwide sales were $62.0 million, 14% more than the previous quarter. Operations outside Canada provided 63% of revenues. Net earnings were $1.2 million. DORTMANS TO LEAD CALL CENTRE SEMINAR: Henry Dortmans, President of Angus Dortmans Associates, will lead a special public presentation of the internationally acclaimed seminar "Essential Skills and Knowledge for Effective Incoming Call Centre Management" in Toronto, May 29-30. ** "For managers who are new to the call centre environment, this seminar provides a solid foundation to build upon. For managers who are experienced in the call centre environment, this seminar provides useful tools to improve management skills" -- Linda Noble, Business Manager, Telus ** "Henry is very knowledgeable, responsive, informal, and professional. He kept the group on topic, and he is very organized. The seminar would be beneficial to any company." -- Joan Letendre, Real Time Management Group, SaskTel To register, call 1-800-672-6177 or go to http://www.incoming.com ============================================================ 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 2. The e-mail edition is distributed free of charge. To subscribe, send an e-mail message to: TelecomUpdate@add.postmastergeneral.com To stop receiving the e-mail edition, send an e-mail message to: TelecomUpdate@remove.postmastergeneral.com Sending e-mail to these addresses will automatically add or remove the sender's e-mail address from the list. Leave subject line and message area blank. We do not give Telecom Update subscribers' e-mail addresses to any third party. For more information, see http://www.angustel.ca/update/privacy.html. =========================================================== COPYRIGHT AND CONDITIONS OF USE: All contents copyright 2002 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 500. 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: mark@markg.co.uk (Mark Gibson) Subject: Wanted: Incoming Call Timer Date: 22 May 2002 11:18:48 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ I'm looking for a device to allow timing of incoming phone calls on a computer. Basically it needs to signal the computer when the call is answered -- to start a timer, and again when the call is terminated (at either end) -- to stop the timer. This is the only functionality required. It is on UK phone lines (we use NTL if that makes a difference). I've search the internet, and the closest thing i've found is a DIY device called Alltel by Shane Wegner (http://www.cm.nu/~shane/alltel/) - DTMF decoding is not required. I'm a bit wary of building devices for phone lines, so does anyone know of a commerical device I could buy for this purpose. Or alternatively can someone point me in the direction of phone line information for the UK. Cheers, Mark Gibson ------------------------------ Subject: Looking for a Needle in a Haystack! Help! Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 14:36:44 -0600 From: Kim Fuller Hello! I am trying to locate some info on a class someone I work with is interested in possibly having some employees attend. He is not sure of the name exactly, but it's something like "Telephone 101" and it's a one-day course in Sacramento. You may or may not be able to assist me, but when I came across your website, I thought it was worth a try. I do not know who hosts the training or really anything else. I would appreciate any information you could provide that would point me in the right direction. Thank you! Kim Fuller Administrative Assistant The Rye Telephone Co ------------------------------ From: john63401@yahoo.com Subject: Where to Buy Northern Telecom Phones for Home Use? Organization: Prodigy Internet http://www.prodigy.com Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 18:15:16 GMT I'd like to buy a nice NT phone with Call ID and answering machine built in ... for my home office. Any idea what model I should get ... and where to order one via mail order? I want something better built then the stuff you see at Walmart. Also ... if there are any other brands I should consider ... let me know. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 15:06:14 -0400 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: High Court Says States Can Be Sued In Federal Court The Supreme Court giveth and the Supreme Court taketh away. This is exactly the strategy that the ILECs have been saying they would follow in the wake of the decision last week upholding FCC rules on UNEs. Deep pockets litigation dragged out forever. Indeed, it was specifically Verizon that had said last week that it would be drawing out the litigation state by state. Note that this decision hasn't gotten NEARLY the publicity of the earlier one. CQ DAILY MONITOR MIDDAY UPDATE Published by Congressional Quarterly and the CQ Daily Monitor www.CQ.com Monday, May 20, 2002 - 1:55 p.m. HIGH COURT SAYS STATES CAN BE SUED IN FEDERAL COURT UNDER TELECOM LAW The Supreme Court ruled 8-0 today that states can be sued in federal court for their activities implementing the 1996 Telecommunications Act (PL 104-104), the Associated Press reported. Justices refused requests by Maryland's regulators to shield states from lawsuits by telephone companies. The ruling is the court's second in a week stemming from the 1996 law, which sought to spur competition in local phone service. Last week, justices upheld a federal plan for making the transition. Today's ruling means states must deal with potentially lengthy federal court litigation from companies angry over how state utility boards or other regulators are following the law. Maryland attorneys had argued that companies dissatisfied with state decisions should be restricted to challenges in state courts. The court also held that state commissioners could be sued individually. The ruling came in the case of Verizon Maryland v. Public Service Commission of Maryland. Direct replies are unlikely to be read. To reply use the address below: falco_marcus_didius yahoo.co.uk ------------------------------ From: onshore@netcom.ca Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 13:36:08 -0700 Subject: Looking For 800 Service for UK and Australia Callers I am looking for a wholesale service that a customer can call me from the UK or Australia on an 800 line and have it terminate in my office in the US or Canada. Thanks, Please e-mail me at onshore@netcom.ca ------------------------------ From: Michael D. Sullivan Subject: Re: Echo With Cell Phones Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 23:52:17 GMT On Sun, 19 May 2002 09:35:09 -0700, no-spam@no-spam.radiomonopoly.com wrote: > In article telecom20.255.7@telecom-digest.org, Dr. Joel M. Hoffman wrote: >> Friends of mine just got a set of three Verizon cell phones (one for >> each family member) and they tell me that they only get echo when they >> call my landline. Is this possible? I thought echo-cancellation was >> on the calling side. > This is probably due to a poor hybrid on your phone that allows > received audio to be turned around and sent back to the caller. With > the advent of digital coding on most cellphone calls, the > transmit/receive delay accentuates poor isolation. One source of delay is the conversion from analog to digital and back. Any A/D or D/A conversion inherently introduces some delay. The delay is greater when using the complex codecs employed in digital cellular service than when doing simple PCM. Another is the extensive processing involved in digital transmission through congested airwaves. A less likely further source of delay is the relatively rare use of satellite circuits by some system operators for backhaul. > The cellphone side is a four-wire circuit; your phone is two wire and > depends on a hybrid to sort it out on your end. If this is done > poorly, no amount of "echo suppression" can compensate without > introducing intolerable artifacts into the conversation. Actually, the cellphone side is a wireless circuit that uses separate radio links for the uplink and downlink. This is analogous to a four- wire telephone circuit, but it is not one. The cellular switch interconnects with the telco facilities in a four-wire circuit, but that is no different from a wireline end office's interconnection. Michael D. Sullivan Bethesda, MD, USA (delete NOSPAM from address to mail me) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 20:43:19 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Rapid Rise in U.S. Mobile Telephone Usage - Survey WASHINGTON, May 20 (Reuters) - Americans used about 456 billion minutes on their mobile telephones last year, up 76 percent over 2000, as revenue jumped 24 percent to $65 billion, said a new industry survey released on Monday. While the average monthly minutes of use rose to 385 minutes from 266 minutes, or 44.7 percent, the average monthly bill rose just 4.6 percent to $47.37 from $45.27, according to the Cellular Telecommunications & Internet Assocation. http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=27254066 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 21:46:58 -0400 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: New Hotmail Account Information Causes Confusion Edupage, May 20, 2002 A new feature of the Hotmail e-mail program allows users to see all of their options for sharing of personal data. The feature was added, according to Microsoft representatives, to give users full access to their account settings. However, many Hotmail users have been surprised to learn that their accounts were set to opt them in to certain kinds of promotions and data sharing. Although Microsoft asserts that it has not changed anyone's settings and has not modified its privacy policy, some users insist otherwise. Analyst David Ferris said users whose options were set to share data had probably agreed to that and were confused by the terms of agreement for their accounts. He applauded Microsoft for giving users access to the information and the option to change it. PCWorld, 17 May 2002 http://www.idg.net/ic_863486_1794_9-10000.html Direct replies are unlikely to be read. To reply use the address below: falco_marcus_didius yahoo.co.uk ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 22:13:37 -0400 From: dhorvath@cobs.com (David B. Horvath, CCP) Subject: More Businesses Want to Give You Information > National Corporation is seeking 5-6 Business reps per state to make > $8,000-$25,000 PLUS a month. ... > This is not MLM, or franchising. ... > Call 1-877-386-8389 24 hours a day to see and hear all the BENEFITS, And > possibly set up a Phone interview. ------------------------------ From: Saaby@MyRealBox.com (Saab Guy) Subject: Re: Neighborhood Local Dial Tone and Long Distance From MCI Date: 20 May 2002 23:10:07 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ > Do you have a reference for this claim? > I can't detect that from scanning the info at www.TheNeighborhood.com. I didn't catch it right at first either, go to: https://www.mci.com/localsignup/jspHelp/benefitDescription.html#unlimited_ld It seems to have all the little info windows for the Java rollovers, or so I suppose, well scroll down to "Unlimited Neighbor-to-Neighbor calls" it says: Neighbor-to-Neighbor lets you call any other Neighborhood, or MCI Local customer, at no extra charge. These Neighbor-to-Neighbor calls are automatic - you don't need to give out the names and numbers of the people you call Make your long distance calls from home any time, any day of the week ... continuing on down we find that ... Unlimited Neighbor-to-Neighbor calls Neighbor-to-Neighbor lets you call any other Neighborhood, or MCI Local customer, at no extra charge These Neighbor-to-Neighbor calls are automatic - you don't need to give out the names and numbers of the people you call Make your long distance calls from home any time, any day of the week Low long distance rate for all calls outside of The Neighborhood: Call anyone in the U.S. who is not enrolled in The Neighborhood or MCI local service for 7cents per minute - includes state-to-state, in-state and local toll calls Rates apply to calls you make day or night, weekday or weekend Rates exclude Federal Universal Service Fee. Additional state-specific fees apply. CA residents pay 5c a minute for local toll calls. So yeah, as I understand it it is unlimited long distance to other neighborhood members or people with MCI for local, thats it ... anyone want to call and ask?? Ryan ------------------------------ From: onceoffoffer@offers.com.jp Subject: Surfing On the Computers at Work? Just How Safe Are You? Organization: blah Reply-To: Surfsec@whatyouneedtoknow.com Date: Tuesday, 21 May 2002 23:15:57 -0600 Do you surf the internet and send E-mail at work? Your work PC will be full of evidence. It is becoming common in the workplace for companies to copy and investigate the contents of workers computers out of hours -- without your consent or knowledge. This is perfectly legal and it is happening now! Your job could be at risk, what would happen to you if you lost your job? People like you are losing their jobs right now because of their Internet activities in America and the UK. According to an APBNews report, 73.5% of all companies admit they "record and review their employees' communications and activities on the job." Download NOW -- http://www.evidence-eliminator.com/go.shtml?A657037+ There is no need for you to play Russian roulette with your job, family, car, property and everything else that depends on it! Act now! We can help, Evidence Eliminator can protect you from the dangers of the Internet! Download today with no risk, guaranteed. Act now! And transform your computer into a safe, clean and faster machine! Download NOW -- http://www.evidence-eliminator.com/go.shtml?A657037+ Do you have an ex-spouse or ex-partner with a grudge against you, have you been "Grassed"? Has anyone ever put a floppy disk in your computer? Is someone after your job? Can you honestly say that you really know for sure what may have been accidentally downloaded or purposefully hidden on your PC? If you have a business, protect your workplace and computers with Evidence Eliminator. Don't get investigated -- get protected! Download NOW -- http://www.evidence-eliminator.com/go.shtml?A657037+ Evidence Eliminator is proven to defeat the exact same forensic software as used by the US Secret Service, Customs Department and Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD). Download NOW -- http://www.evidence-eliminator.com/go.shtml?A657037+ It is a proven fact ... routine Forensic Analysis equipment such as EnCase and F.R.E.D. used by Private and Business Investigators, Law-Enforcement and others, can recover evidence from parts of your hard drive that you thought were empty, parts that you had cleaned. Download NOW -- http://www.evidence-eliminator.com/go.shtml?A657037+ [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I included this spam in this issue because of my own curiosity on exactly how they are doing something different (for example) than merely washing (and following up with bleaching) the /tmp files on your hard drive; the indexes to same; making sure the internet history/filename completion things are all removed; cookies are all gone, etc. The America On Line 'washing machine' (which they were giving away free a couple months ago) not only removes all those things above, but also offers to 'bleach' the shitty load seven or ten times as needed by overwriting the 'clean' disk then washing it again several times. What more needs to be done than that? I should put this formula here for everyone to copy. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Anonymous on Request Subject: Re: Best Way to Keep Children Safe on the Net Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 14:26:20 GMT Organization: ATT Broadband Babu Mengelepouti wrote: > On Fri, 3 May 2002 11:34:59 -0500, Patrick Townson wrote: >> There are so many stories in the media lately about children and sex >> things. One of the big things in recent years has been demands on >> librarians and schools to have filters on the Internet connection in >> the school, so that kids won't be able to see much of the net. We >> know the problems with that approach. There is no such thing as a >> computerized filter that will cover all the angles while not stepping >> on good, valid web sites/news, etc. Nothing takes the place of good >> human judgment. > > [snip] > Great to see you back in the saddle again, and stirring the pot of > controversy as before. Ditto. > There are some major problems with this approach. [snip] > I think there's a pretty simple solution. It's an adult world, and the > Internet is an adult place. If you don't believe that your kids are > mature enough to handle that reality, and you don't care to supervise > them, then don't allow your kids online at all. [snip] FWIW, my policy is that my child only visits web sites I've already seen, and I have a Linux firewall that cuts out any attempt to visit something I haven't approved. With a default policy of "Deny", only sites I explicitly enter are allowed. It's a lot more work than you'd think, but it's the only solution I'm comfortable with. Bill Horne PGP key: http://pgp.dtype.org:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xB1D7BB90 ------------------------------ From: Tom Betz Subject: Last Laugh! Another Worldcom Long-distance Horror Story Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 22:41:08 UTC Organization: XOme Rather amusingly told: Fair use: "So let's get this right, we argued. Unless we'd previously run up a barenaked, full price phone bill of hundreds of dollars of calls in a few days -- and people only enroll with MCI Worldcom to avoid such tariffs -- we couldn't be reprieved? "'That's the policy of the High Toll Department. And it looks like you have no such bills' "Admit it, it's creative. As we pointed this out: "'So it's like, you're fitted up on a murder rap. But unless you can provide evidence of previous unconfessed murders, you're going to stay in the clink?' "'That's the policy of the High Toll Department,' he confirmed. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I am not sure I understand this one. I mean, MCI is well known for their high rates and hidden charges, which they refer to as their low rates and straight forward billing, but how about some background on this if you know it. PAT] ------------------------------ 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-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-870-9697 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! 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 * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. 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. End of TELECOM Digest V20 #259 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu May 23 22:01:31 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id WAA05105; Thu, 23 May 2002 22:01:31 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 22:01:31 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200205240201.WAA05105@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #260 TELECOM Digest Thu, 23 May 2002 22:01:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 260 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? (Jay Hennigan) Re: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? (John Higdon) Re: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? (Hudson Leighton) Re: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? (John R. Levine) Re: Blocking Clients From Non-ISP Mail Servers? Bad Idea (Stanley Cline) Re: Blocking Clients From Non-ISP Mail Servers? Bad Idea (John McHarry) Re: Blocking Clients From Non-ISP Mail Servers? Bad Idea (Joe Lindstrom) Re: Echo With Cell Phones (John Higdon) Can RAM Affect Dialup Connections? (Robert A. Fink, M. D.) Re: Huge Amount of Spam Received Recently (Steven Lichter) Boot-up Relationship to Disconnects (Robert A. Fink, M. D.) Re: Last Laugh! Another Worldcom Long-Distance Horror Story (Ed Ellers) Re: Last Laugh! Another Worldcom Long-Distance Horror Story (Tom Betz) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRII. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: jay@west.net (Jay Hennigan) Subject: Re: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? Organization: Disgruntled Postal Workers Against Gun Control Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 23:08:53 GMT On Mon, 20 May 2002 11:29:21 -0400, Ed Ellers wrote: > John Higdon wrote: >> Besides, radar detectors were around first. > You should know better than that. Part 15 unintentional radiators > (such as superhet receivers) aren't allowed to cause interference, and > have to be shut down if they do. You should know better than that. :-) Part 15 intentional radiators (such as "speedpass" pay-at-the-pump interrogators) must accept any interference they receive, including that which causes undesired operation. If the radar detector's local oscillator causes interference to a licensed service, you're correct. The pay-at-the-pump transponders are themselves part 15 devices and as such not subject to protection from interference. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: > The FCC should realize radar detectors *already, and always have been* > a violation of the communications laws. You are entitled to *listen* > to almost any radio band anytime (you 'listen' in this case when the > radar detector apparatus 'listens' for the presence of police radar), > but you are not permitted to act upon, or benefit from *what you hear* > on the radio*, especially a police transmission. You act upon or benefit > from the transmission which was not intended for yourself when you > reduce your automobile speed or otherwise watch for police activity in > the immediate area. You benefit by not getting a speeding ticket or > being taken to jail. The predictable result of a driver "hearing" police radar would be for that driver to ensure that he is obeying the law. For it to be a violation of the law to obey the law is somewhat of a catch-22. There was a case a while back of some folks who sat around the bend from a police radar speed trap holding signs reading "30 MPH - Radar!!" where they were cited for interfering with a police officer. They were found not guilty because their actions were encouraging motorists to obey the law and as such could not be interfering with the legitimate duties of police. One should always obey traffic laws. Especially so when energy is present in certain portions of the microwave spectrum. > I suppose if you could convince the authorities > that you were merely listening out of intellectual curiosity to the > signals and that you did not act upon what you heard (did not slow > down your driving speed) and did not benefit from what you heard (that > is, did not care if you were taken away to jail), then I would guess > you could have a radar detector device and use it lawfully. A burglar using a scanner to know if he's tripped a silent alarm would be a different case, as the signals are being used in the commission of a crime. But the user of a radar detector is using it as a reminder to avoid commiting crimes. Jay Hennigan - CCIE #7880 - Network Administration - jay@west.net NetLojix Communications, Inc. - http://www.netlojix.com/ WestNet: Connecting you to the planet. 805 884-6323 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 16:36:32 -0700 Subject: Re: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? From: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows In article telecom20.258.10@telecom-digest.org, Stretch wrote: > Most radio receivers use a technique called superheterodyne, which > involves generating a frequency similar to the one being recieved, and > using the interference between the two as an "amplifier" of sorts. I'm > not an RF guru, but I bet any ham could explain it better. Radiated products of reception from these receivers are incidental, not intended. As such, they are very faint, having to meet strict FCC guidelines for type acceptance. If they are interfering with data equipment, there is a serious design flaw in that data equipment and it needs to be dealt with by the manufacturer of that device. If these receivers are interfering with some wireless aspect of the POS system, too bad. That unlicensed wireless data transmission is subject to the same "can't interfere with other services; must accept interference from other devices" rules that govern every other Part 68 device. Unlicensed wireless operation gets no regulatory protection in deployment, even if it belongs to a big oil company! John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | AIM: plodder5 | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 http://www.anntec.com/realpoop.html ------------------------------ From: hudsonl@skypoint.com (Hudson Leighton) Subject: Re: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 19:33:16 -0500 Organization: MRRP In article , John Higdon wrote: (snip) > I would want to see some very convincing data that the miniscule > radiation from a radar detector's local oscillator interferes with POS > data equipment. > I look at this complaint in the same light as the nonsense that > cellphones can cause fires and explosions at gas stations. Without > some sort of compelling evidence backing up these urban legend events, > we could end up with the war of mythical disturbances and interactions > firmly encoded into legislation and regulation. BTW: one of the local gas stations chains puts out so much RF from I assume their cash registers, that I know when I a within a block of them just by the noise from my Ham radio. They don't have the RF pay system Hudson http://www.skypoint.com/~hudsonl ------------------------------ From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) Subject: Re: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? Date: 23 May 2002 09:47:10 -0400 Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > I would want to see some very convincing data that the miniscule > radiation from a radar detector's local oscillator interferes with POS > data equipment. Subsequent articles reported that there was one moderately popular model that interfered, but the manufacturer quickly redesigned it so the ones they're making now don't. It's a tempest in a teapot. 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: Stanley Cline Subject: Re: Blocking Clients From Non-ISP Mail Servers? Bad Idea. Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 04:12:06 -0400 Organization: Roamer1 Communications - Dunwoody, GA, USA Reply-To: sc1-news@roamer1.org On 21 May 2002 23:54:25 -0400, Walter Dnes wrote: > sender. The ISPs that do provide static IP addresses generally allow > them outbound port-25. Earthlink does not. Stanley Cline -- sc1 at roamer1 dot org -- http://www.roamer1.org/ "Never put off until tomorrow what you can do today. There might be a law against it by that time." -/usr/games/fortune ------------------------------ From: John McHarry Subject: Re: Blocking Clients From Non-ISP Mail Servers? Bad Idea. Organization: Giganews.Com - Premium News Outsourcing Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 23:49:54 GMT Walter Dnes wrote: > On Mon, 20 May 2002 01:55:40 -0400, Jack, > wrote: >> Still, people may have legitimate reasons for not wanting to use >> an ISP's mail server ... > Otto von Bismarck once said that a man who states he believes an > idea "in principle" has no intention whatsover of implementing it. I'm > getting rather tired of the bleeding-heart liberal types who wring their > hands over the spam problem, but yell and scream about anybody who tries > to do something about the problem. You may view some of the > self-defense measures against spam as evil. But they're the lesser of > two evils, versus doing nothing. Deal with it. I love the Bismark quote. Sounds a bit like Mark Twain or Amborse Bierce. On the other hand, I feel like puking on you crypto-Nazis calling everyone who advocates an opinion slighty differing from your own a "bleeding heart liberal." The opposite of liberal is illiberal. Deal with it. "T'is sport to hoist the engineer on his own petard." Name calling aside, there are points to be made on multiple sides of this issue. ISPs need to contol spam from networks they are responsible for, but there are also legitimate reasons for running one's own mail server. It is more difficult, but not impossible, to do the former while allowing the latter. ------------------------------ From: Joey Lindstrom Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 18:11:57 -0600 Reply-To: Joey Lindstrom Subject: Re: Blocking Clients From Non-ISP Mail Servers? Bad Idea. On Wed, 22 May 2002 18:32:17 -0400 (EDT), Richard D G Cox wrote: >> I don't think he was saying he should be able to connect to any mail >> server he wants. He wants to connect to one he is authorized to use. >> There is a big difference. > There is indeed. But how does the network administrator KNOW that the > server he is trying to connect to, is one that he is authorised to use? > What authority has he -- or can he produce? OK, I'm the one who started this thread and we've gotten a little off the track, so let me try to restate this. I have a DSL link and a few servers operating in my basement. I host 24 domain names, many of which are "vanity" domain names being used primarily for email purposes. For example, and I'll use a real-life example since it's already listed on several websites anyways (and thus this isn't likely to increase his incoming spam all that much), my friend Tommy Albelin has registered "albelin.com" and I host it - his email services, his web services, his DNS services, the works. If you send fanmail to "tommy@albelin.com", the MX records point to my mail server. The question that was raised was this: some ISP's block port 25 unless it's a request to relay through their OWN servers. This prevents Tommy from sending mail via mail.albelin.com, which resolves to *MY* IP address and *MY* server. Yes, he has authorization to use this server. He has to POP-before-SMTP, but once he's met that requirement, he can send mail "from: tommy@albelin.com" "to: hockeyfan@bourgeoismail.com" via my server. I've been asked "well, why not just have him send it through his own ISP's SMTP server?" I can think of three problems right off the bat: 1) Security. Granted, a packet sniffer can sniff anything, but it's a LOT easier for some snoopy sysadmin at Tommy's ISP to see what he's sending if it goes through their email server than if he bypasses it and goes straight to mine. 2) Some ISP's (perhaps many?) won't permit this. For example, if he sends a message "from: tommy@albelin.com" "to: telecom@telecom-digest.org", that the ISP's mail servers are responsible for. He would have to switch to using his "talbelin@jerseyispname.com" account to send mail, in which case we've defeated the entire purpose of having his own domain name. 3) Many (most?) ISP's have relatively low limits in terms of the SIZE of an email message that you wish to move through their server (either SMTP relay or POP3 storage). Typically, 5,000,000 bytes seems to be quite common. Tommy and I trade *LARGE* files from time to time - 20 to 30 megabytes at a throw. Without being able to access my server DIRECTLY, he'd be up a creek. (And no, we're not trading illegal MP3 files, though some of the files ARE in MP3 format, heh heh). Similarly, he also has need to send large files to other recipients hosted by other servers (who also allow large attachments). As part of the service I provide for him, I'm quite willing to relay these large attachments -- but the point is that he needs access to my port 25 to do this. If I have to use another port, that means setting up a second mail server, because my existing server will only monitor one port at a time, and it must be able to also continue receiving (port 25) SMTP mail from other sources. I hope I've clarified this a little bit. This situation may seem a bit unusual but it really isn't all that unusual at all, and is becoming more common. > If you want an ISP to validate credentials and provide access for one > specific user to one specified SMTP server that they are "authorised" > to use, that's fine too ... but that takes skill and effort and neither > of those come for free. Are you prepared to pay the REAL cost of that? They shouldn't be blocking his use of port 25 on a remote server in the first place. In Tommy's case, they don't -- he has no complaints (I think his ISP is Comcast -- whoever the cable company is down in Newark), but I've had a few OTHER customers who've had to switch ISP's because of their blocking port 25 (and refusing to stop blocking). For the record, if anyone's reading this in the Calgary area, both Nucleus and Cadvision (now Telus) get my thumbs up. NetZero gets a thumbs-down. :-) >> You know, I'm trying to figure out how this is any different from a local >> telephone company saying "you can't use any long distance company except >> ours." Well, with one big exception -- an ISP isn't a common carrier. > Big difference. With Telcos, customers (usually) PAY for Long > Distance. Email, on the other hand, more usually comes postage-due. > The only benefit an ISP gets from insisting you do not use other mail > servers, is that they do not get blamed for the likely abuse that WILL > occur if they allow access (generally) elsewhere. A growing number of ISP's are co-operating with blacklist organizations and informing them of the range of IP's in their dial-up pools, which are then added to a separate blacklist database. Those mail servers with no actual need to accept direct-to-MX mail from dial-up users (I would be an exception) can simply block them based on this database lookup. (I, on the other hand, can't do this or I risk blocking my legitimate customers, so I wind up having to accept a higher volume of spam). >> A few stunts like this, however, and ISP's could suddenly find themselves >> the target of increased government regulation. > If certain ISPs continue to allow abuse from their networks, then THEY > are likely to find themselves on the receiving end of government > regulation. (Are you listening, US Sprint?) Particularly, right now, > in China, since the Chinese government discovered just how extensively > their IP addresses are blocked worldwide as a result of their failing > to curb abuse. It just seems to me that taking this block-port-25 approach is rather heavy-handed, akin to swatting a fly with a jackhammer. Yes, you curb abuse, but you also curb the usefulness of the service you offer. And it WILL cost an ISP customers -- but I guess what you're saying is that by FAILING to take this approach, they'll lose even more. >> The big problem with e-mail today is that most users have no way to reject >> it until it's already in their mailbox. > Again, everything is possible but there is a cost and that means a price. > If you research www.spamcop.net you will find that exactly the service > you want is available, and at a very *modest* price! No thanks -- these are the same cretins who blacklisted *ME* because one idiot reported me as a spammer, after receiving a message in a mailing list much like the Telecom Digest, in which he had to DOUBLE-OPT-INTO. He didn't even bother reading the actual message, he just flipped it to Spamcop and said "this guy's a spammer". And Spamcop never bothered to ASK ME about it. Hey, I'm all in favour of strong efforts towards stopping spam, but these guys seem more interested in relishing the "power" and less interested in the "responsibility" side of the ledger -- and they refuse to clean up their messes. On Wed, 22 May 2002 18:32:17 -0400 (EDT), Fred R. Goldstein wrote: > If you run your own SMTP, you can do your own filtering; again, many > Unixheads do. And there are "blackhole" lists out there which suggest > which originators are most likely spammers. This tends to be tricky > to administer -- you think it's easy to stay ahead of the spammers? -- > which is one reason many end users don't want to do their own peer to > peer mail. Agreed -- I filter against four different anti-spam databases and that catches about 90% of it. Alas, that still lets 10% through. As I mentioned above, I could probably get this down to 2%-3% if I had the freedom to also filter against dial-up accounts - but in choosing to operate the way I do (and allow direct-to-MX SMTP transmission directly from my clients, who're using dial-up type accounts with dynamic IP's), I have to accept that increased risk. But the blackholes do a pretty darned good job. I'm pleased to recommend: http://www.ordb.org http://www.spamsites.org http://www.spamhaus.org http://www.spews.org / From the desk of Joey Lindstrom / "Everybody lies, innocent or guilty. Each lies for their own reasons." / --Everything I Need To Know I Learned From Babylon 5 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 21:48:20 -0700 Subject: Re: Echo With Cell Phones From: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows In article telecom20.259.8@telecom-digest.org, Michael D. Sullivan wrote: > Actually, the cellphone side is a wireless circuit that uses separate > radio links for the uplink and downlink. This is analogous to a four- > wire telephone circuit, but it is not one. The point is that it behaves like one, in essence carrying separate transmit and receive paths from the wire line originating switch. I'm well aware that wireless uses no wires. We in the industry refer to anything that behaves like a four-wire circuit (regardless of the actual transmission medium) as a four-wire circuit when discussing its characteristics. Fiber isn't wire, either, but it still carries data that acts as a four-wire equivalent. Incidentally, there is one other source of echo that I have discovered in cellphone conversations: the wireless phone. It has no electrical path between transmit and receive, but it has an acoustical one. Some users turn the volume up to a point where the microphone picks up sound from the earpiece. With the delays inherent in the digital codec process, an echo develops that is heard by the wire line party. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | AIM: plodder5 | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 http://www.anntec.com/realpoop.html ------------------------------ From: Robert A. Fink, M. D. Subject: Can RAM Affect Dialup Connections? Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 16:04:27 -0700 Organization: Robert A. Fink, M. D., FACS, P. C. Reply-To: rafink@attglobal.net I have posted here before about problems with maintaining v.90 dialup connections (ATTGlobal mainly). A number of possibilities have already been checked out (including testing of the phone lines) and no clear cause has yet been determined. I just noticed (in the past two days), that when my computer is having trouble maintaining a connection (later in the day), and I reboot the machine (WIN98), the connection is fine the next time that I dial up. The computer has 256MB RAM installed, but most of the time, when the standard desktop is running, only about 120MB of RAM is free (I use MemTurbo to monitor the RAM). When the free RAM drops below 100MB, that is when the connection problems appear. The above suggests that something is "hogging" my RAM and that the free RAM is decreasing. My questions: 1. Can this phenomenon interfere with the ability to maintain a dialup connection? 2. How do I access my "startup Group" in order to disable some of the programs which are starting up and which continue to run when not needed? Many thanks, Bob Robert A. Fink, M.D., FACS, P. C. 2500 Milvia Street Suite 222 Berkeley, California 94704-2636 USA Telephone: 510-849-2555 FAX: 510-849-2557 "Ex Tristitia Virtus" ------------------------------ From: stevenl11@aol.com (Steven Lichter) Date: 23 May 2002 02:11:28 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Subject: Re: Huge Amount of Spam Received Recently dave.garland said: > And if a spammer gets taken out and shot, well, that's a little > harsh, but it's still a win-win situation. As I always say: The only good spammer is a dead one! Have you hunted one down today? (c) I Kill Spammers, Inc. A Roast In Hell Company. Apple Elite II 909-359-5338. Home of GBBS/LLUCE, support for the Apple II 24 hours 2400/14.4. An OggNet Server. ------------------------------ From: Robert A. Fink, M. D. Subject: Boot-up Relationship to Disconnects Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 16:57:15 -0700 Organization: Robert A. Fink, M. D., FACS, P. C. Reply-To: rafink@attglobal.net I have posted here before about repeated disconnects from a 56K dialup connection (modem negotiates at between 49333 and 52000). I have had the telco (PacBell) out to check the lines and they are OK (I am currently out of range for DSL and have not yet gone ahead with ISDN). The disconnect problem appears to be time-related, and I had thought that it was traffic-related. Well, there is a new piece to the "puzzle". I have discovered that if I access the Internet immediately after a boot-up, all goes well. The second connection (within the same session) is usually associated with dropped connections. A reboot "fixes" the problem. The RAM seems to "leak" while the machine is running (the machine has 256MB installed, but at boot-up, there is only about 140MB free, and this decreases over time to about 100MB. When the free RAM drops below 100, that is when I seem to have the disconnect problems. Using MemTurbo, I have defragmented the RAM and even "scrubbed' it, but it appears that only a reboot fixes the disconnection problems. I have elimiated from my Startup list all programs which are unnecessary, but there are still a few more than I will kill as I try to troubleshoot this further. Do the above "symptoms" help any to make a "diagnosis"? Best, Bob Robert A. Fink, M.D., FACS, P. C. 2500 Milvia Street Suite 222 Berkeley, California 94704-2636 USA Telephone: 510-849-2555 FAX: 510-849-2557 "Ex Tristitia Virtus" ------------------------------ From: Ed Ellers Subject: Re: Last Laugh! Another Worldcom Long-distance Horror Story Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 18:59:56 -0400 PAT, the TELECOM Digest Editor, noted: > I am not sure I understand this one. I mean, MCI is well known for their > high rates and hidden charges, which they refer to as their low rates and > straight forward billing, but how about some background on this if you know > it." As best I can tell from reading the Register story (actually at http://www.theregus.com/content/28/25007.html), The Register moved its San Francisco office across town, and somehow their MCI discount plan didn't get moved over to their new number, causing them to run up a massive bill with frequent overseas calls, and raising a red flag with MCI's fraud department. When the author called to try to clear up the matter and claimed that the bill was excessive, not only could the fraud department not fix the billing, but they demanded proof that this was a normal calling pattern or else they would cut off service. (Which makes some sense -- I guess some people might run up a big bill over a few days and then try to welch on it,) And The Register couldn't prove that this was a normal calling pattern because they hadn't had such a big bill, since before the move they were on a discount plan! Dunno why MCI wouldn't accept a previous bill showing a similar calling pattern but at lower rates ... ------------------------------ From: Tom Betz Subject: Re: Last Laugh! Another Worldcom Long-distance Horror Story Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 02:45:48 UTC Organization: XOme Quoth Tom Betz in news:telecom20.259.15@telecom-digest.org: > "'That's the policy of the High Toll Department,' he confirmed. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I am not sure I understand this one. I > mean, MCI is well known for their high rates and hidden charges, which > they refer to as their low rates and straight forward billing, but > how about some background on this if you know it. PAT] First, let me correct the URL: The guy moved, and even though he had been promised that he'd keep his low International rate, Worldcom charged him bust-out retail. Then, seeing an unusually large bill, they turned off his long-distance service, requiring him to show a previous bust-out retail bill (which he had never had, because he had a bargain rate plan) before they would turn it back on -- or to just pay the balance right then and there on the bust-out retail bill. He tells it so much better than I could, that people would be better served just to read it. I love this paragraph, him talking to the High Toll Department droid: "I tried the hippy goodness trip. 'You were born an honest man, and raised as an honest man, and now you sit in a call center, with a bogus bill, asking me to prise my ass open a little wider, so you can steal my money?'" ------------------------------ 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-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-870-9697 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! 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 * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. 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. End of TELECOM Digest V20 #260 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri May 24 00:37:03 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id AAA07516; Fri, 24 May 2002 00:37:03 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 00:37:03 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200205240437.AAA07516@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #261 TELECOM Digest Fri, 24 May 2002 00:37:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 261 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? (Denis Mcmahon) Re: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? (John Higdon) Re: Looking for a Needle in a Haystack! Help! (EM Handler) Re: Looking for a Needle in a Haystack! Help! (Jack) Re: Neighborhood Local Dial Tone and Long Distance From MCI (Stan Cline) Vanity Facts (Melvin Broekaart {at} tollfree-l@yahoogroups.com) Re: Where to Buy Nortel Phones for Home Use (Claire Pieterek) Re: Where to Buy Nortel Phones for Home Use (EM Handler) PRI Service (vid2001) Why Aren't Cell Phones Smarter? (Matthew Black) Warning Regarding ECG Communications' New Minimum Usage Charge! (Jack) Fight Spam or Promote it? (Gordon S. Hlavenka) Can WorldCom Dig Out? (Eric Friedebach) Re: Cops Fret About Being Targets of Cellphone Surveillance (H. Leighton) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRII. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Denis Mcmahon Subject: Re: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 02:20:32 +0100 Organization: E-Menu Ltd Reply-To: denisrt@pickaxe.net TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to John Higdon by writing: > The FCC should realize radar detectors *already, and always have been* > a violation of the communications laws. You are entitled to *listen* > to almost any radio band anytime (you 'listen' in this case when the > radar detector apparatus 'listens' for the presence of police radar), > but you are not permitted to act upon, or benefit from *what you hear* > on the radio*, especially a police transmission. Hi Pat, We had new case law on this in the UK recently -- the radar detector detects the presence of a transmission, it does not detect the content. The judgment was that of the Queens Bench Divisional Court on 29th January 1998, the Court concluded that the radar transmission was not communicating a 'message' and therefore equipment designed to detect the presence of the transmission could not decode any such message. Rgds, Denis McMahon / +44 7802 468949 / denis@pickaxe.net sulfnbk is not a virus, see the symantec virus encyclopaedia! Now restocking killfile, new entrants welcome: trolls, spam, xpost cascades, OT ads, top posters & terminally clueless! ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 19:41:08 -0700 Subject: Re: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? From: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows In article telecom20.260.3@telecom-digest.org, Hudson Leighton wrote: > BTW: one of the local gas stations chains puts out so much RF from I > assume their cash registers, that I know when I a within a block of > them just by the noise from my Ham radio. > They don't have the RF pay system So that means that people's credit and debit card info is flying about in the air as well. Recently, it was discovered the some folks were sitting out in a Best Buy parking lot free scooping up the non-encrypted data from the wireless cash registers, gleaning a cornucopia of credit card data. A few days ago, my business partner drove into a car dealership and turned on his laptop. To his astonishment, the dealer's LAN was on the air and fully in the clear. Not only that, the hosts were not password-enabled. Had he been so inclined, he could have snooped through, captured, altered, or deleted any and all of the customer database. The lesson here is that you now use your credit or debit card in a POS device at your peril. For all you know, your card number is flying through the air and being intercepted by not just one, but multiple thieves. Sometimes I wonder about the mental horsepower of some of these systems' designers and the judgment-impaired merchants who put their faith in them. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | AIM: plodder5 | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 http://www.anntec.com/realpoop.html ------------------------------ Reply-To: EM Handler From: EM Handler Subject: Re: Looking for a Needle in a Haystack! Help! Organization: Prodigy Internet http://www.prodigy.com Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 00:54:25 GMT Here is another collection of links that you may find useful: http://www.access-networking.com/telecom_resources.htm to solve your problem. Kim Fuller wrote in message news:telecom20.259.4@telecom-digest.org: > I am trying to locate some info on a class someone I work with is > interested in possibly having some employees attend. He is not sure of > the name exactly, but it's something like "Telephone 101" and it's a > one-day course in Sacramento. You may or may not be able to assist me, > but when I came across your website, I thought it was worth a try. I do > not know who hosts the training or really anything else. I would > appreciate any information you could provide that would point me in > the right direction. Thank you! ------------------------------ From: Adams, John (Jack) Subject: Re: Looking for a Needle in a Haystack!Help! (Telephone 101) Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 09:57:20 -0400 I'm not sure about a one day course in Sacramento, but TRA and Telcordia offer quite a selection of dial tone digest courses in a variety of formats, including instructor led. http://www.800teachme.com/ (Telcordia's web site for training) http://www.tra.com/ (Telecommunications Research Associates) Hope this helps. > I am trying to locate some info on a class someone I work with is > interested in possibly having some employees attend. He is not sure of > the name exactly, but it's something like "Telephone 101" and it's a > one-day course in Sacramento. You may or may not be able to assist me, > but when I came across your website, I thought it was worth a try. I do > not know who hosts the training or really anything else. I would > appreciate any information you could provide that would point me in > the right direction. Thank you! ------------------------------ From: Stanley Cline Subject: Re: Neighborhood Local Dial Tone and Long Distance From MCI Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 04:10:19 -0400 Organization: Roamer1 Communications - Dunwoody, GA, USA Reply-To: sc1-news@roamer1.org On 20 May 2002 23:10:07 -0700, Saaby@MyRealBox.com (Saab Guy) wrote: > Unlimited Neighbor-to-Neighbor calls Neighbor-to-Neighbor lets you > call any other Neighborhood, or MCI Local customer, at no extra charge > These Neighbor-to-Neighbor calls are automatic - you don't need to That is for the $29.99 (in Atlanta anyway) "Neighborhood Choice" plan. The $49.99 (in Atlanta anyway) "Neighborhood Complete" plan does indeed include ALL domestic LD calls. See the difference here: http://www.theneighborhood.com/res_local_service/jsps/join_plans.jsp?state=GA&Bus_Ind=RES&wireSolution=Y&group=012&cos=NoCos&ANI=7703950000 Stanley Cline -- sc1 at roamer1 dot org -- http://www.roamer1.org/ "Never put off until tomorrow what you can do today. There might be a law against it by that time." -/usr/games/fortune ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 15:48:55 +0200 From: Melvin Broekaart Subject: Vanity Facts TollFree Moderator's Note: Please copy your replies to tollfree-l. For a Dutch client of mine I'm looking for facts, figures and graphs as proof of the possitive effect of a tollfree vanity number. Vanity calling is slowly becoming well known in The Netherlands and decision-makers are looking for hard evidence before ordering their number. If you can provide me with any information, please send it to my business adress: melvin@informatienummer.nl Thanks, Melvin Broekaart ------------------------------ From: pieterek@spamcop.net Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 07:03:17 -0500 Subject: Re: Where to Buy Nortel Phones For Home Use john63401@yahoo.com asked about this ... john63401, I suggest you check out Rat Shack. If you're lucky enough to find a discontinued model on sale, that IMHO is the best, since it will be the one at the best price. Otherwise, they are a little pricy, but they are very reliable. I have had the same one (sorry -- don't know what model -- it's in storage ATM) for 5 years with no problems. It is a discontinued model that I bought on sale for ~$90. It has caller ID, call waiting caller ID, a digital answering machine with multiple mailboxes, 2 line capability, and more features than I will probably ever use. Good luck! Claire Pieterek pieterek@spamcop.net ------------------------------ Reply-To: EM Handler From: EM Handler Subject: Re: Where to Buy Northern Telecom Phones for Home Use? Organization: Prodigy Internet http://www.prodigy.com Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 00:57:51 GMT Try http://www.intelevoice.com . Also, here is another collection of links that you may find useful: http://www.access-networking.com/telecom_resources.htm wrote in message news:telecom20.259.5@telecom-digest.org: > I'd like to buy a nice NT phone with Call ID and answering machine > built in ... for my home office. > Any idea what model I should get ... and where to order one via mail > order? > I want something better built then the stuff you see at Walmart. ------------------------------ From: ramachandranvidya@hotmail.com (vid2001) Subject: PRI Service Date: 23 May 2002 07:41:31 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ In our T1 world, I hear the term PRI quite a bit. What is this? What are the advantages of a PRI T1 vs a traditional Voice T1? ------------------------------ From: lb_centaur@yahoo.com (Matthew Black) Subject: Why Aren't Cell Phones Smarter? Date: 23 May 2002 15:00:13 GMT Organization: California State University, Long Beach With all the fancy features found in current cell phones, why can't someone build a phone that keeps an accurate tally of plan minutes used? I'm speaking of a phone that tracks both peak and off peak minutes. These phones have a built-in clock that synchronizes with the service provider when powered on. My plan has 250 peak and 1250 off peak minutes. Why can't phones be programmed with the peak and off peak schedules? I know some people own VCRs that still blink "12:00" because they can't figure out technology. For these folks, the default phone behavior could track total minutes only. Given the sophistication of most cell phone users, many would gladly spend a few minutes to program their peak/off peak schedule. This would also benefit my provider because I wouldn't have to call in to check my account status using non-plan minutes. matthew ------------------------------ From: Jack Subject: Warning Regarding ECG Communications' New Minimum Usage Charge! Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 12:14:08 -0400 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com If you have visited the abtolls.com site to pick a long distance carrier, you may have selected ECG Communications. If you EVER have less than $10 in usage each month then you should know that ECG is now imposing a monthly fee of $4.95 for all accounts billing LESS than 10 dollars in long distance usage in any given month. So if you bill $0 to $9.99 they will just add $4.95 to your bill. My mother got a bill with this charge added, but since there was no prior notification, the ECG representative took the $4.95 off her account this one time but we had to cancel the account to avoid further billings (I understand they tried to notify customers by e-mail, but my mother is elderly and doesn't have e-mail, and besides that, everyone knows that e-mail isn't always reliable -- messages can and do get lost in transit, especially now that some ISP's are using hyperactive filters). So now I have to shop for a new carrier for my mother, and the biggest criteria is that it should have no minimum or monthly usage charges (and should be available in Verizon Michigan exchanges). Any suggestions? In my personal opinion, what ECG has done seems like a real scam -- they probably had their reasons but from the consumer's end it seems really scummy. The company originally promoted its service as having no monthly minimums or usage charges, and then after a year or so of use with no problems, suddenly they switch everything. To me, this sort of aggravation is probably what drives some people to a plan like MCI's "The Neighborhood", despite the high monthly charge. Even if you don't make enough calls in a month that you would always save money, the fact that (hopefully) you won't get hit with nasty surprises with no advance notice (and I realize I'm making a big assumption here, but it's probably one that most potential customers would make) may be what drives some to sign up. Anyway, I personally will never recommend ECG Communications to anyone again. I don't know what happened that made them decide to impose this charge, but it just seems like a scummy trick to me. Jack The return e-mail address in this message will vaporize once the spammers find it. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 11:38:18 -0500 From: Gordon S. Hlavenka Organization: Crash Electronics, Inc. Subject: Fight Spam or Promote It? A while back I posted a message to telecom-digest; today I received this: > << IMPORTANT INFORMATION! >> > This is an automated message. > The email you sent (copied below) requires confirmation before being > delivered. To confirm that you sent the email, please simply reply to > this email (you don't need to edit or include anything other than the > current subject line). This need be done only once -- as soon as your > address has been verified as belonging to a real person, all future > email will simply be delivered. > --- Original Message Follows --- > This email account is protected by: > Active Spam Killer (ASK) V2.1.beta1 - (C) 2001-2002 by Marco Paganini > For more information, visit http://www.paganini.net/ask > --- Original Message Follows --- > Date: Sat, 18 May 2002 01:54:23 -0500 > From: "Gordon S. Hlavenka" > Subject: AT&T Outage Makes "Top Ten" List The return address points to Keith (mumble), someone I don't know and certainly didn't mail a copy of the post to. Furthermore, if Keith receives the Digest by email, it would arrive as a concatenation of many messages with a "Digest" header. So, my question is: Is this just a case of Keith having his anti-spam software misconfigured, or is it a particularly sneaky way for a spammer to harvest "good" addresses from c.d.t? Gordon S. Hlavenka O- nospam@crashelex.com My hovercraft is full of eels. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, it wasn't me. I think he must be misconfigured. *I* am the sender of the mail, so Keith should be asking me to verify, not you. The fact that he asked you means his software reads down through the message looking for things it finds disagreeable, which is fine, I guess, for anti-spam software. But he should have stopped looking for 'From ' or 'From:' once he got past the header information. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 10:46:34 PDT From: Eric Friedebach Reply-To: friedebach@yahoo.com Subject: Can WorldCom Dig Out? Can WorldCom Dig Out? Forbes.com, Dan Ackman, 05.10.02 NEW YORK - WorldCom displays some interesting images on its Web site, including one of an ice-climber deep inside a crevasse. The climber is in a dark and narrow hole, but above there is light. Can WorldCom get there? Thursday, more bad news piled on the embattled telecom company: Moody's Investor Service and Fitch Ratings both downgraded the company's debt to "junk" status amidst concerns that its finances are still deteriorating. The downgrades themselves will increase the company's cost of borrowing. http://www.forbes.com/2002/05/10/0510topnews.html Eric Friedebach ------------------------------ From: hudsonl@skypoint.com (Hudson Leighton) Subject: Re: Cops Fret About Being Targets of Cellphone Surveillance Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 23:12:22 -0500 Organization: MRRP In article , Joe Wineburgh wrote: > Subject: Cops Fret About Being Targets of Cellphone Surveillance > Date: Sat, 18 May 2002 20:20:43 PDT > From: Nick Santucci > Subject: Cell Phones Snoop on Cops (fwd) > Drug gang members are going high tech :) > Forwarded from a law enforcement newsletter > NEW GENERATION CELL PHONE 'AUTO-ANSWER' COULD > TIP OFF POTENTIAL SUSPECTS snip > As stated in the Louisiana State Police Special Bulletin, April 2 > edition: "This is a potentially serious threat to agents especially in > a controlled delivery environment. Always check cell phones to make > sure what kind they are. Be especially careful of Nextel phones when > found and make sure the auto-answer feature is turned off or at least > no one says anything near it that can be heard and tip off a potential > suspect." Maybe taking the batteries out of the cell phone would cure the problem. -Hudson http://www.skypoint.com/~hudsonl ------------------------------ 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-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-870-9697 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! 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 * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. 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. End of TELECOM Digest V20 #261 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri May 24 22:22:47 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id WAA24491; Fri, 24 May 2002 22:22:47 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 22:22:47 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200205250222.WAA24491@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #262 TELECOM Digest Fri, 24 May 2002 22:23:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 262 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Interim Approval for Internet Telephone Numbering System (Anne Shroeder) Good News About the 419 Scams From Nigeria (David Chessler) Re: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? (Mike Lamb) Re: Surfing On the Computers at Work? Just How Safe Are You? (J. McHarry) Re: Wanted: Incoming Call Timer (EM Handler) Re: Blocking Clients From Non-ISP Mail Servers? Bad Idea (Al Iverson) Re: Can RAM Affect Dialup Connections? (Gordon S. Hlavenka) Re: Phone in Colors Other Than Black? (Tom Brown) Help; How Can I Realize Clock Extraction (sunjc) Build Your Own Washing Machine Program (Willis H. Ware) Re: Why Aren't Cell Phones Smarter? (Matthew Black) Re: Why Aren't Cell Phones Smarter? (Barry Margolin) Re: Why Aren't Cell Phones Smarter? (Mickey Ferguson) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRII. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Anne Shroeder - Webmaster, Internet Society Subject: Interim Approval for Internet Telephone Numbering System (ENUM) Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 16:14:36 -0400 Reply-To: lance@isoc.org FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: 24 May 2002 Interim Approval for Internet Telephone Numbering System (ENUM) Provisioning -- Countries wishing to implement ENUM system may now do so. -- System offers promise of standardized international Voice and Video on IP services. Washington, DC - May 24, 2002 - The International Telecommunication Union (ITU) and the Internet Architecture Board (IAB) announce interim approval for a single domain for ENUM, a technology that builds a bridge between the public switched telephone network and the Internet. Voice on IP networks today operate by translating telephone numbers to IP addresses and placing an H.323 or SIP call to the device. The interchange format and translation record has not heretofore been standardized, limiting the possibility of deployment of multi- corporate and international Voice on IP services. Under the ENUM proposal, E.164 numbers can be represented as Internet Domain Names,providing a scalable and standard way to translate the numbers, and opening the way to such services. ITU has begun approving delegations for the purposes of trials. "The lack of an interoperable standard way to turn a telephone number into an IP Address has been one factor limiting the deployment of Voice on IP services internationally", said Leslie Daigle, Chair of the Internet Architecture Board. If desk-mounted computers or servers are given telephone numbers as well as mnemonic names, this system further enables common telephone handsets to place Voice or Video on IP calls to such computers. This is a significant step towards integrating Internet-based services with the global telephone network, and the current agreements between IAB and ITU will allow trials to take place. Patrik Faltstrom, member of the Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG), said that "the integration of the desktop telephone and computer allows corporations to simplify their internal networks." Roy Blane, Chair of ITU-T's Study Group 2, concurred, saying that "In the long term this protocol may facilitate many new internet services. In the short term, countries wishing to trial the system can begin work on developing it." This interim approval is made possible due to cooperation between ITU, IAB and the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). As outlined in the ENUM specification document, RFC 2916, sub-domains from a single domain will be delegated after acceptance by the registries according to the existing assignment of country codes in the telephone address space. Information on how the ENUM registration requests will be processed can be found at http://www.ripe.net/enum/ About ISOC The Internet Society is a non-profit, non-governmental, open membership organization whose worldwide individual and organization members make up a veritable "who's who" of the Internet industry. It provides leadership in technical and operational standards, policy issues, and education. ISOC is the organizational home of the International Engineering Task Force, the Internet Architecture Board, the Internet Engineering Steering Group, and the Internet Research Task Force - the standards setting and research arms of the Internet community. About the IETF The Internet Engineering Task Force is an international community of network designers, operators,vendors, and researchers concerned with the evolution of the Internet architecture and the smooth operation of the Internet. The definition of the ENUM protocol, as proposed by the IETF can be found at http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2916.txt. The IETF is an organized activity of the Internet Society. About ITU The International Telecommunication Union (ITU) is a global organization where the public and private sectors cooperate for the development of telecommunications and the harmonization of national telecommunications policies. Study Group 2 of the ITU Telecommunication Standardization Sector (ITU-T), where work on ENUM is being carried out, is the Lead Study Group on Service definition, Numbering, Routing and Global Mobility and is responsible for the operational aspects of service provision, networks and performance. More information on the ENUM protocol, and the issues related to it, can be found at http://www.itu.int/ITU-T/worksem/enum/index.html. POC: Patrik Fltstrm Leslie Daigle Scott Bradner Roy Blane Richard Hill Lynn St.Amour *~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~* To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@www.isoc.org with UNSUBSCRIBE press in the body. [Leave the subject blank.] Please read our Terms of Use Agreement for all discussion lists: http://www.isoc.org/members/discuss/tou.shtml *~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~* ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 18:10:03 -0400 From: David Chessler Subject: Good News About the 419 Scams From Nigeria. According to "The World", a radio news program from WGBH and the BBC, South African police have arrested about a half-dozen people who have been perpetrating the internet scams (called 419 after the section of the Nigerian criminal code that applies). These are the ones where you are invited to help launder some money for a very high percentage. Anyhow, those arrested were 4 Nigerians, a South African, and someone from Cameroon. However, this didn't clear up the whole problem: I got another offer from the son of a Nigerian political figure who's now on trial for corruption. I don't know why abetting corruption should be an attractive "story" -- I guess it says something about the mindset of these spammer-scammers. This scammer uses Yahoo mail -- the headers are consistent, and there is the little ad at the bottom. ____ ____ David Chessler, Ph.D., President | | | ' David Chessler and Associates |_/ & \_, Economic, Telecommunications, Statistical, ____ and Antitrust Consulting /____\ Phone: +1-301-229-9514 / \ Fax: +1-301-229-3984 dsc69@columbia.edu [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Although those arrests were made, I think it was only a drop of water in a very big bucket of same. Those '419 scams' are *so* prevalent, with nearly everyone, it seems, getting in on the act. Either that, or those few people arrested were very, very busy, fast typists. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Mike Lamb Subject: Re: Will Radar Detectors be Regulated Out of Existence? Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 01:52:01 -0400 Organization: Navix Internet Subscribers Huum, I ended up reading this because I've had to do my once every 5 year or so radar detector upgrade. I try to learn and update myself on the latest radar detector news then. And I ended up here, reading. :-) Let me add from being loosely associated with LE and the political end of this, that the assertion that radar detector interference with other devices (oil companies?) is NOT the main reason for wanting restrictions on detectors. Everyone writing here has seemed to overlook the poilitical end of this. (This applies to most everything else also!) Whether one agrees or not, law enforcement and the entire justice system of the US is actually more a business than a public service. If one studies how these institutions are actually ran and mangaged, and especially if one knew the basics of how public is regarded, it can be easily seen that the purpose for regulating and or eliminating detectors has a whole different reason than interference with some other device. In short the public is a customer and the LE/court system is the seller. They sell justice for a price, which ultimately results in the restrictions of our rights, what little we have left, and turning them into priviledges. (BTW 30 years I was taught in school that driving was a right, NOT a priviledge.) In short many in the poilitical system, as well as in related business' sees radar detectors as a hindrance to their profits! Therefore these groups and people seeks further laws to rectify what they deem lower than possible profits, or to maximize profits. In North Carolina, every couple of years there is a renewed effort to ban radar detectors, and every year the margin of defeating this group becomes more narrow. We just went through this last winter, and it was close! While I know some of you may read my post as being off base, or conspiratorial, I say these things from the standpoint of having actually been involved in the political end of this in being an aide to a state rep. (Haven't been recently involved though.) Finally to all of you who may pose the question; How does the oil compaines stand to actually profit from the above, if what I say is true? I 100% guarantee you, that if one could take the time to track down the PACS of ALL companies involved, you would find that these PACS are composed of some of the same people *representing* BOTH or several of the involved compaines, as well as some politicians. Oil companies and insurance companies, as well as banks shares many people, executives sitting on each others' boards. I had the intriguing task of helping track down one such association a few years back, concerning a sponsored/supported state bill. It took 3 of us almost a month to track down all the tie-ins we could find. So the reason any oil company supports this, or any other company, is because of associated PAC members, plus cross assciations of its' board members. The best way to fight such inane, conspiratorial and strawman acts is to focus on the companies supporting such legislation, and then address your public legislatures, *including* your knowledge or disdain for any company and or PACS attempting to manipulate your rights through the actions they are taking. As long as the legislatures understands that the public knows and is addressing the problem, and them *KNOWING* the root cause of the instigators of any such sponsored bill, they are more likely to not lean as favorably to the companies and the sponsored bill. The old addage, "The truth is stranger than fiction." aptly applies in politics. Denis Mcmahon wrote in message news:telecom20.256.6@telecom-digest.org: > Monty Solomon wrote: >> Apparently, ChevronTexaco Corporation has filed an endorsement with >> the FCC on new regulation that would apply to radar detectors because >> the 25 million devices in use interfere with high-tech payment systems >> now becoming popular at the gas pump. > Did I get that right? > A radar detector, which is basically a sensitive receiver, screws up > the pumps? > Do we have to turn off our FM radios in petrol stations now? > Sounds like, smells like .... > "Sometimes I wonder about the mental horsepower of some of > these systems' designers and the judgment-impaired merchants who put > their faith in them." Why would they care to what happened to your money, except that they end up with part of it? And how's the average customer to be any wiser regardless to how is information is manipulated or lost; By whom? Cheers, Mike Lamb PS: You gotta think of things from a business standpoint! ;-) John Higdon wrote in message news:telecom20.261.2@telecom-digest.org: > In article telecom20.260.3@telecom-digest.org, Hudson Leighton wrote: >> BTW: one of the local gas stations chains puts out so much RF from I >> assume their cash registers, that I know when I a within a block of >> them just by the noise from my Ham radio. >> They don't have the RF pay system > So that means that people's credit and debit card info is flying about > in the air as well. Recently, it was discovered the some folks were > sitting out in a Best Buy parking lot free scooping up the > non-encrypted data from the wireless cash registers, gleaning a > cornucopia of credit card data. > A few days ago, my business partner drove into a car dealership and > turned on his laptop. To his astonishment, the dealer's LAN was on the > air and fully in the clear. Not only that, the hosts were not > password-enabled. Had he been so inclined, he could have snooped > through, captured, altered, or deleted any and all of the customer > database. > The lesson here is that you now use your credit or debit card in a POS > device at your peril. For all you know, your card number is flying > through the air and being intercepted by not just one, but multiple > thieves. Sometimes I wonder about the mental horsepower of some of > these systems' designers and the judgment-impaired merchants who put > their faith in them. ------------------------------ From: John McHarry Subject: Re: Surfing On the Computers at Work? Just How Safe Are You? Organization: Giganews.Com - Premium News Outsourcing Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 23:24:47 GMT > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I included this spam in this issue > because of my own curiosity on exactly how they are doing something > different (for example) than merely washing (and following up with > bleaching) the /tmp files on your hard drive; the indexes to same; > making sure the internet history/filename completion things are all > removed; cookies are all gone, etc. The America On Line 'washing > machine' (which they were giving away free a couple months ago) not > only removes all those things above, but also offers to 'bleach' the > shitty load seven or ten times as needed by overwriting the 'clean' > disk then washing it again several times. What more needs to be done > than that? I should put this formula here for everyone to copy. PAT] If the worry is about stuff you do on your computer at work, the product is not too useful, no matter what. A company can just use a "sniffer" to look at the traffic on its network and apply the relevant filters. For cleaning guilty files off a hard drive, there are programs to write over the entire drive multiple times with different patterns. I don't think I would trust anything that attempted to preserve anything on the drive. For seriously guilty files, I would follow that up with incinerating the drive down to the slag level. If you are just trying to avoid your network admins finding something on a routine scan, something like the mentioned "washing machine" should do fine. Of course, it would have to be run more often than whatever backups the company runs on your hard drive. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Now that I have DSL my computer stays on all the time, and I am likely to be sitting here anytime of day or night. Therefore, I leave my 'washing machine' in the background to run every ten or twelve hours. It comes on that often automatically and washes then bleaches all the stinky, smelly /tmp files, and destroys all the cookies. Yeah, I lose a few 'good cookies', but I guess that is the price I pay. PAT] ------------------------------ Reply-To: EM Handler From: EM Handler Subject: Re: Wanted: Incoming Call Timer Organization: Prodigy Internet http://www.prodigy.com Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 00:56:05 GMT Would a contact manager help. ACT! performs this function when using a call control interface with TAPI. Here is another collection of links that you may find useful: http://www.access-networking.com/telecom_resources.htm Mark Gibson wrote in message news:telecom20.259.3@telecom-digest.org: > I'm looking for a device to allow timing of incoming phone calls on a > computer. Basically it needs to signal the computer when the call is > answered -- to start a timer, and again when the call is terminated (at > either end) -- to stop the timer. This is the only functionality > required. It is on UK phone lines (we use NTL if that makes a > difference). I've search the internet, and the closest thing i've > found is a DIY device called Alltel by Shane Wegner > (http://www.cm.nu/~shane/alltel/) - DTMF decoding is not required. I'm > a bit wary of building devices for phone lines, so does anyone know of > a commerical device I could buy for this purpose. Or alternatively > can someone point me in the direction of phone line information for > the UK. ------------------------------ From: al56g@radparker.com (Al Iverson) Subject: Re: Blocking Clients From Non-ISP Mail Servers? Bad Idea. Organization: Please don't email replies Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 20:23:27 -0500 In article , Fred R. Goldstein wrote: > What you're asking for is the NORMAL type of email that prevailed on > the Internet before the days of the Winsock! The Internet (and its > TCP/IP protocol suite) are inherently peer-to-peer. And so is mail. > The native mail protocol is SMTP, and you send mail end to end without > any involvement in the middle. The mail reader on the end system > reads the mail off of the local spool that the SMTP daemon delivered > it to. > You don't remember this? Hmm, just like you don't remember UUCP? Al Iverson -- http://www.radparker.com -- Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA Support Minnesota Jazz -- Disclaimer: All of my opinions are mine alone. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 21:43:35 -0500 From: Gordon S. Hlavenka Organization: Crash Electronics, Inc. Subject: Re: Can RAM Affect Dialup Connections? Robert A. Fink, M.D. wrote: > I just noticed... When the free RAM drops below 100MB, > that is when the connection problems appear. > The above suggests that something is "hogging" my RAM and that the > free RAM is decreasing. My questions: > 1. Can this phenomenon interfere with the ability to maintain a dialup > connection? If you are using a controller-based modem, the amount of free RAM will have no affect whatsoever on your ability to maintain connections. (Although it may have an affect on your ability to run software which uses the modem -- the connection will stay up as long as the host doesn't drop you for inactivity...) If you are using a "winmodem" (also called, "modem for windows") then most of the modem is actually a piece of software running on your PC. Low memory can adversely affect this software and thus, your connection. This leads to my one point: >>>=========-> Winmodems are crap. If you are non-technical, the easy way to determine whether you have a winmodem is by price; winmodems are generally in the $30-and-under range, often seen as "$9.99 with a $10 rebate". Controller-based modems are generally $50-$100. Whatever you paid for a winmodem, you have been ripped off. Including "$9.99 with a $10 rebate". If your PC was built within the last 3 years or so, and the modem came with it, it's probably a winmodem. > 2. How do I access my "startup Group" in order to disable some of the > programs which are starting up and which continue to run when not > needed? Right-click on the Start button, left-click on "Open", double-click on "Programs", then double-click on "Startup". Or, in Win98/Me, click Start, select Run, and type "msconfig". And get a real modem. Gordon S. Hlavenka O- nospam@crashelex.com My hovercraft is full of eels. ------------------------------ From: kibri@eudoramail.com (Tom Brown) Subject: Re: Phone in Colors Other Than Black? Date: 23 May 2002 19:58:16 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ kibri@eudoramail.com (Tom Brown) wrote in message news: : I thought I would add to the color conversation that last weekend I snagged a Salmon Pink Western Electric Trimilne Phone. I thought I had every color emaginable, only to find another one that I did not have. Toward the end of Western Electric, it seems that WE/ATT came up with some very different colors to enhance design acceptability. I have noted that the later colors include a dark blue (vs liughter blue of older phones) a salmon Pink (ve rose beige), I also recall a 'pea' green that looked like a washed out avocado and even a charcoal (blue?), Can anyone add any other colors to this list? I forgot to add an alternative red (brighter than the classic deep red). What have I missed? Thanks Folks! Tom (Please no spam) ------------------------------ From: sunjc@0451.com (sunjc) Subject: Help, How Can I Realize Clock Extraction Date: 23 May 2002 20:42:48 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Hi, I am developing the E1 tester. How can I realize clock extraction from the HDB3 signals. Please tell me the method or some chips which can realize it. Thanks, Best regards. ------------------------------ Reply-To: willis@rand.org Subject: Wire up Your Own Washing Machine Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 13:37:56 -0700 From: Willis H. Ware >>> ... I should put this formula here for everyone to copy. PAT] YES, pls do. I looked all over the Evidence ... web site and never did find out how much it cost. I did discover that it is not yet available in box form. Willis Ware RAND Santa Monica [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It is not that hard, really. You just 'cd' to the directory where the internet temp files are stored and then delete those files. Then do the same thing in the directory where the cookies are stored. But be careful; there are some index files there which are locked and cannot be erased when the computer is running. It helps to write that little program in DOS and then put it in your startup file or your shutdown area. You have to do the cleaning out there either *before* Windows comes to life or *after* it has started to die, in order to bust those indexes as well. If you don't zap and bleach them, then you might as well not do it at all. In the process of erasing each file, you have to tell the computer to not only erase each one, but also to scribble again on each file and wash it a second time. Then do it a third and fourth time, to meet the standards of that top-secret government agency. That's the 'bleaching' part. Get rid of all those unsightly stains in your underpants. Maybe I will type it all out here sometime. Since I had my brain aneurysm, I really have not felt that well, and I grow tired easily. PAT] ------------------------------ From: lb_centaur@yahoo.com (Matthew Black) Subject: Re: Why Aren't Cell Phones Smarter? Date: 24 May 2002 14:49:19 GMT Organization: California State University, Long Beach In article , lb_centaur@yahoo.com says: > With all the fancy features found in current cell phones, why can't > someone build a phone that keeps an accurate tally of plan minutes > used? I'm speaking of a phone that tracks both peak and off peak > minutes. Someone asked me via e-mail: How would that benefit the cell company? ANSWER: By cell company, I'm assuming you mean my service provider, not the equipment manufacturer. This feature benefits my provider because I would no longer place free (non-billable minutes) calls to get an account update. By not using bandwidth, other calls don't complete with my inquiry, the service provider doesn't build extra capacity to handle status calls. Calling for status updates does not consume plan minutes and it's a free call. Does this clarify the benefits? matthew ------------------------------ From: Barry Margolin Subject: Re: Why Aren't Cell Phones Smarter? Organization: Genuity, Woburn, MA Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 15:54:25 GMT In article , Matthew Black wrote: > With all the fancy features found in current cell phones, why can't > someone build a phone that keeps an accurate tally of plan minutes > used? I'm speaking of a phone that tracks both peak and off peak > minutes. My guess: because it doesn't benefit the cellular providers very much. If they make it easy for you to tell when you're about to use up your base minutes, you're more likely to avoid going over. Since they charge more for those excess minutes, they'll lose out on this valuable revenue. > This would also benefit my provider because I wouldn't have to call in > to check my account status using non-plan minutes. They probably don't get enough of these calls for the benefit to be of value. Barry Margolin, barmar@genuity.net Genuity, Woburn, 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. ------------------------------ Reply-To: Mickey Ferguson From: Mickey Ferguson Subject: Re: Why Aren't Cell Phones Smarter? Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 16:42:09 GMT Simple reason. Because they would rather people aren't aware of their usage. If the average user was aware he was getting close to his threshold of included minutes, he might curtail his usage. What they want is for people to go over their limits, because they get lots of money that way. Yes, it would be a very useful feature for the consumer, but one that is in direct conflict with the cell provider's interests. Matthew Black wrote in message news:telecom20.261.10@telecom-digest.org: > With all the fancy features found in current cell phones, why can't > someone build a phone that keeps an accurate tally of plan minutes > used? I'm speaking of a phone that tracks both peak and off peak > minutes. ------------------------------ 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-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-870-9697 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! 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 * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. 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. End of TELECOM Digest V20 #262 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat May 25 00:33:30 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id AAA26312; Sat, 25 May 2002 00:33:30 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 25 May 2002 00:33:30 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200205250433.AAA26312@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #263 TELECOM Digest Sat, 25 May 2002 00:33:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 263 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson News Headlines of Interest (Marcus Didius Falco) Re: Vanity Numbers (Henry1708@aol.com) Re: Vanity Numbers (Paul Langhorst) Intercom Over WAN via IP? (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Re: Neighborhood Local Dial Tone and Long Distance From MCI (Chris Boone) Minnesota Opts In On Privacy (Eric Friedebach) Re: Blocking Clients From Non-ISP Mail Servers? Bad Idea. (Walter Dnes) Re: Warning Regarding ECG Communications' New Minimum Usage (John Levine) Re: PRI Service (John Higdon) Re: PRI Service (EM Handler) Re: Can RAM Affect Dialup Connections? (John David Galt) Net Scam Purports to Be From U.S. Soldier (editor@telecom-digest.org) Two FBI Agents Charged In Internet Fraud Scheme (editor@telecom-digest) Re: Help, How Can I Realize Clock Extraction (Ken Becker) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRII. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 21:21:24 -0400 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: News Headlines of Interest Edupage, May 24, 2002 FCC ISSUES NEW RULES FOR WIRELESS SPECTRUM The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) this week changed some of the rules for the 2.4 GHz spectrum. Under the old rules, data transfer rates for the spectrum were limited to 11 Mbps. Because of this cap, technologies such as orthogonal division multiplexing (OFDM) that operate at higher data rates had to use the 5.1 GHz band, which has some disadvantatges compared to the 2.4 GHz band, including a weaker signal and more difficulty traveling through walls. The new rules remove the cap on data rates, giving approval for the recently introduced 802.11g standard to operate in the 2.4 GHz spectrum. The changes also allow the coexistence of wireless LAN and Bluetooth devices. InfoWorld, 23 May 2002 http://www.idg.net/ic_865444_1794_9-10000.html NewsScan Daily, 24 May 2002 ("Above The Fold") WORLD'S STRICTEST CELL PHONE RADIATION LAW? IN CHINA! China, which is below international norms for most environmental standards, is considering strict new regulations that would cut cell phone radiation emissions by half of what they are overseas. The cost to cell phone makers would be enormous, because China represents such a huge market for cell phones and because manufacturers would have to redesign their entire operations, from R&D to production. Scientific studies have so far failed to find any evidence that cell phone emissions cause brain cancer, but the World Health Organization (WHO) has also said that further research is necessary before ruling out that possibility. (Reuters/USA Today 24 May 2002) http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/tech/2002/05/24/china-cell-radiation.htm CQ Daily Monitor Midday Update 5-24-02 HOLLINGS URGES 'OBJECTIVE' FCC REVIEW OF MEDIA CONSOLIDATION RULE Senate Commerce Committee Chairman Ernest F. Hollings, D-S.C., wrote to Federal Communications Commission Michael K. Powell last night urging the agency to consider competition and consumer issues as it reviews its rules on media consolidation. The letter, also signed by Senate Judiciary Antitrust Subcommittee Chairman Herb Kohl, D-Wis., and ranking Republican Mike DeWine, Ohio, said the lawmakers want to ensure "an objective analysis of competition and program diversity issues associated with media consolidation." The FCC is currently reviewing a long-standing rule that bars a company from owning television stations that collectively reach more than 35 percent of U.S. households. In February, the District of Columbia Court of Appeals ordered the FCC to justify the rule or rewrite it. The court also overturned a rule that had prevented one company from owning both television stations and cable franchises in a single market. In a separate letter, Hollings wrote to Powell to urge "a measured and rational transition" to digital wireless phone service from analog cellular service. [UPDATE] EDUCAUSE Washington Update, May24, 2002 STATE POLICYMAKERS TESTIFY "THERE IS NO BROADBAND CRISIS" The Senate Commerce Committee continued to hear testimony on methods for deploying broadband services in this country. Touted as "Tauzin-Dingell, Part II" by Senate Commerce Committee Chair Ernest Hollings (D-S.C.), the hearing focused on the role of local competition in spurring broadband deployment. Unlike the first hearing, where only the bill's sponsors, Representatives Billy Tauzin (R-La.) and John Dingell (D-Mich.), testified, Wednesday's hearing provided a forum for opposing viewpoints. Representatives Edward Markey (D-Mass.) and Chris Cannon (R-Utah) both testified in opposition to Tauzin-Dingell. Congressman Markey stressed that Tauzin-Dingell was "unnecessary," noting that high prices inhibit Americans from subscribing to broadband services and arguing that services need to be identified that make broadband worthwhile. Following that testimony, a panel of state policymakers agreed that no broadband crisis exists, but that the rural access issue requires attention. While the hearing centered on the implications of Tauzin- Dingell, the panel also took issue with Senator Breaux's (D-La.) Broadband Regulatory Parity Act of 2002 (S.2430), namely its provision precluding state regulators from regulating broadband equipment and services. While Senator Breaux offered to change the language to ensure that states maintain their current authority, he believes that the states do not have said authority to begin with, given the interstate nature of data services. For a hearing witness list, see the Senate Commerce Committee Web site at http://commerce.senate.gov/ Direct replies are unlikely to be read. To reply use the address below: falco_marcus_didius yahoo.co.uk ------------------------------ Date: 24 May 2002 13:24:14 -0000 Subject: Re: Vanity Numbers From: HENRY1708@aol.com Melvin, We're also trying to get the message across re Vanity Numbers in the UK. As there is very little scope for vanity toll free numbers in the UK (since most 0800 numbers already taken up), we are working ewith 0845 and 0870 number ranges (not toll free). For more info look at our websites: www.dialabc.co.uk and www.0845-0870.com where we've got info on vanity numbers. Henry Newrick 0845 FOR NUMBERS (0845 367 6862) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 09:43:43 -0400 From: Paul Langhorst Subject: Re: Vanity Numbers Regarding the use of vanity numbers in the UK, one of the major drawbacks is the low penetration of phone sets with alpha characters on the key pad. Most new sets conform to the US standard, with the addition of Q on 7 and Z on 9, but many of the imbedded base of older phones, do not contain letters. It has been some time since I dealt directly with the UK, but when I did, I had developed the distinct opinion that UK consumers did not regard Freephone as desired service - at least not to the degree that it is in the US. It seemed consumers they did not like someone else paying for their call. Unlike the US, all calls in the UK are billed at some metered rate per minute. In the US most local calls are free (for a flat fee), so making out of state calls "free" via 800 was a distinct marketing advantage. In the UK and in other countries, all calls are metered which seems to minimize interest in Freephone (toll free). Another thing I experienced was that freephone generated a lot of prank phone calls. Again, I think this is a result of the metering issue. Kids know that 0800 is free and that the records don't show up on the bills arriving at home. Why would anyone make a prank call if they have to pay for it? Good luck. Paul Langhorst Vice President of Marketing 800 Adept, Inc. "Specialists in Toll Free Locator Services" 1-888-298-9643 US: 1-314-966-7615 ------------------------------ Subject: Intercom Over WAN via IP ? Organization: Excelsior Computer Services From: joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 17:40:55 GMT I'm looking for an intercom application that will work over our WAN via IP. Ideally, this would involve only port 80, because part of our WAN is stuck behind a firewall over which I have no control. The idea is that each of a dozen computers (all, fortunately, on T1 lines or better) will have a button on the screen that the user can push to be connected to the "group chat" session. I think that Yahoo! and Netscape both have something like this. Has anyone used these? Do I have other (free) options? Many thanks. Joel (joel@exc.com) ------------------------------ From: Cboone@earthlink.net Subject: Re: Neighborhood Local Dial Tone and Long Distance From MCI Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 17:54:30 GMT Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net BUT the Neighborhood plans do NOT include FCC line charge fees and other state fees, etc ... I thought about changing to MCI after seeing the plans advertised ... looked nice ... My SWB bill with just a little LD on it is $45-50 a month ... BUT after looking at the other charges added on, the MCI final total would probably be over $58 or 60. I dont make THAT much LD to justify it. Chris Stanley Cline wrote: > The $49.99 (in Atlanta anyway) "Neighborhood Complete" plan does > indeed include ALL domestic LD calls. See the difference here: [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I am reminded of how, back in the early 1970's, when MCI was first getting started after having filed a fraudulent petition with the FCC asking for permission to operate a private microwave service for a few *limited* customers between Chicago and St. Louis, they then tried to defraud everyone by making all sorts of outrageous claims about their service. Remember, in those days (early seventies) all zero-plus went to AT&T and there was no such thing as ten-ten. icrowave ommunications nc and outhern

acific ailroad nternal etwork ele- communications which were the originals had to use dialup lines. That is, if you chose to use those two upstarts, you had to dial seven-digit local numbers (in the few major cities they chose to serve), then when you heard a new dialtone, you dialed the three digit area code of the city you wanted to call, and the remainder of the LOCAL number. You were literally sent over a microwave to the city you were calling, then plopped down in a central office switch *in that city* to complete the call. Therefore, dialing your local number for MCI, followed by 212+911 got you the New York City Police, although they did not know that would happen until a few customers brought it to their attention. The upstarts *were* a wee bit cheaper on the long haul portion of the call, but because Illinois Bell (as Ameritech was known in those days) supervised on everything, if you had to dial your distant number several times (because it was busy) in order to get through once, then you had to pay IBT *for their portion* in any event. AT&T of course charged you for the entire *completed call*, but nothing for the 'free ride' to the toll switcher on Canal Street downtown. So while the long distance portion of your phone bill went down, the local call portion (they were called 'message units') went up dramatically. It was like our correspondent noted here: add in the tax and the other incidentals (which MCI would never mention unless backed against the wall) and the total cost of your phone bill was about ten percent higher than when AT&T was handling it all. And oooh, their telesleaze, er, sales people were so demanding and agressive. If you said you did not want their service, they'd come back and accuse you of being an idiot: after all, who wouldn't want a cheaper phone bill each month? "But Mr. Townson, WHY would you want to pay more on your phone bill each month?" was their standard retort to anyone who said no thanks. But the 1970's were basically an anti-Bell period. People who wanted to 'get one over on the phone company' (or thought they could) all migrated to MCI in droves. MCI hasn't really mended their ways at all. I do think the FCC and the Federal Trade Commission have slapped them a few times and made them behave a little better; but it is pretty much a hopeless proposition. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 11:16:31 PDT From: Eric Friedebach Reply-To: friedebach@yahoo.com Subject: Minnesota Opts In On Privacy Gov. Jesse Ventura signs Internet privacy bill. By John Rendleman, Informationweek.com, May 22, 2002 Despite opposition from Internet service providers and online retailers, Minnesota Gov. Jesse Ventura signed legislation Wednesday afternoon enacting the first state law in the country that spells out procedures that Internet companies must follow before using data collected from subscribers. The law will take effect in March. ISPs, Internet content providers, and online marketers say that if other states follow suit, the proliferation of potentially conflicting Internet privacy laws will hinder their operations nationally. http://www.informationweek.com/story/IWK20020522S0009 Eric Friedebach ------------------------------ From: Walter Dnes Subject: Re: Blocking Clients From Non-ISP Mail Servers? Bad Idea. Reply-To: waltdnes@waltdnes.org Date: 24 May 2002 16:39:24 -0400 On Thu, 23 May 2002 18:11:57 -0600, Joey Lindstrom, wrote: What you need to do is look at ssh-tunneling. It'll solve a *LOT* of your problems, if not all of them. > The question that was raised was this: some ISP's block port 25 > unless it's a request to relay through their OWN servers. This > prevents Tommy from sending mail via mail.albelin.com, which resolves > to *MY* IP address and *MY* server. ssh *NORMALLY* goes via port 22, but can be changed to other values. > Yes, he has authorization to use this server. He has to > POP-before-SMTP, but once he's met that requirement, he can send > mail "from: tommy@albelin.com" "to: hockeyfan@bourgeoismail.com" > via my server. Hello ... you've been complaining about "security". Are you aware that normal POP involves sending userID and password in clear text ? This is generally not a problem if you've dialed directly into your own ISP, or use end-to-end-encryption (e.g. ssh-tunneling). However, if Tommy is dialed into his own ISP, and he's logging into your machine, then *HE'S SENDING HIS USERID AND PASSWORD OVER THE INTERNET IN CLEAR TEXT* !!! > 1) Security. Granted, a packet sniffer can sniff anything, but it's > a LOT easier for some snoopy sysadmin at Tommy's ISP to see what he's > sending if it goes through their email server than if he bypasses it > and goes straight to mine. *EVERYTHING* goes through the ISP's modem and their router. If they want to snoop they can snoop. As I mentioned above, he'll be sending his userID+password in clear text over the net if you have your way. > 2) Some ISP's (perhaps many?) won't permit this. For example, > if he sends a message "from: tommy@albelin.com" "to: > telecom@telecom-digest.org", that the ISP's mail servers > are responsible for. He would have to switch to using his > "talbelin@jerseyispname.com" account to send mail, in which case > we've defeated the entire purpose of having his own domain name. That is a stupid practice, but it has nothing whatsoever to do with port-25 blocking. That stunt alone is reason to leave an ISP. I'm not going to try to defend that stupidity. One of the arguments behind port-25 blocking is that your ISP can provide SMTP service. Not being able to use a valid address is *NOT* adequate service. > A growing number of ISP's are co-operating with blacklist > organizations and informing them of the range of IP's in their > dial-up pools, which are then added to a separate blacklist > database. Those mail servers with no actual need to accept > direct-to-MX mail from dial-up users (I would be an exception) > can simply block them based on this database lookup. Which does nothing to address the problem of spammers going direct-to-MX to open relays. Oh ... add yet another blacklist for innocent ISP's to have to consult before deciding whether to accept email. > It just seems to me that taking this block-port-25 approach is > rather heavy-handed, akin to swatting a fly with a jackhammer. > Yes, you curb abuse, but you also curb the usefulness of the > service you offer. And it WILL cost an ISP customers -- but I > guess what you're saying is that by FAILING to take this approach, > they'll lose even more. Yup. Lesser of two evils. Wide open relays used to be courtesy. Spammers abused them, and now they're deprecated. Ditto direct-to-MX from dialups. Ditto formmail webscripts. Sigh. Walter Dnes I'm not repeating myself; I'm an X Window user, I'm an ex-Windows user ------------------------------ Date: 24 May 2002 00:44:30 -0400 From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: Warning Regarding ECG Communications' New Minimum Usage Charge! Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > My mother got a bill with this charge added, but since there was no > prior notification, the ECG representative took the $4.95 off her > account this one time but we had to cancel the account to avoid > further billings (I understand they tried to notify customers by > e-mail, but my mother is elderly and doesn't have e-mail ... There was a notice about the new fee on the front page of the paper bill for a couple of months before they imposed it. You can get PDFs of previous months' bills at https://myecgaccount.com/, so you might check and see if your mom's bills had the notice. I suspect they did. > In my personal opinion, what ECG has done seems like a real scam -- Aw, come on. Phone companies change their rates all the time. If they really changed the rates with no notice, that would be tacky, but I don't think they did. ECG still seems to be the cheapest dial-1 carrier for those of us who live in NECA (non-RBOC) areas. 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 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 22:07:05 -0700 Subject: Re: PRI Service From: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows In article telecom20.261.9@telecom-digest.org, vid2001 wrote: > In our T1 world, I hear the term PRI quite a bit. What is this? What > are the advantages of a PRI T1 vs a traditional Voice T1? Primary Rate ISDN is what it stands for. It is a 1.54 mb, B8ZS stream containing framing for twenty-three 64 kb bearer channels and one 64 kb data channel. The advantage is flexibility and speed. The bearer channels carry voice and the data channel carries the call setup data. Not being in-band, the signaling is virtually instantaneous. Incoming calls are set up by the data channel to any available bearer channel. This allows for an unlimited number of directory numbers to be served with the number of simultaneous calls limited by the number of bearer channels. The data channel can serve multiple PRI circuits, so additional PRIs can carry twenty-four bearer channels each, assuming all the PRIs terminate on the same switch. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | AIM: plodder5 | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 http://www.anntec.com/realpoop.html ------------------------------ Reply-To: EM Handler From: EM Handler Subject: Re: PRI Service Organization: Prodigy Internet http://www.prodigy.com Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 20:39:12 GMT T1 has become the generic name for a digital trunk with in-band signaling, typically channelized for 24 voice paths. PRI, also a digital circuit, is the nickname for Primary Rate Interface of the Integrated Services Digital Network or PRI/ISDN. PRI typically has 23 voice paths (referred to as 'B' channels) and 1 signaling or 'D' channel. PRI is usually superior when compared to most T1 configurations. You can find other useful links at http://www.access-networking.com/telecom_resources.htm "vid2001" wrote in message news:telecom20.261.9@telecom-digest.org: > In our T1 world, I hear the term PRI quite a bit. What is this? What > are the advantages of a PRI T1 vs a traditional Voice T1? ------------------------------ From: John David Galt Subject: Re: Can RAM Affect Dialup Connections? Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 15:20:46 -0700 Organization: Diogenes the Cynic Hot-Tubbing Society Robert, A., Fink, "M. D." wrote: > I just noticed (in the past two days), that when my computer is having > trouble maintaining a connection (later in the day), and I reboot the > machine (WIN98), the connection is fine the next time that I dial up. > The computer has 256MB RAM installed, but most of the time, when the > standard desktop is running, only about 120MB of RAM is free (I use > MemTurbo to monitor the RAM). When the free RAM drops below 100MB, > that is when the connection problems appear. > The above suggests that something is "hogging" my RAM and that the > free RAM is decreasing. My questions: This is what's known in the trade as a "memory leak". Some programs allocate RAM while they are running, but fail to release it before they exit. Thus over time, more and more of your machine's RAM becomes unusable because it is marked as "in use" even though the process that "owns" it no longer exists. Eventually you reach the point where nothing will run, and all you can do is to reboot the PC. You may be able to identify the program that is causing the leak by checking the amount of free memory with MemTurbo before and after you run a particular program. But unless you have access to the source code of the program, chances are there is nothing you can do about the problem. It would be nice if Windows had a "garbage collector" to find and free these blocks of memory when they become "orphaned", but if such a utility exists, I haven't seen it. For what it's worth, this problem is not unique to Windows. The Mac and some mainframes suffer from it too. > 1. Can this phenomenon interfere with the ability to maintain a dialup > connection? That depends on the programs your connection uses, and in particular, whether they need to continually allocate memory "on the fly". > 2. How do I access my "startup Group" in order to disable some of the > programs which are starting up and which continue to run when not > needed? The obvious answer is to look in C:\Windows\Startup, but that is only one of several ways that programs can be made to start up automatically whenever you reboot (Windows) or log in (Windows NT). The actual lists of auto-startup programs are found in the Windows registry. Hit Start -> Run, type in "regedit", and look in this hierarchy of "folders". My Computer HKEY_CURRENT_USER Software Microsoft Windows CurrentVersion Run RunOnce Be warned: it is possible to thoroughly screw up your system using "regedit", and all changes are immediate (no Save step is needed). Be sure to write down the old values of anything you change, so you can change it back if you need to. You might also look at www.regedit.com, which is a good hints site. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 01:09:32 EDT From: ptownson@sbcglobal.net Subject: Net Scam Purports to Be From U.S. Soldier Here is another example of a 'Nigerian-like' scam. That's the main reason I do not think the arrests made in South Africa reported in our last issue will do the entire job of stopping these scams. Click on the URL below for the rest of this story: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,53553,00.html ------------------------------ From: ptownson@sbcglobal.net Subject: Two FBI Agents Charged In Internet Fraud Scheme Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 00:55:53 CDT Read this entire article at http://www.newsbytes.com/news/02/176730.html but here is a summary if you prefer. Two FBI Agents Charged In Internet Fraud Scheme By David S Hilzenrath, Washington Post WASHINGTON, D.C., U.S.A., 23 May 2002, 5:12 AM CST Two FBI agents passed confidential information about investigations of companies to participants in a stock-manipulation scheme, according to a federal indictment. ------------------------------ From: Ken Becker Subject: Re: Help, How Can I Realize Clock Extraction Organization: Giganews.Com - Premium News Outsourcing Date: Sat, 25 May 2002 02:34:09 GMT sunjc wrote: > Hi, > I am developing the E1 tester. How can I realize clock extraction > from the HDB3 signals. Please tell me the method or some chips which > can realize it. Geez, sunjc. Where have you been? There are over 50 chip sets that receive an E1/T1 and generate clock, 8 kHz sync, and what all. Dig into www.agere.com and check out LIU's for T1/E1. While you're at it, head over to PMC-sierra.com for their E1/T1 line devices. Heck, just go over to google and type "t1/e1 LIU and you're going to get buried. (I just tried it: google is great for tracking down parts. Type in 74ACT74 and you'll pop up every manufacturer of a quad D flip flop that exists). Ken Becker Lucent Technologies ------------------------------ 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-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-870-9697 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! 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 * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. 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. ****************************** End of TELECOM Digest V20 #263 From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon May 27 01:55:12 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id BAA27560; Mon, 27 May 2002 01:55:12 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 27 May 2002 01:55:12 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200205270555.BAA27560@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #264 TELECOM Digest Mon, 27 May 2002 01:54:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 264 Inside This Issue: Happy Memorial Day! Re: Intercom Over WAN via IP ? (Stretch) Re: Intercom Over WAN via IP ? (Pete Weiss) Re: Intercom Over WAN via IP ? (Gordon S. Hlavenka) Yahoogroups in RBL (Marcus Didius Falco) New High Speed Internet Solution (Andy Goodman) Voicestream VM ... What's up With It? (mindreader) Re: Warning Regarding ECG Communications' Minimum Usage Charge! (Jack) Spammer With Both an 888# AND an 877#! (John Mianowski) Nortel Switch For Sale (Steve Christie) Re: Disabling MS-Windows Start-up Programs (Colin Sutton) Re: Net Scam Purports to Be From U.S. Soldier (Geoffrey Welsh) Re: Can RAM Affect Dialup Connections? (Robert A. Fink, M. D.) Re: Good News About the 419 Scams From Nigeria (Chris Patterson) News Headlines of Interest 5/26/02 (Monty Solomon) Alternate Local SPs in Boston Area For Consumers? (Daniel Rosenzweig) Re: Vanity Numbers (Hendrik Rood) Another E-mail Spammer With a Toll Free Number (Steven Lichter) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRII. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Stretch Subject: Re: Intercom Over WAN via IP ? Date: Sat, 25 May 2002 04:28:39 GMT Organization: Road Runner - Texas I tried a package called (I think) CU-seemee, which was a fairly simple videoconferencing system. They have a "bridge" product that allows several people to link up and see/hear the rest of the group. We tried it over a company LAN, and it worked fairly well, and over low-delay WAN connections it was tolerable. In the end, people were just uncomfortable leaving a "live" camera or microphone around, and went back to just dialing each other up. Dr. Joel M. Hoffman wrote: > I'm looking for an intercom application that will work over our WAN > via IP. Ideally, this would involve only port 80, because part of our > WAN is stuck behind a firewall over which I have no control. > The idea is that each of a dozen computers (all, fortunately, on T1 > lines or better) will have a button on the screen that the user can > push to be connected to the "group chat" session. > I think that Yahoo! and Netscape both have something like this. Has > anyone used these? Do I have other (free) options? ------------------------------ From: pete-weiss@psu.edu (Pete Weiss) Subject: Re: Intercom Over WAN via IP ? Date: Sat, 25 May 2002 08:02:56 -0400 Organization: Penn State University -- Office of Administrative Systems On Fri, 24 May 2002 17:40:55 GMT, joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) wrote: > The idea is that each of a dozen computers (all, fortunately, on T1 > lines or better) will have a button on the screen that the user can > push to be connected to the "group chat" session. I don't know about voice, but there are instant messaging clients offered that can interact with one more free services e.g., AIM, ICQ, IRC, MSN, Yahoo! One meta client is Trillian: http://www.trillian.cc/ You don't need to be a paying customer of AOL nor ICQ in order to register (and use) a screen name. AOL allows for the creation of a private chat room so that all can view the interactive text messaging. Pete ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 25 May 2002 13:16:56 -0500 From: Gordon S. Hlavenka Organization: Crash Electronics, Inc. Subject: Re: Intercom Over WAN via IP ? "Dr. Joel M. Hoffman" wrote: > I'm looking for an intercom application that will work over our WAN > via IP. Ideally, this would involve only port 80, because part of our > WAN is stuck behind a firewall over which I have no control. > The idea is that each of a dozen computers (all, fortunately, on T1 > lines or better) will have a button on the screen that the user can > push to be connected to the "group chat" session. Roger Wilco is a walkie-talkie app aimed at gamers, but it may do what you need. http://download.com.com/3000-2121-7026813.html?legacy=cnet http://www.resounding.com Gordon S. Hlavenka O- nospam@crashelex.com My hovercraft is full of eels. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 26 May 2002 22:59:47 -0400 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Yahoogroups in RBL * Original: FROM..... Randall Head People who subscribe to insghtbb.com or to attbi.com and surely others got a rude surprise yesterday if they belong to a yahoogroup - yahoogroups made its way into an RBL to which those ISPs subscribe, and NO mail from any yahoogroup was delivered to anyone@insightbb.com or to anyone@attbi.com. Direct replies are unlikely to be read. To reply use the address below: falco_marcus_didius yahoo.co.uk ------------------------------ From: andygoodmanhome@yahoo.com (Andy Goodman) Subject: New High Speed Internet Solution Date: 25 May 2002 20:24:28 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Has anyone heard of Hotlens Internet TurboBooster at http://www.hotlens.com? It claims to be a cost-effective way for an ISP to establish itself as leader of high speed solution providers through 3 - 5 times faster delivery of web sites to its subscribers using desktop, notebook and PDA. It claims that it delivers web content faster because it optimizes and compresses web content before sending them over dial-up and wireless connections. It also claims to support filtering of background music, popup and advertisement banner image/shockwave/applet. In addition, it claims to support user-friendly layout conversion to make web pages usable and productive on PDA. Can anyone please share his or her experience with this product? Regards, Andy ------------------------------ From: bsolucky@hotmail.com (mindreader) Subject: Voicestream VM ... What's Up With It? Date: 26 May 2002 09:16:04 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Hi folks! I am running into this GSM conditional forwarding business again where when calls are forwarded from my phone into voicemail while I am roaming outside of the Southeast, instead of those incoming calls going directly into my personal voice mail box (on VS/Powertel southeast VM - +18509809000), they go to to the main backdoor VM greeting where the caller has to enter my cell number in order to leave me a message. The problem is that I usually forward my office and home numbers to my cell when I am out of town and since callers don't know my cell number (they know only the number they "originally" called me at which then forwarded to my cell and onto VM), therefore they can't leave me a message at the main backdoor VM greeting. Of course if I am using my phone anywhere in the Southeast (even central florida old Arial market) calls are routed to my personal voice mail box without a problem regardless of how the call comes in. This is extreamly annoying and is causing me to miss important messages. As you can see from the thread below, the issue was explained to me by one of VS's techs earlier this year. However, when I was experiencing this problem again a couple of weeks ago (was on Voicestreams network in Dallas, TX) I called CS (both to VS west and old Powertel) to report this issue and this time they were extreamly uncooperative and said that there is nothing I can do but let everyone I know my cell number so they can leave me a message at the backdoor prompt. That obviously defeats the whole forwarding from office or home scheme that works so well in my home market. My reply to them was basically like... "well, my phone is displaying "voicestream" right now when I am here in Dallas, so why should forwarding work any differently than it does in GA, AL, FL, etc? So ... does anyone know if VS has decided to "give up" on trying to alleviate this forwarding issue? Rick. >>> "Santosh Krishnan" wrote in message >>>news:... >>> Why does my VM not follow me where I go? >>> If someone calls me up, it asks >>> them to enter the number they are trying to >>> reach before it gives them the >>> VM. No one cares to enter my number, >>> so I don't receive important VM unless >>> I turn off the damn phone!!! >>>Any clues? > "mindreader" wrote in message > news:d10c9041.0201181442.564905aa@posting.google.com... >> I have been having this problem for a while as well. Very annoying! >> However, this is not all Voicestream's fault. According to a tech >> with voicestream who has been involved with this issue this has to do >> with the landline T1 lines that are supplied by the local telco to the >> wireless provider you are roaming on (or even the voicestream >> region/subsidiary you're roaming on). Apparently the local telco's >> have to register your voicestream number's NXX (first three digits of >> your phone number) in their equipment in order to correctly >> forward/divert the call back to YOUR voice mail box (instead of to the >> general voice mail gateway - which is what you are experiencing). >> Voicestream has been working with telco's all over the country to make >> sure all that the local T1's are programmed with Voicestream's NXX >> number ranges. However, the Baby Bells are notorious for not >> cooperating with other companies, particularly ones they consider >> their rivals (e.g. Verizon) so voicestream has had a very tough time >> getting the local telco's to do whatever programming is needed in >> order for call diversion to work correctly. I personally have had >> good "forwarding" experiences while roaming on GSM systems where PAC >> BELL is the local telco but almost never having things work correctly >> where Verizon was the local land-line telco. >> Pretty much the only thing you can do is to try and call your HOME >> voicestream customer support number when you are in an area and >> experiencing this problem and ask to talk to a tech about this issue. >> Now you will need to HOPE, PRAY, HOPE, PRAY, DO A RAIN DANCE AND HAIL >> MARYS that CS will let you talk to a tech directly because, it is >> useless to explain to CS what the problem is because they a. don't >> understand the problem, b. don't want to understnad the problem, c. >> don't care, or d. insist that callers put in YOUR cell number into the >> gateway and leave you a message that way (personally I can't do that >> because I forward my home calls to my cell, so when people get to the >> voice mail gateway, they try to put in my home number (since that's >> all they know) which obviously doesn't work since the VM system wants >> my cell number). >> Next, if you manage to actually be transferred to a tech, you need to >> HOPE, PRAY, HOPE, PRAY, DO A RAIN DANCE AND HAIL MARYS that the tech >> is aware of this specific issue with forwarding. If they do, they'll >> pass your issue to the right department where they'll find out who the >> local land-line telco that is handling the area you're in and will >> contact them with voicesteam's NXX numbering scheme to program into >> their equipment. Once the local Bell does that, you'll be able to >> divert calls directly to your voice mail box just like in your home >> area. >> --Rick. > "242" <242@nospam.com> wrote in message > news:4L728.19687$k11.537940@read1.cgocable.net... > Correct! This info has recently been broadcast to vs cc, they are aware > of the issue and techs are trying to resolve with telco. ------------------------------ From: Jack Subject: Re: Warning Regarding ECG Communications' New Minimum Usage Charge! Date: Sat, 25 May 2002 02:08:08 -0400 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com On 24 May 2002 00:44:30 -0400, johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) wrote: >> My mother got a bill with this charge added, but since there was no >> prior notification, the ECG representative took the $4.95 off her >> account this one time but we had to cancel the account to avoid >> further billings (I understand they tried to notify customers by >> e-mail, but my mother is elderly and doesn't have e-mail ... > There was a notice about the new fee on the front page of the paper > bill for a couple of months before they imposed it. You can get PDFs > of previous months' bills at https://myecgaccount.com/, so you might > check and see if your mom's bills had the notice. I suspect they did. Ah, but here's the rub: When I first signed her up for the service, I thought they were going to send a bill each month in which there was any usage. I quickly discovered (after my mother complained about not getting a bill for her long distance) that they only bill when the amount due exceeds $10, or after three months, whichever comes first. She didn't like that (she really wanted to be billed for her usage each month!) but accepted it. For about six or eight months all was fine. Then they sent a notice that they wanted to do online billing. However, at that time they were using some fancy scripting or something on their web site -- I know not what the actual problem was -- but in any case, I could not get in to view her account. I called ECG and told them about that, and mentioned that she is elderly and does not use a computer nor does she have an e-mail address, and without hesitation the representative offered to send paper bills. Great, I thought, since this is what my mother really wanted anyway. Well, they did, sort of. They still would only send the bill when she'd accumulated $10 in usage (every two or three months) but would only give the detail for the last month. This really upset my mother, because she wanted itemization for all her calls (you have to realize that she's in her upper 80's; I sometimes suspect she still resents not getting personally handwritten bills anymore!) :-) At that point I figured out that if I used an older version of Netscape I could get into the ECG web site enough to pull up past bills. So when they'd send her one, I'll pull up and print out the last couple months that they didn't send her, and she could check off her calls. Well, this latest bill covered two months (and showed detail for only one), so you may be right about the notice having appeared on last month's bill. But the problem is that because she hadn't yet accumulated another $10 in usage, they didn't send her that bill. Before anyone says I should have gone online and looked at the bill every month, please bear in mind that a) it was a genuine pain in the @$$ to access their site, because of whatever scripting they used, and b) when she signed up they said they would send her a paper bill in the mail each month, which is the only kind of billing she wanted. And besides, I never anticipated this sort of problem. I can understand ECG not wanting to send a bill until there is a certain minimum accumulated usage, but you'd think that when the bills contain a notice of a change in billing that would specifically impact those who don't make $10 in toll calls each month, they'd make it a point to send out that month's bill (or at least the notice) to those people. >> In my personal opinion, what ECG has done seems like a real scam -- > Aw, come on. Phone companies change their rates all the time. If > they really changed the rates with no notice, that would be tacky, but > I don't think they did. Well, after I posted my warning to the MI-Telecom mailing list (a Michigan-specific e-mail list), another user of their service wrote to say that he hadn't received any notification either. I'm sure none of us know what percentage of users may have or may not have received the notice, but it's apparent that some didn't. > ECG still seems to be the cheapest dial-1 carrier for those of us who > live in NECA (non-RBOC) areas. I decided to try another carrier for my mother's account, called Total Call International (which I think you'll find is also available in the non-RBOC areas, since they use Qwest as their underlying carrier, as does ECG). Not only do they have no monthly minimums (confirmed by two different calls to company's 800 number) but their rate for intrastate calls in Michigan is a lot lower (which isn't a big factor because virtually everyone my mother calls long distance is out of state). Their interstate rate is virtually the same as ECG's. The only downside is they say it will take 5-7 days to get the service activated. A friend says he's been using them for six months on two lines, and he is "very satisfied" (his words). Of course I realize they could change their rates next month too, but then I don't think any carrier guarantees to hold their rates these days. But if they do, I hope they'll at least give some advance notice! Today someone was telling my mother that you can buy a prepaid calling card at Sam's Club that works out to about three cents a minute (I was with her at the time). Only problem there is neither she nor I have a membership at Sam's Club (and wouldn't buy enough there to make it worthwhile) and besides that, my mother can barely handle dialing 11 digits (actually, I had to program the numbers she calls into a speed dial phone) and I'm fairly certain that using a calling card would totally mystify her. But what I don't understand is, you'd think it would cost more to handle calling card calls (even prepaid ones) than calls where the line is presubscribed. What's the catch with those prepaid calling cards (or is there any)? Can you really get a better deal with them than by using one of the least expensive presubscribed carriers? Jack The return e-mail address in this message will vaporize once the spammers find it. Resources for Michigan Telephone Users page: http://michigantelephone.workbench.net/ [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: A handwritten bill? I had one in my grandmother's collection of stuff we found after she died in 1978 or so. She was from this part of the country originally, as was I born here. She had a handwritten bill from Southwestern Bell, dated 1937. A buck and a half for a month's worth of service, and a prepaid self addressed envelope to the phone company here in Independence at the office on 6th and West Maple Street. That building is now used as a central office on the second floor. A very elegant script for the bill, handwritten showing the month of service plus a long distance call which was more than the month of local service. PAT] ------------------------------ From: John Mianowski Subject: Spammer With Both an 888# AND an 877#! Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 12:05:00 -0500 Organization: Nortel I think everybody knows the drill by now: IMPORTANT: Free report on all corporations found in asset search. Let Us Tell you the TRUTH / SAME DAY SERVICE. Toll Free at 1 888 729 8976 and PROTECT YOURSELF. ***************** ADDITIONAL SERVICE ***************** ************** MISSING PERSON SEARCHES ***************** ************ ** WE FIND THEM OR NO CHARGE ** ************ **** WE RUN THESE SEARCHES WITH YOU ON THE PHONE **** ********************SAME DAY SERVICE*********************** ********* CALL TOLL FREE 1 877 269 3892 TO SCHEDULE ******** [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yeah, everyone knows the routine by now, but getting rid of those pests is like bombing and spraying roaches. They just keep returning no matter what. PAT] ------------------------------ From: steven.christie1@ntlworld.com (Steve Christie) Subject: Nortel Switch For Sale Date: 25 May 2002 06:54:34 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Nortel DMS 100 MTX/GSM/CDMA Switch with all peripherals to achieve call processing. Backup DC power plant included. Switch consists of: 1 SNSE (Super Node Space Enhanced) Series 70 processor, disk storage capacity, message switch, Enhanced Network W/16K non-blocking matrix. 1 LPP (link peripheral processor) capable of SS7/CCS7/Ethernet Protocol. 1 DTC/ICP (Digital Trunk Controller/Intelligent Cellular Peripheral) for T1 Generation. Could be E1 compatible. 1 IOC (Imput/Output Controller) for man-machine interface W/Monitors, Printer and additional disk storage space. 1 MCAM (Analog Module) for Analog Trunks such as voice anouncements, conference call, alarm system and tone generation. As an option: 1 DPCC (High Capacity SuperNode W/Series 70 Processors) 1 ENET (Enahanced Network) Capable of 64K Non-Blocking Matrix. This Switch configeration comes with a full DC Power Plant. SERIOUS ENQUIRY ONLY ... SHIPPING AND INSTALLATION CAN BE QUOTED. ------------------------------ From: Colin Sutton Subject: Re: Disabling MS-Windows Start-up Programs Date: Sat, 25 May 2002 14:51:31 GMT Organization: BigPond Internet Services (http://www.bigpond.net.au) ; "M. D." wrote in message news:telecom20.260.9@telecom-digest.org: [...] > 2. How do I access my "startup Group" in order to disable some of the > programs which are starting up and which continue to run when not > needed? Mike Lin's http://www.mlin.net/StartupCPL.shtml makes it easy. Using his start-up control panel you can view and move programs between: * user start-up folder * all users start-up * HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE (all users) run registry * HKEY_CURRENT_USER run registry * run once at next start-up or temporarily or permanently remove them. Very useful when an installation puts them in the wrong place. http://www.mlin.net/StartupMonitor.shtml is another good one. Colin [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: And also very dangerous territory to be in unless you know the registry very, very well. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Geoffrey Welsh Subject: Re: Net Scam Purports to Be From U.S. Soldier Date: Sat, 25 May 2002 12:49:14 -0400 Organization: Bell Sympatico wrote: > Here is another example of a 'Nigerian-like' scam. ... with a bit of the movie "Three Kings" thrown in! ------------------------------ From: Robert A. Fink, M. D. Subject: Re: Can RAM Affect Dialup Connections? Date: Sat, 25 May 2002 14:35:29 -0700 Organization: Robert A. Fink, M. D., FACS, P. C. Reply-To: rafink@attglobal.net Gordon S. Hlavenka wrote: > If your PC was built within the last 3 years or so, and the modem came > with it, it's probably a winmodem. The modem, a Supra 56K PCI voice modem, was installed as a separate "component" (the PC was built to specifications). It is not a "winmodem". Best, Robert A. Fink, M.D., FACS, P. C. 2500 Milvia Street Suite 222 Berkeley, California 94704-2636 USA Telephone: 510-849-2555 FAX: 510-849-2557 "Ex Tristitia Virtus" ------------------------------ From: chris@mce.com (Chris Patterson) Subject: Re: Good News About the 419 Scams From Nigeria. Date: 25 May 2002 21:41:32 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Yes, the Nigerian scam e-mails. 60 Minutes did a segment on this years back. It is a cottage industry in Lagos where the perpetrators hope to illicit banking info, ask for forwarding amounts of money to "facilitate" the release of the "big bucks" etc ... It is all a scam of course. On the 60 Minutes episode the chronicled the adventures of a preacher who actually flew to meet the "Prince" only to end up kidnapped and held for ransom. Not much you can do about them with the exception of reporting them for spamming. I myself read them for their humor value as the writers are always outdoing themselves with their outlandish claims. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 26 May 2002 13:21:21 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: News Headlines of Interest 5/26/02 U.S. not getting wireless message. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2002/03/18/BU239258.DTL Watch out for hidden long-distance charges. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2002/03/18/BU162445.DTL Cellular, DSL services lower need for land lines. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2002/03/18/BU194380.DTL A maze of cell phone service http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2002/03/18/BU113102.DTL Cutting through the static to find the right phone plan. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2002/03/18/BU69607.DTL Hackers gain entry to key state database Personnel files were breached last month for 265,000 workers Ryan Kim, Chronicle Staff Writer Saturday, May 25, 2002 Computer hackers have cracked into the state's personnel database and gained access to financial information for all 265,000 state workers, including Governor Gray Davis, officials said Friday. The database, housed at state's Teale Data Center in Rancho Cordova, holds names, Social Security numbers, and payroll information for everyone from office workers to judges. Authorities said that so far they have found no evidence that the information has been used illegally. "There was a breach in the data base, but there is no information to suggest that any of the information has been used to date," said Sacramento County sheriff's spokesman James Lewis. The governor's office alerted state workers to the breach Friday and provided information on how they can further protect their personal information. Merger would benefit only AT&T, Comcast By Steve Early and Myles Calvey, Globe Staff, 5/26/2002 Massachusetts cities and towns have a big decision to make this spring about AT&T's pending sale of its cable TV subsidiary to Philadelphia-based Comcast Corp. Hearings were held around the state last month so community-based cable franchising authorities could assess the local impact of this transaction. It affects 1 million Massachusetts households, 150,000 in Boston alone. If approved by federal regulators, the $72 billion marriage of America's biggest cable TV provider, AT&T Broadband, with the third largest will create a new cable giant with 40 percent of the market and 22 million customers nationwide. The brokers of this deal -- the billionaire Roberts family, which controls Comcast, and AT&T chief executive Michael Armstrong -- will definitely benefit from it. Armstrong plans to leave his troubled telecom firm behind and become chairman of AT&T Comcast once Broadband is spun off. But it's less clear how cable TV customers and workers will fare. http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/146/business/Merger_would_benefit_only_AT_T_Comcast+.shtml ------------------------------ From: danielzr@netzero.net (Daniel Rosenzweig) Subject: Alternate Local SPs in Boston Area for Consumers? Date: 26 May 2002 18:02:24 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Are there any competative local Service Providers for consumers available in the Boston Suburbs (Newton)? Thanks. ------------------------------ Date: 25 May 2002 10:43:20 -0000 Subject: Re: Vanity Facts From: Hendrik Rood > For a Dutch client of mine I'm looking for facts, figures and graphs as > proof of the possitive effect of a tollfree vanity number. > Vanity calling is slowly becoming well known in The Netherlands and > decision-makers are looking for hard evidence before ordering their > number. > If you can provide me with any information, please send it to my > businessadress: melvin@informatienummer.nl Melvin, During 1996-1997 KPN Telecom, our national incumbent, has distributed two booklets about toll-free numbers (servicenummers they called it in Dutch). One of them describing experimental research by their ergonomy and user interface lab together with Erasmus University, who looked at commercial perception. Alas this was mainly directed at user preferences and recognition for "short" versus "long" 800-numbers and the influence of repetition in the number on users memory. Vanity numbers where only mentioned in the passing. You might give it a try to call Eric Cleij at KPN's headquarters (he is the telecommunications consultants point of contact and distributed that booklet in 1997). The booklet was however written in Dutch, but I assume you are able to read that language. To give you and other readers of the list a short glimpse of the results of this 800-ergonomy research: Purchasers of "golden" numbers tend to overrate the ease of their number e.g. 800-3388777 is experienced by the 800-owner as easy to remember, but in reality the average citizen only remember the very "repetitive" or "regular" numbers such as 0800-1212121 or 0800-1234567. E.g. potential 800-number purchasers pay a premium over reality. This overrating of the value of an "easy to remember" telephonenumber. They effectively found that the more expensive Short 800-numbers were really providing a service to the consumer. A consumer is far more able to remember 0800-0100 by head than she/he is able to distinguish 11-digit length numbers. I have the strong impression that additional research, which KPN Research labs planned to perform on 800-vanity numbers has resulted in similar facts for alphanumeric dialling. Thus slightly disappointing and relatively light effects. However I am not aware of publicly published results. The very distinct nature of the US-market with national retailers competing against the local shop who can be reached at the local flat rate created the main initial demand for 800-numbers. From my own research it is easily discovered that all countries with local metering have 800-traffic levels at 1-5% instead of the near 40% of long distance traffic volume the US has for 800-numbers. This means the market you are operating in is very different. It is risky to argue with US success stories for the European 800 market. E.g. alphanumeric vanity numbers different from the company name or their major brands are just that: vanity numbers, that require large sums of money to really attract the publics awareness. Kind regards, Hendrik Rood ------------------------------ From: stevenl11@aol.com (Steven Lichter) Date: 26 May 2002 11:50:27 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Subject: Anothr E-mail Spammer with a Toll Free Number ...to teach this individual about the cost of owning an Toll Free number... -----Original Message----- (877) 852-8732 To find out how you can loose 10 to 15 pounds a week safely without and drugs. Quick Silver Enterprises. =================================================== Remember it is against the law to harrass anyone by telephone. Also you should use a payphone so that the operator can make a little money. Apple Elite II 909-359-5338. Home of GBBS/LLUCE, support for the Apple II 24 hours 2400/14.4. An OggNet Server. The only good spammer is a dead one!!! Have you hunted one down today? (c) Kill Spammers, Inc. A Hope You Roast In Hell Company. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Ah, Steve, another entry for which we all appreciate your purusing the open minefield called the Internet. But I really have to wonder what good it does, it any ... when I was living in Junction City, Kansas three years ago, the landlord came around one day to bomb the roaches out of existence. He brought 'bombs' of roach spray, several cans of spray, roach motels, the works. I stayed in another room that night and the next day when I saw a couple hundred of the little buggers evacuting their nest near the floorboard behind the cooking stove. Will all your efforts ever get rid of them? Probably not ... like cockroaches, if there was a nuclear explosion as part of a world war, I suspect roaches would survive it all; and spammers also. PAT] ------------------------------ 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-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-870-9697 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! 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 * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. 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. End of TELECOM Digest V20 #264 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue May 28 13:54:26 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id NAA22581; Tue, 28 May 2002 13:54:26 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 13:54:26 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200205281754.NAA22581@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #265 TELECOM Digest Tue, 28 May 2002 13:54:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 265 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Telecom Update (Canada) #334, May 27, 2002 (Angus TeleManagement) Re: Alternate Local SPs in Boston Area For Consumers? (Fred Goldstein) Re: Blocking Clients From Non-ISP Mail Servers? Bad Idea. (David Harmon) Re: PRI Service (Jeff Grossman) Re: Can RAM Affect Dialup Connections? (Andrew Yeomans) Re: Intercom Over WAN via IP ? (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Panasonic KX-F780 (no man) What is This (Email) World Coming To? (David B. Horvath, CCP) Isterra Calling Card Problems (Quinn Michael) Query: International Phone Calls Using Internet (J.T. Thompson) What is Required to Start a Cable Television Network? (Author) Re: Another E-mail Spammer with a Toll Free Number (Steven Lichter) Re: Another E-mail Spammer with a Toll Free Number (Mentzer) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRII. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 27 May 2002 13:33:19 From: Angus TeleManagement Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #334, May 27, 2002 ************************************************************ TELECOM UPDATE ************************************************************ published weekly by Angus TeleManagement Group http://www.angustel.ca Number 334: May 27, 2002 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 ** GROUP TELECOM http://www.gt.ca ** LUCENT TECHNOLOGIES CANADA http://www.lucent.ca ** PRIMUS CANADA: http://www.primustel.ca ** Q9 NETWORKS: http://www.Q9.com ** TELUS: http://www.telus.com ** UNISPHERE NETWORKS: http://www.unispherenetworks.com ************************************************************ IN THIS ISSUE: ** Price Cap Decision to Be Released Thursday ** AT&T Canada Raises Millions ** U.S. Court Slows Teleglobe Reorganization ** Rogers Intros GPRS Data Service ** Calgary to Put Wireless LANs in Schools ** BCI Asks Hearing on Nasdaq Delisting ** IBM to Sell Mitel 3100 ** TIW Warns of Coming Cash Crunch ** Microsoft to Open Canadian Call Centre ** Computer Use Increases Among Farmers ** Teleglobe, 360networks Delay Financial Results ** Persona Raises $225 Million ** Stratos Sells Shares to Pay Down Debt ** Metromedia Seeks Creditor Protection ** Correction -- Utility Poles ** How to Confront the Spam Crisis ============================================================ PRICE CAP DECISION TO BE RELEASED THURSDAY: On May 30 at 4:00 p.m., the CRTC will release its long-awaited price cap decision. Watch for a special edition of Telecom Update Friday morning, highlighting key aspects of the decision. ** The decision will be available on the CRTC website, as are the submissions, comments, and evidence submitted in this proceeding. http://www.crtc.gc.ca/PartVII/Eng/2001/8678/C12-11.htm#4d AT&T CANADA RAISES MILLIONS: AT&T Canada has raised $85.5 million by monetizing currency interest rate swaps. Its banks have agreed to provide access to another $200 million when it produces an acceptable business plan following the CRTC price cap decision. U.S. COURT SLOWS TELEGLOBE REORGANIZATION: The U.S. Bankruptcy Court has refused to grant protection to Teleglobe's U.S. subsidiaries in the form the company requested. Teleglobe says it will consider alternatives, including a Chapter 11 filing. ROGERS INTROS GPRS DATA SERVICE: The new Rogers AT&T Portage Plus service allows selected GPRS-equipped cellphones to act as wireless modems for laptops or PDAs. The start-up fee for the service is $129; usage charges range from $30 for 5 MB/month to $145 for 80 MB/month. Customers who sign on by June 30 get six months' unlimited usage for $50/month. CALGARY TO PUT WIRELESS LANs IN SCHOOLS: The Calgary Board of Education has decided to equip more than 200 primary and secondary schools with wireless LANs, enabling students to move laptops room-to-room without losing network connections. Avaya will supply the 11 Mbps wireless LAN technology, which will be used by 90,000 students. BCI ASKS HEARING ON NASDAQ DELISTING: Nasdaq says BCI no longer complies with the Minimum Bid Price requirement for continued listing. BCI has asked for a hearing to review this decision; its TSX listing is unaffected. IBM TO SELL MITEL 3100: IBM has agreed to sell Mitel's 3100 Integrated Communications Platform and 6000 Managed Applications Server through its distribution channels, as part of its small business solutions product line. TIW WARNS OF COMING CASH CRUNCH: TIW reports revenues of $139 million in the first quarter, 37% higher than last year. Net income of $39.5 million includes a $48 million one-time gain. TIW warns that its cash obligations during the next 12 months "exceed its committed sources of funds and cash on hand." (See Telecom Update #319) MICROSOFT TO OPEN CANADIAN CALL CENTRE: Microsoft Corp. plans to establish an international technical-support centre in Mississauga that will employ 50 people. COMPUTER USE INCREASES AMONG FARMERS: StatsCan reports that 40% of Canadian farms used computers in 2001, twice the proportion in 1996. Seven out of 10 farm computer users surfed the Internet for commodity prices, weather reports, and other information. TELEGLOBE, 360NETWORKS DELAY FINANCIAL RESULTS: Teleglobe and 360networks both say that they will not file annual and first quarter reports by the required dates because of financial problems related to their attempts to restructure. PERSONA RAISES $225 MILLION: Persona Inc, formerly Regional Cablesystems, has set up a $225 million line of credit with six Canadian banks and says it now has $120 million available for further acquisitions in Canada. STRATOS SELLS SHARES TO PAY DOWN DEBT: Stratos Global, which provides satellite telecom services, has raised $149 million in new equity, which will be used to repay debt. ** Stratos reports first quarter revenue of US$79.4 million, 21% higher than the same period last year. Net income: $2.8 million. METROMEDIA SEEKS CREDITOR PROTECTION: New York-based Metromedia Fiber Network, which joined with Telus to build a fibre network in Toronto, has filed for bankruptcy protection. Metromedia sold Telus its interest in the Toronto project in December. (See Telecom Update #254, 325) CORRECTION -- UTILITY POLES: Telecom Update #333 incorrectly cited the CRTC-determined rate for cableco use of hydro poles. The correct price is $15.89/year. HOW TO CONFRONT THE SPAM CRISIS: A tidal wave of junk e-mail threatens to destroy the usefulness of e-mail for business. A special feature in the May issue of Telemanagement proposes measures to bring the spam crisis under control. Also in Telemanagement #195: ** Is Your Data Network Ready for Voice? ** First Steps in Disaster Planning ** Why IP Telephony Lags in Call Centres Single copies of Telemanagement #195 are $75 each -- call 905-686-5050 ext 500 and charge to Visa, American Express, or Mastercard. Save 49% with a 10-issue subscription -- go to http://www.angustel.ca/teleman/tm-sub.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 2. The e-mail edition is distributed free of charge. To subscribe, send an e-mail message to: TelecomUpdate@add.postmastergeneral.com To stop receiving the e-mail edition, send an e-mail message to: TelecomUpdate@remove.postmastergeneral.com Sending e-mail to these addresses will automatically add or remove the sender's e-mail address from the list. Leave subject line and message area blank. We do not give Telecom Update subscribers' e-mail addresses to any third party. For more information, see http://www.angustel.ca/update/privacy.html. =========================================================== COPYRIGHT AND CONDITIONS OF USE: All contents copyright 2002 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 500. The information and data included has been obtained from sources which we believe to be reliable, but Angus TeleManagement makes no warranties or representations whatsoever regarding accuracy, completeness, or adequacy. Opinions expressed are based on interpretation of available information, and are subject to change. If expert advice on the subject matter is required, the services of a competent professional should be obtained. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 May 2002 10:04:25 -0400 From: Fred Goldstein Subject: Re: Alternate Local SPs in Boston Area For Consumers? danielzr@netzero.net (Daniel Rosenzweig) asks, > Are there any competative local Service Providers for consumers > available in the Boston Suburbs (Newton)? Mostly the cable companies. Newton is lucky to have real cable competition. Both AT&T-B and RCN offer telephone service. I've found AT&T's (former MediaOne, not TCI) to be far superior to VZ's, both on service and price. (It is not Voice over IP; it is far more reliable than their cable modem service.) But you do have to be careful to pick the right plan. Some plans give a more generous local calling area than VZ, some plans though may be quite narrow, or cost more than VZ for out-of-local coverage. I'm not sure about loop-based competition. A few CLECs are in Newton, but other than resellers, I haven't heard a lot of interest in residential service. (I know one who is considering entry but isn't in Newton yet.) ------------------------------ From: David Harmon Subject: Re: Blocking Clients From Non-ISP Mail Servers? Bad Idea. Organization: Form follows function. Date: Mon, 27 May 2002 14:56:11 GMT On Thu, 23 May 2002 18:11:57 -0600 in comp.dcom.telecom, Joey Lindstrom wrote: > The question that was raised was this: some ISP's block port 25 > unless it's a request to relay through their OWN servers. This > prevents Tommy from sending mail via mail.albelin.com, which resolves > to *MY* IP address and *MY* server. Yes, he has authorization to use > this server. He has to POP-before-SMTP, but once he's met that I thought servers that were specifically set up for that kind of usage would accept connects on some port other than 25. ------------------------------ From: Jeff Grossman Subject: Re: PRI Service Organization: Stikman.com Date: Mon, 27 May 2002 19:00:51 GMT EM Handler wrote: > T1 has become the generic name for a digital trunk with in-band > signaling, typically channelized for 24 voice paths. PRI, also a > digital circuit, is the nickname for Primary Rate Interface of the > Integrated Services Digital Network or PRI/ISDN. PRI typically has 23 > voice paths (referred to as 'B' channels) and 1 signaling or 'D' > channel. PRI is usually superior when compared to most T1 > nconfigurations. When I was researching T-1's for my office, I noticed that a PRI will come with more features then a standard T-1. For instance, you get caller ID standard with a PRI. This might not be standard across the country, but it was here in Southern California. Also, they say that it is quicker to get a dial tone with a PRI than it is with a standard T-1. But, all of this comes with a price. The PRI was about double the price than the standard T-1 for me. Jeff Grossman (jeff@stikman.com) ------------------------------ From: Andrew Yeomans Subject: Re: Can RAM Affect Dialup Connections? Date: Mon, 27 May 2002 22:03:19 +0100 Organization: ntlworld News Service Robert A. Fink M.D. wrote in message news:telecom20.264.12@telecom-digest.org: > The modem, a Supra 56K PCI voice modem, was installed as a separate > "component" (the PC was built to specifications). It is not a "winmodem". Don't necessarily believe it. Check first on http://www.idir.net/~gromitkc/winmodem.html . Some of the ones listed there precisely fit your description, but are winmodems. If it plugs into a serial port, then it won't be a winmodem. But most internal cards nowadays are. Andrew Yeomans ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Intercom Over WAN via IP ? Organization: Excelsior Computer Services From: joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 01:26:34 GMT I wrote: > I'm looking for an intercom application that will work over our WAN > via IP. Ideally, this would involve only port 80, because part of our > WAN is stuck behind a firewall over which I have no control. > The idea is that each of a dozen computers (all, fortunately, on T1 > lines or better) will have a button on the screen that the user can > push to be connected to the "group chat" session. Several people responding, but not with anything that seems like it will work. Why is this so hard? Isn't this basically the same technology as text chat? Couldn't a voice stream be encoded within the same technology designed for text? Joel ------------------------------ From: no man Subject: Panasonic KX-F780 Organization: yes man Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 02:06:24 GMT Anyone else know anything about this fax machine? I don't have a user manual for it, but would love an online version if anyone else could point me in the right direction. Thanks. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 07:02:03 -0400 From: dhorvath@cobs.com (David B. Horvath, CCP) Subject: What is This (Email) World Coming To? What is this world coming to? First it is the slime of the earth that use SPAM, then semi-reputable places like the Chubb Institute, and now "good" companies like Gevalia Coffee! > You may also call us at 1-800-GEVALIA (1-800-438-2542), 24 hours a > day, 7 days a week. David [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I'm beginning to think we are fighting a losing battle **based on the economics of email delivery**. There is no real incentive for spammers to stop. Email is **so cheap to send** and **relatively effective in reaching people**, so what if there are a certain number of economic casualties like occassional toll-free phone lines with spiraling costs. Still less expensive than buying a million postage stamps. I think the whole system of processing email on the net has to change before there is going to be any difference. There will have to be some economic burden on the users of email before we see any changes (i.e. 'pay as you use them' email post offices. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 08:10:29 -0400 From: Quinn Michael Organization: BAH Subject: Isterra Calling Card Problems We have Isterra long distance (we learned about it in TELECOM Digest) and are happy with one exception -- our Verizon (northern VA) call intercept, the one that blocks "out of area" or "not available" calls, will not accept calls to our house made with our calling card, where my company MCI card got right through from the same Verizon payphone in Maryland over the weekend; same thing happened recently from a hotel room in VA, so it's definitely the card. Has anyone else experienced this? Anyone know of a comparable LD carrier with competitive rates (around 5 cents a minute interstate) where this will not happen? Thanks, Mike ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 May 2002 09:36:35 +0000 From: J.T. Thompson Subject: Query: International Phone Calls Using Internet Query: Anyone use the internet for international phone calls? What programs do you use; do you need ISDN or DSL or satellite access to avoid buffering; how does it work; what are the advantages and disadvantages? ------------------------------ From: jm04469@yahoo.com (Author) Subject: What is Required to Start a Cable Television Network? Date: 27 May 2002 09:41:33 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ I have to do a paper for school on what is required to start a cable telivision network. The only site to date that has this information is cablemaven.com but they want $159 for which I cannot afford. If anyone can point me to free sources on the Internet, it would be greatly appreciated. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: If you can't afford to buy the report for this from cablemaven.com then you definitly cannot afford to start a cable network. You have to begin with huge gobs of money and little or no expectations of any return on your investment. There are a lot of things on your checklist; maybe others here will write you with the sordid details. But start by having a huge bank account and expect several year's investment before you see any return at all for your efforts. PAT] ------------------------------ From: stevenl11@aol.com (Steven Lichter) Date: 27 May 2002 15:55:28 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Subject: Re: Anothr E-mail Spammer with a Toll Free Number TELECOM Digest Editor noted: > Will all your efforts ever get rid of them? Probably not ... like > cockroaches, if there was a nuclear explosion as part of a world war, > I suspect roaches would survive it all; and spammers also. PAT] I believe it was P.T Barnham who said a sucker is born every minute. So as long as new people get on the net it will keep on. Also some of the numbers are just toll free voice mails which only cost ... 10 cents per call, so nothing may stop them, that is other then the supplier will get hit with the payphone charges with each call. The numbers where you get a real company or person will get their attention. Until IPs are hit in the pocket book with fines, nothing will stop it. On another subject I got several e-mails on the Nigerian oil scams and forwared it to an address that their government set up. They are serious about stopping it, from a reply I got if caught they will spend a lot of years in jail. Apple Elite II 909-359-5338. Home of GBBS/LLUCE, support for the Apple II 24 hours 2400/14.4. An OggNet Server. The only good spammer is a dead one!!! Have you hunted one down today? (c) Kill Spammers, Inc. A Hope You Roast In Hell Company. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: So the King in Nigeria has decided to crack down on the scamspam has he? Well, good. Let's see if we can notice any difference a year or two from now. Why don't I think we will see any difference? PAT] ------------------------------ From: bassbozo@yahoo.com (mentzer) Subject: Re: Anothr E-mail Spammer with a Toll Free Number Date: 27 May 2002 15:58:39 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Why would I waste my time doing something so juvenile? Let me guess ... "two wrongs make a right," perhaps? Or maybe "the end justifies the means"? I don't think so. Grow up, kid, and do something productive. mm stevenl11@aol.com (Steven Lichter) wrote in message news:... > Remember it is against the law to harrass anyone by telephone. Also > you should use a payphone so that the operator can make a little > money. > Apple Elite II 909-359-5338. Home of GBBS/LLUCE, support for the > Apple II 24 hours 2400/14.4. An OggNet Server. > > The only good spammer is a dead one!!! Have you hunted one down today? (c) > Kill Spammers, Inc. A Hope You Roast In Hell Company. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Ah, Steve, another entry for which we > all appreciate your purusing the open minefield called the Internet. > But I really have to wonder what good it does, it any ... when I was > living in Junction City, Kansas three years ago, the landlord came > around one day to bomb the roaches out of existence. He brought > 'bombs' of roach spray, several cans of spray, roach motels, the > works. I stayed in another room that night and the next day when I > saw a couple hundred of the little buggers evacuting their nest near > the floorboard behind the cooking stove. Will all your efforts ever > get rid of them? Probably not ... like cockroaches, if there was a > nuclear explosion as part of a world war, I suspect roaches would > survive it all; and spammers also. PAT] ------------------------------ 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-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-870-9697 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! 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 * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. 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. End of TELECOM Digest V20 #265 ****************************** ISSUE 266 GOT MAILED OUT OF ORDER. 267 WAS MAILED BUT 266 DID NOT GO OUT UNTIL MONDAY NIGHT AND FOLLOWS AFTER 267 From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri May 31 15:34:52 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id PAA19186; Fri, 31 May 2002 15:34:52 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 31 May 2002 15:34:52 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200205311934.PAA19186@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #267 TELECOM Digest Fri, 31 May 2002 15:36:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 267 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Telecom Update (Canada) EXTRA, May 31, 2002 (Angus TeleManagement) MyLine Local Service - First Coast-to-Coast Local Phone Company (myexcel) Workstation User Cannot Hear the System Intercom Thru SeriesE (Keith) Re: What is Required to Start a Cable Television Network? (James Gifford) MCI Neighborhood and Fax/Modem(ISP) Usage, no DSL (Doug Reuben) Wi-Fi 'Hot Spots' Allow Laptop, PDA User to be Tracked (Monty Solomon) Re: What is This (Email) World Coming To? (Zed) They Will Never Learn (Steven Lichter) This Month's Nagware Request (TELECOM Digest Editor) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRII. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 31 May 2002 09:56:54 -0400 From: Angus TeleManagement Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) EXTRA, May 31, 2002 *********************************************************** TELECOM UPDATE EXTRA! ** CRTC RELEASES PRICE CAPS DECISION CONSUMERS ARE THE BIG WINNERS AT&T MAY APPEAL ************************************************************ published weekly by Angus TeleManagement Group http://www.angustel.ca Number 334a: May 31, 2002 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 ** GROUP TELECOM http://www.gt.ca ** LUCENT TECHNOLOGIES CANADA http://www.lucent.ca ** PRIMUS CANADA: http://www.primustel.ca ** Q9 NETWORKS: http://www.Q9.com ** TELUS: http://www.telus.com ** UNISPHERE NETWORKS: http://www.unispherenetworks.com ************************************************************ May 31, 2001: Consumers are the big winners in the CRTC's Price Caps decision, released yesterday. Both the incumbent phone companies and their major competitors are unhappy, and AT&T Canada says it may file an appeal. The 232 pages of CRTC Telecom Decision 2002-34 set the framework for regulating the major telephone companies for the next four years. Highlights include: ** Basic residential service rates, on average, will not increase unless inflation exceeds 3.5%. Within this cap, no individual rate may increase more than 5% per year, and rates for optional services such as voice mail and call waiting may not increase more than $1 per year per feature. ** Business service rate increases are limited, on average, to inflation rate. No individual rate elements can increase more than 10% per year. ** The telcos' markup on essential services used by competitors has been cut from 25% to 15%. ** Digital Network Access service, which competitors have been paying retail rates for, must now be offered to competitors at cost+15%. ** Customers and competitors will be entitled to rebates if telcos fail to meet Quality of Service standards. The CRTC will open several follow-on proceedings to consider such issues as payphone rates, a consumer bill of rights, and other questions. Overall, it appears that the decision will reduce the fees paid by competitors to use telco facilities by 15% to 20%. This is much less than the 50% to 75% they wanted -- but more than the telcos thought appropriate. Consumer groups have welcomed the decision. Philippa Lawson of the Public Interest Advocacy Centre said that "Hopefully, ordinary consumers will now start seeing some benefits from competition in the local phone market." The telcos, which wanted to increase residence rates and opposed reductions to competitor rates, say they will have to study the decision more fully to assess its impact. Representatives of Bell Canada and Telus both criticized the restrictions on their ability to raise rates. AT&T Canada and Call-Net, which had hoped for much larger discounts on competitor services, expressed disappointment. AT&T CEO John McLennan called it a "disappointing decision," and promised to "explore all options ... including a possible appeal." http://www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Decisions/2002/dt2002-34.htm ============================================================ 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 2. The e-mail edition is distributed free of charge. To subscribe, send an e-mail message to: TelecomUpdate@add.postmastergeneral.com To stop receiving the e-mail edition, send an e-mail message to: TelecomUpdate@remove.postmastergeneral.com Sending e-mail to these addresses will automatically add or remove the sender's e-mail address from the list. Leave subject line and message area blank. We do not give Telecom Update subscribers' e-mail addresses to any third party. For more information, see http://www.angustel.ca/update/privacy.html. =========================================================== COPYRIGHT AND CONDITIONS OF USE: All contents copyright 2002 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 500. 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. ============================================================ ------------------------------ Reply-To: From: Subject: MyLine Local Service - First Coast-to-Coast Local Phone Company Date: Fri, 31 May 2002 01:12:59 GMT Organization: RoadRunner - West [Editor's Note: Although the following comes close to sounding like MLM and I feel a little uneasy about using it here, the concept of a national coast-to-coast 'local calling area' is an interesting concept. I thought I would let readers think it over and see where the discussion takes us. This is not, so far as I know, the same 'MyLine' service I sold here a few years ago. Maybe these folks bought the name to use it. PAT] Excel "MyLine" Local Service ROLL-OUT PREVIEW "The United States' First Coast-to-Coast Local Phone Company" >>> Unprecedented Opportunity for Substantial Income <<< I'm a national recruiter for the fastest growing company in the communications industry and I'm looking for a few sharp people interested in making some serious income. Do you know anyone who may be interested? The following overview is privileged information on the referral-marketing program and income potential associated with the rollout of Local Telephone service with the merger of Excel Communications and VarTec Telecom, which was finalized in March 2002. (www.excel.com / www.VarTec.com) The new partnership, VarTec-Excel, is looking for key individuals to assist in the state-by-state nationwide rollout of what is called "MyLine" local phone service. These entrepreneurs will be the ONLY source for customers to subscribe to this one-of-kind, groundbreaking Local Phone plan. VarTec-Excel will help these reps make money with the referral program described below. The financial rewards in the form of monthly residuals and bonuses will be substantial for those who are on board when the green light is given to register customers around the country. >> HOW YOU CAN EARN SUBSTANTIAL INCOME: The primary responsibility for the VarTec-Excel business owner will be to gather "WEBS" of customers on the calling plan. These customers who are referred to use the MyLine service will be able to call each other and never have to pay a long distance fee! That's right, they can talk for as long as they want and never pay a dime!!! Imagine the possibilities. As an example: If you're an Excel business owner with 10 personal "My Line" customers, and each one refers just three friends or relatives to Excel Local Service, who each refer just three more, etc. you will receive anywhere from 2-10% of all the phone bills, each and every month! The monthly cost for My Line local phone service depends on individual state tariffs, but is anticipated to be a flat rate of $29, $39, and $49 per month. Up to 10 features are included in the price: Unlimited Local Calls, Call Waiting, Call Forwarding, Caller ID, 3-Way Calling and long-distance calling from 3.9 - 6.9 cents per minute. Remember, My Line customers on the "Value" and "Complete" plans can call each other unlimited and never pay long distance, no matter where they live. Doesn't matter if they are across the street or across the country!! Between My Line customers, these are considered LOCAL calls. Also, there are no "per-call minimums." Excel broke historic records when they grew from $31 Million in revenue to over $1.2 Billion in just 3 years by marketing deregulated Long Distance (LD) using this method. Today, VarTec-Excel is a $2.5 BILLION telecom giant, and unlike the 90's, they have the entire network and switches already in place. With revenue projections for 2005 near $10 Billion, you will see an explosion that will make the 1993 growth record pale by comparison. Can you find a reason NOT to take part in this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity? Join our team of Excel Reps! Contact me at Blake McCoach VarTec-Excel Communications 714.846.6558 home office myexcel@socal.rr.com www.excelir.com/xlr8me ------------------------------ From: keithwvaughn@hotmail.com (Keith) Subject: Workstation User Cannot Hear System Intercom Thru Dterm SeriesE Date: 29 May 2002 15:41:54 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Hello, Was hoping that maybe someone might be able to answer the following question, given this info: Telephone Units: Dterm Series E - DTP-8D-1 System: NEAX 2000 IVS Integrated Voice Server Configurable Software: MATWorX 32 version: 2.5.34 Hosted on: Windows NT 4 Server SP6a We have a workstation that cannot hear the system Intercom thru their telephone; Switch the telephone unit, and New telephone still can't hear the intercom (Old telephone plugged into separate location CAN hear it). Looking for Key Chart for Features (Hoping just missing a Specific Key Feature config) can't seem to locate ??? Our software, is remotely configured for us via VNC. So we're not familiar with the MATWorX 32 software configurations. Thanks In Advance; appreciate you taking the time to comment. ------------------------------ From: James Gifford Subject: Re: What is Required to Start a Cable Television Network? Date: Wed, 29 May 2002 17:02:54 -0700 Organization: Nitrosyncretic Press Author wrote: > I have to do a paper for school on what is required to start a cable > television network. 3,735,921 feet of cable. :) | James Gifford - Nitrosyncretic Press | | http://www.nitrosyncretic.com for the Heinlein FAQ & more | | Tired of auto-spam... change "not" to "net" for replies | ------------------------------ From: Interpage Network Services Inc. Subject: MCI Neighborhood and Fax/Modem(ISP) Usage, no DSL Organization: http://www.interpage.net Date: Thu, 30 May 2002 15:10:58 GMT Hello, I'm looking for some dispositive information (from MCI's web site or in writing, ie, brochures, newspaper ads, etc.) regarding MCI's "Neighborhood" $50 plan with unlimited local and long distance. (MCI becomes your local and LD provider.) According to MCI, (as best I can tell), you may only use "The Neighborhood" for *voice* calls. What few guidelines they have posted on the various pagers on their web site (the PDF file in mostly unreadable to me) indicate that non-voice calls may be billed at a different rate, but it is not clear what that rate will be. Since MCI takes over both local, INTRA and INTER LATA toll, their policy would effectively prohibit both fax and modem traffic (to an ISP for example). (Curiously, there is no high-speed/broadband data offering with their "Neighborhood" package; a combo product would make their offering much more attractive; as it stands, if you currently have ADSL multiplexed over your voice line it seems you may have to get rid of the DSL in order to sign up with MCI.) Asking consumers to not use non-voice services and at the same time not provide an alternative to data dialup (via ISP) strikes me as brain-dead (well, this IS MCI after all ... :), let alone somewhat deceptive and unintuitive as sending faxes or logging on to an ISP are (IMO) commonplace in many households now. This reminds me of Sprint a few years ago with their unlimited weekends saying "You may not use 3-way calling with the Sprint Unlimited Plan" (which the slimey people at Sprint never told anyone about until after they re-rated your bills at a non-unlimited rate!), but on a scale which may adversely affect a significantly larger number of consumers (not too many people use 3-way; I think many more people use fax machines and dialup internet service). I'm very reluctantly considering giving them a try, but without a definitive statement on what may or may not be used (and pricing) I'm reticent to even bother. MCI has a horrible customer service history with us (we used to use them as the 1+ carrier on some of our cellphones when cellular LD was NOT included as a component of airtime minutes), and just talking to someone who could carry on a coherent conversation there was trying, let alone answer and/or resolve a problem. Any info would be appreciated! Thanks in advance! -Doug d1@interpage.net www.interpage.net (510) 315-2750 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 30 May 2002 15:11:14 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Wi-Fi 'Hot Spots' Allow Laptop, PDA User to be Covertly Tracked By Simson L. Garfinkel Special to The Seattle Times If you have one of those fancy new wireless Wi-Fi or 802.11(b) cards in your laptop or handheld computer, you probably know about the increasing number of "Wi-Fi hot spots" where you can get wireless Internet access -- often without paying. What you may not know, experts warn, is that these hot spots can also use your wireless card to track your movements as you walk around. Meanwhile, other people using the same hot spots can covertly monitor all of the information that you send over the air. ------------------------------ From: gc@Radix.Net (Zed) Subject: Re: What is This (Email) World Coming To? Date: 31 May 2002 17:19:06 GMT Organization: Spontaneous In article , David B. Horvath, CCP wrote: > What is this world coming to? First it is the slime of the earth that > use SPAM, then semi-reputable places like the Chubb Institute, and now > "good" companies like Gevalia Coffee! >> You may also call us at 1-800-GEVALIA (1-800-438-2542), 24 hours a >> day, 7 days a week. > David > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I'm beginning to think we are fighting > a losing battle **based on the economics of email delivery**. There is > no real incentive for spammers to stop. Email is **so cheap to send** There may be an incentive for the large more reputable companies. I don't know how long ago recorded telemarketing calls started. The first one I got was a bit over 20 years ago. It was from Prudential Insurance. Of course, I have never done any business with them since. In the years since then, I have noticed that the telemarketing recordings seldom mention a company name. They'll just give a number to call. These companies don't want their name associated with telemarketing. Spamming may be cost effective even if it produces a very small number of sales. If it becomes obvious that people really hate spammers and that it is a good way of getting a bad reputation, there may be some hope of the big guys avoiding it. OTOH, as evidence of increasing use of spam by small companies: http://www.blacksnowcloud.com. Yes, I am now getting spam for septic tank cleaner; about half a dozen in the last week. And I have never had a septic tank. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Telemarketing phone calls have been around for more like fifty to sixty years. The advent of direct dialed long distance calls (1950's) and automated collect calling (800 numbers started in the 1960's) made telemarketing extremely lucrative. And yes, you do have a septic tank, or cesspool. It sits on your desk and Usenet pours in there all day long. PAT] ------------------------------ From: stevenl11@aol.com (Steven Lichter) Date: 31 May 2002 13:31:57 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Subject: They Will Never Learn ...to teach this individual about the cost of owning a Toll Free number... -----Original Message----- Best Wishes For Great Golf Dana Jones TheBallman Serving the Internet Golf Community Since 1996 888-205-4059 Voice 281-991-6442 Fax 281-991-6800 From Outside The US 435 B-1 FM 1092 Stafford, TX 77477 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Remember it is against the law to harrass anyone by telephone. Also you should use a payphone so that the operator can make a little money. Apple Elite II 909-359-5338. Home of GBBS/LLUCE, support for the Apple II 24 hours 2400/14.4. An OggNet Server. The only good spammer is a dead one!!! Have you hunted one down today? (c) Kill Spammers, Inc. A Hope You Roast In Hell Company. ------------------------------ From: TELECOM Digest Editor (ptownson) Date: 31 May 2002 14:16:00 CDT Subject: Time to Pass the Hat Once Again Well we are again at the end of one month and the start of the next one. In this case, it is the end of spring and the start of summer. Again, I ask you to please remember the importance of supporting your various mailing list/newsgroup moderators with 'subscription' donations as you are able and willing. No one gets cut off here because of their inability or unwillingness to give financial support. Messages are not presented, organized, commented upon or declined for presenta- tion here because of your financial contributions. Whether or not *I* live in the style to which I was formerly accustomed DOES depend on your financial support. Other than my social security disability payments. I have no other income than your gifts. In addition to making payments via check/money order to: TELECOM / Post Office Box 50 / Independence, KS 67301 via credit cards: http//telecom-digest.org Now you can also use credit cards of your choice or Paypal. To do this, go to http://telecom-digest.org and see the 'donate' button at the very bottom of the main page. Thanks very much for your help. Remember, TELECOM Digest is shareware, not freeware. And think of all the spam and virii that never reaches you because I cut it out first. Please do it today. PAT] ------------------------------ 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-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-870-9697 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! 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 * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. 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. End of TELECOM Digest V20 #267 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Jun 3 23:53:09 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id XAA01898; Mon, 3 Jun 2002 23:53:09 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2002 23:53:09 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200206040353.XAA01898@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #268 TELECOM Digest Mon, 3 Jun 2002 23:53:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 268 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson 5/31/2002 ICB Heads Up Headlines (Judith Oppenheimer) Verizon Class-Action Lawsuit, & proposed Michigan legislation (Jack) Excel MyLine Local Service - USA's Coast-to-Coast Local Phone (myexcel) Austin 911 System Flooded: "Simply" a Matter of Human Error (C. Dawson) Re: What is Required to Start a Cable Television Network? (Greg Monti) Re: What is Required to Start a Cable Television Network? (Author) How Do I Report (900)62-CLAIM Telephone Fraud? (burgerwars) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRII. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Judith Oppenheimer Subject: 5/31/2002 ICB HEADS UP HEADLINES Date: Fri, 31 May 2002 23:36:05 -0400 ICB HEADS UP HEADLINES for the period ending May 31, 2002 from http://ICBTollFreeNews.com - Covering the Political, Legal and Marketing Arenas of 800, ENUM and Dot Com. ARTICLE ACCESS CODE LEGEND ICB Toll Free News offers two valuable service options: F = Free - News and Features articles P = Premium - Unlimited Site Access including all Articles and Documents. Registration information is not sold, leased or rented. *** For additional information about topics and stories, keyword search here: http://www.icbtollfree.com/Search.cfm. ____________________________________________________ F - NTIA PETITIONED TO REBID ICANN "Half of the signatories to this letter have never been to an ICANN meeting, so I'm not sure why they signed..." said ICANN President Stuart Lynn in reaction to the petition -- an observation both inappropriate and ironic, considering that Stuart Lynn had also never been to an ICANN meeting prior to commencing his employment as its president. CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5683 P - U.S. TOLL-FREE SERVICES MARKET Frost & Sullivan estimates that 90% of Americans use toll-free numbers. The U.S. toll-free services market generated $17.28 billion in revenues in 2000. This report points out two market segments for toll-free services, including the following: residential toll-free services, and business toll-free services (small, medium and enterprise.) CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5688 F - ITU UPDATE ON ENUM In keeping with the need to allow for voluntary implementation of the scheme and recognizing that ENUM services are primarily national issues, rapid progress at the international level is necessary to create a stable environment in which investment can be made in the worldwide deployment of ENUM. CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5685 F - THE PUBLIC VOICE IN INTERNET POLICY MAKING On Saturday June 22 ,the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) in association with INET 2002, Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility (CPSR) and Georgia Tech IP3, will host a one-day public symposium on the Public Voice in Internet Policy. CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5684 F - SHOULD VERISIGN DUMP NSI? Some analysts are calling for the company to dump its once highly valued domain name registration business. CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5682 F - LYNN AND MCLAUGHLIN TO EXIT ICANN Did they jump, or were they putsched? CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5680 F - UK ISSUES ENUM REPORT Discusses implementation options and regulatory considerations. CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5679 F - ENUM UPDATE Internet Society announces, "Countries wishing to implement ENUM system may now do so." CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5677 P - DID THEY TAKE YOUR KIDS HOSTAGE? John Gilmore tells ICANN's Vint Cerf, "I don't want to be considered a friend of what you now stand for." CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5681 F - NO FREE .US RIDE FOR NEUSTAR Congressional supporters of the dot-kids legislation dismiss NeuStar's claim that operating the "dot-kids" space would cost too much. "NeuStar got this [dot us] contract from the U.S. Government for free," said Mike Waldron, a spokesman for Rep. Fred Upton (R-Mich.), who cosponsored the [dot kids] bill. "They are going to realize a huge windfall from being awarded this contract." CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5675 P - ICANN CONTRACT NONENFORCEMENT, A WHOIS HEARING RECURRING THEME The solution would call for a complete overhaul in the registrar process, according to ICANN Communications Director Mary Hewitt, from the front-end customer sign-up process to quality assurance staffers to ensure the information given was correct. "We agree with the FTC that the domains need to be enforced (by the registrars) and they need to abide by that, but until there's a less-expensive way for the registrar to verify them," it won't happen, she said. Which begs the question, why is ICANN accrediting registrars that can't (or won't) adhere to its Registrar Accreditation agreement? And why doesn't ICANN disaccredit them when they don't? CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5676 /=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= advertisement =-=-=-\ 350,000+ toll free business listings, 85% with web sites Serious inquiries only. mailto:sales@800management.com \=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=.=/ -- Lost and Stolen Number Retrieval -- ENUM Survival Strategies -- Crisis Resolution -- Vanity Number Issues, Guidance & Navigation -- Tollfree Number Traces -- Representation at SNAC, ENUM & ICANN Forums -- Strategic Leadership + Competitive Intelligence -- Custom Research Reports -- Custom Problem Solving: disputes, litigation support, RespOrg issues, etc. ICB Consultancy -- http://1800TheExpert.com \=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=.=/ Looking for the best 800 and long distance rates available today? Choose from multiple programs - Rates as low as 2.9¢ per minute, with no monthly minimums or hidden service charges! Click here: http://WhoSells800.com \=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=/ F - STAYING THE COURSE ON INTERNET PRIVATIZATION The recently announced resignations of top ICANN staff raise the specter of a sharp drop in organizational effectiveness. The combination of staff turnover and major restructuring could introduce so much simultaneous change into ICANN that it cannot function effectively. ICANN faces a near-term risk of destabilization. CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5687 F - EFF FILES FOR IMMEDIATE ACCESS TO ICANN RECORDS "As even Mr. Lynn admits, ICANN requires dramatic reform," noted EFF Legal Director Cindy Cohn. "The Internet community relies on ICANN's Board members, especially its elected ones, to help find out what has gone wrong and evaluate the proposed solutions. Without access to the basic information about how ICANN has been run so far, Mr. Auerbach cannot help formulate the next incarnation of ICANN to fix the problems of the past." CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5674 F - WECANN REVIEWS ICANN There are two classes of reform propositions. First are attempts to improve the proposition of Stuart Lynn, which are ICANN-centric, wanting to address the problems of the ICANN, mostly building on Staff's positions, and in most of the cases they do not propose any source for the ICANN authority (membership or governments). Second, there are propositions concentrating on the interest of the networks. They lead to a very lean ICANN, a disbanded ICANN or a review by the USG either of the choice of the ICANN or of its mission. CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5673 P - SNAC ASKS FOR ELEVEN NEW 800 NXXs Frustrated with the non-release of 855, industry hopes additional 800 NXXs will "re-vanitize" the 800 pool. CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5672 F - ICANN PROPOSED 2002-2003 BUDGET ... ... leaves no money for public elections ... and any at large ("public interest") costs, "would be funded from external contributions." Why mention it at all? CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5671 F - CAN WE REPLACE ICANN? The idea that ICANN's incompetence should be rewarded with more power, more money, and less adult supervision, would be laughable were it not being pursued with such vigor by ICANN staff members who otherwise face the prospect of seeking new employment. CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5670 F - VERISIGN SUED FOR SLAMMING Tom Cunningham, BulkRegister chief executive officer, said the damages caused by VeriSign's false advertising are exacerbated by the industry's slow down in new and renewed domain names and is a violation of the Lanham Act. CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5668 P - REALNAMES IS HISTORY Founder Keith Teare says, "I am sure that Microsoft will do an excellent job of misinforming the public about the reasons for this decision and so I want to put the record straight." CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5667 F - WHOIS ENTITLED TO WHOIS DATA? Available data suggests that existing work by registrars and ICANN has been unsuccessful in assuring the accuracy of WHOIS data. BUT there are relatively few other products that one can buy that require the purchaser to post his name onto a bulletin board that is visible to the world. Why should a person who buys a domain name be subjected to this breach of privacy? CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5669 P - WHAT HAPPENS WHEN AN 800 COMPANY GOES BELLY UP? It seeks Bankruptcy Court approval for auction or sale of its property and assets, which for all practical purposes include valuable 800 numbers. CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5666 F - GUESS WHERE "AMERICA'S INTERNET ADDRESS(tm)" IS HEADING? "China is the fastest growing Internet market in the world," said Jeffrey E. Ganek, Chairman and CEO of NeuStar. CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5664 F - RANDY BUSH FOR (ICANN) PRESIDENT What's it gonna be - a bigger richer ICANN - or a streamlined, working ICANN? CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5665 F - DOMAIN NAME MARKET SHOWS STEADY GROWTH New registrations for the domain name market in the first quarter increased 13% to 2.6 million from 2.3 million in the fourth quarter of 2001. Market renewals and extensions increased by 22%. The market renewal rate for the first quarter remained healthy at approximately 52%. CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=5663 ___________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________ EVERY 3.6 SECONDS SOMEONE DIES FROM HUNGER http://www.hungersite.com/ ___________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________ ABOUT ICB ICB HeadsUp Headlines is sent by request. Subscriptions to ICB HeadsUp Headlines are free to qualified applicants. Visit http://www.icbtollfree.com/reg.cfm?NextURL=Index.cfm to register. To unsubscribe visit http://www.icbtollfree.com/account.cfm and uncheck the Mailing List Subscription box. ___________________________________________________ ADVERTISING For information on advertising in ICB HeadsUp Headlines, mailto:editor@icbtollfree.com, subject: Headlines Advertising ____________________________________________________ Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. ____________________________________________________ Copyright 2002 ICB, Inc. All rights reserved. ------------------------------ From: Jack Subject: Verizon Class-Action Lawsuit, & Proposed Michigan Legislation Date: Sat, 01 Jun 2002 16:38:43 -0400 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Here's a couple of recent items that may be of interest to readers of this group. One is Michigan-specific; the other is not. I'll start with the one that is not: Group granted class-action status in suit against Verizon Judge admits unusual nature of reversing earlier decision 5/31/02 By SCOTT HADLY [Santa Barbara, CA] NEWS-PRESS STAFF WRITER In a rare move, Santa Barbara County Superior Court Judge Thomas Anderle reversed himself and granted class-action status to a group of Verizon Communication customers in a lawsuit over overcharges on monthly phone bills. The judge's decision Wednesday will allow attorneys to obtain detailed billing records from the phone company and determine how many of Verizon's more than 30 million customers nationwide were overcharged during a six-year period and how much. The case, filed in August 2000, includes four local residents who allege that Verizon assigned customers to long-distance carriers that the customers did not pick. They also claim that the company overcharged customers for long-distance calls and then adopted policies to avoid paying cash refunds for those overcharges. Estimates from the company's own records show that more than a million customers were overcharged. The company attributed it to a computer error, which was corrected. But just how much customers were overcharged has yet to be determined, said Pete Bezek, the Santa Barbara attorney handling the case. The full story on this is at: http://news.newspress.com/topsports/053102verizon.htm The law firm's Web site is at: http://www.foleybezek.com/gte/gte.html Comment: If I am reading the law firm's page right, what they are alleging is that GTE not only sometimes routed calls to a carrier other than the customer's preselected carrier, but when they did that, in some cases they also billed the customer more than what the long distance company billed for the call and pocketed the difference. If a customer noticed that something was wrong and complained, they either got a credit against future service or (rarely) a cash refund. But, it seems the law firm is alleging that many customers never noticed the excessive charges. Item #2 (Michigan specific:) The Michigan Telecommunications Act was revised in 2000 to include a provision that requires telephone companies to include "adjacent calling areas" (which can be read as "adjacent exchanges" everywhere but Detroit) within a customer's local calling area. This change in the law has resulted in expanded local calling areas for many telephone customers throughout Michigan. Unfortunately, this provision was inserted into the Act in a section that initially only applies to Ameritech and Verizon. What it says is that any phone company that "provides basic local exchange service or basic local exchange and toll service to less than 250,000 end-users in this state" is exempted from this section of the Act. The net effect is that many Ameritech and Verizon customers in Michigan have already received expanded local calling areas, and some Verizon customers will receive additional expanded local calling in August of 2002. Meanwhile, customers of Michigan's smaller telephone companies, such as CenturyTel, TDS Telecom, and most of the other, smaller companies have not received any expansions of their local calling area (two small companies - Drenthe Telephone and Barry County Telephone - appear to have voluntarily expanded local calling areas, but they are the only ones that I'm aware of that have done so). The way the law is written, most customers of independent companies will not receive expanded local calling to all adjacent exchanges until such time as their telephone company files for, and is granted a rate increase. At that point the telephone company loses their exemption, and must offer expanded local calling. Since in some cases it may be years before a company decides to apply for a rate increase - especially if they know they'll have to expand local calling areas - many customers of these companies are understandably frustrated that they were left out of the local calling area expansion. The situation is particularly frustrating in many exchanges that are adjacent to Ameritech or Verizon exchanges, because customers of those (Ameritech or Verizon) exchanges can place calls into the independent exchanges as a local call, but if the customer in the independent telephone company exchange needs to return the call, they will be hit with a toll charge. House Bill No. 6097 would remove this inequity. This proposed legislation was introduced on May 21, 2002 in the Michigan House of Representatives by Representatives Allen, Bradstreet, Shackleton and Neumann. This legislation is now in the Michigan House Committee on Energy and Technology. If those who are served by the smaller companies (or have friends or relatives who are served by those companies) want to see this legislation become law, now would be a good time to contact your state representative - particularly if he or she serves on the Committee on Energy and Technology. For more information, including a complete list of representatives that server on the committee, see this web page: http://michigantelephone.workbench.net/hb6097.html If you have friends or relatives that live in a part of Michigan served by a phone company other than Ameritech or Verizon, you might want to take a moment and send them the above URL. I'd hate to see this corrective legislation die in committee because no one knew it was under consideration. Jack (The From: e-mail address vanishes like a sand castle at the seashore during high tide, once the spammers find it.) Resources for Michigan Telephone Users page: http://michigantelephone.workbench.net/ ------------------------------ From: wesrock@aol.com (Wes Leatherock) Date: 02 Jun 2002 23:45:48 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Subject: Re: MyLine Local Service - First Coast-to-Coast Local Phone Company > [Editor's Note: Although the following comes close to sounding like > MLM and I feel a little uneasy about using it here, the concept of a > national coast-to-coast 'local calling area' is an interesting > concept. I thought I would let readers think it over and see where > the discussion takes us. This is not, so far as I know, the same > 'MyLine' service I sold here a few years ago. Maybe these folks bought > the name to use it. PAT] [ ... text deleted ... ] > ... The following overview is privileged information on > the referral-marketing program and income potential associated with > the rollout of Local Telephone service with the merger of Excel > Communications and VarTec Telecom, which was finalized in March > 2002. (www.excel.com / www.VarTec.com) A news story in The Daily Oklahoman (Oklahoma City) a day or two ago said VarTec was closing their Tulsa call center. Earlier they had said the center had 1,100 employees, but they would not say how many there were now who would be affected by the closing. No mention at all of Excel. Wes Leatherock wesrock@aol.com wleathus@yahoo.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Very, very interesting. Are all telco sales agents a bunch of crooks, or just most of them? The guy who sent me the original piece last week sent me a duplicate of it today, apparently thinking I would run it again for him. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 31 May 2002 16:51:02 CDT From: Clive Dawson Subject: Austin 911 System Flooded: "Simply" a Matter of Human Error A story in Wednesday's Austin American-Statesman relates how thousands of Sprint wireless calls from all over the state of Texas were routed to Austin's 911 system for a period of between one and two hours last week. Supervisors had to scramble to fill emergency operator booths, which involved a temporary shutdown of the city's 311 system. Fortunately this took place in pre-dawn hours. It would have been much more serious if it had happened in the middle of the day. A Sprint official stated that the problem was caused by a stray semi-colon in a program used to update their system. The error was fixed as soon as it was noticed. She also said the company's computer system is secure, and she compared the incident to a gardening accident, in which someone severs a cable line while working in the yard. "What happened this time was simply human error," she said. For the full story, see: http://www.austin360.com/auto_docs/epaper/editions/wednesday/news_1.html Clive Dawson AMD Austin, TX ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 03 Jun 2002 00:18:51 -0400 From: Greg Monti Subject: Re: What is Required to Start a Cable Television Network? On or about 29 May 2002, someone wrote: > I have to do a paper for school on what is required to start a > television network. First we need to define the word "network". In the US, "cable network" means a programming service that is sold to cable operators and then resold at retail to cable subscribers. In many European and Asian countries, "cable network" means a local or regional cable system, with coaxial cable strung on poles or underground to serve residences and businesses. I assume you mean "programming service". Here are some ideas, based mostly about reading in trade magazines how new cable networks are launched. 1. You'll need to decide whether your new service will be a pay service, like HBO or Showtime, or a basic service like ESPN, CNN, The Travel Channel, etc. Pay services must have compelling programming to get consumers to cough up $10 to $15 per pay channel per month. The cable operators will keep half of that, you get the other half. Basic services will bring in money two ways, described below, but not as much of it per subscriber per month. 2. There are already plenty of general-entertainment cable networks, like TNT, TBS, The National Network (TNN), USA Network, etc. There are also plenty of news and politics networks (CNN, Fox News Channel, CNBC, MSNBC) and plenty of sports networks with Disney (ESPN), Fox and MSG already in the game. You'll need an idea that will draw a niche audience, like an audience that will buy a special-interest magazine. You'll have to be creative. All the good magazine ideas have already been turned into cable networks. Golf magazine now has the Golf Network. Home & Garden magazine already has a cable network. In effect, Time magazine already has a cable channel, CNN (owned by the same company). Hot Rod and Road & Track effectively have a cable network (even if they don't own it), Speedvision. 3. You'll need to get financing for your idea, which would require you to prepare a detailed business plan showing expenses and revenue (and the cost of interest to borrow money to get you through the lean years. 4. Your next challenge will be getting 'shelf space' with the 'retailers', i.e., the cable operators. If you are planning a basic cable network, normally you have two revenue steams: your advertisers pay you for access to your audience, and the cable operators pay you for your service. Be sensitive to the way cable operators must operate. They key to running a cable company in a city or town is to sell large tiers of channels, with a mix of different channels for different interests and charge one flat price per month for them. Consumers cannot buy just CNN and ESPN, they have to buy a whole package of stuff that only a few people want, like The Food Network or Ovation. This provides revenue to Food Network and Ovation, even while they are small and unprofitable. Your trick is to get yourself onto one of these tiers with each cable operator so that, even if your advertisers aren't paying you much (because you have no audience to sell them), you are at least 'visible' to thousands of subscribers. Those subscribers will accidentally tune to your channel as they surf. A few of them will stay and watch and this will eventually add up to some small ratings that you can sell to advertisers. Most cable operators have a rock-bottom-basic tier that usually includes only local broadcast stations, plus any public-access, educational-access or government access channels required by their franchise agreements, and maybe a local classified-ad channel. Then there's 'expanded basic' which is what most people buy, with popular channels like MTV, A&E, Lifetime, CNN, ESPN, BET, etc. Then there's often a 'super basic' tier that might have less popular (but more special-interest-oriented) channels like WAM (for teenagers), Ovation (for arts lovers), Golf, SpeedVision, Eternal Word TV Network (for Catholics), etc. Unless the cable operator has unused channels on one of these tiers, they will have to throw off some channel or service to make room for yours. That will cause consumer ire because no doubt it will be somebody's favorite channel that gets kicked off. Yours needs to bring in more subscribers than the one that was taken off and caused some consumers to cancel. You want to be on the expanded basic tier if you can get there. There are about 8,000 local cable systems in the US and you can deal with them individually, or you can find out what corporate outfit owns them and attempt to negotiate a deal with the corporate office. The biggest owners of cable systems in the US are AOL Time Warner, AT&T (being sold to Comcast), Cablevision, Charter Communications, RCN and Adelphia. The last one is a well-run cable operation but management is skimming profits that belong to the stockholders, the stock price is in the toilet and much of Adelphia may be sold. If you cut a deal with corporate, they have the power to require the local cable systems they own to carry your channel. This will not be easy or free. Even though, in the normal course of business, the cable operator will pay you a few cents per subscriber per month for your channel, you may have to bribe them in cash to get started. The one-time bribe is usually called a "launch fee". You may have to pay each operator $1 or $2 per subscriber (once only) to get them to sign a carriage contract with you. If you get carriage for a one or two year period and can survive that long (you'll need plenty of bank loans because you won't be making a profit), you may be able to parlay it into a real business. There are about 80 million TV homes subscribed to cable in the US. You'll need to get your new network visible in about 10 or 20 million of those in the first one or two years. (Think of the launch fees it would take to get into 20 million subscriber homes at $2 per home -- that's $40 million by itself.) It will be a long climb to get up where Lifetime is, viewable by maybe 75 million subscribers. 5. You'll have to buy programming, either by paying the rights holder of existing programming for the cable rights to that programming, or pay someone to custom-produce programming for you. 6. You'll also need space on a C-band communicatiions satellite toward which cable operators already have a dish pointed. (They will not install a new dish just to receive you.) Expect to spend about $250,000 per month rent for the satellite transponder, plus $20,000 to $200,000 per month for a service company to either uplink, or play back and originate your programming. There's a short blurb that suggests resources about starting up a new cable Network on the National Cable & Telecommunications Association web site at Greg Monti New York, New York, USA gmonti@mindspring.com ------------------------------ From: jm04469@yahoo.com (Author) Subject: Re: What is Required to Start a Cable Television Network? Date: 3 Jun 2002 02:55:57 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Thank you for your insightful answer. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There, Author, is the answer you were seeking, had you had the money to buy the report offered here on the net. But you got it for free from us. See ya around! Try and visit us more often. PAT] ------------------------------ From: burgerwars@yahoo.com (burgerwars) Subject: How Do I Report (900)62-CLAIM Telephone Fraud? Date: 2 Jun 2002 06:51:22 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ I get an automated call this morning (really early at 6:00 am), telling me to call 900-62-CLAIM to find out how to claim "$500 in unclaimed property" that I'm owed. Problem is, one has to shell-out $19.95 to call that number. I'm due no unclaimed property, and this is nothing but an auto-dialer telling people to call that 900 number so they can collect their part of the $19.95 phone charge. This is nothing but fraud. Who do I report this to to shut this down and send the owners of this thing to jail? Also, if anyone else gets this nonsense phone call, don't call the 900 number. It's a sure trap! [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I bet if I went back and listened to the message it would say 'claim $500 in unclaimed property that *you may be owed*'. Those folks are not fools, but they are hoping you may be one. They *never* say anything other than a very general statement which includes phrases like 'may be' or 'records indicate a name like yours' or similar. They might read off some sort of disclaimer in a rapid, quiet, slurred voice that also gets them off the hook if a judge somewhere listens closely to it. What they are hoping is that your GREED will influence you to try and collect the five hundred dollars. Yeah, its a trap alright, and they win based on the greed and ignorance of the called party. I bet they make a fortune. PAT] ------------------------------ 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-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-870-9697 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! 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 * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. LEGAL STUFF: TELECOM Digest (sm) is owned by Patrick Townson. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. In addition, gifts from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert have 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. End of TELECOM Digest V20 #268 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Jun 4 00:37:19 2002 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id AAA02984; Tue, 4 Jun 2002 00:37:19 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2002 00:37:19 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200206040437.AAA02984@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #266 TELECOM Digest Tue, 4 Jun 2002 00:40:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 266 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Telecom Update (Canada) #335, June 3, 2002 (Angus TeleManagement) Re-Directing Telephone Calls (cal71) Web vendors for Specialty RJ-xx Plugs, etc? (Anthony E. Siegman) Re: Phone Bots and Spampaigns (kadokev@chicagotribune.com) Question on NEC MAT Software (Peter J. Aikins) News Headlines of Interest 6/4/02 (Monty Solomon) They Still Will Not Learn (Steven Lichter) Re: What is This (Email) World Coming To? (Steven Lichter) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRII. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 03 Jun 2002 15:22:01 -0400 From: Angus TeleManagement Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #335, June 3, 2002 ************************************************************ TELECOM UPDATE ************************************************************ published weekly by Angus TeleManagement Group http://www.angustel.ca Number 335: June 3, 2002 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 ** GROUP TELECOM http://www.gt.ca ** LUCENT TECHNOLOGIES CANADA http://www.lucent.ca ** PRIMUS CANADA: http://www.primustel.ca ** Q9 NETWORKS: http://www.Q9.com ** TELUS: http://www.telus.com ** UNISPHERE NETWORKS: http://www.unispherenetworks.com ************************************************************ IN THIS ISSUE: ** Industry Responds to Price Cap Ruling ** Nortel Laying Off Another 3,500 ** AT&T Corp Plans Stock Sale to Buy AT&T Canada ** Publicity Plan Set for Montreal Area Code ** Telus Mobility Launches National 1X ** Telus Moves to Per-Minute Wireless Billing ** User Group Opposes Bit Caps ** Teleglobe U.S. Units File for Chapter 11 ** CRTC Rejects Digital Rate Hikes ** Northwestel Employees on Strike ** Another Directory Fraud Stopped ** Phone Numbers to Map to Internet ** New York Sues Spammer ** Contribution Reporting Simplified ** Satellite Carriers Lose Appeal ** Calgary CLEC Going Public ** Coping With Real-World VoIP Networks ============================================================ INDUSTRY RESPONDS TO PRICE CAP RULING: Telecom company responses to last week's CRTC Price Caps decision were mostly negative. The major exception was Group Telecom which said "Our initial assessment of the decision is that we are pleased to see the commission's regulatory framework continues to foster facilities-based competition." Other comments: ** AT&T Canada President John McLennan calls it "a disappointing decision for competition" because it failed to address "the insurmountable cost advantage enjoyed by the former monopolies over new entrant competitors." ** Call-Net (Sprint Canada) CEO Bill Linton says: "The CRTC had an opportunity to balance the interests of all of the key stakeholders -- consumers, incumbents, and competitors -- but it has failed to do so." ** Bell Canada's Executive Counsel, Bernard Courtois, said that the decision "will place some new burdens on Bell," and promised further comment after a full review. ** Aliant says it is "disappointed" that the CRTC cut the rates competitors pay for telco services, and "surprised" that the Commission denied "greater rating flexibility for residential customers." ** Willie Grieve, Telus Vice-President of Government and Regulatory Affairs, says the decision increases regulation. "It really constrains retail prices, which will restrict the growth of competition during the price cap period." Telecom Update's summary of the decision appeared in a special issue, published on Friday. NORTEL LAYING OFF ANOTHER 3,500: Nortel Networks plans to eliminate 3,500 jobs at its Optical Long Haul division by September, and may sell its optical components manufacturing business. Nortel now aims to reduce its staff to 42,000, 2,000 fewer than previously announced. Overall second quarter sales will be "flat to down 5% from Q1 2002." AT&T CORP PLANS STOCK SALE TO BUY AT&T CANADA: This week AT&T Corp. plans to raise US$2.25 billion by selling AT&T shares and convertible warrants. The proceeds will be used to buy the outstanding shares of AT&T Canada. PUBLICITY PLAN SET FOR MONTREAL AREA CODE: Nine telephone companies have adopted a joint communications plan to prepare Montreal area telephone users for the introduction of a new area code and mandatory 10-digit local dialing in February 2004. The new code, 438, will be an overlay serving the current 514 area. Johanne Lemay of Lemay-Yates Associates is public spokesperson for the group. TELUS MOBILITY LAUNCHES NATIONAL 1X: Telus Mobility has launched 1XRTT higher-speed data service on its cellular network in major cities from Victoria to Halifax. It also now offers 1X wireless modems for laptop computers and PDAs. TELUS MOVES TO PER-MINUTE WIRELESS BILLING: On July 1, new Telus Mobility customers will have their calls rounded up to the next minute for billing, rather than to the next second. Both Rogers AT&T and Bell Mobility are likely to follow suit later this year. USER GROUP OPPOSES BIT CAPS: The Residential Broadband Users' Association says it has 6,900 signatures on a petition opposing plans by Sympatico and Rogers Cable to implement usage limits on their high-speed Internet services, and is currently adding 1,000 names a week. http://www.petitiononline.com/carrick/petition.html TELEGLOBE U.S. UNITS FILE FOR CHAPTER 11: Teleglobe's U.S. subsidiaries have filed for reorganization under Chapter 11 of the U.S. bankruptcy code. (See Telecom Update #334) CRTC REJECTS DIGITAL RATE HIKES: On May 29, the CRTC rejected a Bell Canada proposal to increase rates for DS-1 and DS-3 Digital Network Access links. Telecom Decision 2002-32 said that competitors rely on these services, and that Bell did not submit any cost evidence. ** The May 30 Price Caps decision requires telcos to introduce wholesale versions of these services for competitors. http://www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Decisions/2002/dt2002-32.htm NORTHWESTEL EMPLOYEES ON STRIKE: Three hundred and eighty Northwestel technicians, operators, and clerical workers, members of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, have been on strike since May 27. ANOTHER DIRECTORY FRAUD STOPPED: Old scams never die. Peter Kuryliw, sole director of Yellowbusiness.ca, has been fined $30,000 for sending out over 40,000 fake invoices for listings in an Internet directory. The invoices, designed to look like Yellow Pages bills, drew more than $700,000 in payments. The Competition Bureau says that other parties are also under investigation. PHONE NUMBERS TO MAP TO INTERNET: The International Telecommunication Union and the Internet Architecture Board have agreed on interim procedures for mapping telephone numbers to Internet addresses. If implemented, the ENUM protocol will make it possible to call an Internet service through the telephone network and vice versa. http://www.itu.int/ITU-T/inr/enum/index.html NEW YORK SUES SPAMMER: The state of New York has filed a lawsuit against MonsterHut Inc, which allegedly sent more than 500 million advertising e-mails in 2001. MonsterHut, which seems to be based in Niagara Falls, NY, recently changed its headquarters address to Burlington, Ontario. CONTRIBUTION REPORTING SIMPLIFIED: CRTC Telecom Decision 2002-35 simplifies the annual contribution reporting requirements for companies with annual operating revenue of under $10 million. http://www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Decisions/2002/dt2002-35.htm SATELLITE CARRIERS LOSE APPEAL: The federal government has refused to overturn a CRTC decision that satellite service providers are not exempt from the revenue tax that subsidizes telephone service in high-cost areas. (See Telecom Update #286) http://www.ic.gc.ca/cmb/Welcomeic.nsf/261ce500dfcd7259852564820068dc6d/85256a220056c2a485256bc7004add2c!OpenDocument http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/SSG/sf05506e.html CALGARY CLEC GOING PUBLIC: Shift Networks, a company that plans to offer local service, long distance, and Internet access in Calgary-area office buildings, says it has approval for a reverse takeover that will gain it a listing on the TSX Venture Exchange. It plans a $3 million public offering. COPING WITH REAL-WORLD VoIP NETWORKS: In the June issue of Telemanagement, available this week, John Riddell examines the challenge of upgrading corporate data networks for IP telephony. Also in Telemanagement #196: ** Unlicensed Wireless: Another High-Speed Option for Network Planners ** Will VoIP Over Cable Get a Second Chance? ** K-Net: Bringing Broadband to Northwestern Ontario Single copies of Telemanagement #196 are $75 each -- call 905-686-5050 ext 500 and charge to Visa, American Express, or Mastercard. Save 49% with a 10-issue subscription -- go to http://www.angustel.ca/teleman/tm-sub.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 2. The e-mail edition is distributed free of charge. To subscribe, send an e-mail message to: TelecomUpdate@add.postmastergeneral.com To stop receiving the e-mail edition, send an e-mail message to: TelecomUpdate@remove.postmastergeneral.com Sending e-mail to these addresses will automatically add or remove the sender's e-mail address from the list. Leave subject line and message area blank. We do not give Telecom Update subscribers' e-mail addresses to any third party. For more information, see http://www.angustel.ca/update/privacy.html. =========================================================== COPYRIGHT AND CONDITIONS OF USE: All contents copyright 2002 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 500. 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: garnab@hotmail.com (cal71) Subject: Re-directing Telephone calls Date: 1 Jun 2002 07:10:19 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Hi, I work for a comapny which does a lot of business in Auatralia. As a part of my job I have to travel extensively in many different countries. I was initially based in India but presently I am based in Muscat, Oman in the Middle East. I would like to know if there is any service which can do the following: All calls originating from Australia to destinations in India to be re-directed to my mobile phone. I have a number for Muscat, Oman in the Middle East. Would really appreciate if someone could help me out with this ASAP,as I keep on missing a lot of important business calls.Inspite of trying to inform all and sundry of my change of location, there are still a lot of business calls which are made to my Numbers in India. Thanks. ------------------------------ From: aes Subject: Web Vendors For Specialty RJ-xx Plugs, etc? Date: Sun, 02 Jun 2002 08:54:58 -0700 Organization: Stanford University Would appreciate for recommendations on web vendors of speciality RJ-45, RJ-11, etc, plugs and adaptors (at retail, that is onesies and twosies, or small quantities). (After I try Radio Shack.) Specific situation is a building with Cat 5 cables running everywhere, terminated in RJ-45 jacks, and we want to break out individual pairs at various jacks to use for individual phone lines, audio, etc, without digging into the wiring behind the wall plates. Also, *ninety-degree* RJ-45 and RJ-11 plugs -- that is, the wire comes out of the plug *sideways* (or downward) rather than perpendicular to the wall plate? Email cc of reply to siegman@stanford.edu appreciated. ------------------------------ From: kadokev@chicagotribune.com Subject: Re: Phone Bots and Spampaigns Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2002 19:10:19 UTC Organization: The author does not speak for this organization. Even when you do everything right, some people will be annoyed by any type of cold-calling. I still sometimes will be trying to reach a vendor or friend by phone, and encounter somebody who sees the company name on their Caller-ID display and answers the phone with a shout of: "No, I don't want to subscribe, I don't read newspapers. (CLICK)" Interestingly, part of the reason for this is because the telephone sales group "plays by the rules", and doesn't take any steps to obfuscate the CLID/ANI information. In article , Barry Margolin wrote: > In article , dover@nortelnetworks.com>> wrote: >> John David Galt wrote ... >>> From a purely selfish/amoral point of view, spam makes sense for selling >>> products, because some fraction of a percent of recipients will buy, and >>> the spammer doesn't have to care about the fact that he's annoyed the >>> rest of us. >> He should care ... I make it a habit of listening just long enough to >> find out who or what is calling and add them to my list of vendors >> that I'll never patronize. > If that were common behavior, it would be a problem for vendors. But > since people like you are a tiny minority, they don't have to worry > about it. Absolutely true. This is the reasoning that has lead a number of people to work on solutions to make this behavior more common, by providing improved mechanisms for maintaining and sharing such lists. So far, none have really caught on. Blacklists tend to work only for groups that are tightly-knit and unified behind a religious (Rvd. Donald Wildmon's American Family Association) or quasi-religious (Anti-spam) cause. For the average consumer, following a fad, buying into a trend, or simply the perception of massive savings overrides any desire to make a personal/political/religious statement. This could be the "killer app" for handheld message/presence/P2P -- an easy UI to record/manage/research/share information, both positive and negative, fact and rumor. Kevin Kadow ------------------------------ From: peter_aikins@enterpriseservices.com.au (Peter J. Aikins) Subject: Question on NEC MAT Software Date: 3 Jun 2002 21:02:19 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Hi folks, Does anyone know if there is a third party software platform that will provide administration access across multiple NEC PABX models (e.g. IVS, IMS, ICS etc.)? I'm getting the shits with NEC persisting with the policy of a seperate MAT package for each model! I mean, it's like Nortel insisting that you use a differect terminal emulator for an Opt11 and Opt61! Many thanks, Peter P.S. Anyone who writes such an application would become a very rich person, I reckon! ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 1 Jun 2002 22:15:28 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: News Headlines of Interest 6/4/02 Where piracy and profits converge: Are satellite TV hackers a tool in a global conspiracy? By Bob Sullivan MSNBC May 30 - It's just a thin slice of plastic that's stuck into your satellite TV set-top box when you first bring it home. To viewers, the card is the key that unlocks pay-TV. To corporations, smart cards are much more -- 80 million of them currently unlock one of the world's most influential and lucrative industries. But now, the plastic cards are at the center of a global conspiracy theory - a cutthroat corporate battle, some say, to control the world's living rooms through deception, cheating, and intimidation. ... http://www.msnbc.com/news/745312.asp By Tim Richardson Posted: 05/31/2002 at 09:04 EST The cost of broadband is rising in the US and could dampen demand for high-speed Internet access. The warning comes from California-based ARS after it reported that charges for cable modem and ADSL services had risen on average in the first three months of the year. Cable broadband Internet service prices rose 4 per cent in Q1 2002, from an average of $43.21 a month in December 2001 to $44.95 a month in March 2002. The monthly price of bog standard ADSL increased 1.4 percent over the same time period, from an average of $51.09 in December 2001 to an average of $51.82 in March 2002. http://www.theregus.com/content/6/25106.html Will Americans go for mLife? AT&T is pushing Japanese-style wireless services in the U.S. But until cellphones are as fun to use in New York as they are in Tokyo, a jaded market is likely to keep yawning. By Steve Mollman May 22, 2002 | "I still have Japan-envy," admits Matthew Hart. It's not that Hart doesn't cherish his new cellphone, or appreciate having a real "mLife" before most Americans. It's just that "the 3G videophones they have over there, the ones that open up with the big color screens ..." He trails off wistfully. "We're getting closer, but we're still nowhere near Japan." Hart, a commercial real estate developer in Palm Beach, Fla., is a self-described gadget and cellphone junkie -- he keeps 15 or so retired handsets in his closet. He's the kind of guy who gets a kick out of using his Bluetooth-enabled cellphone as a cable-free modem for his Bluetooth-enabled PowerBook so that he can check his e-mail in a park (just for example). The type who hangs around in chat rooms explaining to innocents the difference between locked and unlocked handsets, and why you should pay more for the latter. The kind who buys a T68i handset -- not officially available in the U.S. yet -- off eBay because it's slightly better than his still-new T68 (a replacement for the Nokia 8890 he got in London). And he's precisely the kind of guy AT&T Wireless must win over with the mMode service launched April 16 (in select US markets including Palm Beach) if it's to have any hope with more typical U.S. cellphone users. A central feature of the company's obscurely marketed mLife "wireless lifestyle," mMode is an imitation of imode, the highly successful, always-on data service offered by NTT DoCoMo in Japan. http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2002/05/22/mmode/index.html Telecoms called on 'opt-out' approach FCC reconsiders regulation of customer calling data May 28, 2002 Posted: 12:16 PM EDT (1616 GMT) INDIANAPOLIS, Indiana (AP) -- When Jason Settles added his name to Indiana's new "no-call" list, he expected relief from the tyranny of telemarketers. But the computer consultant's dreams of dinner in peace quickly turned to alarm when he learned his own phone company intended to share details of his calling habits with its corporate affiliates. Unless customers call a toll-free number to request otherwise, Ameritech plans to share information about what numbers they call, how often they call and how much they pay. http://www.cnn.com/2002/TECH/industry/05/28/telecoms.privacy.ap/ From golf to D&D, cell phone games proliferate ASSOCIATED PRESS SAN JOSE, Calif., May 31 - Bored with playing that game called Snake - chasing a black dot with a string of lines - that likely came standard with your cell phone? Try a round of golf instead, or a combat game called Gladiator. Soon, even the ever popular Dungeons & Dragons will be playable on handsets. No longer a gimmick feature, cell phone games have become serious business for wireless carriers. http://www.msnbc.com/news/760022.asp US suffers broadband inflation By Tim Richardson Posted: 05/31/2002 at 09:04 EST The cost of broadband is rising in the US and could dampen demand for high-speed Internet access. The warning comes from California-based ARS after it reported that charges for cable modem and ADSL services had risen on average in the first three months of the year. Cable broadband Internet service prices rose 4 per cent in Q1 2002, from an average of $43.21 a month in December 2001 to $44.95 a month in March 2002. The monthly price of bog standard ADSL increased 1.4 percent over the same time period, from an average of $51.09 in December 2001 to an average of $51.82 in March 2002. http://www.theregus.com/content/6/25106.html The FCC in Context Bob Frankston Preface The FCC is tasked with implementing a complex and increasingly contradictory regulatory regimen. If we simply look at the FCC as another bureaucracy we miss the larger picture. It is important to think about the FCC in the context of the regulatory infrastructure. Examining the FCC decisions in terms of winners and losers misses the point. As long as it is constrained to support the telecommunications infrastructure as it exists, and thus frustrate change, we are all losers. Instead, we must help the FCC act as the agent of change and steward of the industry as it passes through a necessary, even if traumatic, change. The change is happening anyway as witnessed by the increasingly troubled industry. The sooner we complete this transition the sooner we can again focus on the new opportunities rather nostalgia for the one true and perfect telephone company. http://www.frankston.com/Public/ESSAYS/FCCInContext.asp ------------------------------ From: stevenl11@aol.com (Steven Lichter) Date: 01 Jun 2002 21:25:16 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Subject: They still will not learn -----Original Message----- Would you buy inurance from a spammer, he might have his office in a high speed motor boat to leave with your money, never to be heard from again. Medical Insurance. Over 650,000 doctors 5,800 hospitals and 50,000 outpatient facilities 40,000 pharmacies 20,000 dentists 21,500 vision care professionals SAVINGS UP TO 90% To talk with a Representative call Today 888-294-0975 ...to teach these individuals about the cost of owning an Toll Free number... ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Remember it is against the law to harrass anyone by telephone. Also you should use a payphone so that the operator can make a little money. Apple Elite II 909-359-5338. Home of GBBS/LLUCE, support for the Apple II 24 hours 2400/14.4. An OggNet Server. The only good spammer is a dead one!!! Have you hunted one down today? (c) Kill Spammers, Inc. A Hope You Roast In Hell Company. ------------------------------ From: stevenl11@aol.com (Steven Lichter) Date: 01 Jun 2002 02:08:56 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Subject: Re: What is This (Email) World Coming To? > Spamming may be cost effective even if it produces a very small > number of sales. If it becomes obvious that people really hate > spammers and that it is a good way of getting a bad reputation, there > may be some hope of the big guys avoiding it. The big ones use it to, they have other companies do it for them, then claim that they had no idea the company was a spammer. Chase Bank dumped on me for a week, Then one of their vice-presidents has the gull to tell me the company said that I had logged on to their web site and asked to be added on to mailing lists. Ya right I told him, first I don't go to these type of sites and I never give out my e-mail address; this posting one will never get spam, since only addresses on the Q will get through. Also my browser which some of these sites read has its e-mail address as KILLSOB@FU*KSPAMMER.COM. They only way it will end is if the carriers hang the spammers with large bills, allow us to sue the hell out of them, or allow mass hangings of them, maybe Texas, they like executing law breakers. Apple Elite II 909-359-5338. Home of GBBS/LLUCE, support for the Apple II 24 hours 2400/14.4. An OggNet Server. The only good spammer is a dead one!!! Have you hunted one down today? (c) Kill Spammers, Inc. A Hope You Roast In Hell Company. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: In case anyone is wondering about the strange numbering of issues, 266 *should have* come out over the weekend, but it did not, and I went right on to 267. So 266 is coming out now, better late than never, I guess. PAT] ------------------------------ 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-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-870-9697 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/res