From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Feb 19 02:20:57 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h1J7Kvs12586; Wed, 19 Feb 2003 02:20:57 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 02:20:57 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200302190720.h1J7Kvs12586@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #301 TELECOM Digest Wed, 19 Feb 2003 02:20:00 EST Volume 22 : Issue 301 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Verizon Launches Stepped-Up Plan (Monty Solomon) Fighting Words/Anti-Spam Software Tries to Avoid Throwing Out (M Solomon) Out of Phone Numbers? Add Digits (Monty Solomon) Bob Frankston on Comcast "Theft of Service?" (Monty Solomon) Vivato Unleashed (Monty Solomon) New Hampshire Supreme Court Rules in Amy Boyer Privacy Case (Monty Solomon) Jim Harper on Why Amy Boyer Case Has Nothing to do With (Monty Solomon) Proxim Tsunami MP.11 Product Family (Monty Solomon) Bill Would Ban Spam E-Mail in California (Monty Solomon) Comcast Plans Service Rollout (Monty Solomon) Hacker Gains Access to 5.6 Million Visa, MasterCard Numbers (Monty Solomon) Re: WorldCom Discontinues MCI Mail (tonypo1@cox.net) Re: WorldCom Discontinues MCI Mail (Mark Atwood) Fax Filtering on DID's (David Redemer) Fido Bytes (Joey Lindstrom) 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 VIRUSES. 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: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 16:49:04 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Verizon Launches Stepped-up Plan Targets high-end users in Mass. with unlimited local, long-distance service By Peter J. Howe, Globe Staff, 2/18/2003 Looking to build off its quick start selling long-distance phone service in Massachusetts, Verizon Communications today plans to launch a $55-a-month package that lets residential customers make unlimited local and long-distance calls. Dubbed ''Veriations Freedom,'' the offering is similar to calling plans Verizon launched last month in New Jersey and Pennsylvania, and is also scheduled to be rolled out today in New York and Virginia. The calling plan includes premium features like voice mail and caller ID. In price and features, Verizon's package is nearly identical to MCI WorldCom's ''The Neighborhood'' plan, which is available to only 40 percent of Massachusetts residential customers. Verizon in the last six months vaulted past Sprint into third place in US long-distance customers, behind AT&T and MCI. Analysts largely credit Verizon's growth to success picking up low-volume callers who are happy to consolidate $5 or $10 a month in long-distance calling with Verizon to keep it on one bill. More than one-third of Bay State residential customers have moved to Verizon long distance since it was launched in April 2001. With the Veriations Freedom launch, the company is taking aim at the high end of the market where MCI and Sprint have been particularly successful. Sprint does not have a comparable unlimited local and long-distance package in Massachusetts. MCI limits its plan in Massachusetts mainly to Greater Boston and larger cities such as Springfield and Worcester. That's because MCI rents phone lines from Verizon to provide service and at today's rental rates doesn't see opportunity outside of these densely populated areas. MCI hoped rental rates would drop, but last week in a state regulatory proceeding Verizon proposed raising them. An MCI spokesman declined to comment on Verizon's new package. http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/049/business/Verizon_launches_stepped_up_plan+.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 16:59:38 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Fighting Words / Anti-Spam Software Tries to Avoid Throwing Out Anti-spam software tries to avoid throwing out the good E-mail with the bad By Tony Kontzer, InformationWeek Feb 17, 2003 (12:00 AM) American businesses are taking up the war against junk E-mail, which is clogging their networks, sapping worker productivity, and costing them billions. But they may be simply trading one problem for another. Jay Wessel knows firsthand just how tricky fighting the growing onslaught of spam can be. While many businesses use filtering tools to block unwanted E-mail, Wessel, director of IT for the Boston Celtics, is one of a growing number of IT managers who realize a more-sophisticated approach is needed. That's because software that blocks unwanted messages too often holds back other messages that, in fact, should be getting through. Case in point: One of the Celtics' sponsors is Pfizer Inc., the maker of the drug Viagra. As any E-mail administrator knows, Viagra is a favorite topic among spammers, and so it's become a popular term to filter. But if Wessel blocks all messages containing the word Viagra, the Celtics might miss important communications from a key sponsor. The fear of such false positives has Wessel looking for a replacement for the anti-spam tools built into Ipswitch Inc.'s iMail server, which he uses today. He's hopeful a more capable anti-spam offering Ipswitch plans to release sometime this year will do the trick. "I'm ready to start turning the screws a lot tighter," he says. http://www.informationweek.com/story/IWK20030216S0001 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 17:05:38 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Out of Phone Numbers? Add Digits By Patrick Di Justo Someday soon North American telephone numbers might add up to 12 digits, including area code, instead of the current 10. Verizon, Qwest and BellSouth have urged the Industry Numbering Commission, which regulates the distribution of telephone numbers in North America, to "be proactive" about what the phone companies see as the newest threat to the dwindling supply of available phone numbers: voiceover Internet protocol, or VoIP. Originally a hacker's tool to make free long distance calls, VoIP is set to emerge as the next big thing in commercial telecom. Heather Tinsley of Telegeography estimates that as much as 10 percent of all international voice traffic was carried over IP in 2002. The phone companies insist that VoIP has the potential to eat up 10-digit numbers faster than cell phones, fax machines and pagers did. This would hasten the day North America runs out of unique phone numbers, requiring an entirely new numbering scheme. http://www.wired.com/news/infostructure/0,1377,57571,00.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 19:18:08 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Bob Frankston on Comcast "Theft of Service?" Theft of Service? After getting my latest online bill notification I found myself looking at the Comcast site and not ATTBI (ATT Broadband). I started out with Continental Cablevision at 1.5mbps down and 384kbps. I now find that ATTBI has throttled me to 256kbps up speed and Comcast shows their offering to be 128kbps. As a consolation prize Comcast is offering me 3.5mbps down and 385kbps for $99 vs. $50 month (though my original charge was $40/month). The Comcast site showed no sign of online support and when I finally found a phone number (under support for their telephone service) it was answered "ATTBI". The ATTBI support people say that the ATTBI online support will shift to Comcast at some point so I don't want to be entirely unfair though the URL doesn't work yet. My real source of anger and frustration comes from today's Boston Globe which touts the new services Comcast will roll out. I call it the Hobson plan after the great Mr. Hobson who offered a choice of lame horses. Comcast (and others) prefer to call it Video on Demand. The idea is that I get my own downstream path and get to choose any content I want. Well, any as long as it's from the choices they select. http://www.satn.org/archive/2003_02_16_archive.html#90339603 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 19:27:48 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Vivato Unleashed Vivato's Coming Out Party: Yesterday at Demo, Vivato announced the details of their first Wi-Fi phased-array antenna/switch, an indoor office system that can serve up to 150 users at 11 Mbps at distances up to 300 meters for about $9,000. Some of the early comments have wondered about this pricing model: how many access points at even enterprise pricing of $500 can you put in place instead of a single Vivato switch? They're missing the key point that explains Vivato's disruptive potential: the Vivato unit is a switch not an access point. http://80211b.weblogger.com/2003/02/17 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 21:03:31 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: New Hampshire Supreme Court Rules in Amy Boyer Privacy Case http://www.politechbot.com/p-04472.html Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 15:22:19 -0500 From: Declan McCullagh Subject: FC: New Hampshire Supreme Court rules in Amy Boyer privacy case Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 11:00:52 -0500 To: declan@well.com From: Chris Hoofnagle Subject: Amy Boyer Decision Released Hi Declan, The NH Supreme Court just ruled on five questions of law that will be very important for the privacy landscape. You probably remember that this lawsuit is a civil action against the private investigators who sold Amy Boyer's personal info to a stalker, who then used it to locate and kill Boyer. This case is going to be very important in the national debate on credit reporting agencies, preemption, and regulation of SSNs. The fact of the matter is that better law is coming out of the states than Congress. *Holds that pretext calling violates the state's consumer protection laws. *Adopts the appropriation tort for the state. *Holds that info brokers and private investigators can be liable for the foreseeable harms that may occur from the sale of personal information. *Holds that obtaining a SSN from a CRA could constitute intrusion upon seclusion. The case now goes back to the federal district court where the merits will be heard. Decision: http://www.courts.state.nh.us/supreme/opinions/2003/remsb017.htm EPIC's brief: http://www.epic.org/privacy/boyer/brief.html EPIC Amy Boyer Page: http://www.epic.org/privacy/boyer/ Much praise should go to David Gottesman for litigating this case with expert skill! C 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/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Like Politech? Make a donation here: http://www.politechbot.com/donate/ Recent CNET News.com articles: http://news.search.com/search?q=declan ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 21:03:36 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Jim Harper on Why Amy Boyer Case Has Nothing to Do With http://www.politechbot.com/p-04474.html Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 18:07:13 -0500 From: Declan McCullagh Subject: FC: Jim Harper on why Amy Boyer case has nothing to do with "privacy" Previous Politech message: http://www.politechbot.com/p-04472.html From: "Jim Harper - Privacilla.org" To: Cc: Subject: RE: New Hampshire Supreme Court rules in Amy Boyer privacy case Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 17:18:45 -0500 In-Reply-To: <5.1.1.6.0.20030218143330.02434210@mail.well.com> Declan: The Amy Boyer case has long been called a "privacy" case, but it's really about stalking and murder. Amy Boyer's killer obsessed about her for years. He knew where she lived and would park outside her house for hours on end. He acquired her SSN and work address only in the last days before he shot her and then committed suicide. In the aftermath, Boyer's family sought to pin blame for the murder a lot of places, including the ISP that hosted a Web site where Liam Youens had discussed his plans for murder. They finally settled on private investigators and search services. It's not easy to stop a deranged lunatic, which Liam Youens clearly was. I question whether imposing liability on Web hosting companies, private investigators, or anyone else would prevent future tragedies like this. But the New Hampshire Trial Lawyers weighed in. You can bet they favored liability for all. Only the tiniest nuggets of privacy remain in the case, and unfortunately the court appears to be wedging revelation of the Social Security Number into the "intrusion onto seclusion" branch of the privacy torts. Not a good fit. Privacilla issued a report on the Amy Boyer case in December, 2000: http://www.privacilla.org/releases/AmyBoyer.html Here is a discussion of the privacy torts from July of last year. The privacy torts provide baseline privacy protections nationwide: http://www.privacilla.org/releases/Torts_Report.html I've briefly articulated the issues decided by the court below. Though this case ain't really about privacy, Chris is right that state law is the best source for privacy protection. Jim Harper Editor Privacilla.org 1. Under the common law of New Hampshire and in light of the undisputed facts presented by this case, does a private investigator or information broker who sells information to a client pertaining to a third party have a cognizable legal duty to that third party with respect to the sale of the information? Answer: Yes As the court says, "[I]f a private investigator or information brokers ... disclosure of information to a client creates a foreseeable risk of criminal misconduct against the third person whose information was disclosed, the investigator owes a duty to exercise reasonable care not to subject the third person to an unreasonable risk of harm." The criminal misconduct here is stalking and identity fraud, not invasion of privacy. 2. If a private investigator or information broker obtains a person's social security number from a credit reporting agency as a part of a credit header without the person's knowledge or permission and sells the social security number to a client, does the individual whose social security number was sold have a cause of action for intrusion upon her seclusion against the private investigator or information broker for damages caused by the sale of the information? Answer: Yes Now the trial court must decide whether the disclosure was offensive enough. It sounds like a better case for the "disclosure of private facts" branch of the privacy torts. If it's not a good fit, the common law system has correction mechanisms that federal legislation does not. 3. When a private investigator or information broker obtains a person's work address by means of a pretextual telephone call and sells the work address to a client, does the individual whose work address was deceitfully obtained have a cause of action for intrusion upon her seclusion against the private investigator or information broker for damages caused by the sale of the information? Answer: No The court found that a work address is not private, so there can be no invasion of privacy if a work address is revealed. It probably should have sent the issue to the trial court to find that Amy Boyer's work address in particular was not private, because it's possible to keep a work address private (even if that's exceedingly rare). 4. If a private investigator or information broker obtains a social security number from a credit reporting agency as a part of a credit header, or a work address by means of a pretextual telephone call, and then sells the information, does the individual whose social security number or work address was sold have a cause of action for commercial appropriation against the private investigator or information broker for damages caused by the sale of the information? Answer: No The appropriation tort is on the furthest outskirts of the privacy torts. To have a cause of action, the defendant must have tried to capitalize on some attribute of the individual. It's not an appropriation of one's likeness or character just to transmit information about him or her, according to New Hampshire. 5. If a private investigator or information broker obtains a person's work address by means of a pretextual telephone call, and then sells the information, is the private investigator or information broker liable under N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. 358-A to the person it deceived for damages caused by the sale of the information? Answer: Yes Pretext calling violates New Hampshire's general anti-fraud law. The fraud was perpetrated to get access to personal information, but this doesn't convert the fraud into a privacy violation. If you lie to someone to get information 'personal or not' that's fraud, not invasion of privacy. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Like Politech? Make a donation here: http://www.politechbot.com/donate/ Recent CNET News.com articles: http://news.search.com/search?qÞclan ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 21:53:28 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Proxim Tsunami MP.11 Product Family Based on 802.11b and Proxim's Wireless Outdoor Router Protocol Delivering 20-40% Faster Performance SUNNYVALE, Calif., Feb. 18 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Proxim Corporation (Nasdaq: PROX), a leading provider of high-performance wireless local area networking (WLAN) and wireless wide area networking (WWAN) products, today announced the Tsunami MP.11, a new family of economical wireless outdoor point-to-multipoint solutions enabling campus connectivity, security and surveillance, and residential last-mile access. The Tsunami MP.11 product family includes two subscriber units - an Enterprise Subscriber Unit for businesses and a Residential Subscriber Unit for homes. The product family also includes the Tsunami MP.11 Base Station Unit, which can connect up to 100 Subscriber Units of either type. The Tsunami MP.11 base station, when paired with the Enterprise Subscriber Unit, offers a reliable 11 Mbps solution customized for businesses, campuses, schools, hospitals and other enterprises needing WAN connectivity. When paired with the Residential Subscriber Unit, it becomes the ideal residential last mile access system. The Tsunami MP.11 products are targeted to provide value- oriented connectivity for customers not requiring additional carrier-class features provided by Proxim's Tsunami MP and Tsunami MP Active Interference Rejection (A.I.R.) products. Tsunami MP.11 can be used in conjunction with Proxim's carrier-class Tsunami point-to-point and multipoint products that offer speeds up to 960 Mbps total capacity for large-scale deployments. http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/02-18-2003/0001892817&EDATE= ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 15:45:50 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Bill Would Ban Spam E-Mail in California Under proposal, people could sue for $500 per violation. Some doubt law would stem tide. By Nancy Vogel LA Times Staff Writer SACRAMENTO -- The unwanted, sometimes lurid advertisements unleashed on computer users -- e-mail spam -- would be banned under a new bill in the Legislature. The bill would make it a crime to send unsolicited commercial e-mails from California or to an e-mail address in the state. People who received such spam -- "Miniature Remote Control Car -- Great Gift!" or "Lose 32 Pounds by Easter" -- could sue for at least $500 per violation. "Spam isn't just annoying," said Sen. Debra Bowen (D-Marina del Rey), the bill's author. "It burns people's time and money by forcing them to wade through millions of messages that cost spammers virtually nothing to package and fire off." But office workers weary of drumming the computer delete button each morning should not assume that Bowen's bill will halt junk e-mail, experts say. That's because so much spam is sent from outside the country and includes false return addresses. Sometimes, experts say, spammers will hijack a company's mail-sending capability and use it to route their spam around the world. http://www.latimes.com/technology/la-me-spam18feb18001440,1,104460.story ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 16:04:35 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Comcast Plans Service Rollout By Peter J. Howe, Globe Staff, ANDOVER -- Three months after completing its $45 billion acquisition of AT&T Broadband, Comcast Corp. this week plans to start putting its own brand on the state's dominant cable provider and is beginning to roll out two service innovations: video on demand and delivery of high-definition television signals over cable. Comcast said that in May it will offer on-demand access for 800 to 1,000 hours of movies and cable shows to some digital cable customers in New England. It expects to make its ''On Demand'' service available to all of its 2.2 million regional customers next year. In addition to 24-hour movie rentals for $3 or $4, Comcast plans to make several hundred hours of shows available free for viewing any time as part of digital cable subscriptions. Starting today, subscribers who own high-definition TV sets will be able to get five channels of cinema-quality HDTV programming by paying an extra $2 a month for a special set-top box. The service will include about 50 to 100 hours of shows available each week from the HBO and Showtime cable channels and from Boston network affiliates including WCVB-TV (Channel 5) and WHDH-TV (Channel 7). Few people own a high-definition TV set, which displays a wider and far crisper image than a traditional set. In making high-definition signals available now, Comcast is looking to projections that as many as one-fifth of US homes will have HDTV sets by 2006. However, Comcast may have no more than 100,000 HDTV-capable set-top boxes in service by the end of this year nationally. ''This is all about the future,'' said Kevin Casey, Comcast senior vice president for New England. The new programming features are some of the first tangible impacts of the conversion of AT&T Broadband to Comcast, which for many Greater Boston and southern New Hampshire cable customers will be their third or fourth cable provider in barely six years. Comcast also plans over the next six weeks to replace the AT&T Broadband name with Comcast on customer bills, 2,500 trucks, 6,000 employee uniforms, and 365 offices. The company will also launch a wave of television advertisements featuring champion bicyclist Lance Armstrong. http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/049/business/Comcast_plans_service_rollout+.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 01:33:11 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Hacker Gains Access to 5.6 million Visa, MasterCard Numbers By Eileen Alt Powell, Associated Press, 2/18/2003 12:24 NEW YORK (AP) A computer hacker gained access to more than 5.6 million Visa and MasterCard account numbers by breaching the security of a company that processes transactions for merchants, the card associations said Tuesday. Visa USA spokesman Mike Riley said that there has been no report of fraudulent activity involving the accounts and that Visa was monitoring the situation. He said he could not identify the third-party processor or say exactly when or how the hacker got access to the account information, which involves some 3.4 million Visa accounts and 2.2 million MasterCard accounts. A source with knowledge of the situation who spoke on condition of anonymity said that the incident occurred in early February. Processors handle transactions for merchants, bundling and transmitting charges to the banks that issue the cards. http://www.boston.com/dailynews/049/economy/Hacker_gains_access_to_5_6_mil:.shtml ------------------------------ From: tonypo1@cox.net Subject: Re: WorldCom Discontinues MCI Mail Organization: The Ace Tomatoe and Cement Company Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 02:42:26 GMT In article , TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to joe@obilivan.net: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Not only did I have a 'Telex gateway' > provided through MCI Mail, for a few years I also had a 'Fido gateway' > provided by someone whose name I cannot remember. Does anyone still > use Fido anymore? That name always reminded me of a dog. Heck, does > anyone still use Telex anymore? Telex 'phone directories' used to be > big, giant books like a New York City phone directory. PAT] Law enforcement used to be a user of Telex services but now uses message switching software such as IBM's MQ, or DataMaxx. All IP based now. Tony ------------------------------ From: Mark Atwood Subject: Re: WorldCom Discontinues MCI Mail Date: 18 Feb 2003 13:22:47 -0800 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Linc Madison writes: > You also got a Telex number that translated into your MCI Mail inbox. > There was a time that was a big selling point as well. That was a VERY big selling point for one of my employers back in the late 80s. We had to maintain contact via Telex with several non-US sites, where telephone service was very expensive, which made both voice and fax contact too expensive. We had had a "telex machine", with an integrated CRT and keyboard, and paid a monthly fee. The MCI Mail service fee was exactly the same, I think we were able keep the same telex number, AND we could get rid of the telex machine and use a PC with a modem instead. Mark Atwood | Well done is better than well said. mra@pobox.com | http://www.pobox.com/~mra ------------------------------ From: David Redemer Subject: Fax Filtering on DID's Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 21:35:53 GMT Anyone know of a product or a way to filter junk faxes on a DID trunk. I've found products that allow for this on regular CO trunks. But these devices wont work on DID trunks, because they function with a wink start (polarity reversal) and not the regular line voltage. Any suggestions would be appreciated. Thanks. Dave ------------------------------ From: Joey Lindstrom Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 14:30:23 -0700 Subject: Fido Bytes Reply-To: joey@telussucks.info On Tue, 18 Feb 2003 15:04:23 EST, editor@telecom-digest.org wrote: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Not only did I have a 'Telex gateway' > provided through MCI Mail, for a few years I also had a 'Fido gateway' > provided by someone whose name I cannot remember. Does anyone still > use Fido anymore? That name always reminded me of a dog. The ascii-text logo for the Fido BBS system was a dog holding a floppy disk in his mouth. A more-modern version can be seen at: http://www.fidonet.org -- Joey Lindstrom -- Telus Sucks http://www.telussucks.info ------------------------------ 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: 620-330-6774 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 Fax 3: 775-642-0603 Fax 4: 530-309-7234 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: mirror.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. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2003 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 V22 #301 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Feb 19 02:58:07 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h1J7w6313116; Wed, 19 Feb 2003 02:58:07 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 02:58:07 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200302190758.h1J7w6313116@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #302 TELECOM Digest Wed, 19 Feb 2003 02:58:00 EST Volume 22 : Issue 302 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Weapons of Mass Obstruction (Joey Lindstrom) Re: Advice Needed - Cell Service in Beijing, China (Harold Kost) Re: The A-B-C-D Fourth Column DTMF (Jack Hamilton) Re: The Perils of E-Mail (Ron Bean) Re: The Perils of E-Mail (Barry Margolin) Re: Netizenry (Barry Margolin) Copyleft (Joey Lindstrom) Let's Flap Those Wings, Right and Left (Joey Lindstrom) Last Laugh! Flies Have Wings Too (Joey Lindstrom) 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 VIRUSES. 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: Joey Lindstrom Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 14:18:24 -0700 Subject: Weapons of Mass Obstruction Reply-To: joey@telussucks.info On Mon, 17 Feb 2003 23:26:03 -0500 (EST), editor@telecom-digest.org wrote: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thanks for an excellent rebuttal to the > original item from Ronda. I have one problem though with your statement > about the 'Pig of Baghdad'. You say he is not going to voluntarily > remove or give up the weapons ***he has***. You will have to pardon me > for being somewhat incredulous, but thus far, an army of UN inspectors > and all the sabre-rattling and warnings and threats from Dubya have > yet to produce a single weapon. You are correct in that they haven't found weapons. But that's not really what they're looking for, and more to the point, that's not what Resolution 1441 was all about. It is up to Saddam to *PROVE* that he has destroyed both the weapons we already knew he had (much of which he has ALREADY ADMITTED TO - a point many people such as yourself seem to miss), as well as all capability for making more. HE HAS UTTERLY FAILED TO DO THIS. Documents and people have disappeared: when the inspectors ask for them, all they get is a blank stare and a shrug. Colin Powell's presentation to the UN showed quite clearly that the Iraqis are moving this stuff around, and covering their tracks quite readily. Sometimes inspectors are arriving at weapons' facilities just hours after they've been cleaned out. This is irrefutable. But again, the onus is not on the inspectors, the UN, or the US to prove that Saddam *HAS* the weapons - he's already admitted it. The onus is on Saddam to prove they've been destroyed, and he's steadfastly refused to do that. Ergo, HE STILL HAS THEM and is in clear violation of Resolution 1441. France and Germany say more time is needed - I say hogwash. These two countries are hardly the best examples of leadership when it comes to this type of thing. > On the other hand, we know, for a fact, > that North Korea has plenty of nuclear weapons, ready and willing to be > used. But there is no oil in that cold, dismal country. There is not > much of anything there we want or need, except maybe in my own mind, I > am really getting sick of seeing every piece of electronic gear in > the USA saying 'made in Korea' stamped or stickered on it somewhere. That'd be "South Korea", not "North Korea". > Seriously, when is the last time you bought some electronics which > said 'made in USA'? Korea, Korea, Korea, everything. Look in Walmart, > look in K-Mart (what's left of them; we are losing ours next month); > look in Radio Shack. Korea, Korea, Korea. But they don't have oil > there which Mr. Insane has a lot of, and which Mr. Rockefeller and his > good buddy Dubya need. Pardon me if I'm misinterpreting you, but you're starting to sound as racist as you make Dubya out to be (in your next quote). As the person to whom you're responding pointed out, we do *NOT* need to go to war to get Iraqi oil. More to the point, everybody (especially the USA) benefits when oil is priced moderately high. "Taking" Iraq's oil from them would drive the price down and put a lot of Americans out of work. Your argument sounds great from an emotional point of view, as do most liberal arguments. It doesn't withstand the reason test, though. It's much like the "we must punish the rich by taxing them more" argument. Sounds great, but when implemented plunges the entire economy into the toilet (see: The Carter Presidency). > But you say, its not about oil; its about 'breaking contracts' and > being a Hitler in disguise. The contract he broke was a promise to disarm. This isn't about him screwing Uncle Sugar on a business deal. As for the Hitler thing, I hardly think he's disguising himself, do you? > Its not about a Moslem country which is > essentially despised by the 'Christians' in a 'Christian nation', > especially since 'those people' are forever giving a lot of sass to > 'our president' and 'our way of life', referring to us as Satan, > because of our life styles, etc. But you said its not about oil, its > about Mr. Insane not giving up his weapons and breaking all the 'contracts' > he made with people and the UN. Well, gee, whiz, the essence of any > 'contract' is paying the bills you owe, and when is the last time > Uncle Sam ever paid any dues to the UN? Years ago, probably before > Mr. Insane started breaking his word on things. And here we go. "OK, Saddam's a bad guy, but we're bad guys too!" Stop apologizing for this guy, Pat. Take a good hard look at what he has done to his own people, to the Kurds in the north, to other Muslims in the south. Take a look at conditions in Iraqi jails TODAY. You have spoken eloquently about the poor state of the justice system in the USA and particularly in Illinois. It's freakin' PARADISE by comparison. This isn't Christians versus Muslims, although Saddam is trying very hard to make it appear that way, to get other Muslim nations on his side (most would much rather he go away). The USA has spent the last 12 years DEFENDING Muslims and Kurds, by enforcing the no fly zones, from this monster. It has nothing to do with oil, it has nothing to do with how brown these people are, and it has everything to do with one madman and his regime, and what that madman *WILL* *EVENTUALLY* *DO* with weapons of mass destruction ... if we do not first do unto him what he would do unto us. > We agree on one very important point: the *very brave* guys who are > over there waiting to get blown to hell in pieces. They have no choice > at all in their assignments, except maybe to resign totally from the > military, and in the Vietnam era that was taken care of by a draft. I > never want to see or hear anyone *ever* pick on those guys; they are > are my (at least) heros, in these scary times we live in. But can't > you just see it all starting to take shape all over again; another > Vietnam? PAT] I'm with Heinlein on that one. The draft is just plain wrong. If you cannot convince your strong, brave men to stand up for their country and fight for it, then your country is not worth saving. At least you HAVE a military, though. We Canadians have a proud military tradition that's been pissed away by a succession of (Liberal Party of Canada) governments, to the point where we showed up in Afghanistan wearing green "camoflage". They had to spray-paint their camo gear, and they also had to hitch a ride over there! But at least we've got more than enough people ready to sign up with the Canadian Forces... we just have a government that refuses to fund our military properly, mainly because it's made up of folks who seem to believe, much like yourself, that appeasement and diplomacy and peace-making are the be-all, end-all, and that war must be avoided at all costs. Well, sometimes that cost is too high, and if we don't take care of this thing, September 11th is gonna seem like a bike ride. On Tue, 18 Feb 2003 15:04:23 EST, editor@telecom-digest.org wrote: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Left Wing Propoganda Crap: So what you are > saying is that you, as a netizen, DO favor the idea of a war? Yes. Not war for war's sake, but a small war now to avoid a large war later. > I take > it you are offended because she failed to take into consideration that > as a netizen you want to see a war ... good point; I will try to > remember that. No, I objected to her having the gall to pretend to speak for *ALL* netizens, which is what she claimed. She does NOT speak for me, and in fact from what I read, I abhor everything she stands for. > Speaking now in the context of a family-oriented digest on the net, > I guess you want to see Dubya go cut off Mr. Insane's 'thing' before > he gets a chance to sodomize us with it (or stick it to us as some > would say in the vernacular). That's not a half-bad idea -- it would finish him as a leader. But, see, now you're trying to speak for me too. :-) As you've seen, when I have something to say, I come right out and say it. > Mr. Sodomy Insane needs to be > troubled each day with a few more telemarketer phone calls. Go look at > Mike Sandman's home page ( http://sandman.com ) for a cute cartoon > about ways to end the 'war on terrorism' by letting telemarketers go > to work on Sodomy. Its a very cute cartoon. -- Joey Lindstrom -- Telus Sucks http://www.telussucks.info [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The thread is closed, thanks to all who participated in it. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Harold Kost Subject: Re: Advice Needed - Cell Service in Beijing, China Organization: Amateur Radio Station K1HK Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 21:36:48 GMT On Mon, 17 Feb 2003 22:41:33 -0800, Joseph wrote: > On Mon, 17 Feb 2003 11:51:42 -0700, usenetspamtrap+cdt@newsguy.com> > wrote: >> I'm contemplating taking a new assignment in my company that will >> result in my living in Beijing, China for three weeks out of every >> month. >> I am currently clueless as to what sort of service is available in >> Beijing (GSM, Analog, etc.). I would *like* to have one cell phone >> that worked both in the U.S. (Colorado) as well as in China (e.g., AT&T >> with a smart chip or whatever they call it, or perhaps some GSM >> multi-mode phone?). However, having two service providers (one in US, >> one in China, with two numbers) would be OK. > Assuming you are in a major Colorado location such as Denver, Colorado > Springs, etc. the choice you should make is to go with T-Mobile. > T-Mobile to my knowledge has very decent service in the metro areas. > That said they have very sketchy to no service in remote areas. The > service will however work in Beijing provided you have compatible > equipment. The US GSM is at 1900 Mhz while GSM in China will be at > 900 and/or 1800 Mhz. You will need a "triband" phone that is capable > of both North American and Asian frequencies. If you get an unlocked > GSM handset you will also be able to use a local prepaid SIM card and > it's possible that combined with a service such as Kall8 > you can forward your US number to your local > Chinese SIM card. > Another much more expensive alternative is to keep your Verizon > service. Verizon has an "international" service where they will > provide you with a SIM card that will basically have all your phone > details from your domestic Verizon account and people will be able to > call your Verizon number. > See: http://internationaltraveler.verizonwireless.com/ You will > however need to get a compatible GSM handset either rented (not a very > good deal for more than a few days) or you can buy a handset from any > number of sources. Any way you go you'll have to get a GSM handset. > If you go the route of GSM service with T-Mobile or AT&T you won't > have to get a phone which will be unusable for you after your trip. >> I currently have Verizon. I assume that, unless I keep two cell >> services, I will have to drop Verizon. >> Thanks in advance for any advice you can provide. >> Reply by posting or by email. > Replies are seldom read. Please reply in the group This web site has rental information with cheap airtime rates. I have never used them and do not know anyone who has. I just ran across it. http://www.besteast.com/rental.jsp Harold Kost ------------------------------ From: Jack Hamilton Subject: Re: The A-B-C-D Fourth Column DTMF Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 21:39:49 -0800 Organization: Copyright (c) 2003 by Jack Hamilton. Reply-To: jfh@acm.org Mark J Cuccia wrote: > It's true that the fourth column of Touchtones (DTMF), 'A', 'B', 'C', > 'D', with 1633 Hz as the 'upper' frequency of the DTMF freq.pair, > never "caught on" for even "control" functions of the general public's > switched telephone network. Amateur radio handhelds (often called handie-talkies or HT's) sometimes have the A, B, C, and D buttons (for a not terribly clear example, see . They can be used to control amateur radio repeaters. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 00:40:03 -0600 From: Ron Bean Subject: Re: The Perils of E-Mail >http://www.fortune.com/fortune/technology/articles/0,15114,418678,00.html This is an interesting article. Among other things, it says: == How do you "train" people, when the basic message is "Don't do anything stupid"? == Is the real message "I don't care what you do, as long as you don't write it down"? == In employment cases, email evidence helps the employer as often as it helps the employee. == (OBtelecom): When the telephone first came along, businessmen were reluctant to conduct business in a way that *didn't* leave a paper trail. ------------------------------ From: Barry Margolin Subject: Re: The Perils of E-Mail Organization: Genuity Managed Services, Woburn, MA Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 20:14:07 GMT In article , Monty Solomon wrote: > Sure, 2002 was the Year of Corporate Scandal. But really it wouldn't > be fair to give all the credit to grasping, conniving executives and > malevolent, sneaky bookkeepers. No, as those corporate honchos offer > their plea bargains, they'll all be able to name an accomplice: > e-mail. Isn't this putting the cart before the horse? If they weren't doing anything wrong, there wouldn't have been anything incriminating in the email. Instead of sending employees to email training sessions, they should be sending executives to ethical training sessions. We've all heard the admonition about not putting anything in email that you wouldn't want published in the paper. That's fine advice for private, personal information that might be embarassing. It's also a good idea for trade secrets that you don't want to escape to your competitors. But in the case of corporate malfeasance and other criminal behaviors, we should be more concerned with stopping the behavior in the first place, not hiding the evidence. Barry Margolin, barry.margolin@level3.com Genuity Managed Services, 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: Barry Margolin Subject: Re: Netizenry Organization: Genuity Managed Services, Woburn, MA Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 20:20:05 GMT In article , Joey Lindstrom wrote: > I guess despite how long I've been online, I must not be a netizen. > After all, Ronda has decreed that netizens don't want war in Iraq. She > couldn't say it if it weren't true. > What sheer arrogance. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Left Wing Propoganda Crap: So what you are > saying is that you, as a netizen, DO favor the idea of a war? No, the point is that there's no link between being a netizen and whether you are for or against the war. Ronda claims to be speaking for all netizens when she's actually voicing her personal opinion. Barry Margolin, barry.margolin@level3.com Genuity Managed Services, 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. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I am sorry I printed the damn article to start with!! As stated elsewhere this issue, the thread is closed as of today, 2:45 AM Eastern. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Joey Lindstrom Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 11:00:13 -0700 Subject: Copyleft Reply-To: joey@telussucks.info On Sun, 16 Feb 2003 17:20:30 -0500 (EST), Shalom Septimus wrote: > (Unfortunately, they reproduced it at 78rpm, whereas the original > Columbia "78s" were actually recorded at 80rpm, so it sounds a bit > "draggy". I have an MP3 of this reproduced at the correct speed if you > (Pat) want it; and before someone gets on my case about copyright > violation, I also own a copy of the original 80rpm disc.) There's not likely to be any copyright to violate. Something that old, even if copyrighted originally, the copyright's likely expired. More importantly, there was no such thing as a copyright in a sound recording back then (but you could copyright, say, the script for a radio drama and/or the sheet music for the music performed in the broadcast). -- Joey Lindstrom -- Telus Sucks http://www.telussucks.info ------------------------------ From: Joey Lindstrom Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 11:11:50 -0700 Subject: Let's Flap Those Wings, Right and Left Reply-To: joey@telussucks.info On Sun, 16 Feb 2003 17:20:30 -0500 (EST), editor@telecom-digest.org wrote: > Let's face it, if people in this country wanted mostly > accurate, truthful and honest reporting, instead of 'right wing radical' > reporting or 'left wing crap' then the Christian Science Monitor would > have a very large readership. I'll actually form *my opinion* on the > anti-war march/demonstration/standstill on Lexington Avenue when my > copy of the Monitor for Monday arrives in the Tuesday mail. Would it be helpful at this juncture to point out that Rush Limbaugh is the most-popular (as measured by audience numbers) radio host in the entire history of radio in the USA? A lot of HIS listeners are going to do what he jokingly tells them to do: not think about it, not form any opinion about it, until they tune into his show and he tells them what to think about it. :-) -- Joey Lindstrom -- Telus Sucks http://www.telussucks.info [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: No it would not be helpful! The thread is closed as of today. Thanks to all who participated in it. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Joey Lindstrom Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 11:27:04 -0700 Subject: Last Laugh! Flies Have Wings Too Reply-To: joey@telussucks.info On Mon, 17 Feb 2003 21:07:44 -0500 (EST), editor@telecom-digest.org wrote: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Left-Wing Crap: Since all True Wisdom and > Knowledge is detirmined by majority rule, I guess we can't go wrong > with your decision. But you know what they say about a million flys > don't you. Well, a million flys can't be wrong either, and they all > eat sh--. Have you tried it lately? By the way, I avoid all TV news > like a plague. Most of my news comes from the Christian Science > Monitor, the Independence Reporter and the computer. PAT] There's these two flies, and they're standing on a log of sh--. One lets out a loud, nasty fart. The other say, "hey, knock it off! I'm eatin' here!" :-) (Due credit: I stole that from Drew Carey) Yes, the majority can make stupid decision. SOMEBODY bought all those Michael Bolton albums, and SOMEBODY keeps buying all those J.Lo, Eminem, and Celine Dion records (on behalf of all Canadians, apologize for the latter). But don't you see? Many people, particularly those in the "silent majority" noted above, really, really, REALLY resent it when somebody that they view as some ivory-towered know-it-all brainiac comes along and tells them that THEY DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOOD FOR THEM. You can't win people over by saying stuff like that, Pat. You can advise me what's good for me, but the surest way to make me your enemy is to tell me that I don't know what's good for me and that only you do. Doesn't matter if you're right or wrong, the approach is really, really bad. And let me add one obTelecom note which has a direct bearing on this. The American people, more than any time in history, have much more access to news, not just what the networks and CNN shovel out. (These days, I watch CNN for expert coverage of hard news events like the Columbia disaster, but turn it off most of the rest of the time) You mentioned several sources yourself. The Drudge Report makes a good living out of hunting down under-reported stories and highlighting them. Etc. Americans have access to many viewpoints. Those sites get a lot of traffic, so Americans are availing themselves of that access. And after reading all of these various views... guess what? They still feel war with Iraq is justified. Maybe ... just maybe ... this ONE time ... the majority is right? Maybe you and the anti-war pro-Hussein crowd just MIGHT be wrong? Has this possibility crossed your mind? See, I think what conservatives really resent about liberals, rightly or wrongly, is the perception that while conservatives need to keep an open mind and be prepared to change their minds if a really persuasive argument is made, liberals on the other hand are closed-minded and can't be swayed from their views, no matter how powerful the argument. That's the perception -- your mileage may vary. -- Joey Lindstrom -- Telus Sucks http://www.telussucks.info [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: For Gawds sake, the thread is closed. You've made your point already! The Drew Carey joke about the two flies was sorta funny however and I thought it was good for the closing of this issue **and this thread**. 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: 620-330-6774 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 Fax 3: 775-642-0603 Fax 4: 530-309-7234 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: mirror.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. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2003 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 V22 #302 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Feb 19 23:28:43 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h1K4SgB18004; Wed, 19 Feb 2003 23:28:43 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 23:28:43 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200302200428.h1K4SgB18004@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #303 TELECOM Digest Wed, 19 Feb 2003 23:29:00 EST Volume 22 : Issue 303 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Microwave Towers (Mark J Cuccia) Hang up and Drive (Monty Solomon) RCN to Hike Rates April 1 (Monty Solomon) 'Joe Millionaire' Is Fox's Biggest Hit (Monty Solomon) Spam Blocker Charges For E-mail (Monty Solomon) Powell Seen Dissenting From FCC Local-Phone Rules (Monty Solomon) Intel's Digital Home Vision Moves Closer to Reality (Monty Solomon) EchoStar Reaches Agreement with Gray Television, Cordillera (Monty Solomon) Qwest Communications Reports Fourth Quarter and Year 2002 (Monty Solomon) Microsoft Going After Hotmail Spammers (Monty Solomon) Mainstream Companies and SPAM (Phil Earnhardt) How Can I Detect Caller ID Using V.90 Modem (Sanjoy Sinharoy) MCI Mail Musings (+1 3 0 3 5 4 3 2 3 1 1) 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 VIRUSES. 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: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 09:15:47 CST From: Mark J Cuccia Subject: Microwave Towers In New Orleans, there has been a Bell System microwave tower since the early 1960's if not earlier from sometime in the 1950's. It has been located outside of the "Broadmoor" central office building, 3951 Erato Steet, near South Broad Street. The tower is of "typical" steel girder structure, similar to oil derrick or some styles of towers which carry high voltage electric transmission lines. A tower which has a broad square base, and tapers down (sort of like a pyramid or obelisk) as it rises skyward. The New Orleans Bell System microwave tower is painted in alternating horizontal bands of red and white. It can be seen from a distance away because of its height, especially if on elevated sections of I-10, or overpasses, or high bridges (the "High Rise" bridge, the GNO bridge, the Huey P. Long Bridge, etc). I see it from the bridges or interstate on my way to work every morning, but more or less take it for "granted", not always paying "close" attention to it. Sometimes, the route I take to work is along Broad Street, and I pass right alongside the tower and "Broadmoor" central office building. I took that route to work this morning, and thought to "look up" as the bus passed alongside that city block. (I regularly go home on that bus route, but it's already dark and I never really look closely at the top of the tower). Today, I noticed that *ALL* antennae on the tower are *GONE*!!! (I'd passed in the vicinity only last month and remember seeing all of the antennae.) The four microwave horns at the peak of the tower are gone - there were two pointing southwestward and two pointing northeastward. There was also another micorwave horn midway up the tower, pointing northwestward, and it too is gone. In more recent years, there was a microwave "mesh" parabolic dish antennae also mounted part of the way up the tower, and that too has been removed. Also, there were miscellaneous standard looking VHF or UHF 'stick' antennae, as well as cellular service antennae mounted on that tower. From what I could determine by looking closely this morning, *ALL* antennae have been removed! I wonder how long it will be before the tower is dismantled and carted away. I don't know who actually "owned" the tower and most of the antennae ... AT&T Long Lines? Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph? And with divestiture, who actually owned it? AT&T? BellSouth? I guess it depended on who had the most "circuits" from antennae on the tower. Today, there is mostly fibre-optic cable, so I guess that microwave for both AT&T and the local BOC has become obsolete. I've heard that AT&T and/or the incumbent BOCs/LECs have been selling these old towers to private "holding" or "real estate" type companies, and then cellular entities (and *various* competing communications entites as well) would lease space on the tower for their various antennae. But I've also read that many of these towers are being completely de-commissioned, dismantled and removed. Some think that such towers are "eyesores". However, they are an important part of telecom history, as they provided the means in the postwar decades of the 1940's thru 70's for improved Long Distance telephone service (which was becoming more popular and used), Network Television service (there was also co-ax but microwave could be easier to install), and other private line communication services. Beginning in the 1970's (and earlier) and then used much more so in the 1980's, communications satellites were more used for "one-way point-to-multipoint" distribution, such as network television and network radio, national cable-TV distribution and such, thus there was less use of microwave. And then fiber-optic came into more common use for both by both the local telco as well as the LD carriers. But with cellular service, these towers seemed to become popular again, to mount cellular antennae. However, I guess with even more-so ever increasing popularity of cellular/wireless, more widespread lower towers are more suited for such antennae. I still think of that old microwave tower as a "landmark". I hope that it isn't to be dismantled and removed, but from what I saw this morning, I'm afraid that its fate is sealed! :( BTW, the "Broadmoor" Central Office building opened up in 1962/63, with a WECo #5XB central office switch that also served (new) Dial-TWX for the New Orleans area. The telephone prefix block served is 504-82x. This is in an older part of the city, but the central office and prefix block was brand new in the early 1960's. It was "carved" out of all switching office areas adjacent to it (all of the adjacent ones were SXS at the time). "Broadmoor" also housed a WECo XBTandem switch (with CAMA) for originating DDD service from all Step-by-Step offices in the Metro New Orleans / southeast Louisiana area. (The #5XB offices and later ESS offices had their own Local AMA and could produce their own billing tapes, thus they could route calls thru the "Main" 4A XB toll office instead of having to route to the "Broadmoore" XBTandem/CAMA). NWORLABMMG0 = Broadmoor #5XB (1962-87) NWORLABM01T = Broadmoor XBT (1962-81) In 1981, AT&T/SCBell replaced the Broadmoor XBTandem and the "Main" 4AXB (NWORLAMA01T) with a new 4ESS at "Main" which still is in use today (NWORLAMA04T, 504-2T, 060-T). In Aug/Sept 1987, BellSouth (South Central Bell) replaced the last two #5XB local offices in the immediate New Orleans area with new *DIGITAL* ESS offices! Broadmoor was changed to a brand new *DIGITAL* AT&T/WECo #5ESS office (NWORLABMDS0). The other office, Michoud (NWORLAMUMG0) 5XB was replaced with a brand new *DIGITAL* Northern Telecom DMS-100 office (NWORLAMUDS0). The "Michoud" office was also the Centrex for the NASA plant in that part of New Orleans East during the 1960s/70s/80s, and it too had a microwave tower outside the building. I haven't passed by the building lately to see if the tower/antennae are still in place. Mark J. Cuccia New Orleans LA ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 20:35:35 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Hang up and Drive SOUND MIND By Carey Goldberg, Globe Staff, 2/18/2003 You know it's dangerous, but you do it anyway. The phone rings as you're tooling down the expressway, or you squeeze in a quick dial while stopped at a light and then start to chat as you drive on. No problem. You're still aware of the road, still a top-flight driver. The problem is, you're not. And the limits of your brain are the reason why. The trouble is not so much that your hand is occupied holding the phone: Even if you put down the receiver but keep talking on a hands-free model, you're still a menace on the road, according to a new study by researchers at the University of Utah. Your brain is over-occupied. Neuroscientists like to exult that the brain is the most complicated thing on the planet, and that its connections outnumber stars in the universe or grains of sand on the beach. But, when it comes to attention, it is what brain researchers call a ''limited-capacity information processing system.'' That is, attention is a finite thing, and you can only multitask so far. In fact, the Utah researchers found that part of the impairment of using a cellphone while driving is that you are not aware of your own impairment. The basic problem, said David Strayer, an associate professor of psychology at Utah, is called ''inattentional blindness.'' http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/049/science/Hang_up_and_drive+.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 21:30:10 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: RCN to Hike Rates April 1 By Diane E. Lewis, Globe Staff, 2/19/2003 RCN Corp. yesterday increased the price of basic cable TV, telephone, and Internet service by 13 percent and raised the average price of bundled packages of telephone, cable TV, and high-speed Internet access by approximately 8 percent, effective April 1. The increases will affect consumers in 15 Massachusetts cities and towns, including Arlington, Boston, Brookline, Newton, and Watertown. In Boston and Arlington, customers will see their monthly bills increase by $5 to $37.95. Consumers in 12 communities will pay $40.95 for the service, $5 more than last year. Somerville residents will pay $34.45, or $4 more per month. The price of basic phone service will increase about 5 percent to $9.88 per month, up 47 cents. Meanwhile, digital customers who carry RCN's ResiLink Gold package will pay $145 per month, a $12 increase. ResiLink Gold, the company's most popular product, includes digital cable services, one phone line with unlimited local and regional calling, several phone features, and unlimited high-speed MegaModem Net service. Analog customers will pay $141 per month, or $16 more. In raising prices, RCN followed the lead of Comcast, a top competitor. Comcast announced last fall that standard cable TV customers would see a price increase of approximately $2.93 per month, beginning Jan. 1. In Chelmsford, standard cable rates rose to $42.25 per month, up from $39.21. Expanded service increased to $33.32, from $30.27. However, basic rates remained at $8.05 for senior citizens and $8.94 for all others. Like Comcast, New Jersey-based RCN blamed the price hikes on higher operating costs. RCN said programming costs were especially high. http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/050/business/RCN_to_hike_rates_April_1+.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 21:46:21 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: 'Joe Millionaire' Is Fox's Biggest Hit By BILL CARTER Despite a protracted and somewhat anticlimatic ending, Monday night's final episode of the reality show "Joe Millionaire" became the most watched entertainment show of the television season, with more than 40 million viewers. The episode, with ratings exceeded only by this year's Super Bowl, was also the most watched entertainment show in the 17-year history of the Fox network. Consisting of a one-hour reunion of the show's rejected contestants, watched by 29 million, followed by Joe's selection (the episode drawing more than 40 million), Fox's entire two-hour "Joe Millionaire" night reached about 35 million viewers. They saw Joe Millionaire, whose real name is Evan Marriott, select Zora Andrich as the winner among the 25 women competing for his favor. They also saw him reveal to her and the runner-up, Sarah Kozer, that he was not really heir to a $50 million fortune but a lowly construction worker who made $19,000 last year. Ms. Andrich did not appear dismayed by the news, and said later that she wanted to continue the relationship. The show's much promoted twist was that Mr. Marriott and Ms. Andrich were given a $1 million check to split as a surprise prize. Ms. Kozer received no televised reward. http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/19/arts/television/19MILL.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 22:21:44 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Spam Blocker Charges For E-mail By Declan McCullagh Staff Writer, CNET News.com February 19, 2003, 1:34 PM PT An Australian entrepreneur has created what may be the first antispam service that lets its users charge for the privilege of sending them e-mail. The concept has been discussed in technology circles for the better part of a decade, but Sydney resident Bernard Palmer, 59, has decided to try to turn the concept into a business. "Spammers aren't going to be sending many spams to you if you charge them 50 cents," Palmer said. "A spam would cost them $2 million." Palmer's service, which he plans to announce on Thursday, is called CashRamSpam.com. After people pay $36 with a credit card to sign up for a CashRamSpam account, users may set their contact fee to be anywhere from a few pennies to as high as they think anyone would be willing to pay. Some antispam services try to use text or numerals embedded in graphic images to discern whether the sender is a human, while others rely on "whitelists" of approved correspondents, pattern-matching to flag suspect messages, or verification procedures. The process can be problematic: On Tuesday, a coalition began compiling reports of legitimate e-mail accidentally snared by spam traps. At least in its current form, CashRamSpam is more of a "proof of concept" than it is a robust antispam solution. Anyone who wishes to contact a CashRamSpam customer must purchase an account themselves first, there is no provision to permit friends or colleagues, and the system does not permit legitimate mailing lists to which users voluntarily subscribe to bypass the payment process. CashRamSpam keeps 10 percent of a user's contact fee as its payment. When someone tries to contact a CashRamSpam customer, a message is automatically returned saying: "We regret your message cannot be delivered using ordinary e-mail because the receiver has a CashRamSpam account ... If you want to succeed in reaching this receiver please register at www.cashramspam.com and resend the message from there." Brad Templeton, who wrote an influential essay around 1995 about charging for e-mail, says those shortcomings could doom the concept. http://news.com.com/2100-1023-985175.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 17:55:15 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Powell Seen Dissenting From FCC Local-Phone Rules By Andy Sullivan WASHINGTON, Feb 19 (Reuters) - The U.S. Federal Communications Commission is likely to keep many of its rules for local telephone competition on Thursday over the objections of agency chairman Michael Powell, several sources said on Wednesday. Powell has been unable to convince a majority of his fellow commissioners that the industry needs to be deregulated quickly, industry and government sources said, and will likely issue a rare dissenting opinion when the FCC announces its revised rules on Thursday. The expected ruling is a setback for incumbent local-phone giants like Verizon Communications (NYSE:VZ), which have opposed rules that allow rivals like AT&T Corp. (NYSE:T) to lease their phone lines and other equipment at deep discounts. But sources say the biggest loser is Powell, who was unable to reach a compromise with fellow Republican commissioner Kevin Martin even after postponing the decision by a week, and now must publicly disagree with his own agency. An FCC chairman has not dissented from a high-profile FCC ruling for roughly 15 years. Powell has been so enamored with his deregulation theory that he neglected to line up support, one industry source said, while Martin "has been very shrewd thus far in his political maneuvering." - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=31696280 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 17:53:39 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Intel's Digital Home Vision Moves Closer to Reality Industry Enabling Building Blocks - Feb 19, 2003 12:15 PM (BusinessWire) SAN JOSE, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Feb. 19, 2003-- Engineering Platforms and UPnP* Tools Aid Delivery of Digital Media Throughout the Home Intel Corporation announced new industry building blocks that bring the vision of the Digital Home closer to reality. Available immediately are Digital Home reference and concept platforms, and ten powerful UPnP* tools that underscore Intel's support of the Digital Home vision. ... The "Statesboro" reference platform will assist OEMs and motherboard makers to develop new PC systems this year that broadcast digital photos and music to TVs and stereos throughout the consumer's home. Statesboro is an implementation tool designed for developers that showcases the 2003 Digital Home vision. The reference platform is a complete, validated system solution featuring key technologies in support of the Digital Home usage models, as described in the Desktop Platform Vision Guide for 2003. These technologies include: Intel(R) 3.06GHz Pentium(R) 4 Processor with Hyper-Threading Technology(1), "Springdale" chipset, Dualband 802.11 Wireless NIC, Serial ATA Hard Disk Drive, Dual Channel DDR Memory, and a DVD/CD-RW Optical Disk Drive. The new concept platform, codenamed "Powersville", showcases additional levels of Digital Home experiences, such as wireless streaming video and personal video recording, which consumers can expect as included PC features in the 2004 time frame. Powersville is designed to provide an early demonstration of experiences and technologies in order to highlight innovation opportunities for the PC industry. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=31691240 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 11:24:05 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: EchoStar Reaches Agreement with Gray Television, Cordillera EchoStar Reaches Agreement with Gray Television, Cordillera Communications for Satellite TV Carriage of Local TV Stations - Feb 19, 2003 09:16 AM (BusinessWire) DISH Network Now Offers All Major Local Channels in Colorado Springs, Colo.; Tucson, Ariz.; Lexington, Ky. EchoStar Communications Corporation (Nasdaq:DISH) and its DISH Network announced today agreements with Gray Television, Inc., and Cordillera Communications, Inc., for carriage of their local TV stations via satellite in Colorado Springs, Colo.; Tucson, Ariz.; Lexington, Ky., and Omaha, Neb. As a result of these agreements, DISH Network will provide carriage of CBS-WKTY in Lexington and CBS-KKTV in Colorado Springs, both owned by Gray Television of Atlanta, Ga. Also as part of these agreements, DISH Network will provide on Feb. 20 Gray Television's NBC-WOWT to customers in Omaha, Neb. DISH Network also reached an agreement with Cordillera Communications of Plano, Texas, to provide its TV stations NBC- KVOA in Tucson, NBC- KOAA in Colorado Springs and NBC- WLEX in Lexington. With these agreements, DISH Network will offer all major local channels in Colorado Springs, Tucson and Lexington beginning Feb. 20. DISH Network previously launched local channels in these markets without all four major networks. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=31686248 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 08:12:14 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Qwest Communications Reports Fourth Quarter and Full-Year 2002 Unaudited Results Fourth Quarter Highlights * Fourth Quarter Diluted EPS of $1.61 Compared to a $0.39 Loss per Share in Fourth Quarter 2001 * Working Capital Improved by $5.1 Billion for the Year * First Phase of QwestDex Sale Completed for $2.75 Billion * FCC Approved Long-Distance Services in Nine States; FCC Filings Pending for Three Additional States * Retail Consumer Access Line Losses Improve for Second Consecutive Quarter http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=31681750 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 22:59:57 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Microsoft Going After Hotmail Spammers By Paul Festa Staff Writer, CNET News.com February 18, 2003, 5:00 PM PT Microsoft is turning up the heat on spam, filing a lawsuit to go after people it suspects of having harvested e-mail addresses from its Hotmail servers to spam subscribers. Microsoft on Thursday filed a so-called John Doe suit in the federal court for the northern district of California in San Jose. The suit doesn't name defendants, but allows the plaintiff the power to issue subpoenas as part of the investigative phase of the trial. The defendants are accused of using a "dictionary attack" to discover active Hotmail accounts. A dictionary attack is one in which a computer program goes through every entry in a dictionary in an attempt to guess passwords. In this case, the program guessed millions of random e-mail addresses to see which ones were active, Microsoft alleged. Microsoft filed the suit the same week it called on legislators to pass laws forbidding the practice of spam-address harvesting. http://news.com.com/2100-1023-985018.html ------------------------------ From: Phil Earnhardt Subject: Mainstream Companies and SPAM Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 05:01:23 -0700 Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com On Tue, 18 Feb 2003 16:59:38 -0500, Monty Solomon wrote: > Case in point: One of the Celtics' sponsors is Pfizer Inc., the maker > of the drug Viagra. As any E-mail administrator knows, Viagra is a > favorite topic among spammers, and so it's become a popular term to > filter. But if Wessel blocks all messages containing the word Viagra, > the Celtics might miss important communications from a key sponsor. If Pfizer had an aggressive program for dealing with the venders who were [ab]using e-mail to sell Viagra, then there would be far less likelihood that an e-mail containing that word to be flagged as SPAM. Just like protecting their trademarks from abuse, companies have a duty to protect themselves from resellers using such "scorched earth" marketing techniques to promote their product. SPAM used to promote dubious products is bad, but SPAM used to promote legitimate products is equally distateful. It leads consumers to think that the manufacturers of those products are sanctioning the use of SPAM to promote their sale. It creates distrust of the particular manufacturer. SPAM is just plain bad for business. phil ------------------------------ From: Sanjoy Sinharoy Subject: How Can I Detect Caller ID Using V.90 Modem Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 23:58:42 +0530 Organization: IETE I am using Windows98(SE) as O/S and DAX - 56Kbps Data/Fax/Voice Modem (V.90 & K56flex). I am from India. My modem probably uses Rockwell chips. But I can't detect the 'Caller ID' using AT#CID=2 0r AT#CID=1 command in the Windows 'HyperTerminal'. But my telephone company says that they already enabled the 'Caller ID (CLI)' facility in my landline telephone! Can't we detect Caller ID using modem in India? or should I have to purchase separate gadget for caller ID ? or should I need software other than the Windows 'HyperTerminal' ? My modem is set to county code 30 (which is for India). Please help. Sincerely, Sanjoy ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 11:51:25 -0700 From: Paul Migliorelli Subject: MCI Mail Musings I remember in early '84 hearing tv ads for it. You dialed 800 3 2 3 0 9 0 5 (although there was an earlier 800 3 2 3 number, and it later changed to this), with your modem. I remember the username to type in was "register" and the password was "register". I remember it being free for a while. It worked great using my first braille output terminal with a modem, which is what I was online for a year with. Although, I had to await the Christmas gift in '83 of a Hayes 300 external, as I could never get MCI mail to work with my original Tandy acoustic coupler (grin). I also recall the fine days where MCI mail had a great gateway to Dow Jones News Retrieval. Thru that account, I was able to get in no problem, but I always had a lack of success in the prior year, (my first year online July '82), of having difficulties getting into DJNS via Telenet and Tymnet. (Luckily, while attending college in Poughkeepsie NY where there was no local Compuserve access number, Telenet worked well, although at that time, it was $7 an hour via Telennet for Compuserve instead of the $5). In like '87 or '88, there were all kinds of some kind of bulletin boards on MCI Mail, and I think there was even some kind of MCI Mail terminal you could get. The other neat thing you could do, just like a fidonet node list, was type in a word to scan around at the MCI Mail "to" prompt, such as "radio", or any word you were curious about, and you'd get a list of addresses pulled up with that particular word. Yes, the fine days of Compuserve, MCI Mail, and DowJones access were a great help as the first open door to accessible plain text in braille. I was taking some generalized economics classes, and we needed the Wall Street Journal ***every ***day in class. My original braille output device stored 200k or data on Maxell U D X L 1 audiocassettes. So, it was quite an adventure to type in the old DowJones command, which began with double slash, follwed by wsj for the Journal, and then let it go all night downloading the stories at 300 baud (smile). With determination, it sure worked well pretty much. So much for 21 years ago!! Paul in Boulder http://www.rrsr.org ------------------------------ 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: 620-330-6774 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 Fax 3: 775-642-0603 Fax 4: 530-309-7234 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: mirror.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. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2003 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 V22 #303 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Feb 19 23:58:23 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h1K4wNX18551; Wed, 19 Feb 2003 23:58:23 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 23:58:23 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200302200458.h1K4wNX18551@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #304 TELECOM Digest Wed, 19 Feb 2003 23:58:00 EST Volume 22 : Issue 304 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Microsoft Planning More Spam Suits (Monty Solomon) Net Blocking Threatens Legitimate Sites (Monty Solomon) Seeking Vonage VoIP Testimonials (Eric De Mund) Re: The A-B-C-D Fourth Column DTMF (Paul A Lee) Re: Dialogic Help (Vance Shipley) Re: Autovon Dialpad and Precedence Codes (was: Code to Dial) (Scott Dorsey) Re: Fax Filtering on DID's (Scott Dorsey) Re: Code to Dial When Exchange is Busy - Bell System Codes (Scott Dorsey) Extracting Voice From AG2000 Board (Sriram Seetharam) Re: Erasing a Hard Drive (Robert Bonomi) Re: NYC Demonstration Against War in Iraq (John Higdon) Re: NYC Demonstration Against War in Iraq (Michael A. Chance) 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 VIRUSES. 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: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 23:02:28 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Microsoft Planning More Spam Suits By Paul Festa Staff Writer, CNET News.com Following last week's lawsuit against spam address harvesters, Microsoft plans to file three similar suits this week. The so-called John Doe lawsuits, to be filed in the federal court for the northern district of California in San Jose, target people alleged to have hit Microsoft's Hotmail servers with a "dictionary" attack, according to a company representative. Such attacks pelt servers with a huge number of random addresses in order to discover valid ones. The alleged purpose of the attack is to gather, or "harvest," e-mail addresses for spammers. http://news.com.com/2100-1023-985215.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 23:12:16 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Net Blocking Threatens Legitimate Sites By Declan McCullagh Staff Writer, CNET News.com Government efforts to block offensive Web sites are technically problematic and legally worrisome, a new study says. The study from Harvard University's Berkman Center highlights how modern Web standards have permitted thousands of domain names to share one Internet address. It concludes that instead of precisely targeting only objectionable sites, attempts to restrict Internet addresses with pornographic, political or gambling-related content inevitably make legitimate sites unreachable too. "The numbers are staggeringly high," said Ben Edelman, a student fellow at the Berkman Center and author of the report. "According to my results, two-thirds of sites are hosted on Web servers with 50 or more domain names." The research comes as state and national governments weigh methods to restrict Web sites that may be legal in other jurisdictions but not theirs. http://news.com.com/2100-1023-985216.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 10:27:37 -0800 From: Eric De Mund Subject: Seeking Vonage VoIP Testimonials Reply-To: Eric De Mund Organization: Ixian Systems, Inc. People, Is anyone using Vonage's VoIP service? Do you love it? Do you hate it? Would you like to love it, but several quirks have you holding back the roses? After reading: How a downed tree simplified my life, by Lincoln D. Stein http://www.newarchitectmag.com/documents/s=7802/na0203h/index.html Voice Over IP, by Christopher Allbritton http://popularmechanics.com/technology/telecom/2003/2/voice_over_ip/ in New Architect and Popular Mechanics, respectively, my curiosity about Vonage's VoIP service is really piqued. On paper, the plan for $40/month that gets you unlimited local and long-distance calling looks really good. Regards, Eric De Mund | Ixian Systems, Inc. | 53 49 B2 23 AF 6C 20 81 http://www.ixian.com/ead/ | Mountain View, CA | ED DD 4C 81 AA C9 D1 A5 ------------------------------ From: Paul A Lee Subject: RE: The A-B-C-D Fourth Column DTMF Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 13:40:41 -0500 In TELECOM Digest V22 #300, Mark J Cuccia wrote (in part): > There are a few other miscellaneous uses of the A-B-C-D [touch tones] ... I learned -- the hard way -- of a Comdial PBX that uses DTMF 'A' as its disconnect supervision signal for adjuncts, such as voice mail. I have a Dialogic-based custom automated attendant system on a Nortel Norstar behind a Comdial FXT in a tenant setup. The Norstar was suffering from frequent hung trunks and phantom calls. It was readily apparent that we had a disconnect supervision problem. The Norstar looks for the de facto standard open switch interval [OSI] (open loop, no battery for 250± ms) as a forward disconnect signal. The people responsible for servicing the Comdial insisted that they had programmed it to provide disconnect supervision on four extensions that served as trunks to a Nortel Norstar. The same programming worked fine with the analog extensions connecting their voice mail and auto attendant system to the PBX. Only when I went to the site and monitored the call tear-down did I discover that we were working with two different definitions of "disconnect supervision" (loop signaling versus inband signaling). Paul A Lee Voice: +1 717 730-8355 Sr Telecom Engineer [Voice & Transmission] Fax: +1 717 975-3789 Rite Aid Corporation, Telecomm, 30 Hunter Lane, Camp Hill, PA 17011-2410 ------------------------------ From: vances@motivity.ca (Vance Shipley) Subject: Re: Dialogic Help Date: 19 Feb 2003 10:47:49 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ You can get all the manuals and current drivers, libraries and includes at: http://support.dialogic.com -Vance niraj@verizon.net (Niraj) wrote in message news:: > I was wondering if anyone could assist me in installing a few dialogic > boards I have for testing purposes. Unrfortunately, I don't have the > manuals for the cards nor can I seem to find one on the internet. ------------------------------ From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) Subject: Re: Autovon Dialpad and Precedence Codes (was: Code to Dial) Date: 19 Feb 2003 14:10:28 -0500 Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000) Clark Wilhelm Griswold, Jr. <73115.1041@compuserve.com> wrote: > Gary Novosielski wrote: >> There was no defined "Flash Override" code. It is my understanding >> that this was added to Autovon because it was assumed (correctly) that >> when you put precedence buttons on someone's phone they just naturally >> would push them, bumping everyone else's traffic down a notch, until >> some bird-colonel's call to his mistress (using Flash precedence) >> couldn't get through, and he needed something higher. > Reminds me of my days in one of the US services, when MilStar was just > coming on line. MilStar was a satellite based teletype system that has > evolved over the years, but initially worked as a military only, > internet style email system. As with Autovon based phones, messages > could be coded with the same precedence codes. I thought AUTODIN was the network, and MilStar was the satellite infrastructure that extended the network out through the Pacific (and I seem to recall some AUTOVON voice circuits on it too ... something like 16 teletype circuits could go over one voice trunk, though). > Had a buddy who was manning a control center that had recently > received a MilStar terminal installation. No specific traffic had been > assigned at the time, and people would frequently bang out messages to > their friends around the world as a means of killing time in the quiet > hours of the night. > One evening my friend was having difficultly getting his message > through to his friend, so he proceeded to retry several times with > ever increasing priority, until it finally went through using the > Flash Override precedence. > Shortly thereafter he received a phone call from SAC Headquarters, > suggesting that it might be career limiting if he tried that again. It > seems that Flash Override traffic is considered so important that in > addition to being delivered to the addressee, it is also displayed on > the big screen at all the major nuclear command centers with all the > bells and sirens one might expect. In the last few years of the Vietnam war, AUTODIN trunks were so overloaded that everyone began sending everything with higher and higher priority, to the point where they had to add a couple extra priority levels in order to get actual high priority traffic through. scott "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." ------------------------------ From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) Subject: Re: Fax Filtering on DID's Date: 19 Feb 2003 14:16:39 -0500 Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000) David Redemer wrote: > Anyone know of a product or a way to filter junk faxes on a DID trunk. > I've found products that allow for this on regular CO trunks. But > these devices wont work on DID trunks, because they function with a > wink start (polarity reversal) and not the regular line voltage. Any > suggestions would be appreciated. Thanks. Don't filter 'em! Stack them up and have your legal folks take all the senders to court in one big slew. Minimizes paperwork, only takes an afternoon or two for the legal staff, and more than pays for itself. scott "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." ------------------------------ From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) Subject: Re: Code to Dial When Exchange is Busy - Bell System Codes Date: 19 Feb 2003 14:20:26 -0500 Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000) In article , wrote: > Commander Riker wrote: >> I am not sure if they would work on normal lines in my area, perhaps I >> will have to grab an AUTOVON off of Ebay the next time I see one or I >> supose I could make a tone generator and check it out my area first >> before purchasing a phone, but I think AUTOVON was designed specificly >> for the military lines. > Those AUTOVON tones would mean nothing to your local switching office. An Autovon phone will have the 12 standard DTMF tones, plus the four lettered ones. The four lettered ones will be ignored by the local exchange. Years and years ago, the Sprint network used to use the four lettered tones for internal signalling, but that was back when everything was in-band. > Keep in mind folks what John Higdon said: any call beyond the local "must > carry" area of your local exchange carrier, goes over the interexchange > carrier (IXC) that *you* designate, either through presubscription or my > using a company access code. And, the IXC doesn't even "see" your "Touch > Tone" (DTMF) origination tones. Right, all the tones get dealt with by the local exchange. scott "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." ------------------------------ From: sriramsamm@yahoo.com (Sriram Seetharam) Subject: Extracting Voice From AG2000 Board Date: 19 Feb 2003 13:09:37 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Hi, I am working on NMS-AG2000 board. Is there a way I can extract voice from the board and resend it on the network as packets, and vice-versa. Any help would be great. Thanks in advance. Sriram Seetharam ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Erasing a Hard Drive Organization: Not Much From: bonomi@c-ns (Robert Bonomi) Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 01:26:26 GMT In article , Mark Atwood wrote: > bonomi@c-ns (Robert Bonomi) writes: >> The DOD spec is for handling devices that contained "classified" data, >> *only*. 'Secret', or above, and the device -never- leaves the secure >> area. When it is 'beyond use', the drive is [snip description] > Not quite entirely true, as that would require a drive destruction kit > at every secure facility at every military contractor's site > everywhere. Not practical, as it is my experience that it's not that > unusual for the contractors to keep the classified computing confined > to as few workstations as possible, in as small a room as possible. > When it's time to decommission the drives, the more common thing to > have happen is have a classified courier come pick them up and take > them Someplace Else. Bzzzzt! Even under the circumstances you describe, the drive has never left a 'secure' area. The transport the courier uses *IS* classified as a secure area. > As soon as the courier signed for them, it was > no longer the contractor's problem, the gov't handled the the physical > destruction, and the inventory updates. I always just assumed that the > NSA/DIA/etc either had regional destruction facilities, or had a > contractor running it under their supervision. > Also, it's very common for the disk drives on such workstations to be > in easily removable storage packs. That way you could power down the > workstation, pull the drives and put them in the safe, and the > workstation is now no longer classified. > Also, it's not unusual for the contractor to arrange for the gov't to > actually own the drives. This makes doing the accounting easier both > for the gov't mandated classified inventory management, and also for > arranging for and paying for their destruction. > One of the at-long-last cost saving measures implemented in the US > classified computing world in, if I recall correctly, the early 90s, > was a change in the rules. When an S or above project was ended, or > when some storage system was outgrown, the drives could be "recycled", > i.e. run thru the classified-data multiple overwrite process, and then > reused on another project that was classified at the same or higher > level. To the best of my knowledge, that was true -- given the restriction of 'classified at the same or higher level', back into the (early?) 80s. at least. 'Historical' problem was with 'SI codeword' classified, and inability to recycle to a _different_ 'SI codeword' project. As you say, _very_ big deal when that got cleared up. > This was not that big a deal for things like a thousand dollar 9 gig > disk. > It was a VERY big deal for things like ten million dollar supercomputer > storage arrays. > Mark Atwood | Well done is better than well said. > mra@pobox.com | > http://www.pobox.com/~mra ------------------------------ From: John Higdon Subject: Re: NYC Demonstration Against War in Iraq Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 17:12:35 -0800 In article , Cryderman, Charles wrote: > On the other hand, we know, for a fact, > that North Korea has plenty of nuclear weapons, ready and willing to be > used. But there is no oil in that cold, dismal country. All I care about is whether the equipment works. Be advised that our government is taking Korea very seriously and has been engaged in a number of little publicized actions to prepare for dealing with that problem. For one thing, those heading for Iraq have been put on notice that they may be sent directly from there to Korea with out passing "Go". There have been a number of military groups put in strategic positions in and around the area. One rogue regime at a time, please. > There is not > much of anything there we want or need, except maybe in my own mind, I > am really getting sick of seeing every piece of electronic gear in > the USA saying 'made in Korea' stamped or stickered on it somewhere. > Seriously, when is the last time you bought some electronics which > said 'made in USA'? Korea, Korea, Korea, everything. Look in Walmart, > look in K-Mart (what's left of them; we are losing ours next month); > look in Radio Shack. Korea, Korea, Korea. But they don't have oil > there which Mr. Insane has a lot of, and which Mr. Rockefeller and his > good buddy Dubya need. I have no doubt that the disturbance of trade as it affects our country is considered in policy making for both Iraq and Korea (or anywhere else). I would consider our government negligent if that were not the case. > But you say, its not about oil; its about 'breaking contracts' and > being a Hitler in disguise. Its not about a Moslem country which is > essentially despised by the 'Christians' in a 'Christian nation', > especially since 'those people' are forever giving a lot of sass to > 'our president' and 'our way of life', referring to us as Satan, > because of our life styles, etc. But you said its not about oil, its > about Mr. Insane not giving up his weapons and breaking all the 'contracts' > he made with people and the UN. Well, gee, whiz, the essence of any > 'contract' is paying the bills you owe, and when is the last time > Uncle Sam ever paid any dues to the UN? Years ago, probably before > Mr. Insane started breaking his word on things. How much was our bill to the UN for ousting Slovidon Milosevic? Was it paid? How about all the other little operations we have been asked to perform (such as the Somalia debacle)? How much do we charge the UN for hosting it in New York, and have we ever been paid? > We agree on one very important point: the *very brave* guys who are > over there waiting to get blown to hell in pieces. On that we can agree. That is a very personal matter for me right now. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | Anytown, USA | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: John, you apparently missed the notices in yesterday's Digest saying that this thread had been closed. As a courtesy to you, this final message in the thread has been published. Indeed, soldiers in body bags has been a personal thing for me in the past also. Perhaps that is why I took such notice of the anti-war meetings around the country last Saturday. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Michael A. Chance Subject: Re: NYC Demonstration Against War in Iraq Organization: Prodigy Internet http://www.prodigy.com Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 12:34:45 GMT PAT wrote: > I just wish people would get off > these kicks about 'contracts' Mr. Insane has not kept (the USA has > failed to keep a few contracts also) and how Mr. Insane bullies people > around to get his way. (The USA is famous [or perhaps infamous is a > better word] for that also.) However, to the best of my knowledge, no U. S. president has ever had relatives executed for fleeing to another country or personally shot a cabinet secretary during a cabinet meeting for suggesting that the president might want to consider resigning. Everyone keeps saying that Iraq poses no danger to the U. S., even if they do have biological weapons or nerve gas. Yeah, and it's impossible for a few guys with box cutters to hijack an airliner and fly it into the World Trade Center. The problem with waiting for a "smoking gun" is that it means the gun has already been fired. Michael Chance [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Likewise, Mr. Chance, you may have missed the closure notice on this thread yesterday. 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: 620-330-6774 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 Fax 3: 775-642-0603 Fax 4: 530-309-7234 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: mirror.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. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2003 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 V22 #304 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Feb 21 00:39:22 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h1L5dMk24132; Fri, 21 Feb 2003 00:39:22 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2003 00:39:22 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200302210539.h1L5dMk24132@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #305 TELECOM Digest Fri, 21 Feb 2003 00:40:00 EST Volume 22 : Issue 305 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Cato Press Release: FCC UNE-P Decision (Monty Solomon) Federal Court of Appeals Rules That Palm Infringes Xerox Patent (M Solomon) AOL Reports to Members on Its Efforts to Fight Spam (Monty Solomon) Internet Firms Seek Limits on Privacy Law (Monty Solomon) Policy Post 9.06: Reports Calls Pennsylvania Web Blocking Law (M Solomon) Clear Channel's Big, Stinking Deregulation Mess (Monty Solomon) New Cable TV Channel Aimed at U.S. Hispanics (Monty Solomon) 8 Million Credit Accounts Exposed (Monty Solomon) Hacking Democracy (Monty Solomon) Blogging By Wireless (Monty Solomon) Blogs Get Google's Embrace (Monty Solomon) Big Brother is Watching You - and Documenting (Monty Solomon) T1 - Tip and Ring (R Siffredi) Is it Possible to Make Intercom System With old W.E. Phones? (Comm. Riker) Netizen Ronda (Andrew) 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 VIRUSES. 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, 20 Feb 2003 18:31:58 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Cato Press Release: FCC UNE-P Decision http://www.cato.org/new/02-03/02-20-03r-2.html Media Contact: (202) 789-5200 FCC's Deregulation Decision Will Further Harm Telecom Industry Votes to shift more control of telecom industry deregulation to state utility commissions. Adam D. Thierer, the Cato Institute's director of telecommunications studies, has released the following statement in reaction to the decision of the Federal Communications Commission on Thursday to shift more control of telecommunication industry deregulation to state utility commissions: "The FCC's decision constitutes one step forward, but two steps back on the path toward genuine free market deregulation of the United States' telecommunications industry. "This complicated proceeding -- which examined the unbundled network-element platform that the "Baby Bells" must provide to competitors at regulated rates -- provided the FCC with the chance to significantly revise infrastructure-sharing rules put in place by federal and state regulators in previous years. Such rules are the FCC's preferred short-term method of encouraging entry by offering competitors generous discounts to network elements owned by the Baby Bells. "These rules rested upon the mistaken notion that competition would not have developed in local telecom markets in the short-term. On the contrary, credible threats already exist to the traditional dominance of the Baby Bells from cable and especially wireless providers. In the future, such facilities-based alternatives will continue to develop, but the Commission's unbundling and infrastructure-sharing rules may be slowing their arrival since it has encouraged competitors to share existing networks and technologies before deploying new facilities of their own. "Regrettably, today's decision by the FCC did little to alter this balance. Indeed, the Commission's order is a contradictory mix of half-hearted reforms. For example, while the decision carves out of the regulatory mix high-speed fiber optic lines to the home to ensure that the Baby Bells are not discouraged from deploying such broadband facilities, the order also demands that `dark' fiber line continue to be shared. Many other mandatory sharing regulations remain in place. "Worse yet, what little good might be accomplished under today's order will be almost completely undercut by the Commission's decision to delegate virtually unlimited discretion to state regulators in determining future telecom infrastructure-sharing rules, resulting in a balkanized telecom policy led by 51 different state regulatory offices. "Finally, with today's ruling, the FCC risks forcing yet another round of costly litigation because it merely tweaks the previous rules that the courts have already struck down before. In all likelihood, the courts will once again strike down the Commission's rules and require another revision of them. In the meantime, genuine deregulation and facilities-based competition has once again been placed on hold by an FCC that clearly has little faith in the free market." ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 18:34:57 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Federal Court of Appeals Rules That Palm Infringes Xerox Patent ROCHESTER, N.Y.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Feb. 20, 2003--A federal court of appeals ruled today that Palm Inc. handheld electronic organizers infringe on Xerox Corporation's (NYSE:XRX) Unistrokes(R) patent. The ruling, issued by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington, D.C., rejected Palm's appeal and affirmed a lower court ruling made in December 2001 on Palm's infringement of Xerox's patent. At the same time, the Court of Appeals found that the lower court's ruling did not include sufficient analysis on certain aspects related to the validity of the patent. Therefore, the Court of Appeals returned a portion of the case to Judge Michael Telesca, U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York in Rochester, for further analysis on validity. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=31728984 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 18:37:58 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: AOL Reports to Members on Its Efforts to Fight Spam AOL Reports to Members on Its Efforts to Fight Spam, Including Blocking 780 Million Spam E-Mails from Reaching Its Members Each Day DULLES, Va.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Feb. 20, 2003-- Members Now Reporting 4.1 Million Junk E-Mails Daily To AOL Company Responding to Members' Feedback as Part of Recently Launched 'Tell Us' Campaign America Online, the world's leading interactive services company, today reported to its members on actions it takes against unsolicited bulk e-mail -- or spam -- and announced that members are helping to make important progress in that fight. AOL recently solicited comments about the service from its approximately 27 million domestic members, and recieved tremendous feedback - much of which centered on the issue of spam. Today, in the first of a series of "Welcome Screen" messages highlighting its responses to members' concerns, AOL provided important updates on the Company's multiple efforts to combat junk email, and announced a series of new steps it will take this year to strike back at spam and spammers. AOL announced that its proprietary anti-spam filtering technology is blocking up to 780 million pieces of junk mail every day from reaching member e-mail inboxes, which amounts to an average of 22 blocked spam e-mails per account daily. Driving the successful record of blocking more than three-quarters of a billion unwanted e-mails each day is AOL 8.0's new and popular "Report Spam" button, which premiered in October 2002. AOL members are now using the button up to 4.1 million times a day to report spam to the Company. This allows engineers to update and fine-tune AOL's anti-spam filters to help prevent spam from reaching other members in the future. This is a substantial increase from the amount of spam AOL members were previously reporting. In October 2002, prior to the introduction of a streamlined tool reporting spam to AOL, members reported 200,000 spam e-mails daily. In December 2002 it increased to 2,000,000, before rising to its current level. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=31718854 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 18:55:17 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Internet Firms Seek Limits on Privacy Law Steve Alexander Star Tribune Published Feb. 20, 2003 The ink is hardly dry on Minnesota's first-of-its-kind Internet privacy law, but already opponents are trying to limit the law's reach, raising concerns among privacy advocates. The Minnesota law, passed last spring and set to take effect March 1, requires Internet service providers (ISPs) to give customers a listing of information they have about them and their Web browsing habits. ISPs often keep records on the sites their customers visit; sometimes they sell that information to advertisers and retailers. "The Minnesota law is a pioneer and a test case to see whether state-level privacy laws are desirable and whether they are workable in practice," said Michael Beresik, national director of the privacy practice at accounting firm PricewaterhouseCoopers in Washington, D.C. Big national Internet providers such as AOL Time Warner are trying to eliminate some of the law's requirements. AOL opposed the law last year on the grounds it would lead to an unworkable patchwork quilt of privacy laws in all 50 states. Some national experts say AOL might be right, and that laws like Minnesota's may lead Congress to enact a national privacy law that would over-ride any state laws. http://www.startribune.com/stories/535/3663661.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 18:57:43 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Policy Post 9.06: Reports Calls Pennsylvania Web Blocking Law CDT POLICY POST Volume 9, Number 6, February 20, 2003 A Briefing On Public Policy Issues Affecting Civil Liberties Online from The Center For Democracy and Technology (1) CDT Reports Calls Pennsylvania Blocking Law Unconstitutional and Unsound (2) Background on the Penn. Web Blocking Law (3) Laudable Goals, Serious Constitutional and Technical Problems (4) Request Filed for Records of Undisclosed Web Site Blocking http://www.cdt.org/publications/pp_9.06.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 21:32:41 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Clear Channel's big, stinking deregulation mess The Media Borg Clear Channel's big, stinking deregulation mess The sorry state of the radio industry today is sabotaging FCC chairman Michael Powell's plans to let media conglomerates run wild. Editor's note: Sixth in a series on the consolidation of power and ownership in the media landscape. By Eric Boehlert Feb. 19, 2003 | Clear Channel Communications, the radio and concert conglomerate so many people love to hate, has a new batch of disgruntled critics to deal with. But this time it's not the musicians who claim that the entertainment giant plays hardball and locks acts off the airwaves, or the broadcast rivals who allege the company leverages its unmatched size to drive competitors out of business, or even the former employees who insist the company's rampant cost-cutting style has gutted American radio. Nope -- now the heat is coming from other media company executives and Beltway lobbyists. They are dismayed that Clear Channel is doing what many might have thought impossible. In an era when Republicans control the government and big business generally gets what it wants, Clear Channel is making deregulation look bad. Executives at television, cable and newspaper companies want the government to lift ownership caps that limit the number of properties their companies can own. They've been envious of radio ever since the 1996 Telecommunications Act singled out radio for sweeping ownership deregulation. Passage of the Telecom Act paved the way for Clear Channel to expand from 40 stations to 1,225, and in the process, exert unprecedented control over the industry. http://salon.com/tech/feature/2003/02/19/clear_channel_deregulation/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 21:47:05 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: New Cable TV Channel Aimed at U.S. Hispanics By Cyntia Barrera Diaz NEW YORK, Feb 20 (Reuters) -Imagine "Friends" but in Spanish. Throw in elements of the tear-jerking Latin telenovela but make it younger, hipper. And, oh yes, cast six very good looking actors. A new cable television channel targeting U.S. Hispanics is readying for its May debut, hoping its edgy programming format will help it grab a youthful bilingual audience with growing spending power. Backed by a small group of equity investors, Chicago-based Expresión channel will elbow for room in a market led by Spanish-language broadcasters Univision Communications Inc. (NYSE:UVN) and NBC's Telemundo. U.S. Hispanics have become a key target for advertisers seeking a way to reach a population of 37 million with an estimated annual spending power of over $500 billion. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=31730654 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 08:36:39 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: 8 Million Credit Accounts Exposed FBI to Investigate Hacking of Database By Jonathan Krim Washington Post Staff Writer A hacker broke into a computer database containing roughly 8 million Visa, MasterCard and American Express credit card numbers earlier this month, prompting an FBI investigation into one of the largest intrusions of its kind. All three card companies said that the potentially compromised numbers are being closely monitored, and that so far there is no evidence that any have been used for fraudulent purchases. The big three card issuers said the intruder cracked the computer security of a firm that processes credit card transactions for merchants, but they declined to name the company or provide any other details. The companies said they had turned the matter over to the FBI. About 2.2 million of the affected numbers involved MasterCard customers. "MasterCard's rules require that merchants securely encrypt cardholder information, including card numbers, so that [unauthorized purchases] cannot occur," the company said in a statement yesterday. Visa, which accounted for 3.4 million of the numbers, sought to remind customers that they would be automatically credited for any unauthorized purchases, a policy followed by all three credit card companies. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A27334-2003Feb18.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 03:22:42 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Hacking Democracy Computerized vote-counting machines are sweeping the country. But they can be hacked -- and right now there's no way to be sure they haven't been. By Farhad Manjoo Feb. 20, 2003 | During the past five months, Bev Harris has e-mailed to news organizations a series of reports that detail alarming problems in the high-tech voting machinery currently sweeping its way through American democracy. But almost no one is paying attention. Harris is a literary publicist and writer whose investigations into the secret world of voting equipment firms have led some to call her the Erin Brockovich of elections. Harris has discovered, for example, that Diebold, the company that supplied touch-screen voting machines to Georgia during the 2002 election, made its system's sensitive software files available on a public Internet site. She has reported on the certification process for machines coming onto the market -- revealing that the software code running the equipment is seldom thoroughly reviewed and can often be changed with mysteriously installed "patches" just prior to an election. And in perhaps her most eyebrow-raising coup, she found that Sen. Chuck Hagel, a Nebraska Republican, used to run the company that built most of the machines that count votes in his state -- and that he still owns a stake in the firm. Harris hasn't been alone in making such discoveries. A small group of writers, technologists and activists is working hard to convince elections officials all over the country that their rush to upgrade aging punch-card machines with seemingly more reliable touch-screen systems is dangerous. But so far neither the general public nor elections officials appear too worried. http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2003/02/20/voting_machines/print.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 03:50:26 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Blogging By Wireless Ten O'Clock Tech Blogging By Wireless Arik Hesseldahl, 02.19.03, 10:00 AM ET NEW YORK - Now that Google.com has gotten into the business of Web logs, or "blogs" as they're often called, it means there will likely be a stampede of new bloggers eager to show they have something interesting to say online on a regular basis. But if the prospect of a new crush of bloggers makes you feel a little less on the cutting edge, there's still a way to keep that edge. While most of the world will continue to post their weblog entries from a desktop PC, a new outfit based in Dublin, Ireland, called NewBay Software has designed a service called FoneBlog that could eventually let wireless customers create a blog using only a mobile phone. To be fair, posting to a blog from a wireless device is not terribly new. For example, using Blogger Pro, the enhanced version of Google's Blogger.com service, users can automatically post to a blog via e-mail. Users create an e-mail address associated with their Blogger account that no one else knows, which allows posting from any e-mail address. That means it's possible to write a blog entry from an e-mail-capable mobile phone, wireless PDA or pager. http://forbes.com/home/2003/02/19/cx_ah_0219tentech.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 08:39:33 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Blogs Get Google's Embrace By Cynthia L. Webb washingtonpost.com Staff Writer Tuesday, February 18, 2003; 9:35 AM More evidence that blogging is entering the tech world's mainstream: Search engine giant Google has scooped up Pyra Labs, a small, privately held San Francisco company that makes Blogger, the wildly popular, free blog publishing software. Blogs, short for Web logs, range from online diaries to collections of updated news and links on a variety of subjects. What newsgroups were to the early days of the Internet, blogs are to today's World Wide Web. Media companies like MSNBC are using the formats to relay news and communicate with readers -- and to try and make money. Salon even sells blog software on its site. Pyra Labs's Blogger has more than 1 million registered users. Not shabby, since Pyra was run by just six people, who now will work for Mountain View, Calif.-based Google. The deal, confirmed on the Blogger site, was inked late last week. Last night, Blogger said on its site that "no immediate changes will take place" as a result of the purchase, "except we're working furiously to get more servers in place to handle the extra load this news has caused. Stay tuned." Terms of the deal have not been disclosed. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A24964-2003Feb18.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 17:34:28 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Big Brother is Watching You - and Documenting eBay, ever anxious to up profits, bends over backward to provide data to law enforcement officials By Yuval Dror "I don't know another Web site that has a privacy policy as flexible as eBay's," says Joseph Sullivan. A little bit later, Sullivan explains what he means by the term "flexible." Sullivan is director of the "law enforcement and compliance" department at eBay.com, the largest retailer in the world. Sullivan was speaking to senior representatives of numerous law-enforcement agencies in the United States on the occasion of "Cyber Crime 2003," a conference that was held last week in Connecticut. His lecture was closed to reporters, and for good reason. Haaretz has obtained a recording of the lecture, in which Sullivan tells the audience that eBay is willing to hand over everything it knows about visitors to its Web site that might be of interest to an investigator. All they have to do is ask. "There's no need for a court order," Sullivan said, and related how the company has half a dozen investigators under contract, who scrutinize "suspicious users" and "suspicious behavior." The spirit of cooperation is a function of the patriotism that has surged in the wake of September 11. http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=264863 ------------------------------ From: R Siffredi Subject: T1 - Tip and Ring Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 23:53:13 -0800 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com On a comm T1, you have 4 wires RX tip RX ring TX tip TX ring What are the signals on these wire? Data and clock? What does the tip and ring mean in this case? TIA, i am in confusion. ------------------------------ From: bbg@easylinkgroup.zzn.com (Commander Riker) Subject: Is it Possible to Make an Intercom System With WE Phones? Date: 19 Feb 2003 21:52:27 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ I have a few old Western Electric model 554 wall phones that I would like to make an intetcom system with. In particular I would like to put one model 554 in the house and one in my garage which is set apart from my home. I have the Bell System Service Station manuals but can't find any info on this. I know it is possible. Do I need to get a telephone line simulator, like http://www.teltone.com/telecom_solutions/test_tools/test_tls-4_features.html or can I wire these old phones somehow to work as an intercom system? TIA. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Just to talk from one place to another via intercom is an easy job. Take any two of your phones. Let's assume the wiring is 'standard' red/green. Take the 'red' wire from one phone and wire it in series to the 'green' wire on the other through some small battery, or if you wish, a battery eliminator such as one from Radio Shack. If you want, use a transformer at some low voltage, let's say 3-4.5 volts and maybe a half of an amp. The values don't have to be exact, just very low power. Now take the remaining green wire from the one phone and wire it straight across to the red wire on the other phone. Now when both phones are off hook, you can 'hear; the sidetone or 'battery' and talk to the other end. If either end replaces the receiver -- hangs up -- the circuit is broken and the party still off hook gets dead silence. Of course neither end wants to sit there with a phone to his ear listening for the event he will hear a click and the battery start so there can be a conversation. So what you do is get a couple of little tiny buzzers and put one in each phone. Wire them through the contacts on the 'network' inside the phones so that if either phone goes off hook the battery will have a path to the other phone *through the little buzzer* and back to the originating phone. Now when either end goes off hook, the little buzzer in the opposite phone will make a noise -- a continuing little 'buzz sound' -- which notifies the other end that a caller wants to speak with him. Most of the contacts on the network inside the phone are 'normally open', that is, not making contact until the phone goes off hook. But there is one pair of contacts inside the phone which is just the opposite, normally closed until the phone comes off hook. Use those contacts to silence the buzzer when the phone goes off hook, so that the called party does not get buzzing all the time he is trying to talk on the phone. If you want to get a bit more fancy, get one of those things they use on Christmas trees to make the lights blink on and off every couple seconds. Put this in series with the low voltage buzzer you have installed, and the result will be the buzzer goes buzz-silence-buzz-silence, etc. If you can find one of those old phones that was 'two lines' with a turn button you can instead use the third position on the turn button (depressing it) and use that wire in and out as the contact for the buzzer. The old Harper Theatre in Chicago (HYdePark-3-1717) had a phone like that in the box office, with the other end of the line being in the projectionist booth. The person in the box office took phone calls on the 1717 line on one side of the turn button, had the other side of the turn button for the intercom line, and pressed momentarily on the button to signal the other end to pick up the phone and talk to him. A 'tap' on the line allowed for still another position to listen and talk. The 'stage manager' had an old operator's headset in a jack and he could converse with the projectionist or the box office also. In the 1970's I built a few of those for friends. In fact, I was in an apartment building which had a humongous phone box in the basement, underneath where the building switchboard had been years before. The cable-pairs in that box served the entire neighborhood where I lived. Most of the pairs were in use (we heard dialtone on them when testing them) and a few others had battery (side tone) on them, but three or four were totally cold and dead. By jumping one of the house pairs to one of the idle (and dead) cable pairs and then walking down the street to the other apartment building, using a sounder to 'ring out the other pair' I was able to put an 'intercom arrangement' between someone in one apartment in my building to a person in a similar building down the street. It is absolutely amazing *how far* you can talk or make a buzzer sound with a tiny 1.5 volt triple A battery. Even allowing for some disapation on the line, a little voltage like that can easily go a city block. As a mattter of fact, I used a steady supply of DC power (must be DC, filtered!) of 4.5 volts and around 500 milliamps. You don't need any fancy equipment. You already have the old Western Electric phones and probably have a couple of batteries to wire in series to them. Invest ten dollars or so at Radio Shack and buy yourself a 4.5 or 6 volt DC transformer you plug in the wall so as to give the audio on the two phones a good punch and plug it into the wall in some weatherproof location at either end. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Andrew Subject: Netizen Ronda Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 16:38:34 UTC Organization: North Avenue Trade School Can anyone spot Ronda in this video? http://w3.kill-9.com/peace.mov Andrew [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Are you certain you got that URL correct? The first part w3.kill-9.com only got me the single word 'blah2' in the upper corner of my screen. From there, appending the directory 'peace.mov' got me a little tiny square with three small colored objects in it. No videos, even when I tried appending things like '.htm' and '.html' following that. I thought maybe it was a broken movie, or just slow loading, so I tried it again, and went to get a drink then came back in five minutes. Still nothing. What am I/did I miss in this? 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: 620-330-6774 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 Fax 3: 775-642-0603 Fax 4: 530-309-7234 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: mirror.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. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2003 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 V22 #305 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Feb 21 01:25:13 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h1L6PDA24716; Fri, 21 Feb 2003 01:25:13 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2003 01:25:13 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200302210625.h1L6PDA24716@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #306 TELECOM Digest Fri, 21 Feb 2003 01:25:00 EST Volume 22 : Issue 306 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Microwave Towers (Eric Friedebach) Re: Microwave Towers (Commander Riker) Re: Microwave Towers (Daryl R Gibson) Re: Microwave Towers (Jim Haynes) Re: Microwave Towers (Jim Hopkins) Re: Hang up and Drive (temp7@thewolfden.org) Re: Mainstream Companies and SPAM (Gordon S. Hlavenka) Re: Autovon Dialpad and Precedence Codes (Commander Riker) Re: Autovon Dialpad and Precedence Codes (John R. Covert) Re: Seeking Vonage VoIP Testimonials (John Levine) 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 VIRUSES. 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: Eric Friedebach Subject: Re: Microwave Towers Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 19:23:00 -0600 Organization: Sir Break-Alot School of Dance Reply-To: Eric Friedebach Mark J Cuccia wrote in message news:telecom22.303.1@telecom-digest.org: > In New Orleans, there has been a Bell System microwave tower since > the early 1960's if not earlier from sometime in the 1950's. It has been > located outside of the "Broadmoor" central office building, 3951 > Erato Steet, near South Broad Street. > I don't know who actually "owned" the tower and most of the > antennae ... AT&T Long Lines? Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph? Here is a link to a useful website; the Berkana Wireless Radio Tower Locator: http://www.berkana.com/tower.php3 While the search engine does not allow direct entries of street intersections, etc., they will often show up in the results along with maps. This information comes from the FCC database, so chances are your tower is still in there (and may be some time after the physical site is gone). Eric Friedebach ------------------------------ From: bbg@easylinkgroup.zzn.com (Commander Riker) Subject: Re: Microwave Towers Date: 20 Feb 2003 12:20:19 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ A random thought. Why would AT&T kill the Microwave Towers? In the case of a nuclear attack or terrorist attack, wouldn't it be wise to have the Microwave towers as a backup? Mark J Cuccia wrote in message news:: > In New Orleans, there has been a Bell System microwave tower since the > early 1960's if not earlier from sometime in the 1950's. It has been > located outside of the "Broadmoor" central office building, 3951 Erato > Steet, near South Broad Street. > The tower is of "typical" steel girder structure, similar to oil derrick > or some styles of towers which carry high voltage electric transmission > lines. A tower which has a broad square base, and tapers down (sort of > like a pyramid or obelisk) as it rises skyward. The New Orleans Bell > System microwave tower is painted in alternating horizontal bands of red > and white. I too am very interested in the Microwave Towers. They are a great piece of technology and history. Here is a great site that all of you should check out, if you already have not: "The Microwave Radio and Coaxial Cable Networks of the Bell System" http://www19.addr.com/~longline/ Here is an old Bell System Ad for Microwave, great for your computers wallpaper! http://www19.addr.com/~longline/documents/radio_relay_ad_51.jpg If you fellows find any old towers keep in mind that many times they contain a wealth of goodies inside. I have bumped into a guy that was contracted by American Tower to go up to the mountain tops and "clean" out the buildings and report their condition. He has found great Bell System things such as lineman handsets, oscilloscope, manuals, phones and much more. ------------------------------ From: Daryl R Gibson Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 10:53:12 -0700 Subject: Re: Microwave Towers On 19 Feb 2003 at 23:28, editor@telecom-digest.org wrote: > In New Orleans, there has been a Bell System microwave tower since the > early 1960's if not earlier from sometime in the 1950's. It has been > located outside of the "Broadmoor" central office building, 3951 Erato > Steet, near South Broad Street. > Today, I noticed that *ALL* antennae on the tower are *GONE*!!! > I don't know who actually "owned" the tower and most of the > antennae ... AT&T Long Lines? Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph? AT&T Long Lines (later AT&T Communications) owned most of those towers like you describe. The LOC towers usually looked a bit different, and they tended to use parabolic dishes, not the "sugar scoop" horns used by Long Lines. > And with divestiture, who actually owned it? AT&T? BellSouth? Probably AT&T. > Today, there is mostly fibre-optic cable, so I guess that microwave > for both AT&T and the local BOC has become obsolete. I've heard that > AT&T and/or the incumbent BOCs/LECs have been selling these old towers > to private "holding" or "real estate" type companies, and then > cellular entities (and *various* competing communications entites as > well) would lease space on the tower for their various antennae. But > I've also read that many of these towers are being completely > de-commissioned, dismantled and removed. AT&T sold most of their Long Lines towers to American Tower a couple of years ago. AMT is a tower aggregator. AT&T retained some towers where the adjacent building was used as an AT&T switching center, or POP. At one point, I believe the plan was to use those towers as part of AT&T's project Angel -- fixed wireless -- but that project went by the wayside when Armstrong bought TCI and concentrated on becoming a CLEC. Wireless was later spun off, and the new company killed Angel. Armstrong then sold Broadband to Comcast, and fortunately left AT&T along with the cable systems, having turned AT&T into a shell of its onetime self (admittedly other CEOs also had a hand in this process). AMT has pulled the horns off of most of the towers they still own, except for those that are either in a hard-to-sell area (like the middle of Nevada) or have been resold (they sold many of the towers to private parties who are using them for everything from cell sites to star observatories, to amateur antennas, to private homes -- the supporting building, not the tower, of course). As for the tower you mention, I looked it up in AMT's database, and it's not listed. I imagine it was retained by AT&T (likely) and is now being decommissioned, although it's possible that BellSouth owns it. Some of the ones in downtown areas have been pulled out, but most of them are still there, repurposed in one way or the other. Sad to see those towers lose their horns, or go away altogether, but the bandwidth that microwave provided just can't compete with fiber -- and the current glut of fiber means that in most cases, there's a cheaper, better way to do it. Plus, some of the remaining, decommissioned ones, are being pulled out because of environmentalist lobbying or neighbors' NIMBY (not in my back yard) complaining (one reason why the towers are valuable is it's easier to repurpose one than to build another one, with current NIMBY concerns and zoning laws). In your own case, if they pull it down, it's possibly for an expansion of the CO. There are a bunch of sub-groups that are interested in this sort of thing. Coldwarcomms@yahoogroups.com often discusses the old Long Lines sites (join and read back messages at groups.yahoo.com). There are also several great sites that deal with this, as well. Most are linked from my site, http://www.drgibson.com/towers Daryl ---------------------------------------------------------------- "As you ramble through life, brother, no matter what your goal, keep your eye upon the doughnut, and not upon the hole" --Dr. Murray Banks, quoting a menu ---------------------------------------------------------------- http://www.drgibson.com http://www.salesstar.com Personal Motivation and Positive Attitude ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Microwave Towers Reply-To: jhaynes@alumni.uark.edu Organization: University of Arkansas Alumni From: haynes@alumni.uark.edu (Jim Haynes) Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 17:54:59 GMT I have driven past any number of telephone offices with steel towers bereft of microwave horns. As you noted, some real estate operators are buying up microwave sites with their towers. Some of them they can lease to cellphone operators and other mobile radio users such as police/fire. Others are in out-of-the-way places where there is no market for them except perhaps amateur radio; and I have heard of some ham repeater clubs acquiring a few of these sites. ------------------------------ From: Jim Hopkins Subject: Re: Microwave Towers Organization: Prodigy Internet http://www.prodigy.com Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 23:27:16 GMT > I still think of that old microwave tower as a "landmark". I hope that it > isn't to be dismantled and removed, but from what I saw this morning, I'm > afraid that its fate is sealed! :( > Mark J. Cuccia > New Orleans LA It probably is as good as gone. It's hard to talk the budget people into spending money to paint and light it when there's no revenue coming in from it. I worked for an RBOC in the mid 1990's when cellular service began to eclipse IMTS mobile and fiber cable replaced the microwave routes. It was almost impossible to get upper management to relinquish the mobile licenses (they thought that the sliver of 152 and 454 MHz spectrum was invaluable - as far as I know there's still nothing there besides a few paging transmitters) and equally hard to get them to cough up money to maintain the radios and towers. Then, once the decision was made to get out of radio, someone came up with the bright idea of selling all the towers as a package, even though a large percentage of them were out in the middle of nowhere. I left before it finally got resolved but I've seen several of the ones I was familiar with dismantled in the past years, so I'm guessing that deal fell through also. Jim Hopkins ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 22:42:20 -0600 From: temp7@thewolfden.org Subject: Re: Hang up and Drive > Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 20:35:35 -0500 > From: Monty Solomon > Subject: Hang up and Drive > SOUND MIND > By Carey Goldberg, Globe Staff, 2/18/2003 > You know it's dangerous, but you do it anyway. The phone rings as you're > tooling down the expressway, or you squeeze in a quick dial while stopped > at a light and then start to chat as you drive on. No problem. You're > still aware of the road, still a top-flight driver. > The problem is, you're not. And the limits of your brain are the > reason why. I think we need to ban cellphones when driving. In fact, I also think we should ban billboards. I don't know how many times I've been reading some really humorous new billboard and almost hit the car in front of me. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 12:29:12 -0600 From: Gordon S. Hlavenka Reply-To: nospam@crashelex.com Organization: Crash Electronics, Inc. Subject: Re: Mainstream Companies and SPAM Phil Earnhardt wrote: > SPAM used to promote dubious products is bad, but SPAM used to promote > legitimate products is equally distateful. It leads consumers to think > that the manufacturers of those products are sanctioning the use of > SPAM to promote their sale. It creates distrust of the particular > manufacturer. > SPAM is just plain bad for business. I used GoToMyPC when they were in their free beta phase. I liked it. I registered every PC I sold as a GoToMyPC client, so I could do remote maintenance. Unfortunately, more than half of my service calls related to inability to connect to the internet :-) but aside from that it was pretty neat stuff. But when they took the product "live" the pay structure was no good; neither the "personal" nor the "business" package fit my needs. Now, GoToMyPC accounts for a substantial amount of the spam I receive and intrusive banner ads I see. Consequently, I wouldn't buy their product for free. OT (but related): The same thing goes for the companies that advertise on an extra flap which folds over the Chicago Tribune Sunday funnies. It's ATTACHED to the first page, it gets in the way, and you can't tear it off without risking the funnies themselves. I'm keeping a list. (I decided to Bcc this Telecom Digest post to the appropriate people at the Tribune and GoToMyPC as well; they should know how well their advertising is working...) Gordon S. Hlavenka www.crashelex.com nospam@crashelex.com Grammar and spelling flames welcome. Yes, that's really my email address. Don't change it. ------------------------------ From: bbg@easylinkgroup.zzn.com (Commander Riker) Subject: Re: Autovon Dialpad and Precedence Codes (was: Code to Dial) Date: 19 Feb 2003 22:02:31 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Gary, Thank you very much for the insight. It is very much appreciated! I may decide to grab an Autovon phone just to have a part of history. The Bell System sure inovated some great things! Gary Novosielski wrote in message news:: > Commander Riker wrote in message > news:telecom22.294.6@telecom-digest.org: >> Autovon legends: >> FO = Flash Override >> F = Flash >> I = Immediate >> P = Priority >> I am not sure if they would work on normal lines in my area, perhaps I >> will have to grab an AUTOVON off of Ebay the next time I see one or I >> supose I could make a tone generator and check it out my area first >> before purchasing a phone, but I think AUTOVON was designed specificly >> for the military lines. > Quite true. > And those designations of precedence levels corresponded to those that were > (and still may be) in use throughout the US, Allied, and NATO forces for all > forms of message traffic. In teletype or morse code messages it was a > one-letter code immediately before the date-time group of the message. The > codes for US forces were: > R = Routine (an Autovon call where nobody dialed a precedence code would > be Routine by default). > P = Priority; used for messages requiring precedence over routine, but > not justifying a higher code. This would (i.e., should) > typically be the highest code ever used for purely > administrative (non-operational) messages. > O = Immediate (called "Operational Immediate" by NATO forces); this was > to be used only for urgent orders affecting current field operations. > Z = Flash; reserved for initial enemy contact messages and combat orders > of extreme urgency. > Gary ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 13:17:21 EST From: John R. Covert Subject: Re: Autovon Dialpad and Precedence Codes The buttons were labelled "P" "I" "F" and "FO", but only those precedences authorized for the specific station would actually work. From a 1971 "Official Global Autovon Telephone Directory" which has no classification (not even "For Official Use Only"): NATIONAL COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM VOICE PRECEDENCE SYSTEM CHART FLASH Transmission Pre-emption Has precedence over any other telephonic call of lower precedence. Pre-empts lower precedence calls. May be pre-empted by the application of the FLASH OVERRIDE capability available to: (1) The President of the United States, Secretary of Defense and Joint Chiefs of Staff; (2) Commanders of unified and specified commands when declaring either Defense Condition One or Defense Emergency; (3) CINCNORAD when declaring either Defense Condition One or Air Defense Emergency and other national authorities as the President may authorize. Application Flash precedence is reserved generally for telephone calls pertaining to: (1) Command and control of military forces essential to defense and retaliation; (2) Critical intelligence essential to national survival; (3) Conduct of diplomatic negotiations critical to the arresting or limiting of hostilities; (4) Dissemination of critical civil alert information essential to national survival; (5) Continuity of Federal Government functions essential to national survival; (6) Fulfillment of critical United States internal secunty functions essential to national survival; (7) Catastrophic events of national or international significance. IMMEDIATE Transmission Pre-emption Has precedence over any other telephonic call of lower precedence. Pre-empts lower precedence calls. Application Immediate precedence is reserved generally for telephone calls pertaining to: (1) Situations which gravely affect the security of national and allied f6rces; (2) Reconstitution of forces in a post-attack period; (3) Intelligence essential to national security; (4) Conduct of diplomatic negotiations to reduce or limit the threat of war; (5) Implementation of Federal Government actions essential to national survival; (6) Situations which gravely affect the internal security of the United States; (7) Civil Defense actions concerning direction of our population and their survival; (8) Disasters or events of extensive seriousness having an immediate and detrimental effect on the welfare of the population; (9) Vital information having an immediate effect on aircraft, spacecraft, or missile operations. PRIORITY Transmission Pre-Emption Has precedence over any other telephonic call of lower precedence. Pre-empts lower precedence calls. Application Priority precedence is reserved generally for telephone calls requiring expeditious action by called parties and/or furnishing essential information for the conduct of government operations. ROUTINE Transmission Pre-emption Has no precedence over any other call and is handled sequentially as placed by the calling party. No pre-empt. Application Routine precedence designation applies to those official government communications which require rapid transmission by telephonic means but do not require preferential handling. ------------------------------ From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) To: ead@ixian.com Subject: Re: Seeking Vonage VoIP Testimonials Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2003 00:00:00 EST > Is anyone using Vonage's VoIP service? Do you love it? Do you hate > it? Would you like to love it, but several quirks have you holding > back the roses? I have it and am very favorably impressed. At home I run it over a T1, where it not surprisingly works great, but I just spent a few days at my sister's house where she has DSL and it worked fine there, too. They ship you a preconfigured Cisco ATA-186. You plug it into your network router or hub, and plug a phone into it. No setup is needed, it checks in with headquarters and configures itself. Even when I moved it from my network to hers (which Vonage specifically says is fine), it took maybe 15 seconds to set itself up. Once it's set up, the phone is a phone. You dial phone calls using the New York City dialing plan, 1+10 for everything. It includes CLID, call forwarding, voice mail, all the usual junk. The phone has a regular phone number which can be in any of a large number of places where Vonage has agreements with CLECs, and need not be anywhere near your physical location. (Indeed, if you're in one of the 25 states where they don't have a CLEC, you can't get a local number.) If Vonage can assign you a number in your rate center, you can often port an existing number instead. The plan I have is $26 for unlimited incoming calls, unlimited "local" outgoing for a much larger local area than my regular phone offers, and 500 bundled outgoing minutes in the US and Canada. For $40 you can get unlimited calls to the US and Canada. International rates are low, 5 or 6 cents to most of Europe and Australia. The call quality is quite good. There's more latency than on a regular phone call, but I don't notice it except when I call the POTS phone across the room to demonstrate. (At my sister's, the guys who own the local phone company were impressed when I showed them the Phone from Hell That Pays No Taxes (yet), but the pain was eased by the fact that they make more from DSL lines than from phone lines.) When your net connection gets congested the quality goes down, but is never any worse than a typical cell connection and usually better. They tell you not to use it as your only phone. Unless you have a UPS, it'll stop working if the 110V power goes out. There's no 911 service, at least partly because they have no idea where your phone is physically located. I have a few minor quibbles. Regular phone calls are dialed 7D around here, so it'd be nice if Vonage would permit that. Vonage will sell you multiple phone numbers so you can have local numbers in multiple places, but they don't do distinctive ring so you can't tell which number someone called. The Cisco box is only designed to power a single phone. It'd probably work for two or three but they make no promises, so if you have your house wired with two-line phones, you probably shouldn't plan to unplug line 2 at the network interface and connect it to the Cisco instead. (I fake it by connecting a cordless phone to the Cisco.) But if you make a lot of calls, or you want a local number in a faraway place, it's a very good deal. 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 ------------------------------ 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: 620-330-6774 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 Fax 3: 775-642-0603 Fax 4: 530-309-7234 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: mirror.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. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2003 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 V22 #306 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Feb 21 19:24:26 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h1M0OPY28963; Fri, 21 Feb 2003 19:24:26 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2003 19:24:26 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200302220024.h1M0OPY28963@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #307 TELECOM Digest Fri, 21 Feb 2003 17:24:00 EST Volume 22 : Issue 307 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: The Perils of E-Mail (Gail M. Hall) Re: Advice Needed - Cell Service in Beijing, China (Alan Burkitt-Gray) Re: Mainstream Companies and SPAM (Phil Earnhardt) Re: Mainstream Companies and SPAM (Richard D G Cox) How to Set Up PPP TCP/IP Connection via GPRS Modem Driven by RS232 (Magis) Helpful Telco Numbers Used for Troubleshooting (Reverend Dr. Benrand Jr.) Re: T1 - Tip and Ring (Gordon S. Hlavenka) Re: Hang up and Drive (John Higdon) Re: Seeking Vonage VoIP Testimonials (Hank Karl) Re: Dialogic Help (Gerry Belanger) Re: Bill Would Ban Spam E-Mail in California (Fritz Whittington) Re: Code to Dial When Exchange is Busy - Bell System Codes (Command Riker) FCC Phone Decision Rings In The Old (Eric Friedebach) Re: Net Blocking Threatens Legitimate Sites (Herb Stein) Re: Microwave Towers (Danny Burstein) 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 VIRUSES. 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: Gail M. Hall Subject: Re: The Perils of E-Mail Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 00:07:50 -0500 Reply-To: gmhall@apk.net On Tue, 18 Feb 2003 20:14:07 GMT, in comp.dcom.telecom , Barry Margolin wrote: > In article , Monty Solomon > wrote: >> Sure, 2002 was the Year of Corporate Scandal. But really it wouldn't >> be fair to give all the credit to grasping, conniving executives and >> malevolent, sneaky bookkeepers. No, as those corporate honchos offer >> their plea bargains, they'll all be able to name an accomplice: >> e-mail. > Isn't this putting the cart before the horse? If they weren't doing > anything wrong, there wouldn't have been anything incriminating in the > email. Instead of sending employees to email training sessions, they > should be sending executives to ethical training sessions. My concern about using E-mail "evidence" is the ease with which such things as dates and mail headers can be changed with computer software. It could be easy to forge someone's address in an e-mail to put the blame on someone that the real "perp" has something against. I've read about such cases already where someone forged another employee's address in e-mail and got that person fired. It took a long time for the victim to get the job back and a law suit against the company that fired the victim. This has its parellels in telephone use because one well known way of getting confidential information from a company is to call someone in the company and pose as someone who has a right to the information. Good con artists have been able to get hold of confidential information that way for years. > We've all heard the admonition about not putting anything in email > that you wouldn't want published in the paper. That's fine advice for > private, personal information that might be embarassing. It's also a > good idea for trade secrets that you don't want to escape to your > competitors. But in the case of corporate malfeasance and other > criminal behaviors, we should be more concerned with stopping the > behavior in the first place, not hiding the evidence. It is also important to make sure the "evidence" is true and not manufactured to frame someone. One of the big problems with using fax machines to send information or orders is that after you dial a number (er, I mean punch in a number!) and get another fax machine, you don't have any real feedback to be sure you are really calling the party you intended to. The fact that some companies include a "warning" on their cover sheet or letter saying something like, "If you are not the intended recipient of this message, you must destroy this message and let us know the message was sent to the wrong number." Sheesh! That is an admission right there that people can't be absolutely certain that a fax is sent to the right party. Yet lawyers and doctors continue to use faxes every day to send confidential client information. I used to send documents to doctors' offices by computer and modem, and they had their "host" answering my call. I could see on my screen that I had reached the intended office. And I had to punch in my password to gain entry to their system. The communication went from my machine to their machine through telephone lines. There weren't a lot of "hops" between me and them as there would be on the Internet. I really am sorry that since the WWW has come into wide use that the older technology using computer-to-computer one-on-one traveling over one phone line has been largely abandoned. Gail in Ohio USA ------------------------------ From: Alan Burkitt-Gray Subject: Re: Advice Needed - Cell Service in Beijing, China Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 13:07:56 -0000 usenetspamtrap+cdt@newsguy.com asked: "I would *like* to have one cell phone that worked both in the U.S. (Colorado) as well as in China (e.g., AT&T with a smart chip or whatever they call it, or perhaps some GSM multi-mode phone?). However, having two service providers (one in US, one in China, with two numbers) would be OK." There's lots of GSM in China, from China Mobile and China Unicom, and China Unicom also has a CDMA network (though I don't know if it roams to and from CDMA networks in the US). GSM roams well. I've been in the Hyatt Grand Central in New York calling a Chinese telecoms analyst, who was at a conference in the same hotel, on her Chinese GSM number, and got connected in seconds. And called a China Unicom exec on his GSM number, to find he was in a taxi in London, only a few hundred yards from me. See http://www.gsmworld.com/roaming/index.shtml for more on roaming. If you want to save money on phones, you could get a triple-band GSM phone (working on 1900 MHz in the US, 900 and 1800 MHz in China) and swap SIM cards according to where you are. Otherwise you and people calling you would have to pay hefty international roaming costs. Alan Burkitt-Gray Editor, Global Telecoms Business Euromoney Institutional Investor plc, Nestor House, Playhouse Yard, London EC4V 5EX, UK tel +44 20 7779 8518 fax +44 20 7779 8248 e-mail aburkitt@euromoneyplc.com www.globaltelecomsbusiness.com Global Telecoms Business is the official publication for the TeleManagement Forum's TM World conference and exhibition in Nice, France, May 19-22 2003 ------------------------------ From: Phil Earnhardt Subject: Re: Mainstream Companies and SPAM Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 08:58:21 -0700 Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com On Thu, 20 Feb 2003 14:58:46 GMT, barmar wrote: >> If Pfizer had an aggressive program for dealing with the venders who >> were [ab]using e-mail to sell Viagra, then there would be far less >> likelihood that an e-mail containing that word to be flagged as SPAM. >> Just like protecting their trademarks from abuse, companies have a >> duty to protect themselves from resellers using such "scorched earth" >> marketing techniques to promote their product. > I don't think most of these spammers are marketing Viagra. They're selling > snake-oil that claims to be as good as Viagra. Pfizer might be able to go > after them for trademark violation, but they're not Pfizer's real vendors > so they can't find them without lots of investigation. I looked through my 96MB-or-so of SPAM from the last 3 months. Grepping for viagra in those files yielded 417 lines of matches. That comes out to somewhere around 100 e-mail spams. I looked at a small sample; about half were promoting some viagra-like product; about half were promoting the real thing. AFAICT, Pfizer has done absolutely nothing about either group. >> SPAM used to promote dubious products is bad, but SPAM used to promote >> legitimate products is equally distateful. It leads consumers to think >> that the manufacturers of those products are sanctioning the use of >> SPAM to promote their sale. It creates distrust of the particular >> manufacturer. This applies to many products that don't have the copycat problems above. The manufacturers of laser printer and copier toner cartridges must be aware of the spammers regularly selling their product. Again, AFAICT, they have done nothing to get these people to stop selling their product. Hewlett-Packard uses a company called "m0.net" to send out newsletters about HP products. But I do not have a business relationship with HP. And m0.net doesn't publish telephone contact information. The messages never contained any HP contact information, either. This is SPAM, and it certainly appears to be sanctioned by HP. [Note: I'm not trying to single out HP here; there are many companies that are doing such things. It's just one company that has spammed me personally. OTOH, if anyone at HP is reading this and can tell me more about these spams from m0.net, I'd appreciate it.] Is everyone in the community familiar with the Boulder Pledge? You can see a copy at http://www.panix.com/~tbetz/boulder.shtml > Barry Margolin, barry.margolin@level3.com phil ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2003 11:56:56 GMT From: Richard D G Cox Subject: Re: Mainstream Companies and SPAM Reply-To: nospam@numbering.com Organization: Mandarin Technology Limited On Thu, 20 Feb 2003 18:29 (UT) Gordon S. Hlavenka wrote: >> SPAM used to promote dubious products is bad Hormel would probably agree with you. I believe they own the trademark "SPAM" and seem to be content with the word having been repurposed to refer to Unsolicited Bulk Email. There's a general consensus that as the trademark is the word in all-upper-case, when we use the word to refer to UBE, we write it as "spam" or "Spam". But *never* as "SPAM"! Richard Cox [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Have you seen the television commercial for the real Spam product? It is sort of cute. A family is sitting at the table eating dinner. The woman speaks up and says "I am still hungry, I want more SPAM!" (She literally screams at the people at the table, and the camera recording it. "SPAM! I WANT MORE SPAM!!" Her face is sort of contorted and she continues to say 'SPAM! SPAM!' as the camera closes in on her angry face and her open mouth saying 'SPAM!' After she has said that word a few times getting more angry as she says it, suddenly a *huge truck* crashes through the side of the house, runs over the family computer which is sitting nearby (apparently putting it out of order in the process) and dumps a big load of the little metal cans of spam (the meat product) on her plate. Her husband or some person nearby speaks up and says 'here it is, that delicious meal you like so much.' Then he says something about Hormel Meat Company and that's the end of the commercial. Sort of witty, fun to watch. PAT] ------------------------------ From: sirmo@seeben.com (Luc MAGIS) Subject: How to Set Up PPP TCP/IP Connection via GPRS Modem Driven by RS232? Date: 21 Feb 2003 05:18:35 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ I'm new in this newsgroup and I want to know if someone had experience in GPRS Modem and can give we some interesting adresses. Thanks in advance. ------------------------------ From: Reverend Dr. Benrand Jr. Subject: Helpful Telco Numbers Used For Troubleshooting Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2003 08:35:52 -0500 Organization: Michigan State University I am looking for numbers that can be used on a regular telco system to troubleshoot from a local location rather than traveling to a site. Sort of a newbie here with this stuff, but we have remote power reset sites and it is inconvenient to do traveling when a problem could be diagnosed locally, obviously. I have searched on the web for helpful codes and what I get is hacking info, I don't really need that, but verifying that a line is active would be helpful. TIA ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2003 09:01:14 -0600 From: Gordon S. Hlavenka Reply-To: nospam@crashelex.com Organization: Crash Electronics, Inc. Subject: Re: T1 - Tip and Ring R Siffredi wrote: > On a comm T1, you have 4 wires > RX tip > RX ring > TX tip > TX ring > What are the signals on these wire? Data and clock? What does the tip > and ring mean in this case? Since a T1 is bipolar data, there is no "polarity" to it. The two "RX" leads are going to be data towards you, and the two "TX" leads are data going away from you. There is no "clock and data" as the receiver locks onto the incoming data and recovers the clock from it. Data is formatted so that pulses come frequently enough to maintain lock. On a T1, a "1" is indicated by the presence of a pulse in the time slot, and a zero by the absence of a pulse in a time slot. Every pulse will be the opposite polarity of the previous pulse. To make sure there are enough pulses, long strings of zeroes are munged according to a formula. I think T1 uses "B3ZS" which means that if there are four zeroes in a row, the fourth one will be replaced by a "bipolar violation" (no psych jokes, please :-) -- a pulse with the same polarity as the previous pulse. The receiver is smart enough to call this BPV a zero. So: (Monospaced font, please...) Data: 1100101011110100000000000101011010 T1: ^v--^-v-^v^v-^---^---^---v-^-v^-v- or: v^--v-^-v^v^-v---v---v---^-v-^v-^- The polarity is irrelevant. Actually, if you read Tip-to-ground you'll see one of those patterns, and Ring-to-ground you'll see the other. However, since it's a balanced signal reading anything "to ground" is not recommended. Reading Tip-to-Ring you'll see 1.8v pulses, and which pattern you'll see depends on which way you hook up the leads. The following would be a true bipolar violation and would trip an error indication on a panel someplace: ^v--^-v-^-^-v^--v On the equipment I worked on (20 years ago) a single BPV or bit error (on terrestrial links, anyway) meant we had to go fix something. Frames of T1 data include a sync sequence at the start and a checksum at the end. The higher speed (DS-3) equipment I worked on used B8ZS; same concept, but the PLL in the receiver can tolerate longer strings of zeroes. Before transmission, the data is "scrambled", I think by XORing it with a pseudorandom bit sequence. This is not for security, just to reduce the number of BxZS substitutions required. An idle link may just spit bazillions (technical term) of zeroes and it's better to do as few substitutions as possible. Obviously things get "descrambled" at the other end. As far as "tip" and "ring" -- I think these are just legacy names to keep the wiring straight. Even though the signal is balanced and the polarity of the pulses doesn't matter, it's Good Practice(TM) not to cross your pairs. I suppose it's even Better Practice(TM) to have tip and ring in the appropriate places in any bantam (does anybody use 310 for T1?) patch panels, although technically I don't think it matters. Gordon S. Hlavenka www.crashelex.com nospam@crashelex.com Grammar and spelling flames welcome. Yes, that's really my email address. Don't change it. ------------------------------ From: John Higdon Subject: Re: Hang up and Drive Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2003 07:27:56 -0800 In article , temp7@thewolfden.org wrote: > I think we need to ban cellphones when driving. > In fact, I also think we should ban billboards. I don't know how many > times I've been reading some really humorous new billboard and almost hit > the car in front of me. Hmm ... I've never had a problem with either one. Maybe we ought to simply ban certain drivers. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | Anytown, USA | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ From: Hank Karl Subject: Re: Seeking Vonage VoIP Testimonials Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2003 12:11:53 -0500 Organization: NETPLEX Internet Services - http://www.ntplx.net/ I tried Vonage on my ADSL (768K/128K), and found the perceived voice quality was as good (or better) than toll calls. However, data traffic interfered with voice (if I browsed to the wrong web page, I'd miss a bit of what the person on the far-end said). And once that delay occurred, it persisted. My feeling is that Vonage is good, but your ISP and type of connection are also important. Since I get voice calls for 3.9 cents/min, it wasn't worth $40/month. If you use a lot of minutes to the same people, look into free world dialup at http://www.freeworldialup.com/. This is strictly net to net calling (not net to phone). And its free. However, you do need an internet connection and some hardware (minimum is a PC, mic and speaker, and 28.8K modem) Hank On Wed, 19 Feb 2003 10:27:37 -0800, Eric De Mund wrote: > People, > Is anyone using Vonage's VoIP service? Do you love it? Do you hate it? > Would you like to love it, but several quirks have you holding back the > roses? > After reading: > > How a downed tree simplified my life, by Lincoln D. Stein > http://www.newarchitectmag.com/documents/s=7802/na0203h/index.html > > Voice Over IP, by Christopher Allbritton > http://popularmechanics.com/technology/telecom/2003/2/voice_over_ip/ > in New Architect and Popular Mechanics, respectively, my curiosity about > Vonage's VoIP service is really piqued. On paper, the plan for $40/month > that gets you unlimited local and long-distance calling looks really > good. > Regards, > Eric De Mund | Ixian Systems, Inc. | 53 49 B2 23 AF 6C 20 81 > http://www.ixian.com/ead/ | Mountain View, CA | ED DD 4C 81 AA C9 D1 A5 Hank Karl Eastern Regional Manager +1 (203)207-0047 hank@Nine-9s.com www.nine-9s.com Representing: http://www.telesoft-intl.com/ ISDN, T1 RBS, E1 R2 CAS, Frame Relay, ML-PPP, X.25, ... http://www.agoralabs.com/ elemedia H.323, Video Codecs SIP -- watch this space! ------------------------------ From: glb1202@cognitronics.com (Gerry Belanger) Subject: Re: Dialogic Help Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 17:29:43 GMT Organization: none In article , vances@motivity.ca (Vance Shipley) wrote: > You can get all the manuals and current drivers, libraries and includes at: > http://support.dialogic.com > -Vance Unless your board has been "orphaned" like the V/S24T1 and V/S30E1. Anyone need them? Gerry Belanger, Danbury, CT glb1202@cognitronics.com, until the spammers get there. ------------------------------ From: Fritz Whittington Subject: Re: Bill Would Ban Spam E-Mail in California Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 18:44:07 GMT Organization: AT&T Worldnet Monty Solomon wrote: > Under proposal, people could sue for $500 per violation. Some doubt > law would stem tide. > By Nancy Vogel > LA Times Staff Writer > SACRAMENTO -- The unwanted, sometimes lurid advertisements unleashed > on computer users -- e-mail spam -- would be banned under a new bill > in the Legislature. > The bill would make it a crime to send unsolicited commercial e-mails > from California or to an e-mail address in the state. I think it would be quite interesting to see how the California legislature defines "an e-mail address in[side] the state [of California]." Not to mention how they can determine that the spam was sent from California. In ways that will stand up in courts, of course. ------------------------------ From: bbg@easylinkgroup.zzn.com (Commander Riker) Subject: Re: Code to Dial When Exchange is Busy - Bell System Codes Date: 20 Feb 2003 12:15:31 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ I found some interesting AUTOVON documents over at this site, http://www19.addr.com/~longline/documents/index.html Go down the page a bit and you will see a title called, "System Configuration" You will then have two links from the archives of the Defense Information Systems Agency, binder titled "AUTOVON". kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote in message news:: > In article , wrote: >> Commander Riker wrote: >>> I am not sure if they would work on normal lines in my area, perhaps I >>> will have to grab an AUTOVON off of Ebay the next time I see one or I >>> supose I could make a tone generator and check it out my area first >>> before purchasing a phone, but I think AUTOVON was designed specificly >>> for the military lines. >> Those AUTOVON tones would mean nothing to your local switching office. > An Autovon phone will have the 12 standard DTMF tones, plus the four > lettered ones. The four lettered ones will be ignored by the local exchange. > Years and years ago, the Sprint network used to use the four lettered tones > for internal signalling, but that was back when everything was in-band. >> Keep in mind folks what John Higdon said: any call beyond the local "must >> carry" area of your local exchange carrier, goes over the interexchange >> carrier (IXC) that *you* designate, either through presubscription or my >> using a company access code. And, the IXC doesn't even "see" your "Touch >> Tone" (DTMF) origination tones. > Right, all the tones get dealt with by the local exchange. > scott > "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." ------------------------------ From: Eric Friedebach Subject: FCC Phone Decision Rings In The Old Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 14:50:56 -0600 Organization: Sir Break-Alot School of Dance Reply-To: Eric Friedebach Forbes.com staff, 02.20.03, 12:18 PM ET NEW YORK - Everybody got half a loaf, or maybe half a dial tone. The U.S. Federal Communications Commission voted Thursday to relax rules that require the four regional Bell companies to lease part of their networks to rivals at below-market rates. Unfortunately, it was not the part that the companies had lobbied hardest for deregulating and not anything close to what the agency's own chairman, Michael Powell, had sought. http://www.forbes.com/2003/02/20/cx_vc_0220phone.html Eric Friedebach ------------------------------ From: Herb Stein Subject: Re: Net Blocking Threatens Legitimate Sites Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 19:03:16 -0600 Monty Solomon wrote in message news:telecom22.304.2@telecom-digest.org: > By Declan McCullagh > Staff Writer, CNET News.com > Government efforts to block offensive Web sites are technically > problematic and legally worrisome, a new study says. > The study from Harvard University's Berkman Center highlights how > modern Web standards have permitted thousands of domain names to > share one Internet address. It concludes that instead of precisely > targeting only objectionable sites, attempts to restrict Internet > addresses with pornographic, political or gambling-related content > inevitably make legitimate sites unreachable too. > "The numbers are staggeringly high," said Ben Edelman, a student > fellow at the Berkman Center and author of the report. "According to > my results, two-thirds of sites are hosted on Web servers with 50 or > more domain names." > The research comes as state and national governments weigh methods to > restrict Web sites that may be legal in other jurisdictions but not > theirs. > http://news.com.com/2100-1023-985216.html Blocking is ludicrous in the first place, but doing so by IP address is even dumber. Virtual hosting is a feature, not a bug. If you have a problem with your children accessing "bad" places, that is clearly a parental problem. Please don't make it mine. Technology can not solve this problem. Herb Stein The Herb Stein Group www.herbstein.com herb@herbstein.com 314 952-4601 ------------------------------ From: Danny Burstein Subject: Re: Microwave Towers Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2003 06:40:29 UTC Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC [ lots snipped throughout ] In Daryl R Gibson writes: > On 19 Feb 2003 at 23:28, Mark Cuccia wrote: >> Today, I noticed that *ALL* antennae on the tower are *GONE*!!! >> I've also read that many of these towers are being completely >> de-commissioned, dismantled and removed. > Sad to see those towers lose their horns, or go away altogether, but > the bandwidth that microwave provided just can't compete with fiber -- > cheaper, better way to do it. Plus, some of the remaining, > decommissioned ones, are being pulled out because of environmentalist > lobbying or neighbors' NIMBY (not in my back yard) complaining (one We here in the NYC area are fortunate to have a key bit of radio history just across the river in Alpine, NJ. The Armstrong Tower, while derided by its new yuppy neighbors, still stands in its original location about five miles northwest of the George Washington Bridge. And just like its neighbor, the Little Red Lighthouse, it's been overshadowed by newer and bigger and flashier sites and almost forgotten. And also just like the Little Red Lighthouse, it was very, very, proud to serve when needed. (After the destruction of the WTC, many transmitters were *quickly* installed on it). For some pictures (jpg, about 120k apiece) :: http://www.panix.com/~dannyb/images/alpine-160.jpg http://www.panix.com/~dannyb/images/alpine-170.jpg (some others are at alpine-110 -> alpine-150) _____________________________________________________ Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key dannyb@panix.com [to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded] ------------------------------ 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: 620-330-6774 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 Fax 3: 775-642-0603 Fax 4: 530-309-7234 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: mirror.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. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2003 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 V22 #307 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat Feb 22 18:41:54 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h1MNfrl01891; Sat, 22 Feb 2003 18:41:54 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 22 Feb 2003 18:41:54 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200302222341.h1MNfrl01891@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #308 TELECOM Digest Sat, 22 Feb 2003 18:42:00 EST Volume 22 : Issue 308 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Microwave Towers and Satellite Antennas (Neal McLain) Re: Net Blocking Threatens Legitimate Sites (Mark Crispin) 56kbps and PCM Channels (Alan Fowler) Re: Helpful Telco Numbers Used for Troubleshooting (Chuk Gleason) Re: Seeking Vonage VoIP Testimonials (John) Unlimited Free Long Distance Phone Call (John) Microsoft Windows Rights Mngt Services Windows Server 2003 (Monty Solomon) Re: Mainstream Companies and SPAM (Gail M. Hall) "Reverse Slamming": Unauthorized PIC Freezes (Bob K) Re: The Perils of Email (Charles B. Wilber) Re: E.164 and Telephone Number Display Formats (Phil McKerracher) Last Laugh! "Thank You For Calling the War Sign-Up Line" (Lauren Weinstein) 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 VIRUSES. 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, 21 Feb 2003 20:15:59 -0700 From: Neal McLain Reply-To: nmclain@annsgarden.com Organization: Ann's Garden Subject: Microwave Towers and Satellite Antennas Daryl R Gibson wrote: > Sad to see those towers lose their horns, or go away > altogether, but the bandwidth that microwave provided just > can't compete with fiber -- and the current glut of fiber means > that in most cases, there's a cheaper, better way to do it. A further reason for the demise of microwave towers relates to the rise of C-Band satellite antennas for television signal distribution. Two frequency bands commonly used for terrestrial microwave transmission were (and still are): 4-GHz band (3.7-4.2 GHz) 6-GHz band (5.9-6.4 GHz) When the FCC first authorized the use of geostationary satellites for communications, it apparently perceived the service as a sort of long-distance substitute for terrestrial point-to-point microwave systems. Consequently, it assigned those same two frequency bands to the satellite service: 6-GHz for uplink and 4-GHz for downlink. Consistent with this perception, the FCC imposed technical requirements on all ground-based satellite antennas, both transmit and receive, to prevent interference to or from existing terrestrial microwave antennas: - Satellite antennas had to meet technical specifications concerning beamwidth, gain, and sidelobe performance. - They had to be licensed by the FCC, even if they were used for receive-only service. - As part of the licensing procedure, they were subject to the "frequency coordination" process. Under this process, the license application had to include a technical study showing that the proposed antenna would not cause interference to, or receive interference from, any existing terrestrial microwave antenna using the same frequencies. Several companies went into the business of performing satellite frequency-coordination studies. Some of the early coordination studies look quaintly primitive today: an "interference map" was printed on a large sheet of semi-transparent paper so that it could be laid over a USGS 7.5-minute quad map. Since the printers of the day could only print text, interference data was shown as text numerals scattered across the map. Terrestrial microwave beams stood out clearly as strings of numerals shooting across the map. One of the largest frequency-coordination firms was ComSearch, originally in Dallas, now in Virginia's DC suburbs. ComSearch still does frequency coordination studies for satellite ground stations; see . In 1975, HBO launched its signal on a geostationary communications satellite for cable TV operators nationwide. Within a year or so, two other companies followed suit: - Ted Turner's Turner Communications Group launched the signal of Atlanta UHF station WTCG (now TBS Superstation). - Pat Robertson's Christian Broadcasting Network launched its CBN network feed (which, after morphing several times, is now ABC Family). Both of these services were quickly accepted by cable operators. They offered operators something not available from any other source: basic-tier programming aimed at a national audience. Of course, cable operators had to build receiving antennas to get these new services. Under FCC rules in force at the time, they had to go through the whole frequency-coordination and licensing procedure. In order to meet the technical requirements, these antennas generally used 10-meter reflectors installed on large concrete foundations. Cable operators installed a lot of them during 1975-77. Because of the cost of 10-meter antennas, cable operators petitioned the FCC to have the rules changed to allow smaller antennas, and within a few years, the FCC relaxed the technical requirements so that antennas as small as five meters could be used. But FCC still had to protect the existing terrestrial microwave service, so it didn't eliminate the frequency-coordination and licensing requirements. Other companies soon began constructing satellite antennas for television reception. Holiday Inn constructed the "HI-Net" network to distribute HBO (or Showtime) and a proprietary videoconferencing service to its franchisees. The broadcast industry began using satellites to distribute syndicated programming. All of these antennas were constructed under FCC rules in force at the time, and all were licensed. Although the licensing procedure was an expensive hassle, licenses are valuable insurance: a license gives the owner of a receive-only satellite antenna the same legal standing as a telephone company. Even a small cable operator or a Holiday Inn with a receive-only antenna could block AT&T's attempt to build a new terrestrial microwave link. Meanwhile, a new phenomenon was beginning to take shape: the backyard dish industry. Many entrepreneurs started making and selling small C-band antennas to private individuals. These antennas didn't meet FCC requirements, but they worked well enough for most buyers (except for the unlucky few who found themselves in a 4-GHz terrestrial microwave path). Besides, the programming was free! At first, the FCC didn't pay much attention to all this. After all, since these antennas weren't legal in the first place, the FCC didn't much care if they didn't work because of terrestrial interference. But Congress was paying attention: backyard dish owners were becoming a noisy voting block. Under pressure from Congress (and, probably, foreseeing the inevitable), the FCC rescinded the frequency-coordination and licensing requirements, essentially opening the field for anybody to own a backyard dish legally. While all this was going on, the telephone industry was also growing, with ever-increasing need for more capacity. But getting more capacity by microwave was becoming more difficult because of all those receive-only satellite antennas. Licensed antennas were popping up everywhere. Unlicensed backyard dishes were an even bigger problem: because they weren't documented, nobody even knew where they were. Even though the telcos were under no legal obligation to respect backyard dishes, they were well aware of the PR problems that dish-owning voters could cause in Congress. The obvious solution was for the telcos to abandon microwave altogether, and switch to fiber optics. Once they started laying fiber, they could get all the capacity they needed, and they could replace their existing terrestrial microwave capacity at the same time. During the late 80s and early 90s, many terrestrial microwave paths were abandoned. A personal case in point. In a previous life, I used to conduct microwave-interference studies for companies contemplating constructing new licensed receive-only antennas. On one particular study in the early 90s, taken from the roof of a downtown-Chicago skyscraper, I couldn't get an accurate reading: the telco microwave signals were so strong that they swamped the AGC circuits in the receiver. A few years later, from that same point, telco microwave signals had almost completely disappeared: all I got were a few blips from towers many miles away. The history of the shrinking satellite antenna can be seen in the antenna farms at many cable TV headends today. Most newer satellite antennas are small (5- to 6-meter reflectors) on small foundations (I've even seen antennas on wood bases!). But sometimes I still run across a big 10-meter Andrew monster, or at least the massive concrete foundation where one once stood. Commander Riker wrote: > A random thought. Why would AT&T kill the Microwave Towers? In > the case of a nuclear attack or terrorist attack, wouldn't it > be wise to have the Microwave towers as a backup? Or as decoys. According to an old legend popular among cable TV engineers, a certain cable TV operator was having trouble with hunters shooting at tower-mounted microwave antennas at a remote headend site. He solved the problem by placing a large decoy antenna, complete with a painted target, low on the tower. Neal McLain nmclain@annsgarden.com ------------------------------ From: Mark Crispin Subject: Re: Net Blocking Threatens Legitimate Sites Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2003 18:07:24 -0800 Organization: Networks and Distributed Computing On Thu, 20 Feb 2003, Herb Stein wrote: > Blocking is ludicrous in the first place, but doing so by IP address > is even dumber. Virtual hosting is a feature, not a bug. If you have a > problem with your children accessing "bad" places, that is clearly a > parental problem. Please don't make it mine. Technology can not solve > this problem. On the contrary, widely-deployed blocking by IP address has precisely the desired effect: to get ISPs and hosting providers to clean up their act. Blocking by IP address is nothing more than the technological equivalent of a boycott. The entire point of a boycott is to cause collateral damage. The ISPs and providers will ultimately be forced to choose between their sleazy customers and their legitimate customers. Either way, it makes things easier for the rest of us. I feel sorry for legitimate entities that find themselves in bad neighborhoods, but not that sorry. -- Mark -- http://staff.washington.edu/mrc Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate. ------------------------------ From: amfowler@melbpc.org.au (Alan Fowler) Subject: 56kbps and PCM Channels Date: Sat, 22 Feb 2003 02:23:31 GMT Organization: Whitethorn Software The following is an extract from "FOLDOC" the Free OnLine Dictionary Of Computing http://www.foldoc.org/ which looks like being a useful reference. 56 kbps (56 kilobits per second) The data capacity of a normal single channel digital telephone channel in North America. The figure is derived from the {bandwidth} of 4 kHz allocated for such a channel and the 16-bit encoding (4000 times 16 = 64000) used to change {analogue} signals to digital, minus the 8000 bit/s used for signalling and supervision. Was this particular coding scheme ever used? It's my understanding that its always been eight bit encoding at 8000 samples per second. ------------------------------ From: Chuk Gleason Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2003 20:40:03 -0500 Subject: Re: Helpful Telco Numbers Used For Troubleshooting Reverend - What exactly are you trying to look at, remotely; I work in a two-way radio shop, and my boss is big believer in equipment that monitors remote sites and alerts us to upcoming problems (rather than waiting for them to become crises.) There are several technologies here. Contact me off list, unless someone else requests we keep it here on the list. Chuk Gleason Cary, NC > From: Reverend Dr. Benrand Jr. > Subject: Helpful Telco Numbers Used For Troubleshooting > Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2003 08:35:52 -0500 > Organization: Michigan State University > I am looking for numbers that can be used on a regular telco system to > troubleshoot from a local location rather than traveling to a site. > Sort of a newbie here with this stuff, but we have remote power reset > sites and it is inconvenient to do traveling when a problem could be > diagnosed locally, obviously. I have searched on the web for helpful > codes and what I get is hacking info, I don't really need that, but > verifying that a line is active would be helpful. ------------------------------ From: johns_95110@yahoo.com (John) Subject: Re: Seeking Vonage VoIP Testimonials Date: 21 Feb 2003 14:32:27 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ I like Cuphone's product better. www.cuphone.com no monthly fee Eric De Mund wrote in message news:: > People, > Is anyone using Vonage's VoIP service? Do you love it? Do you hate it? > Would you like to love it, but several quirks have you holding back the > roses? > After reading: > How a downed tree simplified my life, by Lincoln D. Stein > http://www.newarchitectmag.com/documents/s=7802/na0203h/index.html > Voice Over IP, by Christopher Allbritton > http://popularmechanics.com/technology/telecom/2003/2/voice_over_ip/ > in New Architect and Popular Mechanics, respectively, my curiosity about > Vonage's VoIP service is really piqued. On paper, the plan for $40/month > that gets you unlimited local and long-distance calling looks really > good. > Regards, > Eric De Mund | Ixian Systems, Inc. | 53 49 B2 23 AF 6C 20 81 > http://www.ixian.com/ead/ | Mountain View, CA | ED DD 4C 81 AA C9 D1 A5 ------------------------------ From: johns_95110@yahoo.com (John) Subject: Unlimited Free Long Distance Phone Call Date: 21 Feb 2003 14:34:27 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Just bought CuPhone's VOIP Gateway (www.cuphone.com). It works really well. strongly recommend it. We use their USB Internet phone together with their Personal Phone Gateway to stay in touch with my family in Taiwan. Using the Phone Gateway, calls from Taiwan to our phone are free and sound better than the expensive long distance we used to use. ------------------------------ Reply-To: Monty Solomon From: Monty Solomon Subject: Microsoft Windows Rights Management Services for Windows Server 2003 Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2003 18:19:18 -0500 Microsoft Announces Windows Rights Management Services for Windows Server 2003 Rights Management Solution Will Give Organizations and Employees New Ways To Protect Information REDMOND, Wash., Feb. 21 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Microsoft Corp. (NASDAQ:MSFT) today announced plans for Windows(R) Rights Management Services (RMS), a new technology for Windows Server 2003 that will give organizations advanced ways to help secure sensitive internal business information including financial reports and confidential planning documents. Windows Rights Management Services will work with applications to provide a platform-based approach to providing persistent policy rights for Web content and sensitive corporate documents of all types. Beta code for Windows Rights Management Services will be broadly available in the second quarter of 2003. http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=31743048 ------------------------------ From: Gail M. Hall Subject: Re: Mainstream Companies and SPAM Date: Sat, 22 Feb 2003 00:23:49 -0500 Reply-To: gmhall@apk.net On Thu, 20 Feb 2003 08:58:21 -0700, in comp.dcom.telecom message , you wrote: > Hewlett-Packard uses a company called "m0.net" to send out newsletters > about HP products. Obviously, you don't get those newsletters. If you did, you would see they come from a domain called "CcmNewsgram.hpccm.p0.com". That the letter p followed by the number 0, dot com. I did not start getting messages from them until *I* opted to get the messages. This was fortunate because it was a message from the company that told me about a problem with the first HP printer I had. I was able to call the number the message gave and get the fix for my printer. > But I do not have a business relationship with HP. > And m0.net doesn't publish telephone contact information. The messages > never contained any HP contact information, either. This is SPAM, and > it certainly appears to be sanctioned by HP. If you are getting messages from this "m0.com" address, I suspect it is a spammer look-alike and not the real thing. At the end of every message I get from the HP news people, I see instructions for unsubscribing, change of address, and other things. If you do not see such instructions at the ends of the messages you get, then you are not hearing from the *real HP*. Here is what it says about unsubscribing: > To unsubscribe from the HP Newsgram and HP Business Essentials, > hit reply and type "UNSUBSCRIBE" as the subject line. They don't force you to go to their web page or anything like that. > [Note: I'm not trying to single out HP here; there are many companies > that are doing such things. It's just one company that has spammed me > personally. OTOH, if anyone at HP is reading this and can tell me more > about these spams from m0.net, I'd appreciate it.] I suspect you are not hearing from the real HP people. Speaking of who is the real thing or not, I understand that SBC used to be a so-called "baby Bell" phone company. But is it really being truthful in advertising when they advertise themselves as being the real original Bell Telephone Company? And that they are 125 years old now? I agree with some of SBC's other ads in which they talk about the wires and cables and such being their property and responsibility and that they install them and maintain them and such. But I really don't think those guys down in Texas know much of anything about us up here in the Great Lakes states. The Bells were split up quite a few years ago, and most of the guys involved in the original "Bell Telephone Company" are probably all retired by now. All SBC is doing is taking over a bunch of existing companies and turning it into one big monster company. Gail in Ohio USA [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That reminds me of Sprint and the old United Telephone Company of Kansas City. Like the *original* Southwestern Bell (SBC to you newcomers), United Tel also had roots going way, way back. I am not sure off hand of who came first, Bell or United, they both were around well before 1900, both with histories which would make you hold your nose in disgust from the stench they caused. Although 'The Bell Consortium' was probably worse; many of the thousands of independent telcos who did not choose to affiliate or get bought out by Bell chose instead to go with United or GTE. Comes sometime in the 1990's and United buys Sprint in order to get some long distance action. They change their name (United) to Sprint. Then the 'new' Sprint (United Tel plus the 'old' Sprint) starts claiming it is the oldest telco around. 'Over a hundred years of serving you', etc. They advertised that way for about a year in 1999, but eventually stopped. Southwestern Bell (now SBC), like Illinois Bell (which merged with Ohio Bell then eventually changed their name to Ameritech) was one of the Bell 'originals'. I guess now it is SBC's turn (as it was for United/Sprint a few years ago) to get all noble, and unctious and reverent about all the Good Things They Did For Society over the past century-plus. PAT] ------------------------------ From: xlea69802@sneakemail.com (Bob K) Subject: "Reverse Slamming": Unauthorized PIC Freezes Date: 22 Feb 2003 07:00:55 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ I had an experience with Verizon that I call "reverse slamming": Verizon put an unauthorized PIC freeze on my local toll service, which I had been getting through them. I found out about this freeze after I decided to switch my LD and local toll to a new provider. The LD switch went through but Verizon rejected the local toll switch. When I called, they told me I had a PIC freeze, which I never asked for. They said they wouldn't have imposed the freeze if I hadn't asked for it and that all freeze requests are routed through a third-party company (either ACS or Sutherland). They had already charged me for switching my LD carrier and now they wanted to charge me again to change my local toll service provider. Since I never asked for a PIC freeze, I refused to pay and asked for a supervisor. After a moment, the rep said a supervisor wasn't available, but as a courtesy, he'd waive the charge. I thought it was interesting that the PIC freeze was only on the local toll service, which I had been receiving from Verizon, and not on the LD service, which I was not getting from Verizon. Are unauthorized PIC freezes common? Who can I report this to? (The obvious agency is the state PUC, but they often seem to have a cozy relationship to the telcos. I'm in NJ.) Bob [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: A cozy relationship, you say? Gosh, just like here in Kansas where the commissioners live in the same small towns where the Southwestern Bell -- oops, I mean SBC -- executives live; lunch with them at their country clubs a few times each week, and go to the same social events and churches. Yet if you have the audacity to say the somewhat underpaid public servants on the commission eat out of the hands of the telco executives who feed them faithfully, they (the commission) get very annoyed at you for saying it. The king did not like having people notice he was naked, neither do the state commissioners. As to what you can do, and where you can report it: As a pro-forma thing, you can appeal to the Chairman's office and follow that up with a commission complaint. What that will get you is nothing except your telephone records will be noted that you are a 'complainer' (like me) and eventually it will get to the point where those sorts of things happen less often in your case. It also helps if you have a good solid background and knowledge of old time telephone industry history and practices so when you have occassion to talk to one of the service reps you can appropriately shock her sensibilities; that will have the effect of getting a lot of the small, petty charges written off they would otherwise stick you with. Remember, in twenty years or so, those of us who know anything about them at all will be dead and buried; then the telco execs won't have any further worries from us. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: 22 Feb 2003 10:44:25 EST From: Charles.B.Wilber@Dartmouth.EDU (Charles B. Wilber) Subject: Re: The Perils of Email It is the job of the defense attorney to cast doubt on the validity of email intercepts as conclusive evidence. Once such evidence has been shown to be unreliable and easily fabircated or altered, precedent will be established and courts will begin to dismiss it routinely. Charlie Wilber Dartmouth College You wrote: > It could be easy to forge someone's address in an e-mail to put the > blame on someone that the real "perp" has something against. I've > read about such cases already where someone forged another employee's > address in e-mail and got that person fired. It took a long time for > the victim to get the job back and a law suit against the company that > fired the victim. ------------------------------ From: Phil McKerracher Subject: Re: E.164 and Telephone Number Display Formats Date: Sat, 22 Feb 2003 15:45:54 GMT Organization: blueyonder (post doesn't reflect views of blueyonder) Mark J Cuccia wrote in message news:telecom22.295.13@telecom-digest.org: > 15 Feb 2003 03:21:47 -0800, Mark Atwood wrote: >> What is the name of the "standard" telephone number format. The plus >> sign, followed by the country code, followed by the in-nation full >> number with area code, with hyphens/spaces/dots for punctuation? > I think you must mean the "ITU Recommendation E.164" document, which > reports the standards for numbering (and dialing) for worldwide/ > international telephone services, including telephone country code > assignments and such. > BTW, I think that the E.164 "recommendation" prefers that all parsing of > blocks of digits be *SPACES*. I do *NOT* like to use spaces... The formatting is actually described in E.123 not E.164. It can be downloaded for free from www.itu.int. Spaces or hyphens (but not brackets) can be inserted anywhere to improve legibility. Before everyone starts "improving" it as usually happens in these discussions, please remember that it is the only scheme that works with GSM phones, Outlook, TAPI applications and the like, and it's already an internationally agreed standard. Phil McKerracher www.mckerracher.org ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Feb 2003 09:24:41 PST From: Lauren Weinstein Subject: Last Laugh! "Thank You For Calling the War Sign-Up Line" Greetings. Would telecom technology help President Bush build his "coalition of the willing" to battle Iraq? "Fact Squad Radio" speculates with a handy example as described below ... --Lauren-- "REALITY RESET" http://www.vortex.com/reality Satire by Lauren Weinstein (lauren@vortex.com) = = = = = = = = = = = = = February 22, 2003 Today's Edition: "Thank You For Calling the War Sign-Up Line" = = = = = = = = = = = = = To subscribe or unsubscribe to/from this list, please send the command "subscribe" or "unsubscribe" respectively (without the quotes) in the body of an e-mail to "reality-request@vortex.com". = = = = = = = = = = = = = Greetings. In a departure from the usual format, this message is to let you know about a "Fact Squad Radio" short audio segment that may be of interest to "Reality Reset" readers. The piece runs under three minutes and is encoded as standard MP3 audio. It suggests a possible procedure that countries could use to join President Bush's "coalition of the willing" and is entitled: "Thank You For Calling the War Sign-Up Line" It is playable via: http://www.factsquad.org/radio I hope you find it interesting, or at least amusing. Thank you. --Lauren-- Lauren Weinstein lauren@vortex.com For information about the author, please see: http://www.vortex.com/lauren = = = = = = = = = = = = = Copyright 2003 by Vortex Technology. All rights reserved. This item may be freely redistributed so long as it is complete and includes this notice. ------------------------------ 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: 620-330-6774 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 Fax 3: 775-642-0603 Fax 4: 530-309-7234 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: mirror.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. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2003 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 V22 #308 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun Feb 23 01:37:42 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h1N6bg904147; Sun, 23 Feb 2003 01:37:42 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2003 01:37:42 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200302230637.h1N6bg904147@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #309 TELECOM Digest Sun, 23 Feb 2003 01:38:00 EST Volume 22 : Issue 309 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Nigerian Slain Over E-Mail Scam (Monty Solomon) Perspective: Closer to a National ID Plan? (Monty Solomon) Land-Line Rules in a Wireless World (Monty Solomon) Why European ISPs Need Partners (Monty Solomon) Increasingly, TV Viewers are Going to the Dogs (Monty Solomon) EFFector 16.5: Public Asks For DMCA Exemptions; FCC Considers (M. Solomon) Fingerprinting P2P Pirates (Monty Solomon) Re: Net Blocking Threatens Legitimate Sites (John R. Levine) Re: 56kbps and PCM Channels (John R. Levine) Re: Mainstream Companies and SPAM (Phil Earnhardt) Re: Mainstream Companies and SPAM (SELLCOM Tech Support) Re: T-1: Tip and Ring (John Higdon) Some Messages Lost Tonight (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 VIRUSES. 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: Sat, 22 Feb 2003 22:28:11 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Nigerian Slain Over E-Mail Scam By Michelle Delio A notorious e-mail scam has resulted in the murder of a Nigerian diplomat in the Czech Republic. Fifty-year-old Michael Lekara Wayid, Nigeria's consul in the Czech Republic, was shot dead by an unidentified 72-year-old Czech at the Nigerian Embassy in Prague on Wednesday. According to police reports, the suspect was a victim of the 419 scam, a thriving industry that employs thousands of people around the world. The scammers successfully manage to extort money from thousands of victims by promising them compensation for assistance in moving funds from foreign countries to banks in the United States. The criminals typically make their money by extracting ever-escalating sums of money for bribes, bank fees and the like from their "business partners," that is, the folks they scam. But according to early reports in Nigerian and Czech newspapers, the gunman's bank account was drained after he gave the account number and other personal details to someone posing as a senior Nigerian official. It is not known whether the suspect was contacted by e-mail or other means. The 419 scams were carried out by postal mail until the advent of e-mail, but, according to FBI reports, most 419 scams are now conducted, at least in the early stages, by e-mail. According Nigerian newspaper reports, the suspect arrived at the embassy and said he needed to discuss a business matter. He was referred to Wayid. Soon afterward, an embassy receptionist heard raised voices followed by shots and went to investigate. The receptionist was then reportedly shot in the hand, but managed to flee and call embassy security, who detained the suspect until police arrived. The suspect was arrested and is now hospitalized at Prague's Central Military Hospital after collapsing at the scene. The receptionist is also being treated at the same hospital. Both are expected to recover. Nigerian newspaper This Day reports that the shooter had visited the embassy "regularly over the past year" in an attempt to recover the money he had lost. http://www.wired.com/news/culture/0,1284,57760,00.html ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Feb 2003 22:36:07 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Perspective: Closer to a national ID plan? Perspective: Closer to a national ID plan? By Declan McCullagh February 17, 2003, 4:00 AM PT WASHINGTON -- A little-known company called EagleCheck is hoping to provide a standardized identity check technique that governments and corporations will use to verify that you are who you claim to be. EagleCheck, a privately held firm in Cleveland, proposes that whenever someone uses a driver's license or a passport for identity verification, the ID's authenticity will be checked through EagleCheck's network, which is tied to state motor vehicle and federal databases. The databases will respond by saying whether the ID is valid. I ran into David Akers, EagleCheck's president, last week in a Senate office building where he was hawking his system to a crowd of politicians understandably nervous about Threat Level Orange, Osama bin Laden, and possible terrorist attacks sparked by a looming invasion of Iraq. Stacked on a table were brochures warning in stark crimson letters that "EagleCheck could have flagged" 14 of the 19 terrorists who hijacked planes on Sept. 11, 2001, because some had used expired visas and stolen passports. Akers has had some success so far. In December, the Transportation Security Administration gave permission for EagleCheck to link its systems "to government databases" in a pair of test projects at the Cleveland and Akron, Ohio, airports. But EagleCheck isn't limiting its marketing plan to airport security. "We are certainly looking at a variety of other applications other than airports," said Akers, listing bars, banks, government buildings -- in short, wherever ID is required -- as possible customers. If EagleCheck or a similar system succeeds, it raises the specter of something akin to a national identity card, a concept that Americans have shunned in the past but could return in a more high-tech form. (In a column last summer, I wrote about how the White House was pressuring state governments to move in this direction by standardizing on driver's licenses.) ... http://news.com.com/2010-1071-984792.html ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Feb 2003 22:39:06 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Land-Line Rules in a Wireless World By SIMON ROMERO In fits and starts, local telephone competition has taken hold in many parts of the country since the Telecommunications Act of 1996 - most significantly in New York, the home state of the nation's biggest local phone company, Verizon Communications. And yet, in many ways local competition is taking forms, like the remarkable growth of wireless communications and the emergence of Internet-based telephone systems, that were beyond the imagination of many policy makers of the mid-1990's. That is why, for all the lobbying devoted to it, the compromise effort yesterday by the Federal Communications Commission to fine-tune the 1996 rules for competition may prove steadily less relevant in the coming years. The fact is, even as more local telephone lines have been claimed by the Bells' competitors in recent years -- 11 percent by the middle of last year -- the actual number of local phone lines in the nation has been edging down, as consumers and businesses adopt wireless phones and other alternatives. In 2001, for the first time since the Depression, the overall number of local access lines declined, falling by half a percent from the previous year, to 191.7 million lines. Last year, it fell again, to 189.1 million. And so rather than being preoccupied with the tug of war over access to their local phone networks, some analysts say, the local Bell companies like Verizon, SBC Communications and BellSouth are likely to focus more on ways to fend off competitors that do not need the Bells' phone lines at all. Increasingly, that means the Bells will need to offer consumers bundles of services like local, wireless, long-distance and fast Internet links. ... http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/21/business/21COMP.html ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Feb 2003 22:45:23 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Why European ISPs Need Partners Article at a glance: Why European ISPs need partners As compared with independent Internet service providers, European telcos have certain advantages that helped them gain and hold greater market share than their US counterparts, which were left in the dust by strong independent ISPs such as AOL and EarthLink. The continuing strength of the telcos might deter entrepreneurs from entering the ISP market-but shouldn't. The upcoming round of growth in Internet services will offer new revenue streams for companies that choose their partners wisely. The take-away On-line subscription services for newspapers, music, and gaming finally are becoming viable businesses. Operators that want to enter (or survive in) Europe's ISP market should consider partnering with these services, as well as with portals, to share development costs and customers. http://www.mckinseyquarterly.com/ar_g.asp?ar=1280&pagenum=1&L2=22&L3=77&srid=21&gp=1 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Feb 2003 23:36:45 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Increasingly, TV Viewers Are Going to the Dogs ANIMAL BEAT By Vicki Croke, Globe Correspondent, 2/22/2003 These days, if you ask a sports fan who he likes in the big competition, he's just as likely to say ''the poodle'' as ''the Red Sox.'' OK, maybe we're not quite there yet. But dog shows are booming in popularity and giving chase to some previously untouchable professional athletic events, such as pro football. Take Thanksgiving Day. NBC put the National Dog Show from Philadelphia up against the National Football League's game between the New England Patriots and the Detroit Lions. The dog show fetched 19 million viewers for all or part of the show. The USA Network's broadcast this month of the Westminster Kennel Club Dog Show at Madison Square Garden -- the Super Bowl of dog shows -- had its highest ratings ever, with nearly 10 million viewers over two nights. The Animal Planet cable network, which aired the American Kennel Club/Eukanuba National Invitational Championship out of Florida last month, picked up more than a million viewers. The number of dog shows and participants is growing, too. In 1930, 40,000 dogs competed in AKC shows. In 2001, it was more than 1.5 million. Attendance seems to be up, though no one has documented this reliably. The Bay Colony Cluster in Boston routinely pulls in 15,000 spectators. Despite a few glitches, including a snowstorm this year, it has been on an upward trend for years. There is even dog-show buzz on the street these days: ''That Ibizan was robbed!'' Why dogs? Why now? Haven't we loved them for at least 15,000 years? Why is interest in them exploding at this time? ... http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/053/living/Increasingly_TV_viewers_are_going_to_the_dogs+.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2003 00:35:12 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: EFFector 16.5: Public Asks for DMCA Exemptions; FCC Considers EFFector Vol. 16, No. 5 February 20, 2003 ren@eff.org A Publication of the Electronic Frontier Foundation ISSN 1062-9424 In the 244th Issue of EFFector: * Public Asks Copyright Office to Allow Common CD/DVD Uses * FCC Considers Broadcast Flag for Digital Television * Mailing List Headaches? Contact Us * Got Esq? Join the EFF Cooperating Attorney List * Deep Links (5): Labels Move to Scan AU University Email Servers for MP3s * Administrivia http://www.eff.org/effector/HTML/effect16.05.html ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2003 00:48:09 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Fingerprinting P2P Pirates By John Borland Staff Writer, CNET News.com For months, the digital equivalent of a postal censor has been sorting through virtually all file-swapping traffic on the University of Wyoming's network, quietly noting every trade of an Eminem song or "Friends" episode. The technology, provided by Los Gatos, Calif., company Audible Magic, isn't yet blocking individual file trades. But that's the next step. As the company begins testing its service with more universities, corporations and small Internet service providers during next few weeks and months, this peer-to-peer monitoring and blocking technology threatens to open the next front in the online piracy wars. With the capacity to look inside every bit of data that flows over a network -- whether it's part of a song being illegally traded or a personal e-mail -- this new generation of antipiracy technology is sure to prove controversial. But some administrators at universities and corporations -- deluged by peer-to-peer traffic that continues to overwhelm their networks -- say they're ready for this sweeping step. ... http://news.com.com/2100-1023-985027.html ------------------------------ Date: 22 Feb 2003 22:26:11 -0500 From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: Net Blocking Threatens Legitimate Sites Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > On the contrary, widely-deployed blocking by IP address has > precisely the desired effect: to get ISPs and hosting providers to > clean up their act. Perhaps, but when mandated by a government in the United States, it has horrendous first amendment problems. It's also not clear to me what standard these mandated blocks use. If it's anything like the standards that web filters use, it boils down to "stuff we don't like." 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: 22 Feb 2003 22:30:20 -0500 From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: 56kbps and PCM Channels Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > (56 kilobits per second) The data > capacity of a normal single channel digital telephone > channel in North America. The figure is derived from the > {bandwidth} of 4 kHz allocated for such a channel and the > 16-bit encoding (4000 times 16 = 64000) used to change > {analogue} signals to digital, minus the 8000 bit/s used for > signalling and supervision. > Was this particular coding scheme ever used? It's > my understanding that its always been eight bit encoding at > 8000 samples per second. That's the standard coding scheme used on voice channels in North America. The encoding is 64Kb, but since the low bit in each frame is "robbed" to indicate supervision, the useful bandwidth is 56Kb. When we use T1s for data, we use a more modern framing scheme that gives us the full 64Kb. 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: Phil Earnhardt Subject: Re: Mainstream Companies and SPAM Date: Sat, 22 Feb 2003 21:08:49 -0700 On Sat, 22 Feb 2003 00:23:49 -0500, Gail M. Hall wrote: > On Thu, 20 Feb 2003 08:58:21 -0700, in comp.dcom.telecom message > , you wrote: >> Hewlett-Packard uses a company called "m0.net" to send out newsletters >> about HP products. > Obviously, you don't get those newsletters. [SNIP] That's a strange thing to say. I have received dozens. Would you like me to forward one to you? Perhaps I didn't pay enough attention to the headers. But one thing is for certain: there was absolutely no HP contact info contained anywhere in the e-mailing. >> But I do not have a business relationship with HP. >> And m0.net doesn't publish telephone contact information. The messages >> never contained any HP contact information, either. This is SPAM, and >> it certainly appears to be sanctioned by HP. > If you are getting messages from this "m0.com" address, I suspect it > is a spammer look-alike and not the real thing. When you say "real thing", are you talking about a mailing list that has an "opt in" list? That's the only kind of legitimate e-mail marketeering there is. > At the end of every message I get from the HP news people, I see > instructions for unsubscribing, change of address, and other things. > If you do not see such instructions at the ends of the messages you get, >then you are not hearing from the *real HP*. The logic of your statement escapes me. Are you saying I should know the mailings I got were illegitimate because the mailings you got were supposedly legitimate? > Here is what it says about unsubscribing: >> To unsubscribe from the HP Newsgram and HP Business Essentials, >> hit reply and type "UNSUBSCRIBE" as the subject line. You may be naive about SPAM and SPAMMERS. Here's the scoop: most of them now have an "unsubscribe" URL or e-mail address. And the rule is to never ever send anything to it. All you've succeeded in doing is verifying that a particular e-mail address is "live". To turn it into a slogan: if you're already spamming me, why in heaven's name would I entrust you with a verified e-mail address? Requesting to unsubscribe from SPAM e-mailings is problematic. The best that one can do is to add the offending sender to your filter list. > They don't force you to go to their web page or anything like that. I have no idea what this means. I never ever opted in to any HP e-mail list. I don't know how to say it any more plainly than that. >> [Note: I'm not trying to single out HP here; there are many companies >> that are doing such things. It's just one company that has spammed me >> personally. OTOH, if anyone at HP is reading this and can tell me more >> about these spams from m0.net, I'd appreciate it.] > I suspect you are not hearing from the real HP people. What you say doesn't make sense: why would some company gratuitously promote HP products if they weren't hired by HP to do that? Why go to the trouble? There's no money in it for them ... unless HP has hired them to send out the mailings. > Gail in Ohio USA --phil ------------------------------ From: SELLCOM Tech support Subject: Re: Mainstream Companies and SPAM Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2003 00:53:35 -0500 Organization: www.sellcom.com Reply-To: support@sellcom.com Phil Earnhardt posted on that vast internet thingie: > If Pfizer had an aggressive program for dealing with the venders who > were [ab]using e-mail to sell Viagra, then there would be far less > likelihood that an e-mail containing that word to be flagged as SPAM. Symantec could also deal with those vendors spamming their antivirus stuff, unless it is just piracy. When I get those spams I forward them to the piracy depts of the manufacturers just in case. Steve at SELLCOM http://www.sellcom.com Discount multihandset cordless phones by Siemens, Vtech 5.8Ghz EnGenius NEW EP436 4line (the longest range), Panasonic, Twinhead notebooks, WatchGuard firewall, Okidata, Polycom! If you sit at a desk www.ergochair.biz you owe it to yourself. ------------------------------ From: John Higdon Subject: Re: T1 - Tip and Ring Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Sat, 22 Feb 2003 22:06:32 -0800 In article , Gordon S. Hlavenka wrote: > I think T1 uses "B3ZS" which means that if there are four > zeroes in a row, the fourth one will be replaced by a "bipolar > violation" (no psych jokes, please :-) -- a pulse with the same polarity > as the previous pulse. The receiver is smart enough to call this BPV a > zero. That's "B8ZS". > Grammar and spelling flames welcome. Spelling correction, not a flame. > Yes, that's really my email address. Don't change it. So is mine. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | Anytown, USA | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Some Messages Lost Tonight Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2003 00:00:00 EST At least one or two messages were lost in processing Saturday night and cannot seem to be recovered. It happens sometimes, and I must apologize. If you sent in a message late Saturday and it did not make it here as of now, then please resubmit it. You probably *did* get an auto reply. Sorry, Mark Brader, maybe others. 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: 620-330-6774 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 Fax 3: 775-642-0603 Fax 4: 530-309-7234 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: mirror.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. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2003 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 V22 #309 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun Feb 23 19:44:45 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h1O0ijQ08297; Sun, 23 Feb 2003 19:44:45 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2003 19:44:45 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200302240044.h1O0ijQ08297@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #310 TELECOM Digest Sun, 23 Feb 2003 19:45:00 EST Volume 22 : Issue 310 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson For MP3 lovers, a Sound Investment in Home Networking (Monty Solomon) 'Five Years From Now You'll See Virtually no CD Stores' (Monty Solomon) As Music Consumers Download, They Unload Over CD Prices (Monty Solomon) Media Copyright Law Put to Unexpected Uses (Monty Solomon) Brazil's Oi Phone Firm in Talks to Buy BCP - Report (Monty Solomon) Re: Mainstream Companies and SPAM (Richard D G Cox) ICANN Future Extensions? (Al Franz) Re: Is it Possible to Make an Intercom System With WE Phones? (Comm. Riker) Re: Clear Channel's Big, Stinking Deregulation Mess (Ron Bean) Re: Net Blocking Threatens Legitimate Sites (Mark Brader) Re: Net Blocking Threatens Legitimate Sites (Mark Crispin) Re: Traffic Engineering: Reducing Peakedness (John R. Myers) Re: Netizen Ronda (Dave Phelps) 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 VIRUSES. 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, 23 Feb 2003 16:29:12 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: For MP3 Lovers, a Sound Investment in Home Networking GEAR By Christopher Muther, Globe Staff, 2/23/2003 At this moment, I have exactly 1,459 MP3 files stored on the hard disk of my home computer. In an average week, I listen to maybe a dozen of these songs on my MP3 player, while the remainder sit on a virtual shelf, collecting cyber dust. Over the past week, however, I've become reacquainted with my MP3 collection with help from Turtle Beach's AudioTron ($299.95, www.turtlebeach.com). It's a great concept: Take advantage of your home's existing ethernet or HPNA (Home Phone Networking Alliance) to deliver music from your computer to anywhere in the house that you please. The AudioTron is designed to look like a proper stereo component and connects directly into a receiver, only the AudioTron will put the rest of your stereo components to shame. It holds a library of up to 30,000 songs when linked to a computer, plus it plays Internet radio stations. http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/054/living/For_MP3_lovers_a_sound_investment_in_home_networking+.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2003 16:43:57 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: 'Five Years From Now You'll See Virtually no CD Stores' THE MUSIC BUSINESS: WHAT'S NEXT? On the eve of the Grammy Awards, the recording industry is under siege: As the Internet drives a file-sharing revolution, it's the end of the (music) world as we know it By Joan Anderman, Globe Staff, 2/23/2003 It's 2008 and you want the new Coldplay album. You walk into a record store where there are no records, enter a kiosk, and download the collection directly onto your portable digital audio device. Or maybe you're an old-schooler with a soft spot for quaint technology. You sit down at the computer, whip out the $30 prepaid card you got for Christmas, log on to Amazon.com, and burn a few of the 50 tracks you've got coming onto a compact disc. Voila: instant artifact. Perhaps you'll click over to your music subscription service. Depending on your plan, you download tracks No. 2, 7, and 11 for a dollar each into your Internet-wired home stereo or, as a monthly subscriber, load an iPod to your heart's content. Actually, it might be cooler to download the radio single directly to your mobile phone and make it your new polyphonic, master-quality ring tune. The bold new world toward which the music industry is headed will barely be on display tonight, when a pageant of pop stars takes the stage at Madison Square Garden for the 45th Annual Grammy Awards. The industry's woes are likely to be drowned out by the sound of business as usual: fans screaming, stars swapping verses, label executives getting paid their due. But like it or not, the music industry is in a free fall, and things are about to change. The very foundation on which the business is structured -- selling music to stores -- is eroding at an astonishing pace. Sales of recorded music have fallen about 16 percent over the last two years. By contrast, sales of blank CDs jumped 40 percent in 2002, and users of the biggest online file-trading service, Kazaa, outnumber what Napster ever had. ... http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/054/living/_Five_years_from_now_you_ll_see_virtually_no_CD_stores_+.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2003 16:47:36 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: As Music Consumers Download, They Unload Over CD Prices Bring down the costs and they'll stop getting tunes via the Internet, they say By Renee Graham, Globe Staff, 2/23/2003 Even with a world of music just a few keystrokes away, Andrea Luca Rossi isn't inclined to spend hours on his computer downloading his favorite songs. ''I'm on computers all day, and my eyes get tired,'' said Rossi, general manager at Le Soir Bistro in Newton Highlands. ''The last thing I want to do when I'm home is sit at a computer downloading music. I'd rather spend the $20 and buy the CD.'' Even though Rossi, 39, will occasionally download music, he believes nothing can replace the tactile experience of strolling into a record store and walking out with a new CD in hand. He has felt that way since he was a kid buying Pink Floyd and Deep Purple albums, and he still enjoys the sensation when he picks up the latest CD by Peter Gabriel or a Cafe Del Mar compilation. ''Really, I prefer to go to the store,'' he says. ''I still have fun going to buy music, and I try to support, as much as I can, the local stores.'' If there's any truth to the recording industry's latest lamentations, consumers such as Rossi are disappearing faster than Britney Spears's fan base. With revenues declining, label executives contend loyal paying customers are more the exception than the rule as an increasing number of music fans download music for free via Internet services as Kazaa and Morpheus. Yet, consumers who bypass traditional methods for obtaining their music insist their intention isn't to cheat artists but to shake an industry alienating its lifeblood -- music fans. ... http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/054/living/As_music_consumers_download_they_unload_over_CD_prices+.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2003 17:14:57 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Media Copyright Law Put to Unexpected Uses Companies are using legislation meant to restrain Web piracy to try to shut down rivals. By David Streitfeld LA Times Staff Writer February 23, 2003 Under pressure from the entertainment industry, Congress passed a bill in 1998 to restrain Internet piracy. The law made it illegal to break the digital locks shielding a piece of intellectual property -- an electronic book, say, or a CD or DVD. Just as Congress hoped, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act is proving a potent weapon. The recording industry, for example, is successfully using the law to force an Internet service provider to surrender the name of an alleged pirate. But Hollywood isn't the only industry that can wield this sword. Companies that have nothing to do with the entertainment world have discovered the law's broad reach. Dow Chemical Co. used the DMCA to shut down a Web site that attacked the company. Wal-Mart Stores Inc. and other retailers invoked it to remove the details of forthcoming sales from a site for bargain hunters. Apple Computer Inc. cited the DMCA to stop one of its dealers from producing and selling software that allowed Apple's new DVD-burning technology to be used on earlier models of its Macintosh computers. Apple didn't explain its motivation, but commentators noted that upgraded older machines meant fewer sales of new Macs. ... http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-dmca23feb23,1,4074563.story ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2003 01:57:21 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Brazil's Oi Phone Firm in Talks to Buy BCP - Report RIO DE JANEIRO, Brazil, Feb 21 (Reuters) - Oi, the mobile phone unit of Brazil's biggest phone company, Telemar (SAO:TNLP4) (NYSE:TNE), is negotiating to buy cellular phone carrier BCP to gain access to the country's wealthiest market of Sao Paulo, a local newspaper said on Friday. BCP is owned by U.S. phone company BellSouth (NYSE:BLS) and Brazil's powerful Safra family. ... - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=31738517 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2003 16:18:24 GMT From: Richard D G Cox Subject: Re: Mainstream Companies and SPAM Reply-To: nospam@numbering.com Organization: Mandarin Technology Limited On Thu, 20 Feb 2003 at 15:58 UT Phil Earnhardt wrote: > Hewlett-Packard uses a company called "m0.net" to send out newsletters > about HP products. But I do not have a business relationship with HP. > And m0.net doesn't publish telephone contact information. You can get domain information from the registry: Domain Name: M0.NET Registrant: Digital Impact, Inc. (M103-DOM) 177 Bovet Rd. Suite 200, San Mateo, CA 94402 US Administrative Contact: Administrator, DNS (AD13461-OR) dnsadmin@DIGITALIMPACT.COM Digital Impact, 177 Bovet Road, Suite 200 San Mateo, CA 94402 US Phone +1 650-356-3400 Fax +1 650-357-3515 Technical Contact: TechSupport, DNS (TD4914-ORG) dnstechsupp@DIGITALIMPACT.COM (details as above) Digital Impact claim "Superior Results in Online Direct Marketing" and their webpages claim Hewlett Packard as a client. But they are based in California ... where there are specific laws about spam. > The messages never contained any HP contact information, either. > This is SPAM, and it certainly appears to be sanctioned by HP. Always unwise to make assumptions ;-)) You should write and ask HP. That would give you a good opportunity to explain your views on spam. p0.net claims to be sell.com, hosted by Internap and p0.com is Yesmail. Nobody even slightly familiar with spam prevention will find either of those surprising! Richard Cox ------------------------------ Reply-To: Al Franz From: Al Franz Subject: ICANN Future Extensions? Organization: Netmation Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2003 19:13:25 GMT What is a good resource to understand the current state of ICANN approving additional domain extensions? Tried to find the information on http://www.icann.org but was unable to find. ------------------------------ From: bbg@easylinkgroup.zzn.com (Commander Riker) Subject: Re: Is it Possible to Make an Intercom System With WE Phones? Date: 22 Feb 2003 23:14:03 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Thanks for detailed the info!! One question, the voltage does not matter for voice communiations? The reason I ask is that I have 12DC volt power supply available. bbg@easylinkgroup.zzn.com (Commander Riker) wrote in message news:: > I have a few old Western Electric model 554 wall phones that I would > like to make an intetcom system with. In particular I would like to > put one model 554 in the house and one in my garage which is set apart > from my home. > I have the Bell System Service Station manuals but can't find any info > on this. I know it is possible. Do I need to get a telephone line > simulator, like > http://www.teltone.com/telecom_solutions/test_tools/test_tls-4_features.html > or can I wire these old phones somehow to work as an intercom system? > TIA. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Just to talk from one place to another > via intercom is an easy job. Take any two of your phones. Let's assume > the wiring is 'standard' red/green. Take the 'red' wire from one phone > and wire it in series to the 'green' wire on the other through some > small battery, or if you wish, a battery eliminator such as one from > Radio Shack. If you want, use a transformer at some low voltage, let's > say 3-4.5 volts and maybe a half of an amp. The values don't have to > be exact, just very low power. Now take the remaining green wire from > the one phone and wire it straight across to the red wire on the other > phone. Now when both phones are off hook, you can 'hear; the sidetone > or 'battery' and talk to the other end. If either end replaces the > receiver -- hangs up -- the circuit is broken and the party still off > hook gets dead silence. > Of course neither end wants to sit there with a phone to his ear > listening for the event he will hear a click and the battery start so > there can be a conversation. So what you do is get a couple of little > tiny buzzers and put one in each phone. Wire them through the contacts > on the 'network' inside the phones so that if either phone goes off > hook the battery will have a path to the other phone *through the > little buzzer* and back to the originating phone. Now when either end > goes off hook, the little buzzer in the opposite phone will make a > noise -- a continuing little 'buzz sound' -- which notifies the other > end that a caller wants to speak with him. Most of the contacts on the > network inside the phone are 'normally open', that is, not making > contact until the phone goes off hook. But there is one pair of > contacts inside the phone which is just the opposite, normally closed > until the phone comes off hook. Use those contacts to silence the > buzzer when the phone goes off hook, so that the called party does not > get buzzing all the time he is trying to talk on the phone. If you > want to get a bit more fancy, get one of those things they use on > Christmas trees to make the lights blink on and off every couple seconds. > Put this in series with the low voltage buzzer you have installed, > and the result will be the buzzer goes buzz-silence-buzz-silence, etc. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Low power voltage (not harmful to human beings) of a 'few' volts works fine. Regular, old fashioned phones have around ten volts on the line. In fact, it is the change in voltage which signals the central office to respond with dial tone. Do not put so much voltage on the line that the person talking on the phone gets 'tickled' when they pick up the receiver or touch the little buzzer, etc. Low power through a small transformer should work fine, such as your twelve volts. Keep the amperage under control also; 500 milliamps is enough or even a full amp. Just remember, put the power supply in series to ONE SIDE of the two-wire connector in a 'figure 8' manner; one side of power to the 'green' wire on one phone, the other side of the power supply to the 'red' wire on the other phone. Then tie the remaining two wires (one red and one green) together. The juice will flow right through those two phones and carry your voice quite well, as long as they are both *off hook*. If you don't want to fiddle around with a signal buzzer on either (both) end, then use a speaker phone in place of regular phones and just speak up when you want to talk to the other end. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2003 03:46:46 -0600 From: Ron Bean Subject: Re: Clear Channel's Big, Stinking Deregulation Mess > In an era when Republicans control the government and big business > generally gets what it wants, Clear Channel is making deregulation > look bad. What did they expect? Deregulation means sacrificing service to increase efficiency. Regulation means sacrificing efficiency to increase service. There's no free lunch, you pays your money and you takes your choice. Clear Channel did exactly what they were supposed to do. (OBtelecom: The old AT&T emphasized service specifically to avoid this kind of backlash. Were they the only monopoly that ever figured this out?) ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Net Blocking Threatens Legitimate Sites Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2003 01:38:11 -0500 (EST) From: msb@vex.net (Mark Brader) Mark Crispin: > ... widely-deployed blocking by IP address has precisely the desired > effect: to get ISPs and hosting providers to clean up their act. > Blocking by IP address is nothing more than the technological equivalent > of a boycott. No, boycotts are voluntary. > The entire point of a boycott is to cause collateral damage. No, it isn't. Mark Brader, Toronto | "I don't _want_ people using Linux for ideological msb@vex.net | reasons. I think ideology sucks." -- Torvalds [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Would you please explain to Mark Crispin, myself, and others here what you believe the 'entire purpose of a boycott' is in that case? Although boycotts are technically a voluntary thing, there are instances -- for example a labor strike or work stoppage, where there are often times many social ramifications for folks who choose not to go along. Boycotts are, in name at least, a voluntary thing. But since you mention it, what do you, Mark Brader, feel is 'the entire point of a boycott'? PAT] ------------------------------ From: Mark Crispin Subject: Re: Net Blocking Threatens Legitimate Sites Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2003 03:06:17 -0800 Organization: Networks and Distributed Computing On Sat, 22 Feb 2003, John R. Levine wrote: >> On the contrary, widely-deployed blocking by IP address has >> precisely the desired effect: to get ISPs and hosting providers to >> clean up their act. > Perhaps, but when mandated by a government in the United States, it > has horrendous first amendment problems. Considering that government has been trampling on the Second Amendment for decades (particularly in the past 35 years), it shouldn't surprise anyone that the first is now getting its turn to be stomped. This isn't really new either; let's not forget the "hate crime" and "hate speech" laws that the Democrats began importing in the 1990s from our little "allies" in Europe. Speaking of which ... in France it is now a crime to show disrepect to the French flag or national anthem; big fine and prison time. The UK has just put its citzens on notice that if you violate a law of some other EU country, even if you never set foot in that country and the act is not a crime in the UK, you can be extradited. France and Germany prosecute US-based web sites for content that is legal in the US, but illegal in France and Germany. Our cousins north of the 49th parallel are still reeling from recent laws in Canada. Don't kid yourself. Freedom of speech is getting kicked around, and it's a lot worse than whether or not an IP address is blocked because it carries dirty pictures. The kicking around is more subtle than the totalitarian movements of the 20s and 30s, but the end state is the same. Only the refusal of the US government to sign certain UN treaties (with high-sounding names and motivations but rather horrifying consequences) stands in the way of the end of the Bill of Rights in the US. I wish that I could be more optimistic. I suspect that in a few more years, we'll be told that the First Amendment is about the right of the state government to print newspapers. If there's a hopeful note to be sounded, it's that Russia is starting to buck the trend. -- Mark -- http://staff.washington.edu/mrc Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: If the government starts trampling on the First Amendment (more than they are already) it will ruin my joke about same. Recall how 'liberal' folks, in their idealogical consistency for many years have messed with the Second Amendment while worshipping and lauding the First Amendment. You see, while sticks and stones (or in this context, guns) may break your bones, names will never hurt you. Or so 'they' say. Do like me, fire off your mouth all you like, that's cool, but fire off a gun and someone might get hurt or killed. That's how many people think, and because the USA government is so dreadfully afraid of wholesale rebellion if the general public was to routinely and legally possess guns, that is the reason for the rationale which goes like this: "The Second Amendment 'clearly' states that 'in order to have a well ordered milita' the right of the citizens to bear arms will not be infringed." Or some words close to that. That 'well ordered militia' they claim is our military forces. Of all the Amendments, the Second is the only one which in the opinion of many liberals -- and the government and their police agencies -- gives rights to the *government* instead of the citizens. That argument about 'well ordered militia equaling our National Guard' is an old, tired argument. My joke goes like this: If the Second Amendment references to a well- ordered militia refers to the national military, therefore the rest of us 'have no need for weapons', then the First Amendment must be interpreted the same way: Since the New York Times and the Washington Post (and its sister publication, News Weak magazine) both have 'well ordered' and highly sophisticated routines in place to speak for the rest of us, then we don't need free speech either. If you wish to speak, let the newspapers do it for you. After all, if you wish to fire a gun, the government 'has the right' (according to the government and many 'liberal' supporters) to fire the gun for you. I guess before long they will claim they have 'the right' to speak for you also; after all, they wouldn't say or do anything you disagree with, would they? United we stand as Americans and all that. Anyway, that's my joke. When the First Amendment gets 'administrativly revoked' (as happened years ago to the Second) then my joke won't have any meaning any longer. **Please no not misunderstand my posture here.*** I *personally* hate and despise guns or weapons. I would *never* have one in my home. I am afraid of guns, and grow physically ill having them around. I think in my lifetime, I have touched one gun, one time. But I certainly would not want to deny other people the right to own weapons or use them in a responsible way. That's the difference; the government would prefer that no one (but themselves) could have them, and in their arrogance, they would not hesitate to use them. At least they never have thus far. Okay, Mark Crispin, others who would prefer that I say nothing of the Liberal Crap Variety, and stick to Telecom Topics in this forum. Are you a little happier now? PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Feb 2003 22:47:09 -0800 Reply-To: jmyers@n6wuz.net From: John R. Myers Subject: Re: Traffic Engineering: Reducing Peakedness lnpr@yahoo.com (Nekele) asked on 16 Feb 2003: > Hello, > What are some techniques for reducing the day-to-day peakedness of > traffic on Alternate Final routes, so that the usage of those trunks > is increased? > 2. Would decreasing the size of the Intermediate High Usage trunk > groups, thereby increasing the amount of traffic on the Alternate > Final trunk group help? This will help you to accomplish your goal of reducing peakedness on your final trunk group. > 3. Would consolidating numerous Alternate Final trunk groups (each > with varying traffic patterns) into fewer larger Alternate Final trunk > groups help? Probably not, unless there are measurements proving that the different groups have non-coincident busy hours. > -> the question being, does mixing more traffic into the Alternate > Final trunk groups (#2 & #3 above) create smoother, less peaked > traffic, so that Z is lower? You really need to provide a better problem description. Is there a quality-of-service requirement? In solution #2 you could end up with high levels of blocked calls for some origin-destination pairs. Is that OK? To analyze an alternate routing network you need to use a computer unless you are dealing with a trivially-simple network. The computer analysis is meaningless unless it is grounded in accurate measurements of offered traffic; and the traffic measurement part is far more expensive than the computer-aided design and analysis part. Start with the engineering problem of maximizing the dollar value of the traffic carried while minimizing the network cost. This gives you some idea of how much measurement and analysis you can reasonably afford to do on any given network. I hope this question was just a homework problem ... don't go moving trunk groups around on the basis of guesswork. John R. Myers / mailto:jmyers@n6wuz.net P.O. Box 50662 Palo Alto, California 94303 / USA tel. +1 650 322-6863 / fax. +1 650 322-7041 ------------------------------ From: Dave Phelps Subject: Re: Netizen Ronda Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2003 11:04:34 -0600 Organization: www.tippenring.com In article , andrew@nats.edu says: > Can anyone spot Ronda in this video? > http://w3.kill-9.com/peace.mov > Andrew LMAO! That was hilarious. I believe I will be saving my breath (fingers?) from here out. How could I convince such bright, knowledgable people to see something my way, just by presenting indisputable facts? I can't. So instead, I'll just start asking them questions about their own position. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Are you certain you got that URL > correct? The first part w3.kill-9.com only got me the single word > 'blah2' in the upper corner of my screen. From there, appending > the directory 'peace.mov' got me a little tiny square with three > small colored objects in it. No videos, even when I tried appending > things like '.htm' and '.html' following that. I thought maybe it was > a broken movie, or just slow loading, so I tried it again, and went > to get a drink then came back in five minutes. Still nothing. What > am I/did I miss in this? PAT] Pat, it's not streaming, you have to download the whole thing. It doesn't look like it's doing anything. I knew it was downloading because the lights on my hub were showing activity. Dave Phelps Phone Masters Ltd. deadspam=tippenring ------------------------------ 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: 620-330-6774 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 Fax 3: 775-642-0603 Fax 4: 530-309-7234 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: mirror.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. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2003 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 V22 #310 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Feb 24 14:14:24 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h1OJENs13169; Mon, 24 Feb 2003 14:14:24 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2003 14:14:24 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200302241914.h1OJENs13169@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #311 TELECOM Digest Mon, 24 Feb 2003 14:13:00 EST Volume 22 : Issue 311 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Net Blocking Threatens Legitimate Sites (Mark Brader) Re: Net Blocking Threatens Legitimate Sites (Al Iverson) Re: Net Blocking Threatens Legitimate Sites (John Higdon) 900Mhz Staticky Reception and WiFi (Duane Morin) Re: ICANN Future Extensions? (Judith Oppenheimer) Re: The Perils of E-Mail (Barry Margolin) CHP Rethinks Phones/In a Reversal, The Agency Favors a Bill (Monty Solomon) CERT Advisory CA-2003-06 Multiple Vulnerabilities (Monty Solomon) The Next Space Race (Monty Solomon) Sun, Again, Bets Against the Odds (Monty Solomon) Sony Ericsson P800 Focuses On Phone Over E-Mail Tool (Monty Solomon) ESI Announces New Products For 2003 (BHAX) Need Hitachi HCX 5600 PBX Manual Please!!! (E) Re: Helpful Telco Numbers Used For Troubleshooting (Reverend Dr. Benrand) Re: Mainstream Companies and SPAM (Paul A Lee) Last Laugh! 800 Business Directory (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 VIRUSES. 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Net Blocking Threatens Legitimate Sites Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2003 20:56:59 EST From: msb@vex.net (Mark Brader) Mark Crispin wrote: >>> The entire point of a boycott is to cause collateral damage. I (Mark Brader) wrote: >> No, it isn't. I'll go further and say that it's logically impossible for the *entire* reason for *anything* to be to cause collateral damage! TELECOM Digest Editor then noted in response: > Would you please explain to Mark Crispin, myself, and others here > what you believe the 'entire purpose of a boycott' is in that case? To damage the person or organization being boycotted, until they either shut down or make some concession desired by the boycott's organizers; to gain publicity for the cause in question, and promote unity among those sympathetic to it. Mark Brader, Toronto | "Anyone who can handle a needle convincingly can make msb@vex.net | us see a thread which is not there." --E.H. Gombrich My text in this article is in the public domain. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But isn't your latest (more lengthy) definition of 'boycott' essentially what Mark Crispin said in fewer words, 'to cause collateral damage'? PAT] ------------------------------ From: Al Iverson Subject: Re: Net Blocking Threatens Legitimate Sites Organization: WombatMail(sm) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2003 19:37:20 -0600 In article , msb@vex.net (Mark Brader) wrote: > Mark Crispin: >> ... widely-deployed blocking by IP address has precisely the desired >> effect: to get ISPs and hosting providers to clean up their act. >> Blocking by IP address is nothing more than the technological equivalent >> of a boycott. > No, boycotts are voluntary. >> The entire point of a boycott is to cause collateral damage. > No, it isn't. Actually, yes, it is. I would recommend that you investigate how DNSBL anti-spam "spam source" blacklists work. Look at how lists like SPEWS or Spamsites will expand listings to include servers that are not directly involved in a spam issue. The point of doing so is to increase the pressure on the entity causing the spam or spam problem, either directly or indirectly. In the case of directly, the blacklist will list the corporate mailservers of the ISP hosting what they don't like. In the case of indirectly, the blacklist will list the IP addresses and/or networks of other customers on that ISP. Then those customers complain to the ISP for not resolving the problem with the blacklisting entity. In the realm of anti-spam blocking, that's called collateral damage, and it's quite common. It makes non-spam mail bounce, on purpose, to cause pain to whoever runs or owns that server or network. I've run multiple DNSBLs, and I used to work for the Mail Abuse Prevention System. My current employer, where I work as internal spam policeman, has been periodically subject to both types, even though the issues didn't directly relate to any conduct relating to us or our network. So, I know what I'm talking about. Regards, Al Iverson -- http://www.spamresource.com -- Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA Protected by WombatMail! -- Disclaimer: All of my opinions are mine alone. ------------------------------ From: John Higdon Subject: Re: Net Blocking Threatens Legitimate Sites Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2003 16:53:40 -0800 In article , Mark Crispin wrote: > On the contrary, widely-deployed blocking by IP address has precisely the > desired effect: to get ISPs and hosting providers to clean up their act. The problem with that is: who sets "the standards" and who enforces them? One man's pornography is another man's vital medical information. Swinging a club through cyberspace in the defense of truth and right can have unintended consequences. > Blocking by IP address is nothing more than the technological equivalent > of a boycott. The entire point of a boycott is to cause collateral > damage. By whom and for whom? > The ISPs and providers will ultimately be forced to choose between their > sleazy customers and their legitimate customers. Either way, it makes > things easier for the rest of us. So will someone supply ISPs with a detailed list of "sleazy" customers and a list of "acceptable" customers? How will they know? Sometimes opinions vary. > I feel sorry for legitimate entities that find themselves in bad > neighborhoods, but not that sorry. So now we need a third list of "acceptable" hosting sites so that web site owners can find the ISPs that have and honor the "sleazy" and "acceptable" definitions lists. Great. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | Anytown, USA | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Some of you may recall, I had a discussion similar to this with Joey Lindstrom not too long ago about what I consider 'acceptable spam' versus the garbage stuff. I said something about my general approval of (admittedly unsolicited) items sent by educational institutions for use in this Digest. We then got into discussion of 'making subjective decisions'. Remember that discussion? If I quote Joey correctly, he said *all* UCE was essentially spam. All I can say is if we knew 20 years ago what we know today I have to wonder if Usenet would have ever gotten started. PAT] ------------------------------ From: dmorin@morinfamily.com (Duane Morin) Subject: 900Mhz Staticky Reception and WiFi Date: 23 Feb 2003 16:31:09 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Hi, I have an AT&T 900Mhz phone whose features I'm very happy with -- voice caller ID alone is worth the price so that I don't have to get up off the couch when it's my wife's parents :). However, it has lately gone pretty staticky and my wife now hates it. I've heard it too, and she's not exaggerating. It's pretty crummy. Before I assume that it is a hardware failure and just run out to get another version of the exact same phone, can somebody give me ideas what might cause this? I'm running 802.11b in the house but I was under the impression that that screwed up the 2Gig phones not the 900Mhz ones. Could the battery not be fully charged? Is it a channel thing? I doubt that it has to do with any particular call that's being made because the static can be heard even during the dial tone before the call is even connected. Does anybody have a recommendation for a cordless phone that has voice caller id? Thanks. Duane [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, I have a very good unit which I love a lot. Its a Uniden cordless phone which came to me through a friend who obtained it from Costco at a place in Oregon. Not only is it a cordless phone, it has a tapeless answering machine in the base unit, *and* caller ID in the handset, *and* a headset. Fifty dollars ... it is the EXAI-378 series from Uniden. Lots of user setable options. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Judith Oppenheimer Subject: Re: ICANN Future Extensions? Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2003 20:26:02 -0500 Al Franz wrote: > What is a good resource to understand the current state of ICANN > approving additional domain extensions? Tried to find the information > on http://www.icann.org but was unable to find. Read http://ICANNWatch.org daily. Of course there is always plenty of searchable ICANN commentary on http://ICBTollFreeNews.com, and bookmark http://www.domainhandbook.com for the best in historical reference sites on ICANN. Here is a good article you might enjoy immediately: The Farm "...where we talk about the work that we can't talk about." Thoughts On Creating a Sustainable Framework for Administering the Deployment of New gTLDs http://r.tucows.com/archives/2003/02/17/thoughts_on_new_gtlds_part_i.htm l Judith Oppenheimer http://JudithOppenheimer.com http://ICBTollFreeNews.com http://WhoSells800.com 212 684-7210, 1 800 The Expert ------------------------------ From: Barry Margolin Subject: Re: The Perils of E-Mail Organization: Genuity Managed Services, Woburn, MA Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2003 15:45:16 GMT In article , Gail M. Hall wrote: > My concern about using E-mail "evidence" is the ease with which such > things as dates and mail headers can be changed with computer > software. While this may be true, it's irrelevant to this discussion. Management wasn't warning employees to be more discerning about forged email, they were training them to be more careful about not sending valid email that might be used against the company and its management. Also, the cases that they're worried about were not just a couple of forged messages. Situations like Enron involved a conspiracy among the entire management team, and the evidence presumably includes dozens or hundreds of emails between different people. While it may be technically possible to fabricate all of this, it's very unlikely, and everyone involved would have to maintain a consistent cover story to put it in doubt. The email is just *one* piece of evidence, not the entire case against these people. Barry Margolin, barry.margolin@level3.com Genuity Managed Services, 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. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2003 20:13:11 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: CHP Rethinks Phones / In a Reversal, The Agency Favors a Bill In a reversal, the agency favors a bill that would restrict drivers to using hands-free devices. By Ray F. Herndon LA Times Staff Writer After studying 18 months' worth of statewide accident reports, the CHP has recommended to Gov. Gray Davis and the Legislature that California consider passing a law requiring drivers use only hands-free cellular telephones. The recommendation marks a reversal of policy for the CHP, whose director, Dwight O. Helmick, had lobbied against such a bill in the last two sessions of the Legislature. An almost identical bill was introduced for a third time at the beginning of this year's session. To inform its debate about the role of cell phones in accidents, the Legislature passed a bill in 2001 ordering the CHP to study the issue and make a report by the end of 2002. At least 22 countries -- and New York state -- require drivers to use only hands-free cell phones. Virtually every state has considered some type of cell phone legislation since 1999. The CHP withdrew its original report on the hazards of "distracted driving" and revised it in November, after a Times study found that the numbers the CHP was using dramatically understated the number of accidents in which cell phone usage could have been a factor. The final report, posted on the CHP's Web site last week, includes the higher accident numbers unearthed by The Times and acknowledges that some officers may be mistakenly underreporting accidents caused by cell phone usage. This was blamed on unclear reporting guidelines issued by the CHP, which the agency promised to clear up in the next edition of its instruction manual. ... http://www.latimes.com/technology/la-me-cell23feb23,1,390853.story ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2003 20:21:44 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: CERT Advisory CA-2003-06 Multiple Vulnerabilities http://www.cert.org/advisories/CA-2003-06.html CERT Advisory CA-2003-06 Multiple vulnerabilities in implementations of the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Original release date: February 21, 2003 Last revised: Feb 21 14:45:34 EST Source: CERT/CC A complete revision history can be found at the end of this file. Systems Affected SIP-enabled products from a wide variety of vendors are affected. Other systems making use of SIP may also be vulnerable but were not specifically tested. Not all SIP implementations are affected. See Vendor Information for details from vendors who have provided feedback for this advisory. In addition to the vendors who provided feedback for this advisory, a list of vendors whom CERT/CC contacted regarding these problems is available from VU#528719. Overview Numerous vulnerabilities have been reported in multiple vendors' implementations of the Session Initiation Protocol. These vulnerabilities may allow an attacker to gain unauthorized privileged access, cause denial-of-service attacks, or cause unstable system behavior. If your site uses SIP-enabled products in any capacity, the CERT/CC encourages you to read this advisory and follow the advice provided in the Solution section below. I. Description The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) is a developing and newly deployed protocol that is commonly used in Voice over IP (VoIP), Internet telephony, instant messaging, and various other applications. SIP is a text-based protocol for initiating communication and data sessions between users. ... http://www.cert.org/advisories/CA-2003-06.html ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2003 20:26:07 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: The Next Space Race This fall, China will launch its first manned satellite into orbit. For the United States, this is a threat - and an opportunity. By John J. Miller, 2/23/2003 "QUICK ALERT! " SHOUTED Air Force Captain Roger Cutshaw. "Secure all unclassified lines! " An early-detection satellite had just spotted an unscheduled rocket launch inside China. Cutshaw was the ranking officer on duty at the space control center of the North American Aerospace Defense Command-better known as NORAD-inside Cheyenne Mountain. It was a few minutes before 10 o'clock in the morning, Colorado time, this past Dec. 29. Six other people were in Cutshaw's small room. They scrambled to identify the unknown object and track its flight path, glaring at monitors and tapping at keyboards. If this were a missile, they would need to know its trajectory as soon as possible. As it turned out, the rocket didn't lift a weapons payload. Instead, it boosted the Shenzhou 4-a final prototype for the manned orbiter China has committed itself to launching later this year. "We had a good idea of what it was," says Cutshaw. "But we treat every event seriously. This is what we train for. We did our job well." The Chinese appear to have done their job well, too. The Shenzhou 4 zipped around the planet more than a hundred times before dropping its re-entry capsule back to earth about a week later, on January 5. The Shenzhou 5 is slated for launch in October or November, and it will carry a human cargo. Until now, only the United States and Russia have put people in orbit. Assuming the Shenzhou 5 succeeds, China will become the world's third spacefaring nation. There will be astronauts, cosmonauts-and taikonauts. This event, in turn, will mark China's emergence as a major space power, a prospect that is at once admirable and worrisome. ... http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/054/focus/The_next_space_race+.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2003 20:42:53 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Sun, Again, Bets Against the Odds By STEVE LOHR SCOTT G. McNEALY, the chief executive of Sun Microsystems, was pacing the stage in San Francisco two weeks ago, working hard to stir up enthusiasm in the crowd for his company's new products. The litany of offerings was long and impressive - data serving computers of all kinds, graphics workstations, storage networks, software. The implicit message was clear: Sun, though battered by the high-technology slump, is still churning out new products and new ideas. Dressed in blue jeans and a khaki shirt, Mr. McNealy, ever blunt and informal, was helpfully translating the benefits of Sun's wares in plain terms. He gestured toward one of Sun's zippy small server computers. "Think of these as piston rings," said Mr. McNealy, who grew up in suburban Detroit, the son of an auto executive. Increasingly, Sun's customers, mostly corporations, do indeed think of computers as if they were piston rings. And that is precisely Sun's problem. No established company rode higher on the Internet wave than Sun, whose sales nearly doubled, to $18.25 billion, in the three fiscal years ended in June 2001. Sun created the Internet programming language Java and made the hot boxes -- the leading server computers -- that powered so many corporate networks using Internet technology and Web sites. Sun computers, the company's advertising proclaimed, "put the dot in dot.com." Sun's machines were pricey, but customers didn't much care during the good times. Today, things could scarcely be more different for Sun and its customers. No new-economy chic clings to any computer maker anymore. Cost-cutting is the order of the day for corporate customers. And servers based on low-cost technology from the personal computer world -- Intel-compatible microprocessors -- are eating into Sun's business. Sun's quandary is that its business appears to be alarmingly dependent on high-cost, proprietary hardware at a time when technology trends and customers seem to be headed in the other direction - toward inexpensive, PC-based hardware that is more like an industrial commodity, the computer equivalent of a piston ring. Sun relies on its own microprocessor design and its Solaris software, the leading version of the industrial-strength Unix operating system. Rival low-cost Intel-based servers run Microsoft's Windows operating system or Linux, a variant of Unix that is distributed free and constantly improved by a network of programmers. Linux poses the more imminent threat to Sun because both Sun's Solaris and Linux share the Unix heritage, easing the way for companies to move to Linux and the inexpensive hardware on which it runs. Two years ago, for example, weather.com, the Web site of cable television's Weather Channel, ran on 80 Sun servers. Today, the data center for weather.com is filled with 123 Intel-based servers running Linux - and Sun was sent packing. The savings on hardware were $2.3 million, according to Dan Agronow, vice president for technology at weather.com, who added that maintenance costs were lower, too. ... http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/23/business/yourmoney/23SUNN.html ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2003 21:45:13 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Sony Ericsson P800 Focuses On Phone Over E-Mail Tool By WALTER S. MOSSBERG Wireless-gadget fans will get the chance over the next month or so to buy two new communicators -- those combination devices that attempt to merge a cellular phone, PDA and hand-held e-mail receiver. One of the new models was designed in Europe and one in California. They take very different approaches to blending the three functions. This week, I'll look at the European entry, the Sony Ericsson P800, which I've been testing in London and Washington. Next week, I'll review the latest American contender, the Palm Tungsten W. Most of the communicators produced so far are either primarily phones with the PDA and e-mail functions bolted on, or PDAs with the phone and e-mail functions bolted on. These two new entries are no exception. Sony Ericsson makes phones, so the P800 is a phone first and foremost. Palm makes PDAs, so the Tungsten W is a PDA first. The P800 is expected to be rolled out by carriers on both sides of the Atlantic in the next month or two. Until then, American consumers can buy it for $649 from the company's Web site. If you buy it that way, you'll have to activate it yourself by popping in the little smart card that bears your account information from an existing phone on a compatible carrier, such as T-Mobile, AT&T or Cingular. ... http://ptech.wsj.com/archive/ptech-20030220.html ------------------------------ From: bhax@sbcglobal.net (BHAX) Subject: ESI Announces New Products For 2003 Date: 23 Feb 2003 20:10:47 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Plano, Texas, February 14, 2003 ESI (Estech Systems, Inc.) an innovative manufacturer of telephone systems for small to medium-sized businesses, has announced a sight launch for 2003 including newly designed Feature Phones, new classes of phone systems, and Esi-Mail unified messaging. "ESI continues to grow at a rapid pace as a result of providing true value-added products to the customer and exceptional service to our resellers," said Jason Beckett, ESI Senior Vice President of Sales and Marketing. "ESI also continues to expand into new markets by increasing the flexibility of system sizing, and Feature Phone choices, as well as offering new communications technology to customers in a simple, easy-to-implement, easy-to-understand product family." New Feature Phones The three new phone models take greater advantage of ESI system features. Each has a sleek, modern look. The 48-Key Digital Feature Phone (also available in IP, TAPI and Remote IP models) is designed for the active user, and has 30 programmable keys and an enhanced three-line display. The 60-Key Expansion Console shares the look of the new phones, and connects to the 48-Key Feature Phone. The 24-Key Digital Feature Phone is designed for less active applications. The 12-Key Digital Feature Phone is intended for infrequent use, such as for lobbies, warehouses and other placements. New phone system classes IVX E-Class includes voice mail, an automated attendant and automatic call distributor (ACD). IVX E-Class systems also support the new Esi-Mail unified messaging application and advanced voice over IP (VoIP) communications. Two systems are available: IVX 72e (70 call processing ports) and IVX 128e (126 call processing ports). IP E-Class continues ESI's presence in the exploding VoIP market. The IP 200e and IP 40e handling a maximum of 198 and 70 call-processing ports, respectively are advanced, IP (Internet Protocol) network-based business telephone systems that combine all of the features of IVX E-Class with state-of-the-art delivery of packetized voice via the existing local area network/wide area network (LAN/WAN) to the desktop. Also available on IP E-Class is the new Esi-Mail unified messaging application. IVX S-Class is designed for the small to mid-sized business with flexible voice mail needs and moderate growth requirements. IVX S-Class comes with a four-line, eight-digital-station and two-analog-station configuration. It grows to as many as 12 CO lines, 24 digital stations and six analog ports, and is ideally suited to handle the majority of small business growth requirements. Also, IVX S-Class offers two new voice mail options or an Integrated Answering Machine depending on the needs of the customer. Esi-Mail unified messaging With the Esi-Mail unified messaging option, E-Class users can view, prioritize, and select for playback any voice mail message from their Microsoft Outlook 2000/2002 Inbox. A variety of controls on the integrated Esi-Mail toolbar allow for synchronization between the Outlook 2000/2002 Inbox and the user's voice mailbox. Esi-Mail has the added benefit of not requiring an expensive server, meaning unified messaging is now cost-effective for the small to mid-size business. Product availability ESI products are available through Converged Technologies. To contact Converged Technologies, an ESI Reseller, go to www.convergedtech.net, call Converged Technologies at (614) 252-8611, or sales@convergedtech.net. Ben Hackney Converged Technologies ------------------------------ From: enet@csi.com (E) Subject: Need Hitachi HCX 5600 PBX Manual Please!!! Date: 24 Feb 2003 05:57:54 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Hi, Does anyone have a copy of Hitachi's HCX 5600 phone system manual? Ethan ------------------------------ From: Reverend Dr. Benrand Jr. Subject: Re: Helpful Telco Numbers Used For Troubleshooting Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2003 09:04:09 -0500 Organization: Michigan State University On Fri, 21 Feb 2003 20:40:03 -0500, Chuk Gleason wrote: > Reverend - > What exactly are you trying to look at, remotely; I work in a two-way > radio shop, and my boss is big believer in equipment that monitors > remote sites and alerts us to upcoming problems (rather than waiting > for them to become crises.) Numbers that could give you info on things like number of hops or line signal strength or what number you are dialing from. Things like that. I know it's failry complicated, but there has got to be some tricks. It would be helpful when testing remote power reset, we use modems for that and I don't like being completely blind. > There are several technologies here. Contact me off list, unless > someone else requests we keep it here on the list. > Chuk Gleason > Cary, NC >> From: Reverend Dr. Benrand Jr. >> Subject: Helpful Telco Numbers Used For Troubleshooting >> Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2003 08:35:52 -0500 >> Organization: Michigan State University >> I am looking for numbers that can be used on a regular telco system to >> troubleshoot from a local location rather than traveling to a site. >> Sort of a newbie here with this stuff, but we have remote power reset >> sites and it is inconvenient to do traveling when a problem could be >> diagnosed locally, obviously. I have searched on the web for helpful >> codes and what I get is hacking info, I don't really need that, but >> verifying that a line is active would be helpful. ------------------------------ From: Paul A Lee Subject: Re: Mainstream Companies and SPAM Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2003 12:29:25 -0500 In TELECOM Digest V22 #309, Phil Earnhardt wrote (in part): > On Sat, 22 Feb 2003 00:23:49 -0500, Gail M. Hall > wrote: >> On Thu, 20 Feb 2003 08:58:21 -0700, in comp.dcom.telecom message >> , you wrote: >>> Hewlett-Packard uses a company called "m0.net" to send out >>> newsletters about HP products. >> Obviously, you don't get those newsletters. [SNIP] > That's a strange thing to say. I have received dozens. Would you like > me to forward one to you? > Perhaps I didn't pay enough attention to the headers. But one thing is > for certain: there was absolutely no HP contact info contained > anywhere in the e-mailing. [extensive additional point, counterpoint, and conjecture omitted] Phil and Gail may both be right. I recall receiving HP promotional email coming from several third-party companies, as well as some strange, HP-like domains (e.g., "hp3.com" or the like). If you have downloaded a driver update, a product data sheet, or any of a number of other things from Hewlett-Packard (or Compaq, or Digital Equipment [DEC]), you can wind up receiving promotional emails. It's easy to miss during the download "registration" process, but you "agree" to it. That may not be the most enlightened and forthright way to do things, but I will offer this in HP's defense: If you opt out, they DO STOP sending stuff. Check your options at http://whp-sp-orig.extweb.hp.com/country/us/eng/privacy.htm#7 In my experience, you're pretty safe sending an opt-out or unsubscribe request to a legitimate company. That doesn't necessarily mean blindly responding to the promotional email. Check the address of the sender. Look at the source code for the "unsubscribe" link. Or, as I did, go directly to the web site of the company represented in the promotion, and check for privacy or opt-out policies. Typically (again, my experience), you'll find a link or an email address to use to unsubscribe on a legit company's web site, and it will work, even when a third-party promotional service is used. The ones you have to watch out for are the emails that promote a product of a legitimate and reputable company, but that actually represent a spammer/scammer, as with the Norton product spams. I suggest you forward those to the company whose product is being (mis)represented. Trouble is, they're usually already aware of the spam and doing what they can to fight it. Paul A Lee Voice: +1 717 730-8355 Sr Telecom Engineer [Voice & Transmission] Fax: +1 717 975-3789 Rite Aid Corporation, Telecomm, 30 Hunter Lane, Camp Hill, PA 17011-2410 ------------------------------ From: stevenl11@aol.com (Steven Lichter) Date: 24 Feb 2003 02:27:39 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Subject: Last Laugh! 800 Business Directory ...to teach this individual about the cost of owning an 800 number... -----Original Message----- How have you been ... You could make over $150-k in less then 3mo's time, promoting major concerts in the United States and investing into the Music Industry!! We have been investing in the music industry for over 15 years!! Check us out at: www.mcgillismusic.com If you have interest please contact us for more information!! E-Mail: Concerts@mcgillismusic.com (IMPORTANT!! Follow up with telephone call if no response to E-mail) World Wide Entertainment USA Inc. (a Delaware Corporation Since 1988) Telephone: (561) 758-5597 Toll Free USA: (800) 384-7369 Fax: (801) 730-9028 For complete details about this incredible offer, please reply to this email with the words "More Info Please" in the subject line. Thank you. Immediate Help Needed. We are a .com corporation that is growing at a tremendous rate of over 1000% per year. We simply cannot keep up. We are looking for motivated individuals who are looking to earn a substantial income. ------------------------------------------- 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) I Kill Spammers, Inc. A Rot In Hell Company. ------------------------------ 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: 620-330-6774 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 Fax 3: 775-642-0603 Fax 4: 530-309-7234 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: mirror.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. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2003 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 V22 #311 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Feb 24 18:30:53 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h1ONUr114510; Mon, 24 Feb 2003 18:30:53 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2003 18:30:53 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200302242330.h1ONUr114510@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #312 TELECOM Digest Mon, 24 Feb 2003 18:30:00 EST Volume 22 : Issue 312 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Telecom Update (Canada) #371, February 24, 2003 (Angus TeleManagement) Re: Net Blocking Threatens Legitimate Sites (Barry Margolin) Re: Net Blocking Threatens Legitimate Sites (John Higdon) Re: Net Blocking Threatens Legitimate Sites (Herb Stein) Re: Net Blocking Threatens Legitimate Sites (Charles Cryderman) Re: Net Blocking Threatens Legitimate Sites (Joey Lindstrom) 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 VIRUSES. 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, 24 Feb 2003 13:46:12 -0500 From: Angus TeleManagement Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #371, February 24, 2003 ************************************************************ TELECOM UPDATE ************************************************************ published weekly by Angus TeleManagement Group http://www.angustel.ca Number 371: February 24, 2003 Publication of Telecom Update is made possible by generous financial support from: ** BELL CANADA: http://www.bell.ca ** CISCO SYSTEMS CANADA: http://www.cisco.com/ca/letstalk ** CYGCOM INTEGRATED TECHNOLOGIES: http://www.cygcom.com ** ERICSSON CANADA: http://www.ericsson.ca ** JUNIPER NETWORKS: http://www.juniper.net ** PRIMUS CANADA: http://www.primustel.ca ** Q9 NETWORKS: http://www.Q9.com ** TELUS: http://www.telus.com ************************************************************ IN THIS ISSUE: ** Budget Disappoints High-Tech Groups ** Court Rejects Videotron Cabling Appeal ** Creditors Okay AT&T Plan ** Nimiq 2 Hit by Power Disruption ** Foreign Ownership Hearings, Week 4 ** New Microcell Board to Include Sirois ** 8 Million Credit Card Accounts Hacked ** DSL for $18.95 per Month ** Shaw Sells U.S. Cable Firms ** Ottawa Protests Directory Errors ** Mitel Upgrades IP-PBX, Phones ** Bell Offers BlackBerry Cellphone ** Ottawa Plans Library Portal ** Bell Mobility Offers R&D Funding ** New EVP at BCE ** Rogers Wireless Names Eastern President ** More Telemarketers Busted ** Financial Reports Axia NetMedia Com Dev Primus Canada Yak Communications ** Key to Success for Rural Broadband ** New Options for Wireless LAN Security ============================================================ BUDGET DISAPPOINTS HIGH-TECH GROUPS: Both the Canadian Advanced Technology Alliance and the Information Technology Association Alliance say they are disappointed by last week's federal budget, which included no new funding for broadband and no improvements in R&D incentives. COURT REJECTS VIDEOTRON CABLING APPEAL: The Federal Court has refused to hear Videotron's appeal against a CRTC decision limiting the fees the cableco can charge to competitors who use its wiring in apartment buildings. (See Telecom Update #353) CREDITORS OKAY AT&T PLAN: AT&T Canada says that 91% of voting creditors have approved its restructuring plan. The company will seek court approval of the plan this week, and expects to emerge from bankruptcy protection on April 1. (See Telecom Update #367) NIMIQ 2 HIT BY POWER DISRUPTION: Telesat's newly launched Nimiq 2 direct broadcast satellite suffered a power failure February 20 that blacked out 10%-15% of Bell ExpressVu's channels. Telesat will investigate the malfunction this week, after moving traffic temporarily to Nimiq 1. (See Telecom Update #364) FOREIGN OWNERSHIP HEARINGS, WEEK 4: Last week's witnesses before the parliamentary committee reviewing foreign ownership of telecom carriers included BCE, Dominion Telecom, Friends of Canadian Broadcasting, the National Alliance of Communications Unions, McGill Professor Richard Schultz, and the U.K. government. ** BCE CEO Michael Sabia favoured liberalized rules, suggesting that changes could be coordinated with the WTO negotiations that are slated for completion on January 1, 2005. In the meantime, the government could increase foreign ownership limits in holding companies to 49% from 33% without new legislation. ** The Communications unions warned that increased foreign ownership would lead to "poorer service, higher prices, and fewer jobs." ** The committee's final witnesses, scheduled for this week, include the CRTC, the Competition Bureau, and the Canadian Cable Television Association. NEW MICROCELL BOARD TO INCLUDE SIROIS: Microcell Telecom called a meeting of creditors March 17 to vote on its restructuring plan, by which creditors would exchange $1.7 billion in debt for 99.9% ownership. The new Board is to consist of nine creditor representatives plus current majority owner Charles Sirois. (See Telecom Update #364) 8 MILLION CREDIT CARD ACCOUNTS HACKED: Visa, MasterCard, and American Express say that in the past month an "unauthorized intruder" gained access to eight million card numbers, including 100,000 belonging to Canadians. The FBI is investigating. DSL FOR $18.95 PER MONTH: Startec Canada (formerly Vancouver Telephone Company) is reselling Telus ADSL service to its residential LD customers in B.C. and Alberta for $18.95 a month for the first six months and $34.95 a month after that. There's a $19.95 start-up fee, and customers must buy their own modems for about $70. SHAW SELLS U.S. CABLE FIRMS: Shaw Communications has agreed to sell its cable assets in Florida and Texas, which serve 71,000 subscribers, to Twean Subsidiary and Cequel III for a total of US$197 million, subject to regulatory approval. Proceeds will be used to repay debt. OTTAWA PROTESTS DIRECTORY ERRORS: If you want to get a pet spayed or neutered in Ottawa, the new phone book directs you to City Hall. The City says that's only one of more than 50 errors in the City's listings: it has complained to Bell Ontario President Terry Mosey about "poor customer service, lack of ownership, and lack of responsibility" in the Yellow Pages organization. ** Last September, BCE sold its directory publishing business to Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Co. of New York. (See Telecom Update #349) MITEL UPGRADES IP-PBX, PHONES: Mitel has announced Release 4.0 of its 3300 IP-PBX and a new family of six IP desktop phones that are compatible with the 3100, 3300, and SX-200 IP node systems. BELL OFFERS BLACKBERRY CELLPHONE: Bell Mobility says it is the first Canadian carrier to offer the CDMA version of RIM's BlackBerry 6750, which combines cellphone, PDA, and e-mail functions. (See Telecom Update #366) OTTAWA PLANS LIBRARY PORTAL: SmartCapital has announced plans to provide integrated on-line access to the collections of all of Ottawa's public libraries and the National Library of Canada, as well as the libraries of the University of Ottawa, Carleton University, and the National Research Council. BELL MOBILITY OFFERS R&D FUNDING: Bell Mobility has opened its sixth round of funding for wireless R&D conducted in Canada. Applications are due by March 31. For information, e-mail cmalette@cata.ca. NEW EVP AT BCE: Lawson Hunter, former director of the Competition Bureau and more recently a partner at Stikeman Elliot, has been named Executive Vice-President of BCE. He will be responsible for the company's regulatory affairs and other public policy issues. ROGERS WIRELESS NAMES EASTERN PRESIDENT: Jean Laporte, formerly a Vice-President and General Manager at Microcell, has been named President, Eastern Region, of Rogers AT&T Wireless. MORE TELEMARKETERS BUSTED: The Competition Bureau has laid criminal charges against seven Toronto-area individuals who allegedly took money from the bank accounts of victims, mostly U.S. seniors, who thought they were getting a free trial on a medical discount plan. The Bureau estimates that the scam telemarketers took in US$8 million in the past year. FINANCIAL REPORTS: ** Axia NetMedia of Calgary reports $31.8 million in revenue for the quarter ended December 31, compared to $18.8 million last year, an increase it attributes to its work on the Alberta SuperNet project. Axia had a net loss of $9.1 million in the quarter. ** Com Dev International reports net income for the three months ended January 31 of $168,000, compared to a $7.4 million loss last year. Revenue of $22.2 million was down 13% from the same time a year ago and 11% from the previous quarter. ** Primus Canada says its gross margin in the fourth quarter of 2002 was $40.2 million, 62% of net revenue, compared to $35.7 million in the prior quarter and $32.3 million for the fourth quarter of 2001. EBIDTA for the full year was $68M. ** Yak Communications, a Florida-based dial-around long distance reseller, reports net revenue of US$17.5 million, and net income of $1.4 million in the last six months of 2002. Ninety-six percent of the company's revenues come from its Canadian subsidiary, which has a marketing contract with Telus. KEY TO SUCCESS FOR RURAL BROADBAND: Analyzing six community broadband networks in Northern Ontario, Lis Angus identifies the key to their success: targeting government aid to locally determined priorities. Her report, originally printed in Telemanagement #195 and 196, is now posted in the Reports and Tutorials section of the Angus website. http://www.angustel.ca/ NEW OPTIONS FOR WIRELESS LAN SECURITY: In the last year, wireless LANs have proliferated in organizations across Canada -- and most are wide open to hackers and eavesdroppers. The new issue of Telemanagement features an in-depth report on the security measures you should be implementing now and preparing for in the near future. ** Also in this issue, Ian Angus describes the equipment and services he and Lis use to telecommute from a rural farmhouse, without breaking the telecom budget. ** Telemanagement is available only by subscription, and now is a great time to subscribe. Until March 15, new subscribers save $50 and get an extra bonus issue free. Download your Introductory Subscription Saving Certificate at http://www.angustel.ca/teleman/SubscriptionOffer.pdf. ============================================================ 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: join-telecom_update@atomic.sparklist.com To stop receiving the e-mail edition, send an e-mail message to: leave-telecom_update@atomic.sparklist.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 2003 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: Barry Margolin Subject: Re: Net Blocking Threatens Legitimate Sites Organization: Genuity Managed Services, Woburn, MA Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2003 19:17:06 GMT In article , John Higdon wrote: > In article , Mark Crispin > wrote: >> On the contrary, widely-deployed blocking by IP address has precisely the >> desired effect: to get ISPs and hosting providers to clean up their act. > The problem with that is: who sets "the standards" and who enforces > them? One man's pornography is another man's vital medical > information. Swinging a club through cyberspace in the defense of > truth and right can have unintended consequences. The sites that result in such extreme measures are rarely on the borderline like this. They're acknowledged spammers. >> The ISPs and providers will ultimately be forced to choose between their >> sleazy customers and their legitimate customers. Either way, it makes >> things easier for the rest of us. > So will someone supply ISPs with a detailed list of "sleazy" customers > and a list of "acceptable" customers? How will they know? Sometimes > opinions vary. We know -- our abuse mailboxes are full of complaints about the sleazy ones, and hardly any complaints about the acceptable ones. The problem that often results in us being labeled as "spam-friendly" is that people expect us to be able to drop these customers on a dime. Unfortunately, our contracts typically don't allow such drastic action. We have to notify the customer, give them a chance to explain and clean up their act; only if the misbehavior persists after a couple of rounds of this can we cancel their service. In article , Al Iverson wrote: > In the case of indirectly, the blacklist will list the IP addresses > and/or networks of other customers on that ISP. Then those customers > complain to the ISP for not resolving the problem with the blacklisting > entity. We often resolve this by giving new addresses to the customers who are hit by the collateral damage, while we continue negotiating with the spammer that caused their addresses to be blacklisted. It *doesn't* cause us to violate our contract with the spammer -- it still takes just as long for us to terminate their account. So the wide net cast by the expanded blacklist doesn't really have the desired effect. If "bad guys" used techniques like this, it would be called "terrorism" instead of "boycott". Barry Margolin, barry.margolin@level3.com Genuity Managed Services, 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: John Higdon Subject: Re: Net Blocking Threatens Legitimate Sites Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2003 11:19:11 -0800 TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: > [Some of you may recall, I had a > discussion similar to this with Joey Lindstrom not too long ago about > what I consider 'acceptable spam' versus the garbage stuff. I said > something about my general approval of (admittedly unsolicited) items > sent by educational institutions for use in this Digest. We then got > into discussion of 'making subjective decisions'. Remember that > discussion? If I quote Joey correctly, he said *all* UCE was > essentially spam. All I can say is if we knew 20 years ago what we > know today I have to wonder if Usenet would have ever gotten started. > PAT] There is a world of difference between the Digest and the Internet at large. On the one hand, you have a forum with a defined focus and the moderator is the accepted authority in maintaining that focus. In other words, it is YOUR JOB to censor material submitted for inclusion in the Digest. Contrast that with the Internet at large where virtually anything goes. Any material on any subject at any level of taste and discretion can and should be found there. In that environment, NO ONE has the job of censoring material, nor should they. But even more importantly, the last entity that I would pick to censor anything, public or private, would be any government, government entity, or government-appointed entity. Other countries might do something like that, but not the US. So if you deem something worth or unworthy to appear in the Digest, and you include it or exclude it, for whatever reason may be acceptable to you, the moderator, that is the natural order of things. People are likewise free to read the Digest or not. It is all a voluntary thing. But when the government begins to make up our minds for us with regard to life in general (as represented by the Internet), a serious line has been crossed. Guidelines, maybe. Blocking IPs, absolutely not. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | Anytown, USA | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: One thing I agree witn you on is I do not want any government agency making these decisions. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Herb Stein Subject: Re: Net Blocking Threatens Legitimate Sites Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2003 16:14:01 -0600 Mark Crispin wrote in message news:telecom22.310.11@telecom-digest.org: >> On Sat, 22 Feb 2003, John R. Levine wrote: >>>> On the contrary, widely-deployed blocking by IP address has >>>> precisely the desired effect: to get ISPs and hosting providers to >>>> clean up their act. >>> Perhaps, but when mandated by a government in the United States, it >>> has horrendous first amendment problems. > It may have the desired effect for you but not for me. Simply put, > I don't trust my government (US) to make those kinds of > decisions. For that matter, I don't want my ISP to make those > decisions either. I will handle any blocking at my firewall, thank > you. That difference of opinion aside, it is not technically > feasible today to block "offensive" (to who?) material without > also block useful material. We're attacking the symptom - not the > problem. > I don't like the junk email and kiddie porn any more than the rest > of you, but I don't trust anyone else to make the decision for > me. If want a law in the US that all spam be identified as such in > the header, fine. Off course, most that I receive comes from > Russia, Taiwan, etc. and I'm guessing that they couldn't care less > about our opinion. > I do, however, have a gut feeling that I will lose this one to the > do-gooders. >> Considering that government has been trampling on the Second >> Amendment for decades (particularly in the past 35 years), it >> shouldn't surprise anyone that the first is now getting its turn >> to be stomped. > There is a perverse justice in that issue. As someone one said in some > newsgroup, "If the press defended the second amendment as hard as they > defend the first, it be required for every US citizen to own a gun." >> This isn't really new either; let's not forget the "hate crime" >> and "hate speech" laws that the Democrats began importing in the >> 1990s from our little "allies" in Europe. Herb Stein The Herb Stein Group www.herbstein.com herb@herbstein.com 314 952-4601 ------------------------------ From: Cryderman, Charles Subject: Re: Net Blocking Threatens Legitimate Sites Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2003 16:28:36 -0500 The second amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America: "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." Our esteemed moderator stated: > USA government is so dreadfully afraid of wholesale rebellion if the > general public was to routinely and legally possess guns, that is > the reason for the rationale which goes like this: "The Second > Amendment 'clearly' states that 'in order to have a well ordered > militia the right of the citizens to bear arms will not be > infringed." Or some words close to that. A 'well ordered militia' > they claim is our military forces. Of all the Amendments, the Second > is the only one which in the opinion of many liberals -- and the > government and their police agencies -- gives rights to the > *government* instead of the citizens. That argument about 'well > ordered militia equaling our National Guard' is an old, tired > argument." First I put the actual wording of the 2nd amendment for all, pretty close Pat, no doubt from memory. I see the first part as a statement and I agree that it is about the US Military machine ("A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state,"). For any country to be solvent and secure a quality war machine needs to exist. As part of that, during the time the Constitution was written it was not unusual for a King or other Potentate to hurt or even kill their own citizens. Because the need for the security of the United states of America, an Army was needed. To ensure the citizens of the USA that what was common in other countries (killing of citizens for no reason other then the King wanted it as such and using their Armies to do it) there had to be some guarantee that the people could fight back ("the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed"). I see it not only as my right to own guns or any other weapon, I see it as my responsibility to own them. I also see, that if our rights are being taken away it is my responsibility to go to arms against my own government and rebel. One thing the press and liberals need to remember, the first amendment will be the second one to go, after the second is gone. They can't take away the voice of a well armed citizenry. Chip!!! Charles dot Cryderman at global crossing dot com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: And that -- the possibility of a well- armed citizenry -- is what scares the hell out of the government so badly. Let's face it: if the government even *came close* -- tried to work along even occassionally -- with the citizens instead of working only for the welfare of the massive army of public servants, it might be different. But the established press looks at the word 'populist' as some kind of dirty word. The very idea of having a candidate for office who was a libertarian in nature is very unrealistic. Like most prisons, the people who *try* to keep the lid on this country are just barely able to avoid wholesale rebellion. And the government would not hesitate -- not for a minute -- to use the military as needed to keep the citizens in line if they had to do so. Remember who ultimatly has the gun in this country. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Joey Lindstrom Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2003 12:46:16 -0700 Subject: Re: Net Blocking Threatens Legitimate Sites Reply-To: joey@telussucks.info On Sat, 22 Feb 2003 18:41:54 EST, Mark Crispin wrote: >> Blocking is ludicrous in the first place, but doing so by IP address >> is even dumber. Virtual hosting is a feature, not a bug. If you have a >> problem with your children accessing "bad" places, that is clearly a >> parental problem. Please don't make it mine. Technology can not solve >> this problem. > On the contrary, widely-deployed blocking by IP address has precisely the > desired effect: to get ISPs and hosting providers to clean up their act. > Blocking by IP address is nothing more than the technological equivalent > of a boycott. The entire point of a boycott is to cause collateral > damage. > The ISPs and providers will ultimately be forced to choose between their > sleazy customers and their legitimate customers. Either way, it makes > things easier for the rest of us. Your entire premise rests on the assumption that the content of these "bad places" is 100% universally condemned and/or illegal, but as far as I understand this, we're talking about some pornographic BUT LEGAL sites. The assumption is bad, therefore so is the proposal. > I feel sorry for legitimate entities that find themselves in bad > neighborhoods, but not that sorry. To paraphrase Dennis Miller, when did this entire country become Gladys Kravitz from Bewitched? I have a REAL problem with this idea. Porn sites may not be your cup of tea. They're not mine either (ok, I can hear most of you saying "oh yeah, sure sure...", but my argument doesn't rest on this so I don't care if ya believe me or not, heh heh). But they have a right to exist, same as Disney has a right to put up a kids website. Your plan puts excessive, and in my view unconscionable, pressure on ISP's and web hosting companies to "police" the websites they host, against activity that is perfectly legal and legitimate. So long as the websites they host are legal, it's none of your business (nor mine) whether or not they host them, and the idea that we should block the "good" customers of these companies because they happen to share the same IP as another customer of that company, whose material (while legal) we find objectionable, is complete and utter bollocks. You are punishing the "good" customers and you are punishing the ISP/webhost. The former has done nothing wrong, the latter has done something wrong ONLY in your Kravitz-affected opinion. You expect the ISP/webhost to cater to the whims and opinions of billions of people, any one of which could find ANY website "objectionable", and you expect the "good" customer to investigate every single other customer the ISP/webhost has before agreeing to do business with them. Would you like me to describe to you just how far the "good" customer (and the ISP/webhost) will tell you to shove this idea? Now, I do support this idea when it comes to spammers, but that's a breed of an entirely different ilk (to mangle a phrase). My mail servers do a database dip on spews.org's database on every incoming piece of mail, and yes, it does catch the occasional "good" customer in a bad neighbourhood. But at least I can then whitelist the "good" customer. This "bad neighborhood" plan doesn't offer any sort of whitelist capability and for that reason alone, it should be flushed down the toilet along with the rest of the (censored). -- Joey Lindstrom -- Telus Sucks http://www.telussucks.info ------------------------------ 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: 620-330-6774 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 Fax 3: 775-642-0603 Fax 4: 530-309-7234 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: mirror.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. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2003 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 V22 #312 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Feb 24 19:53:46 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h1P0rj015254; Mon, 24 Feb 2003 19:53:46 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2003 19:53:46 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200302250053.h1P0rj015254@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #313 TELECOM Digest Mon, 24 Feb 2003 19:54:00 EST Volume 22 : Issue 313 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Avaya Comverse Integration (Seth) Re: Mainstream Companies and SPAM (Fritz Whittington) Re: Mainstream Companies and SPAM (Paul A Lee) Does This Kind of Voicemail System / Service Exist? (Dave Anderson) Palm Tungsten W Handheld Available for the First Time in US (Monty Solomon) Cisco QOS for 3com NBX IP Telephony (Josh) Re: 900Mhz Staticky Reception and WiFi (Mike Hartley) Re: The Perils of E-Mail (Fritz Whittington) Picky, Picky (Joey Lindstrom) Why Did This Happen? *****SPAM***** Link Correction (Judith Oppenheimer) What Kind of Connector is This? What is it Used For? (Patrick Townson) 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 VIRUSES. 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: shelgesen@ingdirect.com (Seth) Subject: Avaya Comverse integration Date: 24 Feb 2003 11:34:06 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Anyone know if the Comverse/Ultra call recording application if configured for client side recording in an Avaya Definity environment will register as an active or passive ASAI link. Thanks. ------------------------------ From: Fritz Whittington Subject: Re: Mainstream Companies and SPAM Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2003 20:01:26 GMT Organization: AT&T Worldnet Phil Earnhardt wrote: > What you say doesn't make sense: why would some company gratuitously > promote HP products if they weren't hired by HP to do that? Why go to > the trouble? There's no money in it for them ... unless HP has hired > them to send out the mailings. Huh? Office Depot (just for an example) sells HP printers, and I suspect that they make money on each one they sell. Don't you think they have a profit motive to promote HP products? Especially if the cost of promotion is practically free? ------------------------------ From: Paul A Lee Subject: Re: Mainstream Companies and SPAM Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2003 15:39:57 -0500 In TELECOM Digest V22 #307, Richard D G Cox wrote (in part): > On Thu, 20 Feb 2003 18:29 (UT) Gordon S. Hlavenka wrote: >>> SPAM used to promote dubious products is bad > Hormel would probably agree with you. I believe they own the trademark > "SPAM" and seem to be content with the word having been repurposed to > refer to Unsolicited Bulk Email. There's a general consensus that as > the trademark is the word in all-upper-case, when we use the word to > refer to UBE, we write it as "spam" or "Spam". But *never* as "SPAM"! Indeed, Richard has summarized the official position of Hormel Foods Corporation, which can be found at http://www.spam.com/ci/ci_in.htm. They give some examples of other trademarks that have been adopted as slang or colloquial references. Those slang uses -- however disparaging or pervasive -- don't confuse or dilute the brand identity. There _are_ companies that have to scramble to keep their brand identity, such as DaimlerChrysler (Jeep®), Kimberly-Clark (Kleenex®), Kraft Foods (Jell-O®), and Johnson & Johnson (Band-Aid®). There are probably many more obscure (to the general public) ones, such as FMC Technologies (Jetway®), Dow Chemical (Styrofoam®), Kawasaki (Jet Ski®), or Bombardier (Learjet®). For an example of trademark dilution carried to the extreme: Did you know that "PING-PONG" is actually a registered trademark? The generic name for the game is "table tennis", but there are manufacturers and dealers that have no claim on the PING-PONG® trademark but use it generically, as does the general public. On the flip side -- AND telecom related -- the Touch-Tone trademark was cancelled in 1984 by AT&T Bell Labs, and the term "touch-tone" in reference to all things DTMF [dual tone multifrequency] was released to the public domain. LOTS of people think it's still a trademark. It is, but not in telecom. Paul A Lee Voice: +1 717 730-8355 Sr Telecom Engineer [Voice & Transmission] Fax: +1 717 975-3789 Rite Aid Corporation, Telecomm, 30 Hunter Lane, Camp Hill, PA 17011-2410 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2003 15:23:02 EST From: Dave Anderson Subject: Does This Kind of Voicemail System / Service Exist? I'm involved with a small non-profit organization with no paid staff (so there's usually nobody present to answer the phone) which is trying to decide how best to incoming telephone calls. We have quite a bit of information on various topics which we'd like to make available (far more than would fit in any single message of reasoonable length). One idea under discussion is to use a moderately complex system of voicemail menus, fanning out into more and more specific info, with the voicemail system always answering calls but offering a menu option to ring through. We certainly don't need multiple mailboxes for different classes of messages, and probably don't need *any* ability for callers to leave messages. We only have one phone line and don't need any more. I've done a bit of searching and haven't yet found anything but systems designed to integrate with a PBX or very limited services (one-level fanout to a few mailboxes) offered by the telcos -- neither of which meets this need. If anyone here knows of a service or system which might suit us (not too expensive, single line, essentially unlimited numbers and levels of menus, answers immediately but allows ringing through under menu control), I'd appreciate a pointer so I can go find out more about it. We're located in Verizon-land, near Boston, Mass. Thanks, Dave Anderson ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2003 16:26:55 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Palm Tungsten W Handheld Available for the First Time in U.S. Largest High-Speed Voice and Data Network, New Email, Enterprise Applications And Phone Accessory Available MILPITAS, Calif., Feb. 24 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Palm, Inc. (NASDAQ:PALM) today announced the availability of the Palm(TM) Tungsten(TM) W handheld running on AT&T Wireless' next-generation GSM(TM)/GPRS network. With carrier activation, the data-centric Tungsten W handheld provides users with a sophisticated combination of wireless email, text messaging, Internet browsing, phone functionality, and business applications on the GSM/GPRS network .(1) The Tungsten W can be preordered now at The Palm Store http://store.palm.com ), as well as at Amazon.com, CDW.com, CompUSA.com, FranklinCovey.com, Insight.com, JandR.com, MicroWarehouse.com, OfficeDepot.com, PCConnection.com and Staples.com. It will be available nationally at select CompUSA, Franklin Covey and additional U.S. retail stores beginning Feb. 28. Monthly data plans from AT&T Wireless range from $29.99 for 10MB to $99.99 for 100MB. Voice plans, which can be added to any data plan, may be purchased separately and begin at $19.99 per month. In addition, a special 8MB data plan is available for $19.99 when a customer also subscribes to a voice plan. The U.S. suggested retail price for the Palm Tungsten W is $549. In addition to the phone activation service provide by most retailers, InPhonic Inc. will provide the Palm Tungsten Activation Service, a self-service online or phone activation process for the Palm Tungsten W. The Palm Tungsten W handheld will also be sold via Palm and AT&T Wireless enterprise sales channels. The Tungsten W handheld is the first Palm branded integrated GSM/GPRS wireless handheld, and it has a built-in keyboard for easy data entry; one-handed navigation; dual expansion; and a crisp, high-resolution color screen. It features a powerful battery for 10 hours of talk time, and a Class 10 radio, one of the fastest radios available today for the GSM/GPRS network, the most widely supported wireless technology used by hundreds of operators worldwide. With AT&T Wireless and the Palm Tungsten W, international roaming capabilities are available in more than 80 countries, enabling global business travelers to stay connected while abroad. ... http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=31783967 ------------------------------ From: jhortonb@yahoo.com (Josh) Subject: Cisco QOS For 3com NBX IP Telephony Date: 24 Feb 2003 14:24:10 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Has anyone had experience configuring QOS on Cisco Routers for a 3com NBX IP telephony system? I have tried several different things and nothing seems to work. I am having a hard time classifying the traffic. Thanks for the help. jh ------------------------------ From: Mike Hartley Subject: Re: 900Mhz Staticky Reception and WiFi Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2003 22:39:58 -0000 > Before I assume that it is a hardware failure and just run out to > get another version of the exact same phone, can somebody give me > ideas what might cause this? Worth trying a couple of things before throwing it away, if you haven't already. Replace the handset battery Power cycle the base station and handset. Tune both to to another channel, if available - (the phone may automatically search for a low(er) noise channel anyway, but it's worth a shot) > I'm running 802.11b in the house but I was under the impression > that that screwed up the 2Gig phones not the 900Mhz ones. 802.11b uses 2.4gz, or thereabouts, so it shouldn't be causing a problem. > Could the battery not be fully charged? Is it a channel thing? Could be -- see above. Incidentally, does anyone know of a cordless phone which has the same sort of phone book as a mobile? All the ones I've seen have LCDs, but really crap user interfaces which are about as easy to use as an early 80's VCR timer. Mike ------------------------------ From: Fritz Whittington Subject: Re: The Perils of E-Mail Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2003 18:29:35 GMT Organization: AT&T Worldnet Gail M. Hall wrote: > My concern about using E-mail "evidence" is the ease with which such > things as dates and mail headers can be changed with computer > software. > It could be easy to forge someone's address in an e-mail to put the > blame on someone that the real "perp" has something against. I've > read about such cases already where someone forged another employee's > address in e-mail and got that person fired. It took a long time for > the victim to get the job back and a law suit against the company that > fired the victim. This problem has been solved for at least the last 5 years, in extremely practical terms. I routinely sign all my email with a PKI digital certificate. Based on the PRESUMPTION that my 4096-bit RSA secret key has not been compromised (which is MY responsibility to a great extent), then such a signed message cannot be altered without being detected, nor can I deny sending it. Because I make a habit of this, and can show a history of thousands of emails which have been so signed, any email that purports to be from me and is not signed is immediately suspect. (Although of course, I can't prove the negative; that I didn't send it and deliberately not sign it.) ------------------------------ From: Joey Lindstrom Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2003 14:16:30 -0700 Subject: Picky, Picky Reply-To: joey@telussucks.info On Sat, 22 Feb 2003 18:41:54 -0500 (EST), Bob K wrote: > Are unauthorized PIC freezes common? Who can I report this to? (The > obvious agency is the state PUC, but they often seem to have a cozy > relationship to the telcos. I'm in NJ.) Something similar's been happening lately when it comes to domain registrations. Many registrars, usually as a free "service" to the customer, will place a domain "lock" on your domain. Any domain that is locked cannot be transfered to another registrar. Good idea in theory. The problem is, if you don't ask for it, your domain might still be locked, and when you get fed up with your registrar and try to move to another, you're in trouble. You've gotta get it unlocked first, and your current registrar has no real reason to make this an easy process (because it only facilitates your taking your business elsewhere). DISCLOSURE: I am a Registration Service Provider (reseller) for Tucows, Inc. I don't represent them, I just resell their product. So obviously my opinion is biased, but some of what I'm saying applies to them too. Taking Tucows (and any Tucows reseller) as an example ... Let's say Pat calls me up and says "Joey, I need a new domain name. I'd like you to register sbcsucks.info on my behalf". (I have no idea if it's available, this is just a for-instance thing) So, Pat PayPals the money to me, and I register his domain. By default, domain locking is turned *OFF*. Pat can go to Network Solutions or some other registrar next year, once he realizes what a jerk I am, and transfer his domain there. But as the reseller, I have the ability to go into Pat's account (for as long as it's in my profile) and turn his domain locking ON. Pat has an excellent Tucows-provided domain management webtool available where he can change just about anything he wants to in regards to his domain name. Except domain locking. Strange, that. So now let's further suppose that I'm not only a jerk, but I'm an obstructionist jerk. I'm pissed at Pat for taking his business elsewhere. Pat asks me to turn off domain locking. I ignore his emails. Pat must then go through a lengthy process directly with Tucows in order to get THEM to pull the domain lock -- something they are loathe to do, as they rely on us reseller people to deal with the riffraff. See how easy it is? Now, I wouldn't personally do anything like that -- it's not my nature. But I've been through the process of getting set up as a domain reseller and I'm telling you, *ANY* scam operator with $500 (USD) in his jeans can get set up just as easily. And once you realize what he's done to you, he's already spent your money and is long gone. So, stick with "reputable" registrars then, eh? Not so fast (and remember my earlier disclosure). Network Solutions is the worst of the bunch. I've done quite a number of transfers, on behalf of clients, from other registrars to my own Tucows profile. The *ONLY* one that gives me grief is Network Solutions. They too have some sort of "domain lock" in place, and oddly enough they keep claiming that "the customer must have turned it on" even when I know for a fact the customer did *NOT* turn it on. The other thing they like to do is this: when the request comes in for a transfer, Network Solutions' official policy is to send an email to the admin contact for the domain, requesting confirmation that they've authorized the transfer. The problem is, 2 times out of 3, that email never gets sent out. It just seems to get "lost" in the system. You can't get them to admit they've made a mistake, either -- in fact, they'll adamantly insist that that sort of thing NEVER happens. So you have to wait 7 days for the request to "time-out", then restart the whole thing again (so far, it has always worked on the second try). As in the Verizon case you cited, these things all have one thing in common: it's being perpetrated by those with a vested interest in seeing you STAY right where you are. That alone should be enough to pique some regulatory curiosity ... but as Pat points out, most of the time those charged with regulation are in bed with those perpetrating this stuff on us. -- Joey Lindstrom -- Telus Sucks http://www.telussucks.info ------------------------------ From: Judith Oppenheimer Subject: Why Did This Happen? *****SPAM***** Link Correction Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2003 14:25:33 -0500 Two messages in one here: First of all, Judith tells me how my Illustrious Editing Tool let me down a couple issues ago, and dropped a final 'l' out of '.html' making a link difficult to reach. That is corrected below. For next: What made her correction message get asassinated by Spam Assassin? Any idea what she said that was so offensive? Its all printed below. SPAM: -------------------- Start SpamAssassin results ---------------------- SPAM: This mail is probably spam. The original message has been altered SPAM: so you can recognise or block similar unwanted mail in future. SPAM: See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. SPAM: SPAM: Content analysis details: (5.20 hits, 5 required) SPAM: MSGID_CHARS_SPAM (2.0 points) Message-Id has characters indicating spam SPAM: MSGID_CHARS_WEIRD (1.5 points) Message-Id has characters often found in spam SPAM: X_PRIORITY_HIGH (0.9 points) Sent with 'X-Priority' set to high SPAM: X_MSMAIL_PRIORITY_HIGH (0.7 points) Sent with 'X-Msmail-Priority' set to high SPAM: SPAM_PHRASE_03_05 (0.1 points) BODY: Spam phrases score is 03 to 05 (medium) SPAM: [score: 3] SPAM: SPAM: -------------------- End of SpamAssassin results --------------------- Pat, note that as you printed it the "l" didn't wrap in the link below on html, and won't click through properly. (Its too good an article for frustrated readers to pass up.) The Farm "...where we talk about the work that we can't talk about." Thoughts On Creating a Sustainable Framework for Administering the Deployment of New gTLDs http://r.tucows.com/archives/2003/02/17/thoughts_on_new_gtlds_part_i.html Judith Oppenheimer http://JudithOppenheimer.com http://ICBTollFreeNews.com http://WhoSells800.com 212 684-7210, 1 800 The Expert ------------------------------ From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: What Kind of a Connector is This? What Used For? Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2003 19:00:00 EST Maybe someone can tell me what I have here. On one of my recent trash- picking runs (a bad, but often times profitable habit I learned from Bill Pfieffer several years ago) I found a five foot long 'modular' cord, resembling a phone connection cord. This is the way it came from the factory, not taped or patched together, or rigged up. One end of it has a plastic connector like the end of a phone cord, but too wide for phone plug. Phone connectors usually have four little pins (or sometimes just two, but with room for four; first and fourth eliminated and two in the middle kept). Connectors for my Linksys router have eight little pins in a wider piece of plastic. This thing I found has *ten* little pins on the end, the plastic it is in is a tiny bit wider, but to 'idiot-proof' it, there is a wee-tiny extra slice of plastic on the end of the plastic sheath which holds the pins. I think the idea is to prevent someone from trying to stick it in a router, which I tried to do, but it would not fit for the reasons noted above. (10 pins instead of 8 and the little plastic sliver.) The whole thing is five feet long. The other end has a traditional USB connector on it. Not the little square piece (which I think is called a 'B' plug but the 'A' style ( a thin little rectangular type thing which goes into a USB hub or a USB camera (as an example). That end does in fact fit conveniently into one of those devices. The only notation on this is on the USB end where appears the notation 940-0127A. I got so excited when I first found it because I thought it was a connector to take a USB device (camera or printer) directly to the Linksys router, which it would appear except for the one end being slightly too large to fit in the router. Any ideas what it is used for? My thanks. 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: 620-330-6774 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 Fax 3: 775-642-0603 Fax 4: 530-309-7234 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: mirror.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. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2003 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 V22 #313 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Feb 25 18:53:13 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h1PNrDk20874; Tue, 25 Feb 2003 18:53:13 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2003 18:53:13 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200302252353.h1PNrDk20874@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #314 TELECOM Digest Tue, 25 Feb 2003 18:53:00 EST Volume 22 : Issue 314 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Book Review: "Building Secure Wireless Networks with 802.11" (Rob Slade) Coping With Changes to E-mail Address (Monty Solomon) Wireless LAN Mmarket Seen Growing After Slow Start (Monty Solomon) Spike in "Spyware" Accelerates Arms Race (Monty Solomon) Wi-Fi Alliance Plans for 11g Testing (Monty Solomon) Re: Net Blocking Threatens Legitimate Sites (Mark Crispin) Re: Net Blocking Threatens Legitimate Sites (R. T. Wurth) Re: Net Blocking Threatens Legitimate Sites (Dave Close) Re: Net Blocking Threatens Legitimate Sites (Mark Brader) I Feel That Might Help (Dave) Re: Mainstream Companies and SPAM (Phil Earnhardt) Re: Mainstream Companies and SPAM (SELLCOM Tech support) Re: Bill Would Ban Spam E-Mail in California (Paul Wallich) 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 VIRUSES. 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: Rob Slade Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2003 07:47:39 -0800 Subject: Book Review: "Building Secure Wireless Networks With 802.11" BKBSWNW8.RVW 20030208 "Building Secure Wireless Networks with 802.11", Jahanzeb Khan/Anis Khwaja, 2003, 0-471-23715-9, U$40.00/C$62.95/UK#29.95 %A Jahanzeb Khan %A Anis Khwaja %C 5353 Dundas Street West, 4th Floor, Etobicoke, ON M9B 6H8 %D 2003 %G 0-471-23715-9 %I John Wiley & Sons, Inc. %O U$40.00/C$62.95/UK#29.95 416-236-4433 fax: 416-236-4448 %O http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0471237159/robsladesinterne http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0471237159/robsladesinte-21 %O http://www.amazon.ca/exec/obidos/ASIN/0471237159/robsladesin03-20 %P 330 p. %T "Building Secure Wireless Networks with 802.11" As with any hot topic, there are lots of people willing (eager!) to tell you about the security of wireless local area networks, without first making sure that they really know the subject. Part one is an introduction to wireless LANs. Chapter one is a history of networks, an outline of topologies (concentrating on cabling, interestingly enough), and a review of the TCP/IP (actually OSI, [Open Systems Interconnection] protocol stack. The last page gives too little information for an exercise in setting up a home LAN. Terms in regard to wireless technology are listed in chapter two, but the material is verbose without being informative. The explanations given for spectrum multiplexing are unclear, and seem to be delivered by rote without any understanding. The discussion does not build on that from chapter one to, for example, point out that ad hoc wireless networks are similar to bus topologies, while infrastructure networks are more akin to stars. The various IEEE (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers) 802.11 standards are listed in chapter three. However, there is a great deal of material repeated from prior text (the discussion of spectrum is reprised almost word for word), and, other than some frequency and maximum bandwidth information, there is little additional detail. (Repetition and duplication is rife throughout the book, as well as a good deal of space wasted with pointless figures and graphics. On page 125 we are told that "The 40- bit shared key is concatenated with a 24-bit long initialization vector" and referred to figure 6.1. Figure 6.1 tells us "Concatenated-Key = Shared-Key + IV." Not very helpful.) Chapter four is supposed to help you decide whether a wireless LAN is right for you, but only has some vague opining, a little content on wireless ISPs (Internet Service Providers: hardly suitable for LAN discussions), and almost no analysis or details. Part two purports to emphasize secure wireless LANs. Chapter five has random topics regarding network security. Most of it is irrelevant to the specific needs of wireless situations or is not discussed in terms of the particular needs of wireless networks. (Physically securing the components of a wireless LAN has some importance in overall security, but may be pointless if someone driving by can take over the network). Securing the IEEE 802.11 wireless LAN is not reviewed well in chapter six. There is more duplication of content, few details about WEP (Wired Equivalent Privacy), and some clear evidence of misunderstanding of the base technologies. (If you are going to talk about 40 bit keys at the low level, higher level security should be 104, rather than 128, bit. And a 128 bit key is *not* equivalent to 64 characters, in anybody's representation.) When security aspects are discussed, often they relate to issues that are beyond the control of the user, such as moderation of signal strength. Part three collects topics related to the building of secure wireless LANs. Chapter seven is a simplistic overview of generic LAN planning. Shopping for the right equipment is important, but the list of product specifications in chapter eight fails to address vital areas, such as driver availability, default key length, and the existence of default accounts. More space is devoted to where you can buy equipment than how to evaluate it. The installation instructions, in chapter nine, pretty much ignore security considerations. Chapter ten supposedly deals with advanced wireless LANs, including security, but has little new material aside from screenshots of Microsoft Windows utilities with some relationship to VPNs (Virtual Private Networks). Part four covers troubleshooting and maintenance. Chapter eleven touches on a number of possibly wireless connectivity problems. A collection of text repeated from prior chapters is in chapter twelve. There is a glossary included with the book. It is quite limited, and, in particular, does not deal well with acronyms. In fact, the book is full of TLAs (Three Letter Acronyms) and other abbreviations that get used before they are defined, and do not appear in either the glossary or the index. This can be quite aggravating, particularly in cases where the acronyms aren't standard. (The authors use "PHY" to refer to the physical layer of the OSI model, which is not commonly so represented in either communications or security literature.) The text of the book is excessively padded with useless verbiage and irrelevant material. The actual content pertinent to the security of wireless LANs is barely enough to fill a decent magazine article. Overall, the book is poorly structured, limited in detail, and bloated with meaningless or repetitious content. copyright, Robert M. Slade, 2003 BKBSWNW8.RVW 20030208 ====================== rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@sprint.ca slade@victoria.tc.ca p1@canada.com Find book info victoria.tc.ca/techrev/ or sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade/ Upcoming (ISC)^2 CISSP CBK review seminars (+1-888-333-4458): March 31, 2003 Indianapolis, IN ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2003 17:38:37 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Coping With Changes to E-mail Address PERSONAL TECH By Michelle Johnson, 2/24/2003 Are you hopping mad because your e-mail address has changed? Perhaps your Internet service provider is under new ownership, or your free e-mail service went belly up. So now you have to send out change of e-mail notices to a long list of family members, friends, and business associates. Worse yet, maybe you just paid for business cards that are suddenly obsolete. Subscribers to AT&T Broadband's Internet service were pretty outraged recently when Comcast Corp. took over and announced its Boston area customers would be getting their third e-mail address in a year. (Comcast later said it would redirect e-mail sent to AT&T Broadband addresses till the end of next year.) Whatever the reason, when your e-mail address changes, something usually gets lost in the mail. If you've had enough and you're ready to shield your address from the fallout of mergers and the shaky economy, it's time to stop renting and buy. Yes, you can own your own e-mail address for life. Well, for as long as you pay the annual fee for a 'dot com' address. So, for instance, you could be ''you@nameofyourchoice.com.'' I know what you're thinking: "Don't I have to have a Web site to be a dot com?" Nope. You can use a Web address (also known as a 'domain name') strictly for e-mail. And while your Net provider offers you a package that includes access to the Web and e-mail, you're not required to use its e-mail address. ... http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/055/business/Coping_with_changes_to_e_mail_address+.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2003 15:57:56 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Wireless LAN Market Seen Growing After Slow Start SAN FRANCISCO, Feb 24 (Reuters) - Sales of telecommunications hardware used in wireless local-area networks will grow more than 60 percent through 2006, even though businesses and large institutions have been slow to roll out the technology so far, an industry report issued on Monday said. Global sales of hardware used in wireless local-area networks totaled $1.68 billion last year. Such sales are seen rising 62 percent to $2.72 billion in 2006, market research firm Infonetics Research Inc. said. Cisco Systems Inc.(NASDAQ:CSCO), the No. 1 network equipment maker, and Linksys, a privately held network hardware maker in Irvine, California, were the wireless LAN market-share leaders in the fourth quarter and are expected to hold on to their top spots this year, Infonetics said. However, businesses, the so-called enterprise market, comprised of government agencies and large institutions such as hospitals and universities, will not rush to buy and deploy so-called wireless LAN systems, Infonetics said. While the so-called wireless LAN market has posted several consecutive quarters of growth, the growth has not been as explosive as initially expected, and purchasing departments throughout the enterprise market have rising expectations for the capabilities of wireless LAN systems, Infonetics said. ... - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=31789648 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2003 17:38:32 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Spike in "Spyware" Accelerates Arms Race By John Borland Staff Writer, CNET News.com EarthLink's technical support staff handles a variety of problems: broken networks, corrupted files, coffee spills -- and, increasingly over the past few months, bitter complaints from subscribers about "spyware" and "adware." Those persistent types of programs, frequently operating on computers without owners' knowledge, have spread quickly in the last year, evolving as rapidly as anti-spyware software has been able to find them. EarthLink executives estimate that 40 percent to 50 percent of the Internet service provider's subscribers have running on their machines some kind of advertising or more-malicious program, which often monitors their behavior and sends the data back to the software's parent company. The level of complaints has risen high enough that EarthLink says it's finally looking for an official spyware-killer to distribute to its angry customers. ... http://news.com.com/2009-1023-985524.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2003 17:46:14 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Wi-Fi Alliance Plans for 11g Testing By Eric Griffith While the specification for 802.11g is still in the draft stage with the IEEE (define), that hasn't stopped many companies and customers from embracing it. Knowing that, the Wi-Fi Alliance is already taking steps to make sure it's ready for 11g interoperability testing as soon as the specification is ratified in June of this year. Unlike with 5GHz 802.11a product testing, the Alliance plans to have products in labs immediately after the specification is finalized. ... http://www.80211-planet.com/news/article.php/1598431 ------------------------------ From: Mark Crispin Subject: Re: Net Blocking Threatens Legitimate Sites Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2003 15:57:39 -0800 Organization: Networks and Distributed Computing On Mon, 24 Feb 2003, Barry Margolin wrote: > We often resolve this by giving new addresses to the customers who are > hit by the collateral damage, while we continue negotiating with the > spammer that caused their addresses to be blacklisted. It *doesn't* > cause us to violate our contract with the spammer -- it still takes > just as long for us to terminate their account. So the wide net cast > by the expanded blacklist doesn't really have the desired effect. Actually, it *does* have the desired effect. Your mistake is that you're thinking short term instead of long-term. Short term is that you terminate the contract with one spammer. Long term is that the increased inconvenience to your legitimate customers results in you becoming increasingly unwilling to make contacts with likely spammers and/or establishing AUPs which allow for more rapid pulling of the plug on spammers using your network. It isn't about how fast you pull the plug on a spammer. It's about whether you continue to plug in new spammers. -- Mark -- http://staff.washington.edu/mrc Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate. ------------------------------ From: rwurth@att.net (R. T. Wurth) Subject: Re: Net Blocking Threatens Legitimate Sites Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2003 02:04:43 GMT Organization: AT&T Worldnet In article , joey@telussucks.info wrote: > Your entire premise rests on the assumption that the content of these > "bad places" is 100% universally condemned and/or illegal, but as far > as I understand this, we're talking about some pornographic BUT LEGAL > sites. > The assumption is bad, therefore so is the proposal. I think it's time to re-wind the thread and recall the context. The original was about the state of Pennsylvania blocking access to web sites showing child pornography. In the US, the law is crystal clear that the child's right to privacy trumps free speech, in that the making of child porn inherently violates the child because of the child's inherent legal inability to consent. Furthermore, every display of a child's pornographic image is a further crime against that child. Is Pennsylvania going too far? I think the point is arguable both ways, given the additional damage caused by each and every showing of each and every image. I don't think either side has a clear open and shut case. Normally, I am very supportive of the rights of US citizens, even in the area of objectionable material, but I have to draw the line, as the US courts have, at kiddie porn. But, still, censorship, especially censorship of the legal content that would be blocked by blocking an entire IP address worth of webspace, hosting tens of legit web sites, I just don't know. Further clouding the issue is the fact that some overzealous authorities have been cracking down on parents who take (and submit for processing) those "cute" pix of their innocent kids who insist on taking all their clothes off at the beach, or having too much fun in the bathtub. Of course, such photos are fine by me as single copies in the family photo album, but plastered all the net in a collection that includes real porn, again, I'm just not sure. But I certainly don't trust the local WalMart acting in concert with a local Prosecutor eager to score cheap political points to make the right decision either based solely on single pictures coming out of the auto-developer, either. But the debate of this specific issue is not served by mixing up the issues of child porn, other porn and merely objectionable material that wouldn't pass (or fail, I suppose, depending upon one's viewpoint) the three-pronged Lemon test that applies in the US. (The 3-pronged Lemon test was promulgated by SCOTUS in a case involving Mr. or Ms. Lemon as one of the parties, and states that to be pornographic, material must pass three tests: patently objectionable, appeals to a prurient interest, and utterly lacking in Scientific, Literary, Artistic, or Political (SLAP) value.) (IANAL, consult your own attorney, ..., disclaimer, datclaimer, and de other claimer as well) > -- Joey Lindstrom > -- Telus Sucks http://www.telussucks.info R. T. Wurth / rwurth@att.net / Rumson, NJ USA ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2003 23:22:50 -0800 From: Dave Close Subject: Re: Net Blocking Threatens Legitimate Sites Organization: Compata, Costa Mesa, California Mark Crispin wrote: > Blocking by IP address is nothing more than the technological equivalent > of a boycott. The entire point of a boycott is to cause collateral > damage. More specifically, a secondary boycott or a blockade. A blockade is a picket line which the picketers try to prevent anyone from crossing. Because they have a beef with the object of the picket line, they try to stop anyone else from having any business with them. This sort of labor practice has long been illegal in the US. When labor unions were new, picket lines were often blockades, and sometimes led to bloody confrontations. Most of us learned from that. It is fine for a union to inform the public and try to convince them to support a strike, but coercion is going too far. The same should apply to vigilante spam blockers. Dave Close, Compata, Costa Mesa CA "Politics is the business of getting dave@compata.com, +1 714 434 7359 power and privilege without dhclose@alumni.caltech.edu possessing merit." - P. J. O'Rourke ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Net Blocking Threatens Legitimate Sites Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2003 02:37:07 EST From: msb@vex.net (Mark Brader) Earlier, Mark Crispin wrote: >>> The entire point of a boycott is to cause collateral damage. And I (Mark Brader) wrote (in two messages): >> No, it isn't. ... >> I'll go further and say that it's logically impossible for the >> *entire* reason for *anything* to be to cause collateral damage! Having been challenged to do so, I then defined what I thought "the point of a boycott" is. Pat Townson, who will perhaps refrain from editing my attribution line this time, now writes: > But isn't your latest (more lengthy) definition of 'boycott' > essentially what Mark Crispin said in fewer words, 'to cause > collateral damage'? At this point I can only think that Pat doesn't know what "collateral" means. Collateral damage is damage to something that *was not* the intended target of an action. It was, metaphorically or literally, beside the target (lateral = side). Is my point now clear? No matter whether the subject is a military attack, or boycotts and similar actions, or the, um, Internet combat that we're talking about here, collateral damage is always to be deplored (although certainly there are times when it can't be avoided). And that's all I have to say on the point. Mark Brader, Toronto "Logic is logic. That's all I say." msb@vex.net -- Oliver Wendell Holmes My text in this article is in the public domain. ------------------------------ From: Dave Subject: I Feel That Might Help Reply-To: dave@black.com Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2003 16:06:27 GMT Organization: Road Runner - Texas WE MUST COME TOGETHER AND TAKE THESE SITES OFF THE INTERNET! NO NAZI NO WHITE POWER NO HATE http://www.nazichess.com http://www.kkk.org http://www.twelvearyannations.com/ http://www.naawp.com/ http://www.americannaziparty.com/ http://www.unitedskins.com/home.htm Hit them with letters telling them we don't need nor want them! Fill their mail boxes with junk! ------------------------------ From: Phil Earnhardt Subject: Re: Mainstream Companies and SPAM Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2003 23:23:06 -0700 On Mon, 24 Feb 2003 12:29:25 -0500, Paul A Lee wrote: > I recall receiving HP promotional email coming from several > third-party companies, as well as some strange, HP-like domains (e.g., > "hp3.com" or the like). > If you have downloaded a driver update, a product data sheet, or any > of a number of other things from Hewlett-Packard (or Compaq, or > Digital Equipment [DEC]), you can wind up receiving promotional > emails. It's easy to miss during the download "registration" process, > but you "agree" to it. > That may not be the most enlightened and forthright way to do things, > but I will offer this in HP's defense: If you opt out, they DO STOP > sending stuff. I fundamentally disagree. If I want to receive solicitations from a company, I ask for them. That is the "opt-in" model for commercial e-mail. Or you could call it Solicited Commercial E-mail. If a company implicitly puts me on advertising lists -- if they implicitly or explicitly have the "send me mail" checkboxes checked -- then that's an "opt-out" model. It's not a model that respects the consumer and his most fundamental commercial right to respect his private property known as his e-mailbox. There's a corollary to this: companies should keep scrupulous records recording exactly when a consumer has opted in to their service. Companies that fail to do that risk losing the trust of their customers. I'll let you know what I find when I contact m0.net. I strongly suspect they'll have no justification for sending me HP solicitations. > In my experience, you're pretty safe sending an opt-out or unsubscribe > request to a legitimate company. That begs the question. How should I implicitly know if m0.net is legitimate? How much research should I be forced to do? > Typically (again, my experience), you'll find a link or an email > address to use to unsubscribe on a legit company's web site, and it > will work, even when a third-party promotional service is used. I would be far happier if those e-mails had a link to somewhere on hp.com about the mailings. I know nothing about m0.net; without that link on HP's site, I know nothing about whether or not HP is sanctioning those mailings. > The ones you have to watch out for are the emails that promote a > product of a legitimate and reputable company, but that actually > represent a spammer/scammer, as with the Norton product spams. I > suggest you forward those to the company whose product is being > (mis)represented. Trouble is, they're usually already aware of the > spam and doing what they can to fight it. Really? Can you tell us exactly what Norton is doing to fight those spams? > Paul A Lee Voice: +1 717 730-8355 On Mon, 24 Feb 2003 20:01:26 GMT, Fritz Whittington wrote: > Phil Earnhardt wrote: >> What you say doesn't make sense: why would some company gratuitously >> promote HP products if they weren't hired by HP to do that? Why go to >> the trouble? There's no money in it for them ... unless HP has hired >> them to send out the mailings. > Huh? Office Depot (just for an example) sells HP printers, and I > suspect that they make money on each one they sell. Don't you think > they have a profit motive to promote HP products? Especially if the > cost of promotion is practically free? The analogy doesn't hold -- the m0.net newsletter wasn't directly selling anything. Even if the cost is next-to-nothing, I can't see how there is any direct revenue from the m0.net spams. phil ------------------------------ From: SELLCOM Tech support Subject: Re: Mainstream Companies and SPAM Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2003 18:45:57 -0500 Organization: www.sellcom.com Reply-To: support@sellcom.com Richard D G Cox posted on that vast internet thingie: > p0.net claims to be sell.com, hosted by Internap and p0.com is > Yesmail. Nobody even slightly familiar with spam prevention will find > either of those surprising! I took a look at sell.com (for obvious reasons, yikes!) and they appear to just be an ebay wannabe. It does not, at first glance appear to be the type of business that would spam. Steve at SELLCOM http://www.sellcom.com Discount multihandset cordless phones by Siemens, Vtech 5.8Ghz EnGenius NEW EP436 4line (the longest range), Panasonic, Twinhead notebooks, WatchGuard firewall, Okidata, Polycom! If you sit at a desk www.ergochair.biz you owe it to yourself. ------------------------------ From: Paul Wallich Subject: Re: Bill Would Ban Spam E-Mail in California Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2003 09:38:28 -0500 Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC In article , Fritz Whittington wrote: > Monty Solomon wrote: >> By Nancy Vogel >> LA Times Staff Writer >> SACRAMENTO -- The unwanted, sometimes lurid advertisements unleashed >> on computer users -- e-mail spam -- would be banned under a new bill >> in the Legislature. >> The bill would make it a crime to send unsolicited commercial e-mails >> from California or to an e-mail address in the state. > I think it would be quite interesting to see how the California > legislature defines "an e-mail address in[side] the state [of > California]." Not to mention how they can determine that the spam was > sent from California. In ways that will stand up in courts, of > course. Courts, like legislatures, are populated in significant part by lawyers. I don't see the problem. Courts have been able to determine questions of residence and "doing business in" despite the invention of the telephone, the telegraph and the forwarded letter, so it's not clear what additional problems are posed here. There will probably be some cases that won't be decided the way you think they should (e.g. for california residents using an out of state ISP or for email not read at home), but another thing to remember is that in general courts have decided (for better or worse) that the onus is on the sender to determine whether the stuff they're delivering is illegal in the recipient's jurisdiction (see, e.g., the Amateur Action BBS case) paul ------------------------------ 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: 620-330-6774 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 Fax 3: 775-642-0603 Fax 4: 530-309-7234 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: mirror.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. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2003 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 V22 #314 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Feb 25 20:07:28 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h1Q17SF21614; Tue, 25 Feb 2003 20:07:28 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2003 20:07:28 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200302260107.h1Q17SF21614@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #315 TELECOM Digest Tue, 25 Feb 2003 20:08:00 EST Volume 22 : Issue 315 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Picky, Picky (John Higdon) Re: Picky, Picky (SELLCOM Tech Support) ESI Announces New Products for 2003 (Ben Hackney) Defining Spam (Joey Lindstrom) Re: CHP Rethinks Phones/In Reversal, The Agency Favors a Bill (John Higdon) Re: Why Did This Happen? *****SPAM***** Link Correction (Hudson Leighton) Re: Why Did This Happen? *****SPAM***** Link Correction (Robert Bonomi) Re: Why Did This Happen? *****SPAM***** Link Correction (Barry Margolin) A Radio Chip in Every Consumer Product (Monty Solomon) Benefits of ISDN PRI (Forrest Nelson) How Does Telemarketing Work? (Mike O'Dorney) Re: What Kind of a Connector is This? What Used For? (Joe Mauk) Re: What Kind of a Connector is This? What Used For? (Paul Timmins) Re: What Kind of a Connector is This? What Used For? (Mike O'Dorney) Spamblocks was Re: Net Blocking Threatens Legitmate Sites (Danny Burstein) Re: Net Blocking Threatens Legitimate Site (Richard D.G. Cox) 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 VIRUSES. 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: John Higdon Subject: Re: Picky, Picky Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2003 17:16:31 -0800 In article , Joey Lindstrom wrote: > So, stick with "reputable" registrars then, eh? > Not so fast (and remember my earlier disclosure). Network Solutions > is the worst of the bunch. I've done quite a number of transfers, on > behalf of clients, from other registrars to my own Tucows profile. > The *ONLY* one that gives me grief is Network Solutions. As the registrant for dozens of domain names, it is with great pleasure that I announce that not one of them remains registered with Network Solutions. I must in all fairness, however, report that transferring them all away (over the course of about two years) was completely painless. NSI never stood in the way of moving the domain name. In fact, the process was almost TOO easy! > They too have some sort of "domain lock" in place, and oddly enough > they keep claiming that "the customer must have turned it on" even > when I know for a fact the customer did *NOT* turn it on. The other > thing they like to do is this: when the request comes in for a > transfer, Network Solutions' official policy is to send an email to > the admin contact for the domain, requesting confirmation that > they've authorized the transfer. Most of the domains I transferred from NSI required no confirmation to NSI. All I ever got from them in those cases was an email stating that the transfer had been completed. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | Anytown, USA | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ From: SELLCOM Tech support Subject: Re: Picky, Picky Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2003 11:10:13 -0500 Organization: www.sellcom.com Reply-To: support@sellcom.com Joey Lindstrom posted on that vast internet thingie: > DISCLOSURE: I am a Registration Service Provider (reseller) for Tucows, > Inc. I don't represent them, I just resell their product. So > obviously my opinion is biased, but some of what I'm saying applies to > them too. I believe that with buydomains.com I have the ability to lock or unlock domains with my control panel. I just locked some based on more of a "why not" and "because it is there" concept. Netsol once made me renew a domain before I could transfer it (of course I went through the little process with the anti-trust gov site). Steve at SELLCOM http://www.sellcom.com Discount multihandset cordless phones by Siemens, Vtech 5.8Ghz EnGenius NEW EP436 4line (the longest range), Panasonic, Twinhead notebooks, WatchGuard firewall, Okidata, Polycom! If you sit at a desk www.ergochair.biz you owe it to yourself. ------------------------------ From: Ben Hackney Subject: ESI Announces New Products for 2003 Organization: Prodigy Internet http://www.prodigy.com Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2003 18:50:34 GMT Plano, Texas, February 14, 2003 - ESI (Estech Systems, Inc.) an innovative manufacturer of telephone systems for small to medium-sized businesses, has announced a significant product launch for 2003 - including newly designed Feature Phones, new classes of phone systems, and Esi-MailT unified messaging. "ESI continues to grow at a rapid pace as a result of providing true value-added products to the customer and exceptional service to our resellers," said Jason Beckett, ESI Senior Vice President of Sales and Marketing. "ESI also continues to expand into new markets by increasing the flexibility of system sizing, and Feature Phone choices, as well as offering new communications technology to customers in a simple, easy-to-implement, easy-to-understand product family." New Feature Phones The three new phone models take greater advantage of ESI system features. Each has a sleek, modern look. The 48-Key Digital Feature Phone (also available in IP, TAPI and Remote IP models) is designed for the active user, and has 30 programmable keys and an enhanced three-line display. The 60-Key Expansion Console shares the look of the new phones, and connects to the 48-Key Feature Phone. The 24-Key Digital Feature Phone is designed for less active applications. The 12-Key Digital Feature Phone is intended for infrequent use, such as for lobbies, warehouses and other placements. New phone system classes IVX E-Class includes voice mail, an automated attendant and automatic call distributor (ACD). IVX E-Class systems also support the new Esi-Mail unified messaging application and advanced voice over IP (VoIP) communications. Two systems are available: IVX 72e (70 call processing ports) and IVX 128e (126 call processing ports). IP E-Class continues ESI's presence in the exploding VoIP market. The IP 200e and IP 40e - handling a maximum of 198 and 70 call-processing ports, respectively - are advanced, IP (Internet Protocol) network-based business telephone systems that combine all of the features of IVX E-Class with state-of-the-art delivery of packetized voice via the existing local area network/wide area network (LAN/WAN) to the desktop. Also available on IP E-Class is the new Esi-Mail unified messaging application. IVX S-Class is designed for the small to mid-sized business with flexible voice mail needs and moderate growth requirements. IVX S-Class comes with a four-line, eight-digital-station and two-analog-station configuration. It grows to as many as 12 CO lines, 24 digital stations and six analog ports, and is ideally suited to handle the majority of small business growth requirements. Also, IVX S-Class offers two new voice mail options or an Integrated Answering MachineT depending on the needs of the customer. Esi-Mail unified messaging With the Esi-Mail unified messaging option, E-Class users can view, prioritize, and select for playback any voice mail message from their Microsoft® Outlook® 2000/2002 Inbox. A variety of controls on the integrated Esi-Mail toolbar allow for synchronization between the Outlook 2000/2002 Inbox and the user's voice mailbox. Esi-Mail has the added benefit of not requiring an expensive server, meaning unified messaging is now cost-effective for the small to mid-size business. Product availability ESI products are available through Converged Technologies. To contact Converged Technologies, email sales@convergedtech.net, go to www.convergedtech.net or call Converged Technologies at 614 252-8611. ------------------------------ From: Joey Lindstrom Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2003 10:07:05 -0700 Subject: Defining Spam Reply-To: joey@telussucks.info On Mon, 24 Feb 2003 14:14:24 EST, editor@telecom-digest.org wrote: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Some of you may recall, I had a > discussion similar to this with Joey Lindstrom not too long ago about > what I consider 'acceptable spam' versus the garbage stuff. I said > something about my general approval of (admittedly unsolicited) items > sent by educational institutions for use in this Digest. We then got > into discussion of 'making subjective decisions'. Remember that > discussion? If I quote Joey correctly, he said *all* UCE was > essentially spam. All I can say is if we knew 20 years ago what we > know today I have to wonder if Usenet would have ever gotten started. > PAT] Amen. But the point I was making was one of semantics. UCE = spam. Period. The word "spam" is just a one-syllable way to say "unsolicited commercial email" (which includes usenet posts). That's not a value judgement, that's a simple fact. See: http://www.spam.com/ci/ci_in.htm http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=spam Now, if you want to make a value judgement on a particular piece of spam, that's a whole 'nother kettle of eels. All UCE *IS* spam - that's not an opinion, that's fact. But whether or not all spam is bad is definitely a matter of opinion. My opinion is that MOST of it is -- however, in saying that, I use a very loose definition of "unsolicited". If the sender has a REASONABLE belief that the recipient may be interested (and by "reasonable" I'm talking about a LOT more than the typical spammer's 0.0001% positive response rate), then the line between "unsolicited" and "solicited" becomes blurred. By definition it's still spam, but now it's veering towards "good spam". Examples from here in the Digest would include the occasional posts about jobs that are available, please send resume. Knowledge of your audience is key. The above "spam" would be "good spam". Someone spamming the Digest (or its posters, individually) with an offer of a reconditioned PBX system.... ok, that's not quite so cool. It's better targeted than most spam, but it's still a shotgun approach. But hey, we're talking about opinions. Yours will differ from mine. The definition of spam is still UCE, and all UCE is still spam. -- Joey Lindstrom -- Telus Sucks http://www.telussucks.info ------------------------------ From: John Higdon Subject: Re: CHP Rethinks Phones / In a Reversal, The Agency Favors a Bill Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2003 17:31:03 -0800 In article , Monty Solomon wrote: > The recommendation marks a reversal of policy for the CHP, whose > director, Dwight O. Helmick, had lobbied against such a bill in the > last two sessions of the Legislature. An almost identical bill was > introduced for a third time at the beginning of this year's session. I believe the CHP endorses (or not) that which has been sanctioned (or not) by the governor. Spike Helmick was on a radio talkshow not long ago on which he was asked point blank if he supported the latest cellphone restrictions. He waffled and danced for awhile, and then gave a convoluted explanation that said something like "we haven't yet had a chance to discuss this with the governor". I guess Davis has finally decided to get on this bandwagon. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | Anytown, USA | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ From: hudsonl@skypoint.com (Hudson Leighton) Subject: Re: Why Did This Happen? *****SPAM***** Link Correction Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2003 21:22:58 -0600 Organization: MRRP My guess would be too many web addresses in the message body -Hudson In article , Judith Oppenheimer wrote: > Two messages in one here: First of all, Judith tells me how my > Illustrious Editing Tool let me down a couple issues ago, and dropped > a final 'l' out of '.html' making a link difficult to reach. That is > corrected below. > > For next: What made her correction message get asassinated by Spam > Assassin? Any idea what she said that was so offensive? Its all > printed below. http://www.skypoint.com/~hudsonl ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Why Did This Happen? *****SPAM***** Link Correction Organization: Not Much From: bonomi@c-ns (Robert Bonomi) Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2003 03:24:07 GMT In article , Judith Oppenheimer wrote: > Two messages in one here: First of all, Judith tells me how my > Illustrious Editing Tool let me down a couple issues ago, and dropped > a final 'l' out of '.html' making a link difficult to reach. That is > corrected below. > For next: What made her correction message get asassinated by Spam > Assassin? Any idea what she said that was so offensive? Its all > printed below. > SPAM: -------------------- Start SpamAssassin results ---------------------- > SPAM: This mail is probably spam. The original message has been altered > SPAM: so you can recognise or block similar unwanted mail in future. > SPAM: See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. > SPAM: > SPAM: Content analysis details: (5.20 hits, 5 required) The following two items are the -big- hits. Boils down to a 'funny' "Message-Id:" header. Since you didn't print the _full_ headers, no further analysis of _what_ was 'funny' is possible. > SPAM: MSGID_CHARS_SPAM (2.0 points) Message-Id has characters indicating spam > SPAM: MSGID_CHARS_WEIRD (1.5 points) Message-Id has characters often found in spam The following, in combination, were enough to push things 'over the limit' given the presense of the other stuff. The sender (Judith) flagged the message as 'Urgent'/ 'High Priority' / 'Special Delivery' -- a 'tagging' capability existint in the e-mail protocols that allows mail _readers_ to present 'urgent' mail "first". It is _rarely_ used in the real world, *except* by spammers. > SPAM: X_PRIORITY_HIGH (0.9 points) Sent with 'X-Priority' set to high > SPAM: X_MSMAIL_PRIORITY_HIGH (0.7 points) Sent with 'X-Msmail-Priority' > set to high _guessing_ on the 'phrases' that triggered this 'insignificant' addition to the score: "the link below" common part of 'unsubscribe' fictions "click" common part of 'invitations' to various web-sites. > SPAM: SPAM_PHRASE_03_05 (0.1 points) BODY: Spam phrases score is 03 to > 05 (medium) > SPAM: [score: 3] > SPAM: > SPAM: -------------------- End of SpamAssassin results --------------------- > Pat, note that as you printed it the "l" didn't wrap in the link below > on html, and won't click through properly. (Its too good an article > for frustrated readers to pass up.) > The Farm "...where we talk about the work that we can't talk about." > Thoughts On Creating a Sustainable Framework for Administering the > Deployment of New gTLDs > http://r.tucows.com/archives/2003/02/17/thoughts_on_new_gtlds_part_i.html ------------------------------ From: Barry Margolin Subject: Re: Why Did This Happen? *****SPAM***** Link Correction Organization: Genuity Managed Services, Woburn, MA Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2003 15:52:57 GMT In article , TELECOM Digest Editor questioned SpamAssassin treatment of a message from Judith Oppenheimer: > For next: What made her correction message get asassinated by Spam > Assassin? Any idea what she said that was so offensive? Its all > printed below. According to the data from SpamAssassin, about 75% of the reason was her Message-ID. My guess is that there's a spamming tool that creates ideosyncratic Message-IDs, and hers happens to be similar to this. Maybe if you look at the message's header you can tell what's unusual about the ID. > SPAM: Content analysis details: (5.20 hits, 5 required) > SPAM: MSGID_CHARS_SPAM (2.0 points) Message-Id has characters indicating spam > SPAM: MSGID_CHARS_WEIRD (1.5 points) Message-Id has characters often > found in spam > SPAM: X_PRIORITY_HIGH (0.9 points) Sent with 'X-Priority' set to high > SPAM: X_MSMAIL_PRIORITY_HIGH (0.7 points) Sent with 'X-Msmail-Priority' > set to high > SPAM: SPAM_PHRASE_03_05 (0.1 points) BODY: Spam phrases score is 03 to > 05 (medium) > SPAM: [score: 3] > SPAM: > SPAM: -------------------- End of SpamAssassin results --------------------- Barry Margolin, barry.margolin@level3.com Genuity Managed Services, 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. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2003 09:54:10 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: A Radio Chip in Every Consumer Product By CLAUDIA H. DEUTSCH and BARNABY J. FEDER Here's a tip to thieves: If you are bent on stealing packages of Gillette Mach3 razor blades, go someplace other than Tesco's Newmarket Road store in Cambridge, England. There, a "smart shelf" continuously queries tiny radio chips embedded in the packages it holds, and senses the silence when one is removed. The system may soon be programmed to alert security when several are taken at once, Greg Sage, a Tesco spokesman, said. And, yes, Procter & Gamble will notice if a case of Pantene shampoo does not make it to the Wal-mart Supercenter in Broken Arrow, Okla. Its truck is equipped to monitor signals continuously from chips hidden in each case. If any case stops sending its "Hi, I'm still here" signal, a monitor in the "smart truck" will record exactly when and where. Such technology, known as radio-frequency identification -- the same techniques that enable an electronic sensor to record data from an E-ZPass tag or an office door to open for people with chip-equipped cards in their pockets -- could one day stymie pilferers. But it is also capable of doing much more for commerce. Beyond Gillette and Procter & Gamble, companies as diverse as International Paper and Canon USA are teaming up with retailers and customers to apply R.F.I.D., as it is known, to tracking products from the time they leave an assembly line to the time they leave the store. The companies are tagging clothes, drugs, auto parts, copy machines and even mail with chips laden with information about content, origin and destination. They are also equipping shelves, doors and walls with sensors that can record that data when the products are near. "We want to track all of our merchandise, and that includes items that people are unlikely to steal," William C. Wertz, a spokesman for Wal-Mart Stores, said. ... http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/25/technology/25THEF.html ------------------------------ From: Forrest Nelson Subject: Benefits of ISDN PRI Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2003 15:59:33 -0800 I would like to hear experiences and effects of implementing ISDN PRI (vs. conventional analog trunks). Features - Caller ID, DID, etc Return on investment - lower overall trunk cost, time saving, etc Dependability ... Quality of Service ... Please feel free to e-mail directly. Thanks, J. Forrest Nelson, RCDD Affiliated Engineers NW, Inc. (AEI) mailto:jfnelson@aeieng.com * e-mail 206-256-0800 * phone 206-256-0423 * fax 206-972-6808 ~ cell ------------------------------ From: modorney@aol.com (Mike O'Dorney) Subject: How Does Telemarketing work? Date: 24 Feb 2003 16:00:56 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ I talked with a telemarketing form, that calls everyone in the neighborhood/town/etc., with a recorded message, and, if the customer phone rings three times, it hangs up. It says "unavailable" etc. on caller id systems. I asked the company if they can put a number, or message, so the call gets taken "seriously", and they said they do a T1 link to make the calls, and couldn't do CID. My thoughts are: 1. Why can't they put the CID tones after the first ring? 2. Why can't they spoof and put any number in, since the T1 goes directly to the CO, and the calls are actually made by the CO. CID is just data, and the CO will send whatever it's programmed to do. What am I missing here? I realize a national marketing company has to be able to program a number of different CO's, but I can get my CO (a DMS-100) type from a DSL database. Cheers, Mike O'Dorney ------------------------------ From: jsmauk@aol.com (Joe Mauk) Subject: Re: What Kind of a Connector is This? What Used For? Date: 25 Feb 2003 11:27:07 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ TELECOM Digest Editor wrote in message news: Maybe someone can tell me what I have here. On one of my recent trash- > picking runs (a bad, but often times profitable habit I learned from > Bill Pfieffer several years ago) I found a five foot long 'modular' > cord, resembling a phone connection cord. This is the way it came from > the factory, not taped or patched together, or rigged up. > The only notation on this is on the USB end where appears the > notation 940-0127A. > I got so excited when I first found it because I thought it was a > connector to take a USB device (camera or printer) directly to the > Linksys router, which it would appear except for the one end being > slightly too large to fit in the router. Any ideas what it is used > for? My thanks. It is a cable that is used to connect a APC un-interuptable power supply to a USB port. Here's a link: http://www.apcupsd.com/manual/configure.html#ConfigGeneral Regards, Joe Mauk ------------------------------ Subject: What Kind of a Connector is This? What Used For? From: Paul Timmins Date: 24 Feb 2003 23:31:31 -0500 I think your connector is a USB connector for an APC UPS. I don't know where my cabling is at the present, but I do remember it looking amazingly like what you described. Mine have a black cable, if it helps any. And if I'm remembering correctly, the reason for the size of the connector is because you can get a serial cable that plugs in the same modified modular jack on the UPS in place of a USB cable, and those obviously have more than 4 pins. But either way, unfortunately there's no such thing that I'm aware of (besides a computer), that could allow a USB device to talk to ethernet. The protocols are different in every way, shape and form. :-( Paul Timmins paul@timmins.net / http://www.timmins.net/ H: 313-586-9514 / C: 248-379-7826 / DC: 130*116*24495 AIM: noweb4u / Callsign: KC8QAY ------------------------------ From: modorney@aol.com (Mike O'Dorney) Subject: Re: What Kind of a Connector is This? What Used For? Date: 25 Feb 2003 08:11:11 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ TELECOM Digest Editor wrote in message news:: > Maybe someone can tell me what I have here. On one of my recent trash- > picking runs (a bad, but often times profitable habit I learned from > Bill Pfieffer several years ago) I found a five foot long 'modular' > cord, resembling a phone connection cord. This is the way it came from > the factory, not taped or patched together, or rigged up. This is a management cord used for an APC Uninterruptible Power Supply. What it does is provide information from the UPS, directly into a monitoring computer. A trick I use is to search Google (and other engines) on "940-0127A" - with all the punctuation, spaces, etc. Often that will bring up info, or at least a reseller with a one-line description. Cheers (and, remember, dumpster diving is not a crime) Mike O [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, in some places dumpster diving *is* a crime, but not here in Independence, KS. Folks here are very laid back about things like that. There should be a crime, however, about going outside on days like we have had this week thus far. After 73 degrees on Friday, and somewhat cooler weather on Saturday, we had a blizzard on Sunday and yesterday! :( 10 inches of snow on Sunday during the day, combined with winds of 15-25 miles an hour throughout the day/evening/Sunday/Monday and temperatures in the single digits last night. Today, Tuesday, the temperature got all the way up to 20 degrees. My gas bill is going to be horrible this month. But the comp- uter did warn me about this 'winter storm watch' beginning last Thursday when the temperature was in the sixties all day. Can't say I wasn't warned. Thanks to the dozen or so guys who answered my question about the 'funny looking cable'. And it is black in color. I brought an APC type battery over by the computer and plugged in the cable and put the other end in a USB hub port. The Windows XP recognized it right away, and offered to install it and the software for it! I only printed three of the many replies I recieved here. That's one of the great things about being the traffic-cop/moderator in a group like this: Ask a question and get several good replies in minutes from readers. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Danny Burstein Subject: Spamblocks, was Re: Net Blocking Threatens Legitimate Sites Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2003 00:10:47 UTC Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC In Dave Close writes: > Mark Crispin wrote: >> Blocking by IP address is nothing more than the technological equivalent >> of a boycott. The entire point of a boycott is to cause collateral >> damage. > More specifically, a secondary boycott or a blockade. A blockade is a > picket line which the picketers try to prevent anyone from crossing. > Because they have a beef with the object of the picket line, they try > to stop anyone else from having any business with them. This sort of > labor practice has long been illegal in the US. Again, that's NOT the case regarding spam. A much better analogy is when a supermarket is repeatedly cited by the Dep't of Health or by local newspapers and television for leaving rotting meat in the aisles. Pretty soon customers stop going there, either because they smell the meat themselves of they see the reports. Meaning that Hersheys Chocolate can't sell much product there, nor can Ben and Jerrys. Nor Kimberly Clarke their toilet paper. When the district sales reps of the legitimate companies come by to see why the numbers are down they'll have a choice of trying to get the supermarket to clean up its act, or of dropping them all together. And yes, it does mean that the Hershey's sales will miss a couple of points in that area as people don't go to that store. But that's business. As good as Hershey bars are, I'm not going to hold my breath and put on boots to get to the chocolate display. And if the other stores I go to stock Lindt or Nestles but not Hersheys, that's what I'm going to buy. > It is fine for a union to inform the public and try to convince them > to support a strike, but coercion is going too far. The same should > apply to vigilante spam blockers. And again, the spam lists are exactly that. An informational bulletin. It's up to individual internet users (or the company they contract with) to decide whether to walk past the rotting meat and pick up Hershey bars. A person or company sending out e-mail, or hosting a web page, does not, repeat NOT, have an inalienable right to enter my mailbox. Period. End of Story. Finata. ( Hersheys is a registered trademark of the Hersheys Corporation, a manufacturer of pretty decent mass market chocolate. Name used for identification purposes only. Hmmmm, chocolate... ) _____________________________________________________ Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key dannyb@panix.com [to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2003 00:31:17 GMT From: Richard D G Cox Subject: Re: Net Blocking Threatens Legitimate Sites Organization: Mandarin Technology Limited At 07:22 UT on Mon, 24 Feb 2003 Dave Close wrote: >> Blocking by IP address is nothing more than the technological >> equivalent of a boycott. The entire point of a boycott is to >> cause collateral damage. > More specifically, a secondary boycott or a blockade. A blockade is > a picket line which the picketers try to prevent anyone from crossing. Dave seems to have well missed the point here - let me restate it: Blocking lists are implemented by operators of private data networks because THEY, the operators, do not wish to allow certain parties to access THEIR privately-run networks. Those certain parties are most commonly identified by the networks where the messages originate, and specified by IP address ranges allocated to them. In the case of SPEWS, the network identified as being appropriate to block is that of the hosting ISP, rather than the individual computer, because of the established tendency of hosting ISPs to move customers around to frustrate individual IP blocks. The action taken is against the hosting ISP, not the individual user, because it is the hosting ISP who determines (and hopefully enforces) the Acceptable-Use policy. > Because they have a beef with the object of the picket line, > they try to stop anyone else from having any business with them. That is not what is happening here. Every network that implements a blocking list does so of (its administrators') own free will; there is NO compulsion or pressure to do so. The only pressure is from having to clear up the mess, and pay for additional bandwidth, as a result of the unwanted material being sent from the identified networks. > This sort of labor practice has long been illegal in the US. Quite right too, but it's not relevant here. Richard Cox ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of 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: 620-330-6774 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 Fax 3: 775-642-0603 Fax 4: 530-309-7234 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: mirror.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. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2003 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 V22 #315 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Feb 26 22:48:12 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h1R3mCG27967; Wed, 26 Feb 2003 22:48:12 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2003 22:48:12 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200302270348.h1R3mCG27967@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #316 TELECOM Digest Wed, 26 Feb 2003 22:48:00 EST Volume 22 : Issue 316 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Dist. 54 Students to Get Laptops (Monty Solomon) SonyEricsson P800 Survives the Hype, and Some (Monty Solomon) Canada's Sympatico Targeted in Internet Scam (Monty Solomon) Re: How Does Telemarketing Work? (John R. Levine) Re: How Does Telemarketing Work? (john@pdj01.cinci.rr.com) Re: Mainstream Companies and SPAM (Paul A Lee) Re: Net Blocking Threatens Legitimate Sites (Joey Lindstrom) Re: Net Blocking Threatens Legitimate Sites (Barry Margolin) Re: Net Blocking Threatens Legitimate Sites (David Wolff) Re: Microwave Towers (techie) Re: Coping With Changes to E-mail Address (David B. Horvath, CCP) Re: Coping With Changes to E-mail Address (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 VIRUSES. 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: Wed, 26 Feb 2003 00:18:43 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Dist. 54 Students to Get Laptops By Shruti Daté Singh Daily Herald Staff Writer Dooley School teacher Jennifer Antonson is excited about the prospect of each of her students getting a laptop computer. Her sixth-graders could research and write their English papers right at their desks, and they could read about history for social studies as current events occur, Antonson pointed out. "I think back 20 years ago. A school wouldn't even consider not having a set of encyclopedias," said Antonson from her Schaumburg school. "This is a new resource every child should have access to." Schaumburg Township Elementary District 54 plans to give every student in grades four, five and six an Apple iBook laptop to use during the school year. The District 54 school board approved the project on Thursday. ... http://www.dailyherald.com/cook/main_story.asp?intID=3767715 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You know, the encylopedia business is almost a thing of history. Not only the schools in the past, but many private residences also had a set of encyclopedia books. Who has them any longer? PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2003 00:48:14 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: SonyEricsson P800 Survives the Hype, and Some By Andrew Orlowski in San Francisco For almost a year the hype has been gathering around the SonyEricsson P800, which is easily the most talked-about phone on Slashdot. It must be the most hyped handheld device since the Apple Newton. I've had two weeks with one and generally, I'm as pleased as punch with it. As early reviews indicate, it's a great phone and a thoroughly respectable PDA, all in one, at a price that undercuts PDAs. One dealer in the UK, where it began to go on sale for as little as $300 towards the end of last week, described it to me as the best ready for market phone he'd seen, and he's probably right. But for the real news, and why I called it 'revolutionary', you can thank Opera. This is the first handheld that does the full web - Opera's native Symbian browser is quite amazing. I think this is the beginning of the end for the two quite horrible, but related ideas: repurposing content through WAP gateways or "clipping" (the Palm VII/Hiptop model); and closed-garden carrier services. People want the full web, and want to go where they please - not where some phone company wants them to go. This they can now do, at a very affordable price. ... http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/54/29475.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2003 22:17:37 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Canada's Sympatico Targeted in Internet Scam By Jeffrey Hodgson TORONTO, Feb 25 (Reuters) - Sympatico, one of Canada's biggest Internet service providers, is telling some customers to contact police and credit card issuers after an elaborate e-mail scam that sought out confidential information. Company officials said on Tuesday that the scam's organizers had sent out e-mails to some 1,900 of Sympatico's 1.4 million customers last week, seeking personal and financial details, and linking their queries to a fake web site which has since been shut down. ... - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=31813112 ------------------------------ Date: 25 Feb 2003 23:51:57 -0500 From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: How Does Telemarketing Work? Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA In article you write: > Italked with a telemarketing form, that calls everyone in the > neighborhood/town/etc., with a recorded message, and, if the customer > phone rings three times, it hangs up. Just wondering, are they aware that what they're doing is extremely illegal? Under the TCPA robot sales calls to residences, or to hospitals, or to cell phones are completely illegal, and recipients can sue for $500 per call, tripled if the caller knew it was illegal. I know people who file and win these cases. Regards, John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 johnl@iecc.com Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner http://iecc.com/johnl Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail ------------------------------ From: john@pdj01.cinci.rr.com Subject: Re: How Does Telemarketing Work? Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2003 15:43:46 GMT Organization: Road Runner High Speed Online -- Northeast Ohio Mike, They can put out a number, the problem is they don't want to. A pre-recorded message to a home 90% of the time is flat out against the law. USC 47 section 227. Check with the FCC for more details. Then fill out the complaint form on their web page. -John ------------------------------ From: Paul A Lee Subject: Re: Mainstream Companies and SPAM Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2003 17:35:39 -0500 In TELECOM Digest V22 #314, Phil Earnhardt wrote (in part): > On Mon, 24 Feb 2003 12:29:25 -0500, Paul A Lee > wrote: >> If you have downloaded a driver update, a product data sheet, or any >> of a number of other things...you can wind up receiving promotional >> emails. It's easy to miss during the download "registration" process, >> but you "agree" to it. >> That may not be the most enlightened and forthright way to do things, >> but I will offer this in HP's defense: If you opt out, they DO STOP >> sending stuff. > I fundamentally disagree. > If I want to receive solicitations from a company, I ask for them. > That is the "opt-in" model for commercial e-mail. Or you could call it > Solicited Commercial E-mail. > If a company implicitly puts me on advertising lists -- if they > implicitly or explicitly have the "send me mail" checkboxes checked -- > then that's an "opt-out" model. It's not a model that respects the > consumer and his most fundamental commercial right to respect his > private property known as his e-mailbox. I appreciate what you're saying and I agree in principle. I would even take up the point with the company involved, given a reasonable opportunity. However, when I consider the varied promotional email I receive and the numerous ways in which my email address may have come to the attention of the sender, I tend to be circumspect. If I get an advertisement relating to a product I've been interested in, from a company I can reach and as a result of an action I took, I'm not inclined to get upset about it. It has happened quite a few times, and when I have no interest, I request removal, and they stop. In a practical sense, it's a non-event. I reserve my ire and my indignation for those senders I have never contacted and would never deal with, who have repeatedly sent me questionable promotions about products or services I have no interest in, without any initiating action on my part, and despite (or in spite of) my requests that it stop. Even more, I reserve my ire for the senders who obscure their identity, ignore remove requests, lie about their list practices, lie about how your email address got on their list, build and sell mail lists from replies, or harvest addresses from web sites and newsgroups. >> In my experience, you're pretty safe sending an opt-out or unsubscribe >> request to a legitimate company. > That begs the question. How should I implicitly know if m0.net is > legitimate? How much research should I be forced to do? I wouldn't expect anyone to know "implicitly". That kind of knowledge is empirical. It's a lot like learning where it's okay to walk at night in a big city or who is safe to go into the elevator car or stairwell with. Again, I appreciate the principle that, in the foregoing comparison, one should not _have_ to learn and know those things. And yet, I find life easier overall if I _do_ learn those things, even though they may conflict with my principles. >> Typically (again, my experience), you'll find a link or an email >> address to use to unsubscribe on a legit company's web site, and it >> will work, even when a third-party promotional service is used. > I would be far happier if those e-mails had a link to somewhere on > hp.com about the mailings. I know nothing about m0.net; without that > link on HP's site, I know nothing about whether or not HP is > sanctioning those mailings. I got a promotional email for HP just last night and realized that I was (back) on their list, apparently as a result of registering for and downloading a driver for my daughter's printer. The email was, indeed, from the "m0.net" domain. It appears I do have an HP Passport (web site user profile, complete with mail preferences), because when I clicked on the link in the email from m0.net, I was taken right to my Passport account login on hp.com. >> The ones you have to watch out for are the emails that promote a >> product of a legitimate and reputable company, but that actually >> represent a spammer/scammer, as with the Norton product spams. I >> suggest you forward those to the company whose product is being >> (mis)represented. Trouble is, they're usually already aware of the >> spam and doing what they can to fight it. > Really? Can you tell us exactly what Norton is doing to fight those > spams? No, I can't tell you exactly, but I would conjecture that they're doing the same things other reputable companies that are victimized by spammers do: Seek and pursue any trademark infringements, software piracy, and reseller contracts that might be used to stop unscrupulous sellers. However, when a manufacturer tries to selectively sanction some types of promotion or sales tactics, they have to beware of potential trade restriction and anticompetition violations. Most spam marketers quickly learn how to "fly under the radar" to avoid civil and criminal liabilities while they revel in the sleaze of their "business" practices. Our two perspectives can coexist. You can campaign to keep HP, GM, GE, IBM, ABC, and AOL from abusing their trust by sending promotional email. Me, I'll save my energy to deal with 66 ink cartridge refill offers, 73 Russian bride brokers, 104 herbal preparations to increase the size of various body parts, 231 online "pharmacies" offering Viagra, 359 nasty webcams, 581 home refinance and debt consolidation firms, and 1047 free porn sites (17 with barnyard fun). After that, an email from HP -- or even from m0.net -- is almost a welcome relief. Paul A Lee Voice: +1 717 730-8355 Sr Telecom Engineer [Voice & Transmission] Fax: +1 717 975-3789 Rite Aid Corporation, Telecomm, 30 Hunter Lane, Camp Hill, PA 17011-2410 ------------------------------ From: Joey Lindstrom Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2003 09:45:14 -0700 Subject: Re: Net Blocking Threatens Legitimate Sites Reply-To: joey@telussucks.info On Tue, 25 Feb 2003 18:53:13 EST, R. T. Wurth wrote: >> Your entire premise rests on the assumption that the content of these >> "bad places" is 100% universally condemned and/or illegal, but as far >> as I understand this, we're talking about some pornographic BUT LEGAL >> sites. >> The assumption is bad, therefore so is the proposal. > I think it's time to re-wind the thread and recall the context. The > original was about the state of Pennsylvania blocking access to web > sites showing child pornography. In the US, the law is crystal clear > that the child's right to privacy trumps free speech, in that the > making of child porn inherently violates the child because of the > child's inherent legal inability to consent. Furthermore, every > display of a child's pornographic image is a further crime against > that child. 1) It's a slippery slope. We block the IP of an "objectionable" site that, pretty much, we can all agree is "objectionable". That has collateral effects and results in the blocking of non-objectionable sites. OK, this is "acceptable losses", to use military parlance. But having done it, what's to stop us from next doing the same thing to "extreme" (but legal) porn sites? And then once we've done that, we continue down the slope until Hustler and Playboy are being blocked along with anyone else who shares that IP. 2) If we're talking about child porn sites, why the hell are we talking about blocking the IP's? This implies that we will leave that site running and just block IP traffic from it. Child porn is illegal pretty much everywhere: why aren't the authorities busting in and SHUTTING DOWN these sites and arresting the perps? Why are we trying to apply a technological band-aid, which results in damage to innocent third parties, to what is clearly a law-enforcement issue? > Is Pennsylvania going too far? I think the point is arguable both > ways, given the additional damage caused by each and every showing > of each and every image. I'm not going to define child porn, on the net or off it. It's wrong. But lemme just lob this grenade into the debate. You mentioned that additional damage is caused by each and every downloading of a kiddie-porn image. By "image" you imply photograph. But what if we're talking about a drawing, or a painting? Or what about an erotic story involving under-agers? A man in British Columbia, Canada, got a bunch of child-porn charges against him on this particular issue. He argued that that the child porn laws made it unlawful to possess (or distribute) images of *ACTUAL* children involved in a porn setting (I don't recall the exact wording of the law). Depictions of FICTIONAL children didn't fall under the law, and he then used the defence of "artistic merit" to have those charges struck. And it worked. Now, the guy still had a pile of other charges against him stick, for possession of bona-fide child porn (imported from Europe I think), some thousands of counts I think, but an important point was made -- and on this (and this alone), I support the guy. In question was a set of drawings and short stories, both authored by the defendant and NOT DISTRIBUTED TO ANYONE - they were for his own personal use. Now, yes, this guy is a sick, evil f*** who deserves to have his balls cut off, but on the other hand, I really worry about any law that makes it unlawful to write down my thoughts or depict them in a drawing. DISTRIBUTING that stuff is a whole 'nother matter, but just possessing that which you created all by yourself? No, I have a problem with the Thought Police coming to my house and telling me what I can and cannot think (and express). OK, off my soapbox. :-) -- Joey Lindstrom -- Telus Sucks http://www.telussucks.info ------------------------------ From: Barry Margolin Subject: Re: Net Blocking Threatens Legitimate Sites Organization: Genuity Managed Services, Woburn, MA Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2003 15:17:39 GMT In article , Mark Crispin wrote: > It isn't about how fast you pull the plug on a spammer. It's about > whether you continue to plug in new spammers. How do you know beforehand that a new customer will be a spammer? Are salespeople supposed to be private investigators, digging up the dirt on their prospects? Aren't we in the same country where laws had to be enacted to force gun shops to do background checks on their customers? Do you really expect similar due diligence of ISP sales people without forcing it down their throats? Barry Margolin, barry.margolin@level3.com Genuity Managed Services, 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. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What's wrong with ISP's *casually observing* the output from new users for a short period of time when they get signed up. Our ISP here in Indepedence does that, although he does not openly admit it. If you sign up for an account on his service, he watches you off and on for the first couple weeks. If a guy is a spammer, he will find it out real soon, and cut the guy off. He has done it a couple times when new users suddenly started putting out several hundred emails at a time each day. Anyone can sell his services, but he reserves the right to kill them as soon as they get on if they are a spammer, a porn person, etc. PAT] ------------------------------ From: dwolffxx@panix.com (David Wolff) Subject: Re: Net Blocking Threatens Legitimate Sites Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2003 03:45:58 UTC Organization: Public Access Networks Corp. In article , nBarry Margolin wrote: [major snippage] > The problem that often results in us being labeled as "spam-friendly" is > that people expect us to be able to drop these customers on a dime. > Unfortunately, our contracts typically don't allow such drastic action. We "Typically" implies that sometimes your contracts *do* allow such drastic action ... > have to notify the customer, give them a chance to explain and clean up > their act; only if the misbehavior persists after a couple of rounds of > this can we cancel their service. Is there a reason the contracts don't typically say something like, "If we think you've spammed, we can immediately suspend your account while we investigate; if our investigation finds you guilty, we can charge you a cleanup fee of $1 per message"? I'm just asking; maybe there *is* a good reason. Thanks -- David (Remove "xx" to reply.) ------------------------------ From: techie@tantivy.stanford.edu (techie) Subject: Re: Microwave Towers Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2003 03:43:14 UTC Organization: Tantivy Associates There is a yahoo mailing list called 'coldwarcomms', which focuses on the telecommunication networks of the cold war era, mostly focused on the AT&T microwave and coax networks. There are also a number of web pages devoted to the old Long Lines network, such as: http://longlines.addr.com -- Welcome My Son, Welcome To The Machine -- Bob Vaughan | techie@{w6yx|tantivy}.stanford.edu | kc6sxc@w6yx.ampr.org | P.O. Box 19792, Stanford, Ca 94309 -- I am Me, I am only Me, And no one else is Me, What could be simpler? -- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2003 22:11:16 EST From: dhorvath@cobs.com (David B. Horvath, CCP) Subject: Re: Coping With Changes to E-mail Address On Tue, 25 Feb 2003 17:38:37 -0500, Monty Solomon posted: > PERSONAL TECH > By Michelle Johnson, 2/24/2003 > Are you hopping mad because your e-mail address has changed? Perhaps > your Internet service provider is under new ownership, or your free > e-mail service went belly up. So now you have to send out change of > e-mail notices to a long list of family members, friends, and business > associates. Worse yet, maybe you just paid for business cards that are > suddenly obsolete. Subscribers to AT&T Broadband's Internet service > were pretty outraged recently when Comcast Corp. took over and > announced its Boston area customers would be getting their third > e-mail address in a year. (Comcast later said it would redirect e-mail > sent to AT&T Broadband addresses till the end of next year.) Whatever > the reason, when your e-mail address changes, something usually gets > lost in the mail. When I had the need for a "permanent" email address, I got my own domain. It is very hard to change an email address within a printed book sitting on a shelf. I figured that I may want to change ISP at some point because of declining service or increasing prices (although I haven't -- they take good care of me). I figured the free services (yahoo, hotmail, etc.) might go away at some point or charge unreasonable prices. That left getting my own domain. It was a small cost to pay to maintain a fixed address ... David B. Horvath, CCP Consultant, Author, International Lecturer, Adjunct Professor Board Member: ICCP Educational Foundation, ICCP Test Council, and Philadelphia Association of Systems Administrators ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2003 20:13:17 -0600 From: Gordon S. Hlavenka Reply-To: nospam@crashelex.com Organization: Crash Electronics, Inc. Subject: Re: Coping With Changes to E-mail Address > PERSONAL TECH > By Michelle Johnson, 2/24/2003 > Are you hopping mad because your e-mail address has changed? This is old news; I've been using a service called Namesecure.com for several years. When I started with them, their service was $49.95 the first year, and $24.95 each year thereafter. You also had to send Network Solutions $30/year for the domain name itself, as they were the only game in town at the time. Namesecure provides the whole package: web URL forwarding and email forwarding. They'll even host a very basic one-page website for you. If you forward your Namesecure-purchased domain to a URL, they can even arrange to keep your domain in the "Location" field of visitors' browsers. Their fee, including domain registration (Namesecure is a registrar) fee, is now $15/year with discounts for multi-year renewals. Same price for transfers. They can set an MX record to point to your mailserver, and they can directly point to your website by a static (But not dynamic) IP address. When these two things are done, it's as though you had your domain set up directly with your ISP -- except that your ISP can't hold your domain hostage if you move. Just update the information with Namesecure and you're elsewhere. Lest anyone think I'm a shill for Namesecure, let me say two things: First, they don't pay me a dime, and second, their support is pretty bad. They have NO telephone support. None. Zero. Email support takes several days and problems may take several cycles to resolve. But when Namesecure works, it works extremely well. And they've been doing it for a very long time, by internet standards. Gordon S. Hlavenka www.crashelex.com nospam@crashelex.com Grammar and spelling flames welcome. Yes, that's really my email address. Don't change it. ------------------------------ 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: 620-330-6774 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 Fax 3: 775-642-0603 Fax 4: 530-309-7234 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: mirror.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. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2003 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 V22 #316 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Feb 27 22:03:18 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h1S33HD04598; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 22:03:18 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2003 22:03:18 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200302280303.h1S33HD04598@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #317 TELECOM Digest Thu, 27 Feb 2003 22:03:00 EST Volume 22 : Issue 317 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson HeadsUp (McLellan) Wireless Technology in Space Stations (Ronnie) Remote Testing Numbers (Chuk Gleason) 311 in Philadelphia, PA, U.S. (Carl Moore) IDT's Red Scare (Eric Friedebach) IVR Conversations (cabstand@lycos.com) Re: Coping With Changes to E-mail Address (Herb Stein) Re: Coping With Changes to E-mail Address (Garrett Wollman) Re: Coping With Changes to E-mail Address (Paul Timmins) Re: Coping With Changes to E-mail Address (Barry Margolin) Re: Net Blocking Threatens Legitimate Sites (John Higdon) Re: Net Blocking Threatens Legitimate Sites (Barry Margolin) Re: Net Blocking Threatens Legitimate Sites (Mark Crispin) Re: Net Blocking Threatens Legitimate Sites (clowe@ofda.net) Re: Net Blocking Threatens Legitimate Sites (Dave Close) 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 VIRUSES. 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_mclellan@yahoo.com (McLellan) Subject: HeadsUp Date: 25 Feb 2003 21:34:40 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Have any of you tried HeadsUp from www.utilcall.com? They just release a new version and I have a few questions that I would like to ask people. We are using this to monitor any Errors that happen on our Avaya switch, when an error occurs, we have this configured to email us the error, as well as the list history since the last error occured. Thanks, Barry ------------------------------ From: ronnierc@lycos.com (Ronnie) Subject: Wireless Technology in Space Stations Date: 25 Feb 2003 23:46:13 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Hi, Well, does the space community feel that there is the need for Wireless communication in Space Stations? I would like to know whether any research is being done in this field of Science. Well, I for one believe that Space Station and the wirelss communication will help us to make a new web of communcation higher than that of say the IRIDIUM prjt and similar projects. SPACE STATIONS can have enormous capablilities and possibilities ... I hope some may have some research or papers presented on this topic. RONNIE ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2003 05:49:37 EST From: Chuk Gleason Subject: Remote Testing Numbers Reverend - OK, I think I understand now. You're looking for something that the phone company uses, internally. AFAIK, they aren't so much discrete telephone numbers as 'test points' which can be accessed remotely, using the circuit under test. Example: (I used to maintain some Nat'l Weather Service transmitters in North Carolina) Each site had its program audio fed from the forecast office via telephone line; given the distances involved, it might go thru a LEC, an IXC, then a LEC. If I had a problem, first thing I would do was call the main IXC, ask them to test the line. They in turn could tell where the audio was coming from, what level, and where it was going to. At certain points, and especially at the terminating ends, were devices that would let them 'loop-back' the audio; so they could see how the transmission path was in each direction. In my case, if it didn't come back, it was likely the loopback device was dead (site power gone, or smoke and char from lightning, etc). If telco did get their own signal back, it was once again my problem in that the transmitter was off the air for some other reason. (the transmitters are designed so that if they detect loss of program audio input, they shut down, to avoid dead carrier). That's about all I can tell you. How they worked and were accessed, was, in my business, known as FM. Funny Magic. Chuk Gleason Cary, NC >> From: Reverend Dr. Benrand Jr. >> Subject: Re: Helpful Telco Numbers Used For Troubleshooting >> I am looking for numbers that can be used on a regular telco system to >> troubleshoot from a local location rather than traveling to a site. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2003 11:05:19 EST From: Carl Moore Subject: 311 in Philadelphia, PA, U.S. From KYW news-radio: "The mayor wants to consolidate the call centers for eight services -- like the Water and Streets departments -- into a single answering service using a 311 number." Current switchboard number is 215-686-1776. ------------------------------ From: Eric Friedebach Subject: IDT's Red Scare Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2003 16:31:26 -0600 Organization: Sir Break-Alot School of Dance Reply-To: Eric Friedebach Michael Maiello, 02.26.03, Forbes.com NEW YORK - IDT is giving a whole new meaning to the term party line. Today, James Courter, chief executive of the Newark, N.J.-based telecom, will try to convince a bankruptcy judge in New York's southern district to nix a $250 million agreement to sell bankrupt Global Crossing to Hong Kong-based conglomerate Hutchison-Whampoa by claiming the sale would put vital U.S. national security information that might be transmitted over Global Crossing's network into the hands of China's communist government. Global Crossing creditors have approved the deal, as has the court. But the U.S. Treasury's Committee on Foreign Investments in the United States, which must approve the deal, has yet to do so. That might give Courter and IDT Chairman Howard Jonas the time they need. IDT has a nearly $1 billion war chest at the ready to snap up Global Crossing. IDT held a press conference on Monday where Jonas said, "Would we give the keys to the Justice Department buildings or the board rooms of some of our largest corporations to a foreign government so they could listen in? Absolutely not." Though the U.S. has no trade sanctions against China, the trade of sensitive technologies is regulated. http://www.forbes.com/2003/02/26/cz_mm_0226idt.html Eric Friedebach ------------------------------ From: cabstand@lycos.com Subject: IVR Conversations Date: 26 Feb 2003 14:58:46 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Looking for IVR board to receive calls, play a few messages/prompts, capture some digits, do some database lookups and inserts, open a conversation into a VOIP gateway via voice port and maintain good supervision and signalling. It would initially handle four conversations. Would also need a software toolkit to develop the app. Need a low-budget solution. Any recommendations would be appreciated. ------------------------------ From: Herb Stein Subject: Re: Coping With Changes to E-mail Address Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2003 22:10:35 -0600 David B. Horvath, CCP wrote in message news:telecom22.316.11@telecom-digest.org: > On Tue, 25 Feb 2003 17:38:37 -0500, Monty Solomon > posted: >> PERSONAL TECH >> By Michelle Johnson, 2/24/2003 >> Are you hopping mad because your e-mail address has changed? Perhaps >> your Internet service provider is under new ownership, or your free >> e-mail service went belly up. So now you have to send out change of >> e-mail notices to a long list of family members, friends, and business >> associates. Worse yet, maybe you just paid for business cards that are >> suddenly obsolete. Subscribers to AT&T Broadband's Internet service >> were pretty outraged recently when Comcast Corp. took over and >> announced its Boston area customers would be getting their third >> e-mail address in a year. (Comcast later said it would redirect e-mail >> sent to AT&T Broadband addresses till the end of next year.) Whatever >> the reason, when your e-mail address changes, something usually gets >> lost in the mail. > When I had the need for a "permanent" email address, I got my own > domain. It is very hard to change an email address within a printed > book sitting on a shelf. I figured that I may want to change ISP at > some point because of declining service or increasing prices (although > I haven't -- they take good care of me). > I figured the free services (yahoo, hotmail, etc.) might go away at > some point or charge unreasonable prices. That left getting my own > domain. It was a small cost to pay to maintain a fixed address ... That's what virtual domains are about. I do that. > David B. Horvath, CCP > Consultant, Author, International Lecturer, Adjunct Professor > Board Member: ICCP Educational Foundation, ICCP Test Council, and > Philadelphia Association of Systems Administrators Herb Stein The Herb Stein Group www.herbstein.com herb@herbstein.com 314 952-4601 ------------------------------ From: wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu (Garrett Wollman) Subject: Re: Coping With Changes to E-mail Address Date: 27 Feb 2003 05:12:45 GMT Organization: MIT Laboratory for Computer Science In article , Monty Solomon wrote: > Are you hopping mad because your e-mail address has changed? Perhaps > your Internet service provider is under new ownership, or your free > e-mail service went belly up. pobox.com has been providing e-mail forwarding services to solve this problem for $10 a year since before there was a Web. -GAWollman (not a customer, just hate to see the FUD spread like this) -- Garrett A. Wollman | [G]enes make enzymes, and enzymes control the rates of wollman@lcs.mit.edu | chemical processes. Genes do not make ``novelty- Opinions not those of| seeking'' or any other complex and overt behavior. MIT, LCS, CRS, or NSA| - Stephen Jay Gould (1941-2002) ------------------------------ From: Paul Timmins Subject: Re: Coping With Changes to E-mail Address Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2003 15:37:51 -0500 On Tue, 25 Feb 2003 20:13:17 -0600, Gordon S. Hlavenka wrote: > Lest anyone think I'm a shill for Namesecure, let me say two things: > First, they don't pay me a dime, and second, their support is pretty > bad. > They have NO telephone support. None. Zero. Email support takes > several days and problems may take several cycles to resolve. But when > Namesecure works, it works extremely well. That's no exaggeration either. I had to have some stuff done to my domain in 1999, and I couldn't get anything done. It got to the point where I managed to track down the phone number of the CEO at the time, and threatened to complain to ICANN about them not following rules (They were in the trial stage of the 3rd party registrar process at the time) to get them to change the nameserver address to point at my own servers. Needless to say I've never done business with them since. Support is not one of their strong points, but he's right, they've been around a while! Paul ------------------------------ From: Barry Margolin Subject: Re: Coping With Changes to E-mail Address Organization: Genuity Managed Services, Woburn, MA Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2003 16:12:38 GMT In article , David B. Horvath, CCP wrote: > When I had the need for a "permanent" email address, I got my own > domain. Another thing you can do is make use of services provided by your college or professional associations. Many alumni associations provide a "permanent forwarding address" -- I'm barmar@alum.mit.edu, and I forward this to my address at work. If you're a member of a professional organization, they may have a similar service (I think acm.org offers this, for instance). These forwarding services are usually free. Barry Margolin, barry.margolin@level3.com Genuity Managed Services, 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: John Higdon Subject: Re: Net Blocking Threatens Legitimate Sites Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2003 20:21:29 -0800 In article , Barry Margolin wrote: > How do you know beforehand that a new customer will be a spammer? Are > salespeople supposed to be private investigators, digging up the dirt > on their prospects? When I signed up for connectivity with my provider, I was asked quite a few questions regarding the nature of my business and the use to which I would be putting the service. My answers were satisfactory and I have enjoyed a good, long-term relationship. > Aren't we in the same country where laws had to be enacted to force > gun shops to do background checks on their customers? Do you really > expect similar due diligence of ISP sales people without forcing it > down their throats? Certainly not from all. But there are some (like mine) who are interested in maintaining quality space for their customers in general, and take measures to keep that space clean. As far as I'm concerned any provider who fails to do that deserves to get blacklisted. There is no god-given right to Internet connectivity, and providers have every right in the world to screen potential customers any way they choose. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | Anytown, USA | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ From: Barry Margolin Subject: Re: Net Blocking Threatens Legitimate Sites Organization: Genuity Managed Services, Woburn, MA Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2003 19:21:46 GMT In article , Al Iverson wrote: > In the case of indirectly, the blacklist will list the IP addresses > and/or networks of other customers on that ISP. Then those customers > complain to the ISP for not resolving the problem with the blacklisting > entity. We often resolve this by giving new addresses to the customers who are hit by the collateral damage, while we continue negotiating with the spammer that caused their addresses to be blacklisted. It *doesn't* cause us to violate our contract with the spammer -- it still takes just as long for us to terminate their account. So the wide net cast by the expanded blacklist doesn't really have the desired effect. If "bad guys" used techniques like this, it would be called "terrorism" instead of "boycott". In article , David Wolff wrote: > In article , Barry Margolin > wrote: >[major snippage] >> The problem that often results in us being labeled as "spam-friendly" is >> that people expect us to be able to drop these customers on a dime. >> Unfortunately, our contracts typically don't allow such drastic action. We > "Typically" implies that sometimes your contracts *do* allow such > drastic action ... I don't know. I'm not an expert on our contracts, so I didn't want to make an absolute statement. >> have to notify the customer, give them a chance to explain and clean up >> their act; only if the misbehavior persists after a couple of rounds of >> this can we cancel their service. > Is there a reason the contracts don't typically say something like, "If > we think you've spammed, we can immediately suspend your account while > we investigate; if our investigation finds you guilty, we can charge you > a cleanup fee of $1 per message"? And what if we're wrong? My guess is that we'd have to reimburse them for the lost business. We might even be in danger of being guilty of anti-competitive business practices (I know that's not the right phrase, but I'm not a lawyer and I can't remember what it's called when you do something that prevents another company from doing business). In article , Joey Lindstrom wrote: > 2) If we're talking about child porn sites, why the hell are we > talking about blocking the IP's? This implies that we will leave that > site running and just block IP traffic from it. Child porn is illegal > pretty much everywhere: why aren't the authorities busting in and > SHUTTING DOWN these sites and arresting the perps? Why are we trying > to apply a technological band-aid, which results in damage to innocent > third parties, to what is clearly a law-enforcement issue? I think most of these sites are being operated outside the United States, so we don't have the jurisdiction to shut them down or arrest them. Barry Margolin, barry.margolin@level3.com Genuity Managed Services, 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: Mark Crispin Subject: Re: Net Blocking Threatens Legitimate Sites Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2003 21:15:40 -0800 Organization: Networks and Distributed Computing On Wed, 26 Feb 2003, Barry Margolin wrote: > How do you know beforehand that a new customer will be a spammer? Are > salespeople supposed to be private investigators, digging up the dirt > on their prospects? I expect you to have effective Acceptable Use Policies and procedures in place to prevent abuse. I expect you to do background checks. I expect you to be responsive when you are called about an attack originating from your site -- something other than "send email to abuse." I have seen no sign of Level3 doing anything about the spammers on 63.209.159.64 63.209.159.70 63.209.159.72 64.157.143.4 64.157.143.51 64.157.153.52 just to name the level3 spammers of the past two days that repeatedly hit my private domain's SMTP server. The SMTP HELOs all claim to be in the emailbucks.com domain. This has just been going on for ... I dunno ... how many years? Then there's the ongoing dictionary attack against my SMTP server from a certain other large ISP. It uses a different IP address each time, and is slowly advancing through the alphabet; the most recent one it tried was "bedtime". And meanwhile my DSL line's bandwidth is being eaten alive. As far as I'm concerned, this is a DoS attack. > Aren't we in the same country where laws had to be enacted to force > gun shops to do background checks on their customers? I respectfully point out that the laws that had to be enacted were those to create a *means* for shops to do the checks. Gun shops had been begging for such for years. No shop wants to appear on the TV news as having sold the firearm used in a mass murder. The only reason why we have background checks for gun sales at all is that the NRA fought long and hard for it. Revisionist propaganda to the contrary notwithstanding, the original Brady Bill proposal was not about background checks, but rather about harassing gun owners with mandatory wait periods during which the police *might* do a background check. > Do you really expect similar due diligence of ISP sales people > without forcing it down their throats? Let's put it this way; if ISPs don't clean up their act it will eventually be cleaned up for them. Since it has reached the level of a DoS attack, I expect that ISPs which allow such attacks to continue to become criminally liable. Perhaps if the CEO of Level3 finds himself wearing handcuffs one day (as the CEO of Qwest just did), Level3 may pay a bit more attention. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What's wrong with ISP's *casually > observing* the output from new users for a short period of time when > they get signed up. Agreed. It doesn't even require human monitoring. Spamming behavior is rather easy to detect through automated tools. -- Mark -- http://staff.washington.edu/mrc Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate. ------------------------------ From: clowe@ofda.net Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2003 08:04:36 -0500 Subject: Re: Net Blocking Threatens Legitimate Sites <----blah, blah, blah---SNIP!---> > 2) If we're talking about child porn sites, why the hell are we > talking about blocking the IP's? This implies that we will leave that > site running and just block IP traffic from it. Child porn is illegal > pretty much everywhere: why aren't the authorities busting in and > SHUTTING DOWN these sites and arresting the perps? Why are we trying > to apply a technological band-aid, which results in damage to innocent > third parties, to what is clearly a law-enforcement issue? Knee-jerk reactions are not a substitute for thoughtful analysis, no matter what the "greater good" in question (No, this is not a point about our 'homeland security', but it could/should be!) A case in point was a good story in CSO magazine (and no, I am not connected with them in any way) this month talks about an interesting variation in using software worms: extortion w/child porn. The worm plants the porn on your hard drive, and then you get an e-mail threatening to turn you in if you don't pay them off. The full story is here: http://www.csoonline.com/read/020103/undercover.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2003 21:22:08 -0800 From: Dave Close Subject: Re: Spamblocks, was Re: Net Blocking Threatens Legitimate Sites Organization: Compata, Costa Mesa, California Danny Burstein writes: > A person or company sending out e-mail, or hosting a web page, does > not, repeat NOT, have an inalienable right to enter my > mailbox. Period. End of Story. Finata. No argument from me. And if I were your long-lost high school buddy and wanted to get back in touch, you might regret blocking all mail from addresses related to a spammer, one of which was mine. Your right, your loss. But if the blocking was done by your ISP without your knowledge or permission, you might have cause to be upset. When I refer to vigilantes, I mean those folks who block mail destined to other people without the permission of those other people. And when I don't receive a legitimate job offer because of such a vigilante, I'm more than upset. Dave Close, Compata, Costa Mesa CA "Politics is the business of getting dave@compata.com, +1 714 434 7359 power and privilege without dhclose@alumni.caltech.edu possessing merit." - P. J. O'Rourke ------------------------------ 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: 620-330-6774 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 Fax 3: 775-642-0603 Fax 4: 530-309-7234 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: mirror.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. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2003 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 V22 #317 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Feb 27 22:59:58 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h1S3xwS05838; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 22:59:58 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2003 22:59:58 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200302280359.h1S3xwS05838@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #318 TELECOM Digest Thu, 27 Feb 2003 22:58:00 EST Volume 22 : Issue 318 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Book Review: "WiFi Security", Stewart S. Miller (Rob Slade) Important Announcement: Customers - Verizon Landline Service (Fleckenstein) Feds Seizing Domain Names (Monty Solomon) U.S. Takes Over Bootleg Web Site (Monty Solomon) Feds Pick AT&T to Run Telemarketer Registry (Monty Solomon) Liberty May Go Alone in Bid for DirecTV (Monty Solomon) EarthLink to Bundle Phone Service With Internet (Monty Solomon) Net Music Gets AOL Audition (Monty Solomon) Artificial Stupidity (Monty Solomon) Marriott & Intel Promote Wireless High-Speed Internet Access (M Solomon) Verizon Wireless Lets Customers TXT the Talk (Monty Solomon) QUALCOMM Offers Free Access to Encryption Software (Monty Solomon) The Palm Tungsten W Is Good For E-Mail, but Not for Phoning (Monty Solomon) Lawmakers Dialing in E911 Pressure (Monty Solomon) VeriSign, RSA Defend Internet Technology at Trial (Monty Solomon) Wifi Caravan / CodeCon 03 (Monty Solomon) Recent Story: "Telemarketers Try to Zap the Zapper" (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 VIRUSES. 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: Rob Slade Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2003 07:46:34 -0800 Subject: Book Review: "WiFi Security", Stewart S. Miller BKWIFISC.RVW 20030209 "WiFi Security", Stewart S. Miller, 2003, 0-07-141073-2, U$49.95/C$78.95/UK#40.00 %A Stewart S. Miller wifi@itmaven.com %C 300 Water Street, Whitby, Ontario L1N 9B6 %D 2003 %G 0-07-141073-2 %I McGraw-Hill Ryerson/Osborne %O U$49.95/C$78.95/UK#40.00 800-565-5758 fax: 905-430-5020 %O http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0071410732/robsladesinterne http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0071410732/robsladesinte-21 %O http://www.amazon.ca/exec/obidos/ASIN/0071410732/robsladesin03-20 %P 309 p. %T "WiFi Security" When a book starts out with a preface that is basically an advertising pitch for the author's consulting services, one can be forgiven for doubting the author's dedication to the task of informing the audience. This work is yet another attempt to jump on a hot topic bandwagon. Supposedly chapter one introduces us to the standards for wireless LAN security. Instead, the material meanders through an unstructured collection of security and wireless topics. The material is limited, random, and not particularly informative. Even when dealing with strictly technical areas, such as the various types of spread spectrum technologies, the text seems to have been lifted wholesale from marketing brochures, and fails to explain much of anything. There isn't much "Technology Comparison" in chapter two unless we are comparing apples and oranges: again there is a haphazard compilation of topics, with Bluetooth getting the lion's share of the ink. Instead of considering security factors, chapter three lists some basic attacks against systems in general. The "issues in wireless security" are a little more on topic in chapter four. Chapter five mentions a few terms related to the 802.11 family of standards. There isn't much about the promised 802.11 security infrastructure in chapter six: instead we have another amalgam of security problems. Miller demonstrates his limited understanding of the technology, in chapter seven, with common mistakes such as the comparison of "40" and "128" bit WEP (Wired Equivalent Privacy) keys (WEP keys are composed of either 40 or 104 bit base keys concatenated with 24 bit initialization vectors, for total lengths of 64 or 128 bits respectively), so it is no surprise that the analysis of the weaknesses of WEP is only half a page long, and misses all the fundamental problems. Chapter eight is a generic warning that people might snoop on you. The authentication topics jump around so much that it is impossible to say what chapter nine is really talking about. A number of technologies are mentioned, but those discussed together frequently come from completely separate protocols or functions. Similarly, chapter ten is entitled "Direct Sequence Spread Spectrum," but doesn't explain anything about DSSS at all, and isn't even consistent in terms of the subject area under discussion. Chapter eleven does stick to the topic of equipment issues, but does not provide any useful direction to the reader. Cross-platform issues are rather confused, in chapter twelve, although there is a reasonable discussion of the WEP initialization vector reuse problem--which should have been covered in chapter seven. The vulnerabilities listed in chapter thirteen constitute another grab bag: since we have been discussing wireless LANs throughout the book, why do we now bring up the topic of the "WAP (Wireless Access Protocol) gap," which only affects Internet enabled cell phones? Chapter fourteen and fifteen mostly duplicate content from nine, with a few minor additions. Chapter sixteen repeats a lot of other material, adding a tiny bit on risk assessment. PDA security issues are reviewed in chapter seventeen. Chapter eighteen collects another random assortment of duplicated topics for a supposed look to the future. This is an arbitrary and disorganized conflation of subjects, with very little of value to anyone. There are a few salient and helpful facts, which, if brought together, might fill a few pages. However, these tidbits are buried in a deluge of impenetrable verbiage, designed more to impress the naive reader than to inform anyone. copyright, Robert M. Slade, 2003 BKWIFISC.RVW 20030209 ------------------------------ From: Steve Fleckenstein Subject: Important Information for Customers with Verizon Landline Service Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2003 11:20:50 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Reply-To: Steve Fleckenstein Starting as of May 1, 2003, due to a change in federal regulations affecting Verizon landline telephone company's application of toll charges to calls made by its residential or business customers to wireless phone numbers, you may incur toil charges on your land line bill regarding such calls. This change will not affect your Verizon Wireless service or phone bill. However, if such toll charges appear on your landline bill, it may be that changing your Verizon Wireless phone number could decrease such charges. To see if changing your mobile number might help, check whether your landline local calling area under your landline-billing plan covers the area code and first 3 digits of your wireless phone number. If it does, you will not be affected by the change, and there is no need to change your mobile number. (It you do not know your landline local calling area, you can check with your Verizon landline company customer service.) If your mobile number is not within the Verizon landline local calling area, then you may want to call our Customer Service Department about whether changing your wireless number would decrease the toll charges. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2003 01:36:28 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Feds Seizing Domain Names By Declan McCullagh Staff Writer, CNET News.com WASHINGTON--Federal police have adopted a novel crime-fighting tactic: seizing control of domain names for Web sites that allegedly violate the law. Attorney General John Ashcroft said Monday that the domain names for several Web sites allegedly set up to sell illegal "drug paraphernalia" would be pointed at servers located at the Drug Enforcement Administration. A federal judge in Pittsburgh granted the U.S. Department of Justice permission to do so until a trial can take place, the government said. Wednesday afternoon, the DOJ said it had taken over the iSoNews.com domain, whose owner pleaded guilty to felony copyright crimes under the controversial Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). David Rocci, 22, pleaded guilty in December to using his site to sell "mod" chips that let Microsoft Xbox and Sony PlayStation owners modify their devices so they can use them to play illegally copied games, or "warez." Rocci "attempted to profit by marketing circumvention devices to (the gaming) community knowing they would be used to play pirated games," Michael Chertoff, the assistant attorney general for the DOJ's criminal division, said in a statement. "He thought that there were no risks associated with his actions. He was wrong, and everyone engaged in the warez scene should take note." As previously reported, manufacturers like Sony have waged an international fight against mod chips, with Canadian police targeting an Ottawa man last July for selling mod chips for the PlayStation 2. A Hong Kong video game retailer, Lik-Sang, has been sued by game console makers Microsoft, Nintendo and Sony. But this case appears to have been the first such prosecution in the United States under the DMCA, a 1998 copyright law that generally restricts anyone from circumventing copy protection technologies or distributing software or hardware designed for circumvention purposes. The DMCA says commercial violators "shall be fined not more than $500,000 or imprisoned for not more than 5 years, or both, for the first offense." The Justice Department did not release a copy of Rocci's plea agreement, but said that he will be sentenced on March 7 before U.S. District Judge James Cacheris in Alexandria, Va. ... http://news.com.com/2100-1023-986225.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2003 01:21:15 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: U.S. Takes Over Bootleg Web Site By Andy Sullivan WASHINGTON, Feb 26 (Reuters) - The U.S. Justice Department said on Wednesday it had seized a rogue Web site that offered information on bootlegged video games and movies, as the owner faces sentencing for copyright violations. The site remained available to many Internet users hours after the announcement, but Justice Department officials said they would gain complete control as Internet traffic computers were updated to reflect its new address. Justice said it had taken over the Web site (http://www.isonews.com) after its owner pleaded guilty to selling computer chips that would enable users to play bootleg video games on Microsoft Corp. (NASDAQ:MSFT) Xbox consoles, a violation of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. ISO News, which claimed up to 140,000 hits each day, does not contain illegal copies of video games, software and movies, but instead features message boards where Internet users can trade tips about such "warez." David Rocci, 22, agreed to surrender the site after pleading guilty last December to importing 450 Enigmah Mod Chips from Britain and selling them for between $45 and $60 apiece, Justice said. Rocci operated the site as a way to attract an audience that would be interested in buying his code-cracking chips, Justice officials said. Some visitors to the site Wednesday found a warning against copyright infringement and a link to the Justice Department's computer-crime division, but others were able to reach a version of the original site. ... - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=31846834 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2003 01:18:44 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Feds Pick AT&T to Run Telemarketer Registry WASHINGTON (AP) -- Federal regulat