From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun Apr 20 23:40:32 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h3L3eW710905; Sun, 20 Apr 2003 23:40:32 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 23:40:32 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200304210340.h3L3eW710905@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 #401 TELECOM Digest Sun, 20 Apr 2003 23:40:00 EDT Volume 22 : Issue 401 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson A New Leaf for Apple? (Monty Solomon) Steve Jobs, the Music Man (Monty Solomon) Safari, Camino Could Re-Ignite Browser War - on Macs (Monty Solomon) Rules Let Marketers See Patient Data (Monty Solomon) New Online Harassment Involves Provocative Messages Sent (Monty Solomon) Kyocera 7135 Packs In Features -- and the Bulk (Monty Solomon) Why TiVo Owners Can't Shut Up (Monty Solomon) MIP Combox (Thomas B) Filtering Fax Callers & Associated Calling Tone On Ans Machine (Chuck) Re: Cell Phone Companies Seek to Block Rule to Let Consumers (Clayton) Spec For Delay: Off-Hook Till Detect Dial-Tone (eas-lab@absamail.co.za) Re: Voicemail Hacking Leaves Ears Ringing (John Higdon) Re: Greenies (Arthur Kamlet) Re: Greenies (John R. Levine) Massachusetts Local Telephone Rates Increase (Sam Rogers) Re: Ain't Spammers Funny? (David Clayton) 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, 20 Apr 2003 13:31:59 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: A New Leaf for Apple? By Matthew Rothenberg What will Apple Computer Inc. look like by the end of 2003? The picture should come a lot clearer in the next couple of months, as Apple moves simultaneously on several fronts that encompass its home turf as well as new swaths of territory. Addressing the former first, Apple's grand unified plan for the next Mac chapter seems to be progressing apace. As I wrote back in October, mid-2003 will mark the next major crossroads for the Mac as a software and hardware platform. I believe that crucial moment will arrive slightly earlier than I predicted, at June's Worldwide Developers Conference in San Francisco. Apple said it was pushing this traditional gathering of Mac developers back five weeks to give it extra time to prepare a beta version of Panther, the first major rev to Mac OS X since the Mac OS X 10.2 "Jaguar" release, which shipped in August 2002. Like many other observers, I believe that Apple will also use WWDC-and the launch of the 64 bit-complete Panther-as the official coming-out party for new Macs based on IBM's 64-bit PowerPC 970. Behind the scenes, I'm told, Apple is discussing how Panther will present new challenges to Windows XP in terms of interface features and (potentially) performance. At the same time, some hardware wonks at Apple have been privately predicting that new boxes shown at WWDC will close chronic performance gaps compared with Wintel boxes. http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,3959,1032506,00.asp ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 13:35:10 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Steve Jobs, the Music Man If he picks up even part of Universal Music, a pay-per-song download service would help to stop Apple devotees from straying. Apple Computer chief Steven P. Jobs is known in the music industry as Mr. "Rip. Mix. Burn." That was the title of an ad campaign that Apple ran in early 2001 for its iTunes software. Music executives fumed that it was a clarion call to Apple customers to steal music by downloading it from the Internet. Then, in 2002, Apple's portable MP3 player, the iPod, went on sale and quickly became the hippest way to listen to such "hot" tunes on the move. Now, Jobs is angling to sell online music. But how Jobs intends to build a thriving online music business where so many others have stumbled isn't clear. Sources confirm that Apple is in talks to buy all or some of Universal Music. Whether or not that happens, Apple is expected by the end of this month to announce its own service, expected to be called the Music Store. http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/apr2003/tc20030418_9975.htm ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 13:52:47 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Safari, Camino Could Re-ignite Browser War - on Macs By MATTHEW FORDAHL AP Technology Writer Four years after Microsoft Corp.'s Internet Explorer trounced Netscape in the Web browser wars, two new offerings for Macintosh computers offer the best evidence yet that market domination doesn't always make for the most nimble or innovative products. Apple Computer Inc.'s Safari and the Mozilla Organization's Camino are still in beta testing. But they leave Internet Explorer in the dust, rendering pages noticeably faster, dumping rarely used features and adding others not available in the Microsoft browser. Both browsers have simple interfaces that match the elegance of Apple's Mac OS X operating system. And unlike other alternative browsers, particularly for the Mac, they are very quick and accurately draw even complex Web pages. http://www.heraldtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?Date=20030417&Category=APF&ArtNo=304170917 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 01:25:21 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Rules Let Marketers See Patient Data Campaign afoot to give patients right to block release of files By Diane E. Lewis, Globe Staff, 4/19/2003 In an emergency, the hospital can't tell anyone except family that you're a patient. But it's free to use intimate medical details to forward marketing pitches to you from drug companies, insurers, and other 'business associates.' That's a crack in the privacy wall established Monday, when new federal rules for health providers took effect, specialists said yesterday. They promise to try to block marketers' indirect access to patients and to reinstate a patient's right to withhold consent for the commercial use of health data by providers and their associates. When Sally Scofield had knee surgery in January 2002 in Joliet, Ill., she had no idea a document-copying company would see her medical history. After the surgery, Scofield asked the hospital for a copy of her medical file. Instead, she received a letter from the copying company requesting a $20 fee and a 75-cent charge per page. "I thought when I talked to the doctor, it was just between me and him," said Scofield, 49. "I did not know a photocopy clerk could get it. The company had my Social Security number, my age, weight, and height, my credit card information -- enough to steal my identity." Scofield is one of 11 individuals and organizations who sued April 11 in US District Court in Philadelphia. They are asking the court to strike portions of the federal rules that permit healthcare providers to sell indirect marketing access to their patients without the patients' consent. US Representative Edward J. Markey, a Massachusetts Democrat, has filed a bill that would require consent. http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/109/business/Rules_let_marketers_see_patient_data+.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 00:50:28 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: New Online Harassment Involves Provocative Messages New online harassment involves provocative messages sent under guise of activists By Anick Jesdanun, Associated Press, 4/18/2003 13:06 NEW YORK (AP) Arab-American activist Nawar Shora checked his e-mail one day and found scores of angry messages asking why he hated Americans and Jews. The messages were responding to e-mails marked as coming from him. Only one big problem: Shora never sent the hate mail. Shora, a legal adviser to the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, was the victim of a new form of harassment in which fake e-mail is sent using real addresses. By exploiting the simplicity and openness of the Internet's mail protocols, unidentified provocateurs have been sending incendiary messages posing as Shora and other Arab-Americans. The tactic, known as e-mail spoofing, requires little technical know-how and no illegal computer break-ins. Yet it has caused a lot of trouble wasting time, damaging reputations and even leading to the suspension of e-mail accounts. http://www.boston.com/dailynews/108/economy/New_online_harassment_involves:.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 03:00:39 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Kyocera 7135 Packs In Features -- and the Bulk By WALTER S. MOSSBERG When Kyocera, the Japanese electronics firm, took over the cellphone-making operations of U.S.-based Qualcomm a few years back, it inherited the first serious effort to combine a PDA, or hand-held organizer, with a wireless phone. That first product, called the pdQ, was a joke -- huge and unwieldy, with clumsy software. But Kyocera persevered. In 2001, it brought out the QCP 6035, a much-improved combo device that looked like a large, brick-type phone with a monochrome Palm PDA inside. Now, a third-generation Kyocera, the 7135, will go on sale from Verizon Wireless beginning April 28 for $499 with a two-year service contract, and for $529 with a one-year contract. The 7135 looks like an oversized flip-phone, with a handsome dark-gray and silver case. Inside, in the upper half of the clamshell, is a very nice color screen. Below that, in the bottom half, is a traditional phone keypad topped with an area for entering text in Palm's handwriting-recognition system. In the 7135, Kyocera has remained true to its conviction that combo products should be phones, first and foremost, in contrast with many competitors. http://ptech.wsj.com/archive/ptech-20030417.html ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 00:45:01 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Why TiVo Owners Can't Shut Up By WARREN ST. JOHN TO hear his friends tell it, Matt Smith is an easygoing guy. A recently engaged business consultant from Charlotte, N.C., Mr. Smith, 31, is a casual fan of golf, Nascar and Wake Forest basketball. But there is one subject his friends are loath to bring up around him, for fear it will provoke one of his prolonged sermons on its myriad virtues: the television gadget TiVo. "I'd say he brings it up every time we're together," said Fran Radano, a college pal who has resisted Mr. Smith's efforts to convert him to TiVo. "There's usually someone in the group who's new to his preaching. It's highly annoying." Not since the PalmPilot debuted in 1996 has a new electronic contraption sparked a cultlike following and so many zealous proselytizers. Type the phrase "TiVo changed my life" into Google, and you will summon an afternoon's worth of reading (including the observation that there are "as many TiVo-praise Web sites out there as there are hairs on Robin Williams"). Michael Powell, the chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, once called TiVo "God's machine." TiVo has around 700,000 subscribers - a tiny fraction of American television viewers, 70 percent of whom have never even heard of TiVo, according to Josh Bernoff, an analyst at Forrester Research in Cambridge, Mass. But, Mr. Bernoff said, TiVo's fans are a vocal minority. http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/20/fashion/20TIVO.html ------------------------------ From: bolero92@yahoo.com (Thomas B) Subject: MIP Combox Date: 18 Apr 2003 19:10:51 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Anyone tried MIP Combox voip gateway? I can't find any manual in the box and the web site http://www.miptel.com I have set the IP address and dont know how to config the Voip settings. ------------------------------ From: Chuck Subject: Filtering Fax Callers & Associated Calling Tone on Answ Machine Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 20:31:02 -0700 Organization: MindSpring Enterprises Reply-To: Chuck We are plagued by junk fax callers. Although the fax machine autoanswer is now disabled, our answering machine records many messages with several seconds of fax calling tone. Does anyone know of a great system for filtering out fax callers? I have been looking for one of the following solutions to no avail: 1) A digital answering machine intelligent enough not to record a message that has nothing but fax calling tone on it. 2) A box (commercial fax switch?) inserted between the incoming telco line and all other phones that will seize the line, decide if the caller is a fax machine, and ring the downline phones and/or answering machine (using its own built-in ring generator) if it's not a fax. 3) A digital answering machine that has a built-in fax machine port, accomplishing the function outlined in #2 above. Thanks very much! Chuck ------------------------------ From: David Clayton Subject: Re: Cell Phone Companies Seek to Block Rule That Lets Consumers Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 17:40:38 +1000 Organization: Customer of Connect.com.au Pty. Ltd. Reply-To: dcstar@acslink.net.au Joseph contributed the following: > Federal regulators are sympathetic with Danielson's plight and have > ordered cell phone companies to let people take their numbers with > them when they switch to a competitor. The wireless providers asked a > federal appeals court Tuesday to block the regulation, arguing that > keeping the same phone number is a convenience, not a necessity. In Australia we've had Full Number Portability for mobile phones for a while now, the initial "churn" seems to have settled down and it seems to be accepted as a good thing for all concerned. The only issue seemed to be some carriers acting a bit too slowly in processing the change requests, but a bit of negative publicity seems to have fixed that problem. Regards, David Clayton, e-mail: dcstar@acslink.net.au Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. Dilbert's words of wisdom #18: Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. ------------------------------ From: eas-lab@absamail.co.za Subject: Spec For Delay: Off-Hook till Detect Dial-Tone Date: 19 Apr 2003 13:05:51 GMT Hi, This question originates from the quite common "modems fail to detect dial-tone". I'm guessing that the modems allow a certain time to detect dial-tone" ? What is the spec. (for your country/telco) ? A related question (to modems): is the modem supposed to 'activate its "line-relay" ' soon after receiving the string: "ATZ" ? I guess that the delay to recgonise the dial-tone is irrelevant if the line-relay doesn't pull in; or perhaps it is designed to drop-out again if the dial-tone is not recognised in time ? Thanks for any info. -- Chris Glur. PS. is there NewsGroup(s) for mobile/cell technology ? ------------------------------ From: John Higdon Subject: Re: Voicemail Hacking Leaves Ears Ringing Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2003 16:19:59 -0700 In article , Dave Phelps wrote: > I don't see what the disagreement is. If the customer's equipment is > responsible, then the customer is resposible. That's it. If the > customer wants to go after the vendor that configured the equipment, > then that's fine. The buck should truly stop with the vendor > responsible for configuration, if configuration negligence can be > shown on the vendors part. OTOH, if it was because a VM subscriber > used a stupidly obvious password, then the customer pays the bill. In this case, it wasn't the customer's equipment; it was SBC's equipment. > Frequently, a LD carrier will forgive debts rung up by a phreaker, but > it is just only goodwill, not because the LD carrier is responsible. > Why do people confuse goodwill with liability so often? Funny how in this case, no one is even suggesting going after SBC. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | Anytown, USA | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ From: kamlet@panix.com (Arthur Kamlet) Subject: Re: Greenies Date: 19 Apr 2003 22:54:08 -0400 Organization: PANIX -- Public Access Networks Corp. Reply-To: ArtKamlet@REMOVE.com In article , R. T. Wurth wrote: >> Any old Bell System guys out there who remember the green 'analgesic >> tablets' that were a staple in the first aid kits? I wonder what was >> in those things (as I nurse a hamstring strain with nothing more than >> drugstore strength advil)? They would sure clear up a hangover! >> Jim Hopkins >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: For the new guys who do not remember >> the old days of the Bell System, AT&T had a full-size medical unit >> at every company location; a full complement of on duty doctors and >> nurses to treat/examine employees as needed. PAT] > I don't know about your "Greenies", but in my former part of the > former Bell System, a "greenie" was a routing slip, a small slip of > green paper (about 2.5" by 5.5", always used in portrait mode) one > could attach to the front of a memo upon which one would write the > initials of persons one thought might be interested in reading it. > After each set of initials, one wrote a hyphen and the number 2, > unless a.) the person so designated was a direct or indirect report, > and b.) you wanted them to followup, in which case one wrote the > number 1. For normal (-2) handling, one was expected to keep it for > no more , perhaps 1/2 a week to a week, then cross one's initials > off and forward it to someone else on the list, or alternatively, > pass it on without crossing one's initials off if one couldn't read > it within the customary time and wanted another shot at reading it > after others had their chance. The originator could put their > initials, followed by the word "last" if they wanted the memo back > for their files. > New employees were issued a grey routing slip box with a Bell System > logo, a pen holder, and one of those infuriating pens that had no > pocket clip and no way of disarming the writing end (i. e. no cover > and no retraction mechanism), so one had to put it back into its > holder. > The routing slip was also the official raise reporting form in my > organization. One's manager would open his desk, consult his > secret raise report, and write on the slip, for example: > RTW (the report's initials) > > $xx.x K (the report's current salary) > > + x.x K (the raise) > > ----------- > > $xx.x K (the new salary) > > x.x% (the percentage raise) > The slip was then passed across the manager's desk, face down, to the > employee, with the numbers never spoken. Salaries and raises were > always in $100 increments, so the "xx.x K" format sufficed. Later, > the system was changed to use formal computer-generated individual > raise forms on regular (8.5 x 11) paper. > That was the way it was in Bell Labs in the late 1970's. And the late 60s too. At least in Bell Labs Whippany & Columbus. The real green greenies morphed into pale green greenies, and later morphed into plain white "greenies" of the same size. For the last 5-7 years that they still had stockrooms, they carried white :"greenies' which everyone still called greenies. It was the 3M company and its post-it's pads that finally did away with greenies. BTW calling white sheets of papers "greenies" is not too different from calling "green cards" green cards. For those who have not seen a green card lately, they are, naturally, red, white and blue. Art Kamlet ArtKamlet @ AOL.com Columbus OH K2PZH ------------------------------ From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: Greenies Date: 20 Apr 2003 01:48:26 -0400 Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > Someone wrote me off the group that he thought they might have been > APC tablets, which are a combination of asprin, phenatacine (I think I > spelled that right) and caffeine. That would make sense. APC was widely used with Anacin being the most popular brand. Phenacetin is a chemical relative of acetaminophen (aka Tylenol) which fell out of favor due to some ambigous study data that suggest that it might be a minor carcinogen. These days Anacin is just AC, so you can get the same effect a lot cheaper by washing down some generic aspirin with a cup of coffee. By the way, the DOS attack seems to be under control, so mail to and from telecom-digest.org should be working OK now. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies", Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://iecc.com/johnl, Sewer Commissioner "A book is a sneeze." - E.B. White, on the writing of Charlotte's Web [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thank you very much, John, for getting telecom-digest.org and the mail up and running again. Would you mind telling us how the 'DOS attack is under control'? Is it still going on, but 'under control' or has it stopped? Exactly how do you get those things 'under control' if you are not giving away any secrets? PAT] ------------------------------ From: Sam Rogers Organization: V Subject: Massachusetts Local Telephone Rates Increase Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2003 23:32:47 -0400 Verizon is the sole incumbent local telephone carrier for most (all?) of Massachusetts. The state's PUC, known as the DTE, has just passed a rate increase for local service. According to the DTE's findings, Verizon loses an average of more than $6 (per month) for residential local service, which must be made up with business revenue. However the DTE decided that a $6 increase would be too great so, it decided on $2.44. Why a goofy number like $2.44? Because the $0.49 Touch-Tone line item charge is being removed. So the increase for the 87% of customers that pay for Touch-Tone service will see a net increase of $1.95, conveniently just under $2.00. The low income service "LifeLine" subsidy will be increased to at least offset the extra charges. The DTE believes that the increases in regulated rates will spur more competition for local service. ------------------------------ From: David Clayton Subject: Re: Ain't Spammers Funny? Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 17:40:35 +1000 Organization: Customer of Connect.com.au Pty. Ltd. Reply-To: dcstar@acslink.net.au rayta@msn.com (Ray Normandeau) contributed the following: > Joey Lindstrom wrote in message > news:: >> My mail system just trapped a piece of spam. Actually it traps about >> 60 a day, but I found this one to be a particularly funny example of >> how spammers don't have a clue about who they're sending their mail to >> (ie: their advertising is not "targetted"). > I get spam for septic tank cleaners and I live in the heart of NYC. > No septic tanks near my apartment building. What about all of us non-US people who continually get spammed for US services or products? You'd think the spammers wouldn't be that brain dead to at least filter out the non-US domains! Regards, David Clayton, e-mail: dcstar@acslink.net.au Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. Dilbert's words of wisdom #18: Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, you'd think they would not be that brain dead, period. Even with my very own deseased brain, as bad as it has gotten since the aneurysm in 1999, I'd never stoop to the kinds of crapola most of them send out. But then, I didn't make 844 thousand dollars last quarter, ------------------------------ 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 #401 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Apr 21 01:41:03 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h3L5f3K13248; Mon, 21 Apr 2003 01:41:03 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2003 01:41:03 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200304210541.h3L5f3K13248@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 #402 TELECOM Digest Mon, 21 Apr 2003 01:40:00 EDT Volume 22 : Issue 402 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Investors Suing Over Possible DirecTV Sale (Monty Solomon) A New Wave of Wireless / 'WiFi' Networks Are Expanding (Monty Solomon) Once You've Tried WiFi, There's No Going Back (Monty Solomon) No Help for Callers in Trouble (Monty Solomon) Irate Phone Customers Find an Ear (Monty Solomon) Magazine Appeals for CD Archive (Monty Solomon) Pyramid Scheme Spam Temporarily Brings Down Montana ISP (Monty Solomon) Letter Author Claims to have Breached Prison Computer Security (Solomon) Digital Defense Apologizes for Releasing Samba Exploit (Monty Solomon) Video Phone Products Still Suffer From Poor Vision (Monty Solomon) Re: Mapping Call Failures to Announcements (Don't email me) Re: Problem Recieving TELECOM Digest Messages (Tom Betz) Iraqi Caller ID Fingers Secret Police (W Randolph Franklin) Re: Safari, Camino Could Reignite Browser War (pae) 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, 20 Apr 2003 18:58:19 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Investors Suing Over Possible DirecTV Sale Class Actions Suit Ask Court To Block 'Inadequate' Sale LOS ANGELES -- Hughes Electronics, which owns DirecTV, and General Motors are being sued by investors who claim News Corp.'s $6.6 billion bid to buy 34 percent of Hughes is "wholly inadequate," court papers showed Tuesday. The proposed class action suit asks the court to block the sale, claiming it unfairly benefits GM, which plans to sell its 20 percent stake to Rupert Murdoch's media conglomerate for $3.1 billion in cash and News Corp. stock. The other 14 percent comes from shareholders, who would only get stock, according to the lawsuit, which was filed Monday in Los Angeles Superior Court. http://www.nbc4.tv/money/2114222/detail.html ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 19:06:06 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: A New Wave of Wireless / 'WiFi' Networks Are Expanding A New Wave of Wireless 'WiFi' Networks Are Expanding Internet's Reach, Profit Opportunities By Yuki Noguchi Washington Post Staff Writer Sunday, April 20, 2003; Page H01 It's Saturday afternoon, and Art Slater sits at his perch in the bay window of the Cyberstop Cafe. The thin card he slides into the side of his laptop detects a wireless signal, an icon pops up on the bottom of the screen, and Slater clicks on it to connect to the signal coming from the Dupont Circle cafe's back offices 20 feet away. With that, he's on the Internet, with a connection faster than anything at home. Outside on the patio, Matt O'Neill is transmitting files of art over the same airwaves as Slater. Across town near Eastern Market, Nicholas Cho just installed a similar wireless connection in his own cafe, Murky Coffee. A for-fee version of the same technology is available in 145 Starbucks coffee bars around the area. And in a Leesburg subdivision 40 miles from downtown, Laurie and Rich Dunham are making a tiny profit selling a wireless Internet service broadcast from their rooftop to their neighbors' homes. The WiFi networking all these people are using could not have been purchased for any price 10 years ago. Five years ago it was just arriving in the market, advertised solely as a cheap way to network computers in individual homes and classrooms. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A54030-2003Apr18.html ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 19:07:53 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Once You've Tried WiFi, There's No Going Back By Rob Pegoraro WiFi has taken a strange path to popularity. For many users, it has gone something like this: first baffled incomprehension, then frustrated annoyance, and lastly zealous idolatry. This increasingly popular form of wireless networking can be a bear to explain, since it's so foreign to traditional notions of computing. Setting up a WiFi network can be a stingingly frustrating experience, as bad as, well, setting up any kind of network. But once you can flip open a laptop and get online from anywhere in or near your home -- and a great many places outside it -- the troubles all fade away. WiFi is one of the true joys of modern computing. Unlike so many other next-big-things, it actually works, and it is worth the trouble. Put in perspective, the advent of cheap, fast wireless networking is as important as the invention of the laptop and the spread of broadband Internet access. Laptops let us take a computer anywhere, always-on broadband lets us get online immediately, and now WiFi combines the immediacy of broadband with the range of a laptop. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A53986-2003Apr18.html ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 19:30:18 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: No Help for Callers in Trouble By Michelle Delio NEW YORK -- Trapped on a capsizing 8-foot fiberglass dingy floundering in 33-degree waters off New York, Henry Badillo used his cell phone to make a desperate plea for help. "We're taking in water ... we're on the Long Island Sound in a boat off the coast of City I ... oh, my God, we're going to die!" Badillo screamed in his 12-second call to a 911 emergency services operator on Jan. 24, 2003. Badillo, stranded on the boat with three friends, didn't have time to say exactly where he was before the call cut off, and the operator did not clearly hear his reference to City Island, which could have helped to pinpoint the boat's location. The operator and her supervisor decided they didn't have enough information to request assistance. Badillo and his friends died that night. Their parents believe they might have been rescued if New York's 911 system was able to trace cell-phone callers' locations, a service that the state has been collecting taxes to implement for more than a decade. http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,58485,00.html ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 19:52:23 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Irate Phone Customers Find an Ear By Elisa Batista Two years ago, 31,345 California residents complained to the state about their phone companies. Finally, someone is listening. Most of the complaints -- 57 percent of them -- stemmed from billing disputes. Another 17 percent of the complaints had to do with unauthorized fees and services, while 9 percent of the people griped about poor service. The remaining 14 percent of the problems were lumped together by the California Public Utilities Commission under the "other" category. The PUC responded to these grievances with a list of rules it dubbed the Telecommunications Consumer Bill of Rights, which it will vote on sometime this spring, a PUC spokeswoman said. The proposal -- the first of its kind in the country -- would in essence force all phone companies (local, long distance and cell-phone service providers) to provide timely and consistent service. That includes a 24-hour, 7-day-a-week hotline with live operators to handle customer inquiries. The bill would hold the carriers accountable for their marketing and billing practices and even force them to provide phone service to some customers who have not yet paid their bills. Those would be the folks who have filed petitions with the PUC and are waiting for a response. No doubt, customers who say they were wronged by their phone company are thrilled at the idea of a government mandate for better service. Some industry observers, however, have scoffed at the proposed rules as yet another example of government's intrusive and needless legislation. http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,58441,00.html ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 19:57:39 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Magazine Appeals for CD Archive By Gabe Friedman The National Geographic Society plans to appeal a jury verdict in a landmark case pitting the magazine publisher against a freelance photographer who claimed his work was improperly included in a CD-ROM. In late March, a jury in Miami ruled that National Geographic failed to properly compensate the photographer, Jerry Greenberg, for photos of his included on a CD-ROM that contained every issue of the magazine published in its 108-year history. The dispute centered on the question of whether archiving work on microfilm and microfiche is different from releasing it on CD-ROM. In appealing the case, the magazine wants courts to recognize new technology. In 1997, Greenberg filed suit against the National Geographic Society for releasing The Complete National Geographic on CD-ROM without giving him additional compensation. National Geographic Society attorneys argue Supreme Court justices have ruled that converting articles from print to microfilm or microfiche without a freelancer's permission is OK. But Greenberg's lawyers successfully argued to a jury that the CD-ROM created a new product -- an anthology of the magazine. He was awarded $400,000 for his 64 photos, plus National Geographic pulled the product off the shelves. In the meantime, National Geographic promised to challenge the logic behind a decision that draws distinctions between archives on microfiche or microfilm and archives on CD-ROM. http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,58515,00.html ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 22:31:40 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Pyramid Scheme Spam Temporarily Brings Down Montana ISP SANS NewsBites April 16, 2003 Vol. 5, Num. 15 http://www.sans.org/newsletters/newsbites/vol5_15.php A Montana Internet service provider (ISP) was deluged with up to 20,000 e-mail messages an hour, causing the service to shut down briefly. The messages were part of an electronic pyramid scheme. The ISPs owner believes the attacks originated locally; the incident is under investigation. http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/computersecurity/2003-04-08-isp-attack_x.htm ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 22:31:32 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Letter Author Claims to have Breached Prison Computer Security SANS NewsBites April 16, 2003 Vol. 5, Num. 15 http://www.sans.org/newsletters/newsbites/vol5_15.php The Arkansas Democrat-Gazette received a letter containing the social security numbers of several Arkansas prison employees from someone claiming to be an inmate. The author of the letter alleges that prison authorities were lax in allowing inmates to have access to computers. A prison spokeswoman says the information would not have been available through the Internet, but could have been found on the prison's computer system. The incident is being investigated. http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/computersecurity/2003-04-08-inmate-hack_x.htm ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 22:33:05 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Digital Defense Apologizes for Releasing Samba Exploit Along with SANS NewsBites April 16, 2003 Vol. 5, Num. 15 http://www.sans.org/newsletters/newsbites/vol5_15.php The Samba team has released a patch for a vulnerability discovered by the security company Digital Defense. The vulnerability could allow attackers to compromise Samba servers connected to the Internet. Because the vulnerability was already being actively exploited, the Samba team and Digital Defense decided to release their advisories before all the vendors had time to address the problem. Digital Defense's advisory also included code for exploiting the vulnerability, without managerial approval; the company has apologized. http://news.com.com/2100-1002-995834.html http://news.com.com/2100-1002-995939.html ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 23:39:46 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Video Phone Products Still Suffer From Poor Vision By Mike Langberg Mercury News I'm a sucker for videoconferencing. I can't shake the hunch that someday soon we'll regularly see as well as hear people on the other end of phone calls -- despite the years I've spent reviewing home videoconferencing equipment that's too expensive, too hard to install and delivers less than satisfying video. Perhaps I'm hanging on because the products keep getting slightly better, even if the overall results are still disappointing, as with the new D-Link DVC-1000 i2eye VideoPhone at $299 (www.dlink.com/i2eye). The i2eye is unique in that it connects through a home computer network to a broadband Internet connection, such as a cable modem or digital subscriber line. Previous home videoconferencing gear either used regular phone lines, which are far too slow for acceptable video quality, or personal computers with Web cams, forcing callers to sit awkwardly in front of the screen looking at a cracker-sized picture. Slightly larger than a videocassette, the i2eye sits on top of a TV set. Incoming video is displayed on the TV screen, while a camera lens on the i2eye's front captures the outgoing picture. Callers on both ends plug any regular phone -- corded or cordless -- into the i2eye for talking. http://www.siliconvalley.com/mld/siliconvalley/business/columnists/mike_langberg/5655214.htm ------------------------------ From: nomailp@netscape.net (Don't email me) Subject: Re: Mapping Call Failures to Announcements Date: 20 Apr 2003 13:26:45 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ The short answer is "yes" you can map announcements to treatment/cause codes. This is usually done in class 5 switches because they serve the end subscriber. Toll and gateway switches typically pass cause codes back to the class 5 which will then play an announcement to the originating caller. Not all cause codes trigger annuncements. The serving class 5 will determine what codes get announcements and which play tones (fast busy etc.) Hope this answers you question ... questions@telcosupport.net http://www.telcosupport.net m.mcconnell@computer.org (Mitch McConnell) wrote in message news:: > Hello all, > I have been reading GR-675-CORE (about announcement systems) and > GR-674-CORE (special information tones) and have a question or two, as > I am not all that facile with navigating the Telcordia specs. > I understand that at some level, call failures must map cause codes to > special information tones (SIT) and announcements. GR-674 > specifically mentions Call Classification Categories that map pretty > closely (e.g., NC=no circuit, RO=reorder, etc.). So, is there a > direct mapping of cause code to call failure classification? > Another question: how flexible are class 5 switches with respect to > customizing which announcements get played? I assume that operators > can customize which voice file gets played, for language or other > reasons. > Do the various types of call services (like CLASS) specify how/when > announcements get played? > Thanks in advance, > Mitchell J. McConnell ------------------------------ From: Tom Betz Subject: Re: Problem Recieving TELECOM Digest Messages Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 23:34:24 UTC Organization: XOme Quoth TELECOM Digest Editor in news:telecom22.400.1@telecom-digest.org: > I must sadly say I have come to the conclusion that being on the > mailing list no longer guarentees delivery of the Digest. The spammers > have accomplished that for us. Pat, While it's not normally quite as timely (or ever as complete) as the e-mail delivery of Telecom Digest, the web-enabled among your readers still have the option of going to: ... at such times as perturbations in the fabric of the Internet (which still surprises me and Bob Metcalfe when it works at all) preclude timely delivery of the Digest in e-mail. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Even faster than groups.google is the immediate information available when an issue of the digest is released by checking http://telecom-digest.org/back.issues or or looking right at the front page of our web site where the time of release of the most recent issue is given with a link to read it. Also, you can get a 'Usenet style' message by message display by date, author name or subject by looking at http://telecom-digest.org/TELECOM_Digest_Online as well. But Google also works as you point out. but not quite as fast. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Iraqi Caller ID Fingers Secret Police From: W Randolph Franklin Reply-To: W Randolph Franklin Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2003 00:29:35 GMT Organization: Road Runner From The Saddam Files http://www.msnbc.com/news/902240.asp?cp1=1 Judging from the documents in the grimy sack, the IIS (Iraqi Intelligence Service) became a gang of corrupt and somewhat incompetent thugs, more interested in pocketing bribes than stealing American secrets or spreading terror abroad. If the Nazis represented, in Hannah Arendt's phrase, 'the banality of evil', the IIS often seemed to embody the stupidity of evil. The director of the IIS, Tahir Jalil Habbush, comes across in the papers examined by NEWSWEEK as an exasperated bureaucrat. He chastises his supposedly secret agents for showing off their firearms and IDs (the better to shake down frightened citizens). He has to send out memos reminding the secret service of the most elemental tradecraft, such as 'not mentioning informants' names when sending correspondence. He rails against Iraqi spies who tried to monitor Turkish commercial companies but couldn't use the companies' computers, so they failed. IIS spies have to be sternly reminded not to take home computers to surf the Internet and send e-mails, lest highly classified information leak out.? He scolds IIS agents who are amusing themselves by making harassing phone calls. The problem: more and more Iraqi citizens have Caller ID on their phones, and they are phoning the IIS to complain. ------------------------------ From: Phil Earnhardt Subject: Re: Safari, Camino Could Re-ignite Browser War - on Macs Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 23:18:46 -0600 On Sun, 20 Apr 2003 13:52:47 -0400, Monty Solomon wrote: > Apple Computer Inc.'s Safari and the Mozilla Organization's Camino are > still in beta testing. But they leave Internet Explorer in the dust, > rendering pages noticeably faster, dumping rarely used features and > adding others not available in the Microsoft browser. > Both browsers have simple interfaces that match the elegance of > Apple's Mac OS X operating system. And unlike other alternative > browsers, particularly for the Mac, they are very quick and accurately > draw even complex Web pages. Hear, hear. The Beta 2 version of Safari just came out. Like Mozilla, it has tabbed windows for having multiple browser "sessions" in the same window. However, Apple also provides a rich set of keyboard shortcuts for easily doing things like toggling between the tabs (Shift-Command-Left or Shift-Command-Right). Just like disabling pop-up windows, having an easy way to shift between browsing sessions radically alters your experience of browsing. And it is fast! I use my Mac with the mouse typically detached. I view mouse as an ergonomic nightmare -- as does my right arm/hand -- and I do everything I can to avoid using them. Apple has made this browser the most friendly GUI browser to use without a mouse I've ever found. The only think I can't figure out how to do is to open a link in a new tab. With a mouse this is done by holding down the command key when clicking. However, if I hold down the command key when hitting a "5" -- the keyboard key used to simulate a mouse click -- Safari interprets that as a Command-5, which opens your 5th bookmark. Ugh. I filed a bug with Apple. --phil ------------------------------ 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 #402 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Apr 21 20:24:22 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h3M0OLo18156; Mon, 21 Apr 2003 20:24:22 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2003 20:24:22 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200304220024.h3M0OLo18156@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 #403 TELECOM Digest Mon, 21 Apr 2003 20:22:00 EDT Volume 22 : Issue 403 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Telecom Update (Canada) #379, April 21, 2003 (Angus TeleManagement) Kxtd-1232 and HP Officejet d145 (brn2rnjk1@aol.com) Re: Filtering Fax Callers & Associated Calling Tone on (Ray Normandeau) Re: Filtering Fax Callers & Associated Calling Tone on (Carl Navarro) Network Interface Specification Documents (Eddie A) Re: Massachusetts Local Telephone Rates Increase (Michael D. Sullivan) Re: Magazine Appeals for CD Archive (Ed Ellers) Re: Greenies (Manny Olds) 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, 21 Apr 2003 10:34:38 -0400 From: Angus TeleManagement Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #379, April 21, 2003 ************************************************************ TELECOM UPDATE ************************************************************ published weekly by Angus TeleManagement Group http://www.angustel.ca Number 379: April 21, 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: ** Wireless Profits Soared in 2002 ** SBC Sells Half Its Stake in BCE ** SaskTel Wants Exemption From Promotion Ban ** AT&T: Telcos Must Tariff Advanced Services ** BCE Puts Off Decision on CGI Shares ** Bell Proposes Customer Rebates ** Millions in Telco Deferral Accounts ** CRTC Data Forms Due May 15 ** AOL Sues Spammers ** U.S. Cellcos Challenge Number Portability ** Bell Mobility to Recycle Handsets ** Rogers Wireless Operating Profit Rises ** Profits Drop at Aliant ** Juniper Reports Sales Increase ** Rave Reviews for Call Center Seminar ============================================================ WIRELESS PROFITS SOARED IN 2002: Statistics Canada has released its October-December 2002 report on Canada's telecom services industry. For the full year, wireline revenues were $24 billion, down 3% from 2001; operating profits were $3.9 billion, down 13.6%. Wireless revenues were $7.6 billion, up 14.9% from 2001; operating profits were $1.13 billion, nineteen times the 2001 profit of $60 million. http://www.statcan.ca/Daily/English/030415/d030415a.htm SBC SELLS HALF ITS STAKE IN BCE: SBC Communications has sold nine million BCE shares, half the stake it acquired as part of BCE's buyback of its Bell Canada unit last year. (See Telecom Update #339) The shares' market value was about $250 million. SASKTEL WANTS EXEMPTION FROM PROMOTION BAN: SaskTel has asked the CRTC to exempt it from the suspension of local promotions by incumbent telcos (see Telecom Update #374). The telco says its promotions can't disadvantage local service competitors, because there are none in Saskatchewan. http://www.crtc.gc.ca/PartVII/eng/2003/8662/s22_200304882.htm AT&T: TELCOS MUST TARIFF ADVANCED SERVICES: AT&T Canada has asked the CRTC to order the incumbent telcos to file "full and complete" tariffs for Ethernet access, ADSL/Gateway access, and Wavelength access. AT&T says the telcos are wrong to claim that these services are not subject to regulation. http://www.crtc.gc.ca/PartVII/eng/2003/8622/a4_200304957.htm BCE PUTS OFF DECISION ON CGI SHARES: BCE has postponed until August 1 making a decision on what to do with its 30% stake in CGI group. BCE chief executive Michael Sabia has joined CGI's board to facilitate negotiations between the two companies. (See Telecom Update $368) BELL PROPOSES CUSTOMER REBATES: To meet 2002 price cap constraints, Bell is proposing rate reductions of $2.95- $6.00/month for Megalink PSTN access and $.90/month for Equivalent Service ("line hunting"). If the reductions are approved, customers will get rebates retroactive to June 1, 2002. MILLIONS IN TELCO DEFERRAL ACCOUNTS: Bell Canada says its deferral account amount for 2002 (based on 2001 residential revenues) was $56.3 million; SaskTel's was $2.253 million. The CRTC will rule later on how these funds are to be used. CRTC DATA FORMS DUE MAY 15: All telecom service providers in Canada must complete the CRTC's data collection forms by mid- May, reporting on their 2002 results. Electronic submission is encouraged, to speed up production of this year's report on the state of telecom competition. www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Letters/2003/lt030402.htm AOL SUES SPAMMERS: America Online has sued more than a dozen individuals and companies, accusing them of sending its subscribers a billion pieces of spam. Invoking U.S. anti-spam and computer fraud laws, AOL is seeking US$10 million in damages and the shutdown of these spamming operations. U.S. CELLCOS CHALLENGE NUMBER PORTABILITY: U.S. wireless carriers have asked a federal court to overturn an FCC order that requires them to allow cellular subscribers to keep their phone numbers when they switch carriers, effective November 24. BELL MOBILITY TO RECYCLE HANDSETS: Recycle, Reuse, Redial is a new Bell Mobility program to recycle unwanted handsets. Refurbished phones will be donated to charities across the country. (See Telecom Update #372) ROGERS WIRELESS OPERATING PROFIT RISES: Rogers Wireless recorded a first-quarter operating profit of $153 million, 45% more than a year ago. Operating revenue was $510 million, up 16.3%. Net additions were 50,200, and postpaid churn was 1.82%. Foreign exchange gains of $52 million resulted in a net income of $36.6 million. ** Rogers Communications reports revenue of $1.12 billion-- 14.1% higher than the same period last year--and net income of $23.7 million. PROFITS DROP AT ALIANT: Pension- and tax-related charges reduced Aliant's first quarter net income to $36.5 million, 28% less than the same period last year. Revenue rose 1.5% to $655.4 million, and "free cash flow" more than doubled. JUNIPER REPORTS SALES INCREASE: Data networking supplier Juniper Networks had first quarter sales of US$157 million, 29% more than a year ago. Net income was $3.7 million, compared to a $46 million loss last year. RAVE REVIEWS FOR CALL CENTER SEMINAR: "Rarely have I witnessed such great facilitating skills as those presented by Henry. Upbeat, humorous, knowledgeable, and thorough. Extraordinary to witness and enjoyable to experience. Fabulous!" -- Carl Quinlan, Director Customer Service, Newfoundland Power ** That's just one of hundreds of rave reviews that the seminar "Essential Skills and Knowledge for Effective Incoming Call Centre Management," led by Henry Dortmans, has received from call centre managers and supervisors across Canada. ** For information on bringing this essential program to your call centre team, call 1-800-263-4415 ext. 300 or visit http://www.angustel.ca/angdort/adccs.html. ============================================================ HOW TO SUBMIT ITEMS FOR TELECOM UPDATE E-MAIL: editors@angustel.ca FAX: 905-686-2655 MAIL: TELECOM UPDATE Angus TeleManagement Group 8 Old Kingston Road Ajax, Ontario Canada L1T 2Z7 =========================================================== HOW TO SUBSCRIBE (OR UNSUBSCRIBE) TELECOM UPDATE is provided in electronic form only. There are two formats available: 1. The fully-formatted edition is posted on the World Wide Web on the first business day of the week at http://www.angustel.ca 2. The e-mail edition is distributed free of charge. To subscribe, send an e-mail message to: join-telecom_update@nova.sparklist.com To stop receiving the e-mail edition, send an e-mail message to: leave-telecom_update@nova.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: brn2rnjk1@aol.com Subject: Kxtd-1232 and HP Officejet d145 Date: 21 Apr 2003 06:36:36 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ I have the kxtd-1232 system and a hp officejet d145 all-in-one. When I plug the hp into the back of the kxt-7456 deskreceiver, it sends faxes (and an ordinary analog modem works), but I cannot receive a fax. The machine picks up but the connection is never made. Does anyone know how to fix this problem. HP is at a loss since they don't understand the phone system. ------------------------------ From: rayta@msn.com (Ray Normandeau) Subject: Re: Filtering Fax Callers & Associated Calling Tone on Answ Machine Date: 21 Apr 2003 08:01:45 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Chuck wrote in message news:: > We are plagued by junk fax callers. Although the fax machine > autoanswer is now disabled, our answering machine records many > messages with several seconds of fax calling tone. My same problem was solved with http://www.spectrumresearchinc.com/ See other msgs in comp.dcom.telecom I posted to get it cheaper. Email above no good. ------------------------------ From: Carl Navarro Subject: Re: Filtering Fax Callers & Associated Calling Tone on Answ Machine Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2003 12:55:26 -0400 Organization: Airnews.net! at Internet America On Thu, 17 Apr 2003 20:31:02 -0700, Chuck wrote: > We are plagued by junk fax callers. Although the fax machine > autoanswer is now disabled, our answering machine records many > messages with several seconds of fax calling tone. > Does anyone know of a great system for filtering out fax callers? I > have been looking for one of the following solutions to no avail: > 1) A digital answering machine intelligent enough not to record a > message that has nothing but fax calling tone on it. > 2) A box (commercial fax switch?) inserted between the incoming telco > line and all other phones that will seize the line, decide if the > caller is a fax machine, and ring the downline phones and/or answering > machine (using its own built-in ring generator) if it's not a fax. > 3) A digital answering machine that has a built-in fax machine port, > accomplishing the function outlined in #2 above. I don't know if this applies, but try www.digitone.com and check out their products. My friend got one for his residence and he uses it to block telemarketers. It answers with a recording that they do not accept telemarketing calls and to put them on the "do not call" list, then to touch a digit to transfer to him or his wife. I don't know which model he got, but it was about $165. Carl Navarro ------------------------------ From: Eddie A Subject: Network Interface Specification documents Organization: AT&T Broadband Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2003 15:01:41 GMT Hi, I'm trying to find where I can get Nortel's NIS S106-1 Electronic Business Service Specification document. Does. Anyone know where I might be able to get one? I don't think the NIS documents are included on helmsman CD's and the only place I have found to purchase the document only sells hardcopy (ugh). Any information would be helpful. Thanks in advance, Ed ------------------------------ From: Michael D. Sullivan Subject: Re: Massachusetts Local Telephone Rates Increase Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2003 06:04:56 GMT On Sat, 19 Apr 2003 23:32:47 -0400, Sam Rogers posted the following to comp.dcom.telecom: > Verizon is the sole incumbent local telephone carrier for most (all?) > of Massachusetts. The state's PUC, known as the DTE, has just passed > a rate increase for local service. > According to the DTE's findings, Verizon loses an average of more than > $6 (per month) for residential local service, which must be made up > with business revenue. However the DTE decided that a $6 increase > would be too great so, it decided on $2.44. > Why a goofy number like $2.44? Because the $0.49 Touch-Tone line item > charge is being removed. So the increase for the 87% of customers > that pay for Touch-Tone service will see a net increase of $1.95, > conveniently just under $2.00. > The low income service "LifeLine" subsidy will be increased to at > least offset the extra charges. > The DTE believes that the increases in regulated rates will spur more > competition for local service. Yesiree, there sure will be a gold-rush to compete. Now Verizon's higher rates for local residential service will be only $3.56 below cost. I'll bet AT&T and Worldcom will bust their chops to gobble up those residential customers at a smaller loss than the ILEC. They'll probably make up the loss in volume! What idiocy! Michael D. Sullivan Bethesda, MD, USA (delete NOSPAM from address to mail me) ------------------------------ From: Ed Ellers Subject: Re: Magazine Appeals for CD Archive Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2003 03:00:01 -0400 Monty Solomon wrote: > In the meantime, National Geographic promised to challenge the logic > behind a decision that draws distinctions between archives on > microfiche or microfilm and archives on CD-ROM. One distinction might be that microfilms would normally only be bought by libraries, while the CD-ROMs were a consumer product. (Fortunately I have my set. Unfortunately its access program didn't want to run under Windows 2000; I haven't tried it with XP yet.) ------------------------------ From: Manny Olds Subject: Re: Greenies Date: 21 Apr 2003 20:37:00 GMT Organization: Persiflage Press Jim Hopkins wrote: > Someone wrote me off the group that he thought they might have been > APC tablets, which are a combination of asprin, phenatacine (I think I > spelled that right) and caffeine. The phenaticine ingredient in APC's, > as I understand, was later found to be carcinogenic, so if they were > APC's maybe that's why they're not around anymore. The classic APC was aspirin, Paracetamol (now known as acetaminophen, aka Tylenol), and caffeine. Manny Olds (oldsma@pobox.com) of Riverdale Park, Maryland, USA "Share your loot with your band." -- Dirk E. Mahling ------------------------------ 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 #403 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Apr 22 22:59:03 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h3N2x3E26218; Tue, 22 Apr 2003 22:59:03 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 22:59:03 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200304230259.h3N2x3E26218@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson cc: johnl@iecc.com Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #404 TELECOM Digest Tue, 22 Apr 2003 22:58:00 EDT Volume 22 : Issue 404 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Internet is Losing Battle in War Against Spam (Monty Solomon) Is Amazon.con no Place For Kids? (Monty Solomon) Record Labels Sue Napster Investor (Monty Solomon) Motorola Takes Wi-Fi to the Living Room (Monty Solomon) Inside Cisco's Eavesdropping Apparatus (Monty Solomon) Apple to Hold Special Event April 28 (Monty Solomon) Wireless Firm Tackles IM Compatibility (Monty Solomon) Viacom to Acquire AOL Time Warner 50% Interest in Comedy (Monty Solomon) Now Digital, Spy Camera Technology Widens Gaze (Monty Solomon) Satellite Radio Gains Ground With Right Mix of Partners (Monty Solomon) Instant Messaging, Text Messaging at 30,000 Feet (Monty Solomon) AT&T Takes Steps to Protect Against Collect-Calling Fraud (M. Solomon) Re: Massachusetts Local Telephone Rates Increase (Sam Rogers) Re: Massachusetts Local Telephone Rates Increase (John R. Levine) Bill of Rights Defense Committee [BORDC] (gryb@icl.net) Re: No Help for Callers in Trouble (Sam Rogers) Re: Voicemail Hacking Leaves Ears Ringing (Dave Phelps) Surprise International Calling Card Bill (David C) Re: Suing Junk FAX Senders? (Scott Dorsey) Area Code Statistics (Graydon J. Sametz) Re: Phone Filter for Dial Up Connection (Art Jackson) Re: Phone Filter for Dial Up Connection (Bruce Kille) 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, 22 Apr 2003 19:32:35 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Internet Is Losing Ground in Battle Against Spam By SAUL HANSELL Alyx Sachs is no longer sending people e-mail offering to "fix your credit risk free." Confronted by an increasing number of individuals, businesses and Internet service providers using software meant to identify and discard unwanted junk e-mail -- commonly known as spam -- Ms. Sachs has been forced to become more creative in her marketing pitches. The subject line on her credit e-mail, for example, now reads "get a fresh start." From a small office on Sunset Boulevard in Los Angeles, millions of messages prepared on behalf of others by Ms. Sachs and her partner are still going out to e-mail in-boxes every day, promising not just to restore a poor credit rating but also to sell printer ink, 3-D glasses and, lately, even playing cards with pictures of wanted Iraqi leaders. In the cat-and-mouse game of e-mail marketers and those trying to stop them, the spammers are still winning. So far, nothing that has been tried to block spam has done much more than inconvenience mass e-mailers. Just as Ms. Sachs's company, NetGlobalMarketing, has been able to reword its e-mail to evade spam filters, others use even more aggressive tricks to disguise the content of their messages and to send them via circuitous paths so their true origin cannot be determined. http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/22/technology/22SPAM.html [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: How about some violence? If someone paid a midnight visit to Ms. Sach's office and smashed up all her computers (that is, any they did not feel like stealing) then set fire to the rest of her office, and caused her lots of money to get her operation back in order again, that *might* slow her down a little bit. And please, don't hand me all that crap about 'violence never solves anything' or 'she has a right to free speech'. She has no rights to anything IMO except a slow, painful death. Of course, in this paragraph I am just kidding. Can anyone give us her actual street address and phone numbers (toll free and otherwise)? What about her home address and maybe that of a couple of her key employees? Don't bother looking for that information in the New York Times article. The NYT is too prissy and proper to give any details of *real value* to their readers. Her and that Ralsky creep in Michigan. They both need slow torture and total devastation of their computer networks. The lawyer reminds me I need to tell you I am just kidding; naturally I do not mean anything said above in this paragraph. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 19:20:26 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Is Amazon.com no Place For Kids? By Declan McCullagh and Alorie Gilbert Staff Writer, CNET News.com Amazon.com has taken insufficient steps to prevent children from posting personal information on its Web site, potentially endangering their privacy, a collection of advocacy groups said Tuesday. Eleven groups, including the Electronic Privacy Information Center and Junkbusters, filed a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission, asking that it investigate whether Amazon is letting children 12 years old and younger post reviews of toy products without their parents' consent, which violates the federal Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA). A response from the FTC could help establish ground rules for how COPPA affects commercial Web sites primarily intended for adults. The 1998 law applies to data-collection by any Web site or online service directed to children under 13 years old. But Amazon's Web site states that it is intended for use only by adults and says, "If you are under 18, you may use Amazon.com only with the involvement of a parent or guardian." Amazon spokesman Bill Curry called the complaint groundless because "Amazon.com is not a site directed at children." Curry acknowledged that a bug in Amazon's software caused a Web form, designed to allow children to review products anonymously, to work only intermittently, but he said the company had begun work on fixing it before the complaint was filed with the FTC. http://news.com.com/2100-1019-997893.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 19:25:38 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Record Labels Sue Napster Investor By Stefanie Olsen Staff Writer, CNET News.com Two major record labels filed suit Monday against venture capital firm Hummer Winblad Venture Partners for its investment in Napster, alleging that it contributed to rampant music theft through the former file-swapping network. Universal Music Group and EMI Recorded Music filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court in Los Angeles against San Francisco-based Hummer Winblad, its cofounder John Hummer and general partner Hank Barry, who was formerly the CEO at Napster. The 23-page complaint charges that the Napster system, as conceived and implemented, "provided a safe haven for the rampant piracy of copyrighted works on an epic and unprecedented scale...Hummer Winblad knowingly facilitated infringement of plaintiff's copyrights for its direct financial benefit." During the Napster heyday, while millions of people logged onto the peer-to-peer community to exchange digital music files, Hummer Winblad was one of the outfit's chief backers. In May 2000, Hummer Winblad invested about $13 million in Napster and took control of its business and legal liabilities, with Barry assuming an interim CEO role. Legal efforts by the recording industry and music publishers essentially crushed Napster two years ago. But now the music industry is seeking punitive damages from Napster backers, in a move that could portend further suits targeting assets of companies that back independent file-swapping services. http://news.com.com/2100-1027-997860.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 02:24:02 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Motorola Takes Wi-Fi to the Living Room By Richard Shim Staff Writer, CNET News.com Motorola has started connecting home-networking devices using its new combination cable modem and Wi-Fi access product, a move it hopes will spur demand for more connected gadgets. The chipmaker's broadband services division, called the Broadband Communications Sector, on Monday began selling the $350 SBG1000, a combination cable modem, wireless networking access point, Ethernet router and switch, print server and advanced firewall. The device is meant to expand consumer access to information and entertainment while taking advantage of the growing popularity of wireless networking technology Wi-Fi. Motorola says it's offering consumers an easy and complete product for sharing broadband access over a home network. In addition to a broadband connection, the device will allow other resources, such as a printer, fax machine and game console, to be shared over a network. http://news.com.com/2100-1041-997731.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 02:26:16 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Inside Cisco's Eavesdropping Apparatus By Declan McCullagh April 21, 2003, 4:00 AM PT Cisco Systems has created a more efficient and targeted way for police and intelligence agencies to eavesdrop on people whose Internet service provider uses their company's routers. The company recently published a proposal that describes how it plans to embed "lawful interception" capability into its products. Among the highlights: Eavesdropping "must be undetectable," and multiple police agencies conducting simultaneous wiretaps must not learn of one another. If an Internet provider uses encryption to preserve its customers' privacy and has access to the encryption keys, it must turn over the intercepted communications to police in a descrambled form. Cisco's decision to begin offering "lawful interception" capability as an option to its customers could turn out to be either good or bad news for privacy. Because Cisco's routers currently aren't designed to target an individual, it's easy for an Internet service provider (ISP) to comply with a police request today by turning over all the traffic that flows through a router or switch. Cisco's "lawful interception" capability thus might help limit the amount of data that gets scooped up in the process. On the other hand, the argument that it hinders privacy goes like this: By making wiretapping more efficient, Cisco will permit governments in other countries -- where court oversight of police eavesdropping is even more limited than in the United States -- snoop on far more communications than they could have otherwise. Marc Rotenberg, head of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, says: "I don't see why the technical community should hardwire surveillance standards and not also hardwire accountability standards like audit logs and public reporting. The laws that permit 'lawful interception' typically incorporate both components--the (interception) authority and the means of oversight--but the (Cisco) implementation seems to have only the surveillance component. That is no guarantee that the authority will be used in a 'lawful' manner." U.S. history provides many examples of government and police agencies conducting illegal wiretaps. The FBI unlawfully spied on Eleanor Roosevelt, Martin Luther King Jr., feminists, gay rights leaders and Catholic priests. During its dark days, the bureau used secret files and hidden microphones to blackmail the Kennedy brothers, sway the Supreme Court and influence presidential elections. Cisco's Internet draft may be titled "lawful interception," but there's no guarantee that the capability will always be used legally. Still, if you don't like Cisco's decision, remember that they're not the ones doing the snooping. Cisco is responding to its customers' requests, and if they don't, other hardware vendors will. If you're looking for someone to blame, consider Attorney General John Ashcroft, who asked for and received sweeping surveillance powers in the USA Patriot Act, along with your elected representatives in Congress, who gave those powers to him with virtually no debate. I talked with Fred Baker, a Cisco fellow and former chairman of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), about his work on the "lawful interception" draft. http://news.com.com/2010-1071-997528.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 02:29:27 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Apple to Hold Special Event April 28 By Jim Dalrymple jdalrymple@maccentral.com Apple Computer Inc. informed MacCentral by special invitation Monday morning of an event the company will hold in San Francisco on Monday, April 28, 2003. While the invitation was not specific on exactly what the company would announce at the event, it did narrow down the possibilities. The invitation says that Apple will have "announcements that will be music to your ears." Apple has several music products, but speculation over the past couple of weeks has focused on three things: a new iPod; a buyout by Apple of Universal Music; and a new music service by Apple. http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/2003/04/21/appleevent/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 02:33:49 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Wireless Firm Tackles IM Compatibility By Ben Charny Staff Writer, CNET News.com Wireless company Air2Web unveiled on Monday a package designed to let users of business-oriented wireless devices more easily trade messages between rival instant messaging programs. The hardware and software setup, called 2IM, enables users of disparate IM programs from Yahoo, Microsoft and AOL to swap messages, Air2Web Chief Technology Officer Dale Gonzalez said. Software designed to address IM interoperability problems already exists, but Gonzalez said 2IM is unique because it's specifically tailored for the new generations of wireless PDAs (personal digital assistants) now being used mainly by business professionals. http://news.com.com/2100-1039-997699.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 16:28:10 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Viacom Agrees to Acquire AOL Time Warner's 50% Interest in Comedy Cable Network Joins MTV Networks' Lineup of Wholly Owned Channels NEW YORK, April 22 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Viacom Inc. (NYSE: VIA and VIA.B) announced today that it has reached an agreement with AOL Time Warner (NYSE: AOL) to acquire AOL's 50% interest in Comedy Central, for a total of $1.225 billion. Following the completion of the transaction, expected in the second quarter of 2003, Comedy Central will be wholly owned by Viacom and join MTV Networks' lineup of basic cable channels. Larry Divney will remain President of Comedy Central and the network will continue to be based in New York and Los Angeles. Comedy Central, the only all-comedy network, reaches 82 million U.S. households. Comedy Central's schedule includes an eclectic mix of original programming, stand-up comedy, sketch comedy and movies. Current hits on the network are: "South Park," "The Daily Show with Jon Stewart," "Chappelle's Show," "The Man Show," "Insomniac with Dave Attell" and "Tough Crowd with Colin Quinn." Also included in the transaction is comedycentral.com, which features original programs, schedule information, advanced technology, games, downloads and an online store. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=33911100 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 01:13:47 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Now Digital, Spy Camera Technology Widens Gaze By LAURIE J. FLYNN A ceiling-mounted electronic eye captures every transaction at the cash register. In the parking garage, more tiny cameras record every arrival and departure. To many business owners, these aspects of modern life seem a small price to pay for personal safety. But to some customers, they are new examples of Big Brother run amok. The use of surveillance cameras in private businesses and public spaces has been a matter of debate for some time. But even as the controversy becomes more heated, the use of surveillance equipment is surging, driven by new digital technology, falling prices and terrorism jitters. Sales of digital surveillance systems and the services required to install them are growing rapidly at a time sales of many other technologies are limited by tight corporate budgets. In the United States, annual sales of digital surveillance products and services is expected to reach $8.5 billion by the end of 2005. That is up from $5.7 billion in 2002, according to J. P. Freeman, a market research company in Newtown, Conn. One indication this trend will accelerate was the announcement by I.B.M. last month that it would offer a new package of consulting and system-design services for digital network-based video surveillance systems. I.B.M. evidently thinks that retail stores, corporations and government agencies will soon abandon older analog videotape systems and move the management of these surveillance operations to corporate information technology departments. http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/21/technology/21CAME.html [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: *Anywhere* it is legal and lawful for a *LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER* to stand and observe what is going on, it is lawful for a mechanical eye to do the same thing. A police officer cannot stand in your bedroom and observe you, but he certainly can stand on a street corner or by a cash register in a store; anywhere there is not or should not be any 'expectation of privacy', or anywhere no judicial 'search warrant' has been issued is perfectly fair game for the placement of a camera for others to watch. If it is lawful to have a police officer on every public street corner in the United States (although admittedly it is not practical or effective where the money to do so is concerned) then a camera can be there instead. I do not like the idea myself, but logic would dictate it is an acceptable form of policing. People who want to scream about constitutional violations should first read the damn thing. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 01:15:20 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Satellite Radio Gains Ground With Right Mix of Partners By BARNABY J. FEDER Hugh Panero built a reputation in cable and pay-per-view television as a manager who could turn new entertainment technologies into successful businesses. For nearly five years now, he has been putting that reputation to a test as the president and chief executive of XM Satellite Radio, one of two start-up companies trying to develop a market for nationwide radio shows beamed to subscribers in their cars and homes. In recent months, growing numbers of investors and analysts have concluded he just might succeed. Mr. Panero, 47, arrived in June 1998 at what was then called American Mobile Satellite Radio, a privately held company with 12 employees and licenses to launch two satellites. It envisioned broadcasting 100 digital channels of music and talk radio to subscribers fed up with the lack of variety, the variable sound quality and the incessant commercials on traditional radio. But XM lacked broadcasting technology, support from automakers, consumer radios that could receive its digital programming and the several billion dollars it needed from investors to deliver on the dream. Last week, XM, based in Washington, announced that it had passed the 500,000-subscriber mark. General Motors and the American Honda Motor Company are now its biggest shareholders and are strongly committed to offering satellite radio as an option in new cars. Drivers looking to retrofit the 200 million cars already on the road have a growing range of receiver choices from major radio manufacturers, which have also begun to make home XM units. Analysts are betting XM will have one million subscribers well before the end of the year. http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/21/technology/21RADI.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 01:17:45 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Instant Messaging, Text Messaging at 30,000 Feet Verizon Airfone's JetConnect Service Now Available on All Continental Airlines Narrow-Body Planes OAK BROOK, Ill., April 21 /PRNewswire/ -- Two of today's hottest business applications, Instant Messaging (IM) and text messaging, have literally taken off now that Verizon Airfone's JetConnect(SM) service has been equipped on Continental Airlines' entire fleet of narrow-body aircraft. JetConnect is an in-flight communication, news and entertainment service and is the only provider of IM and text-messaging services to passengers on U.S. commercial flights. Verizon Airfone began offering JetConnect on select Continental flights in November 2002. The company has equipped all of Continental's narrow-body fleet with the JetConnect service. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=33903689 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 01:20:04 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: AT&T Takes Steps to Protect Against Collect-Calling Fraud From BEDMINSTER, N.J., April 21 /PRNewswire/ -- AT&T said today it has begun implementing new advanced security measures to protect consumers and businesses against fraud by hackers who compromise inadequately protected voicemail systems to make collect, third-party or direct-dial calls at customers' expense. At the same time, the company renewed a warning it first issued last fall on users' need to safeguard against hacking of voicemail boxes. AT&T said it introduced a technological solution to its automated voice-response platform in January to thwart unauthorized calling from some areas of the world that generated the highest incidence of fraudulent calling. Now, some consumers or business people who receive AT&T international collect calls may notice that instead of saying "yes" to accept an international collect call, they may be asked to follow instructions as to random codes they will need to speak or dial when prompted by an automated operator. Such technological deterrents have proven very effective to date. The solution defeats hackers' ability to complete collect calls once they have hacked into a consumer or business voicemail system and recorded a "yes, yes, yes" string to surreptitiously accept a collect call, the company said. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=33905306 ------------------------------ From: Sam Rogers Organization: V Subject: Re: Massachusetts Local Telephone Rates Increase Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 00:48:41 -0400 Michael D. Sullivan wrote: > On Sat, 19 Apr 2003 23:32:47 -0400, Sam Rogers posted the following to > comp.dcom.telecom: >> Verizon is the sole incumbent local telephone carrier for most (all?) >> of Massachusetts. The state's PUC, known as the DTE, has just passed >> a rate increase for local service. >> According to the DTE's findings, Verizon loses an average of more than >> $6 (per month) for residential local service, which must be made up >> with business revenue. However the DTE decided that a $6 increase >> would be too great so, it decided on $2.44. >> Why a goofy number like $2.44? Because the $0.49 Touch-Tone line item >> charge is being removed. So the increase for the 87% of customers >> that pay for Touch-Tone service will see a net increase of $1.95, >> conveniently just under $2.00. >> The low income service "LifeLine" subsidy will be increased to at >> least offset the extra charges. >> The DTE believes that the increases in regulated rates will spur more >> competition for local service. > Yesiree, there sure will be a gold-rush to compete. Now Verizon's > higher rates for local residential service will be only $3.56 below > cost. I'll bet AT&T and Worldcom will bust their chops to gobble up > those residential customers at a smaller loss than the ILEC. They'll > probably make up the loss in volume! > What idiocy! The Commonwealth has already determined that the ILEC loses an average of six bucks a month for every residential phone line. Since companies cannot lose money forever, this needs to be made up from the commercial phone service. It's hard to have competition in a market where you are forced to sell service below cost -- that is what's idiocy. ------------------------------ From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: Massachusetts Local Telephone Rates Increase Date: 21 Apr 2003 22:09:57 -0400 Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA >> According to the DTE's findings, Verizon loses an average of more than >> $6 (per month) for residential local service, which must be made up >> with business revenue. However the DTE decided that a $6 increase >> would be too great so, it decided on $2.44. ... > Yesiree, there sure will be a gold-rush to compete. Now Verizon's > higher rates for local residential service will be only $3.56 below > cost. I'll bet AT&T and Worldcom will bust their chops to gobble up > those residential customers at a smaller loss than the ILEC. > They'll probably make up the loss in volume! If you believe all the details of "losses" in ILEC cost accounting, I have an excellent deal to offer you on some prime trans-aquatic real estate between lower Manhattan and Brooklyn. ILECs have always claimed they lose money on resi service, but the facts to back up such claims are at best debatable. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 330 5711 johnl@iecc.com Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner http://iecc.com/johnl Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail ------------------------------ From: gryb@icl.net Subject: Bill of Rights Defense Committee [BORDC] Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2003 21:16:43 -0400 Bill of Rights Defense Committee [BORDC] http://www.bordc.org/ ------------------------------ From: Sam Rogers Organization: V Subject: Re: No Help for Callers in Trouble Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 00:54:36 -0400 Monty Solomon wrote: > By Michelle Delio > NEW YORK -- Trapped on a capsizing 8-foot fiberglass dingy > floundering in 33-degree waters off New York, Henry Badillo used his > cell phone to make a desperate plea for help. > "We're taking in water ... we're on the Long Island Sound in a boat > off the coast of City I ... oh, my God, we're going to die!" Badillo > screamed in his 12-second call to a 911 emergency services operator > on Jan. 24, 2003. > Badillo, stranded on the boat with three friends, didn't have time to > say exactly where he was before the call cut off, and the operator > did not clearly hear his reference to City Island, which could have > helped to pinpoint the boat's location. > The operator and her supervisor decided they didn't have enough > information to request assistance. Badillo and his friends died that > night. > Their parents believe they might have been rescued if New York's 911 > system was able to trace cell-phone callers' locations, a service that > the state has been collecting taxes to implement for more than a > decade. Or their boys would have never needed to have been rescued if they hadn't stolen a rowboat and taken it out in the Long Island Sound in freezing temperatures in the middle of winter, without proper equipment, without anyone knowing they were there etc. The boys' parents time would be better spent on better parenting techniques and teaching common sense. ------------------------------ From: Dave Phelps Subject: Re: Voicemail Hacking Leaves Ears Ringing Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 01:04:00 -0500 Organization: www.tippenring.com In article , no- spam@amadeus.kome.com says: > In this case, it wasn't the customer's equipment; it was SBC's > equipment. SBC's equipment, but the customer shouldn't have used 1234 for a password (the article doesn't say, but I'll guarantee it was easy). If the customer did use an easy password, as I suspect, then she's on the hook as far as I'm concerned. That's what passwords are for, to secure something. > Funny how in this case, no one is even suggesting going after SBC. Well, you're right about that. AT&T certainly is the innocent 3rd party in this case. SBC, I suppose it could be argued, could limit easy passwords, similar to common practice in the data world. But just because they could do that, I wouldn't call it negligence on SBC's part if they didn't. Even if they did implement an easy password detection scheme, they can't police the thousands of customers that can inadvertently publicize their VM passwords. How many times do you walk up to a PC and see post-its with un/pw on the monitor, keyboard, or desk? Dave Phelps Phone Masters Ltd. deadspam=tippenring ------------------------------ From: dcantoni@earthlink.net (David C) Subject: Surprise International Calling Card Bill Date: 22 Apr 2003 08:07:03 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Recently I decided to call my son who was vacationing in Scotland and decided to use my Sprint Global Access card, which I had laying in a desk drawer, never having used it before. I made the call, talked for 19 minutes and subsequently got a bill next month for over $60 for that call. I called Sprint customer service and was informed that that was the correct charges for those calls. Am I just stupid? Is this the normal rate for international calling card calls? Is there someplace I can complain to? Or chalk it up to experience and cut up the Sprint Global Access card(which has been done). I saw all the calling cards advertised for making such calls and prices ranged from a few cents/minute up to 20 or 30 cents/minute. I expected Sprint to be higher, but not that much. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Sprint lies about almost everything. Let that be a lesson to you! PAT] ------------------------------ From: Phil Earnhardt Subject: Re: Safari, Camino Could Re-ignite Browser War - on Macs Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 23:18:46 -0600 On Sun, 20 Apr 2003 13:52:47 -0400, Monty Solomon wrote: > Apple Computer Inc.'s Safari and the Mozilla Organization's Camino are > still in beta testing. But they leave Internet Explorer in the dust, > rendering pages noticeably faster, dumping rarely used features and > adding others not available in the Microsoft browser. > Both browsers have simple interfaces that match the elegance of > Apple's Mac OS X operating system. And unlike other alternative > browsers, particularly for the Mac, they are very quick and accurately > draw even complex Web pages. Hear, hear. The Beta 2 version of Safari just came out. Like Mozilla, it has tabbed windows for having multiple browser "sessions" in the same window. However, Apple also provides a rich set of keyboard shortcuts for easily doing things like toggling between the tabs (Shift-Command-Left or Shift-Command-Right). Just like disabling pop-up windows, having an easy way to shift between browsing sessions radically alters your experience of browsing. And it is fast! I use my Mac with the mouse typically detached. I view mouse as an ergonomic nightmare -- as does my right arm/hand -- and I do everything I can to avoid using them. Apple has made this browser the most friendly GUI browser to use without a mouse I've ever found. The only think I can't figure out how to do is to open a link in a new tab. With a mouse this is done by holding down the command key when clicking. However, if I hold down the command key when hitting a "5" -- the keyboard key used to simulate a mouse click -- Safari interprets that as a Command-5, which opens your 5th bookmark. Ugh. I filed a bug with Apple. phil ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 17:26:25 EDT From: Graydon J. Sametz Subject: Area Code Statistics How many millions of people does one area code serve? [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: In theory, slightly under eight million number combinations are possible. Ten thousand per exchange, eight hundred 'exchanges' per area code, or slightly under that. But that does not allow for the many folks who have more than one line in their house (fax, computer, second-third lines, etc). Nor does it allow for companies with many thousands of numbers, indeed, sometimes entire exchanges, etc. Nor does it allow for the fact that many telcos and cellular companies require (according to technical reasons) their own 'exchange' even if they do not come close to using all the numbers. But slightly under eight million number 'combinations' are possible per area code. I'll roughly guess that six million 'people' can be served. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Phone Filter For Dial-Up Connection From: Art Jackson Organization: W4TOY Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 00:56:18 GMT Incognito wrote in news:3ea56388_3@newsfeed: > The throughput on my dial-up connection is adversely effected > (cumulatively) by each telephone connected to the line. I was > wondering if there might be some kind of filter I could use to > eliminate the problem? It's a real pain having to unplug the phones > whenever I want to connect to the Internet, and then plugging them > back in again afterwards (which I forget to do half the time). I know > there are filters for DSL lines, to keep the analog devices from > effecting the DSL connection. Would that type of filter help at all > with a dial-up connection? Thanks. > Joe No, there are no filters because analog modems use the base voice frequencies just like telephone sets do. There are a couple of things you could try. See if your modem has two phone jacks on it. If so, plug all the extensions into the "Phone" jack of the modem. Not all, but many modems disconnect the phone jack on the modem when the modem makes a connection. There is also a Radio Shack device that will do the same thing. Called a Line Restrictor, p/n 43-445. In either case, you may have to do some wiring changes. It's best to run a wire pair from your Telco box outside to a jack near your computer. Then put another jack near your computer and wire all the other phone jacks to it. Then you can use one of the devices I mentioned above, or some manual switch, to activate the desired device. If you ever need to disconnect the modem or switch, just place a patch cord between the two jacks to make everything live again. Good luck. Art Jackson W4TOY Owensboro, KY USA Life is God's open book test. In order to pass, you must open His book to find the answers. ------------------------------ Reply-To: Bruce Kille From: Bruce Kille Subject: Re: Phone Filter For Dial-up Connection Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 21:19:02 -0400 Might I suggest doing what I do. Use a simple toggle switch (double pole, double throw) with the center of the switch going to the telco demark, one normally open side to all your phones, and the other open side of the switch to your modem. Now all you have to do is remember to flip the switch. ;^) There are line sharing devices that duplicate the manual switch function automatically, but might still be "seen" by your modem and still effect your connect speed. The toggle switch works great for this, and keeps others in the house from picking up on your connection too. ;^) YMMV, Bruce Incognito wrote in message news:3ea56388_3@newsfeed: > The throughput on my dial-up connection is adversely effected > (cumulatively) by each telephone connected to the line. I was > wondering if there might be some kind of filter I could use to > eliminate the problem? It's a real pain having to unplug the phones > whenever I want to connect to the Internet, and then plugging them > back in again afterwards (which I forget to do half the time). I know > there are filters for DSL lines, to keep the analog devices from > effecting the DSL connection. Would that type of filter help at all > with a dial-up connection? Thanks. > Joe ------------------------------ 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_#404 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Apr 23 14:43:20 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h3NIhJj04634; Wed, 23 Apr 2003 14:43:20 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 14:43:20 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200304231843.h3NIhJj04634@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson cc: johnl@iecc.com Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #405 TELECOM Digest Wed, 23 Apr 2003 14:40:00 EDT Volume 22 : Issue 405 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Beware Mystery Fees for Web Services (Monty Solomon) Palm Tungsten C Handheld (Monty Solomon) Callers Dial Up Local Cell Plans (Monty Solomon) Gadget-Heavy Audi Geeks It Up (Monty Solomon) Re: Massachusetts Local Telephone Rates Increase (John Higdon) Re: Massachusetts Local Telephone Rates Increase (Michael D. Sullivan) Re: Area Code Statistics (Linc Madison) Re: Area Code Statistics (joe@obilivan.net) Re: Area Code Statistics (Dave Close) Re: No Help for Callers in Trouble (John Higdon) Re: Pneumo Tubes (Chuk Gleason) Re: Phone Filter For Dial-Up Connection (Gordon S. Hlavenka) Anyone Familiar With McLeodUSA's Dynamic PRI Service? (Scott Ables) Re: Cell Phone Companies Seek to Block Rule (Dave Close) Re: Internet Is Losing Ground in Battle Against Spam (tonypo1@sdc.cox) Whuzzup Pat? (Joey Lindstrom) Why Did I Get This Letter? (John R. Levine and Telecom 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: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 00:46:38 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Beware Mystery Fees for Web Services Web firms face investigations of 'cramming' -- charging via telcos for unordered services. Tom Spring, PCWorld.com When Geoff Sigg noticed a small charge from an unfamiliar company called Spoonfull.net on his company's SBC Communications phone bill last September, he looked a little closer. He discovered that for two months, he had paid $4.31 including taxes to a company he'd never heard of. He checked further and found that Spoonfull.net was charging to list his Connecticut jewelry store in its Internet directory. But he couldn't find the listing on Spoonfull.net's site, and he says he never ordered such a service. Sigg soon learned he isn't alone. Other SBC customers have questioned similar charges. Sigg says a Spoonfull.net representative told him and others who complained that they had ordered the service either online or by telephone. Sigg protested, but the bills came for two more months before the charges finally stopped in December. Sigg says he received refunds for two months, then gave up the fight in frustration. http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,110349,00.asp ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 01:00:45 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Palm Tungsten C Handheld Multimedia News Release: New Palm Tungsten C Handheld Delivers Uncompromising Wireless Power and Speed on Corporate Campuses Integrated Wi-Fi, Built-in Keyboard and the Most Memory and Power of Any Palm Branded Device Offer On-Site Professionals Fast Data Access MILPITAS, Calif., April 23 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- For campus-based professionals on the move all day, managing meetings and interacting with data for quick decision-making, Palm, Inc. (Nasdaq: PALM) today introduced its most powerful handheld computer with built-in high-speed wireless connectivity -- the Palm(TM) Tungsten(TM) C handheld. As Wi-Fi hotspots become increasingly commonplace in airports, hotels, offices, hospitals and universities across the nation, Tungsten C handheld users can gain fast wireless access to the Internet, email, messaging, large applications and other corporate data while traveling or anywhere within their business' Wi-Fi-enabled network.(1) To view the Multimedia News Release, complete with video and images, go to: http://www.prnewswire.com/mnr/palm/10757/ The Tungsten C handheld debuts several innovations in design and technology to address what campus networkers want most in a handheld. It is Palm's first device to ship with integrated Wi-Fi, or 802.11b, for wireless campus connectivity. It offers 64MB(2) of memory to manage data-intensive applications; 400MHz of ARM processing power to drastically reduce wait times for almost any query or application; a 320 x 320 transflective TFT display (Palm's sharpest screen to date for indoor and outdoor viewing); and integrated, full-featured business applications, such as VersaMail(TM) 2.5 for email, and DataViz(R) Documents To Go(R) for efficiently managing Microsoft Word, Excel and PowerPoint compatible documents. http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=33923574 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 00:34:44 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Callers Dial Up Local Cell Plans By Elisa Batista As the number of phone customers replacing land lines with mobile handsets continues to rise, companies that offer unlimited wireless local calling are seeing strong demand for service. But such popularity hasn't enabled the original player in the field to stave off bankruptcy. This month, the pioneer of unlimited local wireless service, Leap Wireless, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection after failing to secure fresh financing to meet debt-payment requirements. The company's stock, which traded a year ago for more than $10 a share, now sells for less than 8 cents. But while Leap failed as a publicly traded company, industry analysts have been impressed by its appeal to customers. Leap Wireless' Cricket service lets anyone purchase a cell phone off a supermarket shelf and pay a flat fee of $33 a month for local and incoming calls. Customers can make long-distance calls for 8 cents a minute and calls to Mexico for 18 cents a minute. In the last two-and-a-half years, Leap managed to snag close to 1.5 million customers and become the 10th-largest carrier in the United States, an analyst said. http://www.wired.com/news/business/0,1367,58542,00.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 00:42:04 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Gadget-Heavy Audi Geeks It Up By John Gartner 02:00 AM Apr. 22, 2003 PT NEW YORK -- While the 2003 New York International Automobile Show features the standard assortment of flashy muscle cars, Formula 1 racers and monster trucks, an unassuming four-door sedan tucked in the corner has been causing a scene because of what it packs inside. Although the 2004 Audi A8 L may look like a typical yuppie-mobile, it boasts computer gadgetry, smart sensors and video displays that will dazzle even the geekiest of nerds. Not since KITT, the talking car of television's Knight Rider, has so much silicon been packed around a transmission. Like KITT, the A8 L does most of the thinking for you while providing sufficient comfort and visual stimulation to occupy drivers stuck in rush-hour traffic. The A8 L has solar panels installed on the roof that -- appropriately enough -- power the sunroof, and enable you to preset the temperature of your car before you get behind the wheel. For example, if you leave for work each day at 8:15 a.m. and head home at 6 p.m. without fail, the A8 L can make sure it's always a comfy 72 degrees when you climb aboard without having to turn the engine on. http://www.wired.com/news/autotech/0,2554,58569,00.html ------------------------------ From: John Higdon Subject: Re: Massachusetts Local Telephone Rates Increase Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 21:11:39 -0700 In article , johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) wrote: > ILECs have always claimed they lose money on resi service, but the > facts to back up such claims are at best debatable. SBC and its predecessors have always cried big crocodile tears about how much money is lost in residential service, but they seem to fight tooth and nail to hang onto it. In article , Sam Rogers wrote: > The Commonwealth has already determined that the ILEC loses an average > of six bucks a month for every residential phone line. Since companies > cannot lose money forever, this needs to be made up from the > commercial phone service. It's hard to have competition in a market > where you are forced to sell service below cost -- that is what's > idiocy. What is hard to believe is that the phone company is losing money on a service that it fights tooth and nail to hang onto. We've been hearing this chant about how "business service subsidizes residential service" for decades, but I have yet to see any sort substantiation. "The Commonwealth" simply chews on the figures given to it by the ILEC. It has neither the resources nor the expertise to do a full-scale audit of what amounts to a company that has more complexity and scope than the commonweath's entire government structure. The ILECs mouth the chant and the PUCs pick it up and sing along. But I find two things very interesting. The first is, as mentioned above, the fact that the ILECs fight to the death to keep the residential markets; and the second is that with all this "loss", the ILECs seem to rack up obscene profits, the likes of which were never seen in the days of the full regulated monopoly structure. I would LOVE to lose money that way! John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | Anytown, USA | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ From: Michael D. Sullivan Subject: Re: Massachusetts Local Telephone Rates Increase Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 05:29:38 GMT On 21 Apr 2003 22:09:57 -0400, John R. Levine posted the following to comp.dcom.telecom: > If you believe all the details of "losses" in ILEC cost accounting, I > have an excellent deal to offer you on some prime trans-aquatic real > estate between lower Manhattan and Brooklyn. > ILECs have always claimed they lose money on resi service, but the > facts to back up such claims are at best debatable. I know something about ILEC cost accounting, but am far from an expert. It's my understanding that the intrastate rates for purely local residential service are typically set to underrecover "historic" costs somewhat. If a given subscriber doesn't make or receive any long- distance calls, there is no offsetting access revenue for that subscriber. Accordingly, local-only subscribers are served at a "loss." The interstate subscriber line charge provides one source of recovery for the "loss" that may or may not make the subscriber "profitable." However, most residential subscribers make and receive long-distance calls, permitting the ILEC to collect originating and terminating access charges from the interexchange carrier. I wouldn't be surprised if residential service is profitable when access charges are taken into account. The whole scheme of telephone rate regulation is senseless and should be junked. I realize, however, this won't happen any time soon, and whatever replaces it will undoubtedly be even worse. Now about that bridge .... Michael D. Sullivan Bethesda, MD, USA (delete NOSPAM from address to mail me) ------------------------------ From: Linc Madison Subject: Re: Area Code Statistics Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 04:24:13 -0700 Organization: LincMad.com Consulting Reply-To: Telecom@LincMad.com In article , Graydon J. Sametz wrote: > How many millions of people does one area code serve? > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: In theory, slightly under eight million > number combinations are possible. Ten thousand per exchange, eight > hundred 'exchanges' per area code, or slightly under that. But that > does not allow for the many folks who have more than one line in their > house (fax, computer, second-third lines, etc). Nor does it allow for > companies with many thousands of numbers, indeed, sometimes entire > exchanges, etc. Nor does it allow for the fact that many telcos and > cellular companies require (according to technical reasons) their own > 'exchange' even if they do not come close to using all the numbers. > But slightly under eight million number 'combinations' are possible > per area code. I'll roughly guess that six million 'people' can be > served. PAT] Correct, in theory, but in practice, the number tends to be about 750,000 people in the major urban areas, on up to about twice that in less urban areas. New York City, with only 5 area codes for about 7 million people, is a model of number conservation, by U.S. standards. Nationally, there are well over 200 area codes in service for about 270 million people. www dot LincMad dot com / Telecom at LincMad dot com Linc Madison * San Francisco, California ------------------------------ From: joe@obilivan.net Subject: Re: Area Code Statistics Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 08:14:38 -0700 Organization: Cox Communications And, there are places like Lone Pine, California that take 10,000 numbers to serve 500 lines. Graydon J. Sametz wrote: > How many millions of people does one area code serve? > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: In theory, slightly under eight million > number combinations are possible. Ten thousand per exchange, eight > hundred 'exchanges' per area code, or slightly under that. But that > does not allow for the many folks who have more than one line in their > house (fax, computer, second-third lines, etc). Nor does it allow for > companies with many thousands of numbers, indeed, sometimes entire > exchanges, etc. Nor does it allow for the fact that many telcos and > cellular companies require (according to technical reasons) their own > 'exchange' even if they do not come close to using all the numbers. > But slightly under eight million number 'combinations' are possible > per area code. I'll roughly guess that six million 'people' can be > served. PAT] [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There are lots of examples in the USA like Lone Pine. Kansas is not a very densely populated state, yet we have a bunch of area codes. 913 is the Kansas City (Kansas side) metro area code (816 is for the Missouri side); it used to be the entire north side of the state, now 785 is in there for the non-metro areas going west. 316 used to be the entire southern half of the state; now 316 is Wichita metro area and everyone else is 620. Did I miss any? Something tells me there is a fifth area code now, around the Topeka area. Yet most of 785 and 620 are small towns with a few hundred numbers, each occupying an entire ten thousand number exchange, just like Lone Pine, CA. Horace, Kansas and Tribune, Kansas both of Greely County between them share an exchange, but considering the total population of the *county* is about 2000 people, I guess that is okay. Liberal, Kansas a bit to the south in a different county has its own exchange which is pretty full, like our Independence, and its 620-331. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 23:01:19 -0700 From: Dave Close Subject: Re: Area Code Statistics Date: 22 Apr 2003 23:00:13 -0700 Organization: Compata, Costa Mesa, California > How many millions of people does one area code serve? > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: ... > But slightly under eight million number 'combinations' are possible > per area code. I'll roughly guess that six million 'people' can be > served. PAT] Not around here. The population of the Los Angeles Area is around 12m and we have at least nine area codes, more depending on where you draw the line. So around here, at least, one area code doesn't serve much more than 1m people. Dave Close, Compata, Costa Mesa CA +1 714 434 7359 dave@compata.com dhclose@alumni.caltech.edu "Quantum computing is a marvelous way to show the non- intuitive nature of quantum mechanics." -Gordon Moore [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Dave and the other guys who have responded in this thread point out that in larger, more dense metropolitan areas, the citizens are likely to use up more of the possible 'number combinations' than are the citizens in the lesser populated areas. PAT] ------------------------------ From: John Higdon Subject: Re: No Help for Callers in Trouble Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 21:54:21 -0700 In article , Sam Rogers wrote: > Or their boys would have never needed to have been rescued if they > hadn't stolen a rowboat and taken it out in the Long Island Sound in > freezing temperatures in the middle of winter, without proper > equipment, without anyone knowing they were there etc. The boys' > parents time would be better spent on better parenting techniques and > teaching common sense. Yes, no need to improve or enhance our emergency services. People who are stupid enough to get into dangerous and life-threatening situations deserve to be taught proper lessons. In this case, you can bet those boys will think twice about what they are doing and not behave like children again. I can guarantee you they won't get into trouble anymore. Nothing like death to teach children a lesson! People should realize that they should sit home in chairs with their arms folded and never go out except to earn a living or to get food and clothing. Anything else is reckless and foolhearty. If more people would realize this, we would have no need for these expensive and frivolous emergency response systems. Or at least we wouldn't need them as much. Rather than waste time and money improving emergency response techniques, we should probably just eliminate 911 altogether. All it does is pander to people who should know better than to get into trouble. 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: Mr. Rogers (quoted by John, above) reminds me of my own mother. She is always saying things like 'if the parents did such and such, then the boys would not need so and so and whatever would not happen.' But the fact is, boys will be boys; they will get in trouble and need emergency help. I have a police scanner radio here, and a few days ago it came to life with a call: 'Chatauqua Sheriff needs assistance from Independence'. It seems they wanted some piece of elaborate equipment for a rescue effort (of two boys who had gone joy-riding in a car not their own) and we have the only such equipment for several counties around. Based on the radio call, the police here sent the equipment over to assist the Chatauqua County Sheriff in the rescue attempt. The incident was in a rural area part of the county to our west. The guys were rescued safely, THEN had to deal with the sheriff afterward. I do not think Mr. Rogers understands some of life's realities. Many guys are not going to listen to or obey their parents/guardians; they still have to be kept safe even after the fact as needed. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Chuk Gleason Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 08:10:14 -0400 Subject: Re: Pneumo Tubes Actually, Pneumo tubes are still in common use many places; I've seen them at the Home Depot store in Cary, NC (just outsida Raleigh) from the cash registers to um, I've never asked where they go to. I'm guessing other departments like Millwork, etc. Still works like a champ. Now for a _real_ blast from the past: In the small town of Gowanda, NY, about 35 miles south of Buffalo, there was a clothing store named "Himelein's"; I don't know when it was started, but it was in business into the 1970's certainly. (For reference, I graduated high school in 1976). In looking back at across the reaches of time, it was really quite 'big' - it was two store-front widths. As I remember it, it had those 'classic' details like pressed tin ceiling, probably wooden floors, and ancient wooden display cases around the perimeter. In my memory's eye, they were ancient even then! What was unique about it was the cashier system; instead of the pneumo tubes, each sales station had a little 'trolley' to the cashier in the center back of the store. You made your selections, the sales clerk wrote up the slip and put it and your money into a little basket in the trolley. They then yanked the pull chain, the basket went up to the track at the ceiling, and the trolley whizzzzzzzed along its track to the main cashier, who completed the slip and made your change, set it back in the trolley and sent it whizzzzzzing back to your clerk. It was very impressive to many young kids! As with so many quaint things, it was not labor or monetarily efficient, and in a larger sense perhaps helped the demise of the store (the 60's and 70's influx of big-box discount retail a la' K-Mart, etc. notwithstanding!) And to keep the post relevant to telecom, the local Bell office had only 5-digit (Rotary!) dialing into the early 1970's, I think, before they got SS-whatever. The exchange was 532, and I first learned my phone number about 1965 or so, but Mom & Dad who had been there over 12 years already, had learned it as LF2-xxxx. In fact, the last 4 digits started 94xx; I remember making a collect call home in perhaps 1979, and the operator asked me 'Is this a pay phone?' I said "No, not that I've ever seen it! My folks have had it for years." It was many years after that I found out that Bell by then had tried to standardize to payphones being nnn-9xxx format; We had a party line, by then with apparently only one other party on it, into the time I went to college in 1976. Not really conducive to a teenager!! So, some things are best left on the dustheap of history! Chuk Gleason Cary, NC 4/22/03 11:26:43 PM, editor@telecom-digest.org wrote: > From: Gordon S. Hlavenka > Subject: Pneumo Tubes (was Re: Step-by-step Demonstrator Box From 1895) > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Pneumatic air tubes were a very common > way to move small amounts of paper between offices even as late as > 1990. A department store I did some work for in downtown Chicago ... ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 08:43:00 -0500 From: Gordon S. Hlavenka Reply-To: nospam@crashelectronics.com Organization: Crash Electronics Subject: Re: Phone Filter For Dial-Up Connection Incognito wrote: >> The throughput on my dial-up connection is adversely effected >> (cumulatively) by each telephone connected to the line. Art Jackson wrote: > ... you may have to do some wiring changes. It's best to run a wire > pair from your Telco box outside to a jack near your computer. Then > put another jack near your computer and wire all the other phone > jacks to it. Good advice. Crucial to this, though, is the exclusive use of twisted-pair (TP) wire! Back in the goodle days, telephone wiring was 4 parallel conductors; two were tip and ring, and the other two (if present) were aux power. The second "pair" (not really a pair, just two more wires) were often used for a second line. Before modems and fax more crosstalk could be tolerated, plus there was not as much wiring in the house. Cat5 network cabling works wonderfully for telephone wiring. There is cheaper TP cable available which also works fine for telephone, but it's harder to find. You may be able to scrounge a partial box of CAT5 from someplace in which case it's free. Use the wire as it's paired: line 1 uses the blue pair, line 2 uses orange, line 3 green, and line 4 brown. If you have ANY Red-Green-Black-Yellow telephone wire in your house, you should get rid of it*. Now. No exceptions. Even if you aren't "using" a bad piece of wire, it can -- and will -- screw up your telephone circuit just by being connected. Running a spiffy new CAT5 lead from the junction box to your PC will help, but if the rest of the crappy wiring is still connected back at the junction it's still going to cause problems. Rip it out and replace it. *The wire, that is. This is not a real estate forum :-) Gordon S. Hlavenka http://www.crashelectronics.com Grammar and spelling flames welcome. Yes, that's really my email address. Don't change it. ------------------------------ From: Scott Ables Subject: Anyone Familiar With McLeodUSA's Dynamic PRI Service? Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 09:36:03 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Has anyone any experience with McLeod's Dynamic PRI service? I'm wondering what they mean when they say they offer dedicated data on a PRI. Is it really just nailed up circuit switched data or are they really DACCsing data onto the T1 and pulling it off prior to delivering the PRI to the PBX??? What CPE do they use? How's it work, how well is it supported, is it reasonably priced? TIA scott.ables@integratelecom.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 23:18:08 -0700 From: Dave Close Subject: Re: Cell Phone Companies Seek to Block Rule Organization: Compata, Costa Mesa, California tom.horsley@att.net (Thomas A. Horsley) writes: > Which is, of course, why the cellphone companies are desperate to > get the number portability requirement dropped -- they know pissed > off customers wouldn't be as reluctant to switch services. Actually, according to recent news reports, some cell carriers have reconsidered their opposition -- provided the portability interoperates with landline numbers. The idea is that, even though they may lose some customers through churn, they may gain more from people who give up their landline entirely. Sound plausible to me. Dave Close, Compata, Costa Mesa CA +1 714 434 7359 dave@compata.com dhclose@alumni.caltech.edu "Quantum computing is a marvelous way to show the non- intuitive nature of quantum mechanics." -Gordon Moore ------------------------------ From: tonypo1@sdc.cox.net Subject: Re: Internet Is Losing Ground in Battle Against Spam Organization: The Ace Tomatoe and Cement Company Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 06:22:47 GMT In article , TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to monty@roscom.com: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: How about some violence? If someone > paid a midnight visit to Ms. Sach's office and smashed up all her > computers (that is, any they did not feel like stealing) then set > fire to the rest of her office, and caused her lots of money to get > her operation back in order again, that *might* slow her down a little > bit. And please, don't hand me all that crap about 'violence never > solves anything' or 'she has a right to free speech'. She has no > rights to anything IMO except a slow, painful death. Of course, in > this paragraph I am just kidding. Can anyone give us her actual > street address and phone numbers (toll free and otherwise)? What > about her home address and maybe that of a couple of her key > employees? Don't bother looking for that information in the New > York Times article. The NYT is too prissy and proper to give any > details of *real value* to their readers. Her and that Ralsky creep > in Michigan. They both need slow torture and total devastation of > their computer networks. The lawyer reminds me I need to tell you > I am just kidding; naturally I do not mean anything said above in > this paragraph. PAT] While I don't necessarily condone trashing the whole office I can instead offer something that might be more suited to the telecom crowd. Why not find out who her serving ISP is and cut the lines, in several places. Hell, I'm sure some of us know some people in places that have colocated equipment and could find just the right port to unplug or foul up. Better yet -- why not have some real fun. Send condolence letters to people that know her. That probably constitutes assault but hey, she's clogging up mail servers and deserves much, much worse in my opinion. Find out everything we can about Ms. Sachs including parents, sibblings, friends etc. This would be a rather intensive project but the resulting paranoia would be awe inspiring. Better yet, if one were to break in her office why not install keystroke recorders and a remote access tool on all her computers. Would be very entertaining when the spam she tries to send out actually contains her home address and phone, same for her parents and associates. I say we give spammers the bad name they deserve. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I agree. Of course I was the pioneer in that effort several years ago when I 'outed' Jeff Slaton, the Spam King. Do you guys remember little Jeffy and his toy computers? PAT] ------------------------------ From: Joey Lindstrom Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 08:10:56 -0600 Subject: Whuzzup Pat? Reply-To: joey@telussucks.info On Tue, 22 Apr 2003 20:33:13 -0400 (EDT), TELECOM Digest Editor wrote: > There was a very bad email problem for awhile; John Levine had a major > spammer/denial of service problem. If all went well, a bunch of back > issues of the Digest should have reached you today, or will soon. They did indeed -- thanks muchly. -- Joey Lindstrom -- Telus Sucks http://www.telussucks.info [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Ditto to all of you on the mailing list. Early Wednesday morning you should have gotten bunches of Digests, from issues 392 (last week) through 403 (yesterday). John Levine tells us a bit more of the story next ... It seems the spammers ran him out of disk space. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: 23 Apr 2003 00:43:13 -0400 From: John R Levine Subject: Re: Did my Last Letter Arrive? Yes, I got them all and they look fine. Something got messed up here when my disk ran out of space last week, which I'm fixing, so the back digests will go out sometime later tonight. R's, John [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: A reader who complained about no issues of the Digest arriving for more than a week tipped me off to this. I forwarded his letter to John Levine, who investigated it as part of the vicious attack some spammer had given him. Why shouldn't all spammers get the same kind of treatment we gave to Jeff Slayton a few years ago. All the junk mail Ralsky in Michigan is getting is a good start; let's try to catch up the gap in our net the New York Times mentioned in that article a couple days ago. It is really getting nauseating. Now the spammers are even getting into the majordomo list servers. Read these next two things in my mail today: Date: 23 Apr 2003 06:48:56 -0400 From: majordomo-owner@telecom-digest.org Reply-To: majordomo@telecom-digest.org Subject: Majordomo results: Japanese girl VS playboy No valid commands processed. > John, look at a letter sent to me by 'majordomo-owner'. Now why would > it have written to me about Japanese Geisha Girls? (distasteful > look on my face). Then John Levine responds: That subject line is one that appears in viruses, so most likely it was a bounce from a virus with a forged telecom-digest return address. Ain't today's Internet great? By the way, I just got and installed a patch for the majordomo mailing list problem that appears to have permanently solved it. > From majordomo-owner@telecom-digest.org Wed Apr 23 06:48:59 2003 > Delivered-To: virtual-telecom-editor@telecom-digest.org > Date: 23 Apr 2003 06:48:56 -0400 > From: majordomo-owner@telecom-digest.org > Reply-To: majordomo@telecom-digest.org > To: "editor" > Content-Type: text/plain > Content-Disposition: inline > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit > Content-Description: Results from toplevel > Mime-Version: 1.0 > Subject: Majordomo results: Japanese girl VS playboy > X-Loop: majordomo > Precedence: bulk > X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-3.3 required=5.0 > tests=MAJORDOMO,NO_REAL_NAME,SPAM_PHRASE_00_01, > TO_LOCALPART_EQ_REAL,X_LOOP > version=2.41 > X-Spam-Level: > No valid commands processed. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies", Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://iecc.com/johnl, Sewer Commissioner "A book is a sneeze." - E.B. White, on the writing of Charlotte's Web ------------------------------ 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 #405 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Apr 23 19:02:54 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h3NN2sg06782; Wed, 23 Apr 2003 19:02:54 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 19:02:54 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200304232302.h3NN2sg06782@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson cc: johnl@iecc.com Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #406 TELECOM Digest Wed, 23 Apr 2003 19:00:00 EDT Volume 22 : Issue 406 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson AT&T Announces First Quarter 2003 Earnings (Monty Solomon) AOL Time Warner Reports First Quarter 2003 Results (Monty Solomon) Lucent Technologies Reports Results for Second Quarter (Monty Solomon) BellSouth Reports First Quarter Earnings (Monty Solomon) EarthLink Reports Results For First Quarter 2003 (Monty Solomon) Re: Phone Filter For Dial-up Connection (Justin Time) Re: Phone Filter For Dial-Up Connection (Scott Dorsey) Re: Massachusetts Local Telephone Rates Increase (John Stahl) Re: Massachusetts Local Telephone Rates Increase (Fred R. Goldstein) Re: Spec For Delay: Off-Hook till Detect Dial-Tone (Paul A Lee) Re: Now Digital, Spy Camera Technology Widens Gaze (Scott Dorsey) Re: Area Code Statistics (John Higdon) Re: Can Copy Protected CDs Hurt Artists Limiting Play? (Joey Lindstrom) MCI Sucks!!!! (shpat01) Re: Pneumo Tubes (tonypo1@sdc.cox.net) Need Information for Students on What a Tariff Is (Ken) 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, 23 Apr 2003 13:38:42 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: AT&T Announces First Quarter 2003 Earnings BEDMINSTER, N.J.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--April 23, 2003--AT&T (NYSE:T): -- Earnings per diluted share from continuing operations of $0.67, compared to $0.60 per diluted share in the prior year first quarter -- Consolidated revenue of $9.0 billion for the quarter -- Operating income of $1.2 billion for the quarter AT&T (NYSE:T) today reported income from continuing operations of $529 million, or earnings per diluted share of $0.67, for the first quarter of 2003. The company's current quarter income from continuing operations compares favorably to income of $446 million, or earnings per diluted share of $0.60, in the first quarter of 2002. First quarter 2003 net income of $571 million, or earnings per diluted share of $0.73, included income of $42 million, or $0.06, related to the cumulative effect of the adoption of a new accounting standard. First quarter 2002 net loss of $975 million, or $1.32 per diluted share, included losses of $0.76 and $1.16 from discontinued operations and the cumulative effect of the adoption of a new accounting standard, respectively. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=33925499 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 13:38:04 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: AOL Time Warner Reports First Quarter 2003 Results EBITDA Increases 14% to $2.0 Billion; Operating Income Rises 9% to $1.2 Billion Free Cash Flow Totals $1.0 Billion; Cash Flow from Operations Amounts to $1.5 Billion AOL Time Warner Inc. (NYSE:AOL) today reported financial results for its first quarter ended March 31, 2003. Revenues for the quarter increased 6% over the same period in 2002 to $10.0 billion. Subscription revenues climbed 10% to $4.9 billion, led by growth in the Company's Cable and America Online businesses. Content revenues improved 11% to $3.3 billion, due to increases at the Filmed Entertainment and HBO divisions. Advertising revenues declined 5% to $1.3 billion, stemming from decreases at America Online and Cable, offset partially by solid gains at the Publishing and Networks divisions. Other revenues decreased 21% to $472 million, due to declines at the America Online and Publishing divisions. The quarter's EBITDA rose 14% to $2.0 billion, led by growth at the Filmed Entertainment, Networks and Cable divisions, as well as a decline in restructuring charges from $107 million in the year-ago quarter to $24 million this quarter. Excluding the effect of these charges, EBITDA grew 9%. Operating Income climbed 9% to $1.2 billion, reflecting the EBITDA growth, which was offset in part by increased depreciation primarily at the America Online and Cable divisions. Cash Flow from Operations was $1.5 billion. Free Cash Flow totaled $1.0 billion, or 48% of EBITDA, partially due to the favorable timing of working capital requirements. At the end of the quarter, the Company's net debt totaled $26.3 billion, versus $25.8 billion at year-end 2002. This net debt balance includes $2.1 billion of incremental borrowings upon the closing of its Time Warner Entertainment Company, L.P. ("TWE") restructuring transaction. This increase was substantially offset during the quarter by the sale of an investment in GM Hughes for approximately $800 million, as well as the generation of significant free cash flow that was used to reduce debt. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=33925115 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 13:39:37 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Lucent Technologies Reports Results for Second Quarter Lucent Technologies Reports Results for Second Quarter of Fiscal 2003 - Apr 23, 2003 07:02 AM (PR Newswire) * Revenues of $2.4 billion for the quarter show a sequential increase of 16 percent * Loss per share of 14 cents includes a net unfavorable impact of 6 cents per share for global settlement of shareowner litigation and other items * Posts 10-point improvement in gross margin rate MURRAY HILL, N.J., April 23 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Lucent Technologies (NYSE: LU) today reported results for the second quarter of fiscal 2003, which ended March 31, 2003, in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP). The company recorded revenues of $2.4 billion in the quarter, which represented a 16 percent sequential increase from the $2.08 billion in revenues achieved in the first quarter of fiscal 2003. The company recorded $3.52 billion in revenues in the year-ago quarter. The company's net loss for the quarter was $351 million or 14 cents per share(1). These results compare with a loss of $264 million or 11 cents per share in the first quarter of fiscal 2003 and a loss of $495 million or 16 cents per share in the year-ago quarter. The second quarter's loss per share included the negative impact of charges associated with the global settlement of Lucent's shareowner litigation (11 cents per share) and the repurchase of convertible securities and certain debt obligations (6 cents per share). These charges were partially offset by certain income tax benefits (6 cents per share), a net reduction of reserves for certain business restructuring actions and certain other matters (5 cents per share). The net unfavorable impact of these items was 6 cents per share(2) in the second quarter. By comparison, the loss per share for the first quarter of fiscal 2003 included the net favorable impact of 4 cents per share(2) due to the reduction of reserves for a legal settlement associated with Lucent's former consumer products leasing business and certain business restructuring actions, customer financing recoveries and the repurchase of convertible securities, including the resulting tax benefits. The loss per share for the year ago quarter included the net unfavorable impact of 2 cents per share of several items, including tax charges associated with changes in tax legislation and income from discontinued operations. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=33925811 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 13:42:45 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: BellSouth Reports First Quarter Earnings Gains In Long Distance, DSL, Packages Aid Revenue; Cingular Wireless Adds 189,000 Net Customers ATLANTA, April 23 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- BellSouth Corporation (NYSE: BLS) reported earnings per share (EPS) of 66 cents in the first quarter of 2003, compared to a net loss of 8 cents per share in the same quarter of 2002. Consolidated revenues were $5.52 billion, compared to $5.53 billion in the first quarter of 2002. BellSouth reduced consolidated total operating expenses $21 million in the first quarter, compared to the same three months of 2002. Net income was $1.2 billion, compared to a net loss of $154 million in the first quarter of 2002. In accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), consolidated revenues and consolidated total operating expenses do not include BellSouth's 40 percent share of Cingular Wireless. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=33926731 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 13:45:39 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: EarthLink Reports Results For First Quarter 2003 EarthLink Reports Results For First Quarter 2003; Includes record Broadband subscriber growth of 112,000 - Apr 22, 2003 07:02 AM (PR Newswire) ATLANTA, April 22 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- EarthLink, Inc. (Nasdaq: ELNK) today announced its financial results for its first quarter that ended March 31, 2003. EarthLink reported that revenues grew to $353.7 million in the quarter, an increase of 6.1 percent from the same period a year ago. Earnings before interest income and expense, taxes, depreciation and amortization (EBITDA) excluding facility exit costs were $22.0 million, improving from $6.5 million a year ago. Net earnings before facility exit costs and acquisition-related amortization were $1.5 million. Neisition-related amortization was $61.9 million. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=33911459 ------------------------------ From: a_user2000@yahoo.com (Justin Time) Subject: Re: Phone Filter For Dial-up Connection Date: 23 Apr 2003 11:35:55 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Bruce Kille wrote in message news:: > Might I suggest doing what I do. Use a simple toggle switch (double > pole, double throw) with the center of the switch going to the telco > demark, one normally open side to all your phones, and the other open > side of the switch to your modem. Now all you have to do is remember > to flip the switch. ;^) There are line sharing devices that duplicate > the manual switch function automatically, but might still be "seen" by > your modem and still effect your connect speed. The toggle switch > works great for this, and keeps others in the house from picking up on > your connection too. ;^) > YMMV, > Bruce You should be using a make-before-break switch to lessen the chance of throwing a flash-hook on an analog line. RP ------------------------------ From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) Subject: Re: Phone Filter For Dial-Up Connection Date: 23 Apr 2003 16:16:09 -0400 Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000) > The throughput on my dial-up connection is adversely effected > (cumulatively) by each telephone connected to the line. I was > wondering if there might be some kind of filter I could use to > eliminate the problem? It's a real pain having to unplug the phones > whenever I want to connect to the Internet, and then plugging them > back in again afterwards (which I forget to do half the time). I know > there are filters for DSL lines, to keep the analog devices from > effecting the DSL connection. Would that type of filter help at all > with a dial-up connection? Thanks. No. The solution to this is to stop buying crappy phones that load down the line so heavily. This should NOT happen with decent phones. What is the REN on these phones? --scott "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 16:24:48 -0400 From: John Stahl Subject: Re: Massachusetts Local Telephone Rates Increase I was wondering what the reference to "the ILEC" is in this article about SBC, in: "The Commonwealth has already determined that the ILEC loses ..." I was thought that ILEC is the acronym for "Independent Local Exchange Carrier". Now Verizon (usually called a RBOC or Regional Bell Operating Company or LEC or Local Exchange Carrier) who is the major telephone company in MA, is not an ILEC in that state or any state it operates in; in fact there is only one ILEC listed (by TANE - Telephone Association of New England) in the state of MA. Telephone companies like Taconic Telephone and Hancock Telephone in New York are called ILEC's because of their size and that they are independent operators with franchised physical territories in NY where Verizon has never (and probably will never) operate in.ILEC's have given service in all of those areas where Ma Bell never wanted to service and they have done this for over one-hundred years. The acronyms listed on many Internet teleco sites and in the publications are: LEC - Local Exchange Carrier - the BIG guys like the RBOC's - Verizon, SBC, etc.. ILEC - Independent Local Exchange Carrier - like Taconic, Berkshire and Delhi Telephone - the small franchised territory guys who supply regular residential/business telephone service. CLEC - Competitive Local Exchange Carrier - like Choice One, AT&T, PaeTec and other telephone carriers "created" as result of the Telecom Act of 1996 to compete with the LEC's (they never really got into the ILEC markets as they are too small for them to make any money in!) Hope this helps to get the acronym straight! John Stahl Telecom.Data Consultant Aljon Enterprises ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 17:22:37 -0400 From: Fred R. Goldstein Subject: Re: Massachusetts Local Telephone Rates Increase > John Higdon wrote at Tue, 22 Apr 2003 > 21:11:39 0700 writes: > What is hard to believe is that the phone company is losing money on a > service that it fights tooth and nail to hang onto. We've been hearing > this chant about how "business service subsidizes residential service" > for decades, but I have yet to see any sort substantiation. "The > Commonwealth" simply chews on the figures given to it by the ILEC. It > has neither the resources nor the expertise to do a full-scale audit > of what amounts to a company that has more complexity and scope than > the commonweath's entire government structure. I read the DTE's Order in that case. "Cost" is a really loose concept; "below cost" has a lot of meanings! Just to give an idea of the stuff going on there ... TSLRIC is a cost-study method based on forward-looking incremental costs. TELRIC is like TSLRIC but it adds a share of common costs. Ramsey Pricing is like TSLRIC but it adds common costs based on a different method than TELRIC. The FCC orders the use of TELRIC to produce wholesale (UNE) rates to CLECs. The Mass. DTE looked at equivalent TELRIC rates, in part to determine if there's a "price squeeze" on CLECs. So VZ may be covering TSLRIC and maybe even Ramsey but not necessarily TELRIC. Note that the Mass. DTE is atypically close to the ILEC. They're sometimes called a "subsidiary of Verizon" or "Verizon's outside counsel". They typically rule against VZ when they expect that VZ's position would lose in a higher court; other than that, they give VZ more than enough rope to hang itself. Massachusetts TELRIC rates, recently recalculated by VZ based on DTE guidance, are now among the highest in the country. CLECs will now pay roughly twice New Jersey's UNE prices, for instance, even though both states are similarly urban and appear to me (and I've lived in both) to have similar costs. Even many rural states have lower UNE rates, because the Mass. DTE interprets TELRIC to produce amazingly high numbers. Also, everybody acknowledges that vertical features are pure profit, so while they may lose money on basic rates, they make money on the average ratepayer, because the average one takes a feature or three. ------------------------------ From: Paul A Lee Subject: Re: Spec For Delay: Off-Hook till Detect Dial-Tone Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 14:21:02 -0400 In TELECOM Digest Volume 22 Issue 401, wrote (in part): > This question originates from the quite common "modems fail to detect > dial-tone". > I'm guessing that the modems allow a certain time to detect dial-tone" > ? What is the spec. (for your country/telco) ? I don't know whether there is a specific published or officially adopted standard. All of the modem and chipset manufacturers I've encountered use a default (and minimum) value of 2 seconds (S-register 6). Some docs call this the "wait before blind dialing" parameter, but I have always been able to use it as the (minimum) time the modem will wait for dial tone under any circumstance (before determining a "no dial tone" condition). The maximum time a modem is permitted to wait is apparently regulated in some jurisdictions, but I don't know specifics by country. I have seen S6 settings that can go to a maximum of '99', '127', '255', and perhaps some others, but none greater than '255' or '256'. > A related question (to modems): is the modem supposed to 'activate its > "line-relay" ' soon after receiving the string: "ATZ" ? I have seen documentation for some chipsets that shows values of the 'ATZ' command that load settings but do not explicitly cause a reset. However, my experience with the actual devices is that an 'ATZ' command will cause any commands after it in the same line to be ignored, the modem to drop the phone line and reset, and the default settings to be loaded. > I guess that the delay to recgonise the dial-tone is irrelevant if the > line-relay doesn't pull in; or perhaps it is designed to drop-out > again if the dial-tone is not recognised in time ? Here again, my experience is not exhaustive, but the modem typically will connect to the line and wait seconds for dial tone to be recognized. If dial tone is not recognized, the phone line is dropped and the error is reported. I have dealt with many situations that require S6 to be set to a value greater than default ('2'). The most common is when using a phone line that is provisioned with any of several special features that are indicated to the user with an interrupted ("stutter") dial tone: voice mail audible message waiting signal, forward activated, data protection activated, DND activated, etc. I typically include 'S6=4' in modem initialization strings. Occasionally, I have had to set it as high as '8' to allow the modem to use the line with whatever features are on 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 Tell your senator you support Senate Bill 877 to CAN-SPAM . Find him/her at http://www.senate.gov/. ------------------------------ From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) Subject: Re: Now Digital, Spy Camera Technology Widens Gaze Date: 23 Apr 2003 14:34:56 -0400 Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000) Monty Solomon wrote: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: *Anywhere* it is legal and lawful for a > *LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER* to stand and observe what is going on, it is > lawful for a mechanical eye to do the same thing. Yes, but the question is whether it is beneficial. The police officer on the beat not only can watch what is going on, but he can also respond. The TV camera cannot respond, it can only help inform someone else who will later on. My worry is that police departments are using television cameras as a poor substitute for actually sending police officers out onto the streets and this is bad. > If it is lawful to have a police officer on every public street > corner in the United States (although admittedly it is not practical > or effective where the money to do so is concerned) then a camera > can be there instead. This is true. But putting cameras on every corner just makes people feel uncomfortable. Putting police officers on every corner might also make people feel uncomfortable too, of course. They are both bad ideas for the same reason, even though they are perfectly legal. > I do not like the idea myself, but logic would dictate it > is an acceptable form of policing. People who want to scream about > constitutional violations should first read the damn thing. Not everything constitutional is a good idea, though. --scott "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." ------------------------------ From: John Higdon Subject: Re: Area Code Statistics Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 13:28:46 -0700 In article , > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Dave and the other guys who have > responded in this thread point out that in larger, more dense > metropolitan areas, the citizens are likely to use up more of > the possible 'number combinations' than are the citizens in the > lesser populated areas. PAT] It is almost a badge of distinction these days to live in a major metropolitan area and have an area code that actually looks like an area code and a prefix that looks like a prefix. I'll be enjoying that until my area code changes to "669" as it will in the near future, thanks to the ninnies who scuttled overlays in California. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | Anytown, USA | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ From: Joey Lindstrom Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 10:49:42 -0600 Subject: Re: Can Copy Protected CDs Hurt Artists by Limiting Radio Play? Reply-To: joey@telussucks.info On Tue, 22 Apr 2003 23:31:14 -0400 (EDT), John Higdon wrote: >> And if anyone at one of these places had that kind of slack time in >> their jobs to do that, they were fired back in 1998. > The ONLY people that would be able to sit around making analog dubs at > today's radio stations might be interns. However, entrusting analog > dubbing (which requires meticulous level setting, determining start, > end and cue points, and labelling), producing a recording that will be > in the system indefinitely and heard over and over again to a high > schooler, does not float the boat of many music and program directors. In January 1995, during my second year of "radio school" (the Cinema, Television, Stage & Radio Arts program at the Southern Alberta Institute of Technology), I was assigned to a three-week practicum at MIX-105 in lovely (and bitterly cold at the time) Vernon, British Columbia. I got to do a little bit of everything at that radio station, including some of the dubbing you mentioned. They had a combination of systems. In the on-air booth, they had a pair of Denon professional CD players, plus one Sony "consumer" CD player just in case (I think it dated back a ways and at one time THIS was the only CD player they had). They also had a 1000-disc changer system, and the vast majority of their music was played directly from CD. But they also had just recently installed a new system -- I can't tell you anything about it, as I just don't know -- that allowed them to "record" music directly to hard drive. The server was in the basement and had a whopping 20 gigabytes of storage -- impressive in those days, but it was nearly always running out of space because they were storing full-length songs, commercials, and the like, in uncompressed form. While they weren't converting their old CD collection into hard drive files, they were putting all new songs that they were adding to their library into this system. As the practicum guy, I got to spend hours in the studio, sticking discs into another Sony "consumer" CD player and recording directly to hard drive (across the network) in an analog fashion. Set the levels ahead of time. Cue the disc. Click "record" a fraction of a second before hitting "play". And hit "stop" the instant the last strains of the music ended. You wanted to get it all done in one go, because editing the file (ie: if there's too much silence at the beginning) was a serious pain in the ass. The editing software was there, but we're talking about ENORMOUS files being manipulated across a 10-base network. Hopefully by now they've moved to something a bit more advanced, but that's how it was done a mere 8 years ago. Granted, this was a small-market station, one of two in a city of about (I think) 60,000 people, but there ya go. > Furthermore, the preferred way to transfer a CD is digital ripping. > Any CDs that still permit that method will still be added to the > library in that manner. So analog dubbing would require that the > station maintain two separate modes for entering songs into the > library. > We all know that the Internet music sharers will right readily analog > dub the new CDs to MP3s and put them up on the web sites as they always > have. The bottom line is that all the record companies will accomplish > with their new scheme is to inconvenience its paying customers and to > restrict airplay for new songs. If the record companies thing for one > second that this move will even slow down the trading of songs on the > net, they are even more deluded that I thought originally. I think it's something that's easily rectified. At MIX-105, the music director would receive a pile of CD's every day. Lots of it she'd literally toss out (or give away to whoever in the station wanted 'em), because it didn't fit our format (a mix of retro 80's "new wave" and rock, plus modern rock and dance tracks, even a bit of country). Why they were sending discs that clearly didn't fit our format, I just don't know, but there ya go. The discs were "consumer" discs -- they were the exact same disc that you'd buy in the stores. Assuming this practice has continued, the problem you've mentioned (being unable to digitally rip from CD's) would definitely be a serious problem. But what's stopping the record labels from creating a separate pressing of "radio station only" discs that are only sent to radio stations and contain no copy protection? Seems trivial to me. -- Joey Lindstrom -- Telus Sucks http://www.telussucks.info ------------------------------ From: shpat01@yahoo.com (shpat01) Subject: MCI Sucks!!!! Date: 23 Apr 2003 11:17:27 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ I cancelled my telephone line two months ago, and the cancellation did not go through for another month. When I received a full month's bill (and not the prorated bill), I called up the customer service, and she said, that she will have to take the cancellation order again, and that I have to pay the bill in full, and I should keep checking if the line has been disconnected, and then call back the customer service to get a credit on my account. Today, I called MCI customer service, and they said that the financial department can give me a refund, and they cannot help. The financial representative transferred me back to the customer service department, saying they cannot help me, and the customer service should be able to help me. They kept transferring me back and forth, I kept repeating the same story everytime I was transferred, finally the seventh time, the representative told me that they cannot give me a credit, because the last invoice is not pro-ratable. This is unbelievable, because on my first line, they did send me a pro-rated bill. I think MCI is collecting money from people using these kind of tactics, and trying to come out of bankruptcy. I hope that the company is doomed for ever. Speaking of their accounting, none of the representatives have any clue of what's going on in the system. They kept sending me someone else's bill, and that account was disconnected a long time ago!! I had to make a lot of phone calls to get that issue fixed. Please stay away from MCI, and save your precious time and money (and peace of mind). [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: MCI was literally the *first* of the alternate long distance carriers to AT&T (whom everyone, it seems mostly hated) back in the late 1960's. In those days, it was _M_icrowave _C_ommunications, _I_ncorporated. MCI was dearly loved by the same people who bitterly hated AT&T. For the first few years of the company's existence, it successfully traded on the hated reputation the 'Bell System' had. MCI was fond of getting subscribers by lying to them and telling them how their (MCI's) rates were so much lower than AT&T's. In companies, they would tell that lie, and if the person in charge of the phone system did not buy it, or disputed the 'facts' as they were presented, the MCI rep would demand to speak to that person's supervisor, and they would continue working up the ladder until they found someone stupid enough to believe them and order the change over to MCI 'service'. Since there was so much general dislike of the Bell System (no paragon of good, friendly, reliable customer service either in those days), if the MCI rep even slightly told an accurate story (or half-truth is more like it), the account would soon be theirs. Then a couple years later, Sprint came along. In those days, both MCI and Sprint only had long distance service, and then only in limited territories, mostly along the east-coast corridor, but very soon both of them 'came as far west' as Chicago, circa 1970. PAT] ------------------------------ From: tonypo1@sdc.cox.net Subject: Re: Pneumo Tubes Organization: The Ace Tomatoe and Cement Company Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 21:17:09 GMT In article , kb4mdz@earthlink.net says: > What was unique about it was the cashier system; instead of the pneumo > tubes, each sales station had a little 'trolley' to the cashier in the > center back of the store. You made your selections, the sales clerk > wrote up the slip and put it and your money into a little basket in > the trolley. They then yanked the pull chain, the basket went up to > the track at the ceiling, and the trolley whizzzzzzzed along its track > to the main cashier, who completed the slip and made your change, set > it back in the trolley and sent it whizzzzzzing back to your clerk. I recall that the Ann & Hope store in Cumberland, RI had a carriage trolley for getting from the 1st to 2nd floor. > And to keep the post relevant to telecom, the local Bell office had > only 5-digit (Rotary!) dialing into the early 1970's, I think, before > they got SS-whatever. North Kingstown, RI (401)-267 and (401)-268 was on an SxS switch until the mid to late 80's. It had five digit dialing also. ------------------------------ From: chipps@chipps.com (Ken) Subject: Need Information for Students on What a Tariff Is Date: 23 Apr 2003 14:27:45 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ I need some references that students can look at on what a tariff is, why we have tariffs, what they do, and so on. Does anyone have a list of books and articles that discuss the background to tariffs and the philospohy behind them? ------------------------------ 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 #406 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Apr 24 19:36:59 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h3ONaxN13488; Thu, 24 Apr 2003 19:36:59 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 19:36:59 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200304242336.h3ONaxN13488@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson cc: johnl@iecc.com Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #407 TELECOM Digest Thu, 24 Apr 2003 19:37:00 EDT Volume 22 : Issue 407 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Nortel Networks Reports Results for First Quarter of 2003 (M Solomon) Wi-Fi's Broken Promise (Monty Solomon) Habla usted Clear Channel? (Monty Solomon) New York Has a Number to Call: 311 (Monty Solomon) Apple Announcements to be Broadcast Live Via Satellite (Monty Solomon) Surveillance Nation-Part Two (Monty Solomon) EPIC Alert 10.08 (Monty Solomon) Re: Massachusetts Local Telephone Rates Increase ('nuther Bob) Re: Massachusetts Local Telephone Rates Increase (John Higdon) Re: Massachusetts Local Telephone Rates Increase (tonypo1@sdc.cox.net) Re: Massachusetts Local Telephone Rates Increase (Michael D. Sullivan) Re: Massachusetts Local Telephone Rates Increase (John R. Levine) Re: Massachusetts Local Telephone Rates Increase (Dave Phelps) Re: Massachusetts Local Telephone Rates Increase (Fred R. Goldstein) 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, 24 Apr 2003 08:49:30 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Nortel Networks Reports Results for First Quarter of 2003 TORONTO--(BUSINESS WIRE)--April 24, 2003--Nortel Networks Corporation (NYSE:NT)(TSX:NT): -- Revenues: US$2.40 billion, down sequentially approximately 5% -- Net earnings of US$54 million; US$0.01 per common share -- Strong cash position of US$4.0 billion, up sequentially over US$100 million Nortel Networks Corporation (NYSE:NT)(TSX:NT) today reported results for the first quarter of 2003 prepared in accordance with United States generally accepted accounting principles, "GAAP." Commencing with this presentation of its first quarter 2003 results, Nortel Networks will no longer provide pro forma earnings (which is a non-GAAP financial measure). First Quarter 2003 Results Revenues were US$2.40 billion for the first quarter of 2003 compared to US$2.91 billion in the same period in 2002. Nortel Networks reported net earnings in the first quarter of 2003 of US$54 million, or US$0.01 per common share, compared to a net loss of US$841 million, or US$0.26 per common share, in the first quarter of 2002. Net earnings in the quarter included US$190 million of net earnings from discontinued operations -- net of tax, US$134 million of special charges for restructuring and an aggregate US$36 million (net of tax) for the amortization of acquired technology and deferred stock option compensation associated with acquisitions. The company's reported results also included approximately US$80 million of favorable impacts associated with reductions in accruals principally related to: the wind-down of integration activities of previously acquired companies, operations originally structured as joint ventures, and miscellaneous tax matters; which were more than offset by costs related to the return to profitability bonus plan for employees and stock-based compensation expense. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=33939989 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 23:49:24 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Wi-Fi's Broken Promise So far, its vision for the future has remained so-so. BY TOM KRAZIT, IDG NEWS SERVICE IF THE HYPE IS to be believed, the widespread adoption of the wireless Internet will change the way PCs, handhelds and websites are sold, and will alter how computer users live, work and play. What's interesting is that the hype persists. Maybe it's the lack of much else to cheer about in IT these days. Vendors are offering a future vision of "hot spots" everywhere so that home computer users move unencumbered from room to room while mobile workers can keep plugging away from airports, restaurants and, according to Intel's latest marketing blitz, football stadiums and swimming pools. But even members of the Wi-Fi Alliance, a nonprofit consortium of vendors involved in the wireless market, acknowledge that obstacles must be cleared before wireless networking becomes part of the mainstream corporation's IT budget, or part of a consumer's monthly communications bill. What's the Problem? http://www.darwinmag.com/read/040103/wifi.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 02:34:45 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Habla usted Clear Channel? If the FCC allows the two biggest Spanish-language media companies in the U.S. to merge, it'll create a media conglomerate that will dwarf all competitors -- and could help GOP-friendly radio titan Clear Channel deliver Hispanic votes for Bush in '04. Editor's note: Seventh in a series on the consolidation of power and ownership in the media landscape. By Eric Boehlert April 24, 2003 | How do you say Clear Channel in Spanish? Pending FCC approval, a new consolidated Spanish language media, music, and radio powerhouse may soon be born. The $2.4 billion deal between Hispanic Broadcasting Corporation and Univision Communications -- already the market leader in Spanish-language TV, cable, and music -- would create a new company that controls nearly 70 percent of Spanish-language advertising revenue in the United States. The deal is big and contentious, and involves politics, music and media -- and, to make matters even more interesting, Clear Channel, the U.S. radio station conglomerate, has a starring role. Clear Channel is HBC's largest shareholder, and the company has been accused by opponents of the deal of maneuvering illegally behind the scenes to exert control over HBC, as well as spreading rumors of drug use about the CEO of HBC's chief competitor. Clear Channel and Univision boast many similarities. Neither is known for the originality of its programming. Both are run by conservative, politically active billionaire Republicans, and both exert tremendous, near-monopoly power in their markets. In fact, if the merger goes through, Univision's power in the Spanish-speaking world would dwarf what Clear Channel has achieved in the radio and concert business over the past five years. http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2003/04/24/univision/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 02:41:35 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: New York Has a Number to Call: 311 By JENNIFER STEINHAUER The telephone operators at the city's 311 center had the alternate-side-of-the-street parking rules down pat. They knew what to do with a complaint about a broken traffic light. Marriage license issue? Loud car alarm? Recycling laws? Check! Check! Check! But then, there was the chicken. A woman in the Bronx had one living in her hallway, and she was none too happy about it. It seems she and her landlord had divergent views on all matters of rent and heat, a dispute that manifested itself in the landlord placing a rather menacing bit of fowl at her front door. The operator typed into the computer: "Chicken on stoop." The results were quickly forthcoming. What the lady had was an agricultural problem, and she was referred to the Department of Health. Of the array of changes undertaken by Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg since he took office 15 months ago, few are as ambitious as his insistence on overhauling the way city residents receive information from their government. Appalled to learn during the campaign that there was no central clearing house where residents could call with their questions - there were over 40 call centers and help lines in the city connected to dozens of different agencies - Mr. Bloomberg decided after he was elected that he would set up a single line people could call to get answers to all questions pertaining to government, and to lodge their complaints. Similar systems exist in cities like Chicago, Baltimore and Dallas. Today, as many as 32,023 callers a day find their way to 311, which quietly went live in March. (The average daily volume is 8,385 calls.) New Yorkers get there either by dialing directly or because they have been redirected through another city hot line that will soon be obsolete. ... http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/23/nyregion/23PHON.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 08:43:38 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Apple Announcements to be Broadcast Live Via Satellite CUPERTINO, Calif., April 24 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- WHAT: Live satellite broadcast of Apple(R) announcements presented by Steve Jobs, Apple's CEO WHEN: Monday, April 28, 10:00 a.m. PDT/1:00 p.m. EDT The presentation will be available via satellite at the following coordinates: Ku-band -- Telstar 5/Transponder: 25 K -- Orbital Slot: 97 degrees west -- Uplink Frequency: 14444.0 MHz -- Downlink Frequency: 12144.0 MHz -- Polarity: Vertical down -- Audio subcarriers: 6.2 and 6.8 C-band -- Galaxy 3C/Transponder 1 C -- Orbital Slot: 95 degrees west -- Uplink Frequency: 5945 MHz -- Downlink Frequency: 3720 MHz -- Downlink Polarity: Horizontal down -- Audio subcarriers: 6.2 and 6.8 - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=33942542 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 23:42:33 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Surveillance Nation-Part Two In pursuit of security and service, we are submitting ourselves to a proliferation of monitoring technologies. But a loss of privacy is not inevitable. By Dan Farmer and Charles C. Mann May 2003 http://www.technologyreview.com/articles/farmer0503.asp Surveillance Nation Webcams, tracking devices, and interlinked databases are leading to the elimination of unmonitored public space. Are we prepared for the consequences of the intelligence-gathering network we're unintentionally building? By Dan Farmer and Charles C. Mann April 2003 http://www.technologyreview.com/articles/farmer0403.asp ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 23:45:33 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: EPIC Alert 10.08 ======================================================================= E P I C A l e r t ======================================================================= Volume 10.08 April 23, 2003 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Published by the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) Washington, D.C. http://www.epic.org/alert/EPIC_Alert_10.08.html ======================================================================= Table of Contents ======================================================================= [1] Coalition Alleges Violations of Children's Privacy Law [2] FOIA Documents on ChoicePoint Spark International Inquiries [3] EPIC Establishes Privacy Threat Index [4] Online Petition Drive Continues to Urge Accuracy for FBI Database [5] Privacy and First Amendment Symposium: 5/9/03, Oakland, CA [6] News in Brief [7] EPIC Bookstore: The File: A Personal History [8] Upcoming Conferences and Events http://www.epic.org/alert/EPIC_Alert_10.08.html ------------------------------ From: 'nuther Bob Subject: Re: Massachusetts Local Telephone Rates Increase Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 11:38:44 -0400 On Wed, 23 Apr 2003 17:22:37 -0400, Fred R. Goldstein wrote: > Note that the Mass. DTE is atypically close to the ILEC. They're > sometimes called a "subsidiary of Verizon" or "Verizon's outside > counsel". They key factor in all of this. Like most gov't committees in MA, they are a bunch of politically connected hacks who serve only to collect a salary and "benefits" while never serving the public interest in any way. Bob ------------------------------ From: John Higdon Subject: Re: Massachusetts Local Telephone Rates Increase Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 18:48:00 -0700 In article , John Stahl wrote: > I was wondering what the reference to "the ILEC" is in this article > about SBC, in: "The Commonwealth has already determined that the ILEC > loses ..." > I was thought that ILEC is the acronym for "Independent Local Exchange > Carrier". How about "incumbent Local Exchange Carrier", which is how it is commonly used in this neck of the woods? > Now Verizon (usually called a RBOC or Regional Bell > Operating Company or LEC or Local Exchange Carrier) who is the major > telephone company in MA, is not an ILEC in that state or any state it > operates in; in fact there is only one ILEC listed (by TANE - > Telephone Association of New England) in the state of MA. It isn't an RBOC, and that's for sure. I don't think there are any RBOCs left, since the term referred one of the Regional Bell Operating Companies that were spun off from AT&T after divestiture. Verizon (formerly GTE) was definitely NOT one of those. > Telephone companies like Taconic Telephone and Hancock Telephone in > New York are called ILEC's because of their size and that they are > independent operators with franchised physical territories in NY where > Verizon has never (and probably will never) operate in.ILEC's have > given service in all of those areas where Ma Bell never wanted to > service and they have done this for over one-hundred years. Yes, those would be the Incumbent Local Exchange Companies for the areas they serve, but being associated (or not) with the former Bell System has nothing to do with it. > The acronyms listed on many Internet teleco sites and in the > publications are: > LEC - Local Exchange Carrier - the BIG guys like the RBOC's - > Verizon, SBC, etc.. I wouldn't even classify SBC as an RBOC. It is a conglomeration of several RBOCs. > ILEC - Independent Local Exchange Carrier - like Taconic, Berkshire and > Delhi Telephone - the small franchised territory guys who supply regular > residential/business telephone service. A term that means nothing in post-divestiture times. That's why it doesn't mean that. > CLEC - Competitive Local Exchange Carrier - like Choice One, AT&T, > PaeTec and other telephone carriers "created" as result of the Telecom > Act of 1996 to compete with the LEC's (they never really got into the > ILEC markets as they are too small for them to make any money in!) Ah, you sort of got one right! > Hope this helps to get the acronym straight! Well, it does give us an insight into your way of thinking. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | Anytown, USA | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ From: tonypo1@sdc.cox.net Subject: Re: Massachusetts Local Telephone Rates Increase Organization: The Ace Tomatoe and Cement Company Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 02:42:40 GMT In article , aljon@stny.rr.com says: > I was wondering what the reference to "the ILEC" is in this article > about SBC, in: "The Commonwealth has already determined that the ILEC > loses ..." > I was thought that ILEC is the acronym for "Independent Local Exchange > Carrier". Now Verizon (usually called a RBOC or Regional Bell > Operating Company or LEC or Local Exchange Carrier) who is the major > telephone company in MA, is not an ILEC in that state or any state it > operates in; in fact there is only one ILEC listed (by TANE - > Telephone Association of New England) in the state of MA. > Telephone companies like Taconic Telephone and Hancock Telephone in > New York are called ILEC's because of their size and that they are > independent operators with franchised physical territories in NY where > Verizon has never (and probably will never) operate in.ILEC's have > given service in all of those areas where Ma Bell never wanted to > service and they have done this for over one-hundred years. > The acronyms listed on many Internet teleco sites and in the > publications are: > LEC - Local Exchange Carrier - the BIG guys like the RBOC's - > Verizon, SBC, etc.. > ILEC - Independent Local Exchange Carrier - like Taconic, Berkshire and > Delhi Telephone - the small franchised territory guys who supply regular > residential/business telephone service. ILEC - Incumbent Local Exchange Carrier. Used all the time in the PUC unit of the Rhode Island Attorney General's Office. ------------------------------ From: Michael D. Sullivan Subject: Re: Massachusetts Local Telephone Rates Increase Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 03:12:37 GMT On Wed, 23 Apr 2003 16:24:48 -0400, John Stahl posted the following to comp.dcom.telecom: > I was wondering what the reference to "the ILEC" is in this article > about SBC, in: "The Commonwealth has already determined that the ILEC > loses ..." > I was thought that ILEC is the acronym for "Independent Local Exchange > Carrier". Now Verizon (usually called a RBOC or Regional Bell > Operating Company or LEC or Local Exchange Carrier) who is the major > telephone company in MA, is not an ILEC in that state or any state it > operates in; in fact there is only one ILEC listed (by TANE - > Telephone Association of New England) in the state of MA. TANE and the independents can use whatever terminology they want, but the acronyms generally used in the industry and FCC, based in large part on their usage in the Telecommunications Act of 1996, are: LEC = local exchange carrier - a company providing local wireline service - includes both incumbent telephone companies, such as the RBOCs' LEC subsidiaries and independent (non-RBOC) LECs, and competitive local exchange carriers - pronounced "LECK" ILEC = incumbent local exchange carrier - a traditional telephone company (RBOC or independent) - pronounced "EYE-LECK" CLEC = competitive local exchange carrier - a newcomer that provides local wireline service in competition with the ILEC - pronounced either "KLECK" or "SEE-LECK" (this term is not in the Telecom Act) Telecommunications carrier = a provider of telecommunications service, such as a LEC (any flavor), an interexchange carrier (long-distance company), a CMRS (wireless) carrier, or a handful of other providers IXC = interexchange carrier (long-distance company) - pronounced as initials (this term is not in the Telecom Act) CMRS or wireless carrier = a commercial provider of mobile service (optionally including long-distance service), such as cellular or PCS - specifically excluded from the definition of LEC unless and until the FCC determines otherwise - pronounced as initials (in the Telecom Act, this is called "commercial mobile service"; the FCC added the word "mobile") > Telephone companies like Taconic Telephone and Hancock Telephone in > New York are called ILEC's because of their size and that they are > independent operators with franchised physical territories in NY where > Verizon has never (and probably will never) operate in.ILEC's have > given service in all of those areas where Ma Bell never wanted to > service and they have done this for over one-hundred years. They are called "independents" in the world of the FCC, where ILECs are incumbents, including the RBOC LEC subsidiaries. Among the independents, perhaps the term ILEC is used at variance from the way it is used in the Telecom Act. > The acronyms listed on many Internet teleco sites and in the > publications are: > LEC - Local Exchange Carrier - the BIG guys like the RBOC's - > Verizon, SBC, etc.. > ILEC - Independent Local Exchange Carrier - like Taconic, Berkshire and > Delhi Telephone - the small franchised territory guys who supply regular > residential/business telephone service. Again, from the Telecom Act perspective and the way the term is used among RBOCs, large independents, and the FCC, the RBOCs' telephone operations are the ILECs for about 80% of the nation's population. > CLEC - Competitive Local Exchange Carrier - like Choice One, AT&T, > PaeTec and other telephone carriers "created" as result of the Telecom > Act of 1996 to compete with the LEC's (they never really got into the > ILEC markets as they are too small for them to make any money in!) > Hope this helps to get the acronym straight! Clear as mud. Michael D. Sullivan Bethesda, MD, USA (delete NOSPAM from address to mail me) ------------------------------ Date: 24 Apr 2003 05:01:58 -0000 From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: Massachusetts Local Telephone Rates Increase Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > I was thought that ILEC is the acronym for "Independent Local Exchange > Carrier". Nope, it's Incumbent Local Exchange Carrrier, the telco that used to be the monopoly telco before the invention of CLECs. > Now Verizon (usually called a RBOC or Regional Bell Operating > Company or LEC or Local Exchange Carrier) It's all of those, but it's also the ILEC in most of the northeastern US and all the ex-GTE areas. > Telephone companies like Taconic Telephone and Hancock Telephone in > New York are called ILEC's because of their size ... NO, they're ILECS because they used to be the monoply telco in Chatham, Hancock, etc. > CLEC - Competitive Local Exchange Carrier - like Choice One, AT&T, > PaeTec and other telephone carriers .... It's possible but at the moment uncommon for the ILEC in one area to set up as a CLEC in another area and go poach customers. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 330 5711 johnl@iecc.com Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner http://iecc.com/johnl Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail ------------------------------ From: Dave Phelps Subject: Re: Massachusetts Local Telephone Rates Increase Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 01:06:06 -0500 Organization: www.tippenring.com In article , aljon@stny.rr.com says: > I was wondering what the reference to "the ILEC" is in this article > about SBC, in: "The Commonwealth has already determined that the ILEC > loses ..." > I was thought that ILEC is the acronym for "Independent Local Exchange > Carrier". Now Verizon (usually called a RBOC or Regional Bell ILEC is Incumbent Local Exchange Carrier. Dave Phelps Phone Masters Ltd. deadspam=tippenring ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 19:37:51 -0400 From: Fred R. Goldstein Subject: Re: Massachusetts Local Telephone Rates Increase At 4/23/2003 07:00 PM -0400, John Stahl wrote: > I was thought that ILEC is the acronym for "Independent Local Exchange > Carrier". Now Verizon (usually called a RBOC or Regional Bell > Operating Company or LEC or Local Exchange Carrier) who is the major > telephone company in MA, is not an ILEC in that state or any state it > operates in; in fact there is only one ILEC listed (by TANE - > Telephone Association of New England) in the state of MA. No, that is terribly out of date. "ILEC" is a federally-recognized term meaning "incumbent local exchange carrier", defined as the certificated monopoly LEC as of 1996, or its successor. > ... The acronyms listed on many Internet teleco sites and in the > publications are: > LEC - Local Exchange Carrier - the BIG guys like the RBOC's - > Verizon, SBC, etc.. No, LEC is the broader term including ILECs and CLECs of all stripes. The Telecom Act in Section 251 makes distinctions between ILEC and CLEC. > ILEC - Independent Local Exchange Carrier - like Taconic, Berkshire and > Delhi Telephone - the small franchised territory guys who supply regular > residential/business telephone service. No, those are sometimes referred to as "IOCs", for "Independent Operating Companies", but never, ever ILECs where "I" is "independent". They are of course ILECs just like the Bells. Some of them are called "RLECs", for Rural LECs. > CLEC - Competitive Local Exchange Carrier - like Choice One, AT&T, > PaeTec and other telephone carriers "created" as result of the Telecom > Act of 1996 to compete with the LEC's (they never really got into the > ILEC markets as they are too small for them to make any money in!) Some CLECs do compete with independent ILECs. I have clients who do. Big NYSE-traded CLECs mostly avoided rural areas, but little CLECs often live there. But it is often hard. First off, unbundled network element rates (things like loops and T1s) in IOC areas are usually much higher than in RBOC areas. For instance the highest unbundled loops in some rural IOC areas are over $100/month, and those would compete with $10/month ILEC POTS service! (A more common rate is $30-45.) Second, "small rural" ILECs are exempt from most competition (not all) unless the state affirmatively rules to overturn the exemption (which usually happens on request). That doesn't cover the biggest rural chains like Sprint-Local, but impacts lots of areas. Telephone cooperatives are even more protected against competition. __ Fred Goldstein k1io fgoldstein "at" ionary.com ionary Consulting http://www.ionary.com/ ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of 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 #407 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Apr 24 21:34:37 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h3P1YaZ14991; Thu, 24 Apr 2003 21:34:37 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 21:34:37 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200304250134.h3P1YaZ14991@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson cc: johnl@iecc.com Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #408 TELECOM Digest Thu, 24 Apr 2003 21:34:00 EDT Volume 22 : Issue 408 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson CDT Appeals Pennsylvania Attorney General's Secrecy (Monty Solomon) CDT Headline: Proposed State Legislation Raises Questions (M Solomon) Re: Greenies (Gerry Belanger) Re: Surprise International Calling Card Bill (John Higdon) Re: Anyone Familiar With McLeodUSA's Dynamic PRI Service? (J Kelly) Modem to Measure Line Echo (Paul) Call Detail Records (Blake Sount) Re: AOL Time Warner Reports First Quarter 2003 Results ('nuther Bob) SBC Fraud Detection (Joel Garry) Norvergence (Chip130@aol.com) Automatic Number Identification System on the Intuity Conversant (rtdos) AT&T Local Access Charge (Scott Dorsey) EBay Goes to Court (Joey Lindstrom) Re: Now Digital, Spy Camera Technology Widens Gaze (Paul Wallich) Vonage Internet-Based Phone Service (Oliver Penn) Re: MCI Sucks!!!! (Steven J. Sobol) Re: MCI Sucks!!!! (Al Gillis) 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, 24 Apr 2003 10:32:23 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: CDT Appeals Pennsylvania Attorney General's Secrecy CDT has appealed the refusal by the Pennsylvania Attorney General to disclose the Internet web sites that he has blocked under a controversial state law. Since mid-2002, the Attorney General has issued over 300 secret censorship orders, with no judicial oversight or public review, requiring ISPs to block web sites that allegedly contain child pornography. Those orders also result in the blocking of hundreds or thousands of legitimate web sites that share the same "IP address" as the illegal sites. CDT assisted in the filing of a request under Pennsylvania's "Right to Know" law seeking to force the Attorney General to make his actions public. The Attorney General denied that request on April 1, and CDT has appealed, arguing that the Attorney General cannot continue to shield the censorship orders from public scrutiny. April 21, 2003 CDT Report on Penn. ISP Liability Law, Feb. 2003 [pdf] http://www.cdt.org/speech/030200pennreport.pdf Pa. Attorney General's Denial of "Right to Know Law" Request, Apr. 1, 2003 [pdf] http://www.cdt.org/speech/pennsylvania/030401pennsylvania.pdf CDT Administrative Appeal of Denial, Apr. 22, 2003 [pdf] http://www.cdt.org/speech/pennsylvania/030422appeal.pdf ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 10:31:26 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: CDT Headline: Proposed State Legislation Raises Consumer Questions In recent weeks, a number of state legislatures have come under pressure to pass controversial statutes that could substantially affect what consumers are able to do with audiovisual equipment, computer equipment, and content they purchase. Currently under consideration in Georgia, Colorado, Massachusetts, and elsewhere, the proposed state legislation has the goal of preventing theft-of-service for cable and other communications service operators, but would have the effect of eliminating important consumer and research protections written into the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Numerous consumer groups have raised concerns that, if states continue to pass such legislation, they will significantly undermine consumers' flexibility in the digital world. April 21, 2003 Electronic Frontier Foundation resource page: http://www.eff.org/IP/DMCA/states/ Public Knowledge resource page: http://www.publicknowledge.org/education/super-dmcas.php Prof. Ed Felten's (Princeton University) personal page of resources: http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/superdmca.html Digital Millennium Copyright Act [pdf]: http://www.loc.gov/copyright/legislation/dmca.pdf ------------------------------ From: glb1202@cognitronics.com (Gerry Belanger) Subject: Re: Greenies Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 23:51:28 GMT In article , Manny Olds wrote: > The classic APC was aspirin, Paracetamol (now known as acetaminophen, aka > Tylenol), and caffeine. Checking my Excedrin bottle... Acetaminophen 250mg, check; Asprin 250mg, check; Caffeine 65mg, check. This same formulation is in the Zee Medical First Aid cabinet at work, called "Pain Aid ESF" (Extra Strength Formula). Gerryb Address valid til the spam drowns it. ------------------------------ From: John Higdon Subject: Re: Surprise International Calling Card Bill Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 17:09:51 -0700 In article , > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Sprint lies about almost > everything. Let that be a lesson to you! PAT] I think they all do. We all know that MCI never tells the truth, and Cingular is now on the list of liars. Remember that they quoted $0.99/minute for calls on a mobile phone back to the US. The actual charge was $2.49/minute. This was not a mistake on our part; they lied about it. In talking to a number of other Cingular customers, I found out that it is policy to lie about the rates. Of course, calls to Cingular all had the same bottom line: "You must have misunderstood; pay up." 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: The rule should be that all you people *automatically* tape record *each and every* phone call with one of the customer disservice representatives you speak with. After all, they all give permission to do so these days by telling you the call MAY be recorded for 'quality assurance purposes'. So start recording and hold them to the quality they claim to be so good at. All they'll be able to say at that point was 'the rep made a mistake; the charges are tarriffed, so you have to pay them anyway'. Don't expect them to keep on forgiving the charges based on errors made by customer reps. But at least they won't be able to pretend like YOU are the dimwitted fool who does not know anything (which is how they talk about their customers behind their backs anyway.) PAT] ------------------------------ From: J Kelly Subject: Re: Anyone Familiar With McLeodUSA's Dynamic PRI Service? Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 20:06:04 -0500 Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com Reply-To: jkelly@newsguy.com All I know about McLeod USA is that they can't even get a POTS line to work right. Mine was royally screwed for a month and then I switched back to Qworst. Several other people I know that tried them reported the same thing. I also believe that they are still in bankruptcy. On Wed, 23 Apr 2003 09:36:03 -0700, Scott Ables wrote: > Has anyone any experience with McLeod's Dynamic PRI service? > I'm wondering what they mean when they say they offer dedicated data > on a PRI. Is it really just nailed up circuit switched data or are > they really DACCsing data onto the T1 and pulling it off prior to > delivering the PRI to the PBX??? > What CPE do they use? > How's it work, how well is it supported, is it reasonably priced? > TIA > scott.ables@integratelecom.com ------------------------------ From: rol@newyork.com (Paul) Subject: Modem to Measure Line Echo Date: 24 Apr 2003 06:25:09 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Hello, Unimodem specifications v1.0 states that the command : AT#UD and AT#UG should report keys 14 : Near echo loss 15 : Far echo loss 16 : Far echo delay This is mentioned as Rec10 : Recommended for all implementations. The modems I've tested are reporting these values as always 0, which doesn't permit to know if it is because the info is not know, or because the line is OK. Could someone tell me of some modems which are known to measure and report these, and if possible modems working in Europe ? Please email me : rol@newyork.com Best regards, Roland ------------------------------ From: vhuertas@indra.es (Blake Sount) Subject: Call Detail Records Date: 24 Apr 2003 06:26:49 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Hi all, Does anybody know if there is a standard format for the CDR files? I mean, name of fields, length and type of data (strings of characters or numbers), etc. Thank you very much. Vic ------------------------------ From: 'nuther Bob Subject: Re: AOL Time Warner Reports First Quarter 2003 Results Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 11:38:43 -0400 On Wed, 23 Apr 2003 13:38:04 -0400, Monty Solomon wrote: > EBITDA Increases 14% to $2.0 Billion; Operating Income Rises 9% to > $1.2 Billion > Free Cash Flow Totals $1.0 Billion; > Cash Flow from Operations Amounts to $1.5 Billion > > AOL Time Warner Inc. (NYSE:AOL) today reported financial results > for its first quarter ended March 31, 2003. Interested readers might want to check out the SEC investigation into the alleged mis-stating of advertising revenues by $400 million. See the NY Times Monday/4-21 edition for the full story. Bob ------------------------------ From: joel-garry@home.com (Joel Garry) Subject: SBC Fraud Detection Date: 24 Apr 2003 11:43:48 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Hi all! I was wondering if anyone knew details of how SBC fraud detection works. This is what happened: I'm a landlord (go ahead and boo). OK, so a tenant who had lived there for many years before I was involved, paying the rent and generally being quiet, suddenly flaked out, stop paying rent and bills, etc. Eventually I evicted him, got a default judgment. Painted the place, cleaned the carpet, generally got it nice, rented it to some new people (who speak little English and are related to the tenants next door); huge March storm comes and floods the place out before they move in. OK, takes me a couple weeks to fix the disaster, then they move in. Now it's a few weeks later. I get a call, SBC has cancelled their phone service. They get across to me it was something about the previous tenant. So I call SBC and ask. I'm told they set off the fraud detection because they called the same non-business telephone number as the previous tenant. Then I'm told (this call by me was routed through 4 different people who weren't quite consistent in their stories) that the new people were called by SBC and asked if the old person was there, and someone answered in the affirmative. Now, all this set off little alarm bells in my head. It is possible that the new people actually do know the old person (certainly the people next door did), but why would they call me and ask who it is -- they didn't get the name exactly right? The level of scam sophistication that implies seems out of proportion. More believable would be that there is something screwy with their call matching software (perhaps because the new people asked to start the phone service before the disaster), and/or that some obnoxious fraud person called up and asked in English if someone they never heard of lived there, and a kid answered "yes, let me get my mommie," and then mommie wasn't too cooperative with someone claiming to be from the phone company asking strange questions and demanding payment for a bill from before they moved in. What, if anything, should I do? jg @home.com is bogus For email, lowercase the dash and use compuserve.com. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I assume the only reason or the main reason you want to get involved is as a good neighbor who has a good command of the English language and wants to help these folks. You have bitten off a lot to chew in that case, as it may go on for months and months. First of all, telephone the chairman's office and follow it up with a registered letter to the chairman telling him that these people do not speak English; that they have no knowledge of any fraud (I am *assuming* the people next door were not in on it) and that you are expecting the phone service to be restored immediatly. Don't mess around talking to any customer service reps; they are idiots for the most part. (But you do not have to and should not say that in any letters or phone calls to the chairman's office.) Advise the chairman's office that you are also filing an immediate appeal with the commission (in your state) which handles telephone service, and that essentially you will see his people in court. Tell him also that the company taking advantage of foreign-speaking people in this way is outrageous, and you may be writing to the television and radio stations about it to 'see how they can be of help'. I can assure you that will get their phone back on promptly. That is, unless the new tenants didn't quite give you the entire, truthful account of the matter, in the proper context. Please make sure *YOU* don't get egg on your face in this matter. In the interim, consider getting them a cellular phone to use. Get it in your name; you get the bills; you pay the bills. Tell them their monthly rent payment is going to be increased by the amount of the cellular phone bill (let's say thirty dollars per month) and that the first thirty dollars each month they put your hands is for the phone bill; they have not started paying the rent (for legal reasons) until the phone charges are paid each month. The reason for this is that if these folks are not as honorable as you would like, they may try to stiff you on the phone bill **and you have no easy and effective recourse** against that. On the other hand, if their monthly 'rent' payment is short thirty dollars (or however much) each month (or some month) you can resort to eviction under your state laws. Mark their receipts plainly 'for rent' and 'for phone service'. Insist to them "I get no RENT money each month until I get the PHONE bill money". Once this matter is resolved, if it is, then get the cell phone turned off or keep it for yourself to use, etc. If SBC comes to realize the error of their ways, they'll have their phone service back in a hurry. If -- God forbid -- SBC knows what they are talking about and sticks to their guns, you'll have to take a different approach. **Make certain your tenants are not lying to you or leaving out any pertinent details**. In their defense, SBC is not required under any tariff to provide phone service when they get defrauded in the process. They *are* required to provide phone service to any individual who asks for it otherwise, since they are a common carrier. I knew this phone phreak once in Chicago. He came home from work one day, and a phraud investigator from telco was waiting for him on his front porch. The investigator told him point blank, I have to give you 24 hours notice that your service is being yanked, and this is your notice. Tomorrow at this time, your phone will be dead. Frankly, I hope you are never able to get service again. Illinois politicians and government are *so* corrupt, it only stands to reason the Illinois Commerce Commmission is also. The phreak told me he had to hire some shyster lawyer to go speak for him at the Commission, pay about six hundred dollars to the lawyer to be 'spread around' in order to get his phone service turned back on three or four days later. Let us know what you decide to do and how it turns out. I guess the 'former tenant' must have been a real loser. I repeat, make sure these new people are being totally straight with you. No attorney likes getting up in court and hearing things from the other side that his client should have been honest enough to tell him first. As to your initial question 'how do fraud control algorythyms work' or words to that effect, they work pretty well. The new and improved ESS tells authorities a lot of details they could not get in the old days, including who calls whom, for how long, how often, etc. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Chip130@aol.com Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 15:04:14 EDT Subject: Norvergence Does anyone have any info on Norvergence and their Fast Data hardware system? ------------------------------ From: rtdos@hotmail.com (rtdos) Subject: Automatic Number Identification System on the Intuity Conversant Date: 24 Apr 2003 12:28:53 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Is it possible to design an application on the Conversant using either scriptbuilder or voice@work so that when a particular number is dialed the conversant (using recorded speech) can give the caller the extension they are dialing from and if it is an outside line simply to tell the caller it is an outside line (but don't give the caller the number but only if it is an inside number or extension number) and then hang up? What would I need to ADD to my conversant to write this application myself? Any tools ? Jeff http://www.rtdos.com http://groups.msn.com/telcomadmin (formerly http://groups.yahoo.com/group/telcomadmin) ------------------------------ From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) Subject: AT&T Local Access Charge Date: 24 Apr 2003 16:12:46 -0400 Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000) I have just received a little white card in my mail telling me that since I am a customer of AT&T long distance services that I will begin receiving a $1.95 in-state connection fee in order to help pay for the cost of carrying in-state long distance and local toll calls. They give me a telephone number to call and ask for more information, at 1-800-333-5256. Now, what is the problem? The problem is that I have AT&T selected only as my out of state long-distance carrier and all of my in-state calls are handled by a small carrier that is much cheaper. But now AT&T is going to charge me a subsidy to operate a service that I'm not ordering or receiving from them? So, I call the number ... and it consists entirely of recorded messages, none of which answer any of my questions ... and no way to get out and talk to a human being. Anybody have any clue what is going on here? Do I need to contact the PUC? --scott "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Instead of contacting the PUC you need to get rid of AT&T and choose some other carrier (such as the inexpen- sive one you use for your in-state calls). PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 14:18:44 -0600 From: Joey Lindstrom Subject: eBay Goes to Court Reply-To: joey@garynuman.info NORFOLK, Va. (AP) -- Online auction house eBay, one of the last remaining winners from the dot-com bubble, is going on trial over the very foundation of its success: the programs and procedures that run the popular cyber-bazaar. http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/World/2003/04/24/72473-ap.html ------------------------------ From: Paul Wallich Subject: Re: Now Digital, Spy Camera Technology Widens Gaze Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 16:51:32 -0400 Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC In article , kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote: > Monty Solomon wrote: >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: *Anywhere* it is legal and lawful for a >> *LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER* to stand and observe what is going on, it is >> lawful for a mechanical eye to do the same thing. > Yes, but the question is whether it is beneficial. The police officer > on the beat not only can watch what is going on, but he can also > respond. The TV camera cannot respond, it can only help inform > someone else who will later on. The cop on the beat also can't generally be called by random third parties to testify about observations of events that had no criminal behavior attached to them. Traffic cameras can show who is in a car with whom, outdoor surveillance video can be analysed to determine when houses or appartments are occupied or empty, and some of what is going on inside. Automated tollbooth records are already being used in lawsuits; just take that and run with it. Unless you can somehow figure out how to take video surveillance and sanitize every bit of information that doesn't have to do with a crime, it's an enormous stream of privacy-violating data just waiting to be tapped. paul ------------------------------ From: ccis4sofi@yahoo.com (Oliver Penn) Subject: Vonage Internet-Based Phone Service Date: 24 Apr 2003 14:15:34 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ I can only find one previous posting in this group on this subject. It was more conjecture than information. I live in what must be one of the smallest markets where DSL is available. Speeds vary but generally, it is not very fast. Vonage home page testing says I need to use their speed booster. Only news papers seem to cover it. The Dallas Morning News writer "After testing the service for several weeks ..." recently said it was simple. Do any of the knowledgable telephone folks in this group have any recent personal experience with this service, especially with 'slow' DSL connections? Oliver(recovering telephone guy)Penn Gun Barrel City, TX ------------------------------ From: Steven J. Sobol Subject: Re: MCI Sucks!!!! Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 23:16:50 -0000 Organization: JustThe.net LLC From shpat01 (shpat01@yahoo.com): > Today, I called MCI customer service, and they said that the financial > department can give me a refund, and they cannot help. The financial > representative transferred me back to the customer service department, > saying they cannot help me, and the customer service should be able to > help me. They kept transferring me back and forth, I kept repeating > the same story everytime I was transferred, finally the seventh time, > the representative told me that they cannot give me a credit, because > the last invoice is not pro-ratable. This is unbelievable, because on > my first line, they did send me a pro-rated bill. File a complaint with your state Public Utilities Commission. I am lucky in that Ohio's PUC has been able to get a couple telephone-related issues resolved favorably for me. Also file a complaint with your state Attorney General. > Please stay away from MCI, and save your precious time and money (and > peace of mind). Well, duh! Steve Sobol/CTO/JustThe.net LLC/Mentor On The Lake (Cleveland), OH/888.480.4NET "This country has a strong ethical foundation, but... I hesitate to say that erosion has set in, but it is clear that more and more of what we are is being built on sand and not on that foundation." - G. Waleed Kavalec, in SPAM-L ------------------------------ From: Al Gillis Subject: Re: MCI Sucks!!!! Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 19:54:32 -0700 Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com Microwave Communications, Inc. is certainly the first name of that company and, at one time, just when they began to see revenues that peeked a little above the red some wags on the inside maintained that MCI stood for "Money Comin' In!" shpat01 wrote in message news:telecom22.406.14@telecom-digest.org... > I cancelled my telephone line two months ago, and the cancellation did > not go through for another month. When I received a full month's bill > (and not the prorated bill), I called up the customer service, and she > said, that she will have to take the cancellation order again, and > that I have to pay the bill in full, and I should keep checking if the > line has been disconnected, and then call back the customer service to > get a credit on my account. > Today, I called MCI customer service, and they said that the financial > department can give me a refund, and they cannot help. The financial > representative transferred me back to the customer service department, > saying they cannot help me, and the customer service should be able to > help me. They kept transferring me back and forth, I kept repeating > the same story everytime I was transferred, finally the seventh time, > the representative told me that they cannot give me a credit, because > the last invoice is not pro-ratable. This is unbelievable, because on > my first line, they did send me a pro-rated bill. > I think MCI is collecting money from people using these kind of > tactics, and trying to come out of bankruptcy. I hope that the company > is doomed for ever. > Speaking of their accounting, none of the representatives have any > clue of what's going on in the system. They kept sending me someone > else's bill, and that account was disconnected a long time ago!! I had > to make a lot of phone calls to get that issue fixed. > Please stay away from MCI, and save your precious time and money (and > peace of mind). > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: MCI was literally the *first* of the > alternate long distance carriers to AT&T (whom everyone, it seems > mostly hated) back in the late 1960's. In those days, it was _M_icrowave > _C_ommunications, _I_ncorporated. MCI was dearly loved by the same > people who bitterly hated AT&T. For the first few years of the > company's existence, it successfully traded on the hated reputation > the 'Bell System' had. MCI was fond of getting subscribers by lying > to them and telling them how their (MCI's) rates were so much lower > than AT&T's. In companies, they would tell that lie, and if the > person in charge of the phone system did not buy it, or disputed the > 'facts' as they were presented, the MCI rep would demand to speak to > that person's supervisor, and they would continue working up the > ladder until they found someone stupid enough to believe them and > order the change over to MCI 'service'. Since there was so much > general dislike of the Bell System (no paragon of good, friendly, > reliable customer service either in those days), if the MCI rep even > slightly told an accurate story (or half-truth is more like it), the > account would soon be theirs. Then a couple years later, Sprint came > along. In those days, both MCI and Sprint only had long distance > service, and then only in limited territories, mostly along the > east-coast corridor, but very soon both of them 'came as far west' > as Chicago, circa 1970. 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 #408 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Apr 24 23:50:49 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h3P3onE16566; Thu, 24 Apr 2003 23:50:49 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 23:50:49 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200304250350.h3P3onE16566@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson cc: johnl@iecc.com Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #409 TELECOM Digest Thu, 24 Apr 2003 23:51:00 EDT Volume 22 : Issue 409 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Difference in Allones and AIS in e1/t1 Testing (kris) Re: Wi-Fi's Broken Promise (dold@Wi-FiXsXBr.usenet.us.com) What Does DSL Connect to at the Other End? (AES/newspost) Public Session on Privacy in Government Systems (Monty Solomon) American Web Surfers Boost Traffic to Foreign News Sites (Monty Solomon) SBC Communications Reports First-Quarter Earnings (Monty Solomon) Re: Can Copy Protected CDs Hurt Artists by Limiting Radio Play? (Higdon) Re: Can Copy Protected CDs Hurt Artists by Limiting Radio Play? (Ellers) Re: Area Code Statistics (Justin Time) Re: Area Code Statistics (nmclain@annsgarden.com) Re: Pneumo Tubes (Alan Fowler) Re: Pneumo Tubes (Mike O) Re: Pneumo Tubes (Dale Farmer) Re: MCI Sucks! (John Higdon) Re: E-Bay Goes to Court (John Higdon) Re: Massachusetts Local Telephone Rates Increase (Garrett Wollman) Re: AT&T Local Access Charge (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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: cvkris@rediffmail.com (kris) Subject: Difference in Allones and AIS in e1/t1 Testing Date: 24 Apr 2003 16:38:16 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Can I get the possible reasons for "allones" signal in E1 frame. What is the possibility for getting it in a loopback? ------------------------------ From: dold@Wi-FiXsXBr.usenet.us.com Subject: Re: Wi-Fi's Broken Promise Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 23:54:14 UTC Organization: a2i network Monty Solomon wrote: > So far, its vision for the future has remained so-so. > BY TOM KRAZIT, IDG NEWS SERVICE > IF THE HYPE IS to be believed, the widespread adoption of the wireless > Internet will change the way PCs, handhelds and websites are sold, and > will alter how computer users live, work and play. Has this guy not looked around? The reason that the commercial rollout of hot spots is so slow is because no one wants to pay for what they can get for free. When I moved recently, I had a delay in getting DSL hooked up at my house. I just drove around the block, and found 10-15 Wireless networks, a couple of them with strong enough signal to connect from my upstairs bedroom. I think the pay per minute services will eventually fail, except in captive markets like airports. Other than that, I expect pay listing services to thrive, and more and more places like MacDonalds to appear, where a paying customer is entitled to free internet access for a while, kind of like validated parking. I don't expect to pay $39.95 a month for an occasional connection to a Starbucks coffee shop, when I already have DSL at home. Wireless might get tacked on as a service from your regular ISP, the way dialup is today. ------------------------------ From: AES/newspost Subject: What Does DSL Connect to at the Other End? Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 20:28:42 -0700 I have DSL service between my home and Stanford University's campus network, with the actual service provided by SBC/Pac Bell; my wife and I use it to access our separate accounts ("User ID's") on the Stanford campus net. A non-Stanford family member now wants to go direct to AOL via the Internet using the same DSL connection, without going through Stanford or piggybacking on either of our Stanford accounts. Is this feasible, or meaningful? I understand how DSL works technically, but I'm not up to speed on just what it connects to at the other end. Does DSL always connect only to a single ISP (presumably Stanford in this case) at the far end, and you have to go through that ISP to access the broader web? Or is it somehow "on the Internet" in a broader fashion, and one can connect directly to other sites? (I know, I know, why don't I ask Stanford or SBC about this? Answer: We're way beyond the distance limit for DSL -- about 25,000 feet to be exact. Stanford guys have been extraordinarily helpful in getting our service working, and I'm reluctant to pester them about anything more, at least until I get myself better educated; and the SBC guys have been pressed hard to get and maintain a particularly clean line for us, and I don't want to rattle their cages either -- they might just cut us off.) "Power tends to corrupt. Absolute power corrupts absolutely." Lord Acton (1834-1902) "Dependence on advertising tends to corrupt. Total dependence on advertising corrupts totally." (today's equivalent) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have DSL from SBC also, but in my case I am only six blocks from our community telephone central office. I also have the same thing your family member is talking about, with AOL. I do not use AOL to browse or surf the net (I could, but that would be redundant since I have SBC Global.) But I do like to chat occassionally on line, so I use AOL's pricing plan called 'BYOA' (Bring Your Own Access) which only costs about five dollars per month. If all your party wants to do is chat via AOL, then the AOL Messenger is totally free. The five bucks or so per month is if you want email to go with it or check out other AOL features. Truth be told however, I could use the five dollars per month on other things and am thinking seriously about quitting that and going exclusively with Yahoo Messenger which is totally free. As to your question, 'what does DSL connect to on the other end', well it connects to an ISP. In this case SBC is probably your ISP, just as they are my ISP. You then either direct your ISP (through key strokes) to connect you with the university network just as I instruct my ISP (through key strokes) to connect me with MIT when I wish to work on this Digest. But SBC Global does not care who I connect with. Instead of connecting to MIT to work on the Digest, maybe I choose to connect with Yahoo to use the Instant Messenger or maybe I pick up my personal email at my personal account for same. Or maybe I look at some other sites, etc. I doubt they care who you connect with either. Now AOL is an ISP also, albiet a more fancy one. AOL will let you call in and use their system. Using the system does not cost that much, its the telephone lines that cost. So AOL says, yeah, you can hook up to us, surf the net, visit in our 'community', etc, but all the local phone lines we run all over the world have to be paid for, that will be $19.95 per month, thank you. However, if you get here on your own, i.e. 'Bring your own access' it will only cost you five dollars per month. (The difference between the actual cost of using the AOL ISP and using the AOL telephone lines into your community.) The only difference, I think, would be that when family member sits down at the computer, family member would instruct the ISP (SBC) through key strokes to connect her/him to AOL instead of the University net. And off they would go to AOL just as off you go to the University net. In fact, if SBC Global at your end is like SBC Global here, this person could have her own user name and email box @sbcglobal.net for no extra charge. I get ten names and ten boxes if desired. Now all this assumes that SBCGlobal is your ISP or internet service provider. If in fact your university has a deal with SBC where you are 'hard wired' through SBC direct to the university net so that when you sit down at the computer the first thing you see is a prompt from the university net without asking for anything at all, then it would appear that Stanford is your 'ISP' and all deals are off. Exactly *how* do you get to the university network? If you are dealing with Stanford DIRECTLY for internet connectivity, then you will need to ask them about their policies, etc. But if you are dealing with SBC and then in the course of a day's time sit at the computer and say in effect 'give me the university network' then it is no one's business at Stanford what your family does with your connection otherwise, and AOL does come cheap if you 'BYOA'. Give us a few more details on this please. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 10:33:29 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Public Session on Privacy in Government Systems CDT and the Council for Excellence in Government hosted a public event on important new federal government privacy rules that are expected to be issued in May as part of the Bush Administration's E-Government Act implementation. The new Chief Privacy Officer for the Department of Homeland Security and representatives from the Office of Management and Budget previewed the rules at this public event. April 23, 2003 Video of the event [Real Player required] Hour #1 http://www.cdt.org/egov/030423egovforum1.ram Hour #2 http://www.cdt.org/egov/030423egovforum2.ram Policy Post 8.25 "New Law to Require Privacy Impact Assessments for U.S. Agencies Nov. 11, 2002 http://www.cdt.org/publications/pp_8.25.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 08:45:42 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: American Web Surfers Boost Traffic to Foreign News Sites Aljazeera.net Skyrockets 1200 Percent, While BBC More Than Doubles Its Online Audience in the U.S. NEW YORK, April 24 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Nielsen//NetRatings, the global standard for Internet audience measurement and analysis, shows that American surfers flocked to foreign news sites in March 2003 for additional and alternative coverage of the war in Iraq. Aljazeera.net experienced a 1,208 percent increase in traffic in March 2003, drawing more than one million surfers from the U.S. (see Table 1). About a third of these surfers, or 328,000, visited the English version of the site, which launched last month. British news site, BBC World Service surged 158 percent to 5.3 million surfers in March, attracting 3.2 million more unique visitors since February 2003. Both Aljazeera.net and BBC World Service drew predominantly male visitors comprising nearly 70 percent of the sites' total audience. Traffic to Reuters.com jumped 72 percent month-over-month, posting more than 2.1 million visitors. Like many other news sites, Reuters launched special streaming media content and coverage during the war. Newsmax.com and Fox News followed, increasing site traffic 51 and 43 percent, respectively. CNN and MSNBC, the two biggest online news sources in the U.S. continued their dominance in the overall unique audience rankings, attracting 26.2 and 24.3 and million unique visitors in March, with both sites increasing traffic by nearly a quarter over the previous month. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=33942485 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Speaking of twelve hundred percent increases in traffic, do any of the old timers here remember that month in 1993 (at the very end of the 'golden age of the internet' when a fourteen *thousand* percent increase in traffic in internet web sites was reported as everyone -- literally everyone -- started 'discovering the new thing called the Web'. I think the first .com sites started coming on line in 1993. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 08:48:16 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: SBC Communications Reports First-Quarter Earnings SBC Communications Reports First-Quarter Earnings Per Diluted Share of $1.50; $0.74 Before Cumulative Effects of Accounting Changes SAN ANTONIO--(BUSINESS WIRE)--April 24, 2003-- Company Records Best-Ever Quarterly Growth in DSL and Long Distance: Adds 270,000 DSL Internet Subscribers and 1.5 Million Long-Distance Lines in First Quarter Reaches California Long-Distance Retail Line Penetration of 13 Percent for Consumer, 10 Percent Overall by April 21 SBC Communications Inc. (NYSE:SBC) today reported first-quarter results that reflect robust growth in DSL and long-distance subscribers despite continued revenue pressure and access line loss due to the economic and competitive environments. For the three months ended March 31, 2003, SBC reported earnings per diluted share of $0.74 before the cumulative effects of accounting changes and $1.50 after the cumulative effects of accounting changes. This compares with first-quarter 2002 results of earnings per diluted share of $0.48 before the effects of accounting changes and a loss per diluted share of $(0.06) after the effects of accounting changes. First-quarter 2003 results include an after-tax gain of $0.32 per diluted share related to the sale of SBC's interest in Cegetel, a joint venture that owns 80 percent of a French wireless company. Accounting changes are discussed in detail below. First-quarter reported revenues totaled $10.3 billion, compared with $10.5 billion in the year-ago period. These figures do not include proportionate results from Cingular Wireless, the nationwide wireless company that is 60 percent owned by SBC. Cingular's revenues for the quarter were $3.6 billion, up 1.3 percent from the prior-year period. Revenues also were affected by an accounting change discussed below. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=33941129 ------------------------------ From: John Higdon Subject: Re: Can Copy Protected CDs Hurt Artists by Limiting Radio Play? Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 16:59:17 -0700 In article , Joey Lindstrom wrote: > But what's stopping the record labels from creating a separate > pressing of "radio station only" discs that are only sent to radio > stations and contain no copy protection? Seems trivial to me. And what would stop folks at the radio stations from duplicating those discs (without the "for radio station use only" warning, of course)? Remember, the 1000th generation copy of one of those discs is identical to the original. The record companies are perfectly aware of this. 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: Nothing would prevent it from happening, except that unlike your common garden-variety hacker/hustler sitting at his computer at home with only possibly a very thin line around his conscience to prevent massive rip offs, the radio station people are also presumably in business to make money and where they might go for something that would make it administrativly easier on them to do their jobs, they are far less likely to be interested in biting the hand which is feeding them (free records to play for their audience who hear the sponsor messages, etc). But the record companies could try Joey's suggestion to see if some sort of 'happy medium' could be reached, assuming of course the companies were realistic enough to know there would still be a little bit of 'leakage' of 'radio station play' copies of their things; hopefully a lot less than the general public. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Ed Ellers Subject: Re: Can Copy Protected CDs Hurt Artists by Limiting Radio Play? Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 21:49:32 -0400 Joey Lindstrom wrote: > But what's stopping the record labels from creating a separate > pressing of radio station only" discs that are only sent to radio > stations and contain no copy protection? Seems trivial to me. But those discs would quickly be taken home, ripped, and posted all over the place. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: See my other message in this issue. YES that would happen a little. To what extext is debateable, compared to the 'general public'. After all, radio stations are in business to make money also, which I would think means among other things, taking some care in how many people can hear the music other than hearing it over YOUR airwaves along with YOUR sponsor's messages, etc. PAT] ------------------------------ From: a_user2000@yahoo.com (Justin Time) Subject: Re: Area Code Statistics Date: 24 Apr 2003 07:12:09 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Dave Close wrote in message news:: >> How many millions of people does one area code serve? >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: ... >> But slightly under eight million number 'combinations' are possible >> per area code. I'll roughly guess that six million 'people' can be >> served. PAT] > Not around here. The population of the Los Angeles Area is around 12m > and we have at least nine area codes, more depending on where you draw > the line. So around here, at least, one area code doesn't serve much > more than 1m people. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Dave and the other guys who have > responded in this thread point out that in larger, more dense > metropolitan areas, the citizens are likely to use up more of > the possible 'number combinations' than are the citizens in the > lesser populated areas. PAT] There are other reasons more numbers are used in densly populated areas other than the assumption 'citizens are more likely to use up more.' The governmental body I consult to has 60K plus numbers in their centrex and they have run out of numbers with a little over 25,000 employees. A lot of the problem is due to hunt groups that hide behind a single number. As an example, our voice mail system has over 150 terminals hiding behind a single pilot number or the hundreds that can be assigned on DIDs. Then there are several call centers, mostly inbound. By the time you put a phone in most conference rooms, on tables in reception areas and begin to add in all the fax numbers and other digital/analog dial-up data lines - well, you get the picture! And that doesn't even begin to touch the point-to-point data circuits that aren't assigned a number but carry a circuit ID instead. Rodgers Platt [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yes, but ... the back lines in hunt groups do not have to have 'legitimate looking' numbers assigned to them. Many hunt groups other than a listed directory number have things like 174-xxxx and 175-xxxx as the 'numbers' for the back lines. No one is supposed to be dialing direct into those numbers anyway. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 21:09:05 -0600 From: nmclain@annsgarden.com Reply-To: nmclain@annsgarden.com Subject: Subject: Re: Area Code Statistics joe@obilivan.net wrote: > And, there are places like Lone Pine, California that > take 10,000 numbers to serve 500 lines. Or even smaller: in Nelson, Nevada, all numbers are in the format 702-291-00XX. So there are, at most, 100 active numbers. Neal McLain nmclain@annsgarden.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: They have some of those here in Kansas also. But then the breakdown is continued to the next digit (at least here). For example 620-289-4xxx (Tyro, Kansas) is not the same as 620-289-5xxx (another wide space in the road elsewhere close by. PAT] ------------------------------ From: amfowler@melbpc.org.au (Alan Fowler) Subject: Re: Pneumo Tubes Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 07:12:09 GMT Organization: Whitethorn Software Chuk Gleason wrote: > Actually, Pneumo tubes are still in common use many places; I've seen > them at the Home Depot store in Cary, NC (just outsida Raleigh) from > the cash registers to um, I've never asked where they go to. I'm > guessing other departments like Millwork, etc. Still works like a > champ. > Now for a _real_ blast from the past: In the small town of Gowanda, > NY, about 35 miles south of Buffalo, there was a clothing store named > "Himelein's"; I don't know when it was started, but it was in business > into the 1970's certainly. (For reference, I graduated high school in > 1976). In looking back at across the reaches of time, it was really > quite 'big' - it was two store-front widths. As I remember it, it had > those 'classic' details like pressed tin ceiling, probably wooden > floors, and ancient wooden display cases around the perimeter. In my > memory's eye, they were ancient even then! > What was unique about it was the cashier system; instead of the pneumo > tubes, each sales station had a little 'trolley' to the cashier in the > center back of the store. You made your selections, the sales clerk > wrote up the slip and put it and your money into a little basket in > the trolley. They then yanked the pull chain, the basket went up to > the track at the ceiling, and the trolley whizzzzzzzed along its track > to the main cashier, who completed the slip and made your change, set > it back in the trolley and sent it whizzzzzzing back to your clerk. > It was very impressive to many young kids! These were still in use in Melbourne in the 1960's, and I think 1970's. > As with so many quaint things, it was not labor or monetarily > efficient, and in a larger sense perhaps helped the demise of the > store (the 60's and 70's influx of big-box discount retail a la' > K-Mart, etc. notwithstanding!) > 4/22/03 11:26:43 PM, editor@telecom-digest.org wrote: >> From: Gordon S. Hlavenka >> Subject: Pneumo Tubes (was Re: Step-by-step Demonstrator Box From 1895) >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Pneumatic air tubes were a very common >> way to move small amounts of paper between offices even as late as >> 1990. A department store I did some work for in downtown Chicago ... Pneumatics tubes were used in Melbourne, Australia for many years to dispatch telegrams to BIG customers. Alan. ------------------------------ From: modorney@aol.comIgnoreMe (Mike O) Date: 24 Apr 2003 20:35:43 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Subject: Re: Pneumo Tubes > each sales station had a little 'trolley' to the cashier in the > center back of the store. You made your selections, the sales clerk > wrote up the slip and put it and your money into a little basket in > the trolley. They then yanked the pull chain, the basket went up to > the track at the ceiling, and the trolley whizzzzzzzed along its track > to the main cashier, who completed the slip and made your change, set > it back in the trolley and sent it whizzzzzzing back to your clerk Wallace Armour Hardware, Erie Boulevard, Schenectady, NY had the same system. Cheers, Mike O ------------------------------ From: Dale Farmer Subject: Re: Pneumo Tubes Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 20:42:19 -0400 Organization: Furry green fuzz in the back of the refrigerator Chuk Gleason wrote: > Actually, Pneumo tubes are still in common use many places; I've seen > them at the Home Depot store in Cary, NC (just outsida Raleigh) from > the cash registers to um, I've never asked where they go to. I'm > guessing other departments like Millwork, etc. Still works like a > champ. These tubes are standard in Home Depot stores, and most of the warehouse type stores. ( Costco, etc. ) They make it very easy for a cashier to toss excess cash and so on back to a central cash handling room. That way when there is a robbery, there is far less amount of cash at risk, and thus less incentive for robbers to hit them. They also make easy management practices and processes so it is far more difficult for any single employee to skim cash and remain undetected. The routing boxes that allow a carrier to go to it's chosen destination are interesting. Much more so in a hospital or some such where you have lots of possible destinations from a given station. unlike a retail store where everything is coming from or going to a central cashroom. --Dale [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: When there were many possible destinations for the carrier tubes, there had a be a 'tube exchange' or central routing area for them, like the Conrad Hilton Hotel in Chicago had. A person who worked in the basement 'tube receiving' area would see a tube on the conveyor belt coming at him, he would very quickly glance at it (the carrier tubes were clear plastic) and detirmine its destination, then shove it back up another tube to where it was to go. At the Hilton Hotel in Chicago the basement tube exchange had about two hundred 'inbound airtubes' which would fall down on the conveyor belt from various areas, and in another close by area (like the tube operator could turn around in his swivel chair) the outbound airtubes. He'd grab it off the conveyor belt, glance at it for a second or two which was usually long enough, then put it in his other hand, lean over in his swivel chair and stuff it in the proper outbound airhole. Occassionally the balance of tubes got out of whack; some locations had none, while other locations hoarded their empty tubes for future use. In those cases, the bereft of tubes people would (if they had at least one spare tube) put a note in it saying 'send me a few tubes' and shortly thereafter the guy in the exchange would stuff a few one after another up the person's hole who had asked for them. If the tube man himself ran out of any extras, he'd use the phone to call the various floor housekeepers and tell them to send the excess tubes back to me then a few seconds later with a crash several empty tubes would fall out of the holes onto the conveyor belt and the tubeman would replenish his stock. PAT] ------------------------------ From: John Higdon Subject: Re: MCI Sucks!!!! Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 18:50:16 -0700 In article , Al Gillis wrote: > Microwave Communications, Inc. is certainly the first name of that > company and, at one time, just when they began to see revenues that > peeked a little above the red some wags on the inside maintained that > MCI stood for "Money Comin' In!" My pet name is Mega-Criminal Infestation. The company: charges more than it quotes the customer, charges for services never rendered, charges for services that have been disconnected, virtually invented the practice of "slamming", and has been found to have been cooking the books at the corporate level, cheating not only its customers but its stockholders as well. Why anyone would ever do business with this company for any reason whatsoever is beyond me. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | Anytown, USA | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ From: John Higdon Subject: Re: eBay Goes to Court Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 18:57:19 -0700 In article , Joey Lindstrom wrote: > NORFOLK, Va. (AP) -- Online auction house eBay, one of the last > remaining winners from the dot-com bubble, is going on trial over the > very foundation of its success: the programs and procedures that run > the popular cyber-bazaar. I hope they win. It was gratifying to learn that they intend to stay here in town. If I worked for eBay, I could walk to work every morning. Be that as it may, the signs of the times were quite apparent a couple of months ago. I had to pop into the supermarket for some food items and discovered the streets jammed with traffic. Turns out that eBay posted openings for 100 programming people. Over five thousand showed up. It wasn't that long ago that a call for 100 programmers wouldn't attact five people. How times change. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | Anytown, USA | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ From: wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu (Garrett Wollman) Subject: Re: Massachusetts Local Telephone Rates Increase Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 03:18:28 UTC Organization: MIT Laboratory for Computer Science In article , John Higdon wrote: > It isn't an RBOC, and that's for sure. I don't think there are any RBOCs > left, since the term referred one of the Regional Bell Operating > Companies that were spun off from AT&T after divestiture. Verizon > (formerly GTE) was definitely NOT one of those. Verizon (formerly Bell Atlantic and NYNEX) was definitely two of those. It still legally *is* New England Telephone Company here in Massachusetts, according to the fine print on the back of my statement. -GAWollman -- 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: Dave Phelps Subject: Re: AT&T Local Access Charge Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 22:31:10 -0500 Organization: www.tippenring.com In article , kludge@panix.com says: > I have just received a little white card in my mail telling me that > since I am a customer of AT&T long distance services that I will begin > receiving a $1.95 in-state connection fee in order to help pay for the > cost of carrying in-state long distance and local toll calls. It's interesting that you mention in-state vs out-of-state carrier selection. AFAIK, you can't do that. You have an intralata carrier, and interlata carrier. If your state is in a single LATA, then you are right, but I don't know if there are any states that only have a single LATA. Maybe NJ or RI? In any case, there is no concept of intra-state and inter-state when it comes to LD carrier pre-selection AFAIK. -- 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 #409 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Apr 25 15:31:46 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h3PJVkV21466; Fri, 25 Apr 2003 15:31:46 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 15:31:46 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200304251931.h3PJVkV21466@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson cc: johnl@iecc.com Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #410 TELECOM Digest Fri, 25 Apr 2003 15:32:00 EDT Volume 22 : Issue 410 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Book Review: "Firewalls and Internet Security", Cheswick (Rob Slade) Re: Call Detail Records (Burris) Re: Call Detail Records (David Esan) Re: Area Code Statistics (Justin Time) Re: Area Code Statistics (Greg Monti) Re: Area Code Statistics (Mark Roberts) Re: Massachusetts Local Telephone Rates Increase (John Higdon) Re: Massachusetts Local Telephone Rates Increase (Bob Goudreau) Re: Can Copy Protected CDs Hurt Artists by Limiting Play? (John Higdon) Re: American Web Surfers Boost Traffic to Foreign Sites (G Mitchell) Why Do Some Businesses Use SAT Instead of Landline Networks? (Al Dykes) Re: Now Digital, Spy Camera Techniques (Charles Cryderman) ILECs Becoming CLECs, was Re: MA Local Telephone Rates (Stanley Cline) Re: AT&T Local Access Charge (tonypo1@sdc.cox.net) Re: Pneumo Tubes (Mark Brader) Re: Vonage Internet-Based Phone Service (joe@obilivan.net) Re: SBC Fraud Detection (joe@obilivan.net) Spam Disguised as News: It's Here! CHEAP PHONE CARDS! (Grace Tomeh) 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: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 08:36:54 -0800 Subject: Book Review: "Firewalls and Internet Security", Cheswick/Bellovin BKFRINSC.RVW 20030321 "Firewalls and Internet Security", William R. Cheswick/Steven M. Bellovin/Aviel D. Rubin, 2003, 0-201-63466-X, U$49.99/C$77.99 %A William R. Cheswick ches@cheswick.com %A Steven M. Bellovin smb@stevebellovin.com %A Aviel D. Rubin avi@rubin.net %C P.O. Box 520, 26 Prince Andrew Place, Don Mills, Ontario M3C 2T8 %D 2003 %G 0-201-63466-X %I Addison-Wesley Publishing Company %O U$49.99/C$77.99 416-447-5101 fax: 416-443-0948 %O http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/020163466X/robsladesinterne http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/020163466X/robsladesinte-21 %O http://www.amazon.ca/exec/obidos/ASIN/020163466X/robsladesin03-20 %P 433 p. %T "Firewalls and Internet Security: Repelling the Wily Hacker, Second Edition" As the first work to deal seriously and completely with the topic, the first edition of "Firewalls and Internet Security" was one of those classics that get known only by the last names of the authors, so as not to leave any possibility of confusion with books whose titles may be similar. When such a long time has elapsed between editions of a work such as this, it is more than possible that the field has moved on far enough that a minor updating of the material is simply not feasible. The authors are quite well aware of the new territory: where useful, the original structure has been retained, but otherwise, the book has essentially been rewritten. A huge undertaking, but the only practical course, in the circumstances. Part one establishes a starting point. Chapter one, an introduction, presents a number of basic, but worthwhile, security concepts. The operations of various components of the TCP/IP protocol suite are discussed, with the most serious security vulnerabilities helpfully highlighted, in chapters two (lower layers) and three (upper layers). The authors' thoughts on the security of the Web are amply expressed in the title of chapter four: "The Web: Threat or Menace?" Part two outlines the threats to networked machines. Chapter five describes a number of different types of attacks. A variety of tools for determining security weaknesses are listed in chapter six, alongside discussions of the relative costs/benefits of disclosure versus security by obscurity. Part three details security tools and utilities. Chapter seven reviews authentication concepts and techniques. Various network security systems are described in chapter eight. Part four gets us to firewalls and virtual private networks (VPNs) themselves. Chapter nine outlines the different types of firewalls. Basic filtering concepts are examined in chapter ten. Considerations for constructing and tuning your firewall are in chapter eleven. Tunnelling and VPNs are discussed in chapter twelve. Part five extends the isolated technology of firewalls into the application of protecting an organization. Network layout, and the implications thereof, is reviewed in chapter thirteen. Chapter fourteen deals with hardening of hosts. Chapter fifteen is a rather terse look at intrusion detection. Part six is entitled "Lessons Learned." The detection and tracing of "berferd" is described in chapter sixteen, along with the taking of the "CLARK" machine in chapter seventeen. In chapter eighteen, Kerberos and IPSec are used as examples of approaches to security of insecure networks. Chapter nineteen finishes with some ideas for work that yet needs to be done to help with the security of the Internet. The place of firewalls in regard to network security has broadened considerably in the past decade. This book does reflect that reality. Unfortunately, that breadth of topic has come at the expense of some depth in coverage. The result is a book that is definitely worthwhile as an introduction to the field, but which may no longer be suitable as a working reference. I must admit that, for some time, I have been recommending Chapman and Zwicky (cf. BKBUINFI.RVW) over Cheswick and Bellovin's original text, since "Building Internet Firewalls" seems to have the edge in terms of practicality. Upon reviewing this new edition of the classic, I would have to stick to that recommendation. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1994, 2003 BKFRINSC.RVW 20030321 rslade@sprint.ca rslade@vcn.bc.ca slade@victoria.tc.ca p1@canada.com "If you do buy a computer, don't turn it on." - Richards' 2nd Law ============= for back issues: [Victoria Freenet] site http://victoria.tc.ca/int-grps/books/techrev/ or http://www.victoria.tc.ca/techrev or http://victoria.tc.ca/techrev an alternate site has been provided by CuD and NIU at: http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade/ CISSP refs: [Victoria Freenet]mnbksccd.htm Security Dict.: [Victoria Freenet]secgloss.htm Security Educ.: [Victoria Freenet]comseced.htm Book reviews: [Victoria Freenet]mnbk.htm [Victoria Freenet]review.htm Partial/recent: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/techbooks/ Security Educ.: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/comseced/ Review mailing list: send mail to techbooks-subscribe@egroups.com ------------------------------ From: burris Subject: Re: Call Detail Records Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 10:53:07 -0400 Blake Sount wrote: > Hi all, > Does anybody know if there is a standard format for the CDR files? > I mean, name of fields, length and type of data (strings of characters > or numbers), etc. > Thank you very much. From my days, I remember that every switch had its own CDR format, but within the framework, it was somewhat programmable. burris ------------------------------ From: david_esan@hotmail.com (David Esan) Subject: Re: Call Detail Records Date: 25 Apr 2003 08:28:20 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ vhuertas@indra.es (Blake Sount) wrote in message news:: > Hi all, > Does anybody know if there is a standard format for the CDR files? > I mean, name of fields, length and type of data (strings of characters > or numbers), etc. The short answer is no. The company that I work for writes software to make reports from the CDR. They have a full time person just writing the interface portion for each switch. The format is different between companies that produce the switches, between models, between options within the models. Some are fairly straight forward and some give people a headache just wondering what the programmer was thinking when he wrote the code. ------------------------------ From: a_user2000@yahoo.com (Justin Time) Subject: Re: Area Code Statistics Date: 25 Apr 2003 06:44:04 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ a_user2000@yahoo.com (Justin Time) wrote in message news:: > There are other reasons more numbers are used in densly populated > areas other than the assumption 'citizens are more likely to use up > more.' The governmental body I consult to has 60K plus numbers in > their centrex and they have run out of numbers with a little over > 25,000 employees. A lot of the problem is due to hunt groups that > hide behind a single number. As an example, our voice mail system has > over 150 terminals hiding behind a single pilot number or the hundreds > that can be assigned on DIDs. Then there are several call centers, > mostly inbound. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yes, but ... the back lines in hunt > groups do not have to have 'legitimate looking' numbers assigned > to them. Many hunt groups other than a listed directory number have > things like 174-xxxx and 175-xxxx as the 'numbers' for the back lines. > No one is supposed to be dialing direct into those numbers anyway. PAT] That's true in a lot of cases Pat, but it is not always the case. We have had some huntgroups set up here for years that have assigned numbers to the terminals so you can dial each individually. The voicemail system I mentioned actually has over 150 "real" numbers assigned so the individual terminals can be tested. We have had problems with RNA (Ring, No Answer) and have gone to the practice of dialing the individual terminals to determine which ports are failing on the platform. The LEC (I won't mention them by name, but their name has a V in it) often only assigns fictious numbers on hunt groups coming over a hi-cap such as a T-1 or PRI. If we feed an EKSU with a hi-cap, then the terminals on the hi-cap are fictious, but the DIDs assigned to that hi-cap aren't. Rodgers Platt ------------------------------ From: Greg Monti Subject: Re: Area Code Statistics Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 00:40:26 -0400 On 23 April 2003, joe@obilivan.net wrote: > And, there are places like Lone Pine, California that take 10,000 numbers > to serve 500 lines. It's even less efficient that you indicate. According to http://www.areacode-info.com , the Lone Pine CA rate area has, get this, four prefixes, setting aside 40,000 numbers for those 500 residences: Prefix search Lone Pine, CA Prefixes found: 4 NPA-NXX SWITCH OCN LATA 760-264 LSANCAVADS2 8827 FOCAL COMM CORP CA 730 760-614 BSHPCAAW1MD 5024 WESTERN WIRELESS-CA 730 760-875 LSANCARC5KD 7379 PAC-WEST TELECOMM 730 760-876 LNPNCAXFRS5 2302 VERIZON CALIFORNIA 730 The vast majority of the users in the town are, I'm sure, connected to 760-876 numbers operated by Verizon (nee GTE). The other three companies, two of whom appear to be landline-based (not wireless), each have a prefix "just in case" they someday get a customer in Lone Pine. Their switches are not located in Lone Pine and they don't need to be. Focal's and Pac-West's switches appear to be physically in Los Angeles. Western Wireless' switch is in Bishop. Those numbers are set aside for Lone Pine and cannot be used by Los Angeles or Bishop customers (unless one of those customers, for some reason, wants a foreign exchange line that makes it look like he's in Lone Pine). Later, our Moderator noted: > Liberal, Kansas a bit to the south in a different county has its own > exchange which is pretty full Don't look now, but Liberal has 11 prefixes, occupying 110,000 phone numbers. Liberal, KS Prefixes found: 11 NPA-NXX SWITCH OCN LATA 620-309 LBRLKS04DS1 9533 SOUTHWESTERN BELL 532 620-370 ULYSKS03CM0 1764 ELKHART TEL CO INC 532 620-391 DDCYKSAYCM0 6710 RCC HOLDINGS, INC. 532 620-482 LBRLKS04DS1 9533 SOUTHWESTERN BELL 532 620-604 LBRLKS04XMD 8983 KMC TELECOM III KS 532 620-621 DDCYKSAY1MD 9533 SOUTHWESTERN BELL 532 620-624 LBRLKS04DS1 9533 SOUTHWESTERN BELL 532 620-626 LBRLKS04DS1 9533 SOUTHWESTERN BELL 532 620-629 LBRLKS04DS1 9533 SOUTHWESTERN BELL 532 620-655 MNRGKSABCM1 8704 ALLTEL KANSAS - KS 532 620-690 DDCYKSADAMD 6944 PANHANDLE TELECOMM 532 > like our Independence, and its 620-331 Independence, KS Prefixes found: 10 NPA-NXX SWITCH OCN LATA 620-205 INDPKSMADS0 6267 UNITED STATES CEL KS 532 620-330 INDPKSMADS0 9533 SOUTHWESTERN BELL 532 620-331 INDPKSMADS0 9533 SOUTHWESTERN BELL 532 620-332 INDPKSMADS0 9533 SOUTHWESTERN BELL 532 620-454 PSBGKSAQ1MD 6934 AIRPHONE, INC. 532 620-577 WCHTKSMBX3Y 2240 LEVEL 3 COMM-KS 532 620-714 WCHTKSMR00W 8983 KMC TELECOM III KS 532 620-715 WCHUKSHHDS0 7187 ADELPHIA BUSINESS KS 532 620-779 MNRGKSABCM1 8704 ALLTEL KANSAS - KS 532 620-926 PRSSKSBLAMD 6677 DOBSON CELL SYS INC 532 Fortunately, explosive prefix growth like this has ground to a virtual halt. But anybody who has a prefix assigned to them is holding on to it unless regulators take it away. Greg Monti, New York, New York, USA gmonti@mindspring.com greg.monti@verizon.net [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, you say Liberal has 11 prefixes for a community of seventeen thousand people, but Independence has 'only' ten prefixes for eight or nine thousand people. That is rather amazing. In the above list, 620-926 (shown as 'Dobson') is the Dobson Cellular tower in Liberty, a town of a couple hundred people a few miles east of here. But the town of Liberty is mostly 620-485-3xxx. There is no city government as such in Liberty; the phone book tells me to refer to 'Montgomery County' listings, all of whose numbers are without exception 620-330, even if they are in Coffeyville, Caney or Independence. I think 620-330 is a 'wide area' prefix allowing free calls to it from anywhere in the county. Cingular cell phones are on 620-330 also. City of Independence government is on 620-332 and other cellphones are on 332. *EVERYONE ELSE* in town is on 620-EDison-1. Oh yes, the Arco Corporate building at 8th and Myrtle (which is now officially called 'Independence Corporate' since Arco moved out of town and went bankrupt; they made a donation of the entire building to the city) is also on 332. All the tenants in there have 620-332 phones, since most tenants there are government or quasi government agencies. I have never heard anyone refer to it by the true name, 'Independence Corporate'; most people just say "I am going over to the Arco Building for whatever reason." It has not been 'Arco' for many years. The one tenant there who does not have 620-332 is our local ISP, TerraWorld.net and he has a couple of 332 numbers but his dialups are all on 331. He, by the way, also has the 620-205 number referred to in Greg's list above, since he has been trying (not too successfully) for a few months now to start an alternate to SWB called 'Prairie States Telephone Company.' PAT] ------------------------------ From: markrobt@hotmail.com (Mark Roberts) Subject: Re: Area Code Statistics Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 03:38:22 -0000 Organization: 1.94 meters John Higdon had written: > It is almost a badge of distinction these days to live in a major > metropolitan area and have an area code that actually looks like an > area code and a prefix that looks like a prefix. I think even better is to be able to trace the prefix back to its named version. I was able to do that in Kansas City (EMerson 1) and Chicago (RAVenswood 8) but not in San Francisco with a 701- prefix. (My current phone number does have a prefix that looks like a prefix ... as does my cell phone number.) When I was back in Missouri for a funeral last month, I did a little research on the town where the Robertses settled back before the Civil War. (They had very tiny phone numbers then. :) I knew that there had been an area code change back when those changes were rare. It turns out that the town itself, Centralia, did not have an area code change, but two neighboring exchanges which were in the Centralia extended calling area *did* move from 816 to 314 in 1971. Oddly, that also forced Centralia to change its prefix from the magnificent sounding "EMpire 2" that it had acquired in 1954 to the nameless 682 that it has today. In return, Centralia finally got DDD. > I'll be enjoying that until my area code changes to "669" as it will > in the near future, thanks to the ninnies who scuttled overlays in > California. I just wonder why we don't give it up, go to 10-digit dialing everywhere, and forget about the leading "1". Oh, oh, I bet *that* has been discussed here before ... Mark Roberts | "In 2001, Google bought the Usenet discussion forums." Oakland, Cal.| -- Associated Press dispatch published in the NO HTML MAIL | San Francisco Chronicle, 2-19-2003 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Let's see, have we discussed that in the past? . By the way RAVenswood-8 in Chicago also can be used to spell PATrick and I had 312-PATRICK as my phone number many years ago (like in the sixties) when I lived in that town. I guess RAVenswood 8-7425 spells 'Patrick', right? I wish I had held on to that number. All that has changed in that area is the area code. PAT] ------------------------------ From: John Higdon Subject: Re: Massachusetts Local Telephone Rates Increase Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 21:00:31 -0700 In article , wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu (Garrett Wollman) wrote: > Verizon (formerly Bell Atlantic and NYNEX) was definitely two of > those. > It still legally *is* New England Telephone Company here in > Massachusetts, according to the fine print on the back of my > statement. And of course the venerable New York Telephone is now Verizon, NYT formerly being part of "The Nationwide Bell System". I forgot about that. But generally speaking, Verizon is the descendent of GTE in most areas, GTE NOT being part of Bell. GTE was very much considered the anti-Bell. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | Anytown, USA | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 06:22:54 PDT From: Bob Goudreau Reply-To: BobGoudreau@nc.rr.com Subject: Re: Massachusetts Local Telephone Rates Increase Garrett Wollman wrote: > In article , John Higdon > wrote: >> It isn't an RBOC, and that's for sure. I don't think there are any RBOCs >> left, since the term referred one of the Regional Bell Operating >> Companies that were spun off from AT&T after divestiture. Verizon >> (formerly GTE) was definitely NOT one of those. > Verizon (formerly Bell Atlantic and NYNEX) was definitely two of > those. You're both right, of course; Verizon was formed when Bell Atlantic bought GTE a few years after purchasing Nynex. But Garrett is more correct, since GTE was merely the tail to BA's dog (BA had more revenue and subscribers, and as the purchasing company, subsumed GTE). And for the topic in question, the NET-->Nynex-->BA-->Verizon link is what matters, since NET (not GTE) was the ILEC in most (all?) of Massachusetts. Bob Goudreau Cary, NC ------------------------------ From: John Higdon Subject: Re: Can Copy Protected CDs Hurt Artists by Limiting Radio Play? Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 21:08:27 -0700 In article , Ed Ellers wrote: > Joey Lindstrom wrote: >> But what's stopping the record labels from creating a separate >> pressing of radio station only" discs that are only sent to radio >> stations and contain no copy protection? Seems trivial to me. > But those discs would quickly be taken home, ripped, and posted all > over the place. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: See my other message in this issue. YES > that would happen a little. To what extext is debateable, compared to > the 'general public'. After all, radio stations are in business to > make money also, which I would think means among other things, taking > some care in how many people can hear the music other than hearing it > over YOUR airwaves along with YOUR sponsor's messages, etc. PAT] But radio stations, particularly in the age of consolidation, are run by kids. The kids don't have any such concerns. You can have all the warnings you want, but there is no way station management can control what gets duplicated and slipped out the door. The incentive to do this would be greatly reduced if the product the customer now pays good money for could be ripped and copied for use in various players, but the companies are making their own beds by hamstringing their customers. You can trust that if the free product sent to radio stations is superior to the crippled product that is SOLD to the sucker customers, there will be substantial leakage. Furthermore, this practice would require two separate CD press runs, which is actually sort of expensive for ONE album release. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | Anytown, USA | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ From: George Mitchell Subject: Re: American Web Surfers Boost Traffic to Foreign News Sites Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 09:47:06 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Speaking of twelve hundred percent > increases in traffic, do any of the old timers here remember that > month in 1993 (at the very end of the 'golden age of the internet' > when a fourteen *thousand* percent increase in traffic in internet > web sites was reported as everyone -- literally everyone -- started > 'discovering the new thing called the Web'. I think the first .com > sites started coming on line in 1993. PAT] dec.com was created 30 September 1985; ibm.com was created 19 March 1986 as was sun.com. Obviously they did not have web sites at those times, but they might have been running that brand new information service called gopher. -- George Mitchell (obfuscated email address) ------------------------------ From: adykes@panix.com (Al Dykes) Subject: Why do Some Businesses use SAT Dishes Instead of Landline Networks? Date: 25 Apr 2003 10:43:58 -0400 Organization: PANIX -- Public Access Networks Corp. I drove along what seemed like 20 miles of auto dealerships and major brand gas stations yesterday and, as usual, saw Sat dishes on all of these establishments. I began to wonder how much data a gas station/24-hour Mart really needs to exchange daily, let alone the need for any "real time" networking. And also, why a national frame relay network isn't being used. What's the tradeoff between a Sat network and a frame network, and what data to these businesses send daily? I'd guess once you've justified a full time bidirectional network you could bring the credit card clearing system in-house and save bucks, but by itself wouldn't be a justification. Just curious. Al Dykes adykes@panix.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Twenty miles of auto dealerships and gas stations, eh? You must have been driving down Western Avenue in Chicago then. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Charles Cryderman Subject: Re: Now Digital, Spy Camera Techniques Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 11:36:07 -0400 Master TD Editor, First I wish to say, good to see you back on the air Pat. I have missed reading the digest and was very worried the reason I wasn't getting it was due to a health issue with you. Glad to see that was not the case. Anyway, your comment in V22#404 on "Now Digital, Spy Camera Technology Widens Gaze" > A police officer cannot stand in your bedroom and observe you, but > he certainly can stand on a street corner or by a cash register in a > store; anywhere there is not or should not be any 'expectation of > privacy', or anywhere no judicial 'search warrant' has been issued > is perfectly fair game for the placement of a camera for others to > watch. In actuality a Police Office can not just choose to stand next to a cash register in a store to monitor everyone, at least not with out permission of the owner or manager. On the other hand they, the owner or manager, can install a camera above recording what transpires. What I would want is a statement at the entrance of the store that recording devise are present and in use. This way I can make an informed decision to enter and conduct business or not. Now some would say that is not a good idea because it would also warn potential "bad guys" and discourage them as well. I would see this as a good thing myself. We citizens need to understand and remember, the "Constitution of the United States" governs what the government can do, not private citizens or businesses. Again I am happy to see you are still well (as well as that can be). Chip Cryderman [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have been informed -- politely in some cases and not so politely in others -- that I am one sick puppy. My deseased brain is gradually getting the best of me. You are correct in your example: Cash registers in stores are not public areas. They are the property of the store owner. I should have said the Police Officer cannot stand and view without permission in any private area (like bedrooms, etc). As a member of the public, however, he can stand without any invitation or permission in any public space to observe things. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Stanley Cline Subject: ILECs Becoming CLECs, was Re: MA Local Telephone Rates Increase Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 11:47:43 -0400 Organization: Roamer1 Communications - Dunwoody, GA, USA Reply-To: sc1-news@roamer1.org On 24 Apr 2003 05:01:58 -0000, johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) wrote: > It's possible but at the moment uncommon for the ILEC in one area to > set up as a CLEC in another area and go poach customers. It's certainly uncommon with the RBOCs (with the notable exceptions of SBC's SBC Telecom; Verizon's Verizon Avenue, which provides services to residents of apartment communities in some non-VZ cities such as Atlanta; and BellSouth, which provides service to a few large business customers in independent areas in AL, FL, KY, and NC) and very small independents, but it's quite common with mid-sized independents: - TDS's TDS Metrocom: CLEC in many Midwestern cities, including their HQ city of Madison, WI - ALLTEL: CLEC in various Plains and Southeastern cities, usually those adjacent to large ALLTEL ILEC or wireless markets, such as Charlotte and Omaha, and of course ALLTEL's HQ city of Little Rock - Commonwealth Telephone's CTSI: CLEC in most of PA - CT Communications of Concord NC: CLEC in much of NC as well as the Discover Mills mall (only) in suburban Atlanta (Mills Corp. has another mall in CT's ILEC area in NC, and lots of fiber runs down I-85 between the Charlotte and Atlanta areas ;) ) - Ben Lomand RTC in middle TN: CLEC in the city limits of McMinnville and Sparta, where Frontier provides service (Ben Lomand only got the unincorporated areas around those towns way back when -- but you wouldn't know it from looking at where their McMinnville ILEC CO is; it's *inside* the city limits, two blocks from Frontier's CO!) - EATEL in Louisiana: CLEC in most of Louisiana, and IIRC bought a failed CLEC that served other states (Actel) as well - etc. Then there's the *really* odd situation of companies that are primarily CLECs owning ILECs; I can think of only two such cases off the top of my head: - Illinois Consolidated (before McLeodUSA spun them off, that is) - Interstate/Valley Telephone in the West Point GA/Lanett AL area is owned by Knology, a major Southeastern cable overbuilder (yes, Knology itself provides cable in competition with Charter in the area, but doesn't compete against IVT for phone customers since, after all, they're the same company) -SC Stanley Cline -- sc1 at roamer1 dot org -- http://www.roamer1.org/ "Never put off until tomorrow what you can do today. There might be a law against it by that time." -/usr/games/fortune ------------------------------ From: tonypo1@sdc.cox.net Subject: Re: AT&T Local Access Charge Organization: The Ace Tomatoe and Cement Company Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 04:14:06 GMT In article , tippenring@deadspam.com says: > In article , kludge@panix.com > says: >> I have just received a little white card in my mail telling me that >> since I am a customer of AT&T long distance services that I will begin >> receiving a $1.95 in-state connection fee in order to help pay for the >> cost of carrying in-state long distance and local toll calls. > It's interesting that you mention in-state vs out-of-state carrier > selection. AFAIK, you can't do that. You have an intralata carrier, and > interlata carrier. If your state is in a single LATA, then you are > right, but I don't know if there are any states that only have a single > LATA. Maybe NJ or RI? In any case, there is no concept of intra-state > and inter-state when it comes to LD carrier pre-selection AFAIK. RI only has 401 at the moment. But the business district of Providence is about to undergo a building boom, there are 12-15 parcels that have proposed projects, and one definite is GTECH's world headquarters that had formerly been in West Greenwich. That means lots more phone lines. At last count, there are 592 exchanges defined and there had been a filing with NANPA that was rescinded in 2002, when the economy started souring. But it'll come back, I figure they'll have to do something in a couple years. Right now my in-state LD only default to Verizon, but if I try to dial outside that region with 1+10D I get a message that tells me it's not set up for that. I use a dial-around for out of state LD and sometimes for in-state because it'd be cheaper than making a 100 minute call at .07 a minute with Verizon. About the only time a Verizon toll gets rung up is if I or my SO dial a number we're unfamiliar with since 7D toll dialing is in effect here. ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Pneumo Tubes Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 01:13:48 EDT From: msb@vex.net (Mark Brader) > Actually, Pneumo tubes are still in common use many places ... On the subject of pneumatic transportation, some readers might find my article of interest. (There's nothing particularly telecom-related in it, though.) Mark Brader, "It is impossible. Solution follows..." Toronto, msb@vex.net -- Richard Heathfield ------------------------------ From: joe@obilivan.net Subject: Re: Vonage Internet-Based Phone Service Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 05:12:27 -0700 Organization: Cox Communications I've had Vonage for about two months now and I love it. Then again, I am on a cable modem, which exceeds Vonage's uplink requirements. Your DSL must be bad, because (if I recall correctly) Vonage wants about 100 kb uplink. The worst DSL is suppose to do 128 kb uplink. The quality of Vonage in my situation is as good as any wireline phone. On some calls I hear a faint echo of my voice with a slight delay, but the other party does not hear it. Most of the time, though, it is just fine although there may be a tad delay. But, not as noticable as a satellite long distance connection. And, no access charges, no surcharges, etc, etc. Just $1.35 federal access charge and $4.99 for a virtual number that I elected to add to my primary number. Oliver Penn wrote: > I can only find one previous posting in this group on this subject. > It was more conjecture than information. I live in what must be one > of the smallest markets where DSL is available. Speeds vary but > generally, it is not very fast. Vonage home page testing says I need > to use their speed booster. > Only news papers seem to cover it. The Dallas Morning News writer > "After testing the service for several weeks ..." recently said it > was simple. > Do any of the knowledgable telephone folks in this group have any > recent personal experience with this service, especially with 'slow' > DSL connections? > Oliver(recovering telephone guy)Penn > Gun Barrel City, TX ------------------------------ From: joe@obilivan.net Subject: Re: SBC Fraud Detection Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 05:17:19 -0700 Organization: Cox Communications > ... to your initial question 'how do fraud control algorythyms work' > or words to that effect, they work pretty well. The new and improved > ESS tells authorities a lot of details they could not get in the > old days, including who calls whom, for how long, how often, etc. PAT] I read where the feds are concerned about Vonage because the calls are untraceable provided the Vonage caller blocks Caller ID. Thus, I doubt Vonage is being a Mother Hen (as in chicken s**t) like SBC is doing. ------------------------------ From: phonecardsusa@takoe.com (Grace Tomeh) Subject: Spam Passing as a Nes Item: It's Here! CHEAP PHONE CARDS! Date: 24 Apr 2003 21:49:50 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Calling rates start from $0.03 per minute. No connection fee! Toll-Free order line: 1-888-560-2251. Online order: http://www.phone-cards-usa.com/ ; http://cheap-phone-cards.netfirms.com/ ; http://www.callingcards4us.com/ [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I thought you would all appreciate this closing 'news item' for today. I got at least a dozen copies of it in my mail 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 #410 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat Apr 26 16:19:50 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h3QKJnB27587; Sat, 26 Apr 2003 16:19:50 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2003 16:19:50 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200304262019.h3QKJnB27587@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson cc: johnl@iecc.com Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #411 TELECOM Digest Sat, 26 Apr 2003 16:20:00 EDT Volume 22 : Issue 411 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Area Code Statistics (Steven J. Sobol) Re: Area Code Statistics (Mark Roberts) Re: Massachusetts Local Telephone Rates Increase (Mark Roberts) Re: What Does DSL Connect to at the Other End? (John R. Levine) Re: American Web Surfers Boost Traffic to Foreign Sites (Scott Dorsey) Re: (Fred R. Goldstein) Re: AT&T Local Access Charge (Linc Madison) Re: AT&T Local Access Charge (Michael D. Sullivan) Re: AT&T Local Access Charge (Al Iverson) Re: AT&T Local Access Charge (Steve Michelson) Re: States and LATAs, was Re: AT&T Local Access Charge (John R. Levine) Re: Wire Recorders (Martin McCormick) Re: ILECs Becoming CLECs, was Re: MA Local Telephone Rates (G Wollman) Looking For Hands Free Telephone System For Entire House (OK) 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: Steven J. Sobol Subject: Re: Area Code Statistics Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 19:44:36 -0000 Organization: JustThe.net LLC From Greg Monti (gmonti@mindspring.com): > On 23 April 2003, joe@obilivan.net wrote: >> And, there are places like Lone Pine, California that take 10,000 numbers >> to serve 500 lines. > It's even less efficient that you indicate. According to > http://www.areacode-info.com , the Lone Pine CA rate area has, get > this, four prefixes, setting aside 40,000 numbers for those 500 > residences: > Prefix search > Lone Pine, CA > Prefixes found: 4 > NPA-NXX SWITCH OCN LATA > 760-264 LSANCAVADS2 8827 FOCAL COMM CORP CA 730 > 760-614 BSHPCAAW1MD 5024 WESTERN WIRELESS-CA 730 > 760-875 LSANCARC5KD 7379 PAC-WEST TELECOMM 730 > 760-876 LNPNCAXFRS5 2302 VERIZON CALIFORNIA 730 Let's call a spade a spade. At least ten thousand of those numbers are allocated to CellularONE (Western Wireless). I'll accept that maybe having Focal *and* that other company providing *landlines* in addition to Verizon is overkill, though. Steve Sobol/CTO/JustThe.net LLC/Mentor On The Lake (Cleveland), OH/888.480.4NET "This country has a strong ethical foundation, but... I hesitate to say that erosion has set in, but it is clear that more and more of what we are is being built on sand and not on that foundation." - G. Waleed Kavalec, in SPAM-L ------------------------------ From: markrobt@hotmail.com (Mark Roberts) Subject: Re: Area Code Statistics Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 20:55:54 -0000 Organization: 1.94 meters nmclain@annsgarden.com had written: > joe@obilivan.net wrote: >> And, there are places like Lone Pine, California that >> take 10,000 numbers to serve 500 lines. > Or even smaller: in Nelson, Nevada, all numbers are in the format > 702-291-00XX. So there are, at most, 100 active numbers. Then there is the case of Centerville, Iowa, population around 6,000 for about the last forty years. When I was living there, there were phone numbers of the following form: 856-2xxx, 856-3xxx, 856-6xxx, 856-8xxx, 856-9xxx. You never saw phone numbers of the form 856-4xxx or 856-5xxx. In town, dialing the last five digits was sufficient. To dial neighboring exchanges, seven-digit dialing was required. Three of those exchanges were 647-xxxx, 649-xxxx, and 658-xxxx. After I moved away, sometime in the 1970s, Centerville opened up the 437-xxxx prefix. I always had wondered why a town of that size needed two exchanges so early on. But recently, I think I figured it out. Centerville may have needed more phone numbers, evidently, but if five-digit dialing were preserved, 856-4xxx and 856-5xxx could be confused with the nearby exchanges. 6-4xxx could be a Plano or Mystic number that was incomplete, or it could be a Centerville number that was complete. So, I think, 437-xxxx was opened up to provide more numbers and, presumably, to preserve five-digit dialing without causing collisions with the 6-4xxx or 6-5xxx series. I don't know if Centerville still had five-digit dialing by that time. But if it did, 437-nxxx would work as long as n != 2 (because there was a neighboring 724- exchange) and five-digit dialing would still work. It doesn't answer the question of why 6-0xxx, 6-1xxx, or 6-7xxx wouldn't have worked, but I am assuming the mechanical switches for that exchange may have had limitations. For example, long-distance dialing access would be "11", "12" or even "13" depending on some arbitrary factor unbeknowst to subscribers of the Iowa State Telephone Company (later Continental). Well, as Anne Elk would have said, "That is my theory, this is mine" and it may make just about as much sense. Mark Roberts | "In 2001, Google bought the Usenet discussion forums." Oakland, Cal.| -- Associated Press dispatch published in the NO HTML MAIL | San Francisco Chronicle, 2-19-2003 ------------------------------ From: markrobt@hotmail.com (Mark Roberts) Subject: Re: Massachusetts Local Telephone Rates Increase Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 20:26:59 -0000 Organization: 1.94 meters Bob Goudreau had written: > Garrett Wollman wrote: >> John Higdon wrote: >>> It isn't an RBOC, and that's for sure. I don't think there are any RBOCs >>> left, since the term referred one of the Regional Bell Operating >>> Companies that were spun off from AT&T after divestiture. Verizon >>> (formerly GTE) was definitely NOT one of those. >> Verizon (formerly Bell Atlantic and NYNEX) was definitely two of >> those. > You're both right, of course; Verizon was formed when Bell Atlantic > bought GTE a few years after purchasing Nynex. But Garrett is more > correct, since GTE was merely the tail to BA's dog (BA had more > revenue and subscribers, and as the purchasing company, subsumed GTE). GTE/Verizon has also bailed out of entire states, particularly in the Midwest. GTE exited Iowa even before the Verizon merger; Verizon ditched all its Missouri operations last year. Mark Roberts | "In 2001, Google bought the Usenet discussion forums." Oakland, Cal.| -- Associated Press dispatch published in the NO HTML MAIL | San Francisco Chronicle, 2-19-2003 ------------------------------ Date: 25 Apr 2003 20:07:01 -0000 From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: What Does DSL Connect to at the Other End? Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA In article was written: > I have DSL service between my home and Stanford University's campus > network, with the actual service provided by SBC/Pac Bell; ... > A non-Stanford family member now wants to go direct to AOL via the > Internet using the same DSL connection, without going through Stanford > or piggybacking on either of our Stanford accounts. > Is this feasible, or meaningful? Sure. When you're on the net, you're on the net, and it doesn't really matter what ISP makes the connection for you. It's mostly a historical coincidence that people usually get their e-mail account from the same provider where they get their dialup or broadband access. AOL is an odd (albeit popular) hybrid of a proprietary online service and an ISP. As Pat suggests, your family member can connect to AOL's online service over your existing account. It's one of the options on the AOL initial connection screen. I do something similar for my AOL account and it works great. If she primarily connects that way, she can switch from the usual unlimited dialup to "bring your own access" which is half the price. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 330 5711 johnl@iecc.com Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner http://iecc.com/johnl Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well John, it was and still is not plain to me if SBC puts him 'on the net' whereupon he types something and *then* gets connected to Stanford or if SBC merely carries his traffic over to Stanford who then deals with him entirely. As I said, and you agreed, if he is in fact on SBC and happens to choose Stanford to do some work, that's one thing. As I said and you also agreed, in that case let his family member do as they please, and let them take an alias name for email as well at no extra charge. That is what I do. SBC Global takes me from here in Independence to Wichita which is their local ISP. From there, as I choose, I go to AOL, various web sites or whatever. Mostly however I use 'ssh' (I used to use telnet but the admins at LCS/MIT asked me to begin using 'ssh' which is more secure these days) to go to 'ssh massis.lcs.mit.edu -lptownson' which is to say I use a secure form of telnet to login to massis under my user name where I then work on the Digest using the Unix computer at LCS/MIT. If that is what our correspondent does then god bless his family member. Let then tap whatever keys are needed to wake up the modem and network, and go wherever the person wants. What he may have meant however was that when he sits down at the computer, Stanford, via SBC, hands him a Stanford.edu prompt right off the bat, and he wanted to know how to let his family member go to wherever (like AOL) from there. Now, I could do that also ... I could use the massis.lcs.mit.edu> prompt and do lynx and go looking around all over. But I do not usually do that. My status here at massis is that of guest user to work on the Digest, and I am not going to impose on the admins here by using LCS/MIT to go off their net to other sites. I could; I have, but not routinely. And getting a separate email name/box would be out of the question. I would have to do it as 'ptownson'. Maybe that is our correspondent's problem also: he is 'essentially' using a Stanford account, and limited by Stanford's rules as to *who* can use the computer and *where* they may connect and *what* commands they may issue, and who they can be, username-wise. I don't know. I hope, for the sake of his family member it is the former, and (if Stanford is paying the bill) they are somewhat 'loose' about others in the family using the system. No one can tell *me* what to connect with on a computer I pay to maintain, but as soon as I tell SBC I want to connect (telnet, ssh) to LCS/MIT then I become obligated to follow *their* rules. Maybe our corresponent will clarify this for us a little: who pays for the computer; who pays for the connection. That will help us to make some definite rules. PAT] ------------------------------ From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) Subject: Re: American Web Surfers Boost Traffic to Foreign News Sites Date: 25 Apr 2003 17:24:18 -0400 Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000) In article , George Mitchell wrote: >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Speaking of twelve hundred percent >> increases in traffic, do any of the old timers here remember that >> month in 1993 (at the very end of the 'golden age of the internet' >> when a fourteen *thousand* percent increase in traffic in internet >> web sites was reported as everyone -- literally everyone -- started >> 'discovering the new thing called the Web'. I think the first .com >> sites started coming on line in 1993. PAT] > dec.com was created 30 September 1985; ibm.com was created 19 March > 1986 as was sun.com. Obviously they did not have web sites at those > times, but they might have been running that brand new information > service called gopher. And of course these guys (at least DEC) had stuff on the net before there were fully qualified domain names. "TELNET DECWRL" was no problem since we had DECWRL in the hosts file that we got monthly from the NIC. --scott "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 17:55:32 -0400 From: Fred R. Goldstein Subject: Re: American Web Surfers Who Boost Traffic George Mitchell wrote, > dec.com was created 30 September 1985; ibm.com was created 19 March > 1986 as was sun.com. Obviously they did not have web sites at those > times, but they might have been running that brand new information >service called gopher. No, we didn't do Gopher at DEC. Before 1985 there were host names, not domain names; DEC's ARPAnet (the civilian part of Uncle's Internet) members included DEC-MARLBORO (a big TOPS-20 machine in Marlborough, MA), DECVAX (in Nashua, NH) and I think DECWRL in Palo Alto. Maybe a couple more. The rest of us at DEC could get email passed through these. Internal networking at DEC was far advanced by 1985, being based on DECnet Phase IV. As implemented on VMS (it also ran on lots of other OSs, including Unix), this was more transparent than TCP/IP-based networks. While it used a fixed host table, not a name service, you could access a remote file by just prepending the node name thusly (using an example the node DONJON): DONJON::USER$1:[FGOLDSTEIN]THE_FILE_NAME.HERE . That worked for COPY, and also for most file-opening operations, sort of the way SMB operates on PC networks nowadays. We didn't have a "web", but DEChies spent inordinate amounts of time using NOTES. No, that's not the ugly Lotus hack which was developed later by somebody who had worked on the DEC thing. DECNOTES was a "computer-mediated conferencing" system that, like Usenet, permitted freewheeling discussion, but which kept the whole discussion (a "notesfile") on one server, with moderators who could control access and delete if necessary. There were thousands of internal Notesfiles by the late 1980s on all sorts of topics, some of them actually related to work. It was also a tool for product developers, since it provided a very good way to post questions, make comments, share ideas, etc., while, in the case of software, the source code itself remained in a separate network repository using, say, CMS (an RCS-like utility). In some respects today's Internet has less utility than DECnet had then. Of course neither corporate networks nor Uncle's Internet permitted either advertising or spam. But abUsenet was already pretty smelly. Fred Goldstein k1io fgoldstein "at" ionary.com ionary Consulting http://www.ionary.com/ ------------------------------ From: Linc Madison Subject: Re: AT&T Local Access Charge Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 16:36:39 -0700 Organization: LincMad.com Consulting Reply-To: Telecom@LincMad.com In article , wrote: > In article , > tippenring@deadspam.com says: >> In article , kludge@panix.com >> says: >>> I have just received a little white card in my mail telling me >>> that since I am a customer of AT&T long distance services that I >>> will begin receiving a $1.95 in-state connection fee in order to >>> help pay for the cost of carrying in-state long distance and local >>> toll calls. >> It's interesting that you mention in-state vs out-of-state carrier >> selection. AFAIK, you can't do that. You have an intralata carrier, >> and interlata carrier. If your state is in a single LATA, then you >> are right, but I don't know if there are any states that only have >> a single LATA. Maybe NJ or RI? In any case, there is no concept of >> intra-state and inter-state when it comes to LD carrier >> pre-selection AFAIK. > RI only has 401 at the moment ... Actually, Rhode Island has only 130 at the moment. We're talking about LATAs, which are completely independent of area codes. All of Rhode Island is in LATA number 130, and I didn't see any spillover into Massachusetts or Connecticut. All of Delaware is a single LATA, but that LATA also includes a small portion of Pennsylvania, including an insignificant little town called "Philadelphia." In fact, the unfortunate folks in Delaware live in a LATA that is called "the Philadelphia LATA." Many long-distance companies ask you if you want to designate them as your "state-to-state" carrier and/or your "in-state" carrier, but what they really mean is your inter-LATA and intra-LATA carrier. For example, if you live in Brainerd, Minnesota, and you have XYZ as your "state-to-state" carrier (really inter-LATA), but PDQ as your "in-state" carrier (really intra-LATA), you will use XYZ to call Minneapolis, but PDQ to call Fargo, North Dakota, if you dial both as one-plus calls without a carrier code. The Fargo-Brainerd and Philadelphia LATAs are rather extreme examples of LATAs that straddle state lines, but there are also many other places where one or two small towns are in the LATA of the adjacent state. The Los Angeles LATA includes a small part of Arizona. As for New Jersey, it has three entire LATAs: north Jersey, Trenton- Camden, and Atlantic City. California has ten LATAs, some of which include only part of one area code, but others with all or part of several area codes. The San Francisco LATA includes all of 408, 415, 510, 650, and 925, plus almost half of 831 (Santa Cruz, but not Monterey or Salinas), and ALMOST all of 707. However, the town of Dixon is in area code 707 but in the Sacramento LATA. As to the "in-state connection fee," my guess would be that it is a fee that is charged by the state through your designated Primary Interexchange Carrier, irrespective of your in-state usage. In the same way, the "FCC access charge" on your phone bill is a fee that is charged for your being connected to the interstate network, whether or not you actually use the network for any toll calls (incoming or outgoing). You may be able to get a better deal by switching carriers -- different companies have different strategies for recovering some of the fees that the government charges them -- but be sure to read the fine print. www dot LincMad dot com / Telecom at LincMad dot com Linc Madison * San Francisco, California ------------------------------ From: Michael D. Sullivan Subject: Re: AT&T Local Access Charge Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2003 03:48:35 GMT On Thu, 24 Apr 2003 22:31:10 -0500, Dave Phelps posted the following to comp.dcom.telecom: > In article , kludge@panix.com > says: >> I have just received a little white card in my mail telling me that >> since I am a customer of AT&T long distance services that I will begin >> receiving a $1.95 in-state connection fee in order to help pay for the >> cost of carrying in-state long distance and local toll calls. > It's interesting that you mention in-state vs out-of-state carrier > selection. AFAIK, you can't do that. You have an intralata carrier, and > interlata carrier. If your state is in a single LATA, then you are > right, but I don't know if there are any states that only have a single > LATA. Maybe NJ or RI? In any case, there is no concept of intra-state > and inter-state when it comes to LD carrier pre-selection AFAIK. I think Nevada has only a single LATA. Michael D. Sullivan Bethesda, MD, USA (delete NOSPAM from address to mail me) ------------------------------ From: Al Iverson Subject: Re: AT&T Local Access Charge Organization: Radparker & Associates Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 23:47:32 -0500 In article , Dave Phelps wrote: > In article , kludge@panix.com > says: >> I have just received a little white card in my mail telling me that >> since I am a customer of AT&T long distance services that I will begin >> receiving a $1.95 in-state connection fee in order to help pay for the >> cost of carrying in-state long distance and local toll calls. > It's interesting that you mention in-state vs out-of-state carrier > selection. AFAIK, you can't do that. You have an intralata carrier, and > interlata carrier. If your state is in a single LATA, then you are > right, but I don't know if there are any states that only have a single > LATA. Maybe NJ or RI? In any case, there is no concept of intra-state > and inter-state when it comes to LD carrier pre-selection AFAIK. Minnesota must have only a single LATA, because that's how my phone service with Qwest seems to be set up. To me it's just another kind of long distance. And oddly (blame it on the tariffs?), it's more expensive than out-of-state LD. (Another reason to only use your cell phone.) Al Iverson -- http://www.spamresource.com Disclaimer: All of my opinions are mine alone. ------------------------------ From: Steve Michelson Subject: Re: AT&T Local Access Charge Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2003 09:08:17 -0400 Organization: MindSpring Enterprises In NJ, there are: local calls, local toll calls, in-state long distance calls, and inter-state long distance calls. Whoever you select for your inter-state long distance calls will also serve as your in-state long distance calls. You can select a separate carrier for your "local toll" calls, which are calls to areas "outside your local calling area but not considered long distance." So you could actually have three different cariers: your local carrier, your local toll carrier, and your long distance carrier. Incidentally, LATAs do not necessarily correspond directly to area codes. You could have multiple LATAs within an area code, as NJ does. You could also have multiple area codes within a LATA, due to area code splits or overlays. Dave Phelps wrote in message news:telecom22.409.17@telecom-digest.org: > In article , kludge@panix.com > says: >> I have just received a little white card in my mail telling me that >> since I am a customer of AT&T long distance services that I will begin >> receiving a $1.95 in-state connection fee in order to help pay for the >> cost of carrying in-state long distance and local toll calls. > It's interesting that you mention in-state vs out-of-state carrier > selection. AFAIK, you can't do that. You have an intralata carrier, and > interlata carrier. If your state is in a single LATA, then you are > right, but I don't know if there are any states that only have a single > LATA. Maybe NJ or RI? In any case, there is no concept of intra-state > and inter-state when it comes to LD carrier pre-selection AFAIK. > Dave Phelps > Phone Masters Ltd. > deadspam=tippenring ------------------------------ From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: states and LATAs, was AT&T Local Access Charge Date: 25 Apr 2003 16:01:37 -0400 Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > If your state is in a single LATA, then you are right, but I don't > know if there are any states that only have a single LATA. Maybe NJ > or RI? There are quite a few. NJ has three LATAs, but in the east, ME, VT. NH, and RI are each one LATA, CT is effectively one LATA although most of it is SNET which was technically non-Bell. In the west, SD, WY, and NM are each one LATA. Delaware is less than a LATA, since the whole state is in the Philadelphia PA LATA. I agree that the best way to avoid AT&T's new charge is to switch to a phone company that acts like it wants your business. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 330 5711 johnl@iecc.com Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner http://iecc.com/johnl Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail ------------------------------ From: martin@okstate.edu (Martin McCormick) Subject: Re: Wire Recorders Date: 25 Apr 2003 15:43:21 -0500 Organization: Oklahoma State University Stillwater, OK Net-ops I haven't been on the telecom list for a very long time but I am both glad to hear that Pat is back and sorry about the obstacles that nature has put in the way. I have been slowly transferring recordings from open-reel tape and vinyl to CD and have been reading several messages with fond recollection. In the mid sixties, I got my hands on an old RCA wire recorder that had been a cartridge loader type. There was this huge heavy metal box that loaded in to the mouth of the machine. The box had the two spools of wire that passed through what resembled a tape head except that it had a groove on the top to guide the wire which was very fine and reminded me of fishing line, only made of stainless steel. When I got the machine, the cartridge was a hopeless rat's nest of tangled wire so I never got to see what the system may have been like in better days, probably late 40's. The cartridge was an early attempt at convenience and the steel wire must have been coated with iron oxide since stainless steel isn't particularly diamagnetic. One day, I did do a very weird experiment. I took a scrap of the mess of wire that was in the ruined cartridge and held it against the head of a little portable tape recorder as I pulled the wire along. I could hear a little snippet of the last recording ever to be laid down on that ill-fated cartridge. I had gotten the old recorder from the school I was attending and someone told me that it had been used for Morse Code practice in the amateur radio club. Sure enough, the piece of wire I dragged across the head of the tape recorder had a few dits and daws of Morse on it. It has been about 40 years since I dismantled that machine after many hours of playing with what was left of it so I don't remember many of the details. It did have a bias oscillator and there had to have been some sort of capstan device to keep the wire speed uniform as it went from spool to spool. The rewind function must have been at about the same speed as normal play and record for I remember that the motor just rocked back and forth on its mounts and was pressed against either the supply or the take-up spool in that cartridge. There was also some kind of automatic shutoff that kept the mechanism from continuing to pull on the wire when it got to the end because there was a pair of micros witches in the cartridge holder that would stop the motor if you moved the actuator hard left or hard right. At the time, my classmates thought I was stupid to take home an old broken wire recorder, but it was a tremendous learning experience, much of which kind of stays with me today as far as understanding why things were done the way they are in magnetic recording. Martin McCormick WB5AGZ Stillwater, OK OSU Center for Computing and Information Services Network Operations Group ------------------------------ From: wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu (Garrett Wollman) Subject: Re: ILECs Becoming CLECs, was Re: MA Local Telephone Rates Increase Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 21:15:48 +0000 (UTC) Organization: MIT Laboratory for Computer Science In article , Stanley Cline wrote: > Then there's the *really* odd situation of companies that are > primarily CLECs owning ILECs; I can think of only two such cases off > the top of my head: I think Broadwing (Cincinnati Bell) would be the most obvious. I don't recall the corporate history enough to know how that company came about. -- 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) ------------------------------ Reply-To: O K From: O K Subject: Looking For Hands Free Telephone System For Entire House Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 14:29:22 -0700 Organization: Cox Communications Hello, I am seeking a product or vendor that sells a hands free telephone system either through an intercom system or a set of speakers and microphones place throughout the home, where I would be able to be anywhere in the home and be on a hands free system whenever the telephone rings. I have seen one such system, but I can't get a reply from the supplier. Please remove the * from the email address to email directly. -thanks, Owen ------------------------------ 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 #411 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat Apr 26 17:17:14 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h3QLHEa28919; Sat, 26 Apr 2003 17:17:14 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2003 17:17:14 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200304262117.h3QLHEa28919@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson cc: johnl@iecc.com Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #412 TELECOM Digest Sat, 26 Apr 2003 17:17:00 EDT Volume 22 : Issue 412 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson EFFector 16.10: EFF Opposes State Level "Super-DMCAs," (Monty Solomon) Court Gives Hollywood Broad Powers to Violate Privacy (Monty Solomon) Win for Makers of Morpheus and Grokster (Monty Solomon) Thoughts On Apple's Music Plans (Monty Solomon) DIRECTV Plans Monthly Fee for HDTV (Monty Solomon) Re: Vonage Internet-Based Phone Service (J Kelly) Re: Vonage Internet-Based Phone Service (John R. Levine) Why Vonage Not Verizon? (Carlo Coggi) Re: ILECs Becoming CLECs was Re: MA Local Telephone Rates (David Jensen) Re: ILECs Becoming CLECs was Re: MA Local Telephone Rates (Steven Sobol) Re: Call Detail Records (Al Gillis) Re: SBC Fraud Detection (tonypo@sdc.cox.net) Re: Why do Some Businesses use SAT Dishes Instead of Landline? (Reed) Re: Praise for Cingular Rescinded (David Jensen) Re: [CISSP_PNW] REVIEW: "Firewalls and Internet Security", (D. Youatt) 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, 25 Apr 2003 23:30:32 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: EFFector 16.10: EFF Opposes State Level "Super-DMCAs," Supports EFFector Vol. 16, No. 10 April 20, 2003 ren@eff.org A Publication of the Electronic Frontier Foundation ISSN 1062-9424 In the 249th Issue of EFFector: * EFF Opposes State Level "Super-DMCAs" * EFF Supports Unlicensed Spectrum * Editorial: Finding a Better Way with P2P * Deep Links (6): Security Panel Cancelled on DMCA Threat * Staff Calendar: EFF at O'Reilly Emerging Tech Conference * Administrivia http://www.eff.org/effector/HTML/effect16.10.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 23:36:26 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Court Gives Hollywood Broad Powers to Violate Your Privacy The D.C. District Court today ruled that alleged copyright infringers are to be deemed guilty until proven innocent. Judge Bates agreed with RIAA that copyright holders can issue subpoenas to ISPs to demand identifying information about any Internet users based upon a mere allegation of infringement, with no notice to the user or judicial review of the claim required. In his second decision in support of the RIAA, Judge Bates rejected the arguments of Verizon, supported by 28 consumer and privacy groups and 18 ISPs and ISP organizations, that this sweeping new power violated the First Amendment right to anonymity and privacy rights of Internet users. He also rejected the argument that the law violated the constitutional requirement that private parties can only use subpoenas to get private information about ordinary citizens in the context of a current or imminent lawsuit. The ruling is available here. http://www.dcd.uscourts.gov/03-ms-0040.pdf http://www.eff.org/news/breaking/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 23:40:02 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Win for Makers of Morpheus and Grokster Court Rejects Entertainment Industry Copyright Claims Related: Order granting defendants' motions for summary judgement http://www.eff.org/IP/P2P/MGM_v_Grokster/030425_order_on_motions.php http://www.eff.org/IP/P2P/MGM_v_Grokster/030425_order_on_motions.pdf ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2003 00:00:33 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Thoughts On Apple's Music Plans Arik Hesseldahl, 04.25.03, 10:06 AM ET NEW YORK - Next Monday all the speculation and rumors concerning Apple Computer's new music service will come to an end. At an event at San Francisco's Moscone Center, Chief Executive Steve Jobs will either become a big-shot record executive -- and possibly take a stake in Vivendi Universal's (nyse: V - news - people ) Universal Music unit -- or he won't. What is known is that Apple (nasdaq: AAPL - news - people ) will launch some kind of music download service and will probably bring a few new models of the iPod music player to go with it. As is his usual pattern, Jobs has made a point about being both vague and evasive concerning questions about the forthcoming service. (We confirmed Apple's plans on April 11; see "Apple Wants Vivendi To Dance.") At an Apple shareholders meeting in Cupertino, Calif., Jobs was quoted by Reuters as saying in response to a shareholder question, "There have been a lot of rumors in the last few weeks. Many of them are not true, and some of them are true." That followed his unusual denial about talks with Vivendi that wasn't really much of a denial at all. By name recognition alone, it would seem Apple's service will instantly become the big Kahuna of online music services. When we caught up with Mike Bebel, CEO of Pressplay, the online music-service joint venture operated by Sony (nyse: SNE - news - people ) and Universal, he insisted that Apple's entry into the space will bolster the fortunes of his service, as well as others like America Online's (nyse: AOL - news - people ) MusicNet and Listen.com's Rhapsody, which RealNetworks (nasdaq: RNWK - news - people ) paid $36 million for earlier this week. http://www.forbes.com/2003/04/25/cx_ah_0425tentech.html ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2003 15:31:03 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: DIRECTV Plans Monthly Fee for HDTV By Phillip Swann TVPredictions.com has learned that DIRECTV is planning to launch an HDTV channel package that would cost approximately $10 a month. The package would include ESPN HD, HDNet and HDNet Movies, and The Discovery HD Theater channel. Robert Mercer, a DIRECTV spokesman, confirmed late Thursday (April 24) that the satcaster is considering launching a monthly package of HD channels. The monthly fee would be big news because non-premium HDTV channels -- until now -- have been available for free on DIRECTV. http://www.tvpredictions.com/directvhdtv.html ------------------------------ From: J Kelly Subject: Re: Vonage Internet-Based Phone Service Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 20:32:12 -0500 Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com Reply-To: jkelly@newsguy.com On Fri, 25 Apr 2003 05:12:27 -0700, joe@obilivan.net wrote: > I've had Vonage for about two months now and I love it. Then again, I > am on a cable modem, which exceeds Vonage's uplink requirements. Your > DSL must be bad, because (if I recall correctly) Vonage wants about > 100 kb uplink. The worst DSL is suppose to do 128 kb uplink. Here in Independence, Iowa I can choose from one of two cable modem providers in my town (Mediacom, the big regional one in Iowa, or the Municipal Utilities' service). Both have uploads capped at 128kbps, the city owned system has a max downlink of 384 kbps (what a joke). No DSL available from our ILEC (Qwest). I would love to try Vonage, but I doubt it would work all that well with the speeds I see for uploads. Actual uploads seem to peak at 112 kbps on a good night, but are more like 70 most nights. ------------------------------ Date: 26 Apr 2003 00:52:00 -0000 From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: Vonage Internet-Based Phone Service Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > I can only find one previous posting in this group on this subject. > It was more conjecture than information. I live in what must be one > of the smallest markets where DSL is available. Speeds vary but > generally, it is not very fast. Vonage home page testing says I > need to use their speed booster. Vonage needs 40K to 50Kb upstream, and it'd be a really pitiful DSL that couldn't provide that. My Vonage phone works great on my sister's DSL connection provided by the tiny independent Shoreham Telephone Co. in western Vermont. The delay introduced by the connection is more of an issue than the raw connection speed. There's really no way to find out how usable it is other than to try it. Vonage offers a 30-day money back guarantee. so if anyone's interested, send me a note and I can tell them to send you a $40 signup coupon (applied if you keep the service.) Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies", Information Superhighwayman wanna-be http://iecc.com/johnl, Sewer Commissioner "More Wiener schnitzel, please", said Tom, revealingly. ------------------------------ Subject: Why Vonage Not Verizon? From: noemail@forme.com (Carlo Coggi) Organization: Organization Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2003 11:03:02 GMT I live in Manhattan and have had the same easy-to-remember MUrray Hill (68x) exchange home phone number for several years. I will be moving a few dozen blocks uptown in a few weeks and would like to retain this number. Verizon says that they cannot let me retain my number if they move more than a few blocks beyond the specific geographic neighborhood I live in. But when I entered my number on Vonage's online registration page, I was told that I could retain my number if I switched to Vonage. I called Verizon back and spoke to someone else who repeated that I couldn't retain my number out of my neighborhood. When I mentioned that I could keep it with Vonage, the rep didn't know what that was, and said that Verizon could not match the offer because their (unnamed) technology would not let them accomplish this. I wonder why ... [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have **very seriously** thought about getting Vonage and giving it a 'test run' to see how worthwhile it would be. There are no area codes for Kansas on the Vonage system, in fact none in this part of the country at all. Plus, I would have to keep my SWB line to have the DSL to use Vonage, and I always have my cell phone to use for 'long distance' (anywhere outside of the city of Independence) calls. And there is the financial aspect of it as well ... do I *really* need another $40 bill each month to make calls, when local (inside Independence) calls are unlimited and free each month. I could go to cable service (I already have cable TV and adding internet/modem service would not be that much more expensive. But I feel sort of queasy about cable modem service; having heard some bad things about it in general. *Supposedly* my DSL bill is going to be reduced by $20 starting this month since I also have a Cingular phone (which is owned by SBC) and if you have Cingular cell service you get a discount on your DSL bill. I'll watch and see if that happens or not. If any readers feel like making a 'donation' of a Vonage phone system account in my name I will happily accept it and report on its workings. PAT] ------------------------------ From: David Jensen Subject: Re: ILECs Becoming CLECs, was Re: MA Local Telephone Rates Increase Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2003 11:24:48 -0500 Organization: Jensen Family Reply-To: david@dajensen-family.com In comp.dcom.telecom, Stanley Cline wrote in : > On 24 Apr 2003 05:01:58 -0000, johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) wrote: >> It's possible but at the moment uncommon for the ILEC in one area to >> set up as a CLEC in another area and go poach customers. > It's certainly uncommon with the RBOCs (with the notable exceptions of > SBC's SBC Telecom; Verizon's Verizon Avenue, which provides services > to residents of apartment communities in some non-VZ cities such as > Atlanta; and BellSouth, which provides service to a few large business > customers in independent areas in AL, FL, KY, and NC) and very small > independents, but it's quite common with mid-sized independents: > - TDS's TDS Metrocom: CLEC in many Midwestern cities, including their > HQ city of Madison, WI Though almost all of their offices are in the former Mid-Plains service area. When they first set up Metrocom, it competed against Ameritech and Mid-Plains. TDS Telecom bought Mid-Plains, er, Chorus, a few years ago, so TDS appears to have been in the position of competing with itself -- at least for a time (Metrocom's service map says they offer service in a number of TDS Telecom locations, but I doubt that is the case). >- ALLTEL: CLEC in various Plains and Southeastern cities, usually > those adjacent to large ALLTEL ILEC or wireless markets, such as > Charlotte and Omaha, and of course ALLTEL's HQ city of Little Rock >- Commonwealth Telephone's CTSI: CLEC in most of PA >- CT Communications of Concord NC: CLEC in much of NC as well as the > Discover Mills mall (only) in suburban Atlanta (Mills Corp. has > another mall in CT's ILEC area in NC, and lots of fiber runs down > I-85 between the Charlotte and Atlanta areas ;) ) >- Ben Lomand RTC in middle TN: CLEC in the city limits of McMinnville > and Sparta, where Frontier provides service (Ben Lomand only got the > unincorporated areas around those towns way back when -- but you > wouldn't know it from looking at where their McMinnville ILEC CO is; > it's *inside* the city limits, two blocks from Frontier's CO!) >- EATEL in Louisiana: CLEC in most of Louisiana, and IIRC bought a > failed CLEC that served other states (Actel) as well >- etc. > Then there's the *really* odd situation of companies that are > primarily CLECs owning ILECs; I can think of only two such cases off > the top of my head: >- Illinois Consolidated (before McLeodUSA spun them off, that is) >- Interstate/Valley Telephone in the West Point GA/Lanett AL area is > owned by Knology, a major Southeastern cable overbuilder (yes, > Knology itself provides cable in competition with Charter in the > area, but doesn't compete against IVT for phone customers since, > after all, they're the same company) > Stanley Cline -- sc1 at roamer1 dot org -- http://www.roamer1.org/ > "Never put off until tomorrow what you can do today. There might > be a law against it by that time." -/usr/games/fortune ------------------------------ From: Steven J. Sobol Subject: Re: ILECs Becoming CLECs, was Re: MA Local Telephone Rates Increase Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2003 20:19:55 -0000 Organization: JustThe.net LLC From Garrett Wollman (wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu): >> Then there's the *really* odd situation of companies that are >> primarily CLECs owning ILECs; I can think of only two such cases off >> the top of my head: > I think Broadwing (Cincinnati Bell) would be the most obvious. I > don't recall the corporate history enough to know how that company > came about. IXC merged with Cincinnutty Bell. IXC was the CLEC, of course. Steve Sobol/CTO/JustThe.net LLC/Mentor On The Lake (Cleveland), OH/888.480.4NET "This country has a strong ethical foundation, but... I hesitate to say that erosion has set in, but it is clear that more and more of what we are is being built on sand and not on that foundation." - G. Waleed Kavalec, in SPAM-L ------------------------------ From: Al Gillis Subject: Re: Call Detail Records Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 20:29:07 -0700 Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com Hi Vic, The beauty of Standards is that there are so many to pick from! The same thinking, of course, applies to PBX/Key System CDR outputs. Even within my Nortel "Option" series switches (Option 11c, Option 61c, Option 81c) there are a few different ways the data stream can be put out -- The governing factors are software release and numerous selectable options in the system software. If you describe exactly what system you're interested in (by manufacturer and model as well as by software package identification and release number) someone here would likely be able to help you. Al Blake Sount wrote in message news:telecom22.408.7@telecom-digest.org: > Does anybody know if there is a standard format for the CDR files? > I mean, name of fields, length and type of data (strings of characters > or numbers), etc. > Thank you very much. > Vic ------------------------------ From: tonypo@sdc.cox.net Subject: Re: SBC Fraud Detection Organization: The Ace Tomatoe and Cement Company Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2003 01:29:58 GMT In article , joe@obilivan.net says: >> ... to your initial question 'how do fraud control algorythyms work' >> or words to that effect, they work pretty well. The new and improved >> ESS tells authorities a lot of details they could not get in the >> old days, including who calls whom, for how long, how often, etc. PAT] > I read where the feds are concerned about Vonage because the calls are > untraceable provided the Vonage caller blocks Caller ID. Thus, I > doubt Vonage is being a Mother Hen (as in chicken s**t) like SBC is > doing. Maybe -- they're more than likely using TCP as opposed to UPD so it's a connection oriented service. As such, it can be tapped/traced at will. ------------------------------ From: Reed Subject: Re: Why do Some Businesses Use SAT Dishes Instead of Landline? Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 22:14:53 -0600 At the auto dealer I work at, we use one manufacturer's sat network for all manner of uses. Parts lookup and ordering, car warranty status, key cutting codes, software updates for on-board car computers, training, tech bulletins, recall info, ordering new cars for the showroom, finding another dealer with a specific car in stock, etc etc. Basically anything that in the past would have required large paper books, or a phone call. BTW, credit cards are done on a POTS line. However the sat is planned to be shut down soon in favor of Internet-based access to the same resources, with some form of VPN for safety. We do this with two other manufacturers now. Sat networks in general are a legacy from the days when building a large (ie every Ford dealer, 7-11, or Shell station in the world connected to "corporate") private network based on leased land-lines (pre-frame relay) was more expensive than a sat based network. In some ways, sats could be considered "frame relay in the sky", given the nature of the satellite backbone sharing, and protocol spoofing. Bear in mind also, that large corporate networks tend to change technologies slowly. The imbedded costs are such that "if it works, leave it alone". To make a big change, the payback time has to be very short. --reed Al Dykes wrote: > I drove along what seemed like 20 miles of auto dealerships and major > brand gas stations yesterday and, as usual, saw Sat dishes on all of > these establishments. > I began to wonder how much data a gas station/24-hour Mart really > needs to exchange daily, let alone the need for any "real time" > networking. And also, why a national frame relay network isn't being > used. > What's the tradeoff between a Sat network and a frame network, and > what data to these businesses send daily? > I'd guess once you've justified a full time bidirectional network you > could bring the credit card clearing system in-house and save bucks, > but by itself wouldn't be a justification. > Just curious. > Al Dykes > adykes@panix.com > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Twenty miles of auto dealerships and > gas stations, eh? You must have been driving down Western Avenue > in Chicago then. PAT] ------------------------------ From: David Jensen Subject: Re: Praise for Cingular Rescinded Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2003 11:04:46 -0500 Organization: Jensen Family Reply-To: david@dajensen-family.com In comp.dcom.telecom, bonomi@c-ns (Robert Bonomi) wrote in : > In article , Jack Hamilton > wrote: >> John Higdon wrote: >>> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Let that be a lesson to you to *tape- >>> record* phone calls with customer service reps as needed, especially >>> the dingbat ones. Of course you have to notify anyone you are tape >>> recording, and typically that will put them on their best behavior as >>> well. >> Wouldn't their recording which says "calls may be recorded for quality >> purposes" cover that? "May" sounds like it's giving permission. >> Jack Hamilton >> jfh@acm.org >> If men are to wait for liberty until they become wise and good in >> slavery, they may indeed wait for ever. - Lord MacCaulay >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yes, 'may' does sound like permission >> is given, but *be certain to get that recorded statement on the start >> of your own recording so they cannot later claim they did not give >> permission. > Even if you take it as "we will (possibly) record this call", it is > likely sufficient. To wit: > If one party has 'served notice' of intent to (possibly) record the > conversation, then _no_one_ on *that* side of the conversation has > any "expectation of privacy". They _already_ know (or *should* know) > that the call is subject to being recorded. Why not demand that Cingular provide a copy of the tape they made of the first conversation? "I'd hate to sue you, but I understand that you record all of your CSR calls, please provide a copy of this one so we can get this straightened out." >> And 'quality purposes' sounds to me like you are trying >> to assure the customer service rep has been properly trained. You want >> to know one way to *absolutely assure* that a customer service rep >> gets very annoyed at you? When they first answer the call, you should >> ask, 'may I please speak to someone who has been trained to answer the >> phones and deal with customers?' Say it politely, and always thank them >> in advance for calling someone 'like that' to the phone. PAT] [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You can make all the demands you wish for copies of the tape which was made of the first conversation, but those demands would be in vain; they simply would not provide them, and most likely have an excuse such as 'we record over them on a regular basis'. Better just to make your own copy. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 14:05:13 -0700 From: David Youatt Reply-To: youattd@ieee.org Subject: Re: [CISSP_PNW] REVIEW: "Firewalls and Internet Security", Rob, grandpa of Ryan, Trevor, Devon & Hannah wrote: > "Firewalls and Internet Security", William R. Cheswick/Steven M. > Bellovin/Aviel D. Rubin, 2003, 0-201-63466-X, U$49.99/C$77.99 Great book by true experts, but I prefer Zwicky's "Building Internet Firewalls" -- http://www.bookpool.com/.x/mmq8pj3n1n/sm/1565928717 # Publisher: O'Reilly & Associates; 2nd edition (January 15, 2000) # ISBN: 1565928717 Also, if you buy lots of tech books, check prices at www.bookpool.com, and no sales tax if you live in WA. Or let www.bestbookbuys.com find the best price from several booksellers for you. -- David Youatt, youattd@ieee.org, +1 (425) 868-1927 ------------------------------ 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 #412 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat Apr 26 20:47:06 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h3R0l5x04130; Sat, 26 Apr 2003 20:47:06 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2003 20:47:06 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200304270047.h3R0l5x04130@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson cc: johnl@iecc.com Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #413 TELECOM Digest Sat, 26 Apr 2003 20:47:00 EDT Volume 22 : Issue 413 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Nevada, LATAs (was Re: AT&T Local Access Charge) (Mark J Cuccia) Re: What Does DSL Connect to at the Other End? (CCIE8122) Re: What Does DSL Connect to at the Other End? (AES/newspost) Re: What Does DSL Connect to at the Other End? (John R. Levine) Re: Area Code Statistics (John R. Levine) Re: AT&T Local Access Charge (Linc Madison) Re: AT&T Local Access Charge (John R. Levine) Re: Why do Some Businesses Use SAT Dishes Instead of Landline? (C. Dold) Re: States and LATAs, was AT&T Local Access Charge (Clarence Dold) Re: Praise for Cingular Rescinded (John Higdon) Looking for Hands Free Telephone System for Entire House (O K) Re: DIRECTV Plans Monthly Fee for HDTV (John Higdon) It's Bound to Scare You, Boy / Intellectual Property Today (M. Solomon) Last Laugh! Vonage Internet-Based Phone Service (John Higdon) 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, 26 Apr 2003 17:27:36 CDT From: Mark J Cuccia Subject: Nevada, LATAs (was Re: AT&T Local Access Charge) Michael D. Sullivan wrote: > Dave Phelps posted the following: >> It's interesting that you mention in-state vs out-of-state carrier >> selection. AFAIK, you can't do that. You have an intralata carrier, >> and interlata carrier. If your state is in a single LATA, then you >> are right, but I don't know if there are any states that only have >> a single LATA. Maybe NJ or RI? In any case, there is no concept of >> intra-state and inter-state when it comes to LD carrier >> pre-selection AFAIK. > I think Nevada has only a single LATA. No, Nevada is two significant LATAs: 720 Reno NV - which covers most of the state (central and northern) and 721 "Pahrump NV", which covers the southern portion. Note that 721 for southern Nevada is an 'odd' number. When the LATA numbering scheme was originally developed by AT&T and the DOJ some 20+ years ago in preparation for 1984's divestiture, the initial draft had all LATAs end in an even number. Later on, there were some "adjustments" made to the numbering scheme, and additionally carved out LATAs (or renumberings to some 'independent' 9NX LATAs) were given odd numbers inserted between two previously assigned even numbers. The LATA scheme also follows a format to identify the RBOC region as of 1984's divestiture: 1NX for NYNEX (now VeriZon in the northeast) 2NX for Bell Atlantic (now VeriZon in the mid-Atlantic) 3NX for Ameritech (now part of SBC) 4NX for BellSouth 5NX for Southwestern Bell (now known simply as SBC) 6NX for US West (now part of Qwest) 7NX for Pacific Telesis (now part of SBC) - California Pac*Bell; NV*Bell LATAs and "pseudo" LATAs for points outside of the continental US (Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, US Virgin Islands, and later Guam, Saipan/Mariana Islands, and soon American Samoa, all being "US" points, do indeed fall within LATAs according to US Federal Government telecom regulations), including Canada, the non-US-but-still-NANP Caribbean, Mexico (even though not part of the NANP itself) all have 8NX format "LATA" codes. I think there has even been used a 'pseudo' LATA code for internal telco paperwork/database purposes called "International" or "Overseas", of the 8NX format. LATA-like regions for non-Bell telcos, within the continental US, have been assigned 9NX format LATAs. The "semi" Bell telco of Southern New England Telephone (now part of SBC) for virtually all of the state of Connecticut, has been assigned LATA 920; the "semi" Bell telco of Cincinnati and Suburban Bell Telephone, has been assigned LATA 921, which covers a small part of Kentucky and an even smaller part of southeastern Indiana, as well as the Cincinnati Metro southwestern tip of Ohio. Other rather large CONUS-based indep telcos with their own 9NX LATAs include Talahassee FL (Sprint-Centel), Tamapa FL (VeriZon-GTE), Ft.Myers FL (Sprint-United), Palm Springs CA (VeriZon-GTE), San Angelo TX (VeriZon-GTE), etc. Note that the middle digit of a LATA is 'N', which is any digit '2' thru '9', NOT counting '0' or '1'. This was also done at the time so as to avoid confusion with Area Codes, which at the time had only '0' or '1' in the middle-digit. Note that LATA codes are NOT used by the switching/routing equipment. They are NOT dialed by customers, operators, nor switching equipment. They are strictly for administrative paperwork/database organizational purposes, for billing, and network routing/switching *documentation* purposes. Southern Nevada (aka "Pahrump") is predominantly serviced by Centel, now part of the LEC side of Sprint. This is an independent telco. I seem to think that in 1982 or so, Las Vegas NV and vicinity was going to be assigned a 9NX series LATA code for independent Centel. However, it was later decided to classify this LATA as a "Bell" LATA. Pacific*Telesis' Nevada*Bell Reno NV LATA was/is #720. LATA #722 was already assigned to Pacific*Telesis' Pacific*Bell San Francisco CA LATA with all following 7NX LATAs also assigned to California (Pacific*Bell). Thus, the southern NV LATA (Las Vegas, but named "Pahrump" whose I-LEC, 'I' for *INCUMBENT* LEC, is a 'Bell' town) is numbered as a Nevada*Bell LATA. Something interesting, but not necessarily unique about the Vegas or Pahrump LATA, is that there are Bell central offices/remotes, which "home on" a *NON* Bell telco's tandem for network access, operator services, and such! The Nevada*Bell (now SBC) towns of Pahrump (and its remotes of Indian Springs and Sandy Valley which being in Clark County retained NPA 702, and remotes of Lathrop Wells and Beatty being in southern Nye County split off to new NPA 775 in 1998; Pahrump itself is in southern Nye County and split to NPA 775 back in 1998 as well) are all within the Pahrump/Vegas LATA 721. They are all "Bell" ratecenters. But they get basic LEC operator services as well as network access and intra-LATA tandem access from SPRINT (CENTEL) in Las Vegas! And this "Bell homing on an indepedent" in the southern Nevada area *pre-dates* the 1984 divestiture. There are a handful of other situations where Bell end-offices home on a non-Bell tandem/operator platform for intra-LATA and network access, but not many. And most/all pre-date 1984. So, as for Nevada's LATAs, there are these two significant LATAs, 720 Reno NV and 721 Vegas/Pahrump NV. I think that the Reno LATA also extends "slightly" into California. The Vegas/Pahrump LATA also extends slightly over into Sandy Valley CA (which gets dialtone from Sandy Valley NV remote off Pahrump NV host). Portions of LATAs from Utah, Idaho, and Arizona, and possibly Oregon, extend slightly into Nevada as well. I think that the Reno NV LATA might also extend slightly over to adjacent states as well. The basic thing to understand is, is that LATA, NPA (Area Code), and state lines/regions do *NOT* necessarily correlate neatly and nicely. There are zigzags and overlaps of these all over. There are LOCAL calling areas in some places which cross between two LATAs. There are remotes in one LATA which are hosted by main switches in adjacent LATAs. In New England Telehone (VeriZon) territory, for the most part, the LATA boundaries are EXACTLY along the state lines. However, there are central offices which provide dialtone to customers in the adjacent state. Those customers do have their own state-based NPA-NXX code and ratecenter name, and they are associated with the LATA of their actual state. But the central office switch actually providing them with dialtone is physically in a different LATA! For administrative purposes, a "dummy/secondary" CLLI code has to be assigned to that c.o.switch for the adjacent state ratecenter/c.o.code. There are waivers/exceptions in routing/switching/network/translations to compensate for such; these days, for the most part most independent telcos, the CLECs, and wireless carriers are not necessarily subject to LATA boundary requirements as the ILEC Bells are. Many CLECs and wireless telcos seem to completely ignore LATA boundary setups when configuring their basic network -- i.e., a single central office switch can provide service for customers throughout an entire state, although those customers are actually located within different ratecenters AND LATAs. Of course, unique NPA-NXX c.o.codes have to be assigned for each and every ratecenter where customers are located served from that single c.o.switch. LATAs have provided an administrative purpose, and may continue to do so for a while, but as more and more service providers are directly competing against each other in virtually all aspects of telecom service, it may be that LATAs or the concept of LATAs will become obsolete over time. Mark J. Cuccia mcuccia@tulane.edu ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2003 16:13:45 -0600 From: CCIE8122 Subject: Re: What Does DSL Connect to at the Other End? Organization: Computer Solutions > I have DSL service between my home and Stanford University's campus > network, with the actual service provided by SBC/Pac Bell; my wife and > I use it to access our separate accounts ("User ID's") on the Stanford > campus net. > A non-Stanford family member now wants to go direct to AOL via the > Internet using the same DSL connection, without going through Stanford > or piggybacking on either of our Stanford accounts. > Is this feasible, or meaningful? I understand how DSL works > technically, but I'm not up to speed on just what it connects to at > the other end. Does DSL always connect only to a single ISP > (presumably Stanford in this case) at the far end, and you have to go > through that ISP to access the broader web? Or is it somehow "on the > Internet" in a broader fashion, and one can connect directly to other > sites? I can tell you exactly how this works, as I have set it up for several customers myself. The DSL subscriber line (your line into the home) (almost always provided by the LEC -- in your case PacBell) connects to the LEC's DSL Access Multiplexer (DSLAM), which aggregates all of the subscriber lines in a given area onto the carrier's ATM network. At the host end (ISP), an ATM circuit (typically an ATM DS-1 or an ATM PVC on an existing ATM DS-3) is provisioned and is mapped to a PVC on an ATM T-1/T-3 at the ISPs premises. Individual users are logically mapped to a given host, and virtual circuits tie the subscriber to the host. The host serves as the ISP for the subscriber and buys separate bandwidth to the Internet (I have seen this done on the same ATM DS-3 as a separate PVC or on separate dedicated circuit to a tier-1/2 ISP). In your case, it all depends on if Stanford is the host, or if PacBell or someone else is the host. You will be a bill to PacBell (typically in the $20-$40 range) for the line, and you will pay a bill to the ISP (typically $10-30, depending upon speed). If PacBell is the ISP, you will pay in one aggregated bill. So the question is, does the PacBell bill include the Internet service, or just the access (line)? If the former, then you are likely accessing Stanford via VPN or some other authentication means, or just accessing their public site. If the latter, and if Stanford is indeed the ISP (in which case they might be building the ISP service into the cost of tuition and just requiring you to pay for the line), then you can still access AOL, etc. but it will be across the Stanford network. Stanford likely does not have a problem with this, as they are likely pretty liberal in terms of what they will allow you to access (I am reasonably certain AOL falls within this umbrella). Nevertheless, you would do well to check their access policies. HTH kr ------------------------------ From: AES/newspost Subject: Re: What Does DSL Connect to at the Other End? Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2003 14:04:42 -0700 > In article was written: >> I have DSL service between my home and Stanford University's campus >> network, with the actual service provided by SBC/Pac Bell; ... >> A non-Stanford family member now wants to go direct to AOL via the >> Internet using the same DSL connection, without going through Stanford >> or piggybacking on either of our Stanford accounts. >> Is this feasible, or meaningful? Responding to my own post: * Thanks to John Levine and the Moderator for discussion. * My DSL link at home might be more or less nonstandard, since I had to order it and pay for it through Stanford, not SBC. * In fact, however, to quote a helpful Stanford Networking guy, my connection is "bare naked on the net", i.e. my family member is able to go direct to AOL, without going through Stanford. * At the same time I never see any kind of Stanford prompt, or have to explicitly"go to" or log into Stanford myself. But, there's some kind of Stanford-provided security software named MacLeland which I have to have on my laptop to access Stanford stuff -- via DSL or even if I connect to a Stanford net access point in my office on campus. Apparently it handles whatever it handles -- including Kerberos, whatever that is. "Power tends to corrupt. Absolute power corrupts absolutely." Lord Acton (1834-1902) "Dependence on advertising tends to corrupt. Total dependence on advertising corrupts totally." (today's equivalent) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Kerberos is a type of security method used when connecting between networks. I am not quite certain how it works. I know that when I connect to LCS/MIT they do require me to use 'ssh' which is a similar thing. No straight telnet, and certainly no more rlogin. Year ago, I had an '.rhosts' file in my directory at mit.edu and it was like speed dialing; just tap a couple keys here and go right in. Hackers ruined that, like they did straight telnet. Now when I use 'ssh' it looks for a secure key on my system. Your family member will need to log in to SBC on your master account of course, but can have her own mailbox at that level as well as on AOL, even using the inexpensive BYOA method for about five dollars per month. PAT] ------------------------------ From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: What Does DSL Connect to at the Other End? Date: 26 Apr 2003 16:51:05 -0400 Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA >> I have DSL service between my home and Stanford University's campus >> network, with the actual service provided by SBC/Pac Bell; ... > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well John, it was and still is not > plain to me if SBC puts him 'on the net' whereupon he types something > and *then* gets connected to Stanford or if SBC merely carries his > traffic over to Stanford who then deals with him entirely. Stanford gets its Internet connection from Cogentco, not SBC. SBC DSL in California is just like it is in Kansas, it's an ISP through which you can connect to whatever you want on the net. In theory, he could have some complicated virtual private network setup that connects only to Stanford, but that would be much, much more trouble than it would be worth for anyone to set up. Around here people get DSL from various local telcos and ISPs and use them to connect to Cornell, who gets its connection from Broadwing. Same idea. Works great. The only peculiarity is that some of the ISPs, noting that a whole lot of traffic goes from their net to Cornell, arrange a direct local connection so that the traffic doesn't go from Ithaca to Washington DC and back, but that's invisible to the users other than that it makes their connection faster than it would be otherwise. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 330 5711 johnl@iecc.com Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner http://iecc.com/johnl Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail ------------------------------ From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: Area Code Statistics Date: 26 Apr 2003 17:30:56 -0400 Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA >> Lone Pine, CA >> NPA-NXX SWITCH OCN LATA >> 760-264 LSANCAVADS2 8827 FOCAL COMM CORP CA 730 >> 760-614 BSHPCAAW1MD 5024 WESTERN WIRELESS-CA 730 >> 760-875 LSANCARC5KD 7379 PAC-WEST TELECOMM 730 >> 760-876 LNPNCAXFRS5 2302 VERIZON CALIFORNIA 730 This is the problem that local number portability is supposed to solve. I would be amazed if Focal and Pac-West had as many as a dozen customers in Lone Pine. (Note that the switch code for both starts with LSAN, telling us that the switches are really in Los Angeles, with only a virtual prefix assigned to Lone Pine.) With LNP, those customers can take their VZ (ex-GTE) numbers with them and move them to Focal or Pac-West. For LNP to work, the receiving telco needs only a single prefix anywhere in the LATA, which of course they each already have in Los Angeles. Then they can each give back their Lone Pine prefixes for use elsewhere in 760-land. If the cell companies get their way, you'll be able to port between landline and wireless, too, but I suspect that there really are some Cell One customers there. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 330 5711 johnl@iecc.com Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner http://iecc.com/johnl Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail ------------------------------ From: Linc Madison Subject: Re: AT&T Local Access Charge Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2003 14:34:38 -0700 Organization: LincMad.com Consulting Reply-To: Telecom@LincMad.com In article , Steve Michelson wrote: > Incidentally, LATAs do not necessarily correspond directly to area > codes. You could have multiple LATAs within an area code, as NJ > does. You could also have multiple area codes within a LATA, due to > area code splits or overlays. New Jersey has three LATAs: North Jersey LATA: area codes 201/551, 732/848, 908, and 973/862 Trenton/Camden LATA: area code 856, plus part of area code 609 Atlantic City LATA: the remaining part of area code 609 Minnesota, by the way, has five different LATAs, one of which straddles the North Dakota border. Nevada has two LATAs, one for Las Vegas and the other for the rest of the state. STATES THAT ARE AT LEAST VERY CLOSE TO A SINGLE LATA (with some possible minor spillover to or from adjacent states): Alaska Delaware Hawaii Maine New Hampshire New Mexico Rhode Island South Dakota Vermont Wyoming Utah comes close, but the Navaho reservation in the Four Corners area has its own LATAs for the Utah and Arizona parts. Most of Connecticut is in one LATA, but the area around Greenwich is in the New York City LATA. Also, Puerto Rico, the USVI, Guam, and the CNMI have their own separate LATAs. American Samoa will probably be assigned its own LATA. Florida has ten LATAs, but some of them are further divided into sub-LATAs. I've never really understood why they created sub-LATAs instead of just creating more LATAs, nor why they needed to chop the state up into such tiny pieces. Texas has 17 LATAs. Illinois is next with 13. California has 11. Quite a few LATAs have incidental spillovers to adjacent states, but there are a few that confidently straddle a state line: Portland OR: most of OR plus a substantial piece of WA Fargo-Brainerd: almost half of ND plus a big chunk of MN Omaha: substantial pieces of Nebraska and Iowa Philadelphia: all of Delaware and a good chunk of Pennsylvania Washington DC: all of DC, plus pieces of MD and VA In California, the Monterey LATA is only part of area code 831, but the Los Angeles LATA includes all or part of area codes 213, 310, 323, 562, 626, 661, 714, 760, 805, 818, 909, and 949. Area code 760 is split between three LATAs: Los Angeles, Palm Springs, and San Diego. When area code 209 split a few years ago to form 559, the split followed the LATA boundary, and so each area code is now coterminous with its LATA. www dot LincMad dot com / Telecom at LincMad dot com Linc Madison * San Francisco, California ------------------------------ From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: AT&T Local Access Charge Date: 26 Apr 2003 17:05:10 -0400 Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > I think Nevada has only a single LATA. Nope. Nevada has LATA 721 for the Las Vegas area and 720 for the rest of the state. LATA 720 also includes three small exchanges in California and one in Oregon. Four small Nevada exchanges are in Idaho LATA 652, but I wouldn't count that as a third NV LATA. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 330 5711 johnl@iecc.com Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner http://iecc.com/johnl Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail ------------------------------ From: dold@WhyXdoXSom.usenet.us.com Subject: Re: Why do Some Businesses Use SAT Dishes Instead of Landline? Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2003 21:26:45 UTC Organization: a2i network Reed wrote: > Sat networks in general are a legacy from the days when building a > large (ie every Ford dealer, 7-11, or Shell station in the world > connected to "corporate") private network based on leased land-lines > (pre-frame relay) was more expensive than a sat based network. In some > ways, sats could be considered "frame relay in the sky", given the > nature of the satellite backbone sharing, and protocol spoofing. KMart stores did price updates every night to 2300+ stores via broadcast satellite ... one way. This was in the early 90's when the internet wasn't available in most cities, and individual modem transmissions would have taken too long. Around 93 they upgraded to a two-way system so they could get inventory feedback... look what that did to them ;-) ------------------------------ From: dold@statesXand.usenet.us.com Subject: Re: states and LATAs, was AT&T Local Access Charge Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2003 20:48:20 UTC Organization: a2i network John R. Levine wrote: > I agree that the best way to avoid AT&T's new charge is to switch to a > phone company that acts like it wants your business. In 1983, I was selling "dialers" to route LD and local toll calls. With the minimum usage charges from various LD companies, it sounds like a dialer, feeding a calling-card access point, is almost back to the proper way to go for a small volume home user. Maybe I'm a homebody, but I rarely make calls out of my LATA. Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley (Lake County) CA USA ------------------------------ From: John Higdon Subject: Re: Praise for Cingular Rescinded Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2003 14:39:35 -0700 In article , David Jensen wrote: > Why not demand that Cingular provide a copy of the tape they made of > the first conversation? "I'd hate to sue you, but I understand that > you record all of your CSR calls, please provide a copy of this one so > we can get this straightened out." Actually, Cingular doesn't see an issue here at all. Even if I was lied to and could prove it, the company's position is that they don't have anything to do with roaming rates (e.g. those in Bahrain) and just collect the charges on behalf of the foreign provider. End of story. So they goofed in quote the rates. The rates are still the rates. Pay up. 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: However, you are free to besmirch their character as 'liars' here on the Internet for whatever that will get you. Not that anyone would find that news, which is what the net is supposed to be about. PAT] ------------------------------ Reply-To: O K From: O K Subject: Looking For Hands Free Telephone System For Entire House Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2003 14:19:12 -0700 Organization: Cox Communications Hello, I am seeking a product or vendor that sells a hands free telephone system either through an intercom system or a set of speakers and microphones placed throughout the home, where I would be able to be anywhere in the home and be on a hands free system whenever the telephone rings. I have seen one such system, but I can't get a reply from the supplier. Please remove the * from the email address to email directly. -thanks, Owen ------------------------------ From: John Higdon Subject: Re: DIRECTV Plans Monthly Fee for HDTV Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2003 15:19:19 -0700 In article , Monty Solomon wrote: > Robert Mercer, a DIRECTV spokesman, confirmed late Thursday (April > 24) that the satcaster is considering launching a monthly package > of HD channels. The monthly fee would be big news because > non-premium HDTV channels -- until now -- have been available for > free on DIRECTV. Popular services don't stay "free" for very long. The question is whether such fees constitute another impediment to the rather unimpressive rate of adoption by the public of HDTV. 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: No, they sure don't stay free for very long. Consider Mail Washer as an example. This handy dandy spam fighting tool was free for the longest time, then the guy who wrote it must have sold it to another company which now gives you exactly thirty days to make up your mind what you are going to do, then pay $30.00 or give it up. Unlike some spam fighters which toss out the stuff *they* define as spam (invariably losing some you want in the process), Mail Washer hands it all over to you as single one line entries on your screen with a place to check off what is spam and what you want to blacklist forever. I go click, click, click through my personal mailbox account (as spam ridden as any you have ever seen) and it all disappears then and there. Mail Washer bounces it back to the sender right from the POP server. And believe me, after months of clicking and bouncing, you do eventually start to see a reduction in the spam level. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2003 17:40:43 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: It's Bound to Scare You, Boy / Intellectual Property Today Lawrence B. Ebert Although ElcomSoft was acquitted on December 17, 2002, n2 the DMCA has been getting more use in the time since. One interesting application was that by Lexmark in the case Lexmark International v. Static Control Components, No. 02-571-KSF (E.D. Ky. Dec. 30, 2002) in which Lexmark added a computer chip to its printers to force buyers of its printers to use only the company's brand of replacement toner cartridges. Only when a Lexmark cartridge is used will the chip send an authentication sequence, so that the printer will not run on non-Lexmark cartridges. The defendant allegedly manufactured chips that mimicked the authentication sequence, and Lexmark sued in part under the DMCA. It asserted that defendant's computer chip circumvents the technological measure of authentication and so provides unauthorized access to the printer's copyrighted software. The DMCA prohibits circumventing a technological measure in order to gain access to a copyrighted work. n3 Hewlett-Packard criticized the use of Lexmark of the DMCA. n4 Separately, the subpoena power within the DMCA got attention in an action involving Wal-Mart n5 and then one involving Verizon. n6 Wal-Mart's action invoked a part of the DMCA that allows a copyright holder to ask for "identification of an alleged infringer" without filing a lawsuit first. In the context of the Wal-Mart case, Deirdre Mulligan was quoted: "People are using the DMCA as an extremely flexible tool that gets ISPs (Internet service providers) to take down information. ISPs are not in a position to fight back. It requires resources -- it puts them in a position where they could assume liability. The ability to silence speakers even where the underlying claim does not have any merit is worrying." After the Verizon case, a different provider ominously noted on a board: "Our privacy policy may not be as protective as Verizon's." A poster on a listserv commented: "But on the web can a publisher simply make mistakes 'disappear?' With the DMCA, not only can the publisher remove a story from its web site; it can have it removed from every other web site too." http://www.reedsmith.com/library/publicationView.cfm?itemid=25540 ------------------------------ From: John Higdon Subject: Last Laugh! Re: Vonage Internet-Based Phone Service Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2003 15:23:41 -0700 In article , J Kelly wrote: > Here in Independence, Iowa I can choose from one of two cable modem > providers in my town (Mediacom, the big regional one in Iowa, or the > Municipal Utilities' service). Both have uploads capped at 128kbps, > the city owned system has a max downlink of 384 kbps (what a joke). > No DSL available from our ILEC (Qwest). In Independence, IA, you are better connected than a good share of people in Silicon Valley, many of whom have neither access to DSL nor cable modem service at all. 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: Yeah, but the people in Silicon Valley are all so backward, culturally and in other sophisticated matters as well. In Independence, Iowa; Independence, Missouri; Independence, Kentucky or even Independence, Kansas -- all major population centers -- the guys are sophisticated and demand the best in communications services; DSL, Cable modem service, even satellite and other types of wireless communications, etc. Tell me this John, do you all there have 1200 baud modems yet, or are you still sending email and surfing the net with acoustic 110/300 baud modems? We even have an internet cafe here, downtown on Pennsylvania Street where you have a sandwhich and a soft drink or coffee while you check your email, etc on a super-speed wideband connection to the net. I hope you guys in Silicon get with the times sometime soon. 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 #413 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun Apr 27 20:05:31 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h3S05VA10997; Sun, 27 Apr 2003 20:05:31 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2003 20:05:31 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200304280005.h3S05VA10997@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson cc: johnl@iecc.com Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #414 TELECOM Digest Sun, 27 Apr 2003 20:05:00 EDT Volume 22 : Issue 414 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: AT&T Local Access Charge (John David Galt) Re: AT&T Local Access Charge (Robert Code) Re: AT&T Local Access Charge (Michael D. Sullivan) Re: Looking For Hands Free Telephone System For Entire House (Gail Hall) Re: Now Digital, Spy Camera Technology Widens Gaze (Greg T. Knopf) Re: Call Detail Records (David Clayton) Re: Area Code Statistics (joe@obilivan.net) Re: Area Code Statistics (Michael D. Sullivan) Re: Why Vonage Not Verizon? (Ed Ellers) Re: Why Vonage Not Verizon? (Michael D. Sullivan) Re: Vonage Internet-Based Phone Service (OneNetNut) Re: ILECs Becoming CLECs, was Re: MA Local Telephone Rates (Robert Code) Cell Phone Connection to Home/Office Wiring (John Stahl) Re: Last Laugh! Re: Vonage Internet-Based Phone Service (J Kelly) Re: Last Laugh! Re: Vonage Internet-Based Phone Service (joe@obilivan) 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 David Galt Subject: Re: AT&T Local Access Charge Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2003 19:11:13 -0700 Organization: Diogenes the Cynic Hot-Tubbing Society Linc Madison wrote: > As for New Jersey, it has three entire LATAs: north Jersey, Trenton- > Camden, and Atlantic City. California has ten LATAs, some of which > include only part of one area code, but others with all or part of > several area codes. The San Francisco LATA includes all of 408, 415, > 510, 650, and 925, plus almost half of 831 (Santa Cruz, but not > Monterey or Salinas), and ALMOST all of 707. However, the town of > Dixon is in area code 707 but in the Sacramento LATA. If you believe SBC's directory, Dixon is now in the San Francisco LATA. I don't know if this has been formally changed, (can this even be done?) but it wouldn't surprise me if SBC now routes and bills calls as if it were true. Now that SBC provides intralata long distance to California customers, the distinction has pretty much ceased to matter anyway. > In California, the Monterey LATA is only part of area code 831, but the > Los Angeles LATA includes all or part of area codes 213, 310, 323, 562, > 626, 661, 714, 760, 805, 818, 909, and 949. Area code 760 is split > between three LATAs: Los Angeles, Palm Springs, and San Diego. When > area code 209 split a few years ago to form 559, the split followed the > LATA boundary, and so each area code is now coterminous with its LATA. According to SBC's directories, this is not true; 209 is split between the Stockton and Fresno LATAs, while all of 559 is in the Fresno LATA. 661 is also split among three LATAs: Los Angeles, Bakersfield, and San Luis Obispo. Michael D. Sullivan wrote: > I think Nevada has only a single LATA. Nevada has two: Las Vegas and Northern Nevada. The Northern Nevada LATA also includes three towns in California and one in Oregon. One of the included towns in CA is an oddball case: the "Verdi, CA" exchange (actually Farad, CA; there is no town of Verdi on the California side) is in area code 530 but is physically served from the same switch in Verdi, NV, that serves that town's own exchange. I wonder what other cases like this may exist on state lines. Nevada probably has the highest fraction of service by small independent telcos of any state in the US. As in other parts of the country, Ma Bell doesn't seem to have been interested in serving the boonies, and pretty much the whole state is "boonies" outside of Las Vegas and Reno/Tahoe. Nevada is also probably the largest state covered by a single directory (depending how you count -- that is, SBC's directory includes the listings for the entire state, but in independent-telco areas you will see smaller books showing only the local area). ------------------------------ From: Robert Code Subject: Re: AT&T Local Access Charge Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2003 17:06:19 -0400 Linc Madison wrote: > All of Delaware is a single LATA, but that LATA also includes a small > portion of Pennsylvania, including an insignificant little town called > "Philadelphia." In fact, the unfortunate folks in Delaware live in a > LATA that is called "the Philadelphia LATA." Actually the Philadelphia LATA contains almost all of southeastern Pennsylvania, hardly a small portion, even less so if you are considering population and telephone lines, not land. But I have a question. Let's assume that a caller has selected Verizon for regional calls, and AT&T for all other long distance. Does this mean that this caller in Allentown PA who dials Laurel DE will be billed for Verizon for this call? ------------------------------ From: Michael D. Sullivan Subject: Re: AT&T Local Access Charge Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2003 03:34:34 GMT On 26 Apr 2003 17:05:10 -0400, John R. Levine posted the following to comp.dcom.telecom: >> I think Nevada has only a single LATA. > Nope. Nevada has LATA 721 for the Las Vegas area and 720 for the > rest of the state. LATA 720 also includes three small exchanges in > California and one in Oregon. > Four small Nevada exchanges are in Idaho LATA 652, but I wouldn't > count that as a third NV LATA. I'm glad I hedged by saying "I think." Michael D. Sullivan Bethesda, MD, USA (delete NOSPAM from address to mail me) ------------------------------ From: Gail M. Hall Subject: Re: Looking For Hands Free Telephone System For Entire House Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2003 00:04:36 -0400 Reply-To: gmhall@apk.net On Fri, 25 Apr 2003 14:29:22 -0700, in comp.dcom.telecom message , O K wrote: > Hello, > I am seeking a product or vendor that sells a hands free telephone > system either through an intercom system or a set of speakers and > microphones place throughout the home, where I would be able to be > anywhere in the home and be on a hands free system whenever the > telephone rings. I have seen one such system, but I can't get a reply > from the supplier. It seems to me that a cordless hands-free phone with a headset would work better than the kind of system you are talking about. I have a terrible time hearing people when they are using a speakerphone because of all the background noise that comes over the phone. People don't want to get up close to the speaker on their speakerphone, so their voices aren't as clear as they are on a normal handset or headset. Depending on what your environment is like, I suspect you might have trouble hearing the caller on the other end of the line when you depend on speakers and you expect to be "anywhere" in the house, including across the room from the speaker. Then there is the matter of privacy. With your plan, you would have to be careful what you and the other party talk about whenever someone else is in your house, and other people in your house would have what amounts to a broadcast of their conversations to the other party. I have a Plantronics headset phone, but it is hard-wired. It lets me work with my hands and talk on the phone at the same time. That really saves wear and tear on my neck! My son bought a cordless version of a headset phone. The phone part clips on to his belt, and he wears the headset. He can be in the basement of his shop or up on the main floor working with his hands, and I have no problems hearing him when he is talking to me on that phone. The conversation is not heard all over the shop, either. I think his headset phone is a Plantronics, too, but I'm not sure. Since it is cordless, he can be anywhere in his shop or the basement, the size being comparable to a person's house. There is no problem with extraneous sounds coming into his ear or out to the party on the other end, and certainly no problem with feedback because of microphones picking up sounds from speakers in the room. Going down memory lane: The first push-button phone I ever saw operated was used by a local Realtor around 1962. He had a headset and "dialed" numbers using buttons on the phone instead of the normal dial. He used this phone because he was basically a paraplegic, although he had enough use of his hands to push the buttons on the phone and could hold a pen to do some writing. It's interesting to me that some of the devices developed for people with disabilities do end up being made available to the general public. Gail in Ohio USA ------------------------------ From: greg t. knopf Subject: Re: Now Digital, Spy Camera Technology Widens Gaze Date: 27 Apr 2003 06:43:48 GMT Organization: Concentric Internet Services Reply-To: gtknopf@concentric.net > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: *Anywhere* it is legal and lawful for a > *LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER* to stand and observe what is going on, it is > lawful for a mechanical eye to do the same thing ... anywhere > there is not or should not be any 'expectation of privacy', or > anywhere no judicial 'search warrant' has been issued is perfectly > fair game for the placement of a camera for others to watch. Which is interesting, but what we really want to know is whether it is legal for a moderator of a tech newsgroup, let's say, to set up a camera to broadcast to the world a view of the romantic arts as practiced by a young neighborhood Casanova and his ladyfriend. Just wondering, greg gtknopf@concentric.net [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: In your example, whether or not the person is a moderator of a newsgroup is not of consequence. *Any person* who wishes to legally set up such a camera view needs to have the permission of the participants prior to placing the display on public view. And, I suppose, the person would need to at least pay lip service to the 'obscenity laws' in the place where he lives if not as well in the place where the webcast would be viewed. I happen to think it would be in poor taste in the person's position as a newsgroup moderator to place such a view on a website under his direct control for example, if I were to devote a place in this Digest or on our telecom website for a streaming cam with a sex show. Who the person is does not matter; he needs to have legal permission, and try to show some common sense. PAT] ------------------------------ From: David Clayton Subject: Re: Call Detail Records Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2003 18:01:19 +1000 Organization: Customer of Connect.com.au Pty. Ltd. Reply-To: dcstar@acslink.net.au david_esan@hotmail.com (David Esan) contributed the following: > vhuertas@indra.es (Blake Sount) wrote in message > news:: >> Hi all, >> Does anybody know if there is a standard format for the CDR files? >> I mean, name of fields, length and type of data (strings of characters >> or numbers), etc. > The short answer is no. > The company that I work for writes software to make reports from the > CDR. They have a full time person just writing the interface portion > for each switch. The format is different between companies that > produce the switches, between models, between options within the > models. Some are fairly straight forward and some give people a > headache just wondering what the programmer was thinking when he wrote > the code. Nortel, (I think..) "S", "N" and "E" records....... it hurts my brain just remembering some of these..... :-) Regards, David Clayton, e-mail: dcstar@acslink.net.au Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. Dilbert's words of wisdom #18: Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. ------------------------------ From: joe@obilivan.net Subject: Re: Area Code Statistics Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2003 02:50:16 -0700 Organization: Cox Communications > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There are lots of examples in the USA > like Lone Pine. Kansas is not a very densely populated state, yet we > have a bunch of area codes. 913 is the Kansas City (Kansas side) metro > area code (816 is for the Missouri side) And, that area used to waste a lot of numbers by permitting permissive dialing across the state line in the metro area. It was 7-digit dialing throughout the area. Thus, 913-722 in Mission, KS took away 816-722 although there wasn't any 816-722 in service. Washington DC metro area was the same way. I guess it mattered when everyone had to pull a pulse dialer through 10 rather than 7 times per call. ;-) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, recall please that the whole system of area code numbering *originally* (like 1950's) was set up with 'short pulls' for the major urban areas. New York = 212, Chicago = 312, Detroit = 313, Los Angeles = 213, San Francisco = 415, Washington DC = 202 (which is a bit more than New York or Chicago but still much fewer than Newfoundland = 709 and Hawaii = 808 and Alaska = 907. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Michael D. Sullivan Subject: Re: Area Code Statistics Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2003 03:33:03 GMT On 26 Apr 2003 17:30:56 -0400, John R. Levine posted the following to comp.dcom.telecom: > This is the problem that local number portability is supposed to > solve. I would be amazed if Focal and Pac-West had as many as a dozen > customers in Lone Pine. (Note that the switch code for both starts > with LSAN, telling us that the switches are really in Los Angeles, > with only a virtual prefix assigned to Lone Pine.) Actually, this is the problem that number pooling is supposed to solve. (Except that Lone Pine isn't in a top-100 MSA, so number pooling isn't mandatory there.) Number pooling would allow a single central office code to be used to serve up to 10 carriers' customers. Number portability would allow one carrier to get another carrier's customers, but a carrier is unlikely to be interested in making the investment needed to accomplish this if they don't have any local numbers, either from a pool or from its own central office code, because it wouldn't be able to sign up new customers or sell new lines, only target switchers. > With LNP, those customers can take their VZ (ex-GTE) numbers with them > and move them to Focal or Pac-West. For LNP to work, the receiving > telco needs only a single prefix anywhere in the LATA, which of course > they each already have in Los Angeles. Then they can each give back > their Lone Pine prefixes for use elsewhere in 760-land. Currently, LNP applies only to carriers with numbers in a given rate center, not a LATA. While it may be technically possible to port numbers across rate center boundaries, it's not required. VZ wouldn't have to port a customer's number to a carrier with numbers only in LA. Moreover, LA is in a different area code from Lone Pine, I believe. It's certainly in a different rate center. Thus, if Jane Smith did port her number from VZ to one of the CLECs with a presence only in LA, she would suddenly find that she must pay intraLATA toll to call her neighbors -- assuming VZ was willing to port the number out, which they would be very unlikely to do. In fact, wireline carriers' unwillingness to port numbers out of a rate center even to the adjacent rate center is at the root of the wireless carriers' FCC pending number portability petition. > If the cell companies get their way, you'll be able to port between > landline and wireless, too, but I suspect that there really are some > Cell One customers there. The FCC already requires LNP between landline and wireless, starting November 24, 2003, in the top 100 MSAs. I think it starts a year later for areas outside the top 100, where there is a bonafide request. Cell companies don't particularly want LNP at all, but if they have to do LNP they want it to work for porting numbers from landline to wireless in reality. Unfortunately, wireless carriers tend to draw numbers only from a few rate centers, so under the current rules only wireline numbers in those rate centers have to be ported on request. The cross- rate-center porting problem is what they are seeking to get solved in their pending petition. Michael D. Sullivan Bethesda, MD, USA (delete NOSPAM from address to mail me) ------------------------------ From: Ed Ellers Subject: Re: Why Vonage Not Verizon? Organization: Insight Broadband Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2003 02:49:53 GMT Carlo Coggi wrote: > I live in Manhattan and have had the same easy-to-remember MUrray > Hill (68x) exchange home phone number for several years. I will be > moving a few dozen blocks uptown in a few weeks and would like to > retain this number. Verizon says that they cannot let me retain my > number if they move more than a few blocks beyond the specific > geographic neighborhood I live in." Because you'll have moved into an area served by a different central office. > But when I entered my number on Vonage's online registration page, I > was told that I could retain my number if I switched to Vonage. Vonage's switch probably serves all of Manhattan -- not too difficult, since they use the Internet to connect to their customers rather than running physical facilities out of central offices. That's also how Vonage can give you local service *in another city,* because your adapter box would just be pointed to a different switch's IP address. ------------------------------ From: Michael D. Sullivan Subject: Re: Why Vonage Not Verizon? Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2003 03:41:45 GMT On Sat, 26 Apr 2003 11:03:02 GMT, Carlo Coggi posted the following to comp.dcom.telecom: > I live in Manhattan and have had the same easy-to-remember MUrray Hill > (68x) exchange home phone number for several years. I will be moving a > few dozen blocks uptown in a few weeks and would like to retain this > number. Verizon says that they cannot let me retain my number if they > move more than a few blocks beyond the specific geographic > neighborhood I live in. I bet you could pay for an FX (foreign exchange) line and keep your number, but this would cost quite a bit and probably wouldn't be worth it. Michael D. Sullivan Bethesda, MD, USA (delete NOSPAM from address to mail me) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Actually an FX line is based on mileage 'as the crow flies' and would not be that much in this particular application. In fact, I suspect it would be less than a Vonage type phone *in this application*. PAT] ------------------------------ From: OneNetNut Subject: Re: Vonage Internet-Based Phone Service Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2003 11:49:47 -0500 Actually there has been a number of discussions about it in the comp.dcom.voice-over-ip newsgroup. Mainly positive. On 24 Apr 2003 14:15:34 -0700, ccis4sofi@yahoo.com (Oliver Penn) wrote: > I can only find one previous posting in this group on this subject. > It was more conjecture than information. I live in what must be one > of the smallest markets where DSL is available. Speeds vary but > generally, it is not very fast. Vonage home page testing says I need > to use their speed booster. > Only news papers seem to cover it. The Dallas Morning News writer > "After testing the service for several weeks ..." recently said it > was simple. > Do any of the knowledgable telephone folks in this group have any > recent personal experience with this service, especially with 'slow' > DSL connections? > Oliver(recovering telephone guy)Penn > Gun Barrel City, TX [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I decided to try Vonage out for a month or so and see how it would work. Trouble is, they had no numbers at all in any area code here in the area I live in. I wound up taking a number in 415 since I thought I could use that. I do not know why, however they could not have placed a few numbers in *each area code* rather than a cluster of them on the east and a cluster of them on west coast. I only signed up for the real cheap 500 minute plan since I do not think I ever spend 500 minutes in a month's time on any phone calls. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Robert Code Subject: Re: ILECs Becoming CLECs, was Re: MA Local Telephone Rates Increase Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2003 18:08:09 -0400 Steven J. Sobol wrote: > From Garrett Wollman (wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu): >>> Then there's the *really* odd situation of companies that are >>> primarily CLECs owning ILECs; I can think of only two such cases off >>> the top of my head: >> I think Broadwing (Cincinnati Bell) would be the most obvious. I >> don't recall the corporate history enough to know how that company >> came about. > IXC merged with Cincinnutty Bell. IXC was the CLEC, of course. And don't forget that IXC was an IXC too. :) ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2003 22:18:39 -0400 From: John Stahl Subject: Cell Phone Connection to Home/Office Wiring With more and more people shutting off their land line phones (last estimate was 18% of cell phone owners) in favor of exclusive use of their cell phones, there must be "gadgets" available which the cell phones can be dropped into at home or office, to allow using the home/office internal wiring to extend the cell phone "signal" to the internal wired extensions. Does anyone know of a "gadget" described above for all cell phone manufacturers' phones (Motorola, Samsung, Kyocera, etc.)? I have found only one such device called the CellSocket (www.cellsocket.com) but it only seems to be made for the most popular Nokia phones. Thanks for your help. John Stahl Telecom/Data Consultant Aljon Enterprises [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have suggested to Mike Sandman that if someone were to make a 'ribbon connector' type thing with a cell- socket type device so that all phones could be used with it (and possibly add a couple dip-switches to make some programming changes as needed) I am sure it would sell rather well. PAT] ------------------------------ From: J Kelly Subject: Re: Last Laugh! Re: Vonage Internet-Based Phone Service Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2003 22:34:04 -0500 Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com Reply-To: jkelly@newsguy.com On Sat, 26 Apr 2003 15:23:41 -0700, John Higdon wrote: > In article , J Kelly > wrote: >> Here in Independence, Iowa I can choose from one of two cable modem >> providers in my town (Mediacom, the big regional one in Iowa, or the >> Municipal Utilities' service). Both have uploads capped at 128kbps, >> the city owned system has a max downlink of 384 kbps (what a joke). >> No DSL available from our ILEC (Qwest). > In Independence, IA, you are better connected than a good share of > people in Silicon Valley, many of whom have neither access to DSL nor > cable modem service at all. It sure took awhile. When I moved here 5 years ago we had one internet provider who wanted $40 for 28.8 access. they had no idea what X2 or 56K was, which I had grown accustomed to using (and for only 19.95/mo) when I used ibm.net for my ISP in my previous town. A little under two years ago the city's system came online, and then about a year later Mediacom (which had formerly been ATT Broadband) added internet to their system. AT&T Broadband and TCI before them had been promising internet "in about 30 days" for well over two years before it actually happened. But then the city had said in November of 97 that their internet and cable tv would be going "in August". They failed to mention of what year as it was early 2001 before I was able to get either. We are now blessed to have access to two high speed internet services for this little town of about 6,000 people in podunk Iowa. Thanks to competition my 1500/128 cable modem service costs me $39.95/mo. It would be $10 less if I subscribed to Mediacoms basic cable tv, but I use DishNetwork instead. The city gets $44.95 for 384/128 with a $10 discount for having cable. They have about 97% of the high speed subscribers for some odd reason, probably because Mediacom hasn't really bothered to market the fact that their service is available. ------------------------------ From: joe@obilivan.net Subject: Re: Last Laugh! Re: Vonage Internet-Based Phone Service Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2003 14:08:03 -0700 Organization: Cox Communications John Higdon wrote: > In Independence, IA, you are better connected than a good share of > people in Silicon Valley, many of whom have neither access to DSL nor > cable modem service at all. > 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: Yeah, but the people in Silicon Valley > are all so backward, culturally and in other sophisticated matters as > well. In Independence, Iowa; Independence, Missouri; Independence, > Kentucky or even Independence, Kansas -- all major population centers > -- the guys are sophisticated and demand the best in communications > services; DSL, Cable modem service, even satellite and other types of > wireless communications, etc. Tell me this John, do you all there have > 1200 baud modems yet, or are you still sending email and surfing the > net with acoustic 110/300 baud modems? We even have an internet cafe > here, downtown on Pennsylvania Street where you have a sandwhich and a > soft drink or coffee while you check your email, etc on a super-speed > wideband connection to the net. I hope you guys in Silicon get with > the times sometime soon. PAT] John probably knows very well the problem in much of the high-tech, high-income Silicon Vally area lies with SBC, aka Pacific Bell, aka Specific Hell. The outside plant (read copper) is so old and frazzled in many places such as Palo Alto and Menlo Park. And, SBC isn't about to spend the millions required to fix it to work DSL, so long as it provides acceptable voice. SBC has, however, made sure the business districts of places like Menlo Park and Palo Alto have direct fiber feeds to provide DSL. I have a friend who lives two blocks from downtown Menlo Park and DSL is simply not in the cards. Yet, in the store fronts in the business district two blocks away, DSL is alive and well. As to cable modem service, those communities settled with crummy cable service providers. I told my friend he could order a fractional T3; that SBC would be required to provide that under tariffs. ;-) ------------------------------ 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 #414 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun Apr 27 22:31:47 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h3S2Vlw12811; Sun, 27 Apr 2003 22:31:47 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2003 22:31:47 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200304280231.h3S2Vlw12811@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson cc: johnl@iecc.com Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #415 TELECOM Digest Sun, 27 Apr 2003 22:32:00 EDT Volume 22 : Issue 415 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson 5- vs. 7-Digit Dialing (was Area Code Stats) (nmclain@annsgarden.com) Nevada's Printed Telephone Directories (Mark J Cuccia) Spread of Buggy Software Raises Questions (Monty Solomon) Re: Pneumo Tubes (Carl G Knoblock) Re: States and LATAs, was Re: AT&T Local Access Charge (Steven Lichter) Re: Why do Some Businesses Use SAT Dishes Instead of Landline? (Mike M.) Telecom-digest.zzn.com Down? (Michael Spencer) Re: Area Code Statistics (John R. Levine) Re: AT&T Local Access Charge (John R. Levine) Southeastern PA and the State of DE (Mark J. Cuccia) 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, 27 Apr 2003 11:54:11 -0600 From: nmclain@annsgarden.com Reply-To: nmclain@annsgarden.com Subject: 5- vs. 7-digit Dialing (was Area Code Stats) Mark Roberts Then there is the case of Centerville, Iowa, population around > 6,000 for about the last forty years. > When I was living there, there were phone numbers of the following > form: > 856-2xxx, 856-3xxx, 856-6xxx, 856-8xxx, 856-9xxx. > You never saw phone numbers of the form 856-4xxx or 856-5xxx. > In town, dialing the last five digits was sufficient. To dial > neighboring exchanges, seven-digit dialing was required. Three of > those exchanges were 647-xxxx, 649-xxxx, and 658-xxxx. > After I moved away, sometime in the 1970s, Centerville opened up the > 437-xxxx prefix. I always had wondered why a town of that size needed > two exchanges so early on. But recently, I think I figured it out. > Centerville may have needed more phone numbers, evidently, but if > five-digit dialing were preserved, 856-4xxx and 856-5xxx could be > confused with the nearby exchanges. 6-4xxx could be a Plano or Mystic > number that was incomplete, or it could be a Centerville number that > was complete. > So, I think, 437-xxxx was opened up to provide more numbers and, > presumably, to preserve five-digit dialing without causing collisions > with the 6-4xxx or 6-5xxx series. I don't know if Centerville still > had five-digit dialing by that time. But if it did, 437-nxxx would > work as long as n != 2 (because there was a neighboring 724- exchange) > and five-digit dialing would still work. > It doesn't answer the question of why 6-0xxx, 6-1xxx, or 6-7xxx > wouldn't have worked, but I am assuming the mechanical switches for > that exchange may have had limitations. For example, long-distance > dialing access would be "11", "12" or even "13" depending on some > arbitrary factor unbeknowst to subscribers of the Iowa State > Telephone Company (later Continental). I'll propose a hypothesis. The Centerville situation you describe is remarkably similar to the hypothetical step-by-step (Strowger) office described by AT&T in "Notes on Distance Dialing" [1]. This publication describes "digit absorbing selectors" -- first selectors having specified levels designated A or AR: A = The selector absorbs the specified digit once only; on the next digit, it "trunks on all levels." This digit must be dialed once (and only once) in order to reach certain specified second digits. However, it is absorbed (ignored) for any other second digit. AR = The selector absorbs the specified digit repeatedly unless a digit has been absorbed previously on a level designated "A". If my hypothesis is correct, Centerville had a step-by-stop office in which the first selector was configured as follows: "5" was type AR, meaning that you could dial 5 repeatedly before dialing anything else (e.g., 555556-2xxx would reach 856-2xxx; 5555555555555550 would reach the operator). "6" was type A, meaning that you had to dial 6 once (with or without any previous 5s or 8s) in order to reach the 6-2xxx, 6-3xxx, 6-6xxx, 6-8xxx, and 6-9xxx local numbers or 658-xxxx numbers in a neighboring community. But 6-4... would reach numbers beginning with 4; 6-0 would reach the operator; etc. "8" was type AR, meaning that you could dial 8 repeatedly before dialing anything else (e.g., 8888886-3xxx would reach 856-3xxx). Or, for that matter, 5858585858586-2xxx would reach 856-2xxx, or 5555588885858858885888888586-0 would reach the operator. Therefore, the dialing plan would have been as follows. In this list: [N] is a footnote reference. <85> are the two "AR" digits (although any combination of 5s and 8s could be substituted, or they could be omitted altogether). (6) is the "A" digit (required if the second digit is 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, or 9; absorbed and ignored if the second digit is 1, 4, 7, or 0). <85>(6)11... Long distance <85>(6)12... Long distance <85>(6)13... Long distance <85>(6)1N ??? [2] <85>(6)2xxx Local numbers in form 856-2xxx <85>(6)3xxx Local numbers in form 856-3xxx <85>(6)437-xxxx Local numbers in form 437-xxxx [3] <85>(6)47-xxxx Nearby numbers in the form 647-xxxx [4] <85>(6)49-xxxx Nearby numbers in the form 649-xxxx [4] <85>(6)58-xxxx Nearby numbers in the form 658-xxxx [5] <85>(6)6xxx Local numbers in form 856-6xxx <85>(6)7... Blank level (or possibly 724?) <85>(6)8xxx Local numbers in form 856-8xxx <85>(6)9xxx Local numbers in form 856-9xxx <85>(6)0 Operator All of this is, of course, just hypothesis, so further comments are welcome! Similar situations existed in small and mid-sized communities throughout the Bell System during the 50s, 60s, and 70s [6]. A final question would be: how is a first selector configured for A and AR levels? I don't know the answer to this one; perhaps Roger Conklin or Joe Stevens can explain it to us. Footnotes: [1] Appendix A, Section 4, "Typical Trunking Diagrams for Step-by-Step Offices." "Notes on Distance Dialing." AT&T Engineering and Network Services Department, Systems Planning Section, 1975. [2] Possibly other codes such as information, revertive calling, etc? [3] The choice of this particular NXX code (437) would have allowed the introduction of new numbers in Centerville before the 856 step-by-step equipment was replaced with newer equipment (crossbar or ESS). However, I would surmise that the 437 equipment itself was either crossbar or ESS (to the best of my knowledge, by "sometime in the 1970s" Bell was no longer installing any new step-by-step equipment). So seven-digit dialing would have been required for any local call from a 437 number even if 856-to-856 calls remained 5-digit. [4] Which means that you could have reached 647-xxxx or 649-xxxx numbers from Centerville by dialing only the last six digits. Did you ever try this? [5] In this case, the full seven-digit number (including the 6) would have been required. Omitting the 6 would cause 5 (the AR level) to be the first digit, so it would have been absorbed and ignored. [6] One example: Ann Arbor, Michigan. In Ann Arbor, 6 was type AR and 8 was type A. My previous post about this situation is in the archives at . Neal McLain nmclain@annsgarden.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2003 20:42:49 CDT From: Mark J Cuccia Subject: Nevada's Printed Telephone Directories John David Galt wrote: > Nevada is also probably the largest state covered by a single directory > (depending how you count -- that is, SBC's directory includes the > listings for the entire state, but in independent-telco areas you will > see smaller books showing only the local area). Not true. The SBC (formerly Nevada*Bell) directory lists all SBC/NV*Bell ratecenters throughout the state, the bulk of them being in NPA 775 *and* in LATA #720 the "Reno NV" LATA (covering the central and northern part of the state), as well as the five SBC (NV*Bell) ratecenters in the southern part of the state, which is within Sprint-Centel's LATA #721 "Pahrump NV" which really should be called the Sprint-Centel Las Vegas LATA. These five SBC-NV*Bell ratecenters all actually "home" on independent Sprint-Centel in Vegas: In southern Nye County (NPA 775): Pahrump NV (host) Lathrop Wells NV (remote off Pahrump) Beatty NV (remote off Pahrump) In Clark County (NPA 702): Indian Springs NV (remote off Pahrump) northwest corner tip of Clark Cnty Sandy Valley NV (remote off Pahrump) southwestern corner of Clark County. And Sandy Valley CALIFORNIA (NPA 760) getting dialtone from Nevada's Sandy Valley NV remote off Pahrump. All of the five (six if you count the CA side of Sandy Valley) are within the southern NV LATA #721 (officially classed as a 'Bell' LATA and named 'Pahrump', but really handled by Sprint-Centel and should be named the 'Las Vegas' LATA). AFAIK, the SBC-NV*Bell directory does *NOT* contain any listings for the region of Sprint-Centel Las Vegas. Sprint-Centel publishes its *OWN rather large directory for its region, for the most part all "EAS" (local" wrt itself. There is the independent telco of Moapa Valley Telco just to the northeast of Vegas Metro. I don't know offhand if they print their own directory, neither do I remember offhand if Moapa Valley Telco is listed in Sprint-Centel's directory. I don't think that SBC-NV*Bell necessarily includes these listings. Some of the other independents in Nevada do print their own directories, such as Lincoln County Telco. I seem to remember that (SBC) NV*Bell's directory did *NOT* include listings for Lincoln County Telco in years past. And of course, there are other stateline situations where Nevada ratecenters and customers (both NPA 702 in southeastern NV, and NPA 775 in the rest-of-the-state) are served out of (indep.telcos in) adjacent state (Bell) LATAs, either Qwest-LEC (USWest) or maybe SBC-Pac*Bell from CA. I don't know if any of these are necessarily included in the SBC-NV*Bell directory. But I seriously doubt that the SBC-NV*Bell directory now includes the Sprint-Centel Las Vegas Metro listings, as this directory itself is quite large, and had never previously been included in the "Bell of Nevada" directory. Mark J. Cuccia mcuccia@tulane.edu ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2003 15:02:21 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Spread of Buggy Software Raises Questions By PETER SVENSSON AP Technology Writer NEW YORK (AP) -- When his dishwasher acts up and won't stop beeping, Jeff Seigle turns it off and then on, just as he does when his computer crashes. Same with the exercise machines at his gym and his CD player. "Now I think of resetting appliances, not just computers," says Seigle, a software developer in Vienna, Va. Malfunctions caused by bizarre and frustrating glitches are becoming harder and harder to escape now that software controls everything from stoves to cell phones, trains, cars and power plants. Yet computer code could be a lot more reliable _ if only the industry were more willing to make it so, experts say. And many believe it would help if software makers were held accountable for sloppy programming. Bad code can be more than costly. Sometimes it's lethal. _A poorly programmed ground-based altitude warning system was partly responsible for the 1997 Korean Air crash in Guam that killed 228 people. _Faulty software in anti-lock brakes forced the recall of 39,000 trucks and tractors and 6,000 school buses in 2000. _The $165 million Mars Polar Lander probe was destroyed in its final descent to the planet in 1999, probably because its software shut the engines off 100 feet above the surface. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=33972514 ------------------------------ From: Carl G Knoblock Subject: Re: Pneumo Tubes Organization: Retired Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2003 01:44:26 GMT In article , Dale Farmer wrote: > Chuk Gleason wrote: >> Actually, Pneumo tubes are still in common use many places; I've seen >> them at the Home Depot store in Cary, NC (just outsida Raleigh) from >> the cash registers to um, I've never asked where they go to. I'm >> guessing other departments like Millwork, etc. Still works like a >> champ. > These tubes are standard in Home Depot stores, and most of the > warehouse type stores. ( Costco, etc. ) They make it very easy for a > cashier to toss excess cash and so on back to a central cash handling > room. That way when there is a robbery, there is far less amount of > cash at risk, and thus less incentive for robbers to hit them. Most banks around Omaha still use them for driveup service. The lane next to the building will use a drawer, the rest are service by tubes and cameras. One local Credit Union, in it's newest buildings, has replaced the live teller counter with Pneumo tubes and monitors. You put your request and ID in a tube and send it off, and when a teller gets it, she turns on the monitor at your station and talks to you. When she is done, she returns the tube with your money or receipt or form to sign, and the monitor goes to some other display until she's needed again. A withdrawal typically takes two round trips, just like the drive through. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I had not considered the bank drive up windows but our two banks here, Commerce Bank and First National use pneumo at their drive ups. PAT] ------------------------------ From: stevenl11@aol.com (Steven Lichter) Subject: Re: States and LATAs, was AT&T Local Access Charge Date: 26 Apr 2003 18:52:48 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) wrote in message news:: >> If your state is in a single LATA, then you are right, but I don't >> know if there are any states that only have a single LATA. Maybe NJ >> or RI? This is a little off the subject, but many years ago GTE had a switch located in Huntington Beach, Ca. It was a 2 area code and 2 switch; both steppers. They were 53 in one and 72 in the other. This was very interesting and we used to get a lot of people who wanted to see it. It was also a great learning experiance for me. A couple of years ago I got a chance to go back there doing contract work, it was not a NT switch, still 2 area codes, one for North Orange county and the other for the LA side of Huntington Harbor. The only good spammer is a dead one!! Have you hunted one down today? (C) I Kill Spammers, Inc. A Rot in Hell company ------------------------------ From: mhmallory@hotmail.com (Mike M.) Subject: Re: Why do Some Businesses Use SAT Dishes Instead of Landline? Date: 26 Apr 2003 21:21:34 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Reed wrote in message news:: > At the auto dealer I work at, we use one manufacturer's sat network > for all manner of uses. Parts lookup and ordering, car warranty > status, key cutting codes, software updates for on-board car > computers, training, tech bulletins, recall info, ordering new cars > for the showroom, finding another dealer with a specific car in stock, > etc etc. Basically anything that in the past would have required large > paper books, or a phone call. BTW, credit cards are done on a POTS > line. > However the sat is planned to be shut down soon in favor of > Internet-based access to the same resources, with some form of VPN > for safety. We do this with two other manufacturers now. > Sat networks in general are a legacy from the days when building a > large (ie every Ford dealer, 7-11, or Shell station in the world > connected to "corporate") private network based on leased land-lines > (pre-frame relay) was more expensive than a sat based network. In some > ways, sats could be considered "frame relay in the sky", given the > nature of the satellite backbone sharing, and protocol spoofing. > Bear in mind also, that large corporate networks tend to change > technologies slowly. The imbedded costs are such that "if it works, > leave it alone". To make a big change, the payback time has to be very > short. > --reed > Al Dykes wrote: >> I drove along what seemed like 20 miles of auto dealerships and major >> brand gas stations yesterday and, as usual, saw Sat dishes on all of >> these establishments. >> I began to wonder how much data a gas station/24-hour Mart really >> needs to exchange daily, let alone the need for any "real time" >> networking. And also, why a national frame relay network isn't being >> used. >> What's the tradeoff between a Sat network and a frame network, and >> what data to these businesses send daily? >> I'd guess once you've justified a full time bidirectional network you >> could bring the credit card clearing system in-house and save bucks, >> but by itself wouldn't be a justification. >> Just curious. >> Al Dykes >> adykes@panix.com >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Twenty miles of auto dealerships and >> gas stations, eh? You must have been driving down Western Avenue >> in Chicago then. PAT] A few reasons that stick out. 1) Reliability - If there is a network failure that occurs in a public switched network provider (Non-SONET), a satellite based network is the most cost efficient alternative, especially for "burst type data" a retailer usually transmits. 2) Security - Combine a encryption scheme with a private keyed satellite receiver, and data is virtually theft proof and or unalterable. 3) A satellite based network is a closed network, unlike the internet which travels a public switched network. 4) Cost - satellite infrastructure is a good low cost network soloution for point - to - point POS. The majority of network technology, private lines (56K, ISDN, POTS), T1's, SONET, Frame Relay, ATM, VPN's, etc. traverse a public network. This is why all of a sudden, it has alarmingly occurred to the public utilities providers and even the military how easy a terrorist could take over command and control of there systems. I do not suggest your local gas station maintains a satellite based network for these reasons, but I'm sure security was a requirement for their system developers, who usually base their security model after the military. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2003 20:49:25 EDT From: Michael Spencer Subject: Telecom-digest.zzn.com Down? Hi Pat -- I've been unable to use the email service you set up at zzn.com. I've been using it occasionally since soon after you announced it and it has worked fine. Now I can connect and log in but get an "Ooops!" message in response to the login. Same result trying to create a new account. If they're undergoing an overhaul or are down permanently, perhaps you could announce that in the Digest in order to avoid confusion. It may be a bit belated to say it but it's nice to have you back at the helm. Best, Mike Spencer mspencer@ceci.mit.edu [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thanks for your kind words. I do not really know what the folks at telecom-digest.zzn.com are doing these days. I think they do require you to accept their cookies if you want to log in these days. I know it will not let me in either, since as a general rule I just do not accept cookies or else I dump them as soon as I get them. Those accounts were good while they lasted, but like most things on the net these days, they became very spam-ridden. If you can turn on your cookie acceptance and get in, then let me know. PAT] ------------------------------ From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: Area Code Statistics Date: 27 Apr 2003 20:56:21 -0400 Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA >> This is the problem that local number portability is supposed to >> solve. I would be amazed if Focal and Pac-West had as many as a dozen >> customers in Lone Pine. (Note that the switch code for both starts >> with LSAN, telling us that the switches are really in Los Angeles, >> with only a virtual prefix assigned to Lone Pine.) > Actually, this is the problem that number pooling is supposed to > solve. Number portability would allow one carrier to get another carrier's > customers, but a carrier is unlikely to be interested in making the > investment needed to accomplish this if they don't have any local > numbers, either from a pool or from its own central office code, > because it wouldn't be able to sign up new customers or sell new > lines, only target switchers. Porting and number pooling both address this problem. My impression is that CLECs have numbers in tiny little towns not because they expect to sign up customers there, but because they want to be able to provide local calling everywhere in the LATA for ISP dialup modem banks and the like. Porting would be fine for that, particularly if they change the rules so that you can port a newly assigned number, not just one that's already in service. >> With LNP, those customers can take their VZ (ex-GTE) numbers with them >> and move them to Focal or Pac-West. For LNP to work, the receiving >> telco needs only a single prefix anywhere in the LATA, which of course >> they each already have in Los Angeles. Then they can each give back >> their Lone Pine prefixes for use elsewhere in 760-land. > Currently, LNP applies only to carriers with numbers in a given rate > center, not a LATA. While it may be technically possible to port > numbers across rate center boundaries, it's not required. Don't confuse a rate center with a switch location. Focal's numbers in the Lone Pine rate center are switched in Los Angeles, whether they're ported or in Focal's own block. > It's certainly in a different rate center. Thus, if Jane Smith did > port her number from VZ to one of the CLECs with a presence only in > LA, she would suddenly find that she must pay intraLATA toll to call > her neighbors -- Really? That's not my understanding of the way that LNP works. Whatever rate center the number started in, it stays in. For example, my Vonage phone has an Ithaca NY 607-330 number, even though it's on Paetec's switch which is physically in Syracuse (in AC 315, but that doesn't matter.) If I had an Ithaca Verizon number, I could have ported it to the Vonage service, where it would be switched in Syracuse, but still in the Ithaca rate center. In North America, LNP works by looking up each dialed number in a shared database to get a routing number. If the number hasn't been ported, the routing number is the same as the dialed number. If it has been ported, the routing number is the location routing number (LRN) for the new provider's switch, a number chosen from a prefix assigned to the new switch. Then the call is routed using the routing number, but it's still billed to the caller based on the dialed number. There is nothing I see in the design of number portability that requires that the dialed number and routing number be in the same rate center. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 330 5711 johnl@iecc.com Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner http://iecc.com/johnl Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail ------------------------------ From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: AT&T Local Access Charge Date: 27 Apr 2003 20:25:20 -0400 Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA >> All of Delaware is a single LATA, but that LATA also includes a small >> portion of Pennsylvania, including an insignificant little town called >> "Philadelphia." ... > Actually the Philadelphia LATA contains almost all of southeastern > Pennsylvania, hardly a small portion, even less so if you are > considering population and telephone lines, not land. It's a joke, son. > But I have a question. Let's assume that a caller has selected > Verizon for regional calls, and AT&T for all other long distance. > Does this mean that this caller in Allentown PA who dials Laurel DE > will be billed for Verizon for this call? Yes indeed. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 330 5711 johnl@iecc.com Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner http://iecc.com/johnl Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2003 21:00:12 CDT From: Mark J Cuccia Subject: Southeastern PA and the State of DE Robert Code wrote: > Linc Madison wrote: >> All of Delaware is a single LATA, but that LATA also includes a small >> portion of Pennsylvania, including an insignificant little town called >> "Philadelphia." In fact, the unfortunate folks in Delaware live in a >> LATA that is called "the Philadelphia LATA." > Actually the Philadelphia LATA contains almost all of southeastern > Pennsylvania, hardly a small portion, even less so if you are > considering population and telephone lines, not land. > But I have a question. Let's assume that a caller has selected > Verizon for regional calls, and AT&T for all other long distance. > Does this mean that this caller in Allentown PA who dials Laurel DE > will be billed for Verizon for this call? (in a SINGLE word) ... YES! That said, that "should" be my shortest post to TELECOM-Digest, EVER! :) But I'll add some more descriptive info below: If that customer has selected VeriZon (Bell Atlantic, formerly Bell of Pennsylvania, or Delaware's Diamond State Telephone, the original BOC names, depending on the state), the ILEC (Incumbent) for their in-TRA-LATA toll carrier, YES, calls between Allentown PA and Laurel DE will be billed by VeriZon, unless the caller uses a 101-XXXX+ dialaround CAC before dialing 1+ on such in-TRA-LATA toll calls. Afterall, calls between/within the state of Delaware and southeastern PA, at least when considering VeriZon's operations, are "local-toll" (as far as I'm concerned, an oxy-moronic term, as how can something be toll 'and' local at the same time!), or more properly referred to within the US telco industry since 1984 as in-TRA-LATA toll. Of course these days, you aren't necessariy "locked" into using VeriZon ILEC (Incumbent) in-tra-LATA toll for these calls anymore, as you now can use 101-XXXX+ CAC codes to 'dialaround', upfront default 'PIC' someone you prefer if other than VeriZon, use cards via providers OTHER than VeriZon on 1-800-type dialups or 950- dialups, use cellular providers other than VeriZon, use CLECs that don't necessarily 'default' to VeriZon for *ANY* type of toll call, etc. Mark J. Cuccia mcuccia@tulane.edu ------------------------------ 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 #415 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Apr 28 02:02:13 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h3S62DB14859; Mon, 28 Apr 2003 02:02:13 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 02:02:13 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200304280602.h3S62DB14859@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson cc: johnl@iecc.com Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #416 TELECOM Digest Mon, 28 Apr 2003 02:02:00 EDT Volume 22 : Issue 416 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson "Cyber War!" (Monty Solomon) Rise of the Spam Zombies (Monty Solomon) DirecTV Mole to Plead Guilty (Monty Solomon) London's Soho to Get Blanket 802.11 Cover For Voice, Data (M Solomon) Can Westminster Really Set up a WiFi Zone in a Month? (Monty Solomon) Auditing Web Site Authentication (Monty Solomon) Sometimes, it All Works Out in the End ... (Gordon S. Hlavenka) Re: Why Vonage Not Verizon? (Gary Breuckman) Re: Why Vonage Not Verizon? (tonypo1@sdc.cox.net) Re: DIRECTV Plans Monthly Fee for HDTV (Gary Breuckman) Example of Mail Washer Returned Mail: User Unknown (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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 01:03:13 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: "Cyber War!" Excerpt from PBS Previews FRONTLINE Thursday, April 24, 2003 (9-10:00 pm) A new form of warfare has broken out, and the battleground is America's technological infrastructure -- the power grid, the water supply, the complex air traffic control system and the nation's railroads. This documentary investigates just how real the threat of war in cyberspace is and reveals what the White House knows that the rest of us don't. (CC, Stereo) At the companion site, watch the entire program online, hear the thoughts of a "Master Hacker," submit your questions to a panel of computer security experts, view a timeline of recent major attacks and much more. http://pbs.org/frontline/ (Available Thursday, April 24) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 00:44:35 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Rise of the Spam Zombies By Kevin Poulsen, SecurityFocus Pressed by increasingly effective anti-spam efforts, senders of unsolicited commercial e-mail are resorting to outright criminality in their efforts to conceal the source of their ill-sent missives, using Trojan horses to turn the computers of innocent netizens into secret spam zombies. "This is the newest delivery mechanism," says Margie Arbon, director of operations of anti-spam group MAPS. "I've been looking for it for a year, and in the last couple of months people have actually found Trojans that are doing it ... They're carrying their own SMTP engines. Failing that, they install open proxy software." One of those programs popped up last week. Named "Proxy-Guzu," when executed by an unwitting user the Trojan listens on a randomly-chosen port and uses its own built-in mail client to dash off a message to a Hotmail account, putting the port number and victim's IP address in the subject line. The spammer takes it from there, routing as much e-mail as he or she likes through the captured computer, knowing that any efforts to trace the source of the spam will end at the victim's Internet address. Trojan horses generally rely on their wielder's ability to trick innocent people into executing them. Proxy-Guzu, naturally, arrives as spam -- in one sighting the program was offered as a naughty peek at an online webcam. One early victim of the malware, posting to an anti-virus message board, says he detected it only when his desktop firewall program alerted him to large quantities of outgoing e-mail messages sent to unfamiliar addresses, with subject lines like "Don't tell your parents about this!" and "your bill." http://www.securityfocus.com/news/4217 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 00:41:50 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: DirecTV Mole to Plead Guilty A plea agreement is reached in the case of the college student who knew too much, while elsewhere DirecTV lawyers move against a message board poster for giving hacking advice to satellite pirates. By Kevin Poulsen, SecurityFocus Apr 24 2003 12:23PM A 19-year-old University of Chicago student accused of leaking the secrets of DirectTV's most advanced anti-piracy technology to hacker websites has agreed to plead guilty to violating the rarely used 1996 Economic Espionage Act. Igor Serebryany is scheduled to appear Monday in federal court in Los Angeles to enter a guilty plea, in a plea agreement reached between defense attorneys and prosecutors last week, lawyers for both sides confirmed Wednesday. http://www.securityfocus.com/news/4173 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The damn fools! Why don't they make it a law you cannot show a bank robbery dramatization on television then? After all, there are a lot of bank robberies, some of them *may* have been caused by someone reading the instructions for same on a message board somewhere. Why aren't all television crime shows eliminated and the producers/writers of same arrested since who knows ... some crime somewhere may have been caused by someone who viewed the program. So here is a guy who told on a message board somewhere how to hack Direct TV and they got him. Is the real problem that Igor is smart enough to figure those things out while the prosecutors are well ... stupid prosecutors who needed someone to keep their criminal count up? But of course, prosecutors are not going to try that sort of stunt on CBS or NBC. They have lawyers and would fight back. Better to take some college student who can't afford to fight the evil that lurks in the prosecutors of America. Makes me sick to think about sometimes. Hackers are not the bad guys; prosecutors are! PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 00:46:47 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: London's Soho to Get Blanket 802.11 Cover For Voice, Data By Tony Smith London's City of Westminster Council is to bring 802.11b wireless networking to the streets of Soho. The scheme, dubbed the Westminster 4G project, will initially provide Wi-Fi connectivity for council operatives and remote systems. But in a direct challenge to ISPs and the UK's wired and mobile telcos, the Conservative-led Council plans to extend the network to provide data and voice services to the public. Westminster 4G, due to be rolled out next month, will see a number of "smart boxes" installed throughout the Soho district of central London. Greek Street, Old Compton Street and Dean Street will be among the first to be given blanket Wi-Fi coverage, project leader and West End ward councillor Ian Wilder told The Register. New York City embarked on a similar scheme last year when it rolled out Wi-Fi access in the Bryant Park area and other zones. The Westminster plan will allow parking meter attendants, cleaners, noise inspectors and other council workers to access council systems via 802.11-equipped handheld terminals in real-time, in the field. http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/59/30404.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 00:50:28 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Can Westminster Really Set up a WiFi Zone in a Month? By Guy Kewney Posted on 26/04/2003 at 21:45 Wireless experts are deeply sceptical over leaked plans from Westminster council, London, to establish a blanket voice and data zone in the West End, particularly, the Soho area. Not just the time-scale is being questioned. The story, broken by The Register's Tony Smith, says that Westminster 4G is due to be rolled out next month. Conservative councillor Ian Wilder, who is best known for his campaigning to "clean up" the sex business in Soho, predicted that a number of WiFi nodes, or "smart boxes" will installed throughout the Soho district of central London. Greek Street, Old Compton Street and Dean Street will be among the first to be given blanket Wi-Fi coverage. But rival WiFi providers have expressed dismay at the prospect, predicting that access point overload will quickly follow. There are already dozens of freelance WiFi zones in the area, including Starbucks and BT OpenZone nodes, not to mention even more accidental access points provided by employees in the area, who have installed their own access points on corporate LANs. Richard Lander of WiFi Mesh company, LocustWorld, said that the prospect of seeing the council successfully roll out a wide-area wireless project in a month was "far-fetched." Other experts remembered the chaos of this year's big computer exhibition, CeBIT, in Hanover - where too many WiFi access points were installed, reducing the bandwidth from a theoretical 11 megabits per second, to about 10K - slower than a GPRS cellphone. And even a well-organised wireless zone can be sabotaged by the thoughtless rollout of just one rogue access point which shares a channel with a neighbouring one, as was shown at the recent Microsoft mobile developer conference at Disneyland Paris. http://www.newswireless.net/articles/030426-westminster.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 00:55:26 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Auditing Web Site Authentication by Mark Burnett Consider this scenario: you build a Web site that requires some kind of user log-in. You allow users to create usernames and passwords and require a valid username and password to get in to your site. But is your Web site authentication scheme secure? Every time I register at a site, I marvel at the consistently laughable - sometimes pathetic - security among even the world's largest Web sites. As the Web becomes more a part of our personal lives, the threat of fraud and identity theft grows accordingly. Inadequate user security is a problem that Web developers must address. Perhaps it is lack of standards. Perhaps it is a lack of auditing. This article addresses both of those issues by establishing a standard audit procedure by which to measure your own security. Test this list of questions against your own Web site's authentication scheme and see how it stands. http://www.securityfocus.com/infocus/1688 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2003 23:04:10 -0500 From: Gordon S. Hlavenka Reply-To: nospam@crashelectronics.com Organization: Crash Electronics Subject: Sometimes, it all works out in the end... I have a box (an Extendnet 4000, if you care) that acts as a webserver, mailserver, firewall, NAT/DHCP server, etc. Under the hood it's some flavor of *nix and a bunch of scripts so you can administer everything through a webpage ... it has (2) ethernet cards and an internal modem. You plug it into your broadband and LAN, and if the broadband goes down it will use the modem for dial-backup. In January I relocated from (630-691) to (630-832). I had been getting DSL from Qwest, but they said my new address was too far from the CO so they couldn't transfer the account. This even though the new address is about 2000 feet _closer_ to its CO than the old one. Qwest serves the new CO as well but has changed their rules about loop length, apparently -- they also told me they couldn't provide service at the existing address which they were currently serving :-) SBC (nee Ameritech (nee Illinois Bell)) wanted a $200 setup fee which the sales rep said they never waive. So I just let my 4000 box work the dialup for me while I waited for decent DSL to turn up in my area. Last Tuesday (4/22), I got around to paying the March bill for the new modem line. It showed 420 calls placed which seemed awfully high. So I started poking around, and discovered the 4000 was still set to "always connected" mode -- so the dial schedule I'd programmed in was not being used. Oops -- I fixed that. But I was motivated by the $45 phone bill to look at DSL again, and now SBC is running a $29/mo with no setup fee promotion. It's a dynamic IP, but since it's cheaper than dialup I'll live with it. I made the call, and they said they'd ship the self-install kit and the line would be provisioned on 4/29. Wednesday evening my dialup ISP () cut off my "unlimited" account for excessive usage. I can't really complain about this, because it's up to me to make sure my stuff is properly configured and they do explain upfront that "unlimited" doesn't mean you can nail up their modem 24/7. Interesting coincidence on the timing, though. Fortunately, I keep a $4.95/month AOL account and my mail is routed through Namesecure, so I was only bouncing for about two hours. Namesecure has their bad points, notably a complete absence of telephone support. But they do have the advantage of being cheap, plus this is an example of when they will save your butt: I had three different ISPs in as many days, and the only interruption to my email was the brief period I didn't yet know I had a problem. But AOL is not suitable for regular use, mainly it's a cheap way to get web hosting. (I host 4 banner-free websites at AOL for $4.95/month, and I _could_ be hosting 7.) Joi said they'd turn the account back on Thursday, but then on Thursday morning they said it wouldn't be back until the 29th -- another amusing coincidence. My pending SBC/Yahoo DSL includes unlimited dialup access, but that can't be used until the DSL account is activated, which won't be until Tuesday. I needed an alternate ISP, fast. Thursday around noon I was signed on to AOL looking for cheap dialup access when an Ameritech truck pulled up. (Apparently they haven't put all the SBC decals on yet.) The tech got out, said he was here "to test my new DSL", and headed for the demarc. The self-install kit had arrived that morning, so I went ahead and hooked it up. Guess what? Sync! Now, the SBC/Yahoo installation CD loads up a connection manager, who knows how much spyware, and a whole bunch of other extraneous software. Not a problem -- I put a sacrificial Windows installation on a scratch hard drive, loaded all the SBC/Yahoo crap on it, and got my account configured. Then I moved the DSL over to the 4000 where it happily commenced to chugging bits, and I put my regular drive back in. Monday (4/28) I'll cancel the Joi dialup account and put in a disconnect order for the modem's phone line (no, that's not the pair with the DSL on it :-) I went from 56Kbps for about $50/month to 600+Kbps for about $30/month -- and SBC got it installed less than 48 hours after the order was placed, 5 days ahead of schedule! Gordon S. Hlavenka http://www.crashelectronics.com Grammar and spelling flames welcome. Yes, that's really my email address. Don't change it. ------------------------------ From: Gary Breuckman Subject: Re: Why Vonage Not Verizon? Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2003 22:23:33 -0500 Organization: Puma's Lair - catbox.com In article , Michael D. Sullivan wrote: > On Sat, 26 Apr 2003 11:03:02 GMT, Carlo Coggi posted the following to > comp.dcom.telecom: >> I live in Manhattan and have had the same easy-to-remember MUrray Hill >> (68x) exchange home phone number for several years. I will be moving a >> few dozen blocks uptown in a few weeks and would like to retain this >> number. Verizon says that they cannot let me retain my number if they >> move more than a few blocks beyond the specific geographic neighborhood >> I live in. > I bet you could pay for an FX (foreign exchange) line and keep your > number, but this would cost quite a bit and probably wouldn't be worth > it. You could probably get 'remote call forwarding' on your old line and have calls forwarded to your new number. That way you could continue with the old number as long as you wanted, and when you decided that everyone was using your new number you could drop the forwarding. Depending on the distance you moved, this could be less than a foreign exchange line -- but you are actually paying for two numbers (old and new) and the forwarding. Gary Breuckman ------------------------------ From: tonypo1@sdc.cox.net Subject: Re: Why Vonage Not Verizon? Organization: The Ace Tomatoe and Cement Company Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 03:33:39 GMT In article , zyxNOSPAM@camsul.com says: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Actually an FX line is based on mileage > 'as the crow flies' and would not be that much in this particular > application. In fact, I suspect it would be less than a Vonage type > phone *in this application*. PAT] Well -- way back when I lived right on the line between what would give me a Providence rate-center phone number, or a Pawtucket rate-center phone number. Providence can call Warwick without a toll, Pawtucket can't. Still that way to this day. In any case most of my calling was to Warwick and points beyond so I got an FX. The CO's were < 1 mile as the crow flies but I got whacked an outrageous per month fee on top of mileage. I'm hoping services like Vonage force the incumbents into re-thinking the way they do business. Digital switches don't give a rats ass what yur phone number is, it could be 111-2345 for all that matters, and doesn't SS7 work within LATA boundaries too? It would probably mean software or firmware upgrades for switches and it's going to come down to that eventually. The Bell companies are well known for crying wolf all the time. ------------------------------ From: Gary Breuckman Subject: Re: DIRECTV Plans Monthly Fee for HDTV Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2003 22:34:47 -0500 Organization: Puma's Lair - catbox.com > Mail Washer bounces it back to the sender right from the POP server. And > believe me, after months of clicking and bouncing, you do eventually > start to see a reduction in the spam level. PAT] This is, I believe, wishful thinking on your part :) - at least in reference to bounces. Maybe it learns locally and so you see less. Bounces NEVER (well, mostly never) go back to the originator, they are all sent with fictitious FROM addresses. The only time the spammer might notice bounces are when the email is immediately rejected by the ESMTP host system, such as with "User unknown" -- the host never accepts the message, cuts them off in midstream with an error after seeing the recipient header. In many cases, though, including your example, your ISP's host will accept the mail. It will try to send a bounce message later, but of course that never gets to the sender. Gary Breuckman [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You are correct if we make the assumption that all spam comes from forged, nonsensical addressses. However, I see quite a bit from addresses that are good -- I just don't want the mail because it is crappy nonsense. *I know* a lot of the spam is going to just bounce off to somewhere and float around then get bashed; but bashed by someone other than me. It is just easier (as Mail Washer allows) to tap the mouse once and bash a piece of mail 'bouncing' it somewhere so it is out of my hair. Its like the old saying it is better to light a candle (even if it barely gives any light at all) rather than curse the darkness. If I let all that spam overload my Outlook Express inbox then had to go back and delete it all to the 'deleted' box then go again to the deleted box and say I want to get rid of it and then confirm that I wanted to get rid of it, thats 3 or 4 mouse clicks where I can make one click do it all, and if some of it accidentally reaches the true sender so much the better. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2003 22:49:48 -0600 From: Mail Delivery Subsystem Subject: Example of Mail Washer Returned mail: User unknown [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Here is an example of what bounced mail through Mail Washer looks like. I was here on massis and sent myself a letter to my personal account where I have Mail Washer installed. I just sent a one line message saying 'bounce this back to massis on reciept.' I sent it, it got to my personal account a few seconds later. About an hour later I went on my own account and found it. Mail Washer not only gives an authentic looking bounce, it also diddles with the Date line to make it appear the bounce occurred immediatly on receipt. If you study the bounce long enough you will see some evidence it may have been dummied up but what spammer has the time to look that long and hard. Anyway, here is what I got back after bouncing the 'spam'. PAT] ****************************** This is a MIME-encapsulated message --TCQ30335.1051401600/mx1.sbcglobal.net The original message was received at Sun, 27 Apr 2003 22:49:48 -0600 from massis.lcs.mit.edu [18.24.10.21] ----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors ----- (expanded from: ) ----- Transcript of session follows ----- mail.local: unknown name: ptownson 550 ... User unknown --TCQ30335.1051401600/mx1.sbcglobal.net Content-Type: message/delivery-status Reporting-MTA: dns; mx1.sbcglobal.net Received-From-MTA: DNS; massis.lcs.mit.edu Arrival-Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2003 22:49:48 -0600 Final-Recipient: RFC822; X-Actual-Recipient: RFC822; ptownson@sbcglobal.net Action: failed Status: 5.1.1 Last-Attempt-Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2003 22:49:48 -0600 --TCQ30335.1051401600/mx1.sbcglobal.net Content-Type: message/rfc822 X-Apparently-To: ptownson@sbcglobal.net via web80101.mail.yahoo.com; 27 Apr 2003 20:49:44 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: Received: from vm4-ext.prodigy.net (207.115.63.115) by mta814.mail.yahoo.com with SMTP; 27 Apr 2003 20:49:43 -0700 (PDT) X-Originating-IP: [18.24.10.21] Received: from massis.lcs.mit.edu (massis.lcs.mit.edu [18.24.10.21]) by vm4-ext.prodigy.net (8.12.9/8.12.3) with ESMTP id h3S3nh6q102280 for ; Sun, 27 Apr 2003 23:49:43 -0400 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h3S3ngP13249 for ptownson@sbcglobal.net; Sun, 27 Apr 2003 23:49:42 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2003 23:49:42 -0400 (EDT) From: TELECOM Digest Editor Message-Id: <200304280349.h3S3ngP13249@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@sbcglobal.net Subject: testing the bounces just going to bounce this when it gets to sbcglobal. --TCQ30335.1051401600/mx1.sbcglobal.net-- ************************* So Mail Washer does not do a bad job of 'pretending' to bounce mail sent to a bad address ... I'll grant you that does depend on the original sender using a good address to start with, and some do. 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 #416 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Apr 28 17:06:02 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6/8.11.3) id h3SL61d19304; Mon, 28 Apr 2003 17:06:02 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 17:06:02 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200304282106.h3SL61d19304@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson cc: johnl@iecc.com Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #417 TELECOM Digest Mon, 28 Apr 2003 17:06:00 EDT Volume 22 : Issue 417 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Telecom Update (Canada) #380, April 28, 2003 (Angus TeleManagement) New Mobile Services Are on the RUN, From Mobile to Internet (A. Larsson) Spam Email Conferences (and msg to John R Levine) (AES/newspost) Re: Alternatives, was Re: AOL Blacklists Known Dynamic IP (Robt Bonomi) Re: Can Copy Protected CDs Hurt Artists by Limiting Play? (J Lindstrom) Re: Area Code Statistics (joe@obilivan.net) Re: Why Vonage Not Verizon? (joe@obilivan.net) Re: Example of Mail Washer Returned Mail: User Unknown (tonypo1@sdc.cox) America Online, Microsoft and Yahoo! Join Forces Against Spam (Solomon) Apple Announcements to Be Broadcast Live Via Satellite (Monty Solomon) Wi-Fi Comes To The Office Phone (Eric Friedebach) 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, 28 Apr 2003 10:34:33 -0400 From: Angus TeleManagement Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #380, April 28, 2003 *********************************************************** TELECOM UPDATE ************************************************************ published weekly by Angus TeleManagement Group http://www.angustel.ca Number 380: April 28, 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: ** Committee Recommends End to Foreign Ownership Limits ** Nortel Reports First Quarter Profit ** SARS Scare Delays Telecom Events ** TeraGo Completes Network in Four GTA Regions ** Fido Offers a Free Day Each Week ** Telus to Provide On-Line PC Backup ** Aliant Retires Provincial Telco Names ** Lucent Losses Continue ** Avaya Reports Reduced Loss ** Profits Continue at BCE Emergis ** AT&T Profit Beats Expectations ** Aliant Withdraws Mobile Radio Service ** Telus, BCE Results This Week ** IP-PBXs at the Tipping Point ============================================================ COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS END TO FOREIGN OWNERSHIP LIMITS: The House of Commons Standing Committee on Industry will table its report on foreign ownership limits for telecom companies today. The report, which was leaked to the press on Friday, recommends that the limits be entirely eliminated for both telecom carriers and broadcast distribution (cable) companies. (See Telecom Update #359) NORTEL REPORTS FIRST QUARTER PROFIT: Nortel Networks says it had net income of US$54 million in the first three months of 2003, its first profit in 13 quarters. Revenue was $2.4 billion, down 15% from last year. ** Nortel's wireless division produced 40% of the company's revenue; Enterprise accounted for 26%. SARS SCARE DELAYS TELECOM EVENTS: The WHO travel advisory about Toronto is causing telecom organizations to cancel or delay events in the city. We received three announcements last week: ** CANARIE's IWAY Awards gala, scheduled for April 28, has been delayed to September 22. ** The Canadian Cable Television Association has postponed its Cable Summit, which was to be held in Toronto April 27-29, to a future date. ** Telus has postponed its Investor Forum, planned for May 6. TERAGO COMPLETES NETWORK IN FOUR GTA REGIONS: TeraGo Networks, a wireless Internet access provider, says it has finished its network in downtown Toronto, Richmond Hill, Markham, and Vaughan, and has established links to 23 major Toronto office towers. It expects to finish its GTA network this spring. FIDO OFFERS A FREE DAY EACH WEEK: Microcell's new Freeday package offers Fido wireless free local calls on a day of the week chosen by the customer plus 250 anytime minutes for $25 a month. TELUS TO PROVIDE ON-LINE PC BACKUP: Telus and Massachusetts- based Connected Corporation have teamed up to offer a data backup service for desktop and laptop computers. A corporate version serves 10 or more PCs at $36.95/month. ALIANT RETIRES PROVINCIAL TELCO NAMES: The four Atlantic telcos, NewTel, IslandTel, MNT&T, and NBTel, merged in 1999, but kept their separate provincial identities. That's now changing: the telco will operate as Aliant in all four provinces, and has launched a region-wide campaign to promote the brand. LUCENT LOSSES CONTINUE: January-March 2003 was Lucent Technologies' 12th consecutive money-losing quarter. The company lost US$351 million in the three months. Revenues were down 32% from the same quarter last year. ** COO Bob Holder will leave Lucent this summer; CEO Pat Russo will add his duties to her job description. AVAYA REPORTS REDUCED LOSS: Avaya had first quarter revenue of US$1.08 billion, up 1.3% from the previous quarter and down 15.5% from the same quarter last year. The net loss was $16 million, compared to $121 million the previous quarter. PROFITS CONTINUE AT BCE EMERGIS: BCE Emergis had first quarter revenue of $124.1 million, down 5% from the previous quarter and 6% from a year ago. Net income was $4.8 million, compared with $6.4 million the previous quarter. AT&T PROFIT BEATS EXPECTATIONS: AT&T Corp. reports earnings of US$0.73 a share for the first quarter, well above analysts' expectations. The company's total earnings were US$571 million compared to a $975 million loss last year. Revenue was down 5.9%. ALIANT WITHDRAWS MOBILE RADIO SERVICE: The CRTC has approved Aliant's application to withdraw its obsolete public mobile telephone service in Newfoundland. Aliant must reimburse each remaining subscriber $2,000 to ease conversion to satellite or cellular service. http://www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Orders/2003/o2003-159.htm TELUS, BCE RESULTS THIS WEEK: Telus and BCE are both releasing their first quarter results on Wednesday, April 30. IP-PBXs AT THE TIPPING POINT: "For PBX buyers, the issue now is not whether the conversion will take place, but how to plan for and manage it." In the current issue of Telemanagement, John Riddell examines how the IP-PBX debate has shifted from "whether" to "how and when." ** Also in this issue: Telema