From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Oct 15 16:08:01 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id h9FK81704813; Wed, 15 Oct 2003 16:08:01 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2003 16:08:01 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200310152008.h9FK81704813@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 #701 TELECOM Digest Wed, 15 Oct 2003 16:08:00 EDT Volume 22 : Issue 701 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson and: Lisa Minter Hughes Announces Third Quarter Growth of 17% in Revenues (Monty Solomon) Intel Announces Third-Quarter Revenue of $7.8 Billion (Monty Solomon) Victims of Cyberstalking (Monty Solomon) Studying Special Collections and the Web: An Analysis (Monty Solomon) Passive Radar Ready for Prime Time (Marcus Didius Falco) Latest Info on Future Area Codes in the US/Canada (Mark J Cuccia) Re: USF Recovery Fee (Herb Stein) Re: Canadians Rise-up With Petition For Nextgen Phone (Group Special) Re: ITU, World Radio Broadcasters Join Anti-BPL Chorus (Paul Robinson) Changing Contention Window (nand_in_i@yahoo.com) obTelecom? (Joey Lindstrom) Sad News: Snarl Grove on the 87 Billion (Tom Allen) Re: Last Laugh! Monkeys are Such Cute Creatures (Herb Stein) 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, 14 Oct 2003 18:55:28 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Hughes Announces Third Quarter Growth of 17% in Revenues HUGHES Announces Third Quarter Growth of 17% in Revenues and 33% in Operating Profit Before D&A; Operating Profit Quadruples - Oct 14, 2003 10:30 AM (PR Newswire) DIRECTV U.S. Adds 326,000 Owned and Operated Subscribers in the Quarter, a 58% Increase Over Last Year EL SEGUNDO, Calif., Oct. 14 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Hughes Electronics Corporation ("HUGHES"), a world-leading provider of digital television entertainment, broadband satellite networks and services, and global video and data broadcasting, today reported that third quarter 2003 revenues increased 17% to $2.57 billion compared with $2.19 billion in the third quarter of 2002. Operating profit before depreciation and amortization(1) for the quarter increased 33% to $359 million compared with $270 million in the same period last year. Operating profit increased to $77 million compared with operating profit of $16 million in the third quarter of 2002. In addition, HUGHES reported a third quarter 2003 net loss of $23 million compared to a net loss of $14 million in the same period of 2002. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=36066441 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2003 19:01:21 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Intel Announces Third-Quarter Revenue of $7.8 Billion Intel Announces Third-Quarter Revenue of $7.8 Billion SANTA CLARA, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Oct. 14, 2003--Intel Corporation today announced third-quarter revenue of $7.8 billion, up 15 percent sequentially and up 20 percent year-over-year. Third-quarter net income was $1.7 billion, up 85 percent sequentially and up 142 percent year-over-year. Earnings per share were $0.25, up 79 percent sequentially and up 150 percent from $0.10 in the third quarter of 2002. http://finance.lycos.com/qc/news/story.aspx?symbols=NASDAQ:INTC&story=36074167 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2003 19:17:37 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Victims of Cyberstalking Victims of cyberstalking: An exploratory study of harassment perpetrated via the Internet by Paul Bocij Abstract This paper describes the first study to focus exclusively on the prevalence and impact of cyberstalking. A Web-based questionnaire was used to collect data from a group of respondents who were recruited by snowball sampling via e-mail. A total of 169 respondents completed the questionnaire. The results of the study found that approximately a third of respondents might be considered victims of cyberstalking. Furthermore, when asked to indicate the level of distress felt as a result of their experiences, almost a quarter of respondents chose a value of ten on a ten-point scale. The study also suggests a number of differences between cyberstalking and offline stalking, for instance cyberstalking tends to take place over a shorter period of time than offline stalking and cyberstalking victims are less likely to know the identify of their harassers. These differences add weight to the argument that cyberstalking should be seen as a new form of deviant behaviour that can be distinguished from offline stalking. The work concludes by emphasising a need for further research. http://www.firstmonday.org/issues/issue8_10/bocij/index.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2003 19:20:35 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Studying Special Collections and the Web: An Analysis of Practice by Lorraine Normore Abstract Many digital library collections are the virtual analogs of special collections in libraries, museums, historical societies and archives today. A field study of people responsible for collection maintenance across a variety of institutions was carried out. It aimed at improving our understanding of issues involved in collection description and access. A second study examined the current state of Web access to materials from the previously studied special collections. Data concerning the availability of online finding aids, externally accessible databases for collection content, digitized images and Web exhibits are presented. http://www.firstmonday.org/issues/issue8_10/normore/index.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2003 23:17:29 -0400 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Passive Radar Ready for Prime Time This is the technology that reportedly makes it possible to track "stealth" aircraft relatively easily. It has implications for a lot of hot spots, including the middle east, former Yugoslavia, and a lot of other places. It was discussed extensively on TELECOM Digest a few years ago. * Original: FROM..... Dave Farber Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2003 15:08:11 -0400 From: Alex Salkever Subject: Passive Radar Ready for Prime Time Hi, Dave: My colleague Otis Port has put together an excellent overview of the current status of passive radar.It's eye-oepning and alot further along than many may think. Here's the URL and an extended excerpt. Cheers. http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/03_42/b3854113.htm Super-Radar, Done Dirt Cheap A radar system that uses ubiquitous cell-phone signals is on its way Any technology can be a two-edged sword. Cell phones are a good example. They're clearly a great convenience, even a life-saving tool during natural disasters and medical emergencies. And they should save many more lives under the Federal Communications Commission's enhanced 911 mandate, which requires that cell phones relay their precise locations to 911 operators. Yet some people are appalled that their cell phone will always give away where they are. That makes it possible to compile a "road map" of a user's movements. So imagine the outcry when privacy worriers learn that cell-phone systems can be used to locate and track a car, boat, or plane -- even if no one inside is carrying a wireless phone. But outcry or not, the technology seems certain to be deployed, given its myriad civilian and military applications. The technology is called Celldar, from "cellular" plus "radar." Under development since 1997 at Roke Manor Research Ltd. in Romsey, England, it differs from conventional radar in several key respects. When radar tracks planes for air traffic controllers -- or maps the surface of Venus from a space probe -- the same set of equipment both sends out radio signals and picks up the returning echoes. So computers can easily calculate an object's distance and relative size based on how long it takes the returning signals to bounce back and how strong they are. In contrast, Celldar takes a so-called passive approach: It watches and interprets how signals from cell-phone base stations interact with objects such as cars, trucks or planes. The hardware required for this is much simpler than existing radar systems. A Celldar prototype built in 1999 consisted of a PC and the insides of two cell phones, and cost just $3,000, says Peter Lloyd, head of Roke Manor's Celldar program. The flip side is, the signal-processing software is complex: It must allow for the varying travel times for signals between two or more cellular base stations and a Celldar receiver, as well as the times from the different base stations to the target. Lloyd says Roke's clever program is based on "$10 million worth of expertise in writing software" for cellular systems and military radars. One big plus to the military: passive radar systems are invisible to anti-radar weapons because they don't have their own transmitters. Celldar's implications are exciting -- but also troubling to some. Even though the technology can't be used to identify cell-phone users, since it "sees" only radio waves echoing off hard surfaces, it and similar approaches are evolving quickly. In addition to Celldar, which is sopping up $1.5 million a year for development, a dozen other passive-radar projects are under way in the U.S., Europe, and Asia. As the technology bears fruit, it should give the world's police and homeland security agencies new tools for monitoring shipments of illegal weapons and drug smuggling operations. Highway officials could gain a detailed window on traffic flows, helping them to minimize congestion. But because passive-radar systems could be cheap enough for hobbyists to buy -- or cobble together themselves -- the technology could also become the next fad among people who own police-radio scanners or who enjoy snooping on their neighbors' comings and goings. This month marks something of a passive-radar milestone. In late October, Roke will show off the latest Celldar system to officials of Britain's Defense Ministry at an army exercise on the Salisbury Plain. During the field maneuvers, Celldar will detect the movement of ground vehicles and determine whether cell-phone signals are bouncing off a tank, truck, or armored personnel carrier. Also in late October, radar researchers from around the world will gather in Seattle to discuss recent advances, including passive systems that use FM radio or TV broadcasts instead of cell-phone signals. The invitation-only meeting will be hosted by John D. Sahr, a University of Washington electrical engineer. Since 1997 he has operated a passive-radar system unshrouded by military secrecy. It harnesses an FM station's signals to study particles in the ionosphere -- the top layer of the atmosphere, over 300 miles up. Sahr decided to go with passive radar, he says, "because it's incredibly cheap" -- $20,000 vs. $25 million for a comparable active system. "You could probably do an amateur system for under $5,000," Sahr adds. A system for small airports might cost as little as $15,000. That's important because of the 5,280 public airports in the U.S., only about 300 currently have radar. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2003 18:58:06 CDT From: Mark J Cuccia Subject: Latest Info on Future Area Codes in the US/Canada Earlier this year, in Feb. 2003, the Canadian portion of the NANP Telco industry decided that the 438 overlay to 514 for Montreal PQ metro would be postponed from Feb. 2004 until Oct.2005, along with the associated 'mandatory' dates in preparation being adjusted proportionately as well. The "ten-digit reminder" period for those customers who would still place intra-514 calls as only seven-digits (ten-digit local intra-514 dialing is already permissive within Montreal PQ) was adjusted to 4-June-2005, and mandatory ten-digit intra-514 dialing (customers dialing only seven-digits would get an announcement but the call would *NOT* complete) would begin to be phased in on 24-Sept-2005, phased in over a week throughout the Montreal/514 metro area, thus making the overlay with new geographic/POTS non-test 438-NXX c.o.codes being effective on 01-Oct-2005. All of the above was decided upon by the Canadian portion of the NANP telco industry in Feb.2003, and released to their websites, etc, at that time as well. But Neustar-NANPA only puts up a (revised) Planning Letter (#333) today, Tuesday 14-October-2003, altho' that Planning Letter is dated 10-October-2003 (Friday): http://www.nanpa.com/pdf/PL_333v1.pdf CO-INCIDENTALLY / IRONICALLY, in the MEANTIME, only just these past few days of October ... Bell Canada has filed a request for discussion at the next 514 Relief Planning Meeting, to postpone YET AGAIN the 438 overlay to 514, Montreal. This is *NOT* "official" (yet), but I think that it *WILL* be, as the latest NRUF projected "exhaust" of 514 has been pushed out further ... Since 514's overlay with 438 has been postponed a few times ALREADY, and also recently, the overlay of 519 with 226 (southern ON) has been postponed from its previously announced effective date ... it has already been speculated that 514 would be postponed YET AGAIN ... Bell Canada's proposed recommendation is now for the following dates: Reminder period (play a recorded announcement if customer dials only seven-digits, indicating that the customer should get in the habit of dialing all ten-digits for such calls, and then the call *WILL* be completed) to be phased in from 4-Nov-2006 thru 11-Nov-2006. (Ten-digit dialing *IS* already possible for intra-514 local Montreal calls). MANDATORY ten-digit local intra-514 dialing will be phased in over a week beginning 24-Feb-2007. Mandatory ten-digit intra-514 local dialing would supposedly be in place in every central office throughout 514/Montreal by 3-March-2007. (any seven-digit dialed call would NOT complete, although for a period of time, there could be a MANDATORY-reminder message indicating that now one MUST place such such calls with all ten-digits -- that the call could NOT be completed, the customer MUST HANG UP FIRST and then re-dial with all ten-digits, instead of a "cold" vacant code or partial dial recording). And new 438-NXX (POTS/geographic non-test) c.o.codes (which the CNA-C had already begun "pre-assigning" to qualifying requesting LECs/CLECs) could begin to take effect beginning 3-March-2007, since intra-514 ten-digit local dialing would (hopefully) be MANDATORY as all ten-digits in every Montreal based c.o.switch. Since I *do* think that this delay ***WILL*** be approved ... it would mean that the future new NPA activation line-up will then be: 02-OCT-2004 -- American Samoa becoming part of the NANP, its ITU country code +684 numerics become its +1 NANP *AREA* (NPA) code: +684 begins to change over to +1-684 (mandatory 02-APR-2005) 30-MAR-2005 -- Utah's 801/385 split (mandatory 30-SEP-2005) (I also think THIS one AS WELL might be delayed YET AGAIN EVEN FURTHER into the future, as it's been delayed quite a few times already since 2000) 21-OCT-2006 -- Ontario's 519/226 Overlay (reminder period would be phased in during the third week of May 2006; mandatory messages phased in over a week starting 14-OCT-2006) 03-MAR-2007 -- Quebec's 514/438 Overlay (Montral PQ) (reminder period would be phased in from 04-NOV-2006 thru 11-NOV-2006; mandatory messages phased in over a week starting 24-FEB-2007) And then, there's still the two splits southern CA, 310/424 and 909/951, both being RE-Re-re-reviewed. I do NOT have any "firm/official" dates for these two area codes, although one of the two Administrative Law Judges involved with the Ca.PUC in these NPA relief plans gave the opinion that 951 needed to split from 909 sometime in 2004, with "recommended" dates of 17-JUL-2004 (permissive), 30-OCT-2004 (mandatory). I haven't yet seen any "recommended" dates for the 310/424 split. And finally, there's a BATCH of announced new area codes, which are all postponed "indefinatly", with no firm/announced/official date, throughout the US. More info on these can be found at Neustar-NANPA's website, at the page "PLANNED NPAS NOT YET IN SERVICE", http://docs.nanpa.com/cgi-bin/npa_reports/nanpa?function=list_npa_not_in_service The dates for 519/226 ON and 514/438 PQ still may need to be updated on this page. Actually, NANPA has removed much of the old detail regarding these codes, as they are all in a state of "indefinate postponement", but older information may be found from the associated NANPA Planning Letters referenced for each of these postponed future area codes at this page. Mark J. Cuccia mcuccia@tulane.edu New Orleans LA USA ------------------------------ From: Herb Stein Subject: Re: USF Recovery Fee Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2003 20:11:03 -0500 Sid Zafran wrote in message news:telecom22.700.9@telecom-digest.org: > I have been disputing the USF recovery fee on my invoices from > Earthlink DSL. After having discussed and written to Earthlink about > this matter, the following summary facts apply to my billing: > Earthlink is billing me on behalf of SBC who provides my local > telephone service; > I am already paying SBC a USF recovery fee for the low > frequency telephone signal on my local line; > Earthlink is collecting a USF recovery fee surcharge for the > high frequency DSL signal on my local line; > All of SBC's customers using Earthlink DSL services in Los > Angeles County, California, are being billed $0.66 monthly for USF > recovery. > I was informed verbally by SBC that no additional taxes would appear > on my telephone bill if I used their DSL services. My billing would > stay the same regarding taxes and surcharges. I am presently paying > SBC a monthly USF recovery fee of $0.45. > I believe that that SBC is shifting more than an equitable share of > their USF recovery fee to Earthlink customers such as myself. This may > be a violation of FCC requirements. It also gives SBC an unfair > competitive advantage in providing DSL services. > Note: FCC summary requirements may be seen on the following Web page: > http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/customerfacts/usfincrease.html That's "consumerfacts" Herb Stein The Herb Stein Group www.herbstein.com herb@herbstein.com 314 952-4601 ------------------------------ From: Group Special Mobile Subject: Re: Canadians Rise-up With Petition For Nextgen Phone/PDA Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2003 12:50:59 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Reply-To: look@signature_for_reply_instructions On Mon, 13 Oct 2003 19:18:14 GMT, Gawain wrote: > US Cellular is > still peddling the 5165 in it's TDMA networks. They have essentially > one model. That's US Cellular's choice. There are literally at least a dozen TDMA models available from Nokia, Motorola and Ericsson that will work on TDMA networks. Whether US Cellular chooses to market them is their decision. Unlike GSM you are limited to what your network chooses to use on their networks. You are only permitted to use phones that are either sold by a network or have been used on a network. This is definitely true of CDMA networks in the US and Canada as well. To send an email reply send to GSMthemobilestandard (@) yahoo.com ------------------------------ From: Richie Kennedy Subject: Re: Verizon Charges for Everything Lately Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2003 22:43:28 -0000 Organization: route56.com jbl wrote in news:telecom22.683.10@telecom-digest.org: > In , Steven J Sobol > wrote: >> They _were_ different companies. Hell, how many mergers did New York >> Telephone have to go through before they ended up even being part of >> Bell Atlantic? Two or three, at least? > NYTel--\ > >--Nynex--\ > NETel--/ \ > >--BellAtlantic---\ > / (still) \ > BellAtlantic*-----/ >--Verizon > / > GTE-----------------------------------/ > /JBL Has anyone forgotten their history of the Bell System. The New York Telephone Company (NYTel) and New England Telephone & Telegraph Company (NETel) were both components of the "Bell System" NYNEX (and, for that matter, Bell Atlantic) were born out of the Bell System divesture of 1/1/1984. AFAIK, they did not acquire any other company prior to the NYNEX/BA merger. Richie Kennedy route56@route56.com www.route56.com "Under an old brass paperweight is my list of things to do today." ------------------------------ From: Paul Robinson Organization: elusive-butterfly.net Subject: Re: ITU, World Radio Broadcasters Join Anti-BPL Chorus Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2003 23:28:24 GMT Nick Ruark wrote: > Broadcasters themselves also have exhibited increased concern about > the potential of PLT/BPL to prevent their signals from reaching > listeners. The Research and Development branch of the highly regarded > British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) has released a White Paper > reporting on a brief trial in Scotland > (http://www.bbc.co.uk/rd/pubs/whp/whp067.html). The two competing > PLT/BPL systems in operation in the town of Crieff both interfered > with HF reception. Tests were conducted at four locations. I view with a jaundiced eye any claims by broadcasters about interference. They have often used rigged tests to claim that their signals were subject to interference from even the tiniest of electronic signals. To them it seems like anything that threatens their de-facto monopoly over communications is a danger no matter what. The nauseating spectacle that has occurred with respect to the attempts to implement low power broadcasting in the U.S. to allow alternative voices -- and the subsequent effective blocking of that alternative through various methods -- makes me skeptical of any claims by the broadcast industry of possible interference with their signals. Consider that cable TV is an option and expensive while electricity is virtually a necessity and is much more accessible. If broadcast signals can be sent across electric wire, this is a much more serious threat to broadcasters than anything pre-existing. Now, I am not saying that the claims are not correct, it may well be that carrying signals over electrical wire causes interference to broadcast signals so much that it is not viable. But considering the biases of broadcasters and their lobbying groups in the past, and their attempts to mislead through inaccuracy and downright lying, I am not necessarily convinced of the veracity of their statements. Paul Robinson "Above all else... We shall go on..." "...And continue!" "If the lessons of history teach us anything it is that nobody learns the lessons that history teaches us." ------------------------------ From: nand_in_i@yahoo.com Subject: Changing Contention Window Date: 15 Oct 2003 06:08:42 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com Is it possible to change the contention window of wireless cards (Orinoco,Cisco or any other card) in Linux. I am trying to set CWmin CWmax in Linux. Is it possible to read their values from card . Please help. ------------------------------ From: Joey Lindstrom Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2003 13:18:19 -0600 Subject: obTelecom? Reply-To: joey@telussucks.info On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 13:16:06 EDT, Tom Allen (if that's your real name) wrote: > From: tomallen7629@hotmail.com (Tom Allen) > Subject: Last Laugh! Snarl Grove on the 87 Billion > Date: 14 Oct 2003 04:31:50 -0700 > Organization: http://groups.google.com > http://www.dontvoteforgeorge.com/snarlgrove.html Can we try to make our postings at least tangentially on the topic of telecom? Postings like this aren't even remotely on-topic, and serve only to piss off those who actually support the Bush administration -- which, the last time I checked, was a MAJORITY of Americans. Last time I checked, we were here to talk about telecom-related topics. There are lots of fora where these postings are appropriate. I don't understand why you think this is one of them. Then again, given the intellectual level of the drivel on display on the page in question, it all starts to come into focus. Anyone who thinks that this garbage is correct on any level is quite definitely as electro-encephalographically challenged as the author of the piece, and that would explain the judgment call that was made in posting it here. There. Now we're even. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: As usual, Joey is quite correct about the need to make all messages here relate to telecom, which was neglected in the original posting yesterday. So we will run it again today, and do it correctly this time. Thanks for the reminder, Joey! PAT] ------------------------------ From: tomallen7629@hotmail.com (Tom Allen) Subject: Sad News: Snarl Grove on the 87 Billion Date: 14 Oct 2003 04:31:50 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com http://www.dontvoteforgeorge.com/snarlgrove.html [PAT's Ob-Telecom note: 87 Billion dollars would go a long way toward paying for poor people using library internet terminals to print out the cases they are interested in. 87 Billion dollars would also go a long way toward paying my internet VOIP phone bill and everyone's phone bill. 87 Billion dollars to a relatively small handful of USA-based vendors to reconstruct the Iraqi telephone exchange among other things that got ruined in the war that Dubya sold us a bill of goods on. 87 Billion dollars for a war which lasted a few months and ended back in May, 2003 as Dubya informed us and since a MAJORITY of Americans agreed with him (just as a MAJORITY of Germans first agreed with everything NY Times columnist Adolph Hitler had to say about Germany back in the late 1920's) therefore it has to be correct. Don't worry about those flag draped coffins continuing to be sent back to the USA every day. Dubya's not worried about it; why should you be? Just like fifty million flies and what they choose to eat for lunch each day; fifty million flies couldn't be wrong, Joey, so enjoy a meal with them, okay? PAT] ------------------------------ From: Herb Stein Subject: Re: Last Laugh! Monkeys are Such Cute Creatures Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2003 17:06:16 -0500 Michael Chance wrote in message news:telecom22.700.14@telecom-digest.org: > In article , tomallen7629 > @hotmail.com says: >> Anyone been to a site called called www.dontvoteforgeorge.com ? >> There's a few comparison pics of the president and chimps; they're >> dead on target. > So this group's position is that you shouldn't vote for anyone who > looks remotely like a funny looking animal? Well, that rules out > pretty much all of the Democrat candidates. > [Lisa Minter note: I thought the group's position was that you should > vote for Garry the chimp to give the little guy a chance to show he > could do better than the current resident president now in power. > Lisa M.] Lisa- That's likely to be a less that popular opinion with conservative folk. Herb Stein The Herb Stein Group www.herbstein.com herb@herbstein.com 314 952-4601 [Lisa Minter note: Well Herb, a MAJORITY of flies alight on and enjoy a nice nutritious meal each day graciously left for them by the canines and cows where I used to live on a farm outside of Caney, KS. When I made my earlier comment, I guess I had not taken into account what a MAJORITY of Germ -- ah, err, Americans -- believed. Probably not a MAJORITY of the American military guys believe either. Lisa M.] ------------------------------ 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 fifty 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. If you donate at least fifty dollars per year we will send you our two-CD set of the entire Telecom Archives; this is every word published in this Digest since our beginning in 1981. 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 #701 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Oct 16 23:02:58 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id h9H32vY12493; Thu, 16 Oct 2003 23:02:58 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2003 23:02:58 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200310170302.h9H32vY12493@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 #702 TELECOM Digest Thu, 16 Oct 2003 23:03:00 EDT Volume 22 : Issue 702 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson and: Lisa Minter Ed Ellers Passed Away (Henry E Schaffer) Ed Ellers, R.I.P. (Mark J Cuccia) Obituary Notice: Ed Ellers (Mark J Cuccia) Cablevision Unveils Satellite TV Service (Monty Solomon) Comcast Launches HBO/Cinemax on Demand (Monty Solomon) EchoStar Bids $1.03 Bln For Loral's U.S. Satellites (Monty Solomon) Nokia Third-Quarter Results (Monty Solomon) Bluetooth, Wi-Fi in One Pocket PC (Monty Solomon) Re: Defense Department Orders Suppliers to Implement RFID (Jay Ashworth) Re: Cheap IVR (Paul Crick) BA/NYNEX Plus GTE/Contel Equals VeriZon (Mark J Cuccia) Re: Reminder Ring on Call Forwarding (Valerie in FL) Re: PLOC Freezes (Jay R. Ashworth) Need Help Finding Cheap PC Phone (tablejar@yahoo.com) Re: Smile, You're on Candid Cellphone Camera (Gail M. Hall) When a MAJORITY is Useful (Name Withheld at Reader's Request) 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: hes@hes01.unity.ncsu.edu (Henry E Schaffer) Subject: Ed Ellers Passed Away Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2003 19:57:46 UTC Organization: North Carolina State University Ed Ellers, who was a contributor to this group, passed away on Oct. 5, 2003. His uncle, Ken Forcht, is going through his computer notifying Ed's correspondents -- and so wrote to me. He asked that I notify others, and I am doing so via this post. henry schaffer hes@ncsu.edu [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thank you for passing along this very sad news. You were not the only person to write me on this, Mark Cuccia did also. Ed very frequently had good things to say here in the Digest, and he will be missed. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2003 13:50:45 CDT From: Mark J Cuccia Subject: Ed Ellers, R.I.P. I just received the following email on Thu 16-Oct-2003 even though it references 5-Oct-2003 ... forwarded below. Ed Ellers was a regular participant to several e-lists that many of us are on, including TELECOM Digest. mjc ----- Forwarded message ----- Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2003 14:42:11 -0400 From: Ed Ellers To: Mark J Cuccia This letter is written by Ken Forcht (Ed's uncle). I'm sorry to tell you that Ed has passed away about 3 PM today Oct. 05, 2003. I'm going thru his computer to send E-mails to whoever I can find that he knew &/or corresponded. If you know of anyone who should know of his death please feel free to email me (or them). I will check it in a couple of days. Ken Forcht ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2003 15:39:59 CDT From: Mark J Cuccia Subject: Obituary Notice: Ed Ellers Re, my earlier post about the passing of Ed Ellers, a frequent participant in TELECOM Digest, I that knew he lived in the Louisville KY area. So, I checked the website of the Louisville KY newspaper, the Courier-Journal.com and its Obits section, which pointed to the obituaries "clearinghouse" Legacy.com and found the following: http://www.legacy.com/Louisville/LegacySubPage2.asp?Page=LifeStory&PersonId=1462729 Edward R. "Ed" Ellers, 42, of Louisville, died Sunday, October 5, 2003, at Norton Hospital. He was a writer, editor and technical advisor for the City of Prospect. A native of Louisville, he was preceded in death by his father, William R. Ellers, and grandparents, Rev. G.W. and Mildred Ellers and Charles and Mary Forcht. He is survived by his mother, Dorothy Beaulieu, and many aunts, uncles, cousins and special friends. Ed's body was donated to the University of Louisville School of Medicine for research, as he wished. Family and friends are invited to attend a memorial service to be held at 2 p.m. Saturday, October 11, 2003, in the Reading Room at Prospect City Hall. In lieu of flowers, contributions may be made to the Edward R. Ellers Memorial Fund at any Republic Bank branch, for the benefit of the Brown Cancer Center and Prospect City Library. Published in The Courier-Journal from 10/9/2003 - 10/10/2003. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thank you very much for letting the telecom newsgroup readers know of this news. Ed Ellers was a very good, and generous contributor financially to TELECOM Digest. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2003 00:51:47 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Cablevision Unveils Satellite TV Service By Michael Learmonth and Kenneth Li NEW YORK, Oct 15 (Reuters) - Cable operator Cablevision Systems Corp.(NYSE:CVC) launched a nationwide high-definition satellite television service on Wednesday with a package of 21 commercial-free channels including a horror movie channel, a fashion channel, and music channel. The new service called VOOM puts the New York-based cable operator in direct competition with established satellite television companies, EchoStar Communications Corp. (NASDAQ:DISH) and Hughes Electronics Corp. (NYSE:GMH), which operates DirecTV. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=36097562 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2003 22:34:46 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Comcast Launches HBO On Demand and Cinemax on Demand Comcast Launches HBO On Demand and Cinemax on Demand to Millions of Customers Nationwide Actors from HBO Hit Series' `Sex and the City,' `The Sopranos' and `Six Feet Under' Join Comcast for Star-Studded Launch Event PHILADELPHIA, Oct. 16 /PRNewswire/ -- HBO stars Cynthia Nixon of "Sex and the City;" Lorraine Bracco, Dominic Chianese and Steven Schirripa of "The Sopranos;" and Michael C. Hall of "Six Feet Under" joined Comcast Cable in Philadelphia last night to officially launch HBO on Demand and Cinemax on Demand on Comcast's ON DEMAND service. The launch makes the two products available to millions of Comcast customers in New England, Baltimore, Washington, DC and Detroit, as well as 1.9 million in the Philadelphia region. As Comcast continues to roll out its ON DEMAND service in additional markets, HBO on Demand and Cinemax on Demand will also be made available. With HBO on Demand, Comcast Digital Cable customers who subscribe to HBO will have access to HBO original programming hits including "Sex and the City," "The Sopranos," "Six Feet Under," "K Street," "Curb Your Enthusiasm" and "Carnivale," as well as top movies, specials and children's programming, anytime they want, without leaving their living rooms. Cinemax on Demand has something for everyone's movie tastes, allowing subscribers to draw upon the biggest premium television theatrical library at their convenience. Shows can be instantly paused, rewound and fast-forwarded via the customer's Digital Cable remote control, and new content is added on a weekly basis, so there is always something new to watch. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=36107325 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2003 00:55:52 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: EchoStar Bids $1.03 Bln For Loral's U.S. Satellites NEW YORK, Oct 15 (Reuters) - EchoStar Communications Corp. (NASDAQ:DISH), the No. 2 U.S. satellite TV provider, said on Wednesday it bid $1.029 billion for the U.S. satellites of bankrupt Loral Space & Communications Ltd. (BB:LRLSQ), topping a bid by Intelstat. The offer, which experts believe will force an auction of Loral's North American satellites, comes after Loral rejected EchoStar's $1.85 billion bid for the entire company last week. Loral agreed to sell its North American satellite fleet to Intelsat in July for about $1 billion but must put these assets up for auction as part of bankruptcy court procedures. Intelsat had been the only party to bid specifically for the fleet. The new bid has the same terms and conditions as Intelstat's offer, EchoStar spokesman Steve Caulk said. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=36101025 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2003 08:18:26 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Nokia Third-Quarter Results Strong Volume Growth and Excellent Profitability in Mobile Phones - Nokia Meets Third-Quarter Sales and EPS Targets - Oct 16, 2003 06:24 AM (BusinessWire) HELSINKI, Finland--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Oct. 16, 2003-- Highlights: 3Q 2003 (all comparisons are year on year) -- Net sales declined 5% to EUR 6.9 billion (up 4% at constant currency). -- Nokia Mobile Phones sales were flat at EUR 5.6 billion (up 9% at constant currency). -- Nokia Networks sales declined 21% to EUR 1.2 billion. -- Nokia gains market share with 23% volume growth; industry mobile phone volume growth accelerates to 15%. -- Nokia third-quarter mobile phone market share grows to 39%. -- Company doubles share of global CDMA handset market. -- Excellent pro forma and reported operating margins in mobile phones at 22.4% and 22.0%. -- Nokia Networks achieves breakeven. -- Nokia announces new operating structure for 2004. -- Pro forma EPS (diluted) was EUR 0.18. Reported EPS (diluted) was EUR 0.17. -- Strong operating cash flow in the third quarter at EUR 1.2 billion. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=36103570 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2003 21:28:37 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Bluetooth, Wi-Fi in one Pocket PC HP's iPaq h4000 series boasts small size, improved features REVIEW By Gary Krakow MSNBC Oct. 13 - This has been a great month for PDAs. First, Palm's new top-of-the-line Tungsten T3 with its larger screen; and now Hewlett-Packard's h4150 - the thinnest/lightest Pocket PC to include Wi-Fi (802.11b) and Bluetooth wireless capabilities in the same device. Best of all, you can use both wireless services at the same time with no interference. http://www.msnbc.com/news/979664.asp ------------------------------ From: Jay R. Ashworth Subject: Re: Defense Department Orders Suppliers to Implement RFID by 2005 Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2003 17:15:00 GMT Organization: RoadRunner - Central Florida In article , Michael D Sullivan wrote: > On Sat, 11 Oct 2003 21:55:45 -0700, Nick Ruark posted the following to > comp.dcom.telecom: >> The data tags in each system store much more information -- 128 >> bytes -- than bar codes, which can store only 1.1 bytes. > I not would have expected Computerworld to make this kind of error. > UPC bar codes encode considerably more than 1.1 bytes, which would > allow for slightly less than nine products in the U.S. consumer > marketplace. The standard UPC code has ten decimal digits, plus two > additional digits that perform more limited functions (product class > and checksum, or something like that). The ten decimal digits, > representing 10,000,000,000 possible items, could be stored as ten > hexadecimal bytes, but there wouldn't be ten bytes of information > (because each byte has a capacity of storing 0-15, but only 0-9 would > be used). There is really somewhat more than 9 bytes (8,589,934,592 > items) of information. Fairly obviously, someone saw "9 bytes", thought it meant "9 bits", and "helpfully" converted it. Cheers, -- jra ------------------------------ From: web+google@ivrl.com (Paul Crick) Subject: Re: Cheap IVR Date: 15 Oct 2003 14:47:10 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com Hi Jan, I suggest you take a look at Asterisk PBX - http://www.asterisk.org/ It runs under Linux and would allow you to do exactly what you want. The developer's kit is about US$150 and allows you to plug a phone line in as well as a regular analog handset. The IVR is fully flexibily but for your requirement you could probably set something up within the dial plan quite easily. Feel free to contact me off-list if you want to discuss. Cheers, Paul ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2003 17:03:04 CDT From: Mark J Cuccia Subject: BA/NYNEX Plus GTE/Contel Equals VeriZon In the thread which has the *NOW MEANINGLESS* subject name of "VeriZon charges for everything ...", since the thread now goes into the history of the components that have made up VeriZon, and I'm jumping into this rather late since I skipped the earlier posts because the subject line *DID NOT REFLECT* the current trend of the subject !!!!!!! Don't forget that that GTE acquired Contel (Continental Telephone) some ten years ago, in the 1992/93 timeframe. They spun off certain parts of old Contel and old GTE, mostly in West Virginia and Georgia, some to Alltel, some to Citizens' Tel (aka Citizens' Utilities). And with the merger of GTE/Contel with Bell Atlantic/NYNEX around the beginning of this decade/century/millennium, the resulting VeriZon has spun off several legacy GTE ratecenters (some of it old GTE, some of it was old Contel prior to 92/93), again to Alltel and Citizens, but also some ratecenters to other companies, such as Iowa Network Services, some to CenturyTel (which has its main HQ based here in Louisiana in the town of Monroe although Monroe LA is BellSouth and NOT CenturyTel; but CenturyTel is ALL OVER rural Louisiana though), some (but not all) old GTE in Oklahoma, Texas, Arkansas (Texarkana), and New Mexico was spun off into a brand new minority ethnic group (mostly Hispanic) owned telco called Valor Telecom, and other parts of old GTE/Contel was spun off to other telcos as well. What was GTE, now VeriZon, does continue to include the old Hawaiian Telephone Company (+1-808), as well as the old Micronesian Telecom in the US possession of Saipan/Northern Mariana Islands (+1-670) that name is somewhat of a misnomer because the Federated States of Micronesia (+691) is *NOT* the same as Saipan/N.Mariana Islands (the government of FSM owns FSM Telecom which is *NOT* part of GTE nor VeriZon, nor has it ever been), but GTE-now-VeriZon does still own the incumbent LEC in the Dominican Republic (+1-809) called Codetel. In Canada, GTE's old properties of BCTel (throughout most of British Columbia), and QuebecTel (eastern Quebec) are now referred to as Telus. VeriZon does maintain a small part-ownership of Telus. (Telus was originally formed to take over the once-provincial-government-held Alberta Government Telephones, and later took over the once-city-govt held EdTel aka 'edmonton telephones', and then later merged with GTE's BCTel. As an incumbent landline LEC, Telus in Canada serves *MOST* of BC (except the northern and northeastern section of the province), *ALL* of AB, and most of eastern QC/PQ. GTE/VeriZon has spun off all of its landline-incumbent ratecenter territory in Alaska. In the later 1950s and into the 1960s (prior to acquiring the Mutual Telephone Company of Hawaii), GT&E also owned the Philippines Long Distance Telephone Company, the largest of several monopoly and also competiting telcos in the once-US-possession of the Philippines. Contel also had some unique service areas during the 1970s ... I think that Juneau-Douglas Alaska (in the panhandle) was once a Contel service area, but I think it is now locally owned. Contel had some service area in Quebec at one time, much of it being taken over by Telebec (part of Bell Canada) and some taken over by a small independent telco in Quebec, circa 1980. And Contel had part ownership with Cable & Wireless and the local island government, at one time or another during the 1960s/70s and early 80s, in some "British" Caribbean areas of the (non-US-parts of the) NANP-Caribbean: Grand Bahama Island: Freeport/Lucaya (but *NOT* the rest of the Bahamas), Jamaica, Barbados, and also briefly (until Marxist governments took over in the early 1970s) in Grenada and Trinidad & Tobago. I mentioned GTE's (longtime) ownership of "Codetel", the telco of the Dominican Repbulic. In more recent years (VeriZon) GTE also owns the (incumbent) Puerto Rico Telephone Company (which at one time had a close relationship with the now-defunct ITT). GTE also had various manufacturing entites, some were directly telco related and historically related to the origins of GT&E, others were purchased separately and not really directly telco related, such as Sylvania lighting and electronics, which brought the "&E" to General Telephone in the late 1950s to make GT&E, General Telephone & Electronics which later dropped the ampersand and simply became GTE. I don't think that ANY of those equipment/manufacturing entities have continued to exist under GTE-now-VeriZon, most all being sold or spun off yeras ago. The old "Automatic Electric" went into a joint venture with (once-AT&T) Lucent, to become AGCS, the 'A' for AT&T and the 'G' for GTE, the 'C' and 'S' for Communications Services (I think). Also, I think that Lucent eventually got full control of AGCS, although who knows *WHAT* has become of various parts of Lucent (as well as Nortel and other manufacturing entities -- ITT, Stromberg, etc) over the past 10-to-20 years. ANYHOW ... at the FCC's website, there is a section on tracing the history of ownership/buyouts/mergers/selloffs/spinoffs/etc. of the MAJOR telcos in the US, over the late 1980s and throughout the 1990s, thru today: http://www.fcc.gov/wcb/armis/carrier_filing_history/COSA_History/gttc.htm And the section on VeriZon is: http://www.fcc.gov/wcb/armis/carrier_filing_history/COSA_History/vctr.htm with links to Bell Atlantic (includes NYNEX) at: http://www.fcc.gov/wcb/armis/carrier_filing_history/COSA_History/bntr.htm Puerto Rico at: http://www.fcc.gov/wcb/armis/carrier_filing_history/COSA_History/prtc.htm and GTE (including histories of sales/etc. of Contel and GTE) at: http://www.fcc.gov/wcb/armis/carrier_filing_history/COSA_History/gttc.htm NOTE: these are the correct/current URLs for those FCC pages. The last time I visited them was exactly seven months ago, in mid-March 2003, and the URLs were different. The old URLs came up with "File not found". So, I went the main FCC homepage, http://www.fcc.gov and used their "search" box for 'COSA'. While it didn't come up with NOSTRA :), it did result in the "revised" URLs for the 'COSA', [CO]mapny [S]tudy [A]reas, section of their website. NOTE, under the Bell Atlantic section of VeriZon at the FCC's COSA pages (which does include NYNEX), there is a breakdown of the state-specific BOCs of the old Bell System days, but not the actual legacy "names". In addition C&P (Chesapeake & Potomoc) which actually broke down into three individual state-specific BOCs (WV, VA, MD) as well as C&P-DC, and also NJ Bell ... all of which made up the initial (pre-NYNEX-takeover) Bell Atlantic ... there is also Bell of Pennsylvania and Delaware's "Diamond State Telephone" (DST). DST was actually a *SUBSIDIARY* of Bell of Pa during the old Bell System days, even though all of the BOCs (except "semi" BOCs Cincinnati Bell, CT's Southern New England Tel, and Bell Canada & its ventures in eastern/central Canada, all of which were only partially held by AT&T) were actually majority-held by AT&T. Back then, Nevada Bell was also really a *SUBSIDIARY* of California's Pacific Tel (and Tel) BOC. Mark J. Cuccia mcuccia@tulane.edu New Orleans LA USA ------------------------------ From: Valerie in FL Subject: Re: Reminder Ring on Call Forwarding Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2003 09:41:39 -0400 Paul Crick wrote in message news:telecom22.686.10@telecom-digest.org: > If I forward all calls using *72 to another number, every time a call > is forwarded my phone gives a short little reminder ring to remind me > that a divert is in operation. > Is it technically possible within the CO switch to disable this > feature on a line by line basis? (Telco politics is a completely > different matter of course) ;-) > What I'd like to do is have calls to my regular number divert > immediately to another number, with no local indication, and for calls > to my smart ring number which doesn't follow call forwarding to ring > in the regular fashion. > Any switch techs care to comment? > Thanks in advance, > Paul I'm not a switch tech, but the 5ESS has an option in the switch to turn the reminder ring on or off. I've seen it on the switch interface. Since it would not be a configurable option on a standard order, you would probably need to request a special assembly in order to do it. I know, at least at one time, the 5ESS also had an option to forward either main number only, or all numbers, on any type of call forwarding. This was handy, since I didn't want my daughter's Ringmaster calls to go to my voicemail with CFDA or CFBL. IIRC, the FID 'MCFI' was floated behind the CF USOC on the service order. Valerie in FL ------------------------------ From: Jay R. Ashworth Subject: Re: PLOC Freezes Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2003 17:28:13 GMT Organization: RoadRunner - Central Florida In article , Mark J Cuccia wrote: > On Thursday 9 Oct 2003 06:15:12 -0700, Howie > wrote: >> What is a PLOC freeze > I've never heard of that acronym, but I would *assume* that it stands > for Primary Local Operating Company freeze: I'm voting for "Preferred". Cheers, -- jra ------------------------------ From: tablejar@yahoo.com Subject: Need Help Finding Cheap PC Phone Date: 16 Oct 2003 15:14:41 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com I need a very cheap PC phone service. I want to make long distance calls from my PC directly to another phone internationally. Can anyone give me the cheapest PC phone service on the net? [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I do not know if it is absolutely the cheapest, but one of the better and more reliable PC phones is the offering from Vonage. USA calls can be purchased in unlimited quantity for thirty or forty dollars per month, and international rates are decent also. I have e-coupons available from Vonage which gives one month of free Vonage service on *domestic* calls; it is the second month given for free. Anyone who wants to give a test drive of Vonage VOIP service is welcome and invited to write me and ask for an e-coupon for a month of free service. Just send a note to me at the Digest address, subject line 'not for pub' and ask for your Vonage coupon. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Gail M. Hall Subject: Re: Smile, You're on Candid Cellphone Camera Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2003 17:11:41 -0400 Reply-To: gmhall@apk.net On Mon, 13 Oct 2003 00:50:26 -0400, in comp.dcom.telecom message , Monty Solomon wrote: > PRIVACY ON HOLD > By AMY HARMON > As the man in front of him at the grocery store last week began > yelling at a cashier who could not process his American Express card, > Gary Dann flipped open his palm-sized camera phone and pressed a few > buttons, pretending to look up a number. > Moments later, as the man paid in cash, his snarling picture appeared > on Mr. Dann's Web site (www.fotolog.net/garydann), complete with a > less than flattering caption. The rapidly growing audience of Internet > phonecam voyeurs responded quickly to the image: "Did he make a big > fuss?" asked one. "I hate watching that." Another taunted: "His tie is > strangling him bit by bit!" Ever since I saw the advertisement showing Little Richard having his picture taken by an addoring fan, I wondered when that ad would backfire on the wireless phone companies. Obviously, Little Richard was getting paid for his appearance. But how would he feel if his picture were taken without his permission in a men's room somewhere? Finally, people in our area are getting concerned enough that some local officials are talking about "banning" cell phones in public restrooms, gyms, health clubs, and other recreation areas where people might be seen by others in states of dress or undress they would not want seen on the Internet. How they would go about "banning" these phones, I don't know. Search all the bags and pockets the way the airport security folks do? Or could there be a way of detecting wireless phone signals coming from someone's phone in a certain area even when the phone is hidden in a pocket or bag? If such a signal could be detected, it could set off an alarm to alert people in the room that a cell phone is being used in the immediate area. People could use their cell phones outside the area where people are fully dressed. Last night on our local TV channel WKYC (www.wkyc.com), a reporter deomonstrated just how easy it would be for someone to take her picture as she enters the ladies' room and get the picture posted to the Internet right away. I suspect it won't be long now before a number of cities, counties, or even states enact laws trying to control the use of camphones before it gets to be a big problem for people, even if they aren't sure how they could make the laws really work. Gail in Ohio USA ------------------------------ Subject: When a MAJORITY is Useful From: Withheld at Readers Request Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2003 11:52:02 -0500 Patrick & Lisa - in an attempt to avoid spam, please do not post my name or e-mail address. Thanks. In reply, Joey Lindstrom writes: [snip] >> http://www.dontvoteforgeorge.com/snarlgrove.html > Can we try to make our postings at least tangentially on the topic of > telecom? Postings like this aren't even remotely on-topic, and serve > only to piss off those who actually support the Bush administration -- > which, the last time I checked, was a MAJORITY of Americans. Last > time I checked, we were here to talk about telecom-related topics. [snip] > There. Now we're even. Well, Joey, it seems for some folks in the U.S. that MAJORITY is only a valid means of measure when it's advantageous to the current Administration, unlike the last Presidential election. It appears the web site in question posted actual quotes by President Bush, who is perceived by many nations as the leader of the free world. Anyone who can use proper grammar when speaking and reading should be able to reach accurate and intelligent conclusions without much difficulty. I do agree that postings to this group should be about telecom-related topics only. But if Patrick and Lisa choose to enforce such a policy, it should apply to all political views, not just those that offend supporters of the current Administration. Smile - tomorrow's Friday. : ) Thanks for any consideration. ------------------------------ 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 fifty 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. If you donate at least fifty dollars per year we will send you our two-CD set of the entire Telecom Archives; this is every word published in this Digest since our beginning in 1981. 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 #702 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Oct 17 17:15:53 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id h9HLFqv17505; Fri, 17 Oct 2003 17:15:53 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2003 17:15:53 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200310172115.h9HLFqv17505@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 #703 TELECOM Digest Fri, 17 Oct 2003 17:15:00 EDT Volume 22 : Issue 703 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson and: Lisa Minter VeriSign to Sell Network Solutions Business to Pivotal (Monty Solomon) Verizon Wireless North America's Choice Plan (Monty Solomon) U.S. Judge Tells State to Lay Off Internet Phones (Solomon/Friedebach) Ruling: Vonage Holdings v. Minnesota PUC (Monty Solomon) DIRECTV Launches New Consumer Promotions (Monty Solomon) The Sound Of One Hand E-Mailing (Monty Solomon) Nokia Recommends Using Only Original Batteries with Nokia (M Solomon) Re: Ed Ellers' Passing (Mark J Cuccia) Re: Ed Ellers Passed Away (Marcus Jervis) Ed Ellers (The Old Bear) Cell Site Info Needed; How Much to Charge? (Mark Olenski) NPA 310 (CA) Remains Intact For Time Being (Mark J Cuccia) Re: When a MAJORITY is Useful (Joey Lindstrom) Smile, You're on Candid Cellphone Camera (D. Reinecke) Re: BA/NYNEX Plus GTE/Contel Equals VeriZon (Name Withheld) Re: USF Recovery Fee (Sid Zafran) 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, 16 Oct 2003 22:30:28 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: VeriSign to Sell Network Solutions Business to Pivotal Private .com and .net Registry and Naming and Directory Services Infrastructure to Remain with VeriSign as Cornerstone of Internet Infrastructure Business MOUNTAIN VIEW, Calif., Oct. 16 /PRNewswire/ -- VeriSign, Inc. (Nasdaq: VRSN), the leading provider of critical infrastructure services for the Internet and telecommunications networks, today announced it has signed a definitive agreement to sell the Network Solutions business unit to Pivotal Private Equity. Under the terms of the agreement, VeriSign will receive approximately $100 million, consisting of $60 million in cash and a $40 million senior subordinated note. VeriSign will also retain a 15% equity stake in Network Solutions. The transaction is subject to certain closing conditions and is anticipated to close in the fourth quarter. When VeriSign acquired Network Solutions in 2000, it obtained two distinct businesses: -- The customer-facing Registrar business is the world's leading provider of domain name registrations, and an industry leader in value added services such as business email, websites, hosting and other web presence services. The Registrar, which re-assumed the Network Solutions name in January of this year, constitutes the current Network Solutions business that is being sold. -- The Registry business that is the backbone of the global .com and .net domain name infrastructure currently handles over 10 billion interactions per day, remains with VeriSign as a critical component of its business. This Registry business was recently renamed VeriSign Naming and Directory Services and is a core piece of VeriSign's Internet Services Group. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=36105985 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2003 23:05:42 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Verizon Wireless North America's Choice Plan New Verizon Wireless Service Expands Home Calling Area Beyond U.S. Into Canada and Mexico - Oct 16, 2003 12:17 PM (PR Newswire) First Wireless Carrier to Offer Home Area Coverage in Three Countries With One Simple Plan IRVINE, Calif., Oct. 16 /PRNewswire/ -- Verizon Wireless, operator of the nation's largest and most reliable wireless network in the U.S., today announced the launch of its North America's Choice(SM) Plan, creating an extended home airtime rate area that stretches from the domestic U.S. into sections of Canada and Mexico. The new plan, featuring four price packages from $59.99 to $169.99 per month, is being advertised for the first time starting tomorrow in the company's West Area consumer markets and is now being offered to its Midwest territory business users. Further expansion of the new plan into its Northeast and South Areas is targeted for the first quarter of 2004. Designed for U.S. corporations doing business in Canada and/or Mexico, and for customers who regularly travel between the three countries, North America's Choice Plan provides Verizon Wireless customers with one simple price plan for calls to, from and within the U.S., Canada and Mexico. Puerto Rico is also included in the plan. There are no long distance charges for calls from and to the North America's Choice rate plan area in the United States, Puerto Rico, Canada and Mexico. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=36111179 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2003 23:09:01 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: U.S. Judge Tells State to Lay Off Internet Phones By Eric Auchard NEW YORK, Oct 16 (Reuters) - A U.S. federal judge rebuffed in strong language a move by Minnesota state regulators to force Vonage, a provider of cheap phone calls via the Internet, to comply with rules governing phone companies. In a decision that could stall efforts by other states to regulate Internet communications, Judge Michael Davis of the U.S. District Court of Minnesota ruled that federal law protects information services from regulation and preempts state limits on Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) services. Vonage, which bills itself as "the broadband phone company," enables computer users with high-speed Internet connections to make and receive phone calls worldwide with a touch-tone telephone for a monthly fee of as little as $35. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=36115501 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Eric Friedebach sent an identical message to this one (same clipping) as Monty Solomon, and I want to thank him also. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2003 01:23:47 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Ruling: Vonage Holdings v. Minnesota PUC http://www.nysd.uscourts.gov/courtweb/pdf/D08MNXC/03-08475.PDF ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2003 23:12:22 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: DIRECTV Launches New Consumer Promotions and First-Ever Dedicated DIRECTV Launches New Consumer Promotions and First-Ever Dedicated DIRECTV DVR With TiVo Advertising Campaign - Oct 16, 2003 06:19 PM (BusinessWire) EL SEGUNDO, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Oct. 16, 2003--DIRECTV, Inc., the nation's leading digital multichannel television service provider, today announced a series of new promotions designed to stimulate the growth of DIRECTV(R) Digital Video Recorders (DVRs) and high-definition (HD) television receivers. DIRECTV also announced the launch of its first-ever dedicated DIRECTV(R) DVR with TiVo consumer advertising campaign intended to simplify the fast-growing product segment and educate customers about how DIRECTV and DIRECTV DVRs can enhance their television viewing experience. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=36119733 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2003 22:53:16 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: The Sound Of One Hand E-Mailing Ten O'Clock Tech Stephen Manes NEW YORK - The standalone organizer is not dead yet, but Handspring's new Treo 600 smartphone is one more stake through its heart. Like previous Treos, this far sleeker model puts your address book in your phone where it belongs. Then it throws in wireless e-mail and Web browsing, along with the potential to do just about everything a Palm organizer can. The new design makes it easy to use the unit with one hand--like, well, a phone. In the applications you're likely to use most, a five-way navigation button lets you travel around the display and select items without putting smudgy fingers on the screen or reaching for the stylus -- once you learn a few odd conventions. Every key on the board is within reach of a single thumb. You can even assign individual keys to favorite numbers, Web sites and applications; holding down the F key might call up Forbes.com, B might phone your broker and S could summon your shrink. http://www.forbes.com/2003/10/13/cz_sm_1013tentech.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2003 08:00:47 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Nokia Recommends Using Only Original Batteries with Nokia Nokia Recommends Using Only Original Batteries with Nokia Products; All Investigated Mobile Phone Battery Explosions Caused by Non-Original Batteries - Oct 17, 2003 07:23 AM (BusinessWire) HELSINKI, Finland--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Oct. 17, 2003--Recently, in the Netherlands a battery used in a Nokia 7210 mobile phone exploded. An investigation by Nokia experts clearly proved that the battery involved in the incident was not a Nokia battery. Over the past months, cases have been reported of non-original mobile phone batteries exploding, causing damage to both batteries and phones. In all the reported cases, the battery has been a non-original battery. Nokia offers its cooperation to authorities in taking legal measures available against those who sell and distribute poor quality non-original mobile phone enhancements compatible to Nokia products. In general, the reported incidents are due to an internal short circuit. An internal short circuit can be caused by careless design, an uncontrolled production process or a combination of both. Original Nokia batteries and chargers are designed and manufactured adhering to stringent safety and quality measures. These include very strict requirements regarding the materials and insulation used inside the batteries as well as continuous production control and intensive product testing. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=36124379 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2003 22:18:49 CDT From: Mark J Cuccia Subject: Re: Ed Ellers' Passing I'd written earlier: > Ed Ellers was a regular participant to several e-lists that many of us > are on, including TELECOM Digest. and Pat added: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thank you very much for letting the > telecom newsgroup readers know of this news. Ed Ellers was a very good, > and generous contributor financially to TELECOM Digest. PAT] I forgot to mention in my earlier post(s), that Ed was also a participant in various Radio/TV broadcasting/electronics related lists/groups/digests on the Internet as well, ones that I also regularly read and sometimes post to as well (and many other participants here in TELECOM too ...), including the (now archives only) "Airwaves Radio Journal", dedicated to the radio/TV broadcast industry of today, but also to the (still going, currently maintained by Charlie Summers) OTR (Old Time Radio) Digest, both ARJ and OTR were originally founded, or at least maintained by, another friend of many of us (especially Pat), the late Bill Pfeiffer. (I think that Lou Genco was the original founder of OTR Digest, at least). I also wanted to mention that I've forwarded the notices of Ed's passing to OTR Digest too. Other than the (now defunct, but still Archived on the 'net) Airwaves Radio Journal, I can't remember offhand any other *specific* broadcasting-related lists/journals that Ed regualarly posted to, but if anyone else reading this knows, could they please forward this information on Ed's passing to those lists as well. Thanks, mjc ------------------------------ From: Marcus Jervis Subject: Re: Ed Ellers Passed Away Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2003 04:25:34 +0000 hes@hes01.unity.ncsu.edu (Henry E Schaffer) wrote: > Ed Ellers, who was a contributor to this group, passed away on Oct. 5, > 2003. Apparently Ed was a ham operator: Callsign: KD4AWQ Class: Technician Name: EDWARD R ELLERS Addr1: 4316 MILLDAUN RD Addr2: LOUISVILLE, KY 40213 Country: USA Effective: 13 Nov 2002 Expires: 17 Nov 2012 Lookups: 43 County: Jefferson Grid: EM78de Birthday: 26 Feb 1961 Email: ed_ellers@msn.com QRZ Updated: 2003-01-27 23:27:38 I notified the ARRL so his name and call will appear in Silent Keys in an upcoming issue of QST. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2003 00:41:00 -0400 From: The Old Bear Subject: Ed Ellers I just received this email concerning Ed Ellers, with whom I exchanged email related to early 1A1 and 1A2 key systems back in 2001. I am passing it along as requested. --------------- begin forwarded text ---------------------------- From: Ed Ellers Subject: Re: Old Phone on TV; Old Intercom vs Key Systems Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2003 15:44:58 -0400 This letter is written by Ken Forcht (Ed's uncle). I'm sorry to tell you that Ed has passed away about 3 PM today Oct. 05, 2003. I'm going thru his computer to send E-mails to whoever I can find that he knew &/or corresponded. If you know of anyone who should know of his death please feel free to email me (or them). I will check it in a couple of days. You may receive multiple copies if there is more than one email in his inbox. Ken Forcht [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yes, Ken, we have been advised of this now several times. It was a very sad anouncement. What was equally sad for me to read was Mark Cuccia's message saying that Airwaves Radio Journal is now defunct also. :( PAT] ------------------------------ From: Mark Olenski Subject: Cell Site Info Needed; How Much to Charge? Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2003 23:45:31 -0700 Organization: Cox Communications I have a friend that already has a cell tower on his building. The provider wants to add a second tower for WCDMA and extend the lease 15 years. Anyone on this site have an idea what that would be worth. He is currently getting $1200 a month for one tower with a 10 year lease. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2003 09:30:27 CDT From: Mark J Cuccia Subject: NPA 310 (CA) Remains Intact For Time Being This comes from the Ca.PUC's website, dated yesterday, Thu-16-Oct-2003. I'll have some further notes of my own following. ------------------ http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/PUBLISHED/NEWS_RELEASE/30785.htm Docket #: R.95-04-043 Media Contact: PUC Press Office, 415.703.1366, news@cpuc.ca.gov PUC AVOIDS 310 AREA CODE SPLIT SAN FRANCISCO, October 16, 2003 -- The California Public Utilities Commission (PUC) today determined that a split of the 310 area code is not needed at this time because there are adequate telephone numbers still available in the 310 area code to provide customers and telephone carriers with sufficient service. There are eight whole prefixes, or 80 one thousand number blocks, unassigned and available in the 310 area code. Almost 400 one thousand number blocks are already assigned to various rate centers and currently available to be used by carriers within the 310 number pool. The Commission determined that instead of splitting the area code, it should closely monitor the additional need for telephone numbers in the 310 area code during the next six months to assure adequate telephone number supplies. The Commission will further advocate its Technology Specific Overlay proposal now pending with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), and will evaluate the success of wireless industry compliance with local number portability requirements this November. These actions could free up significant amounts of unused telephone numbers in the 310 area code. The 310 area code split proposed by the North American Numbering Plan Administrator (NANPA) would have created a two-way geographic split of the 310 area code. The northern portion, including the majority of Inglewood and all of Culver City, Marina Del Rey, Mar Vista, Santa Monica, Beverly Hills, West Los Angeles, Malibu, and a small portion of the City of Hawthorne and Ventura County would have retained the 310 area code. The southern portion of the 310 area code, including El Segundo, Hawthorne, Compton, Redondo, Lomita, and San Pedro would have been split off to form a new 424 area code. In exercising its delegated authority from the FCC, the Commission has found that historic industry claims of impending telephone number exhaustion were based merely upon carriers' forecasts of future telephone number usage within each area code, not their respective historical or actual use of telephone numbers. No independent analysis had been provided, however, concerning the reliability of such forecasts or carriers' actual utilization of telephone numbers. Beginning in March 2000, the Commission adopted various number reporting and conservation measures that collectively have slowed significantly the pace of area code splits in California. The Commission initiated the first-ever utilization study of actual number use in California (in the 310 area code) where it found 3 million unused telephone numbers in an area code that was allegedly entirely out of available telephone numbers. By the end of 2001, the Commission had completed a utilization study for each of the state's other 24 area codes. In every case, it found that each area code actually contained between 40 percent to 80 percent of the available numbers classified by the carriers as unused. In addition, the Commission began distributing new telephone numbers to carriers more efficiently, through number pooling and other measures. Number pooling allows telephone companies to receive numbers in smaller blocks than the traditional 10,000 numbers, enabling multiple providers to share a 10,000-number block and therefore use this limited resource much more efficiently. In March 2000, California began the state's first number "pool" in the 310 area code. Today, every area code in California has implemented number pooling, operated by a neutral third-party Pooling Administrator. By allowing the state to distribute numbers in smaller blocks of 1,000, the PUC can better match the numbering needs of new, smaller companies without stranding the remaining numbers in the 10,000-number block. The PUC is required under FCC rules to open a new area code where necessary to avoid code exhaustion and denial of numbering resources necessary for competitive service. The 310 area code was created in late 1991 to relieve numbers exhaustion in the 213 area code. The 310 area code was subsequently split in January 1997, forming a separate 562 area code, again to replenish number supplies. ------------------ MJC's comments/notes/etc. now follow ... In 1998, the southern CA Telco industry and the CA PUC decided that the 310 area code region would be overlaid with 424, in Summer 1999. In late Spring 1999, mandatory 1+ten-digit same-NPA dialing would be enforced, since this was to have been an all services overlay. *PERMISSIVE* 1+ten-digit same-NPA (local) dialing has been possible throughout most (if not all) of California for many years now. The mandatory 1+ten-digit same-NPA (local) dialing was activated by Pac*Bell, GTE, etc. in Spring 1999. But prior to new 424-NXX c.o.codes taking effect in Summer 1999, there was pressure put on the CA PUC by (shortsighted and ignorant) so-called "consumer" groups who hated overlays and ten-digit dialing, thus causing the CA PUC to halt implementation of the 424 overlay to 310, and eventually calling a halt to *ALL* new area codes being implemented in California. At least the latter *has* been a good thing. The last new area code to take effect in CA was the first half of a staggered 3-way split of 619 in the San Diego CA Metro area, with 858 splitting off in the northern part of that metro area, June 1999 permissive, mandatory in Dec. 1999; the second half of that staggered 3-way split would have had 935 splitting off from the southern/eastern parts of San Diego Metro exactly one year later, perm. June 2000, mand. Dec.2000, but that was one of the forthcoming new area codes in CA that was suspended along with all of the others (13 or so total), beginning in Summer 1999. California still has the MOST number of active area codes in the NANP, with 25 total. Texas is a CLOSE RUNNER UP, with one less active area code than CA, at 24 for the Lone Star Republic, and Florida is next with just under twenty (17). Both TX and FL also each have ONE planned future new area code (partial overlays, BTW) that was subsequently put on "indefinite" hold. TX and FL also have active overlays, while CA has *ALWAYS* only done far-more-disruptive splits. Seven-digit same-NPA (local, and toll if there is any within 310) dialing was restored within 310 by Pac*Bell, GTE, etc. There *was* a test number for the 424 overlay to 310 (or 424 split from 310 whever it will become active), 424-654-0424, run out of the SBC-Pac*Bell Torrance CA (Lucent/WECo) 5ESS, TRNCCA11DS0, this test announcement *USED* to work via many LD carriers, since they did route to the 424-654 "test" prefix. However, it seems that SBC-Pac*Bell has either turned off the recording or shut off access, because some months back, I was unable to get the SBC validation announcement. More recently, AT&T has begun to remove the 424 NPA code out of valid 3-digit translations in its thirty-five-or-so (Lucent) 5ESS-OSPS Opr/Card machines. But if the Ca.PUC has recently reiterated that 310 can remain intact for the forseeable future, there's no real need for a test number or access to a test number 424-654-0424. (NOTE: 424-654 does *NOT* "pre-exist" as 310-424, so when the test number begins to work again, you MUST be able to use 424 to reach 654-0424, since 310 will NOT work in this particular test number). Anyhow, when/if 310 will split off a new 424 NPA, here is the planned breakdown. Note that I still refer to the names 'Bell' and 'GTE' the incumbent of that ratecenter. Bell is SBC, and GTE is now VeriZon. 310 => 310 / 424 NPA Split: NPA 310 being retained by SEVEN ratecenters in the northern/northwestern part of the existing (pre-split) NPA 310: (GTE) MAILBU (GTE) SANTA MONICA : SANTA MONICA DA (District Area) (GTE) SANTA MONICA : MAR VISTA DA (District Area) (GTE) WEST LOS ANGELES (Bell) BEVERLY HILLS (Bell) CULVER CITY (Bell) INGLEWOOD NPA 424 to be used by NINE ratecetenters in the southern/southeastern part of the existing (pre-split) NPA 310: (** NPA 424 to also include Avalon, aka Santa Catalina Island **) (Bell) EL SEGUNDO (Bell) HAWTHORNE (GTE) REDONDO (Bell) COMPTON : GARDENA DA (District Area) (Bell) TORRANCE (Bell) LOMITA (Bell) SAN PEDRO (Bell) COMPTON : COMPTON DA (District Area) and (Bell) AVALON - aka Santa Catalina Island SO ... that should be the breakdown of 310/424 whenever (IF-ever) it will split at some point in the undetermined future. Of course, things could change in industry/regulatory policies by the time 310 does need NPA relief. Mark J. Cuccia mcuccia@tulane.edu New Orleans LA USA ------------------------------ From: Joey Lindstrom Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2003 09:32:49 -0600 Subject: Re: When a MAJORITY is Useful Reply-To: joey@telussucks.info On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 23:02:58 -0400 (EDT), anonymous wrote: > Patrick & Lisa - in an attempt to avoid spam, please do not post my > name or e-mail address. Thanks. Withholding the email address, I can see. Withholding the name? Smacks more of cowardice than of prudence. "That's just my opinion, I could be wrong. -Dennis Miller" But hey, at least you're being honest about not wanting to be identified. Some people hide behind aliases. > Well, Joey, it seems for some folks in the U.S. that MAJORITY is only > a valid means of measure when it's advantageous to the current > Administration, unlike the last Presidential election. It appears the > web site in question posted actual quotes by President Bush, who is > perceived by many nations as the leader of the free world. Anyone who > can use proper grammar when speaking and reading should be able to > reach accurate and intelligent conclusions without much difficulty. There is a time and place for such discussion. My point is that this is not the correct forum. The posting had one goal: to piss people off. Not to enlighten anybody about telecom-related topics. Just to piss people off. My use of the term "majority" was not meant to suggest that whatever the majority believes must be right, but to suggest that, by extending what we know from poll results, it is likely that the majority of participants in this forum do support the Bush administration. To put it another way: if this forum was, by definition, a left-leaning discussion forum, the post would have made sense. But this forum is not defined as such, in fact by definition it is not political at all. The poster had to know, therefore, that his post would serve only to inflame THE MAJORITY of the people in this forum. Whatever his motivations are, I cannot guess, but I equate this type of behaviour to the guy who sticks his head into a crowded movie house and yells "fire!" > I do agree that postings to this group should be about telecom-related > topics only. But if Patrick and Lisa choose to enforce such a policy, > it should apply to all political views, not just those that offend > supporters of the current Administration. Alas. The problem here is that Pat/Lisa only enforces that policy long after things get out of hand and/or against postings by Bush supporters/conservatives -- RARELY the other way around. Further, he is the leading CAUSE of these off-topic arguments, as was undeniably the case this time around. You'd think after 20+ years of this, he'd have the hang of the job by now. ------------------------------ From: D. Reinecke Subject: Smile, You're on Candid Cellphone Camera Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2003 11:34:58 -0500 > Finally, people in our area are getting concerned enough that some > local officials are talking about "banning" cell phones in public > restrooms, gyms, health clubs, and other recreation areas where people > might be seen by others in states of dress or undress they would not > want seen on the Internet. Why, may I ask, are such devices any more intrusive or controversial than, say, a regular pocket or purse-sized film or digital camera? I suppose it could be that the general public is not used to cameras that look like cell phones, but there have been ways to disguise cameras that have been used for many years. Yes, I know some shows and concerts and such prohibit cameras, but I have yet to see a sign in a restroom or locker room stating that cameras are prohibited ... the average person knows that it's not polite to pull out a camera in such places and start shooting. If somebody is set on taking photos in such places, he or she will certainly find a way, whether or not cell phones are allowed. ------------------------------ From: Name Withheld at Reader's Request Subject: Re: BA/NYNEX Plus GTE/Contel Equals VeriZon Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2003 12:41:52 -0400 [Mr. Moderator, I once again include my standard plea to strip my email address out of this posting. Thanks.] Mark Cuccia notes: > What was GTE, now VeriZon, does continue to include the old Hawaiian > Telephone Company (+1-808), as well as the old Micronesian Telecom in > the US possession of Saipan/Northern Mariana Islands (+1-670) that > name is somewhat of a misnomer because the Federated States of > Micronesia (+691) is *NOT* the same as Saipan/N.Mariana Islands... There's really no misnomer here, because the Federated States of Micronesia (FSM) is just one country within the much larger *geographic* region of Micronesia (literally, "small islands"), which stretches across thousands of miles of the mid-Pacific and includes the US Territories of Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands, and the independent republics of Palau and the Marshall Islands in addition to the FSM. So, in fact, most of Micronesia lies outside of the FSM, just as most of the geographic region of "America" (the continents of North American and South America) lies outside the bounds of the United States of America. The political entity of the FSM did not exist until 1978-79, when residents of four of the districts of the (US-administered) UN Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands (TTPI) voted to band together as a new nation (the FSM), which eventually achieved independence some years later. Two other districts of the TTPI (Palau and the Marshall Islands) opted for independence too, but chose to go their own separate ways rather than joining the FSM. The final district of the TTPI became the US territory of the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. Guam, already a US possession via the Spanish-American War of 1898, is also part of the geographic region of Micronesia, but was never part of the TTPI. Withheld Cary, NC ------------------------------ From: Sid Zafran Subject: Re: USF Recovery Fee Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2003 17:27:15 GMT Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 20:11:03 -0500, Herb Stein wrote: >> I believe that that SBC is shifting more than an equitable share of >> their USF recovery fee to Earthlink customers such as myself. This may >> be a violation of FCC requirements. It also gives SBC an unfair >> competitive advantage in providing DSL services. >> Note: FCC summary requirements may be seen on the following Web page: >> http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/customerfacts/usfincrease.html > That's "consumerfacts" > Herb Stein > The Herb Stein Group > www.herbstein.com > herb@herbstein.com > 314 952-4601 The consumer facts tell us that all telecommunications companies that provide service between states (including SBC) must contribute to the Universal Service Fund. The FCC does not require telecommunications companies to recover their Universal Service contribution from their customers. Companies that do choose to recover their contributions from customers may do so in different ways, however, they may not shift more than an equitable share of the contribution to any customer or group of customers. SBC is recovering part of their fund contribution from Earthlink DSL customers, but not from their own DSL customers in California. That gives SBC a competitive advantage while shifting more than an equitable share to Earthlink DSL customers. ------------------------------ 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 fifty 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. If you donate at least fifty dollars per year we will send you our two-CD set of the entire Telecom Archives; this is every word published in this Digest since our beginning in 1981. 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 #703 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat Oct 18 02:16:54 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id h9I6GsF19795; Sat, 18 Oct 2003 02:16:54 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2003 02:16:54 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200310180616.h9I6GsF19795@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 #704 TELECOM Digest Sat, 18 Oct 2003 02:17:00 EDT Volume 22 : Issue 704 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson and: Lisa Minter My New Telecom Discussion Group (Lisa Minter) Re: Ed Ellers' Passing (Mark J Cuccia) Re: Ed Ellers' Passing (COTTP) Airwaves Radio Journal, Re: Ed Ellers' Passing (Mark J Cuccia) What on Earth is This? (jmayson@nyx.net) Re: Smile, You're on Candid Cellphone Camera (jbl) Tracing Old Internal Phone/Computer Wiring? (AES/newspost) Re: VeriSign to Sell Network Solutions Business to Pivotal (B Margolin) Re: Cell Site Info Needed; How Much to Charge? (Matt) VoIP / IP Telephony Resouce Needed (Alan) Re: NPA 310 (CA) Remains Intact for Time Being (Linc Madison) Cellphone Deals Sweeten in Face of New Rule on Keeping Number (J Gray) 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, 17 Oct 2003 21:42:27 EDT From: Lisa Minter Subject: My New Telecom Discussion Group With Patrick's encouragement, I have started a new telecom discussion group on Yahoo Groups. http://telecom-news@yahoogroups.com is the email address to use. The URL is http://groups.yahoo.com/telecom-news . To read the messages of others or participate in the open chat at any time, you need to be a member of Yahoo Groups and specifically the telecom-news area. I will be exchanging messages with the Digest through email transfer. That is, messages posted by users of telecom-news will be sent to the Digest for publication here, and issues of TELECOM Digest will be appearing in Yahoo Groups/telecom-news as well. But as a member over there on Yahoo Groups, you will be able to participate in the online chat, the files transfer and the pictures area as well. To get involved, and I hope you will, go to yahoo.com and sign up in groups as a member of telecom-news. To prevent spam, new members have to be approved, but I will be doing that as rapidly as I can tonight and all weekend. Since Yahoo uses pre-built software scripts for the news groups, etc Patrick thought it would be easier for me to use instead of a more complicated system like this one at massis.lcs.mit.edu . I hope to see all of you over there in the next day or two! Lisa Minter [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This should be a very worthwile exchange of messages. All issues of the Digest will be available at YahooGroups starting now, an messages which Lisa approves over there will be forwarded here to the Digest. But, as is pointed out in her message, there is considerable flexibility on Yahoo with a telecom- specific live chat area and a place for users to install files for transfer back and forth. I hope if you use Yahoo that you will check it out. http://groups.yahoo.com/telecom-news PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2003 17:06:26 CDT From: Mark J Cuccia Subject: Re: Ed Ellers' Passing On Fri, 17 Oct 2003 kamlet@panix.com wrote: > Is this the same person: > This is from the qrz.com database. If so, the ARRL Silent Key database > should be notified. (SNIP) Yes it is. There was another post to TELECOM Digest (c.d.t) as well that Ed was also a ham/amateur radio operator, and that Silent Keys has already been notified. mjc ------------------------------ From: COTTP Subject: Re: Ed Ellers' Passing Organization: Children of the Tea Party Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2003 18:03:24 -0500 In article , mcuccia@tulane.edu says: > I'd written earlier: >> Ed Ellers was a regular participant to several e-lists that many of us >> are on, including TELECOM Digest. > and Pat added: >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thank you very much for letting the >> telecom newsgroup readers know of this news. Ed Ellers was a very good, >> and generous contributor financially to TELECOM Digest. PAT] > I forgot to mention in my earlier post(s), that Ed was also a > participant in various Radio/TV broadcasting/electronics related > lists/groups/digests on the Internet as well, ones that I also > regularly read and sometimes post to as well (and many other > participants here in TELECOM too ...), including the (now archives > only) "Airwaves Radio Journal", dedicated to the radio/TV broadcast > industry of today, but also to the (still going, currently maintained > by Charlie Summers) OTR (Old Time Radio) Digest, both ARJ and OTR were > originally founded, or at least maintained by, another friend of many > of us (especially Pat), the late Bill Pfeiffer. (I think that Lou Genco > was the original founder of OTR Digest, at least). I also knew of Ed through my affiliation with amateur radio. I knew his name was familiar but not from c.d.t. A lookup on http://www.qrz.com yielded the following: Callsign: KD4AWQ Class: Technician Codes: HAI USA Name: EDWARD R ELLERS Addr1: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX Addr2: LOUISVILLE, KY 40213 Country: USA Effective: 13 Nov 2002 Expires: 17 Nov 2012 FRN: 0002664142 What's this? FCC: ULS Listing Lookups: 50 Update / Renew License Coordinates: 38° 11' 6'' N, 85° 42' 51'' W Coordinates: 38.1851 -85.7144 County: Jefferson Grid: EM78de Area Code: 502 GMT Offset: -5 Time Zone: Eastern Has DST?: Y Birthday: 26 Feb 1961 Email: ed_ellers@XXXXXXXXX QRZ Updated: 2003-01-27 23:27:38 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2003 17:02:27 CDT From: Mark J Cuccia Subject: Airwaves Radio Journal, Re: Ed Ellers' Passing Regarding Ed Ellers' recent passing, and my mention of of Ed's posts over the years to rec.radio.broadcasting / Airwaves Radio Journal, I had written (and Pat added some comments): > ... the (now archives only) "Airwaves Radio Journal", dedicated to > the radio/TV broadcast industry of today, but also to the (still > going, currently maintained by Charlie Summers) OTR (Old Time Radio) > Digest, both ARJ and OTR were originally founded, or at least > maintained by, another friend of many of us (especially Pat), the > late Bill Pfeiffer. (I think that Lou Genco was the original founder > of OTR Digest, at least). > I also wanted to mention that I've forwarded the notices of Ed's > passing to OTR Digest too. Other than the (now defunct, but still > Archived on the 'net) Airwaves Radio Journal, ... > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: ... > It (Ed's recent death) was a very sad anouncement. What was equally > sad for me to read was Mark Cuccia's message saying that Airwaves > Radio Journal is now defunct also. :( PAT] What I meant was that it appears to have been "defunct" for a couple of years now, I don't know "exactly" how long. I know that I used to post to rec.radio.broadcasting aka Airwaves Radio Journal back around 1999/2000. But then it appeared to "disappear". However, the site http://www.airwaves.com/ still exists, and includes an *ARCHIVE* of backissues/posts of ARJ/r.r.b, and other broadcast miscellania. This is posted on the main page: "Welcome to the 'new and hopefully improved' Airwaves.com. "This site has been created with two goals in mind: "To serve the broadcast community with broadcast related resources. This was Bill Pfeiffer's first priority. Bill always put his own opinions and agendas aside to make the Airwaves digests and website a truly free and open forum for broadcasters. "To keep the memory of Bill Pfeiffer alive. Bill Pfeiffer was in love with radio. He would drive from city to city, state to state looking at towers and airchecking stations. Bill had no children, but maybe through this website we can inspire another generation to marvel at radio and the possibilities that are created by a microphone and a tower." http://www.airwaves.com/archive.html is the archives of ARJ. http://www.airwaves.com/bill.html is "About Bill", but still to be constructed. There are links to subpages for "Broadcast Classifieds", "FCC Lookup", and (coming soon), "Radio Links". Maybe actual posts and activity in ARJ / r.r.b will be returning soon? Even though ARJ / r.r.b seems to have been dormant for a few years now, at least there is this website with Archives and resources, and maybe the ARJ digest will be active again soon ... As for OTR Digest and Charlie Summers, more information on this Digest can be found at: http://www.lofcom.com/nostalgia/maillist.phtml In addition to the *VERY* active OTR Digest, there is also a secondary digest, the "Kinescope Digest", regarding "old TV" in general, of the 1940s/50s/60s, even occasional posts about the early 70s. The name "kinescope" refers to the actual CRT or picture tube or screen, which originally had the name "Kinescope" in the *developmental* stages of all electronic television in the 1920s/30s. In the 1940s/50s (and into the 60s), "Kinescope" referred to a (usually 16mm B&W) *FILM* made off of a TV screen/monitor/CRT, usually of a live or pre-taped program. Video quality of these kinescope-films, common back then before videotape was developed or became popular and widespread in the TV industry, was rather inferior, obviously. But the "Kinescope Digest" isn't "restricted" to old 1950s-era live-on-kine or later pre-taped-transferred-to-kine-film, though ... As I mentioned above, the digest is about "old/nostalgic" TV *IN GENERAL*. However, activity in "Kinescope Digest" isn't yet nearly as popular as in OTR Digest. Mark J. Cuccia mcuccia@tulane.edu New Orleans LA USA ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2003 15:15:23 -0500 From: jmayson@nyx.net Subject: What on Earth is This? Organization: Nyx Net, Free Internet access (http://www.nyx.net/) Someone passed this number on to me. 800-522-5380. It's a very strange recording. I tried a reverse number lookup on it and turned up nothing. John [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It is a very strange recording. When I called it, the announcement began 'two hundred, sixteen, seven one one' and continued on with a few more single digits, then ended with a burst of touch tone dialing. I've no idea what it is supposed to be doing or for. PAT] ------------------------------ From: jbl Subject: Re: Smile, You're on Candid Cellphone Camera Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2003 15:48:15 -0700 Organization: On the desert Reply-To: jbl@spamblocked.com In , D. Reinecke wrote: >> Finally, people in our area are getting concerned enough that some >> local officials are talking about "banning" cell phones in public >> restrooms, gyms, health clubs, and other recreation areas where people >> might be seen by others in states of dress or undress they would not >> want seen on the Internet. > Why, may I ask, are such devices any more intrusive or controversial > than, say, a regular pocket or purse-sized film or digital camera? I > suppose it could be that the general public is not used to cameras > that look like cell phones, but there have been ways to disguise > cameras that have been used for many years. I suggest two factors: 1. People always have their cell phone with them. They don't always have their digital camera, and if they do it's not disguised like a pen or lighter, it looks like a camera. Now everyone with one of these phones has a disguised camera to hand. 2. The current advertising campaigns (multiple wireless services) are stressing the ability to get candid shots (a) to friends and (b) thence to (say) the internet. Their current targets are of the embarrassing sort (the dopy looking guy with pizza all over his face), but it's not a big stretch to think of targets of the _embarrassing_ sort, iykwim. /JBL ------------------------------ From: AES/newspost Subject: Tracing Old Internal Phone/Computer Wiring? Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2003 17:39:49 -0700 I have a big old house whose internal wiring is a chaotic mess: innumerable wires and cables running from here to there, inside the house, over the roof, under the eaves, and through ducts -- phone cables, ancient twisted pairs, Cat 5 cables, cable coax lines, low-voltage lighting, remote speaker wiring, doorbell wires, thermostat wiring, etc, etc, etc, some of it currently in use, some not. Is there some kind of standard tool kit for signal tracing, with a signal generator I can clamp onto a pair of wires, or preferably onto the bundle of twisted pairs inside a cable jacket full of wires at one end -- hopefully, without having to actually contact the individual wires -- and a detector I can wave near the possible route or the possible other end of the cable, to see if it really _is_ the other end? Sources for buying such? Thanks for any info. ------------------------------ From: Barry Margolin Subject: Re: VeriSign to Sell Network Solutions Business to Pivotal Private Organization: Level(3) Communications, Woburn, MA Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2003 21:24:46 GMT In article , Monty Solomon wrote: > -- The customer-facing Registrar business is the world's leading > provider of domain name registrations, and an industry leader > in value added services such as business email, websites, > hosting and other web presence services. The Registrar, which > re-assumed the Network Solutions name in January of this year, > constitutes the current Network Solutions business that is > being sold. > -- The Registry business that is the backbone of the global .com > and .net domain name infrastructure currently handles over 10 > billion interactions per day, remains with VeriSign as a > critical component of its business. This Registry business was > recently renamed VeriSign Naming and Directory Services and is > a core piece of VeriSign's Internet Services Group. This seems like a good thing to me. It always struck me as a conflict of interest that the monopoly operator of the .com/.net registry was also one of the players in the competitive registrar industry. Barry Margolin, barry.margolin@level3.com Level(3), Woburn, MA *** DON'T SEND TECHNICAL QUESTIONS DIRECTLY TO ME, post them to newsgroups. Please DON'T copy followups to me -- I'll assume it wasn't posted to the group. ------------------------------ From: Matt Subject: Re: Cell Site Info Needed; How Much to Charge? Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2003 22:16:21 -0400 It all depends on what the provider is doing. Is it the same provider, or a new provider? And do you mean the provider has antennas on the roof? A tower is a structure that you would build on land, which would have the antennas at different elevations on it. You do not (ok, well, very rarely) have towers on roofs. I'm sure they are not extending it for 15 years, they are extending it for 5 years, with two 5 year option renewal periods. If it is the same carrier and they are just adding some antennas for WCDMA, depending on how the existing lease reads, he could get a few hundred extra per month. Make sure the amendment to the lease calls for a 3-4% annual increase. Mark Olenski wrote in message news:telecom22.703.11@telecom-digest.org: > I have a friend that already has a cell tower on his building. The > provider wants to add a second tower for WCDMA and extend the lease 15 > years. Anyone on this site have an idea what that would be worth. He > is currently getting $1200 a month for one tower with a 10 year lease. ------------------------------ From: kt8993@hotmail.com (Alan) Subject: VoIP / IP Telephony Resouce Needed Date: 17 Oct 2003 19:42:14 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com We are gathering VoIP, IP Telephony resources on the web and create a information page here: http://www.isolvesystems.com/services/Telephone_Phone/VOIP_IP_Telephony_Internet_Telephony.htm Please submit your resource. Thanks. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I use Vonage and find it to be a pretty good deal. In fact, anyone who wishes to test it out for free is invited to write me and get an e-coupon good for a month of free service (the second month). Send email marked 'not for pub' and request a Vonage e-coupon from me. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Linc Madison Subject: Re: NPA 310 (CA) Remains Intact For Time Being Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2003 23:04:50 -0700 Organization: California resident; nospam; no unsolicited e-mail allowed Reply-To: lincmad@suespammers.org In article , Mark J Cuccia wrote: > This comes from the Ca.PUC's website, dated yesterday, > Thu-16-Oct-2003. [310 won't split just yet, because there are EIGHT! > count them EIGHT! whole prefixes left, meaning only about > 780-some-odd are in use.] > Seven-digit same-NPA (local, and toll if there is any within 310) > dialing was restored within 310 by Pac*Bell, GTE, etc. Oh, yeah, there's toll within 310. For one thing, the Avalon rate center (a.k.a. [Santa] Catalina Island) is local only to itself, since it's a good bit more than 12 miles across the water. However, even if you leave out Avalon, there is no rate center in 310 that is local to all the others, and from one end to the other is definitely toll. I don't have a map showing the exact rating points, but it's more than 12 miles from Malibu to LAX, both of which would remain in 310 in the proposed split. The new 424 might be all local, except to/from Avalon, but I'm not certain of that. All calls within 213 are local, and I believe that all calls within and between 323 and 213 are local, but there are toll calls even on the mainland part of 310. Linc Madison * San Francisco, California * lincmad@suespammers.org * primary e-mail: Telecom at LincMad dot com All U.S. and California anti-spam laws apply, incl. CA BPC 17538.45(c) This text constitutes actual notice as required in BPC 17538.45(f)(3). DO NOT SEND UNSOLICITED E-MAIL TO THIS ADDRESS. You have been warned. ------------------------------ From: John Gray Subject: Cellphone Deals Sweeten in Face of New Rule on Keeping Number Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2003 23:25:15 -0400 Cellphone Deals Sweeten in Face of New Rule on Keeping Number New York Times 10/18/2003 Bet Sirianni is the subject of an intensifying courtship. The overtures like the recent offer for a free second cellular phone may win her over to a longer-term relationship. Her mobile phone service provider, AT&T Wireless, wants her to commit to an additional two years on her contract. "I'm thinking about it," Ms. Sirianni, a 40-year-old corporate art director in San Francisco, said of the free phone proposal. "I may give it to my son." Ms. Sirianni is one of millions of customers whom wireless companies are trying quietly to entice into renewing their contracts in the next few weeks. New phones, additional minutes and cash credits are being handed out all with an eye to locking in customers who may not know that come Nov. 24 a new federal regulation will allow them, for the first time, to keep their cellphone numbers when they change mobile services. Because mobile phones have become as important as traditional phone lines for many consumers, the desire to keep the same cellular number has prevented many from switching providers even if they are less than satisfied with the service. That is about to change. Rest of Article: http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/18/technology/18CELL.html?hp [free subscription required. The NY Times is nice enough to still allow you to read their articles online for free, instead of charging.] [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: True, but the amount of spam their advertisers send out based on the NY Times list of users is sort of awful which is why I invite readers of TELECOM Digest to use our group username 'telecomdigest1' and our group password 'telecomdigest1' if they wish to do so. And please don't forget to check out Lisa's new telecom newsgroup on Yahoo Groups soon, and sign up there if you want to use it all the time: http://groups.yahoo.com/telecom-news 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 fifty 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. If you donate at least fifty dollars per year we will send you our two-CD set of the entire Telecom Archives; this is every word published in this Digest since our beginning in 1981. 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 #704 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun Oct 19 02:46:29 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id h9J6kTn25971; Sun, 19 Oct 2003 02:46:29 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2003 02:46:29 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200310190646.h9J6kTn25971@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 #705 TELECOM Digest Sun, 19 Oct 2003 02:46:00 EDT Volume 22 : Issue 705 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson and: Lisa Minter EPIC Alert 10.21 (Monty Solomon) FCC Relaxes TV Rules on Use of F-word (Monty Solomon) iTunes For Windows May Face New Piracy Threat (Monty Solomon) Re: USF Recovery Fee (Michael D. Sullivan) Yahoo News Group (Don Nelsch) New Group (Marcus Didius Falco) Re: Poor Left Out as Courts Enter Web Age (Hank Fung) Re: Tracing Old Internal Phone/Computer Wiring? (Dave Garland) Re: Tracing Old Internal Phone/Computer Wiring? (John Hines) Feds Seek to Use ex-Qwest Executives' Statements (Eric Friedebach) Re: Ed Ellers' Passing (Steven J Sobol) Wireless Technology: Some Newbie Questions (Nimmi Scrivistav) 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, 18 Oct 2003 11:25:28 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: EPIC Alert 10.21 ======================================================================= E P I C A l e r t ======================================================================= Volume 10.21 October 17, 2003 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Published by the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) Washington, D.C. http://www.epic.org/alert/EPIC_Alert_10.21.html ====================================================================== Table of Contents ====================================================================== [1] EPIC Sues DOJ for PATRIOT Act Lobbying Info [2] Canada's Biometric ID Plan Under Fire [3] EPIC, PIRG Submit Comments on Bank Security Notices [4] Senate Passes Genetic Privacy Measure [5] European Parliament Opposes Air Travel Data Transfer [6] News in Brief [7] EPIC Bookstore: The Challenge of Crime [8] Upcoming Conferences and Events http://www.epic.org/alert/EPIC_Alert_10.21.html ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2003 22:42:26 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: FCC relaxes TV rules on use of f-word By Chris Baker THE WASHINGTON TIMES Remember comedian George Carlin's list of the seven dirty words you can't say on television? It just got a little shorter. The Federal Communications Commission ruled this month that Irish rocker Bono did not violate federal indecency rules when he used the f-word during an acceptance speech at the Golden Globe Awards, which NBC broadcast in January. http://washingtontimes.com/business/20031009-105350-7266r.htm ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2003 23:04:47 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: iTunes For Windows May Face New Piracy Threat NewScientist.com news service Apple's successful music download service iTunes faces a new threat of misuse now that it has been extended to include users of Microsoft's Windows operating system, say experts. The threat comes from the combination of the relatively light copy protection iTunes uses and the big increase of potential hackers that comes with opening up to the world's most common operating system.q The paid-for download service was the first to lure music fans away from free file-sharing music networks. Since launching in April 2003, Apple says more than 13 million songs have been downloaded. Observers believe this is partly due to price -- songs can be downloaded for 99 cents without paying a subscription fee. But a crucial factor is that iTunes imposes fewer technical restrictions on what listeners can do with the music files than other paid-for offerings. The files can be copied to compact disc or the iPod music player, and they are encoded in a format that allows them to be played on three registered computers. http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99994289 ------------------------------ From: Michael D. Sullivan Subject: Re: USF Recovery Fee Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2003 09:22:07 GMT On Fri, 17 Oct 2003 17:27:15 GMT, Sid Zafran posted the following to comp.dcom.telecom: > On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 20:11:03 -0500, Herb Stein > wrote: >>> I believe that that SBC is shifting more than an equitable share of >>> their USF recovery fee to Earthlink customers such as myself. This may >>> be a violation of FCC requirements. It also gives SBC an unfair >>> competitive advantage in providing DSL services. [snip] > The consumer facts tell us that all telecommunications companies that > provide service between states (including SBC) must contribute to the > Universal Service Fund. The FCC does not require telecommunications > companies to recover their Universal Service contribution from their > customers. Companies that do choose to recover their contributions > from customers may do so in different ways, however, they may not > shift more than an equitable share of the contribution to any customer > or group of customers. > SBC is recovering part of their fund contribution from Earthlink DSL > customers, but not from their own DSL customers in California. That > gives SBC a competitive advantage while shifting more than an > equitable share to Earthlink DSL customers. The FCC subjects all end user telecommunications revenues to a USF charge by company. If a company sells telecommunications service to a reseller, the revenues are not end user revenues and are exempt from USF charges. The reseller, in turn, must pay USF on its end user telecommunications revenues. Where this gets a bit hazy is where the telecommunications service is used by the purchaser for delivery of an information service. The information service provider isn't providing a telecommuncations service to its customers, so it's not subject to USF. (At present, the FCC holds that a given service is either telecom service or information service, but not both; this may be subject to change as a result of the 9th Circuit cable modem decision.) It's fuzzy whether the telecommunications service provider's revenues for selling the telecommunications service to the ISP are end user revenues. Theoretically, someone ought to be paying USF on all telecommunications services, either the facilities-based provider or the next-tier provider, and no such services should be subject to a double charge. There are plenty of anomalies in practice, though. I don't know how SBC or Earthlink has structured their DSL offerings, but that would affect who pays USF. It is entirely possible that SBC is paying USF on its telecommunications service revenues from its DSL/ISP affiliate, and recovering it from that affiliate, which is the end-user; the DSL/ISP affiliate, as a non- telecommunications service provider, should not be adding a line item on its bill for USF, but can recover what it pays SBC as part of its monthly rate for DSL/ISP. The structure used for Earthlink may be different; if Earthlink, for example, were to resell DSL to its customers, bundled with ISP service, instead of selling just ISP with telecom included, then it would pay USF charges on the resold DSL (and put a line item on its customer bills to recover USF). Michael D. Sullivan Bethesda, MD, USA Delete nospam from my address and it won't work. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2003 09:13:38 -0400 From: Don Nelsch Subject: Yahoo News Group It would appear that there is no dash (-)but an underscore in the Yahoo group Telecom_News as you have indicated in your column. Try: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Telecom_News/ Don [Lisa Minter note: Try it the way you said and you wind up getting the *Canadian version* of the telecom news; the column that runs (usually) every Monday here in the Digest. Put the dash in there instead and get the USA version (in other words this Digest). Do it like this: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Telecom-News. I agree that is a wee bit confusing. Remember, underscore_ for Canadian news, dash- for Telecom Digest USA version. But it is always http://groups.yahoo.com/group/*whatever* to get Yahoo newsgroups. Lisa M.] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2003 00:14:38 -0400 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: New Group I appreciate your efforts to start a new list as a Yahoo group. One advantage will be much less spam IN THE GROUP (LIST). However, once you cross-post messages from the new group to usenet, the spammers will mine names from the listings. There is a reason I'm getting 80 copies a day of the SWEN virus on this account -- and no other -- and it must be that I use this identity to post on this news group (I use it on only one other list). I also had trouble setting up membership from this account, which is in Britain. I had to set up a US Yahoo account to join the list. All in all, I appreciate your efforts -- and the attractive picture of Lisa on the group's home page -- but I'm not sure it will solve the problems administering the group, particularly if you keep the listserv software running in parallel. You know that there is a web-based interface for listserv. I'll admit it's clunky, but the listserv software is good. Some advice from someone who has been administering a small group: set up the list so that it does not send attachments. That will keep viruses off the list, and also will cause HTML to be stripped from messages. HTML can carry viruses, and also causes problems for people who are still reading using Pine or some other old terminal-type reader (there are still some such people!). You can publish this message in the list if you wish. Indeed, you will notice that I CC'd the new list. However, it's mostly intended for your eyes. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I may have cleared some of these problems for Lisa. Basically, editor@telecom-digest.org is on the mailing list for Lisa; thus anything from Yahoo gets approved over here before I publish it; all html code removed, etc. 'telecom-news@ yahoogroups.com' is on our mailing list over here so that Lisa gets my already purified output from here in digest format. Since all 'new' users at Yahoo 'telecom-news' have to be approved prior to any posting allowed, she can (and been shown how to) prevent most viruses from getting over there, and thus, through the email link to here at massis.lcs.mit.edu. Not perfect, by any means, but a way to hopefully get a lot of new readers for both of us. Remember, underscore _ gets you the *Canadian* version and news, dash - gets you the USA version of the Digest. PAT] ------------------------------ From: fungus@OCF.Berkeley.EDU (Hank Fung) Subject: Re: Poor Left Out as Courts Enter Web Age Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2003 05:02:13 UTC Organization: Univ. of California Berkeley Open Computing Facility In article , John R. Levine wrote: > Yes, but that's not enough to get access to court records. For > Federal court records, for example, you need an account on their PACER > system which charges per-page. The per-page charges are low, but you > do need to write them and set up the account and wait for them to mail > you your account code. It is also free for usage under $10 per year. With a cap per document of $2.10, one could get a few hundred pages of material for no charge. Hank Fung fungus@ocf.berkeley.edu ------------------------------ From: Dave Garland Subject: Re: Tracing Old Internal Phone/Computer Wiring? Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2003 02:20:17 -0500 Organization: Wizard Information It was a dark and stormy night when AES/newspost wrote: > Is there some kind of standard tool kit for signal tracing, with a > signal generator I can clamp onto a pair of wires, or preferably onto > the bundle of twisted pairs inside a cable jacket full of wires at one > end -- hopefully, without having to actually contact the individual > wires -- and a detector I can wave near the possible route or the > possible other end of the cable, to see if it really _is_ the other > end? Yes, although most of them require actually connecting to the individual wire on the signal generator end. They may come with clipleads, "bed-of-nails" clipleads designed to pierce insulation adapters for telephone or adapters for telephone/network jacks. They are made by BK, Triplett, and other test equipment makers. > Sources for buying such? Vendors that sell test equipment, telephone or LAN wiring products, etc. MCM http://www.mcmelectronics.com , Sandman http://www.sandman.com search for "toner"), Graybar, etc. ------------------------------ From: John Hines Subject: Re: Tracing Old Internal Phone/Computer Wiring? Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2003 10:13:43 -0500 Organization: www.jhines.org Reply-To: john@jhines.org AES/newspost wrote: > Is there some kind of standard tool kit for signal tracing, with a > signal generator I can clamp onto a pair of wires, or preferably onto > the bundle of twisted pairs inside a cable jacket full of wires at one > end -- hopefully, without having to actually contact the individual > wires -- and a detector I can wave near the possible route or the > possible other end of the cable, to see if it really _is_ the other > end? Yep, anybody with tools should have such a beast. For example: http://www.cyberguys.com/templates/searchdetail.asp?T1=115+3115 ------------------------------ From: Eric Friedebach Subject: Feds Seek to Use ex-Qwest Executives' Statements Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2003 12:41:46 -0500 Organization: Fish heads, fish heads, rolly polly fish heads. DENVER, Oct 17 (Reuters) - Federal prosecutors said on Friday they have 200 potentially incriminating statements from four former Qwest Communications International Inc. executives charged with scheming to inflate the telephone company's revenues. The government would want to use the statements in the upcoming trial of the four, but a judge will have to decide which statements will be admissible and against which defendants. William Leone, chief assistant U.S. attorney in Denver mentioned the 200 statements by the defendants during a status hearing on the case. http://www.forbes.com/newswire/2003/10/17/rtr1114158.html Eric Friedebach ------------------------------ From: Steven J Sobol Subject: Re: Ed Ellers' Passing Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2003 21:59:44 -0500 Mark J Cuccia wrote: > participants here in TELECOM too ...), including the (now archives > only) "Airwaves Radio Journal", dedicated to the radio/TV broadcast > industry of today Hey, Mark. Airwaves Radio Journal is alive. John Levine runs the mailing list and I moderate the newsgroup. Come on over to rec.radio.broadcasting and join us!! JustThe.net Internet & Multimedia Services 22674 Motnocab Road * Apple Valley, CA 92307-1950 Steve Sobol, Proprietor 888.480.4NET (4638) * 248.724.4NET * sjsobol@JustThe.net [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Good! I am glad to hear rrb did not die off and is still around! PAT] ------------------------------ From: nimmi_srivastav@yahoo.com (Nimmi Srivastav) Subject: Wireless Technology: Some Newbie Questions Date: 18 Oct 2003 23:34:02 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com Could someone, once and for all, answer the various questions that I have regarding wireless telephony: 1) What technologies are 1G, 2G, 3G, 3.5G and 4G based on? 2) In a nutshell what's the difference between 1G, 2G, 3G, 3.5G and 4G? 3) What's EVDO and EVDV? 4) What's the difference between UMTS and CDMA2000? 5) What are the new trends in the field of wireless telephony? 6) Where is the wireless telephony headed? Regards, Nimmi ------------------------------ 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 fifty 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. If you donate at least fifty dollars per year we will send you our two-CD set of the entire Telecom Archives; this is every word published in this Digest since our beginning in 1981. 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 #705 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun Oct 19 22:33:54 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id h9K2Xrk01873; Sun, 19 Oct 2003 22:33:54 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2003 22:33:54 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200310200233.h9K2Xrk01873@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 #706 TELECOM Digest Sun, 19 Oct 2003 22:34:00 EDT Volume 22 : Issue 706 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson and: Lisa Minter EPIC Alert 10.21 (Monty Solomon) FCC Relaxes TV Rules on Use of F-Word (Monty Solomon) Re: iTunes For Windows May Face New Piracy Threat (COTTP) iTunes For Windows May Face New Piracy Threat (Monty Solomon) FCC Targets Copying of Digital TV (Monty Solomon) EFFector 16.26: Who Controls Your Computer? (Monty Solomon) EFF Action Alert: Stop the MPAA's Broadcast Flag! (Monty Solomon) Re: New Group (William Warren) Yahoo News Group (Don Nelsch) New Group (Marcus Didius Falco) Subscribing to the "Telecom-News" Yahoo! Group (Wesrock@aol.com) Re: Poor Left Out as Courts Enter Web Age (Hank Fung) Re: Tracing Old Internal Phone/Computer Wiring? (Dave Garland) Re: Tracing Old Internal Phone/Computer Wiring? (John Hines) Re: Tracing Old Internal Phone/Computer Wiring? (Marcus Didius Falco) Re: Tracing Old Internal Phone/Computer Wiring? (Charles P.) Feds Seek to Use ex-Qwest Executives' Statements (Eric Friedebach) Re: Ed Ellers' Passing (Steven J Sobol) Re: USF Recovery Fee (Michael D. Sullivan) Re: Wireless Technology: Some Newbie Questions (Michael D. Sullivan) Download Cell Phone Book to Computer or Another Phone? (psu104@yahoo) Re: Airwaves Radio Journal (Mark J Cuccia) Last Laugh! Direct Email Lead Generation Services (Spyros Bartsocas) 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, 18 Oct 2003 11:25:28 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: EPIC Alert 10.21 ======================================================================= E P I C A l e r t ======================================================================= Volume 10.21 October 17, 2003 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Published by the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) Washington, D.C. http://www.epic.org/alert/EPIC_Alert_10.21.html ====================================================================== Table of Contents ====================================================================== [1] EPIC Sues DOJ for PATRIOT Act Lobbying Info [2] Canada's Biometric ID Plan Under Fire [3] EPIC, PIRG Submit Comments on Bank Security Notices [4] Senate Passes Genetic Privacy Measure [5] European Parliament Opposes Air Travel Data Transfer [6] News in Brief [7] EPIC Bookstore: The Challenge of Crime [8] Upcoming Conferences and Events ... http://www.epic.org/alert/EPIC_Alert_10.21.html ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2003 22:42:26 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: FCC Relaxes TV Rules on Use of F-Word By Chris Baker THE WASHINGTON TIMES Remember comedian George Carlin's list of the seven dirty words you can't say on television? It just got a little shorter. The Federal Communications Commission ruled this month that Irish rocker Bono did not violate federal indecency rules when he used the f-word during an acceptance speech at the Golden Globe Awards, which NBC broadcast in January. http://washingtontimes.com/business/20031009-105350-7266r.htm ------------------------------ From: COTTP Subject: Re: iTunes For Windows May Face New Piracy Threat Organization: Children of the Tea Party Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2003 15:47:06 -0500 In article , monty@roscom.com says: > NewScientist.com news service > Apple's successful music download service iTunes faces a new threat of > misuse now that it has been extended to include users of Microsoft's > Windows operating system, say experts. > The threat comes from the combination of the relatively light copy > protection iTunes uses and the big increase of potential hackers that > comes with opening up to the world's most common operating system.q > The paid-for download service was the first to lure music fans away > from free file-sharing music networks. Since launching in April 2003, > Apple says more than 13 million songs have been downloaded. > Observers believe this is partly due to price -- songs can be > downloaded for 99 cents without paying a subscription fee. But a > crucial factor is that iTunes imposes fewer technical restrictions on > what listeners can do with the music files than other paid-for > offerings. The files can be copied to compact disc or the iPod music > player, and they are encoded in a format that allows them to be played > on three registered computers. The whole setup of sites like ITUnes tends to overcharge to begin with. For example, when one thinks about the cost savings of digital music distribution you can see that we're still being raked over the coals. Ie. a CD normally contains an average of say 14 tracks. That's $13.86 -- not far from the shelf price for a whole CD from one artist. A more realistic and profitable price would be approximately 50 cents a track, bringing the end user price down to $6.93 for 14 tracks. Anybody have any idea what the real production and distribution costs for music industry CD's costs? I'd bet it certainly doesn't equate to close to a buck a track. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2003 23:04:47 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: iTunes For Windows May Face New Piracy Threat NewScientist.com news service Apple's successful music download service iTunes faces a new threat of misuse now that it has been extended to include users of Microsoft's Windows operating system, say experts. The threat comes from the combination of the relatively light copy protection iTunes uses and the big increase of potential hackers that comes with opening up to the world's most common operating system. The paid-for download service was the first to lure music fans away from free file-sharing music networks. Since launching in April 2003, Apple says more than 13 million songs have been downloaded. Observers believe this is partly due to price -- songs can be downloaded for 99 cents without paying a subscription fee. But a crucial factor is that iTunes imposes fewer technical restrictions on what listeners can do with the music files than other paid-for offerings. The files can be copied to compact disc or the iPod music player, and they are encoded in a format that allows them to be played on three registered computers. http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99994289 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2003 16:41:20 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: FCC Targets Copying of Digital TV Hollywood Backs Rule That May Irk Viewers By Jonathan Krim Washington Post Staff Writer The federal government is preparing for the first time to require that personal computers and other consumer electronics devices contain technology to help block Internet piracy of digital entertainment. A rule being considered by the Federal Communications Commission is one of a series of proposals pushed by the entertainment industry to help thwart copying and online trading of movies and television shows that increasingly are being broadcast in digital form with high-quality picture and sound. But the new rule also would force consumers to purchase new equipment if they wanted to record enhanced digital-quality television programs and replay them on other machines. Opponents of the proposed rule, including many technology companies and consumer groups, say it won't work. They are especially concerned that the plan might lead to government regulation of how personal computers and other devices are built, particularly if hackers crack the system and further changes are deemed necessary. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A32173-2003Oct15.html ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2003 12:21:47 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: EFFector 16.26: Who Controls Your Computer? EFFector Vol. 16, No. 26 October 5, 2003 donna@eff.org A Publication of the Electronic Frontier Foundation ISSN 1062-9424 In the 265th Issue of EFFector: * Who Controls Your Computer?: EFF Reports on Trusted Computing * Passenger Profiling Violates Rights, Doesn't Improve Safety * Plan for Library Book Tagging Generates Privacy Concerns * Total/Terrorism Information Awareness: Is It Truly Dead? * Digital Copyright Law Still Damaging After All These Years * Unsafe Harbors: Abusive DMCA Subpoenas and Takedown Demands * Australia's "DMCA": EFF Comments on Australian Digital Agenda * Charity.com Names EFF "Charity of the Month" * Deep Links (14): We're a Record Label. But We're Not Evil. * Staff Calendar: 10.08.03 - Seth Schoen debates Mike Wolff (Microsoft) on Palladium/NGSCB at the SDForum, Mountain View, CA. * Administrivia http://www.eff.org/effector/16/26.php ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2003 12:43:54 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: EFF Action Alert: Stop the MPAA's Broadcast Flag! TAKE ACTION! SEND A MESSAGE Stop the MPAA's Broadcast Flag! Hollywood is at it again, trying to control the design of new digital technologies. If the motion picture studios have their way, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) will force all future televisions to include Hollywood-approved "content protection" technologies. Fair use, innovation and competition will suffer. What's more, the "broadcast flag" technology that the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) has proposed is so weak that it will do nothing to stem Internet redistribution of television programs. In fact, the only people hurt by this are legitimate consumers, innovators and researchers. The FCC has promised a ruling before the end of October. We need you to tell the FCC that we don't need "broadcast flag" regulations that hurt competition, consumers and innovators. http://action.eff.org/action/index.asp?step=2&item=2801 ------------------------------ From: William Warren Subject: Re: New Group Organization: Comcast Online Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2003 15:58:34 GMT Marcus Didius Falco wrote in message news:telecom22.705.6@telecom-digest.org: > I appreciate your efforts to start a new list as a Yahoo group. One > advantage will be much less spam IN THE GROUP (LIST). However, once > you cross-post messages from the new group to usenet, the spammers > will mine names from the listings. There is a reason I'm getting 80 > copies a day of the SWEN virus on this account -- and no other -- and > it must be that I use this identity to post on this news group (I use > it on only one other list). [snip] Good point. Pat/Lisa: please arrange to obfuscate addresses coming from the list into Usenet. Your readers will be eternally grateful. Bill ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2003 09:13:38 -0400 From: Don Nelsch Subject: Yahoo News Group It would appear that there is no dash (-)but an underscore in the Yahoo group Telecom_News as you have indicated in your column. Try: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Telecom_News/ Don [Lisa Minter note: There *is* a dash. The underscore _ gets you the Canadian telecom news group. The dash - gets you the USA version of TELECOM Digest. Lisa M.] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2003 00:14:38 -0400 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: New Group I appreciate your efforts to start a new list as a Yahoo group. One advantage will be much less spam IN THE GROUP (LIST). However, once you cross-post messages from the new group to usenet, the spammers will mine names from the listings. There is a reason I'm getting 80 copies a day of the SWEN virus on this account -- and no other -- and it must be that I use this identity to post on this news group (I use it on only one other list). I also had trouble setting up membership from this account, which is in Britain. I had to set up a US Yahoo account to join the list. All in all, I appreciate your efforts -- and the attractive picture of Lisa on the group's home page -- but I'm not sure it will solve the problems administering the group, particularly if you keep the listserv software running in parallel. You know that there is a web-based interface for listserv. I'll admit it's clunky, but the listserv software is good. Some advice from someone who has been administering a small group: set up the list so that it does not send attachments. That will keep viruses off the list, and also will cause HTML to be stripped from messages. HTML can carry viruses, and also causes problems for people who are still reading using Pine or some other old terminal-type reader (there are still some such people!). You can publish this message in the list if you wish. Indeed, you will notice that I CC'd the new list. However, it's mostly intended for your eyes. ------------------------------ From: Wesrock@aol.com Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2003 20:30:27 EDT Subject: Subscribing to the "Telecom-News" Yahoo! Group Reply-To: telecom-news@yahoogroups.com You can also join the list by sending an e-mail to telecom-news-subscribe@yahoogroups.com Wes Leatherock wesrock@aol.com wleathus@yahoo.com ------------------------------ From: fungus@OCF.Berkeley.EDU (Hank Fung) Subject: Re: Poor Left Out as Courts Enter Web Age Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2003 05:02:13 +0000 (UTC) Organization: Univ. of California Berkeley Open Computing Facility In article , John R. Levine wrote: > Yes, but that's not enough to get access to court records. For > Federal court records, for example, you need an account on their PACER > system which charges per-page. The per-page charges are low, but you > do need to write them and set up the account and wait for them to mail > you your account code. It is also free for usage under $10 per year. With a cap per document of $2.10, one could get a few hundred pages of material for no charge. Hank Fung fungus@ocf.berkeley.edu ------------------------------ From: Dave Garland Subject: Re: Tracing Old Internal Phone/Computer Wiring? Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2003 02:20:17 -0500 Organization: Wizard Information It was a dark and stormy night when AES/newspost wrote: > Is there some kind of standard tool kit for signal tracing, with a > signal generator I can clamp onto a pair of wires, or preferably onto > the bundle of twisted pairs inside a cable jacket full of wires at one > end -- hopefully, without having to actually contact the individual > wires -- and a detector I can wave near the possible route or the > possible other end of the cable, to see if it really _is_ the other > end? Yes, although most of them require actually connecting to the individual wire on the signal generator end. They may come with clipleads, "bed-of-nails" clipleads designed to pierce insulation adapters for telephone or adapters for telephone/network jacks. They are made by BK, Triplett, and other test equipment makers. > Sources for buying such? Vendors that sell test equipment, telephone or LAN wiring products, etc. MCM (http://www.mcmelectronics.com), Sandman (http://www.sandman.com , search for "toner"), Graybar, etc. ------------------------------ From: John Hines Subject: Re: Tracing Old Internal Phone/Computer Wiring? Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2003 10:13:43 -0500 Organization: www.jhines.org Reply-To: john@jhines.org AES/newspost wrote: > Is there some kind of standard tool kit for signal tracing, with a > signal generator I can clamp onto a pair of wires, or preferably onto > the bundle of twisted pairs inside a cable jacket full of wires at one > end -- hopefully, without having to actually contact the individual > wires -- and a detector I can wave near the possible route or the > possible other end of the cable, to see if it really _is_ the other > end? Yep, anybody with tools should have such a beast. For example: http://www.cyberguys.com/templates/searchdetail.asp?T1=115+3115 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2003 15:03:57 -0400 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Re: Tracing Old Internal Phone/Computer Wiring John Hines wrote about Re: Tracing Old Internal Phone/Computer Wiring? > AES/newspost wrote: >> Is there some kind of standard tool kit for signal tracing, with a >> signal generator I can clamp onto a pair of wires, or preferably onto >> the bundle of twisted pairs inside a cable jacket full of wires at one >> end -- hopefully, without having to actually contact the individual >> wires -- and a detector I can wave near the possible route or the >> possible other end of the cable, to see if it really _is_ the other >> end? > Yep, anybody with tools should have such a beast. > For example: > http://www.cyberguys.com/templates/searchdetail.asp?T1=115+3115 Check Mike Sandman, who gets a credit at the bottom of every copy of this list. He has such things in stock. Sandman's web page should probably be the first place you look. http://sandman.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2003 22:25:26 GMT From: Charles P. Subject: Re: Tracing Old Internal Phone/Computer Wiring? Organization: Optimum Online You can usually find them on ebay quite cheap too. Search for "wire tracer", "fox and hound", "tone tracer" things like that. cp AES/newspost wrote in message news:telecom22.704.7@telecom-digest.org: > I have a big old house whose internal wiring is a chaotic mess: > innumerable wires and cables running from here to there, inside the > house, over the roof, under the eaves, and through ducts -- phone > cables, ancient twisted pairs, Cat 5 cables, cable coax lines, > low-voltage lighting, remote speaker wiring, doorbell wires, > thermostat wiring, etc, etc, etc, some of it currently in use, some > not. > Is there some kind of standard tool kit for signal tracing, with a > signal generator I can clamp onto a pair of wires, or preferably onto > the bundle of twisted pairs inside a cable jacket full of wires at one > end -- hopefully, without having to actually contact the individual > wires -- and a detector I can wave near the possible route or the > possible other end of the cable, to see if it really _is_ the other > end? > Sources for buying such? > Thanks for any info. ------------------------------ From: Eric Friedebach Subject: Feds Seek to Use ex-Qwest Executives' Statements Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2003 12:41:46 -0500 Organization: Fish heads, fish heads, rolly polly fish heads. Reuters, 10.17.03, 7:40 PM ET DENVER, Oct 17 (Reuters) - Federal prosecutors said on Friday they have 200 potentially incriminating statements from four former Qwest Communications International Inc. executives charged with scheming to inflate the telephone company's revenues. The government would want to use the statements in the upcoming trial of the four, but a judge will have to decide which statements will be admissible and against which defendants. William Leone, chief assistant U.S. attorney in Denver mentioned the 200 statements by the defendants during a status hearing on the case. http://www.forbes.com/newswire/2003/10/17/rtr1114158.html Eric Friedebach ------------------------------ From: Steven J Sobol Subject: Re: Ed Ellers' Passing Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2003 21:59:44 -0500 Mark J Cuccia wrote: > participants here in TELECOM too ...), including the (now archives > only) "Airwaves Radio Journal", dedicated to the radio/TV broadcast > industry of today Hey, Mark. Airwaves Radio Journal is alive. John Levine runs the mailing list and I moderate the newsgroup. Come on over to rec.radio.broadcasting and join us!! JustThe.net Internet & Multimedia Services 22674 Motnocab Road * Apple Valley, CA 92307-1950 Steve Sobol, Proprietor 888.480.4NET (4638) * 248.724.4NET * sjsobol@JustThe.net ------------------------------ From: Michael D. Sullivan Subject: Re: USF Recovery Fee Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2003 09:22:07 GMT On Fri, 17 Oct 2003 17:27:15 GMT, Sid Zafran posted the following to comp.dcom.telecom: > On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 20:11:03 -0500, Herb Stein > wrote: >>> I believe that that SBC is shifting more than an equitable share of >>> their USF recovery fee to Earthlink customers such as myself. This may >>> be a violation of FCC requirements. It also gives SBC an unfair >>> competitive advantage in providing DSL services. [snip] > The consumer facts tell us that all telecommunications companies that > provide service between states (including SBC) must contribute to the > Universal Service Fund. The FCC does not require telecommunications > companies to recover their Universal Service contribution from their > customers. Companies that do choose to recover their contributions > from customers may do so in different ways, however, they may not > shift more than an equitable share of the contribution to any customer > or group of customers. > SBC is recovering part of their fund contribution from Earthlink DSL > customers, but not from their own DSL customers in California. That > gives SBC a competitive advantage while shifting more than an > equitable share to Earthlink DSL customers. The FCC subjects all end user telecommunications revenues to a USF charge by company. If a company sells telecommunications service to a reseller, the revenues are not end user revenues and are exempt from USF charges. The reseller, in turn, must pay USF on its end user telecommunications revenues. Where this gets a bit hazy is where the telecommunications service is used by the purchaser for delivery of an information service. The information service provider isn't providing a telecommuncations service to its customers, so it's not subject to USF. (At present, the FCC holds that a given service is either telecom service or information service, but not both; this may be subject to change as a result of the 9th Circuit cable modem decision.) It's fuzzy whether the telecommunications service provider's revenues for selling the telecommunications service to the ISP are end user revenues. Theoretically, someone ought to be paying USF on all telecommunications services, either the facilities-based provider or the next-tier provider, and no such services should be subject to a double charge. There are plenty of anomalies in practice, though. I don't know how SBC or Earthlink has structured their DSL offerings, but that would affect who pays USF. It is entirely possible that SBC is paying USF on its telecommunications service revenues from its DSL/ISP affiliate, and recovering it from that affiliate, which is the end-user; the DSL/ISP affiliate, as a non- telecommunications service provider, should not be adding a line item on its bill for USF, but can recover what it pays SBC as part of its monthly rate for DSL/ISP. The structure used for Earthlink may be different; if Earthlink, for example, were to resell DSL to its customers, bundled with ISP service, instead of selling just ISP with telecom included, then it would pay USF charges on the resold DSL (and put a line item on its customer bills to recover USF). Michael D. Sullivan Bethesda, MD, USA Delete nospam from my address and it won't work. ------------------------------ From: Michael D. Sullivan Subject: Re: Wireless Technology: Some Newbie Questions Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2003 16:56:10 GMT On 18 Oct 2003 23:34:02 -0700, Nimmi Srivastav posted the following to comp.dcom.telecom: > Could someone, once and for all, answer the various questions that I > have regarding wireless telephony: > 1) What technologies are 1G, 2G, 3G, 3.5G and 4G based on? 1G: Analog (AMPS/NAMPS in US) 2G: Digital (GSM, CDMA, TDMA) 2.5G: Digital with higher speed for data (GSM->GPRS/EDGE, CDMA->1xRTT; TDMA evolves through GSM route) 3G: "Broadband" higher-speed digital (GSM->wCDMA, CDMA->cdma2000); includes innumerable variants, such as EVD0 3.5G, 4G: Still to come. > 2) In a nutshell what's the difference between 1G, 2G, 3G, 3.5G and 4G? Each generation is more technologically advanced, permitting more "bandwidth" and higher speed communications, while using less spectrum per byte transmitted. > 3) What's EVDO and EVDV? Damned if I know. > 4) What's the difference between UMTS and CDMA2000? I'm a little foggy on the details, but I believe UMTS comprises cdma2000 and wCDMA, with the objective of harmonizing them, whatever that means. > 5) What are the new trends in the field of wireless telephony? Camera phones, game phones, and push-to-talk walkie-talkie service are hot right now. Bluetooth and WiFi are on their way into phones, as well. VoIP is probably next. > 6) Where is the wireless telephony headed? Into the bold unknown, where no man has ever gone before. And into places where privacy up to now has reigned, based on recent stories of camera phones in dressing rooms and such. At some point, wireless telephony won't involve a cellphone so much as a cellphone chip embedded in various devices that will enable IP connectivity via WiFi, Bluetooth, or 3G, depending on availability. Michael D. Sullivan Bethesda, MD, USA Delete nospam from my address and it won't work. ------------------------------ From: psu104@yahoo.com Subject: Download Cell Phone Book to Computer or Another Phone? Date: 19 Oct 2003 10:29:16 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com Is there a way to download your phone book from your cellular phone to your computer? I have a Motorola V60. Thanks. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2003 02:54:14 CDT From: Mark J Cuccia Subject: Re: Airwaves Radio Journal I wrote (regarding the passing of Ed Ellers, as well as ARJ/r.r.b): > including the (now archives only) "Airwaves Radio Journal", > dedicated to the radio/TV broadcast industry of today Steven Sobol replied: > Hey, Mark. > Airwaves Radio Journal is alive. John Levine runs the mailing list and > I moderate the newsgroup. > Come on over to rec.radio.broadcasting and join us!! So, what's the *WEB* address to post and/or read current ARJ issues/articles. I don't do ANY (ab)usenet anymore and haven't for several years. And the last time (several years ago) I tried to get to r.r.b it wouldn't work on two different news servers I had access to. I went to www.airwaves.com and the only thing about the ARJ were archived backissues from Dec.1997 thru Nov.1999. I seem to think that Nov.1999 or about then was when I started having problems accessing r.r.b, and I don't remember exactly what happened with the ARJ as a website. I'm glad to see that there *IS* some kind of (abbreviated) archives site, but I since ARJ is still alive, I'd like to know how to access it. At least, what's the *WEB* address for information on *current* ARJ, on how to "subscribe" to receive as a digest (or individual posts) by *EMAIL*. Thanks. mjc ------------------------------ From: Spyros Bartsocas Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2003 05:31:02 -0800 Subject: Last Laugh! Direct Email Lead Generation Services I attach the following an e-mail I received concerning some services that I might be interested in. Unfortunately, I reside overseas and I can not call the toll-free number provided to learn more about these interesting services. I would appreciate if one of your readers could call and find more about this for me. I am also that other readers might be interested in finding about these services for themselves. They also provide another toll-free number to unsubscribe me from this kind of mails. Perhaps someone can call that number for me as well. Thanks for your help, Spyros Direct Email Lead Generation Services Send 10 million messages for $1100 Send 25 million messages for $2250 Send 50 million messages for $3750 Send 100 million messages for $6000 B2B and consumer lists available Includes the following FREE services: professional toll-free phone answering service Lead validation service Lead screening service Lead delivery service Archived leads also available for sale Call us today to find out more: 1-866-662-3388 To unsubscribe call: 1-866-457-8755 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I am certain many of our readers will want to investigate these services closely, and find out how they can be used in their own businesses. Remember please, that when these entries are published in our business directory, they are for actual use; not abuse or misuse. 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 fifty 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. If you donate at least fifty dollars per year we will send you our two-CD set of the entire Telecom Archives; this is every word published in this Digest since our beginning in 1981. 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 #706 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Oct 20 15:14:04 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id h9KJE3906308; Mon, 20 Oct 2003 15:14:04 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 15:14:04 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200310201914.h9KJE3906308@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 #707 TELECOM Digest Mon, 20 Oct 2003 15:14:00 EDT Volume 22 : Issue 707 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Telecom Update (Canada) #404, October 20, 2003 (Angus TeleManagement) Re: Tracing Old Internal Phone/Computer Wiring? (Dale Farmer) Re: iTunes For Windows May Face New Piracy Threat (Barry Margolin) Re: My New Telecom Discussion Group (Dave Close) [IP] The Columbia Space Shuttle Accident Report (Marcus Didius Falco) [IP] FCC Readies Rule to Block Internet Piracy (Marcus Didius Falco) Re: What on Earth is This? (Dave Phelps) Re: Wireless Technology: Some Newbie Questions (Group Special Mobile) Re: When a MAJORITY is Useful (Name Withheld at Users Request) 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, 20 Oct 2003 11:32:11 -0400 From: Angus TeleManagement Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #404, October 20, 2003 ************************************************************ TELECOM UPDATE ************************************************************ published weekly by Angus TeleManagement Group http://www.angustel.ca Number 404: October 20, 2003 Publication of Telecom Update is made possible by generous financial support from: ** ALLSTREAM: www.allstream.com ** BELL CANADA: www.bell.ca ** CISCO SYSTEMS CANADA: www.cisco.com/ca ** CYGCOM INTEGRATED TECHNOLOGIES: www.cygcom.com ** GROUP TELECOM: www.360.net ** JUNIPER NETWORKS: www.juniper.net ** PRIMUS CANADA: www.primustel.ca ** SPRINT CANADA: www.sprint.ca ** TELUS: www.telus.com ************************************************************ IN THIS ISSUE: ** Dark Fibre Ruling Provokes Protests ** Telus Customer Complaints Up Tenfold ** Rogers to Match Bell Discounts ** MTS Lowers Large-Volume Centrex Rates ** Mitel Intros IP-Enabled SX-200 ** Telus Extends Push-to-Talk Wireless Across Canada ** Bell to Deploy Lucent DSL, Messaging ** Call-Net Protests Telco DSL Bundles ** FCI Objects to Bell Condo Offer ** AirIQ Launches Satellite-Based Tracking ** Telus to Offer CSG Products ** CATA Forms Toronto Technology Group ** McKenna Named CanWest Chair ** Rogers Wireless Has Strong Quarter ** Cogeco Cable Doubles Profit ** Axia NetMedia Reports on "Trying Year" ** Phone Pirates Are Back! ============================================================ DARK FIBRE RULING PROVOKES PROTESTS: Several Quebec school boards have filed protests against CRTC Decisions 2003-58 and 200359 (see Telecom Update #397), claiming the rulings jeopardize their agreements with Bell Canada and Telus Quebec. To win bids for broadband networks, the telcos quoted rates for dark fibre that are unlikely to pass the imputation test required by those decisions. www.crtc.gc.ca/PartVII/eng/2003/8638/c12_200312728.htm ** Separately, Aliant, MTS, and Telus Communications have told the CRTC that they should not be required to file general tariffs for dark fibre, because they do not currently offer it to customers on any basis. TELUS CUSTOMER COMPLAINTS UP TENFOLD: In the first nine months of 2003, the CRTC received 2,010 complaints from Telus customers, compared to only 214 complaints in the same period last year. The complaints refer mainly to repair intervals, service installation, and difficulty in reaching the business office. ** Telus has failed to meet CRTC Quality of Service requirements for several quarters. Commission staff say Telus has recently promised to bring service up to par "by year-end." ** Last year, when Telus announced a plan to reduce staff by 6,500, the Telecommunications Workers Union warned that the cuts would harm customer service (see Telecom Update #337). www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/reports/8660/8660.htm ROGERS TO MATCH BELL DISCOUNTS: Speaking to analysts on September 17, Ted Rogers said his company will match but not exceed discounts offered by Bell and other competitors for combinations of TV, Internet and wireless services. He said Rogers Wireless will not match the "financially unsustainable" offer of unlimited local cellphone airtime for $40 a month, introduced recently by Microcell in Vancouver. (See Telecom Update $403) ** A Rogers ad campaign is now offering Microcell customers a free Rogers handset and their choice of any Rogers rate plan in exchange for their Fido phone. (See Telecom Update #403) MTS LOWERS LARGE-VOLUME CENTREX RATES: The CRTC has approved Manitoba Telecom's application to lower Centrex rates for customers with more than 4,000 lines to $24.85 per line (5- year contract) or $26 (3-year contract). The previous rates were $26 and $27 respectively. www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Orders/2003/o2003-420.htm MITEL INTROS IP-ENABLED SX-200: Mitel Networks has launched the SX-200 ICP, which it says offers SX-200 users an evolution path to IP telephony. TELUS EXTENDS PUSH-TO-TALK WIRELESS ACROSS CANADA: As Telecom Update forecast two months ago (#395), Telus Mobility has enhanced the Direct Connect feature of its Mike service to provide national push-to-talk functionality. This fall, Telus will also introduce four new Mike handsets with Global Positioning System capability. BELL TO DEPLOY LUCENT DSL, MESSAGING: Lucent Technologies says Bell Canada will be the first telco in the world to install its new "Stinger Compact Remote" equipment to extend the reach of DSL services. Bell will also buy Lucent's IP-based AnyPath Messaging System, which integrates voice mail, e-mail, fax, and text messages on one platform. ** Deployment of the new technologies is scheduled to begin in 2004. CALL-NET PROTESTS TELCO DSL BUNDLES: Call-Net says that because Bell and Telus still provide DSL only to their own local phone customers -- ruled in Telecom Decision 2003-49 to be a violation of the Telecom Act -- the telcos should not be allowed to provide new service bundles that include DSL. ** Though the Commission ordered the telcos to "forthwith" cease tying DSL to their local phone service, they say that for technical reasons they cannot provide DSL to CLEC customers until August 2004 (Bell) and January 2005 (Telus). www.crtc.gc.ca/PartVII/eng/2003/8622/c25_200313932.htm FCI OBJECTS TO BELL CONDO OFFER: FCI Broadband says residents of a Toronto condo complex received a letter from Bell Canada offering video/internet/phone service at "a great price" including free installation. FCI says this is an untariffed bundle, and omits the connection fee required for phone service. www.crtc.gc.ca/PartVII/eng/2003/8622/f18_200313875.htm AIRIQ LAUNCHES SATELLITE-BASED TRACKING: AirIQ, a Pickering, Ontario, provider of vehicle tracking, now offers satellite- based services, utilizing Orbcomm's Low Earth Orbit network. TELUS TO OFFER CSG PRODUCTS: Under an agreement announced October 16, Telus will offer billing and customer care products developed by Colorado-based CSG Systems to enterprise customers in Canada. CATA FORMS TORONTO TECHNOLOGY GROUP: The Canadian Advanced Technology Alliance (CATA) has formed a Toronto branch, CATA Toronto Technology Community. The new organization includes the members of SMART Toronto Technology Alliance, which merged with CATA in August. www.cata.ca McKENNA NAMED CANWEST CHAIR: CanWest Global Communications has named former New Brunswick Premier Frank McKenna as interim Chairman, replacing I.H. Asper, who died October 7. ROGERS WIRELESS HAS STRONG QUARTER: Rogers Wireless third quarter revenues of $599.8 million were up 15% from the same period a year ago. Net income was $42.7 million, compared to a loss of $14 million a year ago. Data revenue grew 127% year-over-year and now makes up 3.5% of total income. ** Rogers Wireless has named Murna Dalton, formerly with CGI Group, to head corporate sales in Ontario. ** Rogers Communications lost $17 million on third-quarter revenues of $1.2 billion. COGECO CABLE DOUBLES PROFIT: Cogeco Cable reports revenue of $479 million for the year ended August 31, 7% more than the previous year. Net income of $7.9 million was double that of fiscal 2002. Cogeco added 46,987 Internet customers, 7% fewer than in the previous year. AXIA NETMEDIA REPORTS ON "TRYING YEAR": Axia NetMedia revenue for the year ended June 30 was $101 million, up from $45 million the previous year. Losses also doubled, to $24.6 million. Axia says that with the resolution of its dispute with Bell West, "the worst is behind us." (See Telecom Update #375) PHONE PIRATES ARE BACK! Are your communications systems safe from long distance thieves? In this month's Telemanagement, Ian Angus reports on the new wave of toll theft -- and how business customers can defend themselves. ** Also in this issue: New rules for dark fibre, and how IP Telephony is making inroads in health care. ** For a limited time, save $70 on a new one-year subscription to Canada's #1 information resource for telecom professionals. Call 1-800-263-4415 x500 for details. http://www.angustel.ca/teleman/Telemanagement-Oct2003.pdf ============================================================ HOW TO SUBMIT ITEMS FOR TELECOM UPDATE E-MAIL: editors@angustel.ca FAX: 905-686-2655 MAIL: TELECOM UPDATE Angus TeleManagement Group 8 Old Kingston Road Ajax, Ontario Canada L1T 2Z7 =========================================================== HOW TO SUBSCRIBE (OR UNSUBSCRIBE) TELECOM UPDATE is provided in electronic form only. There are two formats available: 1. The fully-formatted edition is posted on the World Wide Web on the first business day of the week at 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 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: Dale Farmer Organization: Furry green fuzz in the back of the refrigerator Subject: Re: Tracing Old Internal Phone/Computer Wiring? Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 14:56:47 GMT Charles P. wrote: > You can usually find them on ebay quite cheap too. > Search for "wire tracer", "fox and hound", "tone tracer" things like that. > cp Last couple that I have bought actually came out of pawn shops. Bring some fresh batteries and make sure that they work before you lay down your cash though. --Dale ------------------------------ From: Barry Margolin Subject: Re: iTunes For Windows May Face New Piracy Threat Organization: Level(3) Communications, Woburn, MA Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 15:18:33 GMT In article , COTTP wrote: > The whole setup of sites like ITUnes tends to overcharge to begin > with. For example, when one thinks about the cost savings of digital > music distribution you can see that we're still being raked over the > coals. As is taught in most economics courses, prices are generally based on things like value and supply/demand ratio, not costs. Cost impacts the minimum price (if the vendor is trying to make a profit), but it isn't the only factor, or even the primary one. So while it may be cheaper to distribute music over the net than on physical disks, the value of downloaded music can be higher because of the convenience of copying it to different players. This is similar to the "Touch-Tone" surcharge that many phone companies used to have (maybe some still do -- Verizon appears to have done away with it, although the option still shows up on my bill with a zero price). Even though electronic switches made it *less* expensive to support Touch-Tone than pulse dialing, they could get away with the surcharge because it added value for the consumer. Barry Margolin, barry.margolin@level3.com Level(3), Woburn, MA *** DON'T SEND TECHNICAL QUESTIONS DIRECTLY TO ME, post them to newsgroups. Please DON'T copy followups to me -- I'll assume it wasn't posted to the group. ------------------------------ From: dave@compata.com (Dave Close) Subject: Re: My New Telecom Discussion Group Date: 19 Oct 2003 20:08:04 -0700 Organization: Compata, Costa Mesa, California Lisa Minter writes: > With Patrick's encouragement, I have started a new telecom discussion > group on Yahoo Groups. http://telecom-news@yahoogroups.com is the > email address to use. The URL is http://groups.yahoo.com/telecom-news . It is possible to join a Yahoo! mailing list using only email. In this case, you would send a blank message to telecom-news-subscribe@ yahoogroups.com. If all messages continue to be gateway'd between Yahoo! and the Digest, there would be little point in that. However ... Yahoo! provides NO email support whatsoever for that service. If you have any problem, you may be lost. Some of their messages suggest you send email to a support address, but when you do, you get a form reply directing you to a Web page instead. If you subscribed by email, you can't use their Web interface because you don't have the necessary password. If something goes wrong with your subscription, you can't even unsubscribe by email. Personally, I won't join Yahoo!'s Web interface because they demand too much personal data, like birthdate. (Yes, you can lie, but you must remember your lie in case you need it in the future.) I also strongly object to any company which demands to know my email address but won't provide one of theirs that actually gets to a real person. Email must be a two-way medium. Dave Close, Compata, Costa Mesa CA "The cost of silicon chips has been dave@compata.com, +1 714 434 7359 steady at about $1bn per acre for dhclose@alumni.caltech.edu 40 years." --Gordon Moore ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2003 18:54:26 -0400 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: The Columbia Space Shuttle Accident Report * Original: FROM ... Dave Farber Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2003 13:51:30 -0700 From: Andreas Ramos Subject: The Columbia space shuttle accident report Dave, I sent you this about the Columbia space shuttle last week. You didn't send it out to the IP list, and I don't know whether you oversaw it or you didn't want to send it out. The accident board's report is a remarkable document about the impact of management's decision making process on large organizations. It's really worth reading. yrs, Andreas www.andreas.com Dave, Here's a summary of the report on the Columbia space shuttle accident. yrs, Andreas www.andreas.com Back in February, the space shuttle Columbia came in for a landing. It would pass over Northern California, so I was outside in the early dawn to watch it go overhead. But Palo Alto was cloudy that day. I came in and a few minutes, the radio news reported that the space shuttle had been lost during re-entry. All seven astronauts died. An accident review board, the CAIB, was created and they released their report a few weeks ago. Yesterday, I read the CAIB report. Here are a few notes and a summary of the report, along with links to the report. The day after takeoff, NASA engineers were reviewing the various videos of the takeoff. They noticed that a piece of foam hit the shuttle's wing. This started a discussion among NASA engineers as to whether the foam had caused damage. They estimated the foam was traveling at about 500 miles per hour when it struck the wing. However, NASA management had a tight schedule for a number of missions. There was no time for delays. In previous takeoffs, pieces of foam had hit the shuttles and nothing had happened, so management, who weren't engineers, concluded there was no need to look into this. NASA engineers, using personal contacts, asked the US military and intelligence agencies to use their spy satellites to look at the shuttle's wing. There were three separate attempts to ask for spy photos and each time, NASA management found out about these requests and ordered the military NOT to look at the shuttle. Managers warned the engineers to follow procedures. If the NASA engineers had gotten the images, they would have seen the hole, the astronauts could have stayed in the space station, another shuttle (Atlantis) could be sent up, and the astronauts could return on the second shuttle. At page 140 in the CAIB report, there is a description of these actions and decisions, with a list of three requests for images at p. 166 and a list of eight missed opportunities at p. 167, with a summary at p. 170. At p. 177, the CAIB looks into NASA's decision-making process. The piece of foam stuck the wing, creating a hole in the wing's leading edge. During re-entry, superheated air entered through the hole, melted the wing's aluminum internal structure, and the wing collapsed and fell off the shuttle as it was moving at 12,000 miles per hour. NASA managers, with their demand to stick to the schedule, their refusal to listen to the engineers, and using threats of reprimands against engineers who spoke up, caused the loss of the shuttle and the deaths of the astronauts. In the early 80s, the shuttle Challenger took off in cold weather. The Challenger accident review showed that engineers warned NASA before launch that the O-rings might fail and they asked for a launch delay. NASA managers overrode the engineers and went ahead with the launch. Challenger exploded and all seven astronauts were killed (summary of the Challenger event at p. 199-200.) From the CAIB's summary: ".NASA's management system is unsafe to manage the shuttle system." In contrast, the US Navy has a decision system that actively seeks minority or dissenting opinions. If there are no dissenting opinions, the officers are obligated to actively look for dissenting opinions. At NASA, the opposite was done: management suppressed dissent and did not seek it out. The CAIB report should be read by anyone who works in large organizations. It uncovers the blindness in organizational decision making, shows how this occurs, and how this can be remedied. The Columbia Accident Investigation Board (CAIB at www.caib.us) 248-page report is at www.caib.us/news/report/default.html (PDF, 10 MB file). I suggest that you fetch this file; the CAIB website will close in early 2004. yrs, andreas www.andreas.com Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/ ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2003 18:59:27 -0400 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: FCC Readies Rule to Block Internet Piracy In the fight between the computer industry and the entertainment industry, the entertainment industry can always rely on their support from the FCC. * Original: FROM ... Dave Farber Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2003 08:10:34 -0700 From: Dewayne Hendricks FCC readies rule to block Internet piracy By Jonathan Krim, Washington Post, 10/19/2003 WASHINGTON -- The federal government is preparing for the first time to require that personal computers and other consumer electronics devices contain technology to help block Internet piracy of digital entertainment. A rule being considered by the Federal Communications Commission is one of a series of proposals pushed by the entertainment industry to help thwart copying and online trading of movies and television shows that increasingly are being broadcast in digital form with high-quality picture and sound. But the new rule also would force consumers to purchase new equipment if they wanted to record enhanced digital-quality television programs and replay them on other machines. Opponents of the proposed rule, including many technology companies and consumer groups, say it won't work. They are especially concerned that the plan might lead to government regulation of how personal computers and other devices are built, particularly if hackers crack the system and further changes are deemed necessary. FCC officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said they expect the agency to settle on details of the "broadcast flag" rule by the end of the month. The broadcast flag takes its name from the computer code that would be embedded in digital television signals and would be read by "compliant" devices such as a television or a digital video recorder. The rule would not affect consumers who record shows with VCRs. Nor would it affect programming received on a cable or satellite system, in part because consumers pay for that content. But the entertainment industry does not want digitally enhanced "high-value" entertainment sent free over the air to be easily copied and distributed on the Internet. FCC officials said they expect the final rule to enable competition among different means of deploying the flag system to protect broadcasts, rather than the government anointing one in particular. Unlike with recent FCC decisions on high-speed Internet access and media consolidation that have deeply split the five-member commission, none of the three Republicans and two Democrats has led a public campaign against the broadcast flag. "I'm optimistic we'll have a clean majority," said one senior agency official. "The commission has acted in the area of digital television in a very bipartisan fashion." Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/ ------------------------------ From: Dave Phelps Subject: Re: What on Earth is This? Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2003 21:11:27 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com In article , jmayson@nyx.net says... > Someone passed this number on to me. 800-522-5380. It's a very strange > recording. I tried a reverse number lookup on it and turned up nothing. It's an AT&T number. I have no clue what it's for though. I need to build a digit grabber. Dave Phelps DD Networks www.ddnets.com deadspam=tippenring ------------------------------ From: Group Special Mobile Subject: Re: Wireless Technology: Some Newbie Questions Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 11:25:30 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Reply-To: look@signature_for_reply_instructions On Sun, 19 Oct 2003 16:56:10 GMT, Michael D. Sullivan wrote: >> 3) What's EVDO and EVDV? http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/33718 To send an email reply send to GSMthemobilestandard (@) yahoo.com ------------------------------ Subject: Re: When a MAJORITY is Useful From: Name Withheld at Reader's Request Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 09:27:41 -0500 Patrick and Lisa - again, please withhold my LAST name and e-mail address. Thanks. From: Joey Lindstrom Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2003 09:32:49 -0600 Subject: Re: When a MAJORITY is Useful Reply-To: joey@telussucks.info > On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 23:02:58 -0400 (EDT), anonymous wrote: >> Patrick & Lisa - in an attempt to avoid spam, please do not post my >> name or e-mail address. Thanks. > Withholding the email address, I can see. Withholding the name? > Smacks more of cowardice than of prudence. "That's just my opinion, I > could be wrong. -Dennis Miller" But hey, at least you're being honest > about not wanting to be identified. Some people hide behind aliases. Hey, Joey -- Ever hear of reverse look-up? Not that I owe you or anyone else an explanation of why I requested my name and e-mail withheld, since I've joined this group I get 30-40 pieces of crap-mail per day. I'm not the network manager and have very little control over the firewalls and spam fighting software. So I'll sign my first name, if that makes you feel any better. For obviously being part of a group that has claimed majority and power, you seem a bit hostile. I did expect that type of response, though. Too bad. Marise ------------------------------ 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 fifty 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. If you donate at least fifty dollars per year we will send you our two-CD set of the entire Telecom Archives; this is every word published in this Digest since our beginning in 1981. 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 #707 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Oct 20 23:13:44 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id h9L3Dib08919; Mon, 20 Oct 2003 23:13:44 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 23:13:44 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200310210313.h9L3Dib08919@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 #708 TELECOM Digest Mon, 20 Oct 2003 18:52:00 EDT Volume 22 : Issue 708 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Internet Society Announces New Board Members (Internet Society) Re: Download Cell Phone Book to Computer or Other Phone (Group Spec) Dumb Question: BIX vs. 110 or 66 Punchdown Blocks (Geoffrey Welsh) Nat'l Mobile Narrows Iraq Mobile Supplier Choices (Eric Friedebach) Re: The Columbia Space Shuttle Accident Report (John A. Weeks III) Theirs For the Taking: Sensitive Credit Data (Monty Solomon) Natick Selectmen Consider RCN Fines (Monty Solomon) EFFector 16.27: Action Alert: Stop MPAA's Broadcast Flag (Solomon) EFFector 16.28: Action Alert: USA-PATRIOT Act Reform (Monty Solomon) Can Cable Fast-Forward Past TiVo? (Monty Solomon) A Game Player That Happens to Be a Phone (Monty Solomon) Dell Turns on Satellite TV (Monty Solomon) Telephone <-> Intercom Application (Transom) Re: iTunes For Windows May Face New Piracy Threat (Paul A Lee) Re: When a MAJORITY is Useful (Joey Lindstrom) Re: Last Laugh! Direct Email Lead Generation Services (Wm Warren) 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, 20 Oct 2003 14:16:33 EDT From: Internet Society Subject: Internet Society Announces New Board Members Date: 20 October 2003 Contact: Julie Williams Phone: +1-(703) 464-7005, x111 Cell: +1-703-402-6715 E-mail: JWilliams@isoc.org Internet Society Announces New Board Members for Public Interest Registry; World-Renowned Internet Leaders to Join Board of .ORG Registry -- Priority is to Ensure Exemplary Operation of .ORG Domain Reston, VA -- 20 October 2003 --The Internet Society (ISOC) today announced the selection and approval of new board members for the Public Interest Registry (PIR). PIR was established by ISOC to manage the .ORG domain last year. An initial Board was appointed for a term of one year with an expiration date of 30 October, 2003. "We want to sincerely thank the founding PIR Board for their energy and diligence. The transition of the .ORG registry to PIR was extremely well executed. The operations of PIR are setting a new and higher standard for the operation of a registry, due in very large part, to the superb execution of the founding PIR Board," said ISOC President and CEO Lynn St.Amour. "That said, the new Board represents a wealth of knowledge and experience, both in the technical name space as well as business. We expect the new Board to continue and further refine the direction that has been established so competently by the founding Board." According to Edward Viltz, PIR President & CEO, PIR is committed to continuing to define a new standard of customer satisfaction and registry operations, while providing resources to empower and educate the Internet community it serves, and positioning .ORG as a valued global brand. "We are excited to have this group of known global Internet leaders to help guide us on that path." The new board will be seated on 1 November 2003, and will have staggered terms of 1 to 3 years. The primary criteria in PIR Board member selection was a thorough understanding of registries, registrar and registrant needs, active board participation, and a strong record of excellence in involvement with professional or community organizations. Below is a summary of some of the member's activities. Returning PIR Board members: David Maher (US - 3 years): Partner Chicago office of the law firm Sonnenschein, Nath & Rosenthal; intellectual property and communications law expert; former ISOC VP - Public Policy; member of the International Ad Hoc Committee (IAHC); World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Arbitration & Mediation Center Panel of Neutrals. Marc Rotenberg (US - 3 years): Executive Director Electronic Privacy Information Center; Adjunct Professor Georgetown University Law Center; Chairman American Bar Association Committee on Privacy and Information Protection; UNESCO Expert Panel on Cyberspace Law. Frode Greisen (Europe - 1 year): Board member Rseaux IP Europens (RIPE NCC) Association; former president European Research and Education Network; former chairman and founding board member ISOC; former president Trans-European Education and Research Networking Association (TERENA). New PIR Board members: Amadeu Abril i Abril (Europe - 2 years): ICANN Board of Directors 1999-2003; member ICANN's Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO) Names Council; professor of EU Law and Director of European Documentation Center at ESADE Law School; legal counsel for IP/IT group for Cuatrecasas Law Firm; legal and policy advisory to Nominalia. Geoff Huston (Asia Pacific - 2 years): Technical Manager Australian Academic and Research Network 1989-1995; Chief Internet Scientist Telstra 1995-present; Internet Architecture Board (IAB) 1999-present; Executive Director IAB; ISOC Founding Board Member (1992-1995), Board Secretary (1993-1999; 2000-2001), Chairman (1999-2000); Asia Pacific Network Information Center Executive Council 8 years. Eva Frlich (Europe - 1 year): 20 years experience in IT and telecom; member Rseaux IP Europens (RIPE), Council of European National Top-Level Domain Registries (CENTRE), Internet Council of Registrars (CORE); Director of European Technology Development for Neulevel; Senior Technical Industry Liaison for Neustar; Network Information Centre Sweden AB (NIC-SE). Kenny Huang (Asia Pacific 1 year): pioneer of Internet Development in Taiwan; ICANN Address Council, Asia Pacific Representative; ICANN Internationalized Domain Name Registry Implementation Committee (IDN-RIC); founding member Taiwan Network Information Center (TWNIC); co-chair Address Policy SIG, Asia Pacific Network; Advisor Chinese Domain Name Consortium; Co-Chair, JET (Joint Engineer Team, formed by JPNIC, KRNIC, CNNIC, TWNIC); Searchable Internet Resource Name (SIREN). ABOUT PIR Public Interest Registry (www.pir.org) is a not-for-profit corporation created by the Internet Society to manage the .ORG domain. PIR's mission is to manage the .ORG domain in an exemplary manner while educating and empowering the global non-commercial community to more effectively utilize the Internet. PIR is based in Reston, Virginia. ABOUT ISOC The Internet Society (www.isoc.org) is a not-for-profit membership organization founded in 1991 to provide leadership in Internet related standards, education, and policy. With offices in Washington, DC, and Geneva, Switzerland, it is dedicated to ensuring the open development, evolution and use of the Internet for the benefit of people throughout the world. ISOC is the organizational home of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), the Internet Architecture Board (IAB), the Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG) and other Internet-related bodies who together play a critical role in ensuring that the Internet develops in a stable and open manner. For over 12 years ISOC has run international network training programs for developing countries and these have played a vital role in setting up the Internet connections and networks in virtually every country connecting to the Internet during this time. ------------------------------ From: Group Special Mobile Subject: Re: Download Cell Phone Book to Computer or Another Phone? Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 11:28:08 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Reply-To: look@signature_for_reply_instructions On 19 Oct 2003 10:29:16 -0700, psu104@yahoo.com wrote: > I there a way to download your phone book from your cellular phone > to your computer? I have a Motorola V60. With a data cable and appropriate software you should be able to. Do google search for Motorola sync software. To send an email reply send to GSMthemobilestandard (@) yahoo.com ------------------------------ From: Geoffrey Welsh Subject: Dumb Question: BIX vs. 110 or 66 Punchdown Blocks Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 14:48:28 -0400 Organization: Bell Sympatico I've never gotten around to asking this before, though it's been on my mind for a long time. Almost all of the equipment I've seen here in Canada -- Bell Canada, Nortel, Mitel, building station cabling -- is terminated on BIX punchdown blocks, but BIX seems practically unknown anywhere else. Is this a plot by our Heritage Ministry to preserve unique Canadian culture?!? Geoffrey Welsh This address is not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Unsolicited bulk mail is spam, no matter what regulations (real or imagined) it complies with! We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. ------------------------------ From: Eric Friedebach Subject: Nat'l Mobile Narrows Iraq Mobile Supplier Choices Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 14:10:48 -0500 Organization: Fish heads, fish heads, rolly polly fish heads. By Ahmad Mustafa KUWAIT, Oct 20 (Reuters) - Kuwait's National Mobile Telecommunications Co. said on Monday either Nokia, Siemens or Ericsson would be its main equipment supplier for part of a mobile network it is building in northern Iraq. One of these companies will be chosen as the supplier for the western part of that network, David Murray, chief executive officer and general manager, told Reuters. In the east, it will be supplied by China's largest telecom gear maker Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd., the existing supplier to consortium partner Asia-Cell, a local Iraqi firm already operating in northern Iraq, he added. http://www.forbes.com/business/newswire/2003/10/20/rtr1115261.html Eric Friedebach ------------------------------ Subject: Re: The Columbia Space Shuttle Accident Report Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 14:55:24 -0500 From: John A. Weeks III Organization: Newave Communications In article , Marcus Didius Falco wrote: > If the NASA engineers had gotten the images, they would have seen > the hole, the astronauts could have stayed in the space station, > another shuttle (Atlantis) could be sent up, and the astronauts > could return on the second shuttle. This is not true. The shuttle was not on a space station mission when the accident happened. To reach the space station, the shuttle has to launch on a very specific path to obtain both the inclination and altitude needed to be in the same orbit as the space station. The shuttle does not carry fuel on-board to change to a different orbit (other than the OMS and retro fuel to do a small amount of navigation and to re-enter). The space station is not an option unless that is your initial goal. There is also no garantee that any imagery would have seen the problem with Columbia. Any defect in the carbon-carbon leading edge could have lead to tradegy, with the smallest fatal defect being smaller than what imagery could have resolved. The only thing that could have found this problem for sure was an EVA (space walk), and in all likelihood, the EVA would have done more damage, and the Columbia had nothing on board that could have fixed the problem. The Columbia report did state that they could have gone into a mode to conserve consumables, and it may have been possible to launch another shuttle in time to rescue the crew. This would all have to have been done on-the-fly with little time to improvise, train, or simulate. > In the early 80s, the shuttle Challenger took off in cold weather. The > Challenger accident review showed that engineers warned NASA before > launch that the O-rings might fail and they asked for a launch > delay. NASA managers overrode the engineers and went ahead with the > launch. Challenger exploded and all seven astronauts were killed The Challenger actually broke up due to aerodynamic forces, and then the fuel burned. It did not explode, and the vehicle was not blown apart by the fuel. The spacecraft was exposed to the supersonic air- flow at an angle in which it was not designed to survive, and it came apart. It is true that NASA was warned about the o-rings. But to be fair, NASA gets warned about a lot of things. The shuttle is a large and complex vehicle, and a lot of things have to go exactly right for a launch. If they stopped the program everytime someone voiced a concern, they would never fly. It is just too bad that sometimes important flaws get past the system of checks and balances, and due to the unforgiving nature of space, the results can easily be fatal. We see this happen about every 10 years at NASA. 3 of the 4 times it resulted in loss of crew/loss of vehicle. Given the compexity of the job and the number of people involved, some might argue that this is a good or a bad safety record. That is the real question coming out of the Columbia disaster. ==================================================================== John A. Weeks III 952-432-2708 john@johnweeks.com Newave Communications http://www.johnweeks.com ==================================================================== ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 00:40:13 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Theirs For the Taking: Sensitive Credit Data CONSUMER BEAT Resale of reports depends on an honor system that goes unpoliced. By Bruce Mohl, Globe Staff, 10/19/2003 Sensitive personal financial information belonging to Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney recently ended up on sale online for $125, exposing the inner workings of a credit reporting network that operates largely on an honor system and is rarely policed. As part of a story on the vulnerability of personal financial data, The Boston Globe purchased Romney's TransUnion credit report -- listing his credit card accounts, credit card numbers, credit limits, and payment history -- from a Colorado company calling itself Goldshield Inc. It wasn't hard to do. On its website, Goldshield asked: "What are you looking for?" On sale were Social Security numbers ($30), unlisted telephone numbers ($85), telephone billing information ($95), vehicle information ($65), credit reports ($125), and credit card billing statements ($125). Everything a thief would need to steal an identity. All the information was sold with no questions asked. John Strange, who identified himself as the president of Goldshield, said he could obtain a person's credit report or a credit card billing statement without anyone knowing about it. "I can pull miracles out of the air," he said. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 01:04:24 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Natick Selectmen Consider RCN Fines Cable company criticized over gaps in service By Alison O'Leary Murray, Globe Correspondent, 10/19/2003 Natick selectmen are expected to decide at their meeting tomorrow night whether to fine telecommunications company RCN up to $500 a day for breach of contract or give the company more time to reach town residents with limited access to cable television, telephone, and Internet providers. Last year the board opted to give RCN a one-year extension on the contract terms, which required the company to make service available to all of the nearly 14,000 residences in Natick. But at a meeting earlier this month, RCN vice president and general manager Bob Sheehan admitted that they have fallen short. He described almost 2,500 of those residences as "cold," meaning the company has been unable to extend its network close enough to offer services. Sheehan said RCN has spent $6 million in Natick so far and that it would cost another $2 million to $4 million to comply with their contract. That kind of money, he said, is harder to come by following a change in the telecommunications industry that makes companies more accountable to investors' expectations. RCN executives were expected to meet with Town Administrator Philip Lemnios and members of the Natick Cable Advisory Board to discuss their plans for reaching more Natick residents before tomorrow's meeting. Lemnios said last week that he was looking for specific information, including a timetable for resolving issues. http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2003/10/19/selectmen_consider_rcn_fines/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 01:19:44 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: EFFector 16.27: Action Alert: Stop the MPAA's Broadcast Flag! EFFector Vol. 16, No. 27 October 11, 2003 donna@eff.org A Publication of the Electronic Frontier Foundation ISSN 1062-9424 In the 266th Issue of EFFector: * Action Alert: Stop the MPAA's Broadcast Flag! * EFF Expands San Francisco Staff * EFF Co-Founder Mitch Kapor Honored by CPSR * Deep Links (8): Silly Wabbit, RFIDs Are for Kids! * Staff Calendar: 10.20.03 - Wendy Seltzer speaks at ISPCon, Santa Clara, CA; 10.24.03 - Lee Tien speaks at BayNet, San Francisco, CA * Administrivia http://www.eff.org/effector/16/27.php ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 01:16:35 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: EFFector 16.28: Action Alert: USA-PATRIOT Act Reform: Tell EFFector Vol. 16, No. 28 October 18, 2003 donna@eff.org A Publication of the Electronic Frontier Foundation ISSN 1062-9424 In the 267th Issue of EFFector: * Action Alert: USA-PATRIOT Act Reform: Tell Congress to Ask Tough Questions * RIAA Gets Ready to Sue More Music Fans: EFF's "The Great MP3 Caper" Tells the Story * EFF Defends Alleged Filesharer: Another Error in Record Companies' Crusade * ISP Rejects Diebold Copyright Claims Against News Website: EFF Defends Right to Publish Links to Electronic Voting Memos * SunnComm Threatens Princeton Student Over "Shift Key" Research; Backs Down * EFF Thanks SnapGear for Hardware Donation * Deep Links (11): FCC May Give DTV Hollywood Ending * Staff Calendar: 10.18.03 - Wendy Seltzer speaks at ISPCon, Santa Clara, CA.; 10.24.03 - Lee Tien speaks at BayNet, San Francisco, CA. * Administrivia http://www.eff.org/effector/16/28.php ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 02:26:47 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Can Cable Fast-Forward Past TiVo? By SETH SCHIESEL TiVo, the best-known maker of digital video recorders, may need to worry about people like Peter S. Palermo. But Mr. Palermo may also represent just what the cable television industry has been looking for. A few weeks before the P.G.A. Championship golf tournament in Rochester in August, Mr. Palermo, a real estate broker, was trying to figure out how he would record the broadcast. Mr. Palermo thought about buying a TiVo, the digital video recorder, or DVR. Using a computer hard drive and advanced software, a DVR lets the user pause, rewind and fast-forward even with live television programs. It also provides a much easier way to automatically record programs than is possible with videocassette recorders. In the end, Mr. Palermo was turned off from TiVo by the prospect of having to connect all kinds of wires and adding a new box to his home entertainment system. So, instead, he ordered a relatively new product that his cable company, Time Warner Cable, a unit of Time Warner, has been pitching: a set-top box made by Scientific-Atlanta with a DVR already built in. http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/20/technology/20tivo.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 02:34:41 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: A Game Player That Happens to Be a Phone By ERIC A. TAUB The world is awash in cellphones that deliver only black-and-white video games that are as archaic looking as Pong. Nokia is hoping to change that landscape with N-Gage, its new mobile phone that offers graphically rich, three-dimensional, full-color video games stored on cards. The handset, with its built-in wireless technology, allows two players to compete in the same room, while software built into each game allows players across the world from each other to compete by way of a special Web site. The unit is also an MP3 player, capable of storing songs downloaded from a PC onto a memory card, and an FM radio. Oh, and by the way, it can make phone calls. http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/20/technology/20nokia.html ------------------------------ Reply-To: Monty Solomon From: Monty Solomon Subject: Dell Turns on Satellite TV Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 17:32:43 -0400 By John G. Spooner Staff Writer, CNET News.com Dell is finalizing a deal to sell satellite TV systems provided by DirecTV. Beginning next month, the Round Rock, Texas, PC maker plans to sell hardware and to sign up subscribers for DirecTV's digital video recording (DVR) service, a Dell representative said. A DirecTV representative confirmed that the two companies are discussing a deal. The system combines DirecTV's satellite TV with TiVo's digital video recorder (DVR), which can store and play back TV programs. http://news.com.com/2100-1041-5093791.html ------------------------------ From: TransomSailor@excite.com (Transom) Subject: Telephone <-> Intercom Application Date: 20 Oct 2003 14:43:09 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com I'd like to consult ($) with someone who knows their way around PBXs and intercoms. I've got an application that is similar to the intercom system of an apartment building where the front door intercom gets connected to a telephone when a visitor presses a switch. If you have some experience on the hardware side of this sort of applications please contact me if you'd like to be considered for a short-term consulting project. I will not be checking this group as often as I check e-mail so please send e-mail to me directly. Thanks. ------------------------------ From: Paul A Lee Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 17:13:41 -0400 Subject: Re: iTunes For Windows May Face New Piracy Threat Reply-To: telecom-news@yahoogroups.com In TELECOM Digest V22 #707, Barry Margolin wrote (in part): > This is similar to the "Touch-Tone" surcharge that many phone > companies used to have (maybe some still do -- Verizon appears to > have done away with it, although the option still shows up on my > bill with a zero price). Even though electronic switches made it > *less* expensive to support Touch-Tone than pulse dialing, they > could get away with the surcharge because it added value for the > consumer. I seem to recall that the touch tone surcharge was a means the federal government used to induce the Bell System and independent telcos to build DTMF switching capability. Starting around 1963, the feds (especially the Defense Department) pushed the telcos to upgrade to DTMF switching to support the federal networks (AUTOVON, etc.). The objective was to have a more redundant network -- if a switching center got nuked, the DoD operator could DTMF around the problem. The telcos balked at the cost of rebuilding the entire network to deploy DTMF capability for a small percentage of terminals, but realized how marketable touch tone would be to consumers and businesses. So, the feds supported the telcos in getting state regulatory approval for charging an extra $1 per month per touch tone line for 30 years to defray the cost of building DTMF switching. Some states didn't go along, some surcharges were a bit more or less than $1, some telcos were "decent" enough to eliminate the surcharge once the system had been paid for by revenues and technological advances, and some telcos held out the full 30 years. I think the last of the touch tone surcharge tariffs should have expired in 1999 (having been granted in 1969). The Verizon bill that still itemizes the charge is probably a former GTE division. They were late in adopting touch tone, and I think they held out the full 30 years. I remember having touch tone from GTE in 1976, when they actually did a DTMF-to-pulse conversion to serve me from their crossbar switch. It worked that way for almost 10 years, until they put in a GTD-5. That's my recollection of various accounts I have read. Maybe a real telephone historian can corroborate or correct. Paul A Lee Voice: +1 717 730-8355 Sr Telecom Engineer [Voice & Transmission] Fax: +1 717 975-3789 Rite Aid Corporation, Telecomm, 30 Hunter Lane, Camp Hill, PA 17011-2410 ------------------------------ From: Joey Lindstrom Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 15:24:55 -0600 Subject: Re: When a MAJORITY is Useful Reply-To: joey@telussucks.info On Mon, 20 Oct 2003 15:14:04 EDT, Marise wrote: >>> Patrick & Lisa - in an attempt to avoid spam, please do not post my >>> name or e-mail address. Thanks. >> Withholding the email address, I can see. Withholding the name? >> Smacks more of cowardice than of prudence. "That's just my opinion, I >> could be wrong. -Dennis Miller" But hey, at least you're being honest >> about not wanting to be identified. Some people hide behind aliases. > Hey, Joey -- Ever hear of reverse look-up? Not that I owe you or > anyone else an explanation of why I requested my name and e-mail > withheld, since I've joined this group I get 30-40 pieces of crap-mail > per day. I'm not the network manager and have very little control > over the firewalls and spam fighting software. So I'll sign my first > name, if that makes you feel any better. For obviously being part of > a group that has claimed majority and power, you seem a bit hostile. > I did expect that type of response, though. Too bad. > Marise Expect what you want. Some of us get a little tired of people popping in here, setting off grenades, and running away - all while ducking under the "I don't want to get spammed" excuse. Which, in and of itself, is a very valid excuse. But "reverse look-up"? What on earth are you talking about? If you have had your email address expunged by the moderator, then no spammer on earth is going to harvest your email address (if they didn't already have it). Spammers deal in bulk -- addresses by the millions. They're not sitting around reading this group, spotting the name "Marise Smith" (or whatever your last name is), and then performing searches to try to find out what your email address is. They ain't got the time for it, and the returns would be vanishingly small. If your email address is available via any kind of search, THEY ALREADY HAVE IT. So do you mean a reverse look-up as in a reverse telephone directory? Y'think spammers are gonna try to phone you? No Marise, if you're going to defend this argument (and/or attack mine), please use a valid reason. As I said, withholding the email address alone is a valid means of fighting spam (or otherwise munging it into human-readable, but not machine-readable, form). That said, you did not make it clear whether or not this is the only place you've made your email address known. If so, then yes, most of your spam has likely been the result of your address being harvested from here. If not, then it's equally likely that it's happened via other means (or a combination of both -- these guys are thorough). Majority? Yes, I claim to be a part of the majority. Power? I don't claim any power. Talk to Pat/Lisa. Finally, as to your assertion that you owe nobody an explanation of why you're posting anonymously ... ok, well, the final ruling comes from Pat/Lisa, but speaking as somebody who's participated in these public forums for more than two decades, I say with some feeling of moral authority that, yes, you do owe us that explanation. Most of us post "publicly", using our real names and real addresses (munged or otherwise). When somebody wanders into the forum and behaves in a manner inconsistent with the rest of the group, we are going to want to know why. ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Last Laugh! Direct Email Lead Generation Services From: William Warren Organization: Comcast Online Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 12:47:59 GMT Sir, I hung up when they told me they don't take credit cards. Bill ------------------------------ 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 67301-0050 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 fifty 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. If you donate at least fifty dollars per year we will send you our two-CD set of the entire Telecom Archives; this is every word published in this Digest since our beginning in 1981. 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 #708 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Oct 21 01:21:27 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id h9L5LR909753; Tue, 21 Oct 2003 01:21:27 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2003 01:21:27 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200310210521.h9L5LR909753@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 #709 TELECOM Digest Tue, 21 Oct 2003 01:21:00 EDT Volume 22 : Issue 709 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson I-D ACTION: Draft-Stastny-Enum-Numbering-Voip-00.txt (joppenheimer Re: The Columbia Space Shuttle Accident Report (Joey Lindstrom) Rendezvous in Space (was Re: Columbia Space Shuttle Accident (R Chapman) Re: Can Cable Fast-Forward Past TiVo? (Ron Chapman) Re: iTunes For Windows May Face New Piracy Threat (COTTP) Re: Dumb Question: BIX vs. 110 or 66 Punchdown Blocks (Al Gillis) Re: Dumb Question: BIX vs. 110 or 66 Punchdown Blocks (COTTP) Re: What on Earth is This? (jmayson@nyx.net) Re: What on Earth is This? (Gary Breuckman) Re: Telephone <-> Intercom Application (Gordon S. Hlavenka) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRUSES. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Reply-To: From: Subject: I-D ACTION: Draft-Stastny-Enum-Numbering-Voip-00.txt Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 19:46:54 -0400 Organization: ICB Inc./WhoSells800.com Interesting. http://ICBTollFreeNews.com _ http://800Consulting.com 160 East 26 Street, Suite 6E New York, New York 10010 212 684-7210, 1 800 The Expert CALL 1-800-EVERYONE for low rates on Business Toll Free Service & Long Distance Service -- Standalone Toll Free Service -- Power Conferencing >>To: IETF-Announce: ; >>From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org >>Reply-to: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org >>Subject: I-D ACTION:draft-stastny-enum-numbering-voip-00.txt >>Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 15:41:58 -0400 >>Sender: owner-ietf-announce@ietf.org >>A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts >>directories. >> Title : Numbering for VoIP and other IP Communications >> Author(s) : R. Stastny >> Filename : draft-stastny-enum-numbering-voip-00.txt >> Pages : 43 >> Date : 2003-10-20 >> This document gives advice in setting up E.164 compatible numbering >> and dialing plans in administrative domains set up for IP >> Communications in general and VoIP applications in detail. After >> explaining numbering and dialing plans in principle, it discusses >> which types of E.164 numbers should be used for IP based terminals, >> to achieve proper routing of calls and other communications on the >> PSTN/ISDN and also on the Internet, using ENUM technology. >> A URL for this Internet-Draft is: > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-stastny-enum-numbering-voip-0 0.txt >> To remove yourself from the IETF Announcement list, send a message to >> ietf-announce-request with the word unsubscribe in the body of the >> message. >>Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username >>"anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, >>type "cd internet-drafts" and then >> "get draft-stastny-enum-numbering-voip-00.txt". >> A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in >> http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html >> or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt >> Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. >> Send a message to: >> mailserv@ietf.org. >> In the body type: >> "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-stastny-enum-numbering-voip-00.txt". >> OTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in >> MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this >> feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" >> command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or >> a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail readers >> exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with >> "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split >> up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on >> how to manipulate these messages. >> >> Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader >> implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the >> Internet-Draft. >> Content-Type: text/plain >> Content-ID: <2003-10-20144818.I-D@ietf.org> >> ENCODING mime >> FILE /internet-drafts/draft-stastny-enum-numbering-voip-00.txt >> > ------------------------------ From: Joey Lindstrom Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 18:24:34 -0600 Subject: Re: The Columbia Space Shuttle Accident Report Reply-To: joey@telussucks.info Thank you, John, for an excellent rebuttal to what sure seemed like a one-sided trashing of NASA (I note there was very little in that article that tried to show the other side of the story). On Mon, 20 Oct 2003 18:52:21 -0400 (EDT), John A. Weeks III wrote: >> If the NASA engineers had gotten the images, they would have seen >> the hole, the astronauts could have stayed in the space station, >> another shuttle (Atlantis) could be sent up, and the astronauts >> could return on the second shuttle. > This is not true. The shuttle was not on a space station mission when > the accident happened. To reach the space station, the shuttle has to > launch on a very specific path to obtain both the inclination and > altitude needed to be in the same orbit as the space station. The > shuttle does not carry fuel on-board to change to a different orbit > (other than the OMS and retro fuel to do a small amount of navigation > and to re-enter). The space station is not an option unless that is > your initial goal. I heard a lot of this on CNN and other outlets from so-called "experts". "They coulda gone to the space station and waited for rescue!" These aren't Buicks we got running around out there. As you said, the space station wasn't an option. But since you seem well-informed, I'll ask these questions: assuming they had detected this problem prior to de-orbit, was it an option to simply remain in orbit and await rescue? How much food/air/supplies do they have on board for such a contingency? Could a rescue launch have been mounted in a short enough time to get them out of there safely? And, what kinds of technical problems would have been involved in such a rescue? So far as I know, there've never been two shuttles in space at the same time, let alone one trying to reach another for a rescue. The logistics alone would be a nightmare. > There is also no garantee that any imagery would have seen the problem > with Columbia. Any defect in the carbon-carbon leading edge could > have lead to tradegy, with the smallest fatal defect being smaller > than what imagery could have resolved. The only thing that could have > found this problem for sure was an EVA (space walk), and in all > likelihood, the EVA would have done more damage, and the Columbia had > nothing on board that could have fixed the problem. Could you explain more fully your statement that an EVA could have resulted in more damage? As for the imagery, I tend towards being even more pessimistic: I believe it's EXCEEDINGLY doubtful that any imagery would have detected the problem, unless we were talking about a monstrously gaping hole in the wing -- which, as far as we know, probably wasn't the case. > The Columbia report did state that they could have gone into a mode to > conserve consumables, and it may have been possible to launch another > shuttle in time to rescue the crew. This would all have to have been > done on-the-fly with little time to improvise, train, or simulate. See my questions above. I assume, also, that survivability would be increased the earlier into the mission (and thus the earlier they switch to conservation mode) they detect the problem. > It is true that NASA was warned about the o-rings. But to be fair, > NASA gets warned about a lot of things. The shuttle is a large and > complex vehicle, and a lot of things have to go exactly right for a > launch. If they stopped the program everytime someone voiced a > concern, they would never fly. It is just too bad that sometimes > important flaws get past the system of checks and balances, and due to > the unforgiving nature of space, the results can easily be fatal. > We see this happen about every 10 years at NASA. 3 of the 4 times it > resulted in loss of crew/loss of vehicle. Given the compexity of the > job and the number of people involved, some might argue that this is a > good or a bad safety record. That is the real question coming out of > the Columbia disaster. I tend to agree. While there's probably room for improvement (ie: your statement that sometimes an IMPORTANT flaw gets through), I'd have to say that their safety record is pretty damned good. Again, these aren't Buicks and these ain't trips to the store. These are seriously dangerous endeavours (no pun intended) where a great many things can go wrong -- and there ain't no AAA out there. If something breaks, it can easily kill you. This reminds me of a non-fiction essay in Robert A. Heinlein's "Expanded Universe", in which he writes of the trip he and his wife Virginia took to the Soviet Union -- this would have been late 50's or early 60's, PRIOR to Gugarin's historic flight. Anyways, one day during the trip, everybody they met (schoolteachers, tour guides, soldiers, people on the streets) gushed with excitement at the latest triumph for the Soviet Union: they had put a man in space. It was even printed in the local newspaper (in whatever town they were in at the time). By evening, nobody would admit it had happened -- or, rather, that the flight was unmanned and only contained a dummy. The evening newspapers all ran stories containing only the newer "pravda". After their return from the Soviet Union, they confirmed that there had been no (substantiated) reports of a manned Soviet launch in the press OUTSIDE of the Iron Curtain. So the question is: did somebody jump the gun with an incorrect news story, or is there even now a dead cosmonaut orbiting above us? :-) (I know, there's been a lot of debunking of this theory, but still ... y'never know.) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 20:21:14 -0400 From: Ron Chapman Subject: Rendezvous in Space (was Re: The Columbia Space Shuttle Accident In article , John A. Weeks III wrote: >> If the NASA engineers had gotten the images, they would have seen >> the hole, the astronauts could have stayed in the space station, >> another shuttle (Atlantis) could be sent up, and the astronauts >> could return on the second shuttle. > This is not true. The shuttle was not on a space station mission when > the accident happened. To reach the space station, the shuttle has to > launch on a very specific path to obtain both the inclination and > altitude needed to be in the same orbit as the space station. Did anyone see HBO's From The Earth To The Moon? Wonderful TV. It gives you back a reason to have a TV. Anyway, once they decided they were going to do it, and the basic steps, they had a meeting to discuss these steps. Stephen Root (I love him; he can play a wide range of characters, from Milton in Office Space all the way up to this role) as Chris Kraft was heading the meeting, and discussed rendezvous: "OK, you go in back of my house and I'll stand in front. You throw a rock over the roof; I'll throw a tennis ball, and try to hit your rock. That's rendezvous." ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 20:26:09 -0400 From: Ron Chapman Subject: Re: Can Cable Fast-Forward Past TiVo? In article , Monty Solomon wrote: > By SETH SCHIESEL > TiVo, the best-known maker of digital video recorders, may need to > worry about people like Peter S. Palermo. But Mr. Palermo may also > represent just what the cable television industry has been looking > for. > A few weeks before the P.G.A. Championship golf tournament in > Rochester in August, Mr. Palermo, a real estate broker, was trying to > figure out how he would record the broadcast. > Mr. Palermo thought about buying a TiVo, the digital video recorder, > or DVR. Using a computer hard drive and advanced software, a DVR lets > the user pause, rewind and fast-forward even with live television > programs. It also provides a much easier way to automatically record > programs than is possible with videocassette recorders. > In the end, Mr. Palermo was turned off from TiVo by the prospect of > having to connect all kinds of wires and adding a new box to his home > entertainment system. So, instead, he ordered a relatively new product > that his cable company, Time Warner Cable, a unit of Time Warner, has > been pitching: a set-top box made by Scientific-Atlanta with a DVR `> already built in. > http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/20/technology/20tivo.html It's interesting to note that with Time Warner's DVR box, the user is UNABLE to record pay per view movies and events. Sure, Time Warner's box has two tuners inside, allowing you to record two separate events simultaneously -- or watch one with full pause and rewind capability while recording another. But the no PPV thing is very telling, because the cable companies really and truly want to control what you watch and how. I bet they end up charging an extra $10 to give you the ability to skip through commercials. And another $10 to allow you to record premium channels. Etc, etc. ------------------------------ From: COTTP Subject: Re: iTunes For Windows May Face New Piracy Threat Organization: Children of the Tea Party Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 21:22:52 -0500 In article , palee@riteaid.com says: > The Verizon bill that still itemizes the charge is probably a former > GTE division. They were late in adopting touch tone, and I think they > held out the full 30 years. I remember having touch tone from GTE in > 1976, when they actually did a DTMF-to-pulse conversion to serve me > from their crossbar switch. It worked that way for almost 10 years, > until they put in a GTD-5. No -- that's not it. I'm in Rhode Island -- Providence to be precise and the city had been on a #1ESS since the early 70's and was upgraded to a DMS-100 sometime around 1995 or so. We still see the Touch-Tone charge itemized at $0.00 on our bills too. It's like they want us to know they could be charging for it, but out of the goodness of their hearts they aren't. ------------------------------ From: Al Gillis Subject: Re: Dumb Question: BIX vs. 110 or 66 Punchdown Blocks Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 17:24:32 -0700 Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com It's quite possible that, along with radio programs (or should it be programmes?), your government requires that telephone systems have a certain percentage of Canadian content to be legal. You know how governments can be! But, on the other hand, requiring a certain percentage of Canadian content made many Canadian musical groups popular on your radio stations! Maybe the same thinking explains the widespread use of BIX blocks? Geoffrey Welsh wrote in message news:telecom22.709.3@telecom-digest.org: > I've never gotten around to asking this before, though it's been on my > mind for a long time. > Almost all of the equipment I've seen here in Canada -- Bell Canada, > Nortel, Mitel, building station cabling -- is terminated on BIX > punchdown blocks, but BIX seems practically unknown anywhere else. > Is this a plot by our Heritage Ministry to preserve unique Canadian > culture?!? > Geoffrey Welsh > This address is not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or > given away without explicit written consent. Unsolicited bulk mail is > spam, no matter what regulations (real or imagined) it complies with! > We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we > are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but > because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one > stands against crime. ------------------------------ From: COTTP Subject: Re: Dumb Question: BIX vs. 110 or 66 Punchdown Blocks Organization: Children of the Tea Party Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 21:15:31 -0500 In article , reply@newsgroup.please says: > I've never gotten around to asking this before, though it's been on my > mind for a long time. > Almost all of the equipment I've seen here in Canada -- Bell Canada, > Nortel, Mitel, building station cabling -- is terminated on BIX > punchdown blocks, but BIX seems practically unknown anywhere else. > Is this a plot by our Heritage Ministry to preserve unique Canadian > culture?!? No it isn't. Verizon used them during a period in the late 90's for breakout on multi-pair drops. Stupid when you consider the rest of wiring was on 110 blocks. ------------------------------ From: jmayson@nyx.net Subject: Re: What on Earth is This? Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2003 01:24:42 GMT Organization: Road Runner - Texas >> Someone passed this number on to me. 800-522-5380. It's a very strange >> recording. I tried a reverse number lookup on it and turned up nothing. > It's an AT&T number. I have no clue what it's for though. I need to > build a digit grabber. You mean AT&T provides the service or AT&T actually "owns" the number? John Mayson Austin, Texas, USA ------------------------------ From: Gary Breuckman Subject: Re: What on Earth is This? Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 21:48:38 -0500 Organization: Puma's Lair - catbox.com In article , Dave Phelps wrote: > In article , jmayson@nyx.net says: >> Someone passed this number on to me. 800-522-5380. It's a very >> strange recording. I tried a reverse number lookup on it and turned up >> nothing. > It's an AT&T number. I have no clue what it's for though. I need to > build a digit grabber. The voice says (this time) 2167113228206 The touchtone digits are 216#42#7113228206#02 -- Gary Breuckman ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 21:51:01 -0500 From: Gordon S. Hlavenka Reply-To: nospam@crashelectronics.com Organization: Crash Electronics Subject: Re: Telephone <-> Intercom Application Transom wrote: > I'd like to consult ($) with someone who knows their way around PBXs > and intercoms. I've got an application that is similar to the intercom > system of an apartment building where the front door intercom gets > connected to a telephone when a visitor presses a switch. Most PBXs support a "door module" which does this. I know that Panasonic 616 PBXs show up on eBay for under $500 with the door module included. I'm sure other brands/models are available in that price range as well, but I've been keeping an eye out for cheap 616-compatible phones so that's the system I've been keeping up with. Aside to TELECOM Digest folks: Anybody looking to dispose of some KX-T61630 or similar phones, cheap? I see them sold individually for $100+, but I also see 616 systems including the switch, door module and 1 or 2 stations, plus 5 or a dozen 61630/650 stations going at auction for $300 -- $500. I have a 616, I just want more phones. Prefer phones w/LCD. Cosmetics unimportant as long as they work. But I'm looking more in the $10 and under range. Yeah, I know -- the 616 is old and there are niftier units out there. But I've GOT the 616 already :-) Plus, if I can figure out how to add Caller ID to my 616, I just might turn that into a Product. There are a lot of 616s still in service ... Gordon S. Hlavenka http://www.crashelectronics.com "If we imagined he could _find_ the car, we could pretend it might be fixed." - Calvin ------------------------------ 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 fifty 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. If you donate at least fifty dollars per year we will send you our two-CD set of the entire Telecom Archives; this is every word published in this Digest since our beginning in 1981. 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 #709 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Oct 21 14:21:04 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id h9LIL4A14163; Tue, 21 Oct 2003 14:21:04 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2003 14:21:04 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200310211821.h9LIL4A14163@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 #710 TELECOM Digest Tue, 21 Oct 2003 14:20:00 EDT Volume 22 : Issue 710 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Theirs For the Taking: Sensitive Data (Marcus Didius Falco) Cingular Wireless Posts Third-Quarter Net Subscriber Gain (M Solomon) Cingular Multimedia Messaging Service (MMS) (Monty Solomon) Microsoft Monopoly Says Apple Monopoly Too Restrictive (Monty Solomon) AT&T Announces Third Quarter 2003 Earnings (Monty Solomon) Government Microsoft Fight Over Online Music (Monty Solomon) EarthLink Reports Net Income of $3.5 Million Third Quarter (M Solomon) Voiceplus (Mohair) Re: Can Cable Fast-Forward Past TiVo? (Barry Margolin) Dropping 1st Digit on Auto ATT (Chris) Re: Tracing Old Internal Phone/Computer Wiring? (Scott Dorsey) Cheap Phonecard to Call Portugal From Florida (zaphod) Re: What on Earth is This? (will) Re: When a MAJORITY is Useful (Marise) Re: When a MAJORITY is Useful (Phil Earnhardt) Re: "Fax Spam" (Tonia Grigg) Removal From Fax (Meg Trafton) 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, 21 Oct 2003 00:06:29 -0400 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Theirs For the Taking: Sensitive Data http://www.boston.com/business/globe/articles/2003/10/19/theirs_for_the_taking_sensitive_credit_data/ http://www.boston.com/business/globe/articles/2003/10/19/theirs_for_the_taking_sensitive_credit_data?mode=PF By Bruce Mohl, Globe Staff, 10/19/2003 Sensitive personal financial information belonging to Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney recently ended up on sale online for $125, exposing the inner workings of a credit reporting network that operates largely on an honor system and is rarely policed. As part of a story on the vulnerability of personal financial data, The Boston Globe purchased Romney's TransUnion credit report -- listing his credit card accounts, credit card numbers, credit limits, and payment history -- from a Colorado company calling itself Goldshield Inc. It wasn't hard to do. On its website, Goldshield asked: "What are you looking for?" On sale were Social Security numbers ($30), unlisted telephone numbers ($85), telephone billing information ($95), vehicle information ($65), credit reports ($125), and credit card billing statements ($125). Everything a thief would need to steal an identity. All the information was sold with no questions asked. John Strange, who identified himself as the president of Goldshield, said he could obtain a person's credit report or a credit card billing statement without anyone knowing about it. "I can pull miracles out of the air," he said. But those miracles apparently were obtained illegally. The federal Fair Credit Reporting Act prohibits companies or individuals from obtaining credit reports for other than a "permissible purpose." There are a number of permissible purposes, but the main ones include determining the credit worthiness of an individual, screening new employees, and underwriting insurance. Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, any employee at a consumer reporting agency who releases an individual's information to someone who is unauthorized to receive it, or someone who obtains such information under false pretenses, is subject to fines and imprisonment for up to two years. Since Goldshield's sale of Romney's credit report to the Globe and the Globe's purchase of it appeared to violate the law, TransUnion immediately launched an investigation to find out what happened. After 10 days of review, TransUnion spokesman Jeffrey Junkas disclosed that the Chicago-based company had sold the Romney credit report to Savvydata Technologies of Fort Lauderdale, Fla., which in turn sold the report to Colorado-based USA Skiptrace. USA Skiptrace and Goldshield share employees and the same toll-free phone number, so it appears USA Skiptrace passed the Romney credit report to Goldshield. Junkas, who said he did not know how many credit reports had made their way to Goldshield in the past, accused Savvydata of violating its contractual obligations to TransUnion by transferring Romney's credit report to a third party for a nonpermissible purpose. "The responsibility lies with the reseller to follow their obligation and comply with the law," Junkas said. TransUnion halted Savvydata's access to its credit reports, but as of late last week it had not referred the case to law enforcement authorities. Savvydata, a company that offers its business clients pre-employment screening, data security assistance, and white-collar crime investigative services, blamed USA Skiptrace. Goldshield for the security lapse. Michael Nevins, the president and chief executive of Savvydata, said all of the firm's customers go through a detailed due diligence process. "We are investigating the current situation and have suspended all business activities with the company in question," Nevins said in a statement. "We are cooperating fully with TransUnion to determine if our customer has violated any of our agreements and policies." Goldshield/USA Skiptrace, which charged the Globe $125 for Romney's credit report, paid less than $7 for it, Nevins said. He did not know what his company paid TransUnion for the report, but said it was probably less than $7 because his firm does such high-volume business with TransUnion. Officials at USA Skiptrace and Goldshield, which as of this week is no longer listing credit reports or credit card statements as being for sale on its website, could not be reached for further comment. Mary Culnan, a professor of management at Bentley College in Waltham who specializes in privacy issues, said the Goldshield incident illustrates the pass-the-buck mentality of the credit reporting industry. She said the industry is dominated by three national credit bureaus -- TransUnion, Equifax, and Experian -- but has a soft underbelly of resellers. "It's just a big chain," she said. "This is supposed to be a lockdown system, but it's not." Critics also say the Federal Trade Commission and state attorneys general don't do enough to enforce the Fair Credit Reporting Act. The Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights in San Francisco sent a letter on Oct. 8 to Massachusetts Attorney General Thomas F. Reilly, urging him to investigate the release of Romney's credit report. Reilly declined to comment. "It's basically a black market in information that leads back to one place, the credit bureaus," said Jamie Court, the executive director of the foundation. "This information isn't falling off a truck. It's being delivered." US Representative Barney Frank, a Massachusetts Democrat serving on the House Financial Services Committee, said the law is difficult to enforce. "Part of it's a resources problem. Part of it's a priority problem," he said. "It's hard to prevent the sale of these things, since the purpose of them is to make them available to other people to determine whether to give you credit." Peggy Twohig, assistant director for financial practices at the FTC, said resellers of credit reports have been a problem in the past. She said Congress in 1999 tried to address the issue by requiring that credit reporting agencies and resellers maintain an audit trail of who receives a consumer's credit information and for what purpose. It's unclear how extensive the audit trail was in this instance, but some critics say the Goldshield case illustrates how the security of the nation's credit reporting industry is largely dependent on an honor system. When one link in the credit reporting distribution chain fails to fulfill its responsibilities, these critics say, the entire system collapses. "TransUnion would laugh you out the door if you asked them for this sort of information directly, but they're willing to sell it to another company I've never heard of who's willing to sell it to another company I've never heard of," said Ed Mierzwinski, program director for the US Public Interest Group, a consumer watchdog organization in Washington. "TransUnion just wants to make a lot of money and they don't want to be bothered with the end of the food chain." Bruce Mohl can be reached at mohl@globe.com. Copyright 2003 Globe Newspaper Company. Copyright 2003 The New York Times Company *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2003 08:30:31 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Cingular Wireless Posts Third-Quarter Net Subscriber Gain Cingular Wireless Posts Third-Quarter Net Subscriber Gain of 745,000; Ahead of Schedule in GSM/GPRS Network Conversion - Oct 20, 2003 05:06 PM (PR Newswire) -- Net adds up 38 percent compared with the second quarter of this year, Cingular's third consecutive quarter of strong sequential improvement in net adds -- High-quality subscriber growth with 92 percent of third-quarter net adds post-paid -- 2.7 million gross adds, up 21 percent from the second quarter of this year and up 44 percent versus the third quarter of 2002 -- 4.6 percent year-over-year growth and 4.4 percent sequential growth in revenues to a record $4.0 billion -- Cellular/PCS data revenues up 104 percent versus the third quarter of 2002 -- Cingular's GSM/GPRS network now available to 92 percent of company's POPs ATLANTA, Oct. 20 /PRNewswire/ Cingular Wireless LLC, the United States' second largest wireless company, today reported third quarter results driven by strong marketplace execution, accelerated subscriber growth and rapid expansion of its GSM/GPRS network coverage. For the three months ended Sept. 30, 2003, Cingular, a joint venture between SBC Communications (NYSE:SBC) and BellSouth Corporation (NYSE:BLS), achieved net subscriber additions of 745,000, up 38 percent from net adds of 540,000 in the second quarter of this year. This was Cingular's strongest net add quarter in more than two years, bringing its nationwide cellular/PCS customer base to 23.4 million. Third-quarter gross subscriber adds totaled 2.7 million, the best quarterly total in Cingular's history - up 21 percent from the second quarter of this year and up 44 percent from the third quarter of 2002. While accelerating subscriber growth, Cingular has also moved ahead of schedule in its GSM/GPRS network overlay. As of Oct. 20, Cingular's GSM/GPRS network is now available to 92 percent of the company's total POPs, exceeding and substantially in advance of its previously announced target of 90 percent coverage by the end of 2003. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=36151088 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2003 08:32:45 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Cingular Multimedia Messaging Service (MMS) Snap It, Say It, And Send It With Cingular's New Multimedia Messaging Service - Oct 10, 2003 10:52 AM (PR Newswire) Cingular Wireless First To Offer MMS Notification to Most Mobile Phones ATLANTA, Oct. 10 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Cingular Wireless, the second largest wireless carrier in the nation, today introduced its next generation messaging service -- Multimedia Messaging (MMS) -- a full-featured, easy to use, and simply priced enhanced messaging service, that includes Cingular's unique MMS notification feature. Cingular's MMS lets its customers shoot and add photos, text, graphics, music, video and voice to send "living" messages instantly to virtually any e-mail address or mobile phone. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=36027153 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2003 08:51:50 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Microsoft Monopoly Says Apple Monopoly is Too Restrictive By Andrew Orlowski in San Francisco Posted: 20/10/2003 at 09:15 GMT Microsoft would be negligent if it didn't see Apple's music ambitions as a competitive threat. On the eve of Apple's splashy launch last week, Microsoft offered a Q&A which warned users not to be seduced by iTunes, Apple's integrated MP3 player/ripper/burner/radio/music store, which is now available on Windows. Microsoft's David Fester (and whether Fester is his birthname or an homage[*] to his CEO, we don't know; Intel employs a Mr. Jason 'Ziller', which isn't at all relevant here) warned that iTunes carried several disadvantages. It's worth quoting in full: http://theregister.com/content/7/33468.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2003 08:58:18 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: AT&T Announces Third Quarter 2003 Earnings BEDMINSTER, N.J.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Oct. 21, 2003--AT&T (NYSE:T) -- Third Quarter Earnings Per Diluted Share from Continuing Operations of $0.58 -- Consolidated Revenue of $8.6 Billion -- Operating Income of $829 Million AT&T (NYSE:T) today reported income from continuing operations of $458 million, or earnings per diluted share of $0.58, for the third quarter of 2003. The company's current quarter income from continuing operations compares to income of $525 million, or earnings per diluted share of $0.67, in the third quarter of 2002. This quarter's net income of $418 million, or $0.53 per share, included a charge of $27 million, or $0.03 per share, related to the cumulative effect of the adoption of a new accounting standard and $13 million, or $0.02 per share, of losses from discontinued operations. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=36157359 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2003 09:01:56 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Government, Microsoft Fight Over Online Music By TED BRIDIS AP Technology Writer WASHINGTON (AP) -- Nearly a year after Microsoft Corp. agreed to end its anticompetitive conduct, the government is raising concerns the world's largest software maker is trying to use its dominant Windows operating system to influence where customers buy their music online. If the dispute isn't resolved by week's end, it could become the first test of Microsoft's landmark antitrust settlement that was approved by a federal court in October 2002. Lawyers for the Justice Department and 19 state attorneys general have formally complained to a federal judge about a design feature of Windows that compels consumers who buy music online to use only Microsoft's Internet browser and steers them to a Web site operated by the company. Microsoft's design "may be inconsistent" with the settlement, government lawyers wrote in court papers asking U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly to intervene if the problems aren't resolved. The company said Monday it is willing to work with the government but does not believe the design is illegal. Online music purchases are expected to be one of the most-lucrative areas for Internet commerce. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2003 08:57:39 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: EarthLink Reports Net Income of $3.5 Million for Third Quarter ATLANTA, Oct. 21 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- EarthLink, Inc. (Nasdaq: ELNK) today announced its financial results for its third quarter that ended September 30, 2003. Financial highlights for the quarter: - Revenues of $347.4 million, an increase of 2.0 percent from the same period a year ago. - Earnings before interest income and expense, income taxes, depreciation and amortization (EBITDA) of $45.5 million compared to $22.4 million from a year ago. - Earnings before acquisition-related amortization of $26.4 million, or $0.16 per share, compared to a loss of ($645,000), or $0.00 per share, from a year ago. - Net income of $3.5 million, or $0.02 per share, compared to a loss of ($30.1) million, or ($0.20) per share, from a year ago. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=36157611 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2003 14:05:42 GMT From: Mohair Subject: Voiceplus Organization: Optimum Online What other charges are involved? Are there line charges, taxes, FCC charges, etc? ------------------------------ From: Barry Margolin Subject: Re: Can Cable Fast-Forward Past TiVo? Organization: Level(3) Communications, Woburn, MA Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2003 14:11:00 GMT In article , Monty Solomon wrote: > In the end, Mr. Palermo was turned off from TiVo by the prospect of > having to connect all kinds of wires and adding a new box to his home > entertainment system. "all kinds of wires"? It's basically the same as hooking up a VCR. The only additional connection is the IR Blaster, which allows the DVR to change the channel on the cable box (something VCR owners have long been wishing for). Of all the arguments against DVRs I've heard, this is the most ridiculous. Barry Margolin, barry.margolin@level3.com Level(3), Woburn, MA *** DON'T SEND TECHNICAL QUESTIONS DIRECTLY TO ME, post them to newsgroups. Please DON'T copy followups to me -- I'll assume it wasn't posted to the group. ------------------------------ From: cshields@mynra.com (Chris) Subject: Dropping 1st Digit on Auto ATT Date: 21 Oct 2003 07:36:18 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com I am having a problem with a customer's system; Legend with an audix vm system. What it is doing is when a caller comes in to that AA and tries to enter the party's extension, sometimes the system seems to drop the first digit when the second digit is "1". and sends the call to the dispatcher which is dial "1" option in the AA. for example: caller dials 512, system drops the 5 and see's the 1, and sends the call to the dispatcher. This does not happen all the time but it happens enough to be an annoyance to dispatch. I have checked all dial plans, coverage groups and so on. I have even gone as far as to have them keep track of the calls to see if they were possible cell phones that possible didn't have the best signal. This turned out to be false because a good majority of these calls were in fact coming from a land line. Has any body else had this or a similar problem that might be able to help? ------------------------------ From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) Subject: Re: Tracing Old Internal Phone/Computer Wiring? Date: 21 Oct 2003 12:27:09 -0400 Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000) AES/newspost wrote: > Is there some kind of standard tool kit for signal tracing, with a > signal generator I can clamp onto a pair of wires, or preferably onto > the bundle of twisted pairs inside a cable jacket full of wires at one > end -- hopefully, without having to actually contact the individual > wires -- and a detector I can wave near the possible route or the > possible other end of the cable, to see if it really _is_ the other > end? > Sources for buying such? Go to your local Graybar. Ask for a "fox and hound." --scott "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." ------------------------------ From: uktelecommobile@yahoo.com (zaphod) Subject: Cheap Phonecard to Call Portugal From Florida Date: 21 Oct 2003 04:29:07 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com A friend needs to call a PSTN line in Portugal from Florida while he's on holiday next month. The cheapest option in the UK would be a prepaid calling card -- could anyone reccomend one for use in Florida? Thanks, z ------------------------------ From: wrampart@hotmail.com (will) Subject: Re: What on Earth is This? Date: 21 Oct 2003 04:35:28 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com Dave Phelps wrote in message news:: > In article , jmayson@nyx.net says: >> Someone passed this number on to me. 800-522-5380. It's a very strange >> recording. I tried a reverse number lookup on it and turned up nothing. > It's an AT&T number. I have no clue what it's for though. I need to > build a digit grabber. > Dave Phelps > DD Networks > www.ddnets.com > deadspam=tippenring 225#19#7113228206#02 ------------------------------ Subject: Re: When a MAJORITY is Useful From: Marise_ (Remainder deleted at User's Request) Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2003 07:53:02 -0500 [Please withhold last name and e-mail address] Joey Lindstrom on Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 15:24:55 -0600 wrote about Re: When a MAJORITY is Useful > Expect what you want. Some of us get a little tired of people popping > in here, setting off grenades, and running away - all while ducking > under the "I don't want to get spammed" excuse. Which, in and of > itself, is a very valid excuse. > But "reverse look-up"? What on earth are you talking about? A Google search will give you lots of web sites to search for e-mail addresses by the person's name, some for a fee, others not. Perhaps I'm being a little too cautious, but oh well, safety first. I didn't run away -- I'm still here. Although I know I haven't been in this group for as long as many others I have sat quietly for the past 2 years or so, just reading, learning, picking up a few good tips, only submitting a telecom-related question here or there. I've read the heated arguments on non-telecom related topics. I have not been as vocal here as some participants like yourself, so I guess I was only asking for it by participating in such a discussion. Lesson learned. Marise ------------------------------ From: Phil Earnhardt Subject: Re: When a MAJORITY is Useful Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 22:52:58 -0600 Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com On Mon, 20 Oct 2003 09:27:41 -0500, Name Withheld at Reader's Request wrote: > For obviously being part of > a group that has claimed majority and power, you seem a bit hostile. You really are missing the point here. If you with to make postings that have nothing to do with telecom, they have no place in this newsgroup. It really doesn't matter if your posting advocates the current majority party or lambastes them. It doesn't matter if you promote the main party not in power or criticize them unmercifully. It doesn't even matter if you speak of the positives or negatives of some third party. If it's not about telecommunications, it doesn't belong here in this newsgroup. Period. End of story. Now, given it's a moderated group, the moderator should be taking care of such things. But no moderator is perfect; sometimes they let inappropriate postings get through. > I did expect that type of response, though. Too bad. You're way off base here. All Joey is saying is that this isn't the forum for such discussions. If you had made postings fawning about GW, those would be completely inappropriate. And I bet that Joey would have complained about them, too. There are plenty of USENET groups dedicated to political discussion. This isn't one of them. If you feel a need to make postings about politics that have nothing to do with telecom, please make them in one of those newsgroups. Thanks! > Marise --phil ------------------------------ From: Tonia Grigg Subject: Re: "Fax Spam" Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2003 08:14:13 -0500 We've noticed a sharp increase in spam from "Wall Street Stock Alerts" as well. A little digging shows that their hands have been slapped once by the FCC already (http://www.fcc.gov/eb/Orders/2002/EB-02-TC-071.html). You can submit a new consumer complaint at http://svartifoss2.fcc.gov/cib/fcc475.cfm. Apparently, the spam goes deeper, and is associated with Fax.com. In August 2002, the FCC proposed a $5,379,000 fine against Fax.com for violating "junk fax"prohibition. In March 2003, a judge ruled in favor of Fax.com and ordered a stay of FCC efforts to fine Fax.com. However, this ruling was quickly overturned on an appeal. A table is available at http://privatecitizen.com/fcc-nal-fdc/firm-nmbr.htm with specific opt-out phone numbers (match your spam to the list). Regardless of the history lesson, I'd be inclined to lodge a new complaint since they obviously have not learned their lesson. Tonia Dousay Grigg [tonia.grigg@teexmail.tamu.edu] Instructional Design Specialist Engineering Utilities and Public Works Training Institute Texas Engineering Extension Service Office: 979/845-6565 Fax: 979/845-2443 ------------------------------ From: Meg Trafton Subject: Removal From Fax Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2003 10:07:39 -0400 We have been trying to get our fax number removed from "Travel Partners" list and always get a recording that the circuits are busy. Any way of having that number removed by you? Our fax number is below. Meg Trafton Dover Secretarial Services 6 Dover Point Rd. Suite B Dover, NH 03801 603-742-1971 FAX: 603-742-6347 dssmeg@c1mail.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well Meg, here at the Digest, we do not remove numbers from lists. I do have here however a number of first rate instuctors who are good at helping companies learn their lessons, as Tonia Grigg in the neighboring message in this issue longs for. What you should have done was supply us with the phone number for 'Travel Partners' for inclusion in our business directory. Their voice and fax numbers would be very important for our instructors to use when helping recalcitrant companies to learn their lessons. This business directory is most useful for all our readers. Instructors and other readers: Do you have any data on 'Travel Partners' and/or 'fax.com'? Look of course at Private Citizen as Tonia suggests, but Meg, would you PLEASE write again, *not* with your fax and office numbers as targets but with 'Travel Partners' numbers in the message so our instructors can compare notes and see what can be done to help you and Tonia. Thanks. PAT] ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-330-6774 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 Fax 3: 775-642-0603 Fax 4: 530-309-7234 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2003 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. In addition, gifts from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert have enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty 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. If you donate at least fifty dollars per year we will send you our two-CD set of the entire Telecom Archives; this is every word published in this Digest since our beginning in 1981. 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 #710 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Oct 21 23:38:58 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id h9M3cwO24092; Tue, 21 Oct 2003 23:38:58 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2003 23:38:58 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200310220338.h9M3cwO24092@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 #711 TELECOM Digest Tue, 21 Oct 2003 23:39:00 EDT Volume 22 : Issue 711 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Who is in Charge of the Internet? The Contest Continues (Ronda Hauben) Re: Tracing Old Internal Phone/Computer Wiring? (COTTP) Re: Can Cable Fast-Forward Past TiVo? (COTTP) Re: USF Recovery Fee (Sid Zafran) Beware: Vonage and Local Number Transfers->Long Time No See (M Yougth) Re: What on Earth is This? (Al Gillis) Maps of Global Fiber Optic Backbones? (AES/newspost) Re: Removal From Fax (Steven J Sobol) Fax Removal Test Numbers (Carl Navarro) Re: More About Spam Email (Fritz Whittington) 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: Ronda Hauben Subject: Who is in Charge of the Internet? The Contest Continues Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2003 00:31:16 UTC Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC Pat, The question of who controls the Internet's infrastructure continues as an important issue. It is good to see that many in the Internet community are taking it seriously. Here is an article about it that I just wrote for Telepolis. Ronda WHO IS IN CHARGE OF THE INTERNET? Verisign's Unilateral Actions versus an Internet model or How to Manage the Internet's Infrastructure? by Ronda Hauben http://www.heise.de/tp/english/inhalt/te/15903/1.html It has been a common perception that nobody is in charge of the Internet, that there is no controlling entity, nor should there be. The recent controversy over Verisign's Site Finder(1), however, shows that it is indeed a misperception that no one controls the Internet. Instead, there is currently a contest over who does and who should exercise this control. This contest is being played out over the question of what management structure is needed for the Internet's infrastructure.(2) On Wednesday, October 15, 2003, Verisign, announced that they will reintroduce their Site Finder advertising site.(3) They believe that there is a vacuum and that they can usurp the power and wealth that will accrue to any company that can seize control of aspects of the Internet's infrastructure. Verisign has a contract with the U.S. government to control the DNS directory (called a registry) for .com and .net domain names. The recent crisis erupted in September, when Verisign directed packets for any unassigned .net or .com domain name to their Site Finder site. In response, there were various soundings of alarm on the Internet. Verisign, on its part, claimed that it was introducing an "innovation" for the Internet's infrastructure. The crisis was abated temporarily when Verisign agreed to halt the use of Site Finder, in response to a threat that they would lose their contract for the .com and .net registry. In some of the many pages of press articles that appeared on the controversy, the question was raised, "Who is in charge of the Internet?"(4) Recently, on the Netizens mailing list, Alexandru Petrescu raised several questions. He wrote(5): "Say, what would a netizen do in this entire context? "Is a netizen hurt by a potentially helpful service? "Is a US netizen hurt by a potentially helpful service? "Is a netizen outraged by the side-effects of the commercialization of the Internet in that private interests (and not public interests) lead to destabilizing the overall working of the Internet? A netizen would need to provide a palpable counter-argument of how this endangers, and make it as visible as the advantage. This can be done, instead of crying 'wolf'." Such questions focus attention on the users of the Internet, particularly the netizens, the active participants working for the Internet's continuing development as a collaborative and ever more inclusive global electronic commons.(6) Verisign's unilateral action was greeted by many netizens with comments and online discussions, appearing on mailing lists, web sites and in Usenet newsgroups. Among the many reasons given to condemn Verisign's actions, was a post in a Usenet newsgroup. The post analyzes how directing Internet packets to Site Finder is a violation of the public nature of the Internet's infrastructure. The Usenet post explains(7): "Whether or not it has any impact, socially or technically, is beside the point. What gives VeriSign defacto ownership of all domain names not registered by someone else? Why is it entitled to use, for its own lucrative commercial purposes, the virtually infinite domain of domains, shutting out all others? Why has no one addressed this?" John Higdon Anytown, USA A subsequent post sarcastically describes some of the implications of Verisign's action to assume private ownership of all unregistered .net and .com domain names: "Can you imagine registering a new domain and getting some angry emails to your postmaster account that blast you for hijacking this 'nifty search engine' that used to come up at your URL? They would accuse YOU of hijacking the domain! "Obviously, VeriSign believes that in return for providing root servers for the two top-level domains that they are entitled to exploit for their own use ANY conceivable second-level domain name that is not, in fact, registered to someone. In other words, when you register a domain name (through any registrar), you are in fact transferring that name from VeriSign's stewardship to yours. The difference is that you have to pay in perpetuity to continue using it; VeriSign gets it at no charge." John Higdon Anytown, USA This post helps to highlight that the nature of the Internet's infrastructure is public. It is like other public utilities, such as the water system and the electricity system. Such systems are vital to people's existence. They need to be administered in a way that recognizes public service obligations. The components of a public infrastructure require protection that government traditionally has been expected to provide. With no reliable management structure dedicated to preserving the public nature of the Internet's infrastructure, there will be a perpetual contest. A second aspect of the infrastructure of the Internet, is that it is international in scope. Hence no single government can fulfill the need to provide the protection for the public nature of the Internet's infrastructure. An international collaboration made it possible to create the Internet and an international collaboration will have the broad and global reach to support the continued development of the Internet. A third aspect of the infrastructure of the Internet is that it has been built by a participatory process. This process welcomed the participation and contribution of all those who had a broad social perspective. There is one Internet. The architecture requires a common agreement among the participating networks to make communication possible across the boundaries of the different forms of technology, of ownership, or of political control of these networks. The common agreement has been reflected in the development and adoption of the TCP/IP protocol. In turn, the TCP/IP protocol respects the diversity of the networks that are part of the Internet. Unilateral actions, like Verisign's, violate such basic aspects of the Internet. In the midst of the furor created by Site Finder, Verisign claims it has the right to introduce what it calls "innovations" into the Internet's infrastructure. If some entity introduces an "innovation" that harms others who are part of the Internet, what are those who are hurt by such actions to do? Not only does Verisign's claim violate the public and international nature of the Internet's infrastructure, it also violates that principle that the networks and their users themselves retain the ability to determine what is in their own interest. Verisign is usurping this right, the very right that has made it possible to create and spread the Internet. No single company, nor multiple companies, were able to create the Internet. Many private companies created the kinds of networks they felt would be the networks wanted by everyone else. These were proprietary networks, which served the companies who created them. The Internet, however, was created by a collaboration of scientific researchers from different countries, who were able to do the research to create the international infrastructure of the Internet.(9) By the broad nature of the objectives of the researchers, they were able to create an Internet which could be open to education, business, government, and citizen networks. When one business starts to try to turn the Internet into its own private network, it is threatening the nature of the Internet as a metasystem of diverse and different networks. By welcoming the participation of researchers from different countries in the development of the protocol TCP/IP, the process of welcoming feedback to guide the continuing development was integrated into the development process. That process, therefore, had the advantage of input from a broad set of experiences and views. The international nature of the collaboration that built the Internet, made it possible for the Internet to be international. Unilateral decisions to change the Internet's infrastructure, can only threaten the international nature of the Internet. The Verisign problem once again brings to the fore the need for a public, participatory process of international collaboration to support and develop the Internet's infrastructure. Fortunately, there is a model for this, the model of how the Internet was developed.(10) This year, 2003, is the 30th anniversary of the creation of the draft paper outlining the philosophy and architecture of the TCP/IP protocol. The paper was presented in Brighton, England, at the University of Suffolk in September, 1973. It was presented to a meeting of researchers from many different countries of the world. Spreading an understanding of the model of how the Internet developed can be helpful in the efforts to create an appropriate management structure for the Internet. The model of the Internet's development is a model of a system that learns from, and builds on the development of the Internet itself. Until an appropriate management structure for the Internet's infrastructure is developed, netizens can continue to utilize the collaborative, participatory, public and international process of Internet development to effectively challenge inappropriate and ineffective management proposals like Verisign's Site Finder. URL's 1) John Leyden, "VeriSign's Site Finder is undead", 16/10/2003 at 13:02 GMT, The Register http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/33432.html 2) See for example "The Culture Divide and the Internet's Future" Charles Cooper, October 16, 2003, CNET. http://news.com.com/2008-7347_3-5092590.html 3) ICANN Security and Stability Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda October 15, 2003, Site Finder Review http://secsac.icann.org/agenda-15oct03.htm 4) Anick Jesdanun, "Who is in charge of the Internet?" Katu News, September 25, 2003, http://www.katu.com/news/story.asp?ID=61010 5) Netizens Digest, Fri, 03 Oct 2003 22:14:17 +0200, http://www.ais.org/~jrh/netizens/digest/Digest_1-525.txt 6) Michael Hauben, Preface, "Netizens: On the History and Impact of Usenet and the Internet", N.Y., Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1997 (http://www.columbia.edu/~rh120/ch106.xpr) 7)Usenet post: John Higdon Newsgroups: ba.internet Subject: Re: Verisign "sitefinder" traffic and MS IE's "url redirection" hack Date: Wed, 08 Oct 2003 08:28:49 -0700 8)Usenet post: From: John Higdon Newsgroups: ba.internet Subject: Re: Verisign "sitefinder" traffic and MS IE's "url redirection" hack Date: Wed, 08 Oct 2003 09:19:32 -0700 9)Ronda Hauben, "The Internet: On its International Origins and Collaborative Vision" http://www.columbia.edu/~rh120/other/misc/haubenpap1.rtf 10) Ronda Hauben, "What Institutional Form is Needed to Replace ICANN?", Telepolis, 16.08.1999 http://www.heise.de/tp/english/inhalt/te/5183/1.html Article on Telepolis in English and German. http://www.heise.de/tp/english/inhalt/te/15903/1.html ------------------------------ From: COTTP Subject: Re: Tracing Old Internal Phone/Computer Wiring? Organization: Children of the Tea Party Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2003 15:03:15 -0500 In article , kludge@panix.com says: > AES/newspost wrote: >> Is there some kind of standard tool kit for signal tracing, with a >> signal generator I can clamp onto a pair of wires, or preferably onto >> the bundle of twisted pairs inside a cable jacket full of wires at one >> end -- hopefully, without having to actually contact the individual >> wires -- and a detector I can wave near the possible route or the >> possible other end of the cable, to see if it really _is_ the other >> end? >> Sources for buying such? > Go to your local Graybar. Ask for a "fox and hound." > --scott > "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." Ack! Stay far away from Graybar for things like this. Find a local electronics distributor (In Providence check out A&J Supply.) and pay half what you would at Graybar. ------------------------------ From: COTTP Subject: Re: Can Cable Fast-Forward Past TiVo? Organization: Children of the Tea Party Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2003 15:02:01 -0500 In article , barry.margolin@level3.com says: > In article , Monty Solomon > wrote: >> In the end, Mr. Palermo was turned off from TiVo by the prospect of >> having to connect all kinds of wires and adding a new box to his home >> entertainment system. > "all kinds of wires"? It's basically the same as hooking up a VCR. > The only additional connection is the IR Blaster, which allows the DVR > to change the channel on the cable box (something VCR owners have long > been wishing for). Of all the arguments against DVRs I've heard, this > is the most ridiculous. Actually Cox tried something similar with their StarSight navigator. That was of course until they revamped the whole system and gave us something WORSE than StarSight but with the promise that in coming revisions we could 'order pizza' etc. using the cable box. In any case, there was a little IR dongle that came from the General Instrument cable box and used a suction cup to position it near the VCR's IR receiver. Thing is, it never worked with my Phillips VCR. From what I heard it didn't work with many VCR's at all. Have the same problem with my Pacific Neo-Tek OmniRemote for the Palm platform. Set it up with an IR receiver hooked to a scope - signal is just barely there and doesn't have a very wide angle. Yet the company still markets this piece of crap same as always. I modified mine with a lens that widens the beam. Seems to work ok now. ------------------------------ From: Sid Zafran Subject: Re: USF Recovery Fee Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2003 20:40:43 GMT Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net On Sat, 18 Oct 2003 09:22:07 GMT, Michael D. Sullivan wrote: [snip] >> The consumer facts tell us that all telecommunications companies that >> provide service between states (including SBC) must contribute to the >> Universal Service Fund. The FCC does not require telecommunications >> companies to recover their Universal Service contribution from their >> customers. Companies that do choose to recover their contributions >> from customers may do so in different ways, however, they may not >> shift more than an equitable share of the contribution to any customer >> or group of customers. [snip] > I don't know how SBC or Earthlink has structured their DSL offerings, > but that would affect who pays USF. > It is entirely possible that SBC is paying USF on its > telecommunications service revenues from its DSL/ISP affiliate, and > recovering it from that affiliate, which is the end-user; the DSL/ISP > affiliate, as a non- telecommunications service provider, should not > be adding a line item on its bill for USF, but can recover what it > pays SBC as part of its monthly rate for DSL/ISP. > The structure used for Earthlink may be different; if Earthlink, for > example, were to resell DSL to its customers, bundled with ISP > service, instead of selling just ISP with telecom included, then it > would pay USF charges on the resold DSL (and put a line item on its > customer bills to recover USF). The structure you described is what Earthlink is doing. What is not clear, however, is the amount of USF recovery that SBC is getting from its affiliate in California. It should be the same amount, per customer, that I am being billed through Earthlink. There should be a verification mechanism in place to assure that SBC is not shifting more than an equitable share of its contribution to any group of customers. I am unaware of any such verification. ------------------------------ From: anmach914@yahoo.com (Mach Yougth) Subject: Beware: Vonage and Local Number Transfers - Long Time No See Date: 21 Oct 2003 15:10:05 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com Wondering if anyone else has had the experience on vonage where a number transfer took an extremely long time? Problem with this ... I am paying for two phone bills ( my original and the vonage one) while this time goes by ... not to mention the fact that I am about to loose my original number because I have moved. For those of you who would like to see what the gripes are first here is a short list. 1. Technique 1: Blame it on someone else - They tend to make the excuse that it is the carrier that is taking a long time ... and they are not specific about what they mean by carrier ... They make it sound like it is your previous carrier that is holding up the transfer when in reality it is the carrier voange has contracted with. So, because Vonage and their contracted carriers act as one virtual entity, it is actually vonage (the virtual entity) that is holding up the process. vonage is one step removed from the whole process than say a LEC (Verizon) - Vonage gets their local numbers from clecs such as Focal, XO, and Quest, hence when they do a number transfer they have to tell the Voange-clec to initiate the transfer and then the Vonage-clec has to contact the "third party transfer folks" ... in my case it is the first two steps (totally vonage controlled) that are taking to long. 2. Technique 2: Isolate the number transfer department - The only way anyone, including the service representatives to get in touch with the number transfer deparment is by email. So basically if they are not doing their job there can be no pressure applied. Also, if you do happen to get an email response to from the number tranfer department (numbertransfer@vonage.com) it is usually just an reiteration of what is on the website ... in my case awaiting response from Vonage-clec .. which has been posted for a month. 3. Technique 3: Confusing terms - a. carrier - I already described the confusing carrier term above b. third party - In number transfers there is a third party that handles the number transfers between entities, Vonage typically will use this language when in fact they should use more specific language to avoid blaming others for their shortfalls. Basically there are 4 parties involved. Vonage --- Vonage-clec --- "the thrird party transfer folks" --- original number holder. 3. The time they sit on the letter of authorization before sending it to one of their contracted carriers is way to long ... in my case it was two weeks. 4. The amount of time Vonage gives to the Vonage-clec party is 1 month ... in my opinion way to long. The general amount of time it takes for a number transfer to take place is about four business days once the initiating carrier, meaning the transfer to carrier or Vonage-clec, submits the request to the "third party transfer folks". Again, it is Vonage that is the problem in this whole transfer process. My experience: 1. Faxed the letter of authorization in; 2. Vonage (to their credit) acknowledged the receipt of the number transfer the next day; 3. (Here is where my rub starts) two weeks later they sent the letter to the carrier (they posted this on their website). They should have turned this around in a day or two; 4. ... One month later from the time that the letter is submitted to the Vonage-clec or 1.5 months since I sent in the paper work and it is still is not transferred ... and there is no ETA of the transfer despite many inquires. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, five or six weeks does seem to be an outragously long time. However, one thing you should remember is that the traditional landline telcos are fit to be tied -- really bent out of shape -- about the amount of business companies like Vonage are taking away from them. A situation which even a few years ago would have been unthinkable. Vonage has very few local numbers here in the midwest; some St. Louis numbers, a few in Denver, etc, so it is sort of a moot point for me, so I wound up taking a San Francisco 415 number and a Chicago 773 number on my Vonage equipment. Regards local number portability ever sometime in the distant future, if Vongage obtains a 620-331 port I *may* consider an LNP on them. But more relevant in our present time, our local telco, Prairie Stream always gets the same kind of stalls from SBC Southwestern Bell, who flatly refuses to give up lines and customers if there is any stall, appropriate or not, that they can use. Take my own case as an example: I wanted to dump SBC totally, and put in an order with Prairie Stream, a far superior and much less expensive alternative. I put in the order with Prairie Stream who told me they would take over my account the next day; no change in service. They got back an answer four days later from SBC saying I could not be changed because there was a PIC freeze on my line, and SBC was refusing to deal with Prairie Stream because of it. I had to call SBC, go through voicemail hell and wait on hold for 45 minutes to talk to a disinterested rep who agreed to remove the freeze. Then it was back to Prairie Stream, where one ring after I dialed a cheery, effecient rep took my order and said Prairie Stream would try again. Two days later, Prairie Stream was back on the phone saying SBC still wouldn't give up the line since I was 'not eligible for conversion' (I had DSL on the line). The same day, I changed my internet to Cable One and went back into the SBC voicemail hell and holding time queue, this time to DEMAND that they turn off the phone service pronto; to expect no more money from me to pay for it and to *please* release the line. This time the lady agreed to do as I asked (lucky me!) but 'it might be two weeks until we get around to it.' I called back to Prairie Stream and they said they would again work on it, 'but given the luck we have with SBC when we try to do this, it may well be a couple weeks more.' It turned out that three or four days later I had Prairie Stream in complete control of my phone line. The moral of this whole story is it may not be Vonage's fault at all. It could be your local telco is playing games and stalling. Is there any reason your local telco might say you are 'ineligible for LNP or conversion'(which they hate anyway) because of DSL on your line or some other untariffed feature on your line which telco does not, under the rules have to give up and the word just has not gotten back to you yet? Call your landline telco and lean on them a little to release your line. By the way, if anyone wants to test drive the Vonage system for free, let me know, I will send you an e-coupon to use for a month of free service. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Al Gillis Subject: Re: What on Earth is This? Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2003 16:06:57 -0700 Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com I called the number from the comfort and safety of a nearby coin telephone. A pleasant young-sounding woman's voice reported to me that "This Toll-Free number does not accept calls from pay phones". will wrote in message news:telecom22.710.13@telecom-digest.org: > Dave Phelps wrote in message > news:: >> In article , jmayson@nyx.net says: >>> Someone passed this number on to me. 800-522-5380. It's a very >>> strange recording. I tried a reverse number lookup on it and >>> turned up nothing. >> It's an AT&T number. I have no clue what it's for though. I need to >> build a digit grabber. >> Dave Phelps >> DD Networks >> www.ddnets.com >> deadspam=tippenring > 225#19#7113228206#02 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I tried it again also, this time from the comfort and safety of my cell phone. What the man read back to me was 'two hundred, seventeen, seven, one, one, three, two, two, eight, two, oh, six'. No mention of the pound signs or the final 02 on the end. Then the rapid tones. When I tried it from my Vonage phone (which always registers the SFCA 415 number on caller ID) the response I got was 'two hundred, twenty-nine', then the rest of the above number, again, with no mention of the final 02, and the tones. When I tried it again from Vonage, it was 'two hundred, twenty-seven', etc. PAT] ------------------------------ From: AES/newspost Subject: Maps of Global Fiber Optic Backbones? Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2003 16:17:00 -0700 Have to give a talk for a general and high-school audience on fiber optics and fiber optics telecom. I can of course Google for myself, but would much appreciate pointers to any sites (or publications) where I could access well-done graphics showing the worldwide web of fiber optics -- fiber optics routes overlaid on world maps or the globe, and the like. Pointers to related fiber optics telecom material also appreciated -- thanks for any assistance. ------------------------------ From: Steven J Sobol Subject: Re: Removal From Fax Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2003 17:01:04 -0500 Meg Trafton wrote: > We have been trying to get our fax number removed from "Travel > Partners" list and always get a recording that the circuits are > busy. Any way of having that number removed by you? Our fax number is > below. DON'T SEND THEM ANY INFORMATION! Junkfaxers will never remove you. Professional junkfaxers, that is, and the travel faxes and stock touts are the absolute worst. JustThe.net Internet & Multimedia Services 22674 Motnocab Road * Apple Valley, CA 92307-1950 Steve Sobol, Proprietor 888.480.4NET (4638) * 248.724.4NET * sjsobol@JustThe.net ------------------------------ From: Carl Navarro Subject: Fax Removal Test Numbers Reply-To: cnavarro@wcnet.org Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2003 01:23:55 GMT Organization: Road Runner High Speed Online -- Northeast Ohio Alright. FOUR stock market tip sheets in one day, the last one won't accept my number. Lesson time! Stock Prophet 866-273-2467 Stock Wave USA 800-390-1403 Stock Buyers Alert 888-528-8863 WS Stock Alerts 888-398-2349 I think it's time to get out the old war-dialer (frecom fax board anyone?) and set the calls to 100 or 1000. Carl Navarro ------------------------------ From: Fritz Whittington Organization: Only on odd Tuesdays Subject: Re: More About Spam Email Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2003 20:07:57 GMT temp7@thewolfden.org wrote: > On Mon, 07 Oct 2002 22:51:40 -0500, Gordon S. Hlavenka wrote: >>> What I WOULD like to see is some way to trivially and accurately locate >>> the PERSON (not just the account) who sends an email. Senders could >>> (for "privacy" reasons) choose not to include this information and I >>> could choose to trash any anonymous mail. > That would be the From: field. Oh, they fake that? Well let's add > another field; surely they won't fake the new field, would they? With a 2048-bit RSA key, if you can fake the digital signature on this message, then your fortune is assured! (an example followed, but since it was binary it failed to go through at many sites): ------------------------------ 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 fifty 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. If you donate at least fifty dollars per year we will send you our two-CD set of the entire Telecom Archives; this is every word published in this Digest since our beginning in 1981. 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 #711 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Oct 22 00:31:58 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id h9M4VvS02076; Wed, 22 Oct 2003 00:31:58 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2003 00:31:58 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200310220431.h9M4VvS02076@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 #712 TELECOM Digest Wed, 22 Oct 2003 00:32:00 EDT Volume 22 : Issue 712 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson The NANP is 56-Years-Old Wednesday, October 22 (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: Tue, 21 Oct 2003 21:09:57 CDT From: Mark J Cuccia Subject: The NANP is 56-Years-Old Wednesday, October 22 The NANP (North American Numbering Plan), as it was originally "finalized", and then built-upon, expanded, and developed, "as we have known it", does "officially" turns 56 this Wednesday, 22-October-2003. AT&T issued a memo, authored by Harold L. Ryan, dated 22-October-1947, regarding the subject "Numbering Plan Area Arrangements -- Toll Area codes -- Letter to all General Traffic Managers -- attached Map and List of Codes". I do *NOT* have a copy of that memo! I wish I did, though! :-) But I do have reference to the date and title of the memo. There were prelminary plans for a nationwide / continent-wide telephone numbering plan for Operator and later customer toll dialing, being drafted in the early to mid 1940s, one of them being where every toll (and tandem) switch in the US and Canada, some 2,600 of them (what an ironic number, twenty-six hundered for the approximate total number of toll switches in the US/Canada! If you know what I mean! :-), would be uniquely identified with an Operator Toll Dialing code of the form 0XXXX, zero followed by four-more-digits. Operators were already using a limited form of regional OTD in some parts of the US and Canada, since the 1920s, using 0XX and 1XX SXS OTD codes, which customers weren't able to access (or at least not supposed to be able to access). These codes *have* continued to this day for internal operator and network routing purposes, and are not supposed to be dialable by customers. Anyhow, to have actual Nationwide Operator Toll Dialing, the use of individual 0XXXX codes for each toll center to reach specific *customers* would have been a bit "awkward" because of the large number of individual routing/area codes, as well as whenever there needed to be "re-homes" or growth. By 1945, the basics of the plan used today were being developed, where there would be a 3-digit "Area Code" of the form N1X, a three-digit office code (based on the office-name and a digit), and the four-digit line-number. There is a map of the US (Canada was intended to be included but wasn't indicated on the map), which divided up the country into sixty numbering plan areas, some states having multiple area codes, some states having one area code, and there were some instances where two or three states would "share" the same area code. The map was published in articles on OTD which appeared in 1945 in Bell Labs Record and also Bell Telephone Magazine. I had posted information on these in previous issues of Telecom Digest (back in 1996 and 1997). By 1946, the area code numbering was revamped to where Canada was specifically included. Also both N0X and N1X format codes would be included. There were 86 area codes for the US and Canada in this draft. States which were to have one and only one area code had N0X format codes. States which were to have more-than-one area code were to have had N1X format codes. Also, all codes within those multiple code states were in a sequential range, i.e., NY State would have had 212, 213, 214, 215, 216, and also in a "linear progression/adjacency" across the state. Canada "as a whole" was to be treated as if it were a "single state" with multiple area codes, and would have had: 912, 913 Ontario 914, 915 Quebec 916 Maritime Provinces 917 Manitoba 918 Saskatchewan 919 Alberta 910 British Columbia And while this might have "looked nice" in that there was a "block" of sequential area codes within multi-code states, and within Canada, the "growth" aspect would have been difficult (maybe impossible) to keep things in these "nice" ranges. To truly accommodate growth, the initial benefits of this particular numbering plan would have to be violated and even discarded completely. I had posted on this plan in 1996/97 issues as well. pwd But by October 1947, AT&T issued yet another numbering plan for area codes in the US/Canada for OTD and ultimate customer DDD. This is the plan that has mostly been built upon since then. And while I have posted the original "chart" of the NPA assignment layout in previous posts to TELECOM Digest, since this *IS* the plan that survived, and has its 56th anniversary this Wednesday, 22-October-2003, I'll go into the details of what was intended in October 1947, and how it developed since. This plan carried over the N0X format for single area code states, and N1X format codes for multi-area code states. There were initially 86 area codes assigned (as in the previous 1946 proposal). But Canada was now treated as multi-province, where the provinces followed the same rules as the states in the US. Ontario and Quebec had (as of Oct. 1947) two area codes each, and were assigned N1X codes. The other provinces were assigned one area code each, and had N0X codes. The Maritime Provinces shared a single N0X code (902). This still "exists" to this day in the smaller form that Nova Scotia *AND* Prince Edward Island both share 902. As growth came about in the 1950s, this N0X vs. N1X "rule" for single code vs. multi-code states/provinces was abolished, first when the states with only ONE area code (N0X) were split in 1953 (the additional code was still of the N1N format), and next when both single-code states (N0X) and multi-code states (N1N) were split and new N0X format codes were assigned as additional codes in 1954. Also in the Oct. 1947 initial assignments was that shorter/quicker dial "pulls" or "spins", or fewer dial PULSES, for an N0X *OR* an N1X code (EACH FORMAT TAKEN SEPARATELY, as N0X and N1X had specific different assignments as mentioned above), were assigned to higher incoming volume locations. 212 for NYCity 213 for Los Angeles 214 for Dallas 312 for Chicago 216 for Cleveland 313 for Detroit 314 for St.Louis 412 for Pittsburgh 414 for Milwaukee 415 for San Francisco etc. and in the N0X states/DC: 201 for NJ 202 for DC 203 for CT 301 for MD 302 for DE 401 for RI Even though RI, MD, DE might not have had a lot of incoming calls, they were still along the eastern seaboard of highly populated surrounding territory, and had more incoming calls than other single-area-code states elsewhere in the US. There is one anomoly in the above, and I think it was an error in printing that became embedded: 413 (4+3 is seven pulses) became western MA (Springfield/etc) 617 (6+7 is thirteen pulses) became eastern MA (Boston/etc) More pulses for inbound to Boston than the seven pulses for inbound to Springfield and the more rural western MA area. There was *NEVER* any "special" DDD tests involving Springfield that have ever been documented, despite what some people claim as the "reason" that Springfield had a shorter/quicker "pull/spin", or "lower" (fewer pulses) area code than Boston. If this was true, documentation to it would have shown up by now and eventually posted to the Digest/Archives "in perpetuity". But that has never seemed to happen. Even if there were some special DDD tests involving Springfield, it would have been sometime in the 1950s or 60s, WELL AFTER 1947. The 413 vs. 617 assignments re Springfield vs. Boston was "embedded" on the paper assignments as of 22-October-1947. (Springfield MA *DID* become an AT&T IOC International Operator Center, a city of gateway overseas operators, but that was in the mid-1970s, LONG after the Oct. 1947 plan was "finalized"). N0X Form (States/Provinces with only ONE code assigned) (40 codes assigned): 201 NJ 301 MD 401 RI 501 AR 601 MS 701 ND 801 UT 901 TN 202 DC 302 DE 402 NE 502 KY 602 AZ 702 NV 802 VT 902 mrtm.prv. 203 CT 303 CO 403 AB 503 OR 603 NH 703 VA 803 SC 204 MB 304 WV 404 GA 504 LA 604 BC 704 NC 205 AL 305 FL 405 OK 505 NM 605 SD 206 WA 306 SK 406 MT 207 ME 307 WY 208 ID (902 originally for all of the Maritime Provinces: NB, NS, PEI, NF/LB) N1N Form (States/Provinces with several codes assigned) (46 codes assigned): 212 NY 312 IL 412 PA 512 TX 612 MN 712 IA 812 IN ------ 213 CA 313 MI 413 MA 513 OH 613 ON 713 TX ------ 913 KS 214 TX 314 MO 414 WI 514 PQ 614 OH ------ 814 PA 914 NY 215 PA 315 NY 415 CA 515 IA ------ 715 WI 815 IL 915 TX 216 OH 316 KS 416 ON ------ 616 MI 716 NY 816 MO 916 CA 217 IL 317 IN ------ 517 MI 617 MA 717 PA 218 MN ------ 418 PQ 518 NY 618 IL ------ 319 IA 419 OH Linc Madison has some of this information at his website: http://www.LincMad.com/table1947.html (the above chart/table) http://www.LincMad.com/map1947.html (a map of the 22-Oct-1947 assignments) Note that in the October 1947 finalized original plan, there are no area codes assigned of the forms N09, N00, N11, nor N10. The N11 format has been used (initially only in Panel and #1XB areas, later many SXS areas also began to use N11, and eventually all central office areas used N11 codes regardless of equipment type) as "short" 3-digit codes for special services (211 for the Long Distance Operator, 411 for Information or Directory, 611 for Repair Service, 811 for the Business Offfice, and later on 911 for Emergencies, and other assignments/reservations over more recent years). The N09 format codes weren't assigned until some ten years later, in 1957. The N10 format codes were first assigned for TWX (Teletypewriter Exchange Service) in Summer 1962, but when TWX service was completely taken over by Western Union (in the United States) on WU's own switch network (separate from the Bell System telephone DDD network) circa 1981, those N10 format codes were now "vacant" and re-assigned starting in the early 1990s. The N00 format codes were first used starting in the mid-1960s, and always for *special* non-geographic services, the first being 800 Toll-Free "Inward-WATS". In addition to the Springfield/413 vs. Boston/617 question, there is yet ANOTHER "old wives' tale" which keeps getting repeated, but which is simply *NOT* true, and that is that c.o.codes/names/letters/exchanges assigned in one area code were NOT (initially) assigned "at all" in "any" adjacent area code. That presumption is *NOT* true one bit! Central Office code assginments were *already* occurring *LONG* before the area code format was even dreamed of. The only thing that telco *tried* to do for "communities of interest" along state-lines, was/is not to assign "duplicate" c.o.codes in adjacent states ALONG THAT LINE, IN THE LOCAL or EAS calling area, so as to TRY to permit 7-digit (2L-5N) dialing within that community of interest along the NPA or state line. But that wasn't always possible, such as in NYCity and northeastern NJ. In the NYCity Metro area and northeastern NJ area, Panel and #1XB (and later #5XB) switching was used. Step (SXS) was *NOT* used at all in this metro area. There was no "routing" need for any 112+ or 1+ type CAMA/DDD access code for toll in this area. If c.o.codes between 212 NYCity and at least the northeastern NJ portion of NJ's 201, then such calls, usually "multi-message-unit" (not "strictly" toll, although from the consumer's perspective these per-minute charges were indeed toll), "could" have been dialed as "just" 7-digits (2L-5N). However, during the later 1940s and throughout the 1950s, such calls between 201 (northeastern) NJ and 212 NYC were *NOT* dialed as 2L-5N (7-d) but rather (in each direction) as 11+ 2L-5N. There *WERE INDEED* "duplicate" c.o.code assignments between the two states/NPAs in this lower Hudson River NYCity/NJ Metro area. Such duplicate code assignments most likely existed long before the idea of area codes was ever thought of. By 1960, the use of "11+" in each direction for such northeast-NJ <=> NYCity calls was abolished, replaced with use of the actual destination 3-digit NPA codes, i.e., 201+7d for calls from NYCity to northeastern NJ, and 212+7d for calls from NJ to NYCity. Anyhow, the 1950s era was quite a period of NPA assignments in the US and Canada. A great deal of this was postwar growth and a stronger economy. Some of it was the expansion of Operator Toll Dialing as well as Customer originated DDD, especially with the installation of automation for switching and routing calls (new XBTandems, 4A/4M XB toll machines, and 5XB machines, as well as AMA/CAMA billing equipment). In November 1951, the towns of Englewood and Teaneck NJ, were the first where *customers* could actually *DIAL* toll calls to distant cities, even clear across the country, although at this time, only to a few limited metro areas. But it *was* a first. The customers in these two towns actually used *real* area codes plus 2L-5N to dial such calls in most cases. One of the exceptions was for calls to the San Francisco/Oakland Bay area. The "official" area code list indicated only 415 for central California. But there were the two sides of the Bay, and different toll machines on each side of the Bay. For the Englewood NJ Customer Long Distance Dialing trials, calls to Oakland (and east Bay metro area points) were reached with NPA 415. However, calls to San Francisco (and west Bay and north-of-the-Golden Gate points that were dialable) were reached with a different 318 area code. I think that Operators dialed 415 for the entire region. I think that some of this may have had to do with the number of digits that could be analyzed and translated up-front in the #5XB machines in Englewood and Teaneck NJ. I think that for discrete routing to Oakland toll vs. San Francisco toll, the machines couldn't translate all six-digits of the NPA-NNX code, but only three-digits of "just" the NPA code. Thus the use of 318 indicated San Francisco "up-front" while the use of 415 indicated Oakland "up-front". This didn't seem to matter for Operators, because they keyed into a 4A XB toll machine, which was probably able to analyze/translate the full six-digits of the 415+NNX code, and thus be able to route directly to Oakland vs. San Francisco on those six digits 415+NNX. By the time full six-digit translation was extended to customer-originated DDD calls, the use of 318 vs. 415 for San Francisco vs. Oakland was no longer needed, thus 318 was fully reclaimed for this use, with 415 being the only code for all calls to the Bay area. In 1957, 318 was assigned to the split of Louisiana's (only) area code 504. During the 1950s, many PBXes became automated and to the point where individual "extensions" began to have "real" dialable 7-digit (ten-digit) "public" telephone numbers. Every hotel or hospital room, or office desk, etc. had a unique public/dialable telephone number. Mobile (IMTS) and paging was becoming available and popular, to where the mobile devices also had dialable "POTS" (NANP) telephone numbers. Manual service was becoming automated and getting dialable c.o.codes in many rural areas, and even in cities where manual service still existed. There were possibly the beginnings of tele-fax, as well as dial-up data connections over the regular DDD or local-dial telephone network. The US possessions of Alaska and Hawaii were about to become states, and in 1957 were assigned area codes. Even the Caribbean area (both the US possessions of Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands, as well as the Dominican Republic, the "British" West Indies, and possibly even other parts of the French and Dutch Caribbean and maybe even pre-Castro Cuba ... was assigned an Area Code (809) in 1958. However, it wouldn't be until the mid/late 1960s and into the 1970s (and even later) when all of these non-CONUS points could begin to be *directly dialed* by customers in the US and Canada, without the need for operator intervention (at least for non-coin-station-sent-paid calls). With the exception of the *temporary* use of 318 for calling to San Francisco (from Englewood/Teaneck NJ in the customer toll dialing trials starting Nov. 1951), there were *THIRTY-FOUR* new area codes assigned and activated for the US, Canada, Caribbean, between 1948 and 1962. I seem to think that around 1960, it was planned to extend Alberta's 403 area code to include (Canadian National's) Yukon and southern/western Northwest Territories. Customer *dial* service with NPA 403 to the YT/NWT didn't begin until around 1972 though. New telephone service in the eastern/Arctic NWT began in the 1960s/70s, provided by Bell Canada. Eventually, NPA 819 (one of the three NPA codes for Quebec) was "extended" to include this part of the NWT, circa Fall 1975. In 1962/63, the northwest border towns of Mexico were (temporarily) incorporated into the NANP/DDD network, many of these communities actually received their *dialtone* from a Bell telco (or Contel of the West) in the United States, or else if they provided their own dialtone, their toll homings were on an AT&T (or BOC -- Pacific Tel or Mountain States Tel) toll switch in the US. This was the (temporary) use of Area Code 903 for (the northwest border towns of) Mexico. AT&T and/or Pacific Telephone also had a financial interest in Telefonica Fronteriza. Telefonos de Mexico was *NOT* the telco in these northwestern Mexican border towns! In 1980, there were changes where the Mexican Government took over the telephone service in these towns and put them into Telefonos de Noroeste, which was made a subsidiary of the Mexican Government's TelMex. Eventually, the "homings" or dialtone for these towns was provided by *MEXICO*, and these towns were being re-numbered to conform with Mexico (+52) dialing/numbering, under Mexico's 6NXX city codes in other TelMex parts of northwest Mexico. 903 was reclaimed, and instead, 70-6 was assigned, the '6' being the third digit of the NANP area code, but also the first digit of the Mexican "national/domestic" telephone number in that overall part of Mexico. By 1970, AT&T assigned 90-5 for future customer use to dial Mexico City and surrounding communities. The +52 Mexican city-code for Mexico City was '5', and surrounding communities had city codes of the 59X form. The '5' in 90-5 did the same "double duty" that the '6' in 70-6 would do starting ten years later. The use of 70-6 and 90-5 for reaching *limited* parts of Mexico from the US and Canada was eliminated in Feb. 1991, since most US/Canadian customers had the capability of 011+/01+ International/Overseas access. With the exception of the northwestern 903 Mexican border towns in the 1960s/70s, and to a lesser extent in the 1980s, Mexico was *NOT* part of the NANP (+1), but has been its *OWN* ITU-assigned country-code +52. As for the POTS area codes of the US and Canada itself, there were those *thirty-four* new area codes assigned between 1948 and 1962. By the mid-1950s, AT&T was becoming concerned at the "rate" of new area codes being assigned and activated. There were several telco planning meetings that took place in the second half of the decade, and it was ultimately decided to go from 2L-5N (exchange name/letters) over to strictly 7-d ANC (All Number Calling). This would allow potential use of NN0 codes for c.o.codes (the third-digit '0' in c.o.codes was "discouraged" during the "exchange name" days because of confusion with the letter 'O' on the numeral '6', but there were still some NN0 codes with an exchange name with letters on the 'NN' first two digits, especially in the Los Angeles metro area back in the 1920s/30s!), as well as "POTS" use of 55X, 57X, 95X and 97X c.o.codes, which were mostly unused during the EXchange NAme days, because of difficulty in coming up with two letters to form a real use-able/pronounce-able/ easy-to-spell word/name from the letters J/K/L on the 5, P/R/S on the 7, W/X/Y on the 9. Those codes were mostly used for internal telco test purposes in the EXchange NAme days, and even today are still commonly used for special telco purposes, or special functions, although there are now POTS c.o.codes as well of the 55X, 57X, 95X, 97X formats. "ANC" was also going to allow expansion to N0X/N1X format *CENTRAL OFFICE* codes, expected for Los Angeles (NPA 213) by the early 1970s (which did take effect as scheduled), and for New York City (NPA 212) by the mid-1970s (and took effect around 1981). It would also allow NNX format NPA codes to be introduced, anticipated by 1995-2000, and eventually took effect in Jan. 1995, more-or-less on schedule. But with better control over number resources, after the splits of 1962, and except for special code assignements of the 1960s/70s, there were only TWO more "POTS" NPA splits for the remainder of the 1960s, and throughout the 1970s ... In 1965, 305 in eastern/northern Florida split, with 904 for the panhandle and other parts of north-central and northeastern Florida. In 1973, 703 in Virginia (its only NPA code as of 1947) was split, with 804 for southeastern Virginia. It wasn't until almost ten-years-later, when 714 CA split off 619 (effective Nov. 1982), and 713 TX split off 409 (effective March 1983). The breakup of the Bell System officially took effect on 01-January-1984. In 1984, there were two area code splits, even with N0X/N1X format c.o.codes, both 213 Los Angeles and 212 New York City needed to split. 213 split off 818 for the northern part of the city/metro area ... and 212 split off 718 for Brooklyn/Queens/Staten Island, with Manhattan (and initially) Bronx retaining 212. (Bronx was transferred from 212 to 718 during 1992/93). There were a few more area codes splits in the late 1980s, three in 1988 (303/719 CO in March, 305/407 FL in April, 617/508 MA in July), and one in 1989 when Chicago, which had already gone to N0X/N1X c.o.codes, eventually needed to split, the city itself retaining 312, with the suburbs splitting off to 708. The 1990-94 timeframe had thirteen new NPA codes, but even that wasn't a huge number. However, for "POTS" format area codes, it "exhausted" the supply of "traditional" style codes. But it was planned that 1995 would probably be the year that new format NNX codes, for a generalized overall NXX format, would begin to be used. In the early 1990s timeframe, there was the first "overlay" area code, 917 overlaying all of NYC (both 212 and 718), initially for new wireless services, but ultimately for landline service as well. Actually, the original 1991 Bellcore ILs for the 917 overlay to 212/718 *did* indicate that the ultimate intent was for 917 to be "all/full" services and not "just" wireless. There were still several "special function" area codes assigned throughout the 1970s/80s/early 90s, such as 700, 710, the swap of 610 for 600 in Canada, 456, 500, etc. but these were just for special purposes and not geographic/POTS service. The 1995-2001 timeframe saw an *EXPLOSION* in the number of new area codes assigned and activated, now that the NANP was using new NNX format area codes (generalized NXX for "all" codes), for a NANP ten-digit number format of NXX-NXX-xxxx. Some of it was because of more cellular service, some because of emerging and/or *potential* CLECs. The 809 Caribbean/Bermuda area broke off 18 new area codes for a total of 19 codes (including 809 retained by (only) the Dominican Republic). This took effect in a staggered implementation, from 1995-99. In Fall 1997, the Yukon and Northwest Territories (and future Nunavut Territory politically/jurisdicationally splitting off from NWT) in northern Canada, which had been "sharing" from *two* area codes assigned to lower provinces (403 in Alberta for YT and southern/western NWT; 819 as one of three codes in Quebec for eastern/Arctic NWT), now split off into its own new SINGLE area code of 867. Two U.S. territories or possessions in the Pacific, Guam (+671) and the Northern Mariana Islands/ Saipan/etc. (+670) became incorporated into the NANP in Summer 1997. The numerics of their (three-digit) ITU assigned Country Code was migrated to their *AREA* (NPA) code within +1/NANP. There were two more overlays, which from the beginning were full service overlays, in 1997. Maryland's two area codes were each overlaid. 1997 was the fiftieth anniversary of the NANP "as we have known it as it has evolved/developed", but 1997 was also the year that saw the *MOST* number of new area codes activated in a single calendar year, a total of 43 new codes! When divestiture happened, effective 1984, the overall administration of the NANP and assignment of area codes was transferred from AT&T over to the new Bellcore organization, which was spun out of the old AT&T/Bell System. The name of this administering organization within Bellcore was first called the "Numbering and Dialing Plan Group", but was later changed to NANPA, the North American Numbering Plan *Administration". Bellcore was owned 1/7th each by each of the seven regional Bell holding corporations which were carved out of the old Bell System. When competition in the local telco arena was becoming more and more apparant (actually even in the later 1980s, there was competition in cellular, between a BOC wireless subsidiary against a competitive Radio Common Carrier), there appeared to be a "conflict of interest" with Bellcore also being the NANPA. There was also more regulatory oversight over the numbering plan as well. And there was the 1996 Telecom Act. It was decided that Bellcore would divest itself of the NANPA functions, to be turned over to a non-governmental impartial third-party entity. There were several hearings and such over at least five years time, and by 1998, Lockheed-Martin took over the NANPA functions from Bellcore. Also, Bellcore was about to be sold by the regional Bell holding corporations over to a new owner, SAIC, and the name of Bellcore was changed to Telcordia in 1999. Also, Lockheed-Martin announced at the end of 1998, just less than a year of handling the NANPA, that it wanted "out" of numbering. A year later, in late 1999, just before 2000, a new entity named "Neustar" took over the NANPA functions. When the NANPA became separate from Bellcore, even local c.o.code assignments (in the US) were transferred from the BOCs over to (LM) NANPA. In Canada, the incumbent local telcos turned over local c.o.code administration over to SAIC-held "CNA" (Canadian Numbering Adminstration) beginning in 1998. Starting in 1998 were a few more overlays, and there have been overlays ever since. This prevents the need for a "two stage" holding of c.o.codes in existance during an "overlap" period under both the old and new area codes for the permissive dial period. And existing customers do NOT have to change the area code part of their already existing ten-digit telephone number. The US, Canada, and even Puerto Rico (US teritory) in the Caribbean have had some overlays. With the explosion of area code assignments, there was concern about the possible premature exhaust of the NANP ten-digit format "itself" (supply of assignable area codes). There was supposed to be the evolution of "portability" for those who were changing from one local telco to another in a competitive environment, where they could KEEP the same number, and there was also the concept of assigning blocks of assignable numbers in blocks of 1,000 instead of 10,000. This began to happen more and more by 2000, and with OTHER factors involved as well, has actually caused a SIGNIFICANT DOWNTURN in the number of new area codes! :) There were only eight new area codes in calendar year 2002, last year. This year, 2003, there are only THREE new area codes, all co-incidentally within the Republic of Texas. The only "known" new area code for 2004 is 684 for the US Pacific territory of American Samoa, in where it migrates from +684 to +1-684, similar to Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands/Saipan in 1997. Permissive/Parallel dialing for American Samoa's new situation is expected to begin in October 2004, a year from now. (The country of Guyana, +592, did make a request to join the NANP, back in 1999/2000, this is a "British" or former British location on the northern coast of South America, with a community-of-interest with the "British" Caribbean/West Indies; I personally don't think that allowing +592 Guyana or even +501 Belize, into the NANP, would have caused premature exhaust, but the FCC and the CRTC both gave Guyana "thumbs down" at this time on becoming part of the NANP). Many states have actually called off area code implementation or even relief planning. California has been able to hold off any new area codes since Summer 1999. Some planned area code overlays in Canada keep getting pushed further and further into the future (but with planned specific future dates). I have recently posted to TELECOM Digest some articles on the currently viewed situation of future area codes, in more detail. It actually does seem to look more and more like the 1980s (or even 1960s/70s) regarding new area codes, as there are FAR fewer new codes assigned/activated each year than in the past years of the late 1990s thru 2001. There is a lot more I could say here on the history and current/future developement of the NANP and the DDD network. Much of it has already been said over and over by me *AND* others who are all well known. So I will close here, but remember that Wednesday 22-October-2003, could be said to be the 56th Anniversary of the NANP "as we have known it" and "as it has actually developed and evolved", since the first "known" memo identifying the original 86 area codes that "took" was issued by AT&T some 56 years ago, on 22-October-1947. Mark J. Cuccia mcuccia (at) tulane (dot) edu New Orleans LA USA +1 504 UNiversity 5-5954 (WORK) +1 504 CHestnut 1-2497 (HOME/voicmail) NWORLASKDS0 (BellSouth #5ESS Cl.5 Local "Seabrook" 504-24x-) NWORLAIYCM3 (BellSouth-Mobility Ericsson Cellular-MTSO NOL) NWORLAMT01T (BellSouth DMS-100 "Metairie" Tndm; Cellular routes thru) NWORLAMA0GT (BellSouth DMS-100/200 inTRA-LATA/fg.B-C-D Tndm "Main" 504+) NWORLAMA20T (BellSouth DMS-200 TOPS:inLATA Opr.Svc.Tndm "Main" 504+053+) NWORLAMA04T (AT&T #4ESS Class-2 Toll 060-T / 504-2T "Main" 504+) JCSNMSPS06T (AT&T #5ESS OSPS:Operator-Services-Tandem 601-0T 601+121) JCSNMSPS14T (AT&T #4ESS Class-3 Toll 040-T / 601-2T; OSPS routes thru) NWORLAELH01 (Tulane U PBX NEC-2400 broken down to the following 504-NXXes and thousands-blocks: 865-4/5/6xxx, 862-3/8xxx, 314-2/7xxx, 247-1xxx) NWORLACADS0 (BellSo.DMS-100 Cl.5 Lcl "Carrollton" 504-86x;PBX 'homes' on) ========================================================= [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: My sincere thanks to Mark Cuccia for this very interesting historical account of the telephone area code numbering system, and how it evolved. In addition to this going out to readers early on Wednesday, it will also be archived in the special reports section of the archives and the history area of the archives. 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 fifty 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. If you donate at least fifty dollars per year we will send you our two-CD set of the entire Telecom Archives; this is every word published in this Digest since our beginning in 1981. 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 #712 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Oct 22 22:32:45 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id h9N2Wje20892; Wed, 22 Oct 2003 22:32:45 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2003 22:32:45 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200310230232.h9N2Wje20892@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 #713 TELECOM Digest Wed, 22 Oct 2003 22:32:00 EDT Volume 22 : Issue 713 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson New Stereo Linked to Online Music Store (Monty Solomon) Three U.S. States Eye EchoStar Interest in Loral (Monty Solomon) Cingular Wireless and RIM Demonstrate Color BlackBerry 7280 (Solomon) FYI on Unlicensed Spectrum For Wireless Use (Marcus Didius Falco) Re: Beware: Vonage and Local Number Transfers - Long Time (S. Schwartz) Becoming A Switch Technician (Jeremy) Re: Good Connection But no Internet Pages (Al Loy) Dialogic cards in (Hot Swap) PCI Slots (Compaq Dl380) (CoderRob) Re: Fax Removal Test Numbers (Craig Lombardi) Skype (Tom Zachman) 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, 21 Oct 2003 23:45:47 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: New Stereo Linked to Online Music Store By KENJI HALL Associated Press Writer TOKYO (AP) -- Four Japanese electronics makers have teamed up to make stereo systems that can download music directly from an Internet service, without a home computer serving as middle man. Sony Corp., Sharp Corp., Pioneer Corp. and Kenwood Corp. unveiled prototypes of the new equipment Tuesday and said they expect the systems to go on sale early next year. There are no plans yet for marketing it overseas, the companies said. Each company owns one-fourth of a joint venture, Any Music Planning Inc., that developed the Linux-based stereo equipment in an attempt to adapt to rapid changes engulfing the music industry. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=36165193 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2003 23:58:01 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Three U.S. States Eye EchoStar Interest in Loral By Sinead Carew NEW YORK, Oct 21 (Reuters) - Three state attorneys general expressed competition concerns to a U.S. bankruptcy court this week over EchoStar Communications Corp.'s (NASDAQ:DISH) efforts to buy satellites that rival DirecTV had ordered from bankrupt Loral Space & Communications Ltd. (BB:LRLSQ). New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer and his counterparts in Missouri and Pennsylvania said competition in the U.S. television market could be at risk if EchoStar buys the satellites from Loral, according to a Loral spokeswoman and letters seen by Reuters on Tuesday. The concerns were the latest chapter in a drama between satellite operator and maker Loral and EchoStar, the No. 2 U.S. satellite television service. Loral, which says it is not up for sale, recently rejected EchoStar's bid for all its assets. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=36175581 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2003 00:06:13 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Cingular Wireless and RIM Demonstrate Color BlackBerry 7280 Cingular Wireless and RIM Demonstrate Color BlackBerry 7280 at CTIA Conference; New BlackBerry Wireless Handheld Targets Additional Markets LAS VEGAS--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Oct. 22, 2003--Cingular Wireless and Research In Motion (RIM) (Nasdaq:RIMM) (TSX: RIM) are demonstrating the new BlackBerry 7280(TM) handheld at CTIA Wireless I.T. & Entertainment 2003 in Las Vegas (Cingular booth #821, RIM booth #320). The BlackBerry 7280 is designed to provide the best combined email/data/phone experience and features a high-resolution color screen with added 850 MHz support allowing it to operate in new markets on the Cingular wireless network. It will operate on Cingular's 850/1900 MHz GSM/GPRS network in the United States and supports international roaming on 1800 MHz networks. The Java-based BlackBerry 7280, the newest wireless handheld to be offered by Cingular, combines phone, email, SMS, organizer, Web and corporate data applications in a single handheld. The new high-resolution screen displays crisp images with support for over 65,000 colors while the handheld continues to offer superior battery life for optimal wireless performance. The BlackBerry 7280 also features cradle-free wireless email synchronization, integrated attachment viewing (including support for popular file formats such as Word, Excel, PowerPoint, WordPerfect, PDF and ASCII) and remote address look up in addition to secure, push-based wireless connectivity. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=36176221 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2003 22:40:10 -0400 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: FYI on Unlicensed Spectrum For Wireless Use * Original: FROM ... Jay O. Casey Increasing Public Access to Unlicensed Spectrum By Harold Feld, Associate Director, Media Access Project Copyright 2003 to Media Access Project. Released under the Creative Commons BY License An obscure proceeding at the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) may hold the key to the next evolution in unlicensed wireless services. For the first time, the FCC has proposed dedicating a significant amount of spectrum to unlicensed access on a primary basis. This means that users within the new unlicensed band would not have to worry about whether they interfered with a protected service. Even better, the proposed band includes spectrum immediately adjacent to the existing 2.4 GHz underlay. The existing unlicensed underlay in the 2.4 GHz band has spurred vast amounts of telecommunication innovation and investment; increasing the available bandwidth will reward those who have developed this technology and spur further growth and wider deployment. If the FCC approves the proposal, the benefits to unlicensed wireless technologies would be enormous. At the same time, however, the FCC has also proposed auctioning the rights to an unlicensed underlay. This proposal, if accepted, would entirely defeat the purpose of unlicensed access. Worse, it would set a negative precedent that could severely limit the expansion of unlicensed wireless access. The FCC needs to hear from all users and supporters of unlicensed wireless access in support of allocating the relevant band for primary unlicensed access. This document provides background, general guidelines, and instructions for how to file at the FCC. It is not intended as a form letter or sign on petition. The FCC needs to hear the stories of people using unlicensed access and who are eager to take this technology to the next level of deployment and innovation. However, as described below, anyone with Internet access can file comments at the FCC. Background On April 2, 2003, the FCC released a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, or NPRM. A NPRM is an agency proposal to change existing rules. By law, a federal agency must give the public a chance to see proposed rule changes and to file comments on these changes. The FCC usually has a deadline to file comments and a deadline to file replies to these comments. In addition, however, members of the public can continue to file comments even after these deadlines. This NPRM goes by the rather lengthy name "Amendment of Parts 1, 21, 73, 74 and 101 of the Commission's Rules to Facilitate the Provision of Fixed and Mobile Broadband Access, Educational and Other Advanced Services in the 2150-2162 and 2500-2690 MHz Bands." It's Docket Number is WT 03-66. This information will be important later. The NPRM discusses a proposal by certainly licensees to restructure the Multipoint Distribution Service (MDS) and Instructional Fixed Television Service (ITFS). While this sounds extremely boring and technical and in many ways is the essence of the NPRM is a question: What do we do with a huge band of spectrum covering from 2500 MHz to 2690 MHz. Those familiar with spectrum will recognize this as prime spectrum with excellent propagation characteristics. Furthermore, importantly for unlicensed access aficionados, it sits practically adjacent to one of the existing unlicensed bands (2400 MHz). At the moment, this spectrum is parceled into exclusive licenses that are required to offer fixed point-to-point two way communication on either a commercial basis (MDS service) or non-commercial educational basis (ITFS). Under the current rules, none of the licensees can really exploit the potential of the band. The original rules for the service date back to the 1970s, and the efforts by the FCC to fix these rules over the years to make the spectrum productive have created a confusing patchwork of licenses rights. So the FCC wants to reorganize the band to make better use of the spectrum. The current MDS and ITFS licensees have proposed a restructuring plan which would, unsurprisingly, benefit the existing licensees. The existing licensees would enjoy total flexibility and would be allowed to reorganize themselves to offer mobile as well as fixed services. To its credit, the FCC has asked whether others could benefit from this reorganization. Specifically, the FCC has proposed creating a band dedicated exclusively to unlicensed use. NPRM 79-81. The FCC also proposed extending the existing unlicensed rules (also known as Part 15 rules, for their location in the FCC's rules) to include the 2500-2690 range. 143-148. The effect of either proposal on unlicensed access would be enormously beneficial. Even if the FCC merely extended the Part 15 rules, it would help overcome many congestion issues and help avoid interference with other devices. Creating a significant band devoted exclusively for unlicensed without the fear of interfering with a licensed primary service would open the door to a whole new range of products and services. At the same time, the FCC also proposed allocating the spectrum to exclusive licensees. Worse, it proposed auctioning the right to a Part 15-style underlay. Such an auction would defeat the value of unlicensed and would set a bad precedent for future spectrum restructuring. The New America Foundation/Media Access Project Comments The New America Foundation (NAF) and the Media Access Project (MAP) drafted and submitted comments that supported both the creation of a primary unlicensed band and the extension of the Part 15 rules. The NAF/MAP comments also contained other material relating to auctions and other issues raised in the NPRM. Copies of the NAF/MAP comments are available from both the NAF website (www.spectrumpolicy.org) or on the MAP website (www.mediaaccess.org). A number of parties joined the comments. Most importantly, the comments were joined by wireless ISPs eager to see expansion of wireless access. No other party in this proceeding filed in favor of expanding unlicensed access. Many parties filed against the proposal. While the FCC does not decide policies solely by counting noses, it does look to see if there is interest in expanding unlicensed access in the relevant band. At the moment, the record does not reflect support for expanding unlicensed wireless access. How You Can Help Anyone can file comments at the FCC. Reply comments are due on October 23, 2003. But interested parties can continue to file comments using the procedure outlined below. Contrary to popular belief, the FCC really does read public comments and really does care about them. Most important are comments filed that provide either technical information or real world experiences that underscore the value of unlicensed wireless access. In particular, if you are a WISP, a WISP subscriber, or some other business user of unlicensed access, the FCC will be very interested in your comments. A Style Guide For Posting To The FCC Be polite - The staff at the FCC are real people with human feelings. They do not appreciate hearing that they are morons or losers or corrupt servants of special interests. If you abuse them, they will disregard your comments. That's just human nature. Explain yourself - Many of the people who will read your comments are not engineers or are engineers unfamiliar with the specific issues you describe. If you assume an audience generally familiar with the issues but with no technical training, you will probably hit the right level. At the same time, do include complex technical or economic information where you have to. This is important in building the record. If you have lengthy technical comments, try having a plain English summary at the beginning followed by technical comments. Make sure you explain all acronyms. Be personal - The FCC needs to hear about real world experiences in the field. Even if you are just a general supporter of unlicensed access services such as wi-fi, try to make the comments personal. In particular, if you are a business, discuss the economic impact of unlicensed access and how you would benefit from expanding unlicensed access. While there is no page limit (some filings are hundreds of pages long), try to stick to essentials. A shorter document will be given preferential treatment by staffers than a longer one that says the same thing. This is simply human nature. How To File Comments The FCC will accept written comments in Word, WordPerfect, or PDF format. You can also type in short comments directly to the FCC on its comments webpage at: http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/upload_v2.cgi. In other words, anyone with Internet access can file a comment just by going to the FCC's webpage and typing in the window provided (scroll down to the bottom of the page). If you write comments, you should include at the top the name of the proceeding and the Docket No. You must also include in the written comments the date of filing, your name, and an address where you can be reached. You do not need to be a lawyer, or even a U.S. citizen, to write or file comments before the FCC. When you go to file your comments, the docket number should be entered as 03-66 (ignore the WT). The FCC's webpage is relatively self-explanatory about what information is required and how to attach any files. At the end of the process, you will receive a confirmation from the FCC that your comments were filed. You may wish to print this out and save it for your files. You may view other comments in this proceeding by using the FCC's Electronic Comment Filing System (ECFS) search function available at: http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/comsrch_v2.cgi Again, the relevant docket Number is 03-66. How To Stay Involved NAF and MAP will continue to update their websites with new information. The NAF website is http://www.spectrumpolicy.org. The MAP website is http://www.mediaaccess.org. In addition, the Washington Internet Project (http://www.cybertelecom.org) is a good resource for FCC proceedings that relate to unlicensed access. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2003 21:13:04 -0700 (PDT) From: Stan Schwartz Reply-To: stannc@yahoo.com Subject: Re: Beware: Vonage and Local Number Transfers - Long Time No See In TELECOM Digest V22 #71, TELECOM Digest Editor noted in reply: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, five or six weeks does seem to be > an outragously long time. However, one thing you should remember is > that the traditional landline telcos are fit to be tied -- really bent > out of shape -- about the amount of business companies like Vonage are > taking away from them ...] If the traditional landline telcos want to generate or keep service, they need to at least pay attention to the customers who actually WANT their service, let alone getting into LNP issues. I've spent many an e-mail ranting about living in 'telecom purgatory' here, just outside of Charlotte, North Carolina and just outside the service area of BellSouth. I live under the black cloud and curse of 'ALLTEL Carolina, Inc.'. Last year, I moved from an apartment within ALLTEL territory to a single family house in a different Alltel C.O. There was no wire in the house yet, so Alltel had to attach a wire to the telephone pedestal at the curb (on the easement on my lawn), run the wire around the back of my house, and to the entry point that the builder left for them. Easy enough, right? Well, they connected this line and left it strung across my lawn, around the back of my house, and up part of my driveway. This was in November. I asked when it was going to get buried. Supervisors showed up to look at it. They referred it to other departments, more people came to look at it. The winter came, and it was fairly brutal for North Carolina, so I left them alone. Along came February and warmer weather (this IS the south), and the wire was still there. I called them on the Monday before Presidents' Day. I said, "Look, the wire has been running across my lawn for 3 months. If the wire gets tripped over, you might have a problem. I pay for that wire maintenance plan, so if my lawn mower accidentally hits that wire, you'd probably have to re-string it, right?" Well wouldn't you know it? There was a tractor with an auger and a length of pipe on my lawn within three days. They did a nice job of burying the line and running conduit under my driveway. The bottom line: they just didn't feel like doing it. Now I've been running Vonage for the last two months and suddenly they have numbers available all over LATA 424 (Charlotte, NC and surrounding areas). So far, Vonage has beat out my land line for up time. On two separate days in the last three weeks, I've received a call on my cell phone from ADT telling me that the the landline from my house has gone out. This ends up being something that Alltel has messed with in the area. BellSouth would be half the price and give me twice the service. I can only hope that Alltel continues this level of service and runs its system into Chapter 11 and gets taken over. I'd even welcome SBC at this point. I know some nice people there, too. -Stan [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Wasn't Alltel originally just into long distance service like Sprint and MCI? Apparently now they are into local service just like Sprint? PAT] ------------------------------ From: essay182@yahoo.com (Jeremey) Subject: Becoming A Switch Technician Date: 21 Oct 2003 22:15:14 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com I would really like a job in the telecom industry someday and I was wondering what the best thing to do to become a switch technician would be? I'm really fascinated by telephones and computers and am very good with both, so I was wondering how I would jump into this field? I was thinking of calling a local CO and asking them, but I also wanted to ask here. Any help is greatly appreciated. Thanks. ------------------------------ From: albertoa33@yahoo.com (Al Loy) Subject: Re: Good Connection But no Internet Pages Date: 22 Oct 2003 05:46:25 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com I think what is happening is what John Meissen is mentioning. That is that the AP is filtering out connections by the MAC address of the card. I have searched all over the internet to get the software to configure the AP. I have a Lucent Model WP-II-E. I think this model is not being made any more so maybe that is why I am having a hard time getting the software. I don't have the original CD's because the person that originally set up the network to all the software with him. Any help with locating the configuration software would be greatly appreciated. David Clayton wrote in message news:: > albertoa33@yahoo.com (Al Loy) contributed the following: >> John, thank you for your response. Encryption is turned off. Can you >> please tell me how I could change the configuration on the Access >> Point so that it does not filter out MAC addresses or so that I can >> add the new cards? I know that to change the configuration on the >> router you can access 192.168.1.1 through the browser. I am waiting >> till Saturday to try resetting the password using the router's pin >> hole so I can see what settings it has. I want to make sure that I >> have the whole day to fix things in case everything get screwed up. Is >> there another IP for the Access Point that I can access through the >> browser? > Of course, the PC's with the new cards have been set to the correct > Access Point SSID, (like the other cards), haven't they? > Does the Cisco Access Point have a restriction on how many individual > wireless connections it can have? > > David Clayton, e-mail: dcstar@XYZ.myrealbox.com, > Victoria, Australia. > (Remove the "XYZ." to reply) > Dilbert's words of wisdom #18: Never argue with an idiot. They drag > you down to their level then beat you with experience. ------------------------------ From: rob@mindspring.com (CoderRob) Subject: Dialogic Cards in (Hot Swap) PCI Slots (Compaq Dl380) Date: 22 Oct 2003 06:35:25 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com I am experiencing problems with multiple Dialogic D/480-JCT-2T1 boards in Compaq DL380 server machines. In some cases they work, but in most cases I get problems detecting the boards or starting them once they are detected. I have seen rumors that there were problems with that Dialogic model when running in a Hot Swap slot; the issue was related to high power consumption requirements of the Dialogic card. Allegedly a second revision (Rev 2 or Rev B?) of the D480 hardware resolved this. Does anyone have any information on this or similar problems with the hardware combination that I described above? Thanks, Rob ------------------------------ From: Craig Lombardi Subject: Re: Fax Removal Test Numbers Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2003 09:48:48 -0400 Organization: 24hoursupport.com We called and did get thru to that last one Wall Street Stock Alerts two days ago, but we STILL got their junk today. The stock tip sheet clearly says at the bottom: "To be removed from our database, call toll free at 1-888-398-2349". Carl Navarro wrote: > Alright. FOUR stock market tip sheets in one day, the last > one won't accept my number. > Lesson time! > Stock Prophet 866-273-2467 > Stock Wave USA 800-390-1403 > Stock Buyers Alert 888-528-8863 > WS Stock Alerts 888-398-2349 > I think it's time to get out the old war-dialer (frecom fax board > anyone?) and set the calls to 100 or 1000. > Carl Navarro ------------------------------ From: Tom Zachman Subject: Skype Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2003 22:10:34 -0500 Organization: Elpaso Internet Anyone heard or used this application: http://www.skype.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 fifty 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. If you donate at least fifty dollars per year we will send you our two-CD set of the entire Telecom Archives; this is every word published in this Digest since our beginning in 1981. 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 #713 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Oct 23 00:43:11 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id h9N4hBg21947; Thu, 23 Oct 2003 00:43:11 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 00:43:11 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200310230443.h9N4hBg21947@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 #714 TELECOM Digest Thu, 23 Oct 2003 00:43:00 EDT Volume 22 : Issue 714 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Comcast Launches 'Comcast Teleworker' Internet Service (Monty Solomon) Time Warner Cable Tangles With DSL, Dial-up (Monty Solomon) See You Later, Anti-Gators? (Monty Solomon) Sony Studying Ways to Embed Cell Phones (Monty Solomon) Senate Votes for Tough Limits on Spam (Monty Solomon) Qwest CEO Says He Has no Plans to Leave (Eric Friedebach) Re: Beware: Vonage and Local Number Transfers - Long Time (Sara Garland) Re: Beware: Vonage and Local Number Transfers - Long Time (S Schwartz) Re: The NANP is 56-Years-Old Wednesday, October 22 (Mark Brader) Re: The NANP is 56-Years-Old Wednesday, October 22 (jared) Re: The NANP is 56-Years-Old Wednesday, October 22 (wesrock@aol.com) Re: Can Cable Fast-Forward Past TiVo? (Joey Lindstrom) Re: What on Earth is This? (George Mitchell) Re: A Game Player That Happens to Be a Phone (Geoffrey Welsh) Re: Dell Turns on Satellite TV (jbl) 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. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk is definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2003 23:31:30 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Comcast Launches 'Comcast Teleworker' Internet Service Comcast Launches 'Comcast Teleworker' Internet Service to Serve Corporate Telework Needs - Oct 22, 2003 09:02 AM (PR Newswire) PHILADELPHIA, Oct. 22 /PRNewswire/ -- Employers wanting to provide their employees with Internet telework solutions now can rely on Comcast, an expert in broadband connectivity, with the launch of Comcast Teleworker. Comcast now offers a business Internet service designed specifically for organizations with large numbers of employees who work remotely. The service is available anywhere Comcast offers high-speed Internet service. Comcast provides Internet service in 35 U.S. states and is the nation's leading provider of residential broadband Internet service. Comcast Teleworker offers a standard set of features tailored to national, regional corporate customers. Comcast Teleworker speeds are optimized for teleworkers to connect to their corporate locations via VPN to access e-mail and transfer corporate files. Comcast also provides business-class customer support including dedicated support representatives specially trained to support business services and customers. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=36181921 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2003 23:38:54 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Time Warner Cable tangles With DSL, Dial-up By Jim Hu Staff Writer, CNET News.com Time Warner Cable reported another quarter of sagging growth for its broadband Internet business, raising speculation that the market for high-speed cable access is maturing and facing more competition. As part of parent company Time Warner's second-quarter results, the nation's second-largest cable provider reported a 23 percent increase in broadband subscribers, from 2.3 million last year to 3 million this year. That's a significant drop from the growth rate of 69 percent the company saw the year before. The question many analysts and even company executives are asking is whether this is an early indicator that rival digital subscriber line (DSL) services are stealing market share. The answer from them at this point is no, but stay tuned next quarter. http://news.com.com/2100-1034-5095319.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2003 23:53:52 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: See You Later, Anti-Gators? By Paul Festa Staff Writer, CNET News.com In an effort to improve its corporate reputation, adware company Gator has launched a legal offensive to divorce its name from the hated term "spyware" -- and so far its strategy is paying off. In response to a libel lawsuit, an antispyware company has settled with Gator and pulled Web pages critical of the company, its practices and its software. And other spyware foes are getting the message. http://news.com.com/2100-1032-5095051.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2003 23:17:16 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Sony Studying Ways to Embed Cell Phones By AUDREY McAVOY Associated Press Writer TOKYO (AP) -- Sony Corp. is studying ways to let consumers use their cell phones to buy groceries at convenience stores, pick up the tab for lunch and pay train fares, the company said Wednesday. The electronics giant already has its own smart card payment service called Edy _ an acronym for "euro, dollar, yen" _ which is accepted by about 2,700 stores in Japan. Sony said it's working on using the same computer chip technology, called FeliCa, in cell phones. About 2.7 million Edy cards are currently in circulation. But the company declined to confirm a newspaper report Wednesday that it would tie up with NTT DoCoMo Inc., Japan's largest mobile telephone provider, which accounts for roughly 60 percent of the cell phone market. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=36192905 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2003 23:14:00 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Senate Votes for Tough Limits on Spam By TED BRIDIS AP Technology Writer WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Senate agreed Wednesday to impose tough new limits on the irritating but lucrative business of e-mailing unwanted sales pitches to millions of people in the United States. Internet users have complained about mailboxes clogged with offers for prescription drugs, cheap loans, herbal remedies and pornography. The Senate voted 97-0 to approve the "Can Spam" bill. The measure outlaws the shadiest techniques used by many of the Internet's most prolific e-mailers, who pump out millions of unsolicited messages daily. Despite the vote, senators cautioned computer users not to expect an immediate end to overflowing inboxes. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=36196210 ------------------------------ From: Eric Friedebach Subject: Qwest CEO Says He Has no Plans to Leave Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2003 22:06:44 -0500 Organization: Muddy Paw Prints On The Corvette CHICAGO (Reuters) - Qwest Communications International Inc. Chief Executive Richard Notebaert denied any interest in the top job at Motorola Inc. Notebaert, in a Monday morning e-mail to the telephone company's employees, said he plans to see the turnaround of the No. 4 U.S. telephone company through to the end. Reuters obtained a copy of the message Wednesday. "I am committed to this company, to each of you and to the customers we serve," he said. "And I am not leaving." http://www.forbes.com/newswire/2003/10/22/rtr1119044.html Eric Friedebach ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Beware: Vonage and Local Number Transfers - Long Time No See From: no_email_address@hotmail.com (Sara Garland) Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 03:15:25 GMT Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to Mach Yougth by adding: > five or six weeks does seem to be an outragously long time. I faxed in my transfer form on Sept 9th, they sent it to Verizon on Sept 18th, and I'm still waiting for the transfer to go through. Very annoying. ------------------------------ From: Stan Schwartz Subject: Re: Beware: Vonage and Local Number Transfers Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2003 23:20:30 -0400 Organization: what do you want In TELECOM Digest V22 #713, TELECOM Digest Editor noted in reply: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Wasn't Alltel originally just into > long distance service like Sprint and MCI? Apparently now they are > into local service just like Sprint? PAT] Back in the '80's and early '90's, there was a long distance company called 'Allnet' (I believe they used CIC 10444 at the time). Alltel is the result of one company buying out independent rural telcos on the outskirts of major cities in the East and Midwest. In the last few years, they've focused more on building out their wireless service more than servicing their existing wireline franchise. From their own propoganda sheet, Alltel is: . Nation's 7th largest wireless company with 7.9 million customers. . Nation's 6th largest local telephone company with approximately 3.1 million customers. The also have a major roaming agreement with Verizon Wireless, which was hammered out at the time of the BellAtlantic-GTE merger. They are the third major CDMA carrier in the US, after Verizon Wireless and Sprint PCS. -Stan ------------------------------ Subject: Re: The NANP is 56-Years-Old Wednesday, October 22 Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2003 10:29:38 EDT From: msb@vex.net (Mark Brader) Thanks to Mark Cuccia for that excellent writeup. One detail. In describing the original codes of 1947, Mark writes: > (902 originally for all of the Maritime Provinces: NB, NS, PEI, NF/LB) Did the dialing plan actually include Newfoundland as well as Canada and the US at that time, or is this a mistake for "NB, NS, PEI"? Mark Brader, Toronto | "Anyone who can handle a needle convincingly can make msb@vex.net | us see a thread which is not there." --E.H. Gombrich My text in this article is in the public domain. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2003 20:46:45 -0600 From: jared.NospaM@netspace.net.au (jared) Subject: Re: The NANP is 56-Years-Old Wednesday, October 22 Once Lockheed Martin began to acquire Comsat, it was moving into telecommunications and so, reportedly, believed or it was suggested it should no longer run NANPA. > It was decided that Bellcore would divest itself of the NANPA > functions, to be turned over to a non-governmental impartial > third-party entity. There were several hearings and such over at > least five years time, and by 1998, Lockheed-Martin took over the > NANPA functions from Bellcore. Also, Bellcore was about to be sold by > the regional Bell holding corporations over to a new owner, SAIC, and > the name of Bellcore was changed to Telcordia in 1999. > Also, Lockheed-Martin announced at the end of 1998, just less than a > year of handling the NANPA, that it wanted "out" of numbering. A year > later, in late 1999, just before 2000, a new entity named "Neustar" > took over the NANPA functions. ------------------------------ From: Wesrock@aol.com Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2003 20:26:02 EDT Subject: Re: The NANP is 56 Years Old Wednesday, October 22 Reply-To: telecom-news@yahoogroups.com In a message dated 10/21/03 11:37:09 PM Central Daylight Time, > For the Englewood NJ Customer Long Distance Dialing trials, calls to > Oakland (and east Bay metro area points) were reached with NPA > 415. However, calls to San Francisco (and west Bay and > north-of-the-Golden Gate points that were dialable) were reached with > a different 318 area code. I think that Operators dialed 415 for the > entire region. I think that some of this may have had to do with the > number of digits that could be analyzed and translated up-front in the > #5XB machines in Englewood and Teaneck NJ. I think that for discrete > routing to Oakland toll vs. San Francisco toll, the machines couldn't > translate all six-digits of the NPA-NNX code, but only three-digits of > "just" the NPA code. Thus the use of 318 indicated San Francisco > "up-front" while the use of 415 indicated Oakland "up-front". This may be consistent with the Waxahachie, Texas, #5XB office. I was involved in the planning and cutover of the #5XB there, the second office in then-Southwestern Bell territory to have customer DDD. My part was the advertising, public relations and publicity. One thing everyone agreed on was that none of the printed or published information should include Italy, Texas, as a dialable point. Italy is 15 miles down the road from Waxahachie, and homed on Waxahachie. The reason? The Waxahachie office was equipped for only three-digit translation, and a DDD call to Italy from Waxahachie would go into the 4A in Dallas (30 miles), then be back-hauled through Waxahachie to Italy. Circuits were still in short supply and expensive in the 1950s, and going an extra 30 miles to Dallas and then 30 miles back through Waxahachie would be wasteful. There was nothing, of course, to prevent customers from dialing Italy that way, but we surely didn't want to tell them they could. Not many customers were knowledgable about DDD in those days, and dependent on the telco instructions. Wes Leatherock wesrock@aol.com wleathus@yahoo.com ------------------------------ From: Joey Lindstrom Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2003 10:18:21 -0600 Subject: Re: Can Cable Fast-Forward Past TiVo? Reply-To: joey@telussucks.info On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 23:38:58 EDT, COTTP wrote: > In any case, there was a little IR dongle that came from the General > Instrument cable box and used a suction cup to position it near the > VCR's IR receiver. Thing is, it never worked with my Phillips > VCR. From what I heard it didn't work with many VCR's at all. Have the > same problem with my Pacific Neo-Tek OmniRemote for the Palm > platform. Set it up with an IR receiver hooked to a scope - signal is > just barely there and doesn't have a very wide angle. Yet the company > still markets this piece of crap same as always. > I modified mine with a lens that widens the beam. Seems to work ok now. My Bell ExpressVu 3100 and 6000 satellite receivers (which, I understand, have equivalent Dish Network model numbers) have kinda the same feature, except no dongle required. They send out a powerful IR signal that can bounce off the far wall and back into the IR receiver on the VCR. Works like a charm here -- all I hadda do was enter the appropriate VCR model code into the receiver and I was up and running. ------------------------------ From: George Mitchell Subject: Re: What on Earth is This? Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2003 11:21:50 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I tried it again also, this time from > the comfort and safety of my cell phone. What the man read back to me > was 'two hundred, seventeen, seven, one, one, three, two, two, eight, > two, oh, six'. No mention of the pound signs or the final 02 on > the end. Then the rapid tones. When I tried it from my Vonage phone > (which always registers the SFCA 415 number on caller ID) the > response I got was 'two hundred, twenty-nine', then the rest of the > above number, again, with no mention of the final 02, and the tones. > When I tried it again from Vonage, it was 'two hundred, twenty-seven', > etc. PAT] That initial part (the number in the low two hundreds) sound like it could be a propagation delay measurement of some sort in milliseconds. -- George Mitchell (obfuscated email address) ------------------------------ From: Geoffrey Welsh Subject: Re: A Game Player That Happens to Be a Phone Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2003 19:41:19 -0400 Organization: Bell Sympatico Monty Solomon quoted from the New York Times: > The world is awash in cellphones that deliver only black-and-white > video games that are as archaic looking as Pong. > [...] > Oh, and by the way, it can make phone calls. Could somebody please explain to me why forced combinations like this are selling, while seemingly natural combinations like callphone/PDA (a la Handspring Treo) or cellphone with attachment for a laptop (why have a separate card for it if you already have the cellphone?!?) seem to be niche markets? Better yet, can we not make the connectivity plans more affordable? Geoffrey Welsh This address is not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Unsolicited bulk mail is spam, no matter what regulations (real or imagined) it complies with! We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. ------------------------------ From: jbl Subject: Re: Dell Turns on Satellite TV Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2003 17:28:38 -0700 Organization: On the desert Reply-To: jbl@spamblocked.com In , Monty Solomon wrote: > By John G. Spooner > Staff Writer, CNET News.com > Beginning next month, the Round Rock, Texas, PC maker plans to sell > hardware and to sign up subscribers for DirecTV's digital video > recording (DVR) service, a Dell representative said. A DirecTV > representative confirmed that the two companies are discussing a deal. No big surprise -- DTV has had a deal with Dell promote some special deal to DTV customers on a dedicated advertising channel (I don't know if it's still going on). I wasn't in the market so I didn't go over to see if it was a decent deal. /JBL ------------------------------ 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 fifty 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. If you donate at least fifty dollars per year we will send you our two-CD set of the entire Telecom Archives; this is every word published in this Digest since our beginning in 1981. 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 #714 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Oct 23 19:15:56 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id h9NNFtp27647; Thu, 23 Oct 2003 19:15:56 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 19:15:56 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200310232315.h9NNFtp27647@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 #715 TELECOM Digest Thu, 23 Oct 2003 19:16:00 EDT Volume 22 : Issue 715 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Victoria's Secret to Pay up For Poor Panty Privacy (Monty Solomon) Number Portability May Spark Wireless Migration (Monty Solomon) Venture to Offer ID Card for Use at Security Checks (Monty Solomon) Spam is Starting to Hurt Email (Monty Solomon) AT&T PrePaid Web Cents Technology (Monty Solomon) AT&T Wireless Signs Number Porting Agreement with T-Mobile (M Solomon) U.S. Cellular Reports Certain Operating Data for Third Quarter (Solomon) Lucent Technologies Reports Results for Fourth Quarter (Monty Solomon) Students Fight E-Vote Firm (Monty Solomon) T-Mobile USA Signs Pacts with All Other Major Carriers (Monty Solomon) T-Mobile USA Deploys New 'Pico-Station' Technology (Monty Solomon) Re: NANP is 56 Years Old (Mark J. Cuccia) Re: Senate Votes for Tough Limits on Spam (Ed Clarke) Re: Senate Votes for Tough Limits on Spam (Phil Earnhardt) 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. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk is definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 03:05:10 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Victoria's Secret to Pay Up For Poor Panty Privacy By Ashlee Vance in Chicago New York Attorney General Eliot Sptizer has sorted through Victoria Secret's dirty undies and is set to doll out a $50,000 fine to the company for online privacy violations. Spitzer has spent several months looking into charges that Victoria's Secret Web site allowed shoppers to take a peek at other customers' orders. An apparent flaw in the lingerie giant's ordering system made it possible to tweak customer ID numbers and see what kind of knickers people were buying -- a clear violation of Victoria's Secret online privacy policy. The New York AG and Victoria's Secret reached a settlement on Monday, according to the New York Times . Jason Sudowski of Niantic, Connecticut was looking for a nice matching bra and undies set for his loved one when he discovered the panty raid flaw. He reported the incident to a customer service representative that dutifully told him to shove off. http://theregister.com/content/6/33504.html http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/21/technology/21priv.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 03:10:47 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Number Portability May Spark Wireless Migration CHICAGO, Oct 23 (Reuters) - About one in five U.S. wireless subscribers will change carriers in the next year after a new rule goes into effect allowing them to keep their telephone numbers when switching providers, according to a survey released on Thursday. The survey also found that about 42 percent of consumers are aware of the so-called number portability rule, more than twice the 20 percent level industry observers have estimated. The findings were detailed in a report by communications consulting firm The Management Network Group (TMNG), which conducted a survey of more than 1,000 respondents in September. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=36198333 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 03:16:47 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Venture to Offer ID Card for Use at Security Checks By JOHN SCHWARTZ Americans hate to wait. But will they pay -- and submit to security screenings and even high-technology fingerprinting -- to avoid the long lines snaking behind checkpoints in airports, office buildings and sports arenas? Steven Brill is betting that the answer is yes. Mr. Brill, a journalist and entrepreneur, will announce today a new company, Verified Identity Card Inc., which will offer customers an electronic card containing data showing that they are not on terrorism watch lists and do not have certain felony convictions on their records. If businesses, airports and government agencies sign on to the plan and put Verified's card readers at security checkpoints, cardholders would be able to zip through, avoiding the most thorough searches. Mr. Brill, who created CourtTV and The American Lawyer and Brill's Content magazines, joins a wave of companies hoping to fill a need and make a profit as government agencies and businesses scramble to shore up defenses against terrorism. The card, he said, could serve as a more palatable alternative to a government-mandated national ID card, which is opposed by privacy advocates and the Bush administration. http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/23/technology/23secu.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 09:03:09 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Spam is Starting to Hurt Email WASHINGTON (October 22, 2003) -- The recent explosion of email spam is beginning to take its toll on the Internet world. A new nationwide survey shows that 25% of America's email users say they are using email less because of spam. Within that group, most say that spam has reduced their overall use of email in a big way. Further, more than half of email users say that spam has made them less trusting of email in general. One of their fears is that legitimate emails might be turned away by filters designed to stop spam. Another is that they'll simply miss incoming email from friends, family, or colleagues amid the clutter of spam in their inboxes. A new report entitled "Spam: Hurting email and degrading the Internet environment," by the Pew Internet & American Life Project, includes scores of stories gathered in a Web-survey by the Washington-based Telecommunications Research & Action Center about how spam has affected people's experience with email and changed their views about the value of email. http://www.pewinternet.org/releases/release.asp?id=67 Spam: How it is hurting email and degrading life on the Internet http://www.pewinternet.org/reports/toc.asp?Report=102 http://www.pewinternet.org/reports/pdfs/PIP_Spam_Report.pdf Questionnaire http://www.pewinternet.org/reports/pdfs/PIP_Spam_Topline.pdf ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 09:17:14 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: AT&T PrePaid Web Cents Technology World's Largest Retailer, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Now Offers Disney Online, SportsLine.com, Shockwave.com and Cellus USA Specialty Cards MORRISTOWN, N.J., Oct. 23 /PRNewswire/ -- AT&T today announced that Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. will now carry specialty cards with select online digital content from various providers, using AT&T PrePaid Web Cents(R) technology. All Wal-Mart stores will carry specialty-content cards from Cellus USA, Disney Online, Shockwave.com and SportsLine.com, with more specialty-content cards to come in the future. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=36203958 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 09:18:51 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: AT&T Wireless Signs Number Porting Agreement with T-Mobile REDMOND, Wash., Oct. 23 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- AT&T Wireless today announced that it has signed an agreement with T-Mobile USA, Inc. detailing how the two carriers will port customers' phone numbers between them once local number portability takes effect on November 24, 2003. After that time, wireless customers in the nation's largest 100 markets will generally be able to take their phone numbers with them when they switch wireless carriers. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=36203466 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 01:08:59 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: U.S. Cellular Reports Certain Operating Data for Third Quarter; CHICAGO, Oct. 22 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- United States Cellular Corporation (Amex: USM) reported service revenues of $628.4 million for the third quarter of 2003, up 12% from $561.2 million in the comparable period a year ago. The company recorded operating income of $97 million during the quarter, an increase of 55% from the third quarter of 2002. The company's results include operations through July 31, 2003 of markets included in the August 1, 2003 exchange of assets with AT&T Wireless (NYSE:AWE). Year-over-year comparisons are also affected by the acquisition of the company's Chicago operations on August 7, 2002. Third quarter 2002 results only include the operating results of the Chicago operations subsequent to that date. Third Quarter Highlights: -- Customer units totaled 4,268,000, an 8% increase from 3,943,000 customers one year earlier. During the quarter, 141,000 customer units were transferred to AWE related to the exchange transaction. -- Net customer unit activations from distribution channels totaled 66,000 during the quarter, compared to 76,000 activations for the same quarter of 2002. -- For the quarter, the company recorded postpay churn of 1.6%, favorable to industry averages. -- Average monthly retail service revenue per customer increased 2% year-over-year in the quarter to $39.57, compared to $38.95 in the same period a year ago. President's Comments - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=36180296 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 01:09:58 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Lucent Technologies Reports Results for Fourth Quarter and Year * Records profitable quarter, with net income of 2 cents per share * Generates positive operating cash flow of $145 million * Posts revenues of $2.03 billion for the quarter, an increase of 3 percent sequentially MURRAY HILL, N.J., Oct. 22 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Lucent Technologies (NYSE:LU) today reported results for the fourth quarter and year end of fiscal 2003, which ended Sept. 30, 2003, in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP). The company reported its first profitable quarter since March 2000, posting net income for the quarter that was $99 million or 2 cents per share(1). These results compare with a net loss of $254 million or 7 cents per share(2) in the third quarter of fiscal 2003 and a net loss of $2.81 billion or 84 cents per share(2) in the year-ago quarter. The company recorded revenues of $2.03 billion in the quarter, which is an increase of 3 percent from the $1.96 billion in revenues for the third quarter of fiscal 2003. The company recorded $2.28 billion in revenues in the year-ago quarter. The fourth quarter's earnings per share included the negative impact of charges associated with the reversal of certain previously recognized income tax benefits, an asset impairment charge related to capitalized UMTS software development costs, and the revaluation of warrants that are expected to be issued as part of Lucent's global settlement of shareowner litigation, all of which were more than offset by the positive impact from bad debt and customer financing recoveries, a net reduction of reserves for certain business restructuring actions, and certain other items, including certain adjustments to employee expenses as well as customer and supplier credits. The net effect of these charges and benefits was a favorable impact of about 2 cents per share on the fourth quarter's results(2). For the fiscal year, Lucent reported revenues of $8.5 billion compared with $12.3 billion in fiscal 2002. The net loss was $770 million or 29 cents per share during fiscal 2003, compared with a net loss of $11.8 billion or $3.49 per share during fiscal 2002. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=36178984 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 01:39:12 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Students Fight E-Vote Firm By Kim Zetter A group of students at Swarthmore College in Pennsylvania has launched an "electronic civil disobedience" campaign against voting machine maker Diebold Election Systems. The students are protesting efforts by Diebold to prevent them and other website owners from linking to some 15,000 internal company memos that reveal the company was aware of security flaws in its e-voting software for years but sold the faulty systems to states anyway. The memos were leaked to voting activists and journalists by a hacker who broke into an insecure Diebold FTP server in March. http://www.wired.com/news/business/0,1367,60927,00.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 09:26:39 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: T-Mobile USA Signs Pacts with All Other Major Carriers Now Easier for Consumers and Business People to GET MORE With T-Mobile BELLEVUE, Wash.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Oct. 23, 2003-- T-Mobile USA Signs Pacts with All Other Major Carriers to Ease Switching Process: Consumers Won't Have to Worry About Losing Current Number T-Mobile USA, Inc., the nation's fastest growing major wireless services provider, took an important step today in preparation to assist customers of other carriers who want to switch to T-Mobile without losing their phone number. T-Mobile has now completed agreements with AT&T Wireless, Cingular Wireless, Nextel Communications, Sprint PCS and Verizon Wireless that allow customers of each carrier to switch with T-Mobile in an efficient manner as of Nov. 24. These agreements facilitate the implementation of Wireless Local Number Portability (WLNP) in accordance with the Federal Communications Commission's mandate and guidelines for WLNP and in a customer friendly and consistent manner. T-Mobile's objective is to make it possible for customers of all carriers to conveniently and easily switch or "port" their number from one carrier to another. These agreements are another important step in a series of preparations T-Mobile is making for porting. In addition, T-Mobile has created a dedicated porting call center; trained thousands of retail store and customer service employees to assist potential customers with tips that make switching to T-Mobile simple; and has provided porting information and tips on the t-mobile.com website. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=36202754 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 09:31:48 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: T-Mobile USA Deploys New 'Pico-Station' Technology T-Mobile USA Deploys New 'Pico-Station' Technology, Makes Other Enhancements As Part of Continuous Coverage Quality Effort; Best Value in Wireless Keeps Getting Better - Oct 23, 2003 09:07 AM (BusinessWire) BELLEVUE, Wash.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Oct. 23, 2003--Capping off a year in which T-Mobile USA has shifted its focus from building out major new markets to further enhancing its quality in areas of existing coverage, the company announced today a series of related quality enhancement efforts -- including signing on as the first carrier to use "pico-basestations" to improve coverage inside buildings. The new technology -- the world's smallest basestation, the nanoBTS -- has been developed by ip.access based in Cambridge, England, a subsidiary of TTP Communications plc. It uses a building's existing Ethernet infrastructure to enable the nanoBTS stations to deliver service in a "pico-point" to where the service is actually needed. Deployment will begin this year. These pico-basestations join a long list of other planned enhancements T-Mobile is currently making to its nationwide GSM network: - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=36204201 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 08:27:20 -0500 From: Mark J. Cuccia Subject: Re: NANP is 56 Years Old Mark Brader (Toronto ON Canada) wrote: > Thanks to Mark Cuccia for that excellent writeup. And thank YOU! > One detail. In describing the original codes of 1947, > Mark (Cuccia) writes: >> (902 originally for all of the Maritime Provinces: NB, NS, PEI, NF/LB) > Did the dialing plan actually include Newfoundland as well as Canada > and the US at that time, or is this a mistake for "NB, NS, PEI"? I really don't have any thing "specific" one way or the other regarding Newfoundland/Labrador. I do know that in October 1947, Newfoundland/Labrador was not really part of Canada, jurisdictionally/politically, but rather still officially part of the UK's colonies or territories or whatever (I don't really know all of the minute details on such ... and it is also said that the Channel Islands of Guernsey and Jersey, as well as the Isle of Man, are not really part of the UK "itself", but I don't want to get into that right now!). Anyhow, it wasn't until 1949 (?) when Newfoundland/Labrador became officially part of Canada as a province. However, I would "assume" that because of the close proximity, and other infrastructure arrangements, it was probably intended that Newfoundland (including Labrador) be included in the US/Canada telephone numbering plan from the very beginning. Even though it wasn't until 1949(?) when Newfoundland became part of Canada, wasn't it "known" in 1947 that it was a possibility "in the works"? Also, while the NANP's Area Codes as we have come to know them, was "defined" in October 1947, it was still many years before most customers (and even some operators) could actually *DIAL* to MOST customers throughout the US/Canada. There was *NOT* any customer dialing with area codes until the trials at Englewood/Teaneck NJ starting 10-November-1951. (See my previous archived reports and also posts in back-issues, regarding Englewood NJ 1951). I don't think that Operators could begin using *area codes* until January 1949. Even then, only *certain* originating locations could "dial" *certain* destination locations. Back to the Maritime Provinces ... I have seen maps dated in the early 1950s of the US/Canada showing NPA codes, and 902 is shown as "extending" to include NF/LB. It wasn't until sometime in 1955 when New Brunswick and Newfoundland (including Labrador) was "split" from 902, the new code being 506 for *BOTH* NB and NF/LB. NS/PEI retained 902, both *still* "share" 902. In 1962, NF/LB broke off from 506 into the new 709 area code. NB "alone" does still retain 506. FINALLY, Neustar-NANPA's website has the following specific pages which go into great detail on the current/future (and recent past) of the NANP: http://www.nanpa.com/home/index.html http://www.nanpa.com/press_releases/index.html http://www.nanpa.com/planning_letters/planning_letters_2003.html http://www.nanpa.com/area_codes/ http://docs.nanpa.com/reports/ http://www.nanpa.com/relief_planning/index.cfm http://www.nanpa.com/relief_planning/nruf_cover.html http://www.nanpa.com/number_resource_info/adm_state.html http://www.nanpa.com/number_resource_info/co_assignment_activity.html http://www.nanpa.com/number_resource_info/co_code_assignments1.html Neustar also does "thousands-block" assignments, portability, and other technical standards some involving the Internet: http://www.nationalpooling.com/ http://www.npac.com/ http://www.neustar.com/ SAIC-Telcordia Traffic Routing Administration: http://www.trainfo.com/products_services/tra/index.html ATIS (Alliance for Telecommunications Industry Solutions): http://www.atis.org/home.htm SAIC-CNA (Canadian Numbering Administration): http://www.cnac.ca/ And there are NUMEROUS other organizations involved with the NANP in one way or another. The Telcordia-TRA site has a great "links" page to various ohter industry/regaulatory resources. Mark J. Cuccia mcuccia@tulane.edu New Orleans LA USA ------------------------------ From: Ed Clarke Subject: Re: Senate Votes for Tough Limits on Spam Date: 23 Oct 2003 11:32:41 GMT Organization: Ciliophora Associates, Inc. Reply-To: clarke@cilia.org In article , Monty Solomon wrote: > By TED BRIDIS AP Technology Writer > WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Senate agreed Wednesday to impose tough new > limits on the irritating but lucrative business of e-mailing unwanted > sales pitches to millions of people in the United States. > Internet users have complained about mailboxes clogged with offers for > prescription drugs, cheap loans, herbal remedies and pornography. > The Senate voted 97-0 to approve the "Can Spam" bill. The measure > outlaws the shadiest techniques used by many of the Internet's most > prolific e-mailers, who pump out millions of unsolicited messages > daily. Despite the vote, senators cautioned computer users not to > expect an immediate end to overflowing inboxes. > - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=36196210 It's an opt-out plan. This means that every person and/or company on the planet can send you at least one piece of spam. Furthermore it tends to make people think that unsolicited bulk email is legitimate. UBE (spam) is not legitimate and neither are the people who send it nor the people who voted for this bill. The Pandora Project is starting to look less insane all the time. http://www.sitetamer.com/strads/spam/pandora.html ------------------------------ From: Phil Earnhardt Subject: Re: Senate Votes for Tough Limits on Spam Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 07:59:24 -0600 Organization: Kaos OnLine Coalition On Wed, 22 Oct 2003 23:14:00 -0400, Monty Solomon wrote: > The Senate voted 97-0 to approve the "Can Spam" bill. The measure > outlaws the shadiest techniques used by many of the Internet's most > prolific e-mailers, who pump out millions of unsolicited messages > daily. Despite the vote, senators cautioned computer users not to > expect an immediate end to overflowing inboxes. The bill, as proposed, would still allow "legitimate" e-mailers to send you one message, unsolicited. Recipients would have to explicitly reply to the message to stop getting messages from that one business. The onus would be on the recipient to track any abuses of this system -- similar to the telephone regs we had before the "do not call" lists. Ugh. > - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=36196210 "One amendment, by Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., authorizes the Federal Trade Commission to establish a do-not-spam list, similar to the agency's popular do-not-call list of telephone numbers that marketers are supposed not to call. The Direct Marketing Association opposes that amendment and has described it as 'a bad idea that is never going to work.' " Of course it could work. It could even work far better than a telephone "do not call" list if domain-wide registrations could be entered in the list. This would have the great effect of stopping e-mail from those "legitimate sources" without compromising the privacy of individual users. One other thing that's perplexing to me: if the Can Spam bill were passed, it's trivial for mail readers to filter the advertisements from "legitimate" e-mailers. How would these advertisers ever have a clue what percentage of their advertisements were actually read by readers? Why would "legitimate" e-mailers pay for such a service when they have no idea whatsoever what they're getting for their money? What exactly is the point of having billions and billions of "legitimate e-mail advertisements" being sent just to be silently and automatically blackholed when they arrive at their destination? Does that really serve anybody? --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 fifty 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. If you donate at least fifty dollars per year we will send you our two-CD set of the entire Telecom Archives; this is every word published in this Digest since our beginning in 1981. 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 #715 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Oct 23 21:22:26 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id h9O1MPP28401; Thu, 23 Oct 2003 21:22:26 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 21:22:26 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200310240122.h9O1MPP28401@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 #716 TELECOM Digest Thu, 23 Oct 2003 21:22:00 EDT Volume 22 : Issue 716 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Filings in FCC Rulemakings was FYI on Unlicensed Spectrum (Sullivan) 2003 Foreign Telecommunications Carriers (Brisk Attivo) Tekelec Deploys SanteraOne Switches in Canada (John Wise) Re: iTunes For Windows May Face New Piracy Threat (JDS) Re: My New Telecom Discussion Group (JDS) Re: NANP is 56 Years Old (Mark Brader) Dallas Phone Service - SBC versus Comcast? (No-Name) Re: Becoming A Switch Technician (Chip G) Re: Beware: Vonage and Local Number Transfers (Michael D. Sullivan) Re: Verizon Charges for Everything Lately (jbl) Apology - Well, Sorta (Joey Lindstrom) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk is definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Michael D. Sullivan Subject: Re: Filings in FCC Rulemakings was: FYI on Unlicensed Spectrum Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 05:53:53 GMT A few additional suggestions from an FCC practitioner for those who may be interested in filing comments in FCC rulemakings of interest, prompted by a posting by Marcus Didius Falco on 10/21/03 (not specific to the docket on allocation of unlicensed spectrum in 2.5 GHz range, Docket No. WT 03-66 NPRM, so discussion of the docket is omitted.) > A Style Guide For Posting To The FCC > Be polite - The staff at the FCC are real people with human > feelings. They do not appreciate hearing that they are morons or > losers or corrupt servants of special interests. If you abuse > them, they will disregard your comments. That's just human nature. Absolutely correct. If you are abusive or dismissive, they will treat you like a crackpot (or crackhead) and ignore your filing. Be polite, even if you are absolutely certain that they are morons, losers, or corrupt. Do not direct your comments at personalities (e.g., particular Commissioners, Bureau Chiefs, or staffers); if you try to flatter particular persons, others may feel slighted, and if you insult or "dis" particular persons, they will feel slighted, and in either case you won't gain points for persuasiveness. > Explain yourself - Many of the people who will read your comments are > not engineers or are engineers unfamiliar with the specific issues you > describe. If you assume an audience generally familiar with the issues > but with no technical training, you will probably hit the right > level. At the same time, do include complex technical or economic > information where you have to. This is important in building the > record. If you have lengthy technical comments, try having a plain > English summary at the beginning followed by technical comments. Make > sure you explain all acronyms. None of the Commissioners are engineers, and their personal staff assistants are virtually always lawyers, not engineers. Few of the top- level staff decisionmakers (bureau and office chiefs and deputy chiefs) are engineers. The only top-level official who is an engineer is Ed Thomas, the Chief of the Office of Engineering and Technology. Many of his staff are engineers. If the docket (like this one) has "WT" in its docket number, primary responsibility for it falls on the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, which is typically not headed by an engineer (I believe its Chief, John Muleta, is a lawyer). The Wireless Bureau has numerous engineers, but the drafts of FCC decisions are usually written principally by lawyers, with substantial input by engineers. The tentative policy decisions will typically be made by lawyers and economists with input from engineers. The Office of Engineering and Technology will provide advice and input to both the staffers drafting the item and the Commissioners' offices. Assuming that your comments are actually reviewed by any of the people responsible for making policy recommendations, it would be best to write them so that they could be understood by an educated person without an engineering background who is familiar with very basic telecommunications engineering concepts. Pitch your position as though you were speaking to a CEO of a telecom company who is more familiar with Wall Street and Capitol Hill than IEEE standards. The reader can be assumed to know what Wi-Fi and MMDS are, but it would be unwise to assume that the reader will understand how a technology such as QTAM-WE (quadrature tertiary amplitude modulation -- whizbang enhanced) or ALOHA (this is a real acronym, but I can't remember what it stands for) works. Go ahead and use the acronym, but explain it in 9th grade terms (e.g., "This provides 166.7 users per square mile with 1 Mbps bandwidth up and down in spectrum that currently accommodates 7 walkie-talkies."). Bear in mind that many FCC staffers are not intimately familiar with cutting-edge technologies. They need to have the details explained. For example, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau staff are familiar with the technologies that they regulate (e.g., cellular, MMDS) to the extent necessary to regulate them. In other words, they know about the RF characteristics of the existing service and about where the industry is regarding policies like CALEA, E911, etc. They don't necessarily know what is on the front or back burner at a particular manufacturer. Some may, but the staffer working on your rulemaking may not. Educate him or her. > Be personal - The FCC needs to hear about real world experiences in > the field. Even if you are just a general supporter of unlicensed > access services such as wi-fi, try to make the comments personal. In > particular, if you are a business, discuss the economic impact of > unlicensed access and how you would benefit from expanding unlicensed > access. Extremely important. > While there is no page limit (some filings are hundreds of pages > long), try to stick to essentials. A shorter document will be given > preferential treatment by staffers than a longer one that says the > same thing. This is simply human nature. True within limits. A filing that is just a page or two (double spaced) will tend to get blown off. If it's that short, either you aren't providing any information much beyond "I agree" or "I oppose", or you are providing information that is too dense to be understood. Moreover, comments that are very short are simply not taken seriously. > How To File Comments Go to , either directly or by going to , clicking on "E-filing", scrolling down to "Electronic Comment Filing System (ECFS) [main]" and clicking, and then clicking on "Submit a Filing". When entering the docket number, ignore the letters, as Marcus Didius Falco said. (I.e., if the docket number is WT 03-66, enter "03-66" (without the quotes, of course).) > The FCC will accept written comments in Word, WordPerfect, or PDF > format. Use PDF. All filings will be converted to PDF. If you submit in Word or WordPerfect, the FCC will convert it, and the results may not be what you hoped for. There are plenty of filings by law firms and telecom companies with weird symbols, erratic spacing, and aberrant pagination that result from submitting Word or WordPerfect files. The FCC also allows Excel spreadsheets; if you are submitting data files, this is the preferred format. > You can also type in short comments directly to the FCC on its > comments webpage at: > http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/upload_v2.cgi. In other words, > anyone with Internet access can file a comment just by going to > the FCC's webpage and typing in the window provided (scroll down > to the bottom of the page). While you have the option of typing in "short comments" directly, instead of uploading a file, this should be avoided if you want your comments to be taken seriously. If an FCC staffer wants to check out the "significant" comments, and there are 25 uploaded comments and 2500 "short comments", the latter will be ignored for the most part. I wouldn't count on any more than an intern or law clerk checking them for a count of pro or con. If you must, for some reason, use this vehicle for your comments, put the docket number and title at the top of your comments, in the best reproduction of a formal comment you can muster, and include your full name and address information at the bottom of the entry. When these "short comments" are printed out or viewed, there is no identifying information beyond what you typed. > If you write comments, you should include at the top the name of the > proceeding and the Docket No. You must also include in the written > comments the date of filing, your name, and an address where you can > be reached. You do not need to be a lawyer, or even a U.S. citizen, to > write or file comments before the FCC. To make your comments most effective, make them look like "real" comments. Download a few comments in your proceeding or another similar proceeding by companies in the industry. Follow the general style of these comments in order to be taken seriously. Also, if your comments are over 10 pages, there must be a table of contents and summary (and a cover page, although this isn't in the rules). Michael D. Sullivan Bethesda, MD, USA Delete nospam from my address and it won't work. ------------------------------ From: brisk@netins.net (Brisk Attivo) Subject: 2003 Foreign Telecommunications Carriers Date: 23 Oct 2003 03:27:23 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com (COMMENT:I created this list mostly because of my own curiousity about foreign telecommunications, but also because I discovered in my own curiousity that there is not much information on the subject and the need for it was in demand. This is my first time publicly posting the list, so any comments or criticism is appreciated. Hope some people find this useful or interesting:) Foreign Telecommunications Carriers Brisk Attivo (brisk@netins.net) October 20th, 2003 This list is meant to be a reference for the current telecomm- unications carriers for all foreign countries. The countries selected for this list have been chosen because they are recognized by the CIA World Factbook. The telecommunications carriers selected have been chosen because they are the most economically dominant in their associated countries, or because they are state-owned, government- owned, public operators of telecommunications. Information on the telecommunications of some countries -- such as Afghanistan, Iraq, and North Korea -- is limited due to their political instability. Most of this information was found due to help from publications by the FCC (Federal Communications Commission), CIA (Central Intelligence Agency), ITU (International Telecomunications Commission), and Google. Afghanistan - Ministry of Communications Albania - AlbTelecom (Albanian Telecom) Algeria - Algerie Telecom American Samoa - American Samoa TeleCommunications Authority (Samoa Telco) Andorra - Servei de Telecomunicacions d'Andorra (STA) Angola - Angola Telecom Anguilla - Cable & Wireless: Anguilla Antartica - I Bet You Looked At This One First (IBYLATOF) Antuiga and Barbuda - Antigua Public Utilities Authority (APUA) Argentina - Telecom Argentina Armenia - ArmenTel (Armenian Telephone Company) Aruba - SETAR Australia - Telstra Austria - Telekom Austria Azerbaijan - Aztelecom Bahamas - Bahamas Telecommunications Company (BaTelCo) Bahrain - Bahrain Telecommunication Company (Batelco) Bangladesh - Bangladesh Telegraph and Telephone Board Barbados - Cable & Wireless: Barbados Belarus - Beltelecom Belgium - Belgacom Belize - BTL (Belize Telecommunications) Benin - Office des Postes et Télécommunications Bermuda - Bermuda Telephone Company Bhutan - Bhutan Telecom Bolivia - Entel Bosnia and Herzegovina - BH Telecom Botswana - Botswana Telecommunications Corporation Brazil - Telebras British Virgin Islands - Cable & Wireless: British Virgin Islands Brunei - Jabatan Telekom Brunei Bulgaria - Bulgarian Telecommunications Company Burkina Faso - Office national des Telecommunications (ONATEL) Burma/Myanma - Myanma Posts & Telecommunications Burundi - Office National des Télécommunications (Onatel) Cambodia - Ministry of Posts and Telecommunications Cameroon - Intelcam Canada - Telus and Bell Canada Cape Verde - Cabo Verde Telecom Cayman Islands - Cable & Wireless: Cayman Islands Central African Republic - "Societe Centrafricaine des Postes et Telecommunications" (SOCATEL) Chad - La Poste et les Telecommunications Du Tchad Chile - Telefónica Chile (CTC); ENTEL privatised state provider China - China Telecom Columbia - Empresa Nacional de Telecomunicaciones Comoros - Société Nationale des Postes et Télécommunications (SNPT) Congo - SOTELCO Cook Islands - Telecom Cook Islands Costa Rica - Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad (ICE) Cote d'Ivoire - Côte d'Ivoire Telecom (CI-Telecom) Croatia - Hrvatski Telekom Cuba - Empresa de Telecomunicaciones de Cuba SA (ETECSA) Cyprus - Cyprus Telecommunications Authority (CTA) Czech Republic - Ceský Telecom (Czech Telecom) Denmark - TeleDanmark (TLD) Djibouti - Djibouti Telecom (STID) Dominica - Cable & Wireless: Dominca Dominican Republic - La Compañía Dominicana de Teléfonos (CODETEL) East Timor - Timor Telecom Ecuador - Emetel, Andinatel, Pacifictel Egypt - Telecom Egypt El Salvador - Telecom El Salvador Equatorial Guinea - "La Sociedad Anonima de Telecomunicaciones de la Republica de Guinea Ecuatorial" (GETESA) Etritrea - Telecommunication Service of Eritrea (TSE) Estonia - Estonian Telephone Company Ethiopia - Ethiopian Telecommunications Corporation (ETC) Falkland Islands - Cable & Wireless: Falkland Islands Faroe Islands - Faroese Telecom Fiji - Telecom Fiji Finland - Sonera Ltd. France - France Telecom French Guiana - France Telecom French Polynesia - Office des Postes et Télécommunications (OPT) Gabon - Gabon Telecom Gambia - Gambia Telecommunications Company (GAMTEL) Gaza Strip - Ministry of Post and Telecom Georgia - Telecom Georgia Germany - Deutsche Telekom Ghana - Ghana Telecom Gibraltar - Gibraltar Telecommunications International (GIBTEL) Greece - Hellenic Organization of Telecommunications (OTE) Greenland - TELE Greenland A/S Grenada - Cable & Wireless: Grenada Guadeloupe - France Telecom Guam - Guam Telephone Authority (Guamtel) Guatemala - Telecomunicaciones de Guatemala (Telgua) Guernsey - Cable & Wireless: Guernsey Guinea - Societé des Télécomunications de Guinée (SOTELGUI) Guinea Bissau - Guinea Telecom Guyana - Guyana Telephone and Telegraph (GT&T) Haiti - Telecommunications d'Haiti S.A.M. Holy See (Vatican City) - Telecom Italia Honduras - Empresa Hondureña de Telecomunicaciones (HONDUTEL) Hong Kong - Hong Kong Telecom Hungary - Hungarian Telecommunication Co. (MATAV) Iceland - Iceland Telecom (Landssiminn) India - Videsh Sanchar Nigam Ltd (VSNL) Indonesia - PT. Indosat Iran - Iran Telecom (TCI) Iraq - Ministry of Telecommunications Ireland - Eircom Isle of Man - Manx Telecom Israel - Bezeq Italy - Telecom Italia Jamaica - Cable & Wireless: Jamaica Japan - Nippon Telegraph & Telephone Corporation (NTT) Jersey - Jersey Telecom Jordan - Jordan Telecom Kazakhstan - Kazakhtelecom Kenya - Telkom Kenya Kiribati - Telecom Services Kiribati Limited (TSKL) Korea (South) - Korea Telecom Korea (North) - "Ministry of Posts and Telecommunications"; "Cen- tral Telegraph and Telephone Bureau" Kuwait - Ministry of Communications Kyrgyzstan - Kyrgyztelecom Laos - Lao Telecom (LAOTEL) Latvia - Lattelekom Lebanon - Ministry of Telecommunications Lesotho - Telecom Lesotho Liberia - Liberia Telecommunications Corporation (LIBTELCO) Libya - General Post and Telecommunication Company (GPTC) Liechtenstein - Telecom FL Lithuania - Lietuvos Telekomas Luxembourg - Enterprise Des P&T Macau - Companhia de Telecomunicações de Macau (CTM) Macedonia - Makedonski Telekomunikacii Madagascar - Telecom Malagasy (TELMA) Malawi - Malawi Telecommunications Limited (MTL) Malaysia - Telekom Malaysia Maldives - DHIRAAGU Mali - Société des Télécommunications du Mali (SOTELMA) Malta - Maltacom Marshall Islands - National Telecommunications Authority (NTA) Martinique - Outremer Telecom Mauritania - Société Mauritanienne des Télécommunications (MAURITEL) Mauritius - Mauritius Telecom Mayotte - France Telecom Mexico - Telefonos de Mexico (TelMex) Micronesia - FSM Telecommunications Moldova - Moldtelecom Monaco - Monaco Telecom Mongolia - Mongolia Telecom Morocco - Maroc Telecom Mozambique - Telecomunicações de Moçambique (TDM) Myanma - Myanma Posts & Telecommunications Namibia - Telecom Namibia Nauru - Nauru Telecommunications Nepal - Nepal Telecommunications Corporation Netherlands - KPN Telecom Netherlands Antilles - Antelecom N.V. New Caledonia - Office des Postes et Télécommunications (OPT) New Zealand - Telecom New Zealand Limited Nicaragua - ENITEL Niger - Société Nigérienne des Télécommunications (SONITEL) Nigeria - NITEL Niue - Telecom Niue Norfolk Island - Norfolk Telecom North Korea - "Ministry of Posts and Telecommunications"; "Cen- tral Telegraph and Telephone Bureau" Northern Mariana Islands - Verizon Pacifica Norway - Telenor Oman - Oman Telecommunications Company (OmanTel) Pakistan - Pakistan Telecommunication Company Limited (PCTL) Palau - Palau National Communications Corporation (PNCC) Palestinian Territory - PALTEL Panama - Cable & Wireless: Panama Papua New Guinea - Telikom PNG Limited Paraguay - Copaco S.A. Peru - Telefónica del Perú Philippines - Philippine Long Distance Telephone Company (PLDT) Poland - Telekomunikacja Polska SA Portugal - Portugal Telecom Puerto Rico - Puerto Rico Telephone (PRT) Qatar - Qatar Telecom (Q-TEL) Reunion - France Telecom Romania - Romtelecom Russia - Rostelecom Rwanda - RwandaTel SA Saint Helena - Cable & Wireless: Saint Helena Saint Kitts and Nevis - Cable & Wireless: St Kitts & Nevis Saint Lucia - Cable & Wireless: St. Lucia Saint Vincent and Grenadines - "Cable & Wireless: Saint Vincent and the Grenadines" San Marino - Telecom Italia Sao Tome and Principe - Companhia Santomense de Telecomunicações (CST) Saudi Arabia - Saudi Telecom (STC) Senegal - SONATEL Serbia and Montenegro - Telekom Srbija Seychelles - Cable & Wireless: Seychelles Singapore - SingTel Slovakia - Slovenske Telekomunikacie Slovenia - Telekom Slovenije Solomon Islands - Solomon Telekom Company Ltd. Somalia - al-Barakaat South Africa - Telkom SA Limited South Korea - Korea Telecom Spain - Telefonica Sri Lanka - Sri Lanka Telecom Sudan - Sudan Telecom (Sudatel) Suriname - Telesur Svalbard - Telenor Swaziland - Swaziland Posts and Telecommunications Corporation (SPTC) Sweden - Telia Switzerland - Swisscom Syria - Syrian Telecomunications Establishment (STE) Taiwan - Chunghwa Telecom Tajikistan - Tajiktelecom Tanzania - Tanzania Telecommunication Company Limited (TTCL) Thailand - Telephone Organization of Thailand (TOT) Togo - Togo Telecom Tokelau - Telecommunications Tokelau Corporation (TeleTok) Tonga - Cable & Wireless: Tonga Trinidad and Tobago - "Telecommunications Services of Trinidad and Tobago" (TSTT) Tunisia - Tunisie Telecom (TUNTEL) Turkey - Turk Telekomunikasyon AS Turkmenistan - Turkmentelecom Turks and Caicos Islands: Cable & Wireless: Turks and Caicos Islands Tuvalu - Ministry of Labor, Works and Communications Uganda - Uganda Telecom Ukraine - Utel United Arab Emirates - Etisalat United Kingdom - British Telecom United States - SBC, Qwest, Verizon, and BellSouth (RBOCs) Uruguay - Administración Nacional de Telecomunicaciones (ANTEL) Uzbekistan - Uzbek Telecom Vanautu - Telecom Vanuatu Limited (TVL) Venezuela - Telecom Venezuela Vietnam - Vietnam Post and Telecommunications Corporation (VNPT) US Virgin Islands - US Virgin Islands Telephone Company (VITELCO) Wallis and Futuna - France Telecom West Bank - Bezeq; PALTEL Western Sahara - Maroc Telecom Western Samoa - Samoa Communications Ltd. Yemen - TeleYemen Zambia - Zambia Telecommunications Company Limited (Zamtel) Zimbabwe - TelOne Bibliography: [FCC]Federal Communications Commission. May 6, 1999. "List of Foreign Telecommunications Carriers that are Presumed to Possess Market Power in Foreign Telecommunications Markets" www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/International/Public_Notices/1999/da990809.html [CIA]Central Intelligence Agency. August 1, 2003. "CIA World Factbook" http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/ [ITU]International Telecommunications Union. 2003. "ITU Carrier Codes (ICC)" http://www.itu.int/ITU-T/inr/icc/index.html ------------------------------ Reply-To: From: John Wise Subject: Tekelec Deploys SanteraOne Switches in Canada Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 09:53:45 -0500 Distributel Selects Tekelec's SanteraOne for Local and Long-Distance Switching Installation Helps Canadian Competitive Pioneer Lower Operating Costs Grow New LD Services and Enter Local Telephone Markets PLANO, Texas--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Oct. 22, 2003-- Tekelec (NASDAQ: TKLC), a leading developer of telecommunication products for next-generation fixed, mobile, and packet networks, announced today that Distributel, a Canadian provider of competitive long-distance services, has selected SanteraOne for a now- and next-generation multi-switch deployment. Distributel's purchase of four SanteraOne switches enables the company to eliminate its dependence on telco-based switching. As a result, Distributel anticipates significant network cost reductions and the ability to offer new services. "With the business challenge of becoming a switch-based long-distance carrier, Distributel requires technology that can seamlessly migrate traffic onto new equipment transparently to our subscribers. In addition, we need the ability to offer legacy and next-generation feature-rich services in both the long-distance and local telecommunications markets," said Don Cavanagh, vice president of telecommunications for Distributel. "Distributel selected the SanteraOne product after an extensive review of competing platforms. Key criteria for choosing SanteraOne were the switches' high density and associated economies, the facility for program control of the switches to accommodate customer applications, and Santera's responsiveness and commitment to making its platform work for Distributel. SanteraOne was a clear leader in all of these criteria." Distributel, a 15-year veteran and pioneer in the Canadian competitive long-distance market, is using SanteraOne to consolidate voice traffic from existing switches in two provinces, as well as to migrate voice traffic from leased facilities to its new next-generation Tekelec equipment. A key benefit of SanteraOne is its ability to make these network changes without service interruption or noticeable changes in service for end users. "We're hearing from the marketplace that one of the most critical requirements in the latest network infrastructure is the technology's ability to work with networks right now, as well as those in the future," said Kevin Mitchell, Directing Analyst, Service Provider Networks and Next Gen Voice with Infonetics Research. "As more and more Canadian carriers look to next-gen voice solutions, they're going to need switches that are flexible and scalable supplied by vendors who are willing to work with the carriers to meet their specific needs." Fred Lax, chief executive officer of Tekelec, added, "The amount of subscriber churn in today's Canadian service provider market calls for carriers to be innovative yet loyal to subscribers by making smart technology decisions. By installing SanteraOne switches, Distributel is doing just that. Forward-thinking carriers such as this have helped to make Tekelec a player in the Canadian switching marketplace. Additionally, Distributel now also has the capability to bring this same level of quality and innovation to its new local customers. Distributel's deployment of SanteraOne is representative of Tekelec's commitment to a growing customer base in Canada." About SanteraOne SanteraOne is Tekelec's carrier-grade integrated voice and data switching solution delivering key applications such as full feature IXC Tandem, Class 4/5, PRI Offload, packet/cell switching and Voice over Broadband (VoB) services all on a single platform. SanteraOne has both circuit (TDM) and packet fabrics and supports all of the regulatory requirements of a legacy system (including LNP, CALEA, and E911), enabling a graceful migration from traditional circuit-based networks to next-generation packet-based technology such as ATM, Frame Relay, and IP. SanteraOne is comprised of the Open Feature Exchange (OFX), which includes a media gateway controller, signaling gateway and an applications server; the SanteraOne Broadband Office Exchange (BoX), which is a high-density media gateway; and the SanteraOne element management system (NetScan) that delivers common GUI-based management of the complete system. About Distributel In business since 1988, Distributel Communications is 100 percent Canadian owned and one of the pioneers of the competitive long-distance industry in Canada. Operating in Ontario and Quebec, Distributel provides Canadians with high-quality, competitively priced long-distance services and communications solutions while maintaining an extremely high standard of customer service. About Tekelec Tekelec is a leading developer of telecommunications signaling and switching solutions, packet-telephony infrastructure, network monitoring technology, and value-added applications. Tekelec's innovative solutions are widely deployed in traditional and next-generation wireline and wireless networks and contact centers worldwide. Corporate headquarters are located in Calabasas, Calif., with research and development facilities and sales offices throughout the world. For more information, please visit www.tekelec.com. Tekelec Switching Division Rob Ennis, 972-461-6506 rob.ennis@santera.com or Tekelec Mike Attar, 818-880-7821 michael.attar@tekelec.com ------------------------------ Subject: Re: iTunes For Windows May Face New Piracy Threat From: JDS Organization: SBC http://yahoo.sbc.com Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 17:40:27 GMT > As is taught in most economics courses, prices are generally based on > things like value and supply/demand ratio, not costs... The most important difference between downloaded music and purchased CDs is in what you own. If you buy a CD, you have "rights" in the material you have purchased. These rights are created by laws and common practice, and explicated by courts. For example, you can use a purchased CD forever on any machine that will play it; you can resell it; and you have additional "fair use" rights. When you download a file, you can do only what you agreed to do in the "license agreement" you accepted before you downloaded. Instead of acquiring property rights, you enter into an enforceable license which generally is quite restrictive. So ripping a CD you own so that you can listen to it on your computer or on a portable device is universally accepted as fair use. However, depending on your license agreement, doing what with a downloaded file is likely forbidden. ------------------------------ Subject: Re: My New Telecom Discussion Group From: JDS Organization: SBC http://yahoo.sbc.com Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 17:50:48 GMT To save you a lot of work, you might consider allowing anyone to sign up, but requiring approval of the first message they post. Yahoo Groups Management -> Group settings/Messages -> Posting and Archives/Posting options [Edit] -> Moderation -> New members In this way, anyone can sign up, get daily digests, and read the archives. Their first post will be vetted by you (which will eliminate almost all spammers), and thereafter they'll be full-fledged members unless they resign or are kicked out. Your workload will be reduced to checking first posts from new members. Thanks for all your efforts on behalf of this group. [Lisa Minter's note: The above is almost exactly what I have done. In addition, editor@telecom-digest.org is an 'approved new user' on Yahoo so the Digest gets through without approval, and the Digest is also a user at Yahoo which gets messages as they are posted there. Right now there is a flurry of new members signing up over there (at Yahoo) and having to be approved of course. And would you believe there were thus far today, *85* 'Microsoft Urgent Patch' viruses submitted and subsequently destroyed/deleted. About the same number as arrived here at the Digest, I think. Lisa M.] ------------------------------ Subject: Re: NANP is 56 Years Old Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 14:39:06 EDT From: msb@vex.net (Mark Brader) Mark Cuccia: >>> (902 originally for all of the Maritime Provinces: NB, NS, PEI, NF/LB) Mark Brader: >> Did the dialing plan actually include Newfoundland as well as Canada >> and the US at that time, or is this a mistake for "NB, NS, PEI"? Mark Cuccia: > I really don't have any thing "specific" one way or the other regarding > Newfoundland/Labrador. Well, if you have anything that says the plan was for the US and Canada, that would be an answer. > I do know that in October 1947, Newfoundland/Labrador was not really > part of Canada, jurisdictionally/politically, but rather still > officially part of the UK's colonies or territories or whatever.. I'm not sure what the official term was, but in practice it amounted to dependent status, like a colony. This had been chosen voluntarily after an independent Newfoundland had gone broke in 1934. > (I don't really know all of the minute details on such ... and it is > also said that the Channel Islands of Guernsey and Jersey, as well > as the Isle of Man, are not really part of the UK "itself", They're not; again, they're dependencies. > but I don't want to get into that right now!). Oops. :-0 > Anyhow, it wasn't until 1949 (?) when Newfoundland/Labrador became > officially part of Canada as a province. You say "officially" as though it was always "sort of part of Canada". I think this impression comes entirely from its being part of Canada now. > However, I would "assume" that because of the close proximity, > and other infrastructure arrangements, it was probably intended that > Newfoundland (including Labrador) be included in the US/Canada > telephone numbering plan from the very beginning. I know nothing about shared infrastructure arrangements. > Even though it wasn't until 1949(?) when Newfoundland became part of > Canada, wasn't it "known" in 1947 that it was a possibility "in the > works"? Possibility, yes, but it was a very hot political question at the time. The referendum vote in 1948 was 78,323 to join Canada vs. 71,334 for a return to independent status, so it should be clear that in 1947 no one knew what was going to happen. Mark Brader "After all, it is necessary to get behind Toronto someone before you can stab them in the back." msb@vex.net -- Lynn & Jay, "Yes, Prime Minister" My text in this article is in the public domain. ------------------------------ From: No-Name Subject: Dallas Phone Service - SBC Versus Comcast? Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 10:47:25 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Reply-To: No-Name Looks like I can get either SBC phone service or Comcast in the house I'm buying -- I'll be getting Cable TV and Cable Modem from Comcast (I can't get DSL from SBC) -- is one any better than the other for residential phone service? Thanks. ------------------------------ From: Chip G Subject: Re: Becoming A Switch Technician Organization: Comcast Online Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 04:57:00 GMT Hi Jeremey, You're doing the right thing. Ask as many questions as possible of people in the industry. Keep reading this group and comp.dcom.telecom.tech. Network ... get to know local folks in the business. If your schedule allows, volunteer some time to work with local people... perhaps for a local non-profit that needs some help with their systems. It might even start with things like pulling wires... just get exposed to the technologies and real-life experience. There are many certification programs out there and they are great for book-learning which is always good but if you have the knowledge, certifications, and actual experience, you will be a step above your competition when it comes to finding a job in the field. Keep studying and promote your desire to everyone you know. It is fantastic to get as much general knowledge as possible but eventually you will need to decide a one or more vendors systems that you want to become familiar with. Depending on your interest and the area in which you live, you will likely find that there are certain vendors that are popular in your area for certain things. I think that enterprise communications systems are much more interesting than carrier systems personally so my comments below really point in that direction. I don't mean to say that carrier based opportunities aren't good but my personal interest lead me the other direction so feel free to stop here if you are more interested in the carrier aspect of the business as your original post leads me to believe because of your reference to calling your local CO ... not sure if that is what you intended to convey though so here goes ... If you are interested in big business, you will probably find it useful to be familiar with the likes of Avaya, Nortel, NEC, perhaps Alcatel. There are many others too ... this list is just intended to get you started. All of these also have systems for smaller businesses as well. If you are more interested in smaller businesses or find that they are more prevalent in your area, there are many companies to consider ... Mitel, Fujitsu, Tadiran, Intertel come to mind in addition to those listed above. There are a lot of commonalities but each vendor has its own take on the industry and the way their technologies address their customers. Personally, I think you also need to decide on what part of the business you are interested in ... TDM or IP ... administrative systems vs. contact centers vs. unified communications/messaging ... all of these are important concepts and you will need to eventually become familiar with all of them and much more. Just decide what sounds interesting to you and jump right in. One thing you might consider ... just because it is free ... is downloading all of the material about AsteriskPBX. If you happen to have a computer available to load Linux, you could download that for free too and setup your own IP PBX right in your home to play with. If you are just getting into the industry, I believe that you would serve yourself well to learn about IP Telephony and networking first. However, there will be a need for TDM saavy people for many years to come as well ... its up to you and where your interest lie! Best wishes, Chip Jeremey wrote in message news:telecom22.713.6@telecom-digest.org: > I would really like a job in the telecom industry someday and I was > wondering what the best thing to do to become a switch technician > would be? I'm really fascinated by telephones and computers and am very > good with both, so I was wondering how I would jump into this field? I > was thinking of calling a local CO and asking them, but I also wanted > to ask here. Any help is greatly appreciated. Thanks. ------------------------------ From: Michael D. Sullivan Subject: Re: Beware: Vonage and Local Number Transfers Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 05:58:45 GMT On Wed, 22 Oct 2003 23:20:30 -0400, Stan Schwartz posted the following to comp.dcom.telecom: > Alltel is: > . Nation's 7th largest wireless company with 7.9 million customers. > . Nation's 6th largest local telephone company with approximately 3.1 > million customers. > The also have a major roaming agreement with Verizon Wireless, which > was hammered out at the time of the BellAtlantic-GTE merger. They are > the third major CDMA carrier in the US, after Verizon Wireless and > Sprint PCS. Alltel acquired many of its wireless subscribers by buying properties that were excluded from the BellAtlantic/GTE->Verizon merger. Michael D. Sullivan Bethesda, MD, USA Delete nospam from my address and it won't work. ------------------------------ From: jbl Subject: Re: Verizon Charges for Everything Lately Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 02:49:03 -0700 Organization: On the desert Reply-To: jbl@spamblocked.com In , I wrote about some of the history of Verizon and the mergers and acquisitions that caused it to exist. Here's the real graphic deal, found on a Verizon web site: http://www.mv.com/ipusers/levin/vzhist.html /JBL ------------------------------ From: Joey Lindstrom Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 09:02:33 -0600 Subject: Apology - Well, Sorta Reply-To: joey@telussucks.info In a recent posting, I took "Marise" to task for posting anonymously, and rather harshly at that. I've received a lot of feedback on this, both positive and negative. And while my feelings on anonymous posting to a moderated forum remain largely unchanged, there are two points that, in fairness, need to be considered. 1) Such postings are not against the posted rules of this forum. While I firmly believe that such a rule SHOULD be among them, the fact of the matter is: it ain't. Therefore, Marise (and others whom I've also taken to task) did nothing wrong and acted in a fashion that was well within the rules. Even then, though: expressing my disagreement with behaviour that, while within the rules, I found personally objectionable is still cool -- despite the fact that, as one correspondent pointed out, if I think the speed limit on the road outside my house should be 35 but the posted limit is 50, I wind up looking rather foolish when I stand on the side of the road with a sign exhorting drivers to slow down. :-) (Boy, that was a bit more convoluted than I intended, sorry.) 2) My objections were stated in an overly harsh way. Again, by itself, this is still cool -- in a forum like this, things sometimes get heated, and that's part of the spice -- and also not against the rules. But when you add these two points together, they cross the line. I was overly harsh against someone who hadn't violated the rules of the forum. One or the other is ok, but not both together. I therefore apologize. I went too far, and will endeavour not to repeat this in future. Marise, I'm sorry. Now, any time Pat Townson wants to apologize for inviting me to eat shit, I'll gratefully accept that apology. ------------------------------ 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 fifty 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. If you donate at least fifty dollars per year we will send you our two-CD set of the entire Telecom Archives; this is every word published in this Digest since our beginning in 1981. 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 #716 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Oct 24 18:11:00 2003 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id h9OMAx504406; Fri, 24 Oct 2003 18:11:00 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2003 18:11:00 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200310242211.h9OMAx504406@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 #717 TELECOM Digest Fri, 24 Oct 2003 18:11:00 EDT Volume 22 : Issue 717 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Remember Those X-10 Popups? X-10 Sued, Files Bankruptcy (Marcus Jervis) Re: 2003 Foreign Telecommunications Carriers (Alan Burkitt-Gray) The Great Library of Amazonia (Monty Solomon) AOL Quietly Combats Pop-Up Spam Messages (Monty Solomon) VeriSign Reports Third Quarter 2003 Results (Monty Solomon) Nortel Networks Reports Preliminary Results for Third Quarter (Solomon) Wireless Switching May be Rocky (Monty Solomon) Nextel Sued in California Over Billing Practices (Eric Friedebach) Motorola's Phone On A Chip (Eric Friedebach) Re: Vonage, and Digressing (Chuk Gleason) Re: Dallas Phone Service - SBC Versus Comcast? (Steven J Sobol) Re: Apology - Well, Sorta (William Warren) Re: iTunes For Windows May Face New Piracy Threat (Barry Margolin) PC to PC Voice Link Over IP Link (Bobsa) Re: Becoming A Switch Technician (yeltrabnhoj@email.com) Re: Voiceplus (John R. Levine) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk is definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Marcus Jervis Subject: Remember Those X-10 Popups? X-10 Gets Sued, Files Bankruptcy Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2003 03:36:14 +0000 http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/2001772635_x10wireless23.html Pop-up ad pusher X10 files for bankruptcy By Tricia Duryee Seattle Times Eastside business reporter The notorious Internet pop-up ads of scantily clad women being viewed from miniature wireless cameras might be gone forever. X10 Wireless Technology, which sells the cameras mainly through the Internet, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy Tuesday in U.S. District Court, seeking a voluntary reorganization. The filing comes just two weeks after a Superior Court jury in Santa Ana, Calif., ordered X10 to pay $4.3 million in damages to three brothers who claimed the company stole their proprietary technology and failed to pay $564,000 in commissions. The brothers, who had founded AdvertisementBanners.com in Yorba Linda, Calif., were listed as X10's largest unsecured creditor, at $3.9 million. X10 attorney Ada Ko, of Lane Powell Spears Lubersky in Seattle, said the bankruptcy wasn't a result of the lawsuit but of overall business. "The lawsuit was just another creditor." X10 may have been one of the first companies to take full advantage of pop-under and pop-up technology. It used splashy, colorful ads to draw attention to its Web site from such Web sites as The New York Times. At its height two years ago, X10.com was the fourth-most visited Web site ahead of well-known names like eBay and TerraLycos, according to research firm Jupiter in Darien, Conn. The strategy may have backfired. Jupiter found that nearly two-thirds of the people who saw the ads closed the browser within 20 seconds. Todd Hanson, an analyst with Gartner in San Jose, Calif., who used to follow X10, said he was disappointed. "I know they've had sharkish marketing tactics, but the products are clever," said Hanson, who has a wireless camera on his porch and can turn on the TV to see who's there when his doorbell rings. "The user in me says bummer, but the analyst in me says maybe they had it coming." The company, which lists its headquarters in Kent, did not return phone calls seeking comment. It is claiming to have less than 200 unsecured creditors who are owed less than $50 million. It has up to $10 million in assets. Other unsecured creditors listed in the filing include: America Online for $55,413; FedEx, $39,930; Foxnews.com, $40,866; and Google, $69,984. Tricia Duryee: 206-464-3283 or tduryee@seattletimes.com *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ From: Alan Burkitt-Gray Subject: Re: 2003 Foreign Telecommunications Carriers Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2003 10:42:13 +0100 Brisk Attivo (brisk@netins.net) wrote: > I created this list mostly because of my own curiousity about > foreign telecommunications, but also because I discovered in my own > curiousity that there is not much information on the subject and the > need for it was in demand. This is my first time publicly posting > the list, so any comments or criticism is appreciated. Hope some > people find this useful or interesting. Your list has a 1980s feel to it, and that's not just because you refer to BT (its name for about 15 years) as British Telecom. But it's because you give a view that there is in general one operator per country. And you list only fixed line operators. Where's China Mobile, China Unicom and China Netcom, where's Reliance in India? Where's Vodafone -- one of the world's biggest telecoms operators? In the UK, where's NTL, Telewest and Cable & Wireless? Where are the South African mobile operators -- they provide service to 12 million people, while Telkom, which you list, has under 5 million lines? There are comprehensive lists of operators on the web -- notably at totaltele.com http://www.totaltele.com/links/list.asp?CategoryID=842 -- where there's a reasonably good country-by-country list. The GSM Association has a comprehensive list of GSM operators country by country at http://www.gsmworld.com/roaming/gsminfo/index.shtml Alan Burkitt-Gray Editor, Global Telecoms Business Euromoney Institutional Investor plc, Nestor House, Playhouse Yard, London EC4V 5EX, UK tel +44 20 7779 8518 fax +44 20 7779 8248 e-mail aburkitt@euromoneyplc.com www.globaltelecomsbusiness.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 21:30:32 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: The Great Library of Amazonia By Gary Wolf This story will appear in Wired magazine's upcoming December issue, 11.12. The fondest dream of the information age is to create an archive of all knowledge. You might call it the Alexandrian fantasy, after the great library founded by Ptolemy I in 286 BC. Through centuries of aggressive acquisition, the librarians of Alexandria, Egypt, collected hundreds of thousands of texts. None survives. During a final wave of destruction, in AD 641, invaders fed the bound volumes and papyrus scrolls into the furnaces of the public baths, where they are said to have burned for six months. "The lesson," says Brewster Kahle, founder of the Internet Archive, "is to keep more than one copy." Kahle recently gave a copy of his digital archive of 10 billion Web pages to a new library in Alexandria. On a visit to the city last year, he sat down with Suzanne Mubarak, the wife of Egypt's president, and discussed his gift, which has all the advantages of a modern electronic resource: It can be instantly updated, easily searched, and endlessly replicated. Mubarak, with diplomatic politeness, allowed that she was impressed. Still, she ventured a protest: "But I love books!" Therein lies a problem. Books are an ancient and proven medium. Their physical form inspires passion. But their very physicality makes books inaccessible to the multi-terabyte databases of modern Alexandrian projects. Books take time to transport. Their text vanishes and their pages yellow in a rash of foxing. Most important, it's still shockingly difficult to find information buried in books. Even as the Internet has revived hope of a universal library and Google seems to promise an answer to every query, books have remained a dark region in the universe of information. We want books to be as accessible and searchable as the Web. On the other hand, we still want them to be books. An ingenious attempt to illuminate the dark region of books is under way at Amazon.com. Over the past spring and summer, the company created an unrivaled digital archive of more than 120,000 books. The goal is to quickly add most of Amazon's multimillion-title catalog. The entire collection, which went live Oct. 23, is searchable, and every page is viewable. To build the archive, Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos has had to unravel a tangle of technological and copyright problems. His solution promises to remake the publishing business and give Amazon a powerful new weapon in its battle against online competitors such as Yahoo, Google, and eBay. But the most interesting thing about the archive is the way it resolves the paradox of the book, respecting its physical form while transcending its limits. http://www.wired.com/news/business/0,1367,60948,00.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 21:43:30 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: AOL Quietly Combats Pop-Up Spam Messages By ANICK JESDANUN AP Internet Writer NEW YORK (AP) -- Even more annoying than junk e-mail are all the spam messages that "pop up" through a little-used feature in Windows. As part of its spam-fighting efforts, America Online has been turning off that feature for its customers without telling them. AOL spokesman Andrew Weinstein said the feedback has been all positive, and he knows of no complaints to AOL call centers about side effects on other applications that may need that feature. Nonetheless, AOL's action worries some security experts who were told about it by The Associated Press. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=36210647 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The writer was a little mistaken. AOL is not doing it 'without telling the customers'. On my copy of AOL 9.0 (their latest version of their software) AOL does put a little push button on the screen asking users if they want pop ups or not. If the user says no popups by pressing that button, then the popups end. What people may not know, as I didn't know, is that when you clear your screen of AOL, the software does not release that condition, although rebooting the computer should clear it, and anytime the user goes to visit updates.msn.com, the MSN people also make sure it is restored to its default condition, which is 'popups turned on'. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 23:06:45 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: VeriSign Reports Third Quarter 2003 Results MOUNTAIN VIEW, Calif., Oct. 23 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- VeriSign, Inc. (Nasdaq: VRSN), the leading provider of critical infrastructure services for the Internet and telecommunications networks, today reported its results for the third quarter ended September 30, 2003. VeriSign reported revenue of $268 million for the third quarter of 2003. On a pro forma basis, net income was $48 million or $0.20 per fully diluted share. Pro forma results exclude the following items, which are included under generally accepted accounting principles ("GAAP"): amortization and write-down of goodwill and other intangible assets, the gain and write-down of certain investments, restructuring and other charges and non-cash stock-based compensation charges related to acquisitions. VeriSign's third quarter results were not fully taxed. On a fully taxed basis, applying a 30% effective tax rate to pro forma pre-tax income of $51 million, pro forma earnings per share for the third quarter was $0.15 per fully diluted share. On a GAAP basis, VeriSign reported a net loss of $31 million for the third quarter. The GAAP loss for the third quarter is primarily attributable to a charge of $78 million for the amortization and write-down of goodwill and other intangible assets. A table reconciling the pro forma to GAAP numbers reported above is appended to this release. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=36213182 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 23:07:57 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Nortel Networks Reports Preliminary Results for Third Quarter Nortel Networks Reports Preliminary Results for Third Quarter of 2003 and Provides Update on Comprehensive Review of Assets and Liabilities including Planned Restatement TORONTO--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Oct. 23, 2003--Nortel Networks Corporation (NYSE:NT)(TSX:NT): -- Q3 2003 revenues of US$2.27 billion(1) -- Q3 2003 net earnings of approximately US$179 million; approximately US$0.04 per common share on a diluted basis(1) -- Previously announced comprehensive review of assets and liabilities to lead to restatement of financial statements for 2000, 2001, 2002, Q1 2003 and Q2 2003 -- Restatement primarily relates to the elimination of liabilities of approximately US$900 million, partially offset by a reduction in the net deferred income tax asset of approximately US$160 million(1) -- Principal expected impacts of restatement on previously reported results: reduction in net losses for 2000, 2001 and 2002; increase in shareholders' equity and net assets; no expected impact to cash balance as at June 30, 2003 or to forward business operations - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=36213773 ------------------------------ Reply-To: Monty Solomon From: Monty Solomon Subject: Wireless Switching May be Rocky Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2003 14:48:31 -0400 Changing carrier, retaining number By Peter J. Howe, Globe Staff, 10/24/2003 Like millions of Americans, Canton attorney Steve Rosen is counting the days until a new federal policy will let him keep his existing cellphone number when he switches wireless carriers. The Nov. 24 launch of "wireless number portability" is expected to roil the hypercompetitive US wireless sector. Surveys estimate that one quarter or more of the nation's 150 million cellphone owners hope to switch carriers once they don't need to get a new number. But some analysts and industry insiders warn that consumers may be in for a big disappointment, especially if they think wireless number portability will be anything like the normally smooth process of switching long-distance carriers on a home phone. Rosen, who says he is fed up with poor coverage and "horrible customer service" from AT&T Wireless, may discover that his plan to switch his AT&T number to T-Mobile will be more difficult and take longer than he expects. For example, almost without exception, everyone making a switch will have to buy a new phone. Many will have to pay an early termination fee of up to $200 to dump their current provider. When they make the switch, subscribers will not be able to use their new phone for incoming calls for anywhere from two to 24 hours. Opportunities to switch a landline home or business number to a wireless phone account will be sharply limited. And the change takes effect Nov. 24 only in Greater Boston and the 99 other largest US metro areas; residents of northern New England and Central and Western Massachusetts will have to wait until May. Industry analysts and some wireless executives worry that consumer expectations may be too high. http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2003/10/24/wireless_switching_may_be_rocky/ ------------------------------ From: Eric Friedebach Subject: Nextel Sued in California Over Billing Practices Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 18:35:19 -0500 Organization: Muddy Paw Prints On The Corvette LOS ANGELES, Oct 23 (Reuters) - A consumer rights group has sued wireless carrier Nextel Communications Inc.in Los Angeles, saying that a new Nextel billing policy unfairly hides details on usage charges from customers. A Nextel spokeswoman on Thursday said the company had not received the suit and could not comment. The suit was filed Tuesday in Los Angeles Superior Court by the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights, a well-known advocacy group in the state. http://www.forbes.com/technology/newswire/2003/10/23/rtr1121471.html Eric Friedebach ------------------------------ From: Eric Friedebach Subject: Motorola's Phone On A Chip Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 18:39:06 -0500 Organization: Muddy Paw Prints On The Corvette Arik Hesseldahl, 10.22.03, Forbes.com NEW YORK - Chipmaker Motorola is expected to announce a mobile phone chip it says will combine most of the circuitry for a smart mobile phone onto a single chip. Motorola will announce the news today at a press conference at the Cellular Telecommunications and Internet Association conference in Las Vegas. It will call the chip the Mobile Extreme Convergence architecture, or MXC. The aim of the chip, the company says, is to give makers of mobile phones and devices that combine mobile phone and wireless data connections, and other sophisticated features, the ability to cut down on the number of components they need to get the job done. The chip will allow those manufacturers to cut costs, as well as design times, in half, Motorola says. http://www.forbes.com/2003/10/22/cx_ah_1022mot.html Eric Friedebach ------------------------------ From: Chuk Gleason Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 21:50:44 -0400 Subject: Re: Vonage, and Digressing FWIW, I work as a two-way tech in the Raleigh, NC area; Land of BellSouth. In three years with my current company I have met almost a dozen telco techs who handle the various leased lines for my customers. Only 2 of these techs are worth anything near worth having on a job. They are both getting closer to retirement age than is comfortable! Most of the younger ones are more concerned with 'clearing the ticket' than clearing the problem; it once took me 6 weeks to get a single circuit cleaned up; I almost had to lead two techs to the pedestal by the street before they found the 20dB loss. Another tactic is to BS the customer with technobabble; one boy (I'm sure he wasn't past 25!) tried to impress me with a 'Stress Test' that his gizmo did; when I asked him >exactly< what that did, he flustered and floundered, then shut up. My EE degree, 5 years in Quality, and 15 years in 'plain old two-way radio' seemed no match for his usual BS skills. When the first one of these two >good< guys retires, I'm gonna run screaming into the hills; ain't no way I can be a full time radio tech AND a phone tech; besides, I don't have SouBell company badge to get in and test up and down the frames, too. When the companies care more for turning numbers than for keeping good customers, it's only natural that company's like Vonage will eat their lunch. And management at the 'older' shops will continue to measure only things that don't matter to customer satisfaction. Chuk Gleason Cary, NC 10/22/03 10:32:45 PM, editor@telecom-digest.org noted in response to Stan Schwartz on the topic of Re: Beware: Vonage and Local Number Transfers - Long Time No See >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, five or six weeks does seem to be >> an outragously long time. However, one thing you should remember is >> that the traditional landline telcos are fit to be tied -- really bent >> out of shape -- about the amount of business companies like Vonage are >> taking away from them ...] > If the traditional landline telcos want to generate or keep service, > they need to at least pay attention to the customers who actually WANT > their service, let alone getting into LNP issues. ------------------------------ From: Steven J Sobol Subject: Re: Dallas Phone Service - SBC Versus Comcast? Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 21:30:39 -0500 No-Name wrote: > Looks like I can get either SBC phone service or Comcast in the house > I'm buying -- I'll be getting Cable TV and Cable Modem from Comcast (I > can't get DSL from SBC) -- is one any better than the other for > residential phone service? Thanks. SBC is a horrible company that will screw you over without even thinking about it -- I was without service on my DSL and voice lines for two months and they offered me $5 worth of credits. I had to sic the Public Utilities Commission on them before they'd do the right thing (this was in Ohio.) My general impression is that while phone companies are run by malicious assholes, cable companies are just clueless. I suppose the lesser of the two evils would be the phone company, but heaven forbid you ever have a problem with the service