From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Jan 1 21:23:00 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i022N0E10801; Thu, 1 Jan 2004 21:23:00 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2004 21:23:00 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200401020223.i022N0E10801@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 V23 #1 TELECOM Digest Thu, 1 Jan 2004 21:23:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 1 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Tim Berners-Lee Gets His Knighthood for the WWW (Danny Burstein) Satellite Radio Goes for a Spin (Monty Solomon) Car-Monitoring Service Allows You to be Big Brother (Monty Solomon) California Plan Would Halt Trucks Remotely in Attack (Monty Solomon) GILC Alert v7i9 (Monty Solomon) Step, Panel, XB, and Tone Plants (was Re: 10 Digit) (jsw@ivgate.omahug) Voip PC to PC Talking Try Skype (Gordon Laubach) Re: 10-Digit Dialing (Wesrock@aol.com) Re: NANP Numbering (Linc Madison) Re: NANP Numbering (Arthur Kamlet) Re: NANP Numbering (Mark Brader) Re: Is That Possible? (Greg T. Knopf) Re: Taxes on Phone Bills - Ouch (John R. Levine) Barbers (was Re: 10-Digit) (Dave Close) Re: Linksys boxen (Carl Navarro) Re: Taxes on Phone Bills - Ouch (Joe@nospamcity.com) Re: Telecoms Embrace Internet Calling, But Is It Trouble? (Joe@nospam) Re: Migrating to ADSL -- Questions For the Tech Gurus (Earle Robinson) Correction, was Re: Migrating to ADSL -- Questions (Danny Burstein) N-Gage (www.gorover.com) 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: Danny Burstein Subject: Tim Berners-Lee Gets His Knighthood for the WWW Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2004 02:24:32 -0500 Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC http://www.w3.org/ -- 31 December 2003 -- Tim Berners-Lee, the inventor of the World Wide Web and director of the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), will be made a Knight Commander, Order of the British Empire (KBE) by Queen Elizabeth. This was announced earlier today by Buckingham Palace as part of the 2004 New Year's Honours list. The rank of Knight Commander is the second most senior rank of the Order of the British Empire, one of the Orders of Chivalry awarded. Berners-Lee, 48, a British citizen who lives in the United States, is being knighted in recognition of his "services to the global development of the Internet" through the invention of the World Wide Web. [ snippety snip ] http://www.w3.org/2003/12/timbl_knighted _____________________________________________________ Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key dannyb@panix.com [to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2004 03:03:33 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Satellite Radio Goes for a Spin By Lewis Wallace In a TV commercial for XM Satellite Radio, country legend Willie Nelson calls the service "the best radio there is." That's strong praise for an industry still in its infancy. So, are Nelson's words strictly an ad man's hyperbole, or is satellite radio something no self-respecting technophile can live without? The answer, of course, lies somewhere in between. For a stone digital-music geek who has an iPod jammed with thousands of MP3s and no real interest in straying from custom play lists, satellite radio is probably unnecessary. The same goes for talk-radio junkies with well-established affinities for local shows or National Public Radio. However, if you're a music lover with wide-ranging tastes, a driver who spends a lot of time on the road, or a resident of a rural area with no satisfactory radio options, satellite radio could be a digital dream come true. We tested products from the industry's dueling companies -- XM Satellite Radio and Sirius Satellite Radio -- locally and on long jaunts. http://www.wired.com/news/gizmos/0,1452,61668,00.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2004 03:04:56 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Car-Monitoring Service Allows You to Be Your Own Big Brother Don't trust your teenagers or your spouse? Networkcar can tell you where they've been driving. By Ralph Vartabedian Times Staff Writer December 31, 2003 The way George Orwell imagined Big Brother was as a police state that imposed unrelenting surveillance on an unwilling public. Orwell never imagined that people would actually make nice with Big Brother as a matter of convenience, but that's one way to view the growing stream of data from automobiles that has attracted a lot of interest from the government and, so far, not a lot of suspicion from the public. Some consumers actually are willing to pay for a service that lets the government know your car isn't breaking the law. For about a year, a La Jolla company has offered to provide remote sensing of a car's systems and to post that data to a private Web page, along with verifying to state agencies that the car is in compliance with the emission laws of California and a few other states. http://www.latimes.com/classified/automotive/highway1/la-hy-wheels31dec31,1,1009805.story ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2004 12:13:11 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: California Plan Would Halt Trucks Remotely in Attack By Daniel Sorid SAN FRANCISCO, Jan 1 (Reuters) - Three years after a truck driver slammed an 18-wheeler into California's state capitol building, lawmakers are considering a plan to link trucks carrying hazardous material to a satellite tracking system that would halt them if they were used in a terror attack. The trucks would be equipped with devices that would either cut off fuel to the engine or turn on the brakes when activated. The proposed bill would implement the country's most stringent safety regulations for trucks carrying fuel and other hazardous materials, but it faces fierce opposition from local trucking companies who complain that the rules would make California truckers uncompetitive. Assemblyman John Dutra, unhappy with the slow federal pace in addressing the issue, introduced the bill in February 2003, and it passed easily in the state assembly. Amid protest from industry groups, the bill failed to get past the transportation committee in the state senate, where it will be reconsidered this year. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40109808 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2004 12:26:01 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: GILC Alert v7i9 GILC Alert Volume 7, Issue 9 19 December 2003 Welcome to the Global Internet Liberty Campaign Newsletter. Welcome to GILC Alert, the newsletter of the Global Internet Liberty Campaign. We are an international organization of groups working for cyber-liberties, who are determined to preserve civil liberties and human rights on the Internet. We hope you find this newsletter interesting, and we very much hope that you will avail yourselves of the action items in future issues. If you are a part of an organization that would be interested in joining GILC, please contact us at . If you are aware of threats to cyber-liberties that we may not know about, please contact the GILC members in your country, or contact GILC as a whole. Please feel free to redistribute this newsletter to appropriate forums. =============================================== Free expression [1] Hollywood suffers defeat in Net file sharing case [2] Controversial world info summit held [3] Christian Chinese online activist arrested [4] Zimbabwean gov't arrests 14 online dissenters [5] Protests mount against Iran Net censorship [6] Tunisian Net dissident finally freed [7] DVD programmer awaits appeals court ruling [8] Diebold backs down on Internet copyright threats [9] Report on Vietnam Net speech curbs released Privacy [10] Bush Backs International Cybercrime Plan [11] Planned VeriPay human implants pose privacy problems [12] Microsoft security flaws affect automated bank tellers [13] US gov't gets still more spy powers [14] Study: many British websites poor on privacy [15] Yahoo and Excite fix webmail security hole [16] Controversy grows over South Korean mobile phone security [17] New privacy-friendly Cryptophone unveiled http://www.gilc.org/alert/alert79.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2004 10:37:17 CST From: jsw@ivgate.omahug.org Subject: Step, Panel and XP Reply-To: jsw@ivgate.omahug.org > It should be noted that in the waning days of SxS, the Bell System > added electronic front and back ends to the switches to improve > performance. I'm not sure if they went as far as converting an SxS > exchange into "common control" run by the front end electronics, but > there was some up front processing. The Manawa office in Council Bluffs, IA (Omaha, NE area, 712-366) used what was called 'Directorized SxS'. This was an outboard conversion used on some Ma Bell (and maybe others) step offices to approach common control. This conversion was most likely done in the 1960's, and provided dial tone to the subscriber, and recorded the dialed number, either in dial pulses or touch-tone tones. For interoffice calls it then drove the switch train, and for intra-office it provided the signaling (MF, dial-pulse, possibly even revertive - I dunno) that the called office expected. This installation lasted until the mid 1980's when the Manawa office was cut to a DMS-10. > Panel Type and 1XB had no provision for dealing with SxS pulsing. When > 1XB came around, presumably the easterners assumed that any place which > would need them would be panel. Panel used the 'revertive' signaling method, possibly invented by Rube Goldberg which, to make it very simple, the called office advanced the contact and the calling office told the called office when to stop. This was emulated in the #1 crossbar, as it was intended to be compatible with the panel system. (I also vaguely remember that the 1ESS was able to speak revertive as well.) When placing a call from a panel office, the revertive pulse sounds could often be heard as a distinctive 'scratch-scratch' sound during dialing. I'm familiar with the way both the Omaha and NYC phone systems were back in the electromechanical days, and both used panel and 1XB extensively with lots of revertive pulsing between the various offices. (Ma Bell's first full-scale panel office was in the Atlantic office in Omaha. Years ago I provided information about this to the Digest here.) Both areas used 5XB for newer installations until the early 1970's. There were pockets of SxS around both Omaha and NYC, often appearing as DID implementations, but occasionally for POTS, as in the Manawa office I mentioned above. (I remember specifically that Columbia U in Manhattan and Union Pacific in Omaha used such a scheme.) Many of the CDO's in the hinterlands surrounding Omaha (but in the dialing area) used direct-control step well into the 70's. IIRC, the panel and 1XB offices (and some others) reached the direct-control step offices by way of a tandem office that provided the expected pulse signaling to drive the switch train. > It was only when 5XB came out that there was an alternative to step in > large step cities. I do remember that some 1XB offices were retrofitted to receive (and presumably transmit) MF for interoffice signaling. (The O Street office in Omaha was an example.) I assume that if they could speak MF, that there were provisions for dial pulse signaling as well. > Interestingly I have found historical references to a Panel system > being installed and utilized in the Providence, RI CO on Washington & > Greene. I was always fascinated with the dialing arrangements in some parts of Rhode Island I visited during my younger days. IIRC, the Coventry area was direct-control SxS (early 70's) and had a few varied access codes to dial nearby areas. (Dusting off very rusty memory cells ...) I also vaguely remember that the Scituate area had at least one office with the 'directorized' step, and offered 7-digit 'sane' dialing into the Providence area. > I think there was also some SxS gear because my grandparents phones had > the standard SxS dialtone and when called had the SxS ring and busy > signals, though those may have been Panel signaling I'm not familiar > with. It seems like many of Ma Bell's step offices used a similar type of tone plant, one with the 'flatulent' ringback, and that most of their panel offices (as well as most 1XB and many 5XB) used the very familiar 'metropolitan' tone plant, but I know of many exceptions, making it not trivial to determine the CO type just by the dial/ring/busy tones. I do remember, for example, that some of Ma Bell's step offices had a ring tone that appeared to come from the same type of tone plant used in the newer 5XB offices, one that to the untrained ear sounded very much like today's standard ring tone. There were variations on this theme. The Manawa office I cited above had a ring tone that I had/have never heard elsewhere. It could best be described as a muted blast of an air horn, with a similarly raucous busy tone. I also remember one panel office that served the Boro Park/Sunset Park area of Brooklyn that had a very mechanical-sounding 'flatulent' ring tone and equally funky busy tone. IIRC, the dial tone from this office was similarly unusual. And then there was this strange ring tone best described as a 'low rumble' that occasionally appeared on some of Ma Bell's 5XB offices. I never figured that one out. It was barely audible on some LD calls. It almost sounded like only the spurious harmonics of the ring signal. ------------------------------ From: gordonl@rocketmail.com (Gordon Laubach) Subject: Voip PC to PC Talking Try Skype Date: 1 Jan 2004 14:23:25 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com For FREE great VOIP Pc to Pc talking try Skype.. http://www.skype.com/ 4,968,275 downloads and counting Much easier to use than FWD;.. ( sorry to say) cuts thru the firewalls... The best Audio I have Used.. Skype is the next phenomenon from the people who brought you KaZaA. Just like KaZaA, Skype uses P2P (peer-to-peer) technology to connect you to other users not to share files this time, but to talk and chat with your friends. The technology is extremely advanced but super simple to use... You'll be making free phone calls to your friends in no time! Free unlimited worldwide phone calls to other Skype users Superior sound quality better than your regular phone Works with all firewall, NAT and routers nothing to configure! Friends list shows you when your Skype friends are online and ready to talk or chat. Super-simple and easy to use. Your calls are encrypted "end-to-end" for superior privacy Based on cutting edge peer-to-peer technology developed by the creators of Kazaa and Joltid. ------------------------------ From: Wesrock@aol.com Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2004 19:39:59 EST Subject: Re: 10-Digit Dialing In a message dated 30 Dec 2003 19:19:54 -0800, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) writes: > I don't know of the Bell System priorities in the old days. But a > reading of the "Engineering & Science" histories of the Bell System > indicates that small areas did receive attention. "Community dial > offices" were developed. The plans for nationwide direct distance > dialing took into account the many varied dial plans of small offices. As I mentioned, the first dial office in Oklahoma City, in 1920, used A.E. SxS because there was no W.E. SxS equipment. By 1927, there was #1 SxS from W.E., and it was installed in the downtown office in Oklahoma City. CDOs, much smaller places, usually without local operators after dial equipment was installed, were usually W.E. 350 SxS and 355 SxS. But most of these came after World War II. It was in the 1920s, perhaps earlier in a few places, that SxS was installed in a quie a few places it is now hard to consider a "small office";: indeed, many of them were multi-office cities by the time the first dial equipment was installed. These "small places" include such places as Los Angeles, Dallas, Houston, San Antonio, Oklahoma City, Tulsa, Wichita and many others. > I dare say that the big cities received more attention because the > more complex calling patterns required it and the cities generated > more revenues. I suspect businesses in big cities tended to spend > more in long distance and premises equipment (key sets, PBXs, etc.) > than in a small town which justified the greater interest. I'm not sure how the usage of long distance and premises equipment particularly affected the type of central office equipment to be installed. Those were all the smae for all types of offices, Panel, step, #1XB. > Step by Step was cheaper to install and run since it was simpler. > Crossbar and panel required technicians with a higher level of > training. > As to inter-office connections, remember that when Panel and #1 > crossbar were developed (1920s and 1930s, virtually all long distance > was handled manually by operators, indeed even establishing a > connection took some time and effort. Gradually, operators could dial > calls in distant cities and routing was simplified. The vast majority of interoffice trunking in cities with more than one office was local trunking between offices. Los Angeles was probably almost unique in having substantial operator dialing to interzone (or "multiple message unit") and toll offices before World War II. Indeed, in the last 1940s my experience on outgoing long distance calls from Los Angeles was that you dialed the code "110" for the long distance operator, who then had to determine from Rate and Route not only the routing (including intermediate distant tandem points), but also what manual toll tandem in L.A. to access because the volume of toll trunks was so great that they had to be allocated between different manual toll tandem boards in the L.A. area. I still remember my first call where the operator dialed directly to a distant point when I was living in Dallas. It was to Corpus Christi, and when I passed the number to the toll operator in Dallas the next thing I heard was the number ringing in Corpus. Before that time, the originating toll operator would pick a trunk to Corpus, where the inward operator would answer "Corpus Christi," and the originating operator would pass the number for Corpus inward to dial. > Panel DID contain capacity for manual/automatic dial interface. > I'm also curious how the last manual systems (1960s) worked in terms > of handling modern higher call volumes. For example, in suburban > Philadelphia (Upper Darby) there was the FLanders exchanges, which > didn't convert until around 1962. It was an old suburban community, > with a big transit terminal and shopping district, and residential > neighborhoods. (In the 1980s I asked Bell of Pennsylvania for > information and they said they had no historical information.) Pat has given an answer to this; I believe various systems, including the ones he mentioned, were used. No local dial-manual interfaces existed in Oklahoma after the downtown office in Oklahoma City was converted to dial in 1928. It is my belief, based on stories of old timers, that customers in the "Northwest" office dialed the local operator at the downtown office and passed their number; customers in the downtown office (still "Number, please") passed their call to the operator orally just like any other call, and she dialed the number in the "Northwest" office. One issue, of course, was of interoperability between dial and manual offices. But a more pressing issue in places that were all SxS and had grown to where the trunking arrangement, directly controlled by the pulses the customer dialed, had become complex and was rapidly becoming more complex, had no way of interfacing with offices designed for such complex arrangements. Panel, and later #1XB, the apparently logical answer, had no provision for interfacing with step offices, only with each other. It wasn't until #5XB came along that there was a solution other than kludges (used in most places), putting senders in the step offices (the L.A. solution) or just accepting that there were some local routes that couldn't be economically automated and requiring customers to dial "operator," who then completed the call for the customer (a solution that was adopted in Houston). An interesting corollary to this is that large and small SxS offices could interface seamlessly, as long as the complexity of the trunking did not overwhelm certain routes. The CDO behind the barber shop in Britton, Okla., a suburb of Oklahoma City, was originally toll, then interzone from most of Oklahoma City. Then it became part of the local dialing area, with "88-" prefixed to the number, working out of the 84- office (a large step office) with suitable digit absorption. Finally, with the change to 7-digit (then as two letters and five) it became TRinity 8-, with one more digit to be absorbed. Incidentally, the office no longer exists, as you would expect, the municipality of Britton has been absorbed into Oklahoma City and no longer is a separate legal entity. But the location of that CDO is still the location of the rate point for the "Britton" zone, which includes at least three separate wire centers, each with ESSs serving multiple prefixes. If you make a toll or other detail-billed call to a number served out of those offices, it will show on your bill as "Britton, OK", no doubt to the confusion of many callers. (That, of course, is not unique anywhere around the country -- there are many rate points like that around the country that, in many cases, have no current place name to give you a clue.) In a message dated 12/30/03 3:31:48 AM Central Standard Time, editor@telecom-digest.org writes: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Two points of interest to add to the > note from Wes Leatherock ... '3 or 4 chair barbershops'; there is no > such animal any longer. The very few barbershops which remain these > days are almost always single person proprietor places. Only rarely > will several barbers work as a group. There simply is no longer any > demand for their services. I go to a salon here in Independence which > has two beauticians on duty; a mother and daughter, but 'Classy > Clippers' as it is known has been around for twenty years at least. > Several multi-chair shops *used to exist* years ago in Chicago. Pat, This is straying far afield from telecom news, but I can assure I had my hair cut this morning in a 3-chair barber shop. And all three barbers were there (on New Years' Eve!). Sometimes I have my hair cut at another 3-chair shop that is on the other side of the center. And again sometimes at a 5-chair barber shop, with all the barbers usually pretty busy. Between those threet is a 4-chair barber shop, with the last chair behind a partition and nominally a style shop, but the barber will do ordinary haircuts if he has no style customers. These are all within three or four miles of my house in Oklahoma City, and I think I saw another one in the other direction a few days ago. I may try it soon. A new "salon" not far from the three I mentioned is having its grand opening special with $2.99 haircuts. I don't know how much male trade they have; the few times I've tried a salon type of place I wasn't entirely satisfied (but of course this is true of some barber shops, too). In a message dated Tue, 30 Dec 2003 04:34:28 -0500, COTTP writes: > Interestingly I have found historical references to a Panel system > being installed and utilized in the Providence, RI CO on Washington & > Greene. > The missing link is between the Panel. I think there was also some SxS > gear because my grandparents phones had the standard SxS dialtone and > when called had the SxS ring and busy signals, though those may have > been Panel signaling I'm not familiar with. I have lived and worked in places served by Panel, #1XB, and SxS, and never noticed a different in the dial tone, ringing and busy signals. Those were produced by a ringing machine which is used in all kinds of offices. (Of course, when a deviant ringing machine is used, as the A.E. ringing machine I mentioned that was in use in the Oklahoma City Jackson office until around 1960 or a little later. It sounded different because the A.E. machine did produce somewhat different tones, but those were used throughout the office, including the numerous expansions of the office with W.E. SxS.) Wes Leatherock wesrock@aol.com ------------------------------ Subject: Re: NANP Numbering Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2003 14:39:19 -0800 From: Linc Madison Reply-To: lincmad@suespammers.org Organization: California resident; nospam; no unsolicited e-mail allowed In article , Rob wrote: > OK, I know that this may very well seem a dumb question, but why is > the NANP numbering system different to other phone systems throughout > the world? Why do so many other countries have numbering systems different from the NANP? (Hint: where was the telephone invented?) The answer is that the telephone systems in North America and Europe evolved very differently, under very different economic and social conditions. Europe does not have the vast swaths of sparsely settled territory that exist in the United States and Canada. Also, the telephone systems in Europe developed under government control, mostly under the direction of the postal authorities, while in the US and Canada the telephone systems, especially for intercity calling, were developed by for-profit corporations. > The vast majority of countries in the world have area codes beginning > with '0', whereas in NANP countries the area code commences with '1', No, very few countries in the world have area codes beginning with '0'; Russia is one of a handful. (Moscow = +7 095) For instance, area codes in the UK do not ever begin with '0'. Likewise, area codes in the NANP never, ever begin with '1'. Most countries have '0' as an access prefix, which is customarily quoted as if it were part of the area code, although it is not. In the NANP, we quote the area code as the area code. My area code is 415, not 1415. The leading '1' is quoted separately, since it is an access code. That may sound like a pedantic point, which it may be, but it's also an important element in the equation. > and then numbers on the same area code, or even numbers in > neighbouring codes (i.e. 919, 252 and 304), aren't always regarded as > local, as they are here in the UK. For example, my local calling > area not only covers my own exchange (01685) but also all numbers on > the neighbouring exchanges of 01443, 01639, 01874 and 01495. Another pedantic point: 919, 252, and 304 are not neighboring codes. I suspect you meant 804 (Richmond VA) rather than 304 (WV). Even before the advent of the newest area codes like 028 for Northern Ireland, it was never true that all calls within a UK area code were local. All calls within a *CHARGING GROUP* are local, and in the majority of cases the charging group coincided with the 01xxx area code, but there were several exceptions. Then along came 091 (now 0191), which includes multiple charge groups, and finally 028 and 023. It is also important to remember that, even with the recent explosion of area codes in the NANP and the recent consolidation of area codes in the UK, there are still far more than twice as many area codes in the UK as in the NANP. Area code +1 867 alone is more than sixteen times the land area of the entire UK, although it has about the same population as Worthing, West Sussex (just west of Brighton). Worthing is the 62nd-largest city in the UK. For Welsh examples, Swansea and Newport each have more people than +1 867, and Cardiff has more than three times as many people. The full NANP has about eighty times the UK's land area, with only about five times the population. In short, you *usually* have local calling within an area code because your area codes are *vastly* smaller in land area and population. (Of course, there are exceptions at the extremes: +1 213 has a tiny land area, and +44 20 has a huge population.) If the NANP's area codes covered the same average land area as the UK's area codes, there would be about 40,000 of them. No, thank you. Even if the NANP's area codes only covered the same average population, there would still be over 3,000; again, no, thank you. In North America, at the advent of national numbering, the decision was made by AT&T to take advantage of certain efficiencies in routing by adopting a fixed numbering format, known as 3-3-4. The area code is always three digits, the central office code is always three digits, and the line number is always four digits. By contrast, most of the world adopted variable numbering formats. Each has its advantages and disadvantages, and those comparisons weigh differently today than they did in the middle of the last century. > Also, how are calls charged between countries within NANP -- that > is, is a call from Canada or the US to Bermuda or Barbados regarded > as international, even though they're technically (I think!) on the > same phone system? Being on the same phone system is a separate issue from being international. The country code isn't the end of the story as far as billing rates. For instance, on many carriers, it costs less to call a Mexican border town than to call the Yucatan. Likewise, each telco sets its own rates for calls to each country in the world. Although few telcos did so, it was in theory possible to charge differently for Switzerland and Liechtenstein, even before Liechtenstein got its own separate country code. Calls to +41 75 (now +423) could be charged at one rate, and calls to other points in +41 at a different rate. Likewise, calls, whether within the NANP or from outside, can be billed differently to +1 202 or +1 613 or +1 242. Indeed, one of the questions I find most interesting is why so many overseas telcos bill much higher rates for +1 808 (Hawaii) and +1 907 (Alaska) than for other points in the United States. Of course, even within the United States, many telcos bill higher rates for Hawaii and Alaska than for the "contiguous 48." Another related point is that, by the standards of most people in the NANP, the UK has no local calling at all. In most of the NANP, all local calls are included in the monthly line rental at no additional charge. In the UK, that's only true in Kingston-upon-Hull, and with some of the new cable-based telcos. For BT subscribers, it can be less expensive to call the United States than to call your neighbor! My local calling area includes all of +1 415, +1 510, +1 650, +1 925, and +1 408, almost all of +1 707, and about half of +1 831. The total population in that area is about six million, and I have untimed calls at no additional charge. That's on a regular landline, although not with the traditional dominant telco. Many people now have the option for about $20/month of having unmetered calls within the entire USA, and for an extra $5 you can add Canada. 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: kamlet@panix.com (Arthur Kamlet) Subject: Re: NANP Numbering Date: 31 Dec 2003 18:18:53 -0500 Organization: PANIX -- Public Access Networks Corp. Reply-To: ArtKamlet@aol.REMOVE.com In article , John R. Levine wrote: > It's not one phone system, it's one numbering plan. Phone switches > have no trouble looking at the dialed digits and figuring out that a > call staring with 1212 goes to New York, 1416 to Toronto, and 1758 to > St Lucia. The numbers are all the same length, but the numbering plan > is designed so that switches can route long distance calls based on > the first few digits. And then there are overlays [1-800 +7D] Art Kamlet ArtKamlet @ AOL.com Columbus OH K2PZH ------------------------------ Subject: Re: NANP Numbering Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2004 00:57:12 EST From: msb@vex.net (Mark Brader) Charlie Gibbs: > That leading 1 is _not_ part of the area code. It started out as > a prefix identifying long-distance calls, ("Access code" in North American jargon.) > but it's nowadays better thought of as the country code - corresponding > to your 44 - followed by a 3-digit area code. No, it is not better thought of as the country code. It's only a coincidence that the country code is also 1. Proof of this is that we have *two* access codes -- we can use access code 0 to request alternate billing (originally, to request operator assistance, but these days it's usually done automatically) on the call. Mark Brader | "The net exists to be used. It is a powerful tool msb@vex.net | and as long as people treat it as a tool and not a toy Toronto | it will prosper." --Jerry Schwarz on Usenet, 1982 My text in this article is in the public domain. ------------------------------ From: Greg T. Knopf Subject: Re: Is That Possible? Date: 30 Dec 2003 16:34:04 EST Organization: Concentric Internet Services Reply-To: gtknopf@concentric.net Hello, dado wrote: > Hi, > Can PBX (private branch exchange) line access the internet ?? > Here is the situation: > The City A (central region) has its own leased line and it's server. > Other cities B,C,D just connect to the central region (city A) > through pbx line. (We all in the same country). > My question now, is that possible that cites (b,c,d) can get the > internet connection through pbx line ?? If that is possible what are > the requirements?? Much of this depends on the PBX type you are using, the type of telco line tying them together, and the protocols supported by them. With that caveat: At all sites you would want to establish a Local Area Network with a hub or a switch. Then each site would need a router, with the central site A having a router capable of multiple serial connections. If possible, then dedicate some of your bandwidth tying the sites together through the PBX setup, let's say a 64kbps channel, for a data connection. At sites B,C, and D this data connection is attached to the local router, which in turn sits on the LAN via the local hub or switch. There are a lot of "ifs" here, so it might be helpful to post your PBX info or info about what type of connections tie the remote sites to the central site. Good luck, - Greg gtknopf@concentric.net info@knopfnet.com ------------------------------ From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: Taxes on Phone Bills - Ouch Date: 1 Jan 2004 02:01:16 -0500 Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > Monthly fee: > Line with local service: $8.95 > Taxes: 911 Tax, Al Gore Tax, Spanish American War Tax, State Utility > Tax,Sales Tax =$6.00. > I dropped the second line because of 67% taxes. If not for that, I > would have kept it. You forgot the $6 access charge which is really part of the local service price although telcos would like you to believe that it's something else. That makes the effective tax rate somewhat lower. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2003 23:53:46 -0800 From: Dave Close Subject: Barbers (was Re: 10-Digit Dialing) Date: 31 Dec 2003 23:52:08 -0800 Organization: Compata, Costa Mesa, California > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The Palmer House Hotel in Chicago and > the Conrad Hilton Hotel both had (maybe still) multi-chair shops. The > lead barber was also the cashier. Of course in addition to a haircut > many guys went in the shop every day to also get a shave and a facial. > Palmer House had twelve chairs I think; but it used to be that all > guys would get a haircut once a week or every two weeks at least. No > more. PAT] I've been going to a four-chair shop in Fountain Valley California for most of the last ten years. Fountain Valley is in Orange County, the epitome of suburbia by some reconning. The owner just retired and sold the shop last month, but it still has four chairs and stays busy. However, what has disappeared are real haircuts. I'm told that using a straight razor is essentially optional on the California license exam and most barbers skip that. A few places seem to recognize the problem, but solve it by pretending to shave my neck, not really doing it. Since I can't see the process, I can only infer their action by the lack of a smooth result. I feel like such an old-timer! 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 ------------------------------ From: Carl Navarro Subject: Re: Linksys boxen Reply-To: cnavarro@wcnet.org Date: Thu, 01 Jan 2004 10:00:01 GMT Organization: Road Runner High Speed Online http://www.rr.com On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 22:16:38 -0600, Gary Breuckman wrote: >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Actually I could use a 'pass through' >> socket back there, to attach a second Linksys box as well. But I am >> trying to *avoid* the additional hardware expense and keep my system as >> simple as possible. PAT] > If you mean a Linksys hub or switch, yes, but you do not need another > router. > Also, if you have four ports AND an uplink connector, be advised that the > uplink shares the port next to it, you can't use BOTH the port and the > UPLINK at the same time. > -- Gary Breuckman > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What I have is a little blue box with > squat legs that says Linksys Etherfast Cable/DSL Router on the front. > On the back side are six modular connectors (lines one through four) > plus a 'pass through' and a connector to the cable 'modem'. I assume > if I strap another box on either through the 'pass through' or the > socket next to it, I would not need another connector to the cable > modem as well. But then I could have the luxury of a second VOIP > phone, but just imagine the traffic jam going through the cable! PAT] Actually, you unplug one of your 4 devices from the Linksys Router box, and add a 4/5/8/12/16 port hub or switch to that port and plug whatever you unplugged into the hub or switch. A Linksys 8 port switch is designed to stack on top of the router, but I'd just go by price. :-) Carl Navarro ------------------------------ From: Joe@nospamcity.com Subject: Re: Taxes on Phone Bills - Ouch Date: Thu, 01 Jan 2004 05:34:07 -0800 Organization: Cox Communications Second line for basic charge of $8.95? Wow! David wrote: > I recently got ADSL service and looked at what it would take to keep > my second phone line for fax use. > Monthly fee: > Line with local service: $8.95 > Taxes: 911 Tax, Al Gore Tax, Spanish American War Tax, State Utility > Tax,Sales Tax =$6.00. > I dropped the second line because of 67% taxes. If not for that, I > would have kept it. > David ------------------------------ From: Joe@nospamcity.com Subject: Re: Telecoms Embrace Internet Calling, But Is It Trouble? Date: Thu, 01 Jan 2004 05:40:08 -0800 Organization: Cox Communications Marcus Didius Falco wrote: > It's not entirely bad news for the industry: Net-based calling is > already lowering traditional phone companies' capital costs, and will > continue to do so. And a rack of VOIP equipment is about the size of a > microwave. Just one of those can replace floors' worth of old-school > telecom switches, which are about the size of an industrial > refrigerator. It will be decades, however, before the upgrades are > complete. Those old-school telecom switches are still needed to complete the VOIP call to 99.99% of the subscribers. And, likewise they are need to originate most calls to VOIP subscribers. Cell phones are going after the local provider a lot faster than VOIP. And, the cell phone providers use pretty much the same old-school telecom switch as do the old-school wireline providers. Apparently the reporter doesn't get it. ------------------------------ From: Earle Robinson Subject: Re: Migrating to ADSL -- Questions For the Tech Gurus Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2004 22:42:30 +0100 Please accept the following, but please hide my email address. Thank you. In fact, ADSL and ISDN may co-exist quite nicely and this is what happens in Germany. A relatively small amount of the lower bandwidth is left for ISDN, enough for the 2 b channels and the d channel, and the upper bandwidth devoted to ADSL. The reason for this is ISDN has long been very popular in Germany, so the best way to get ADSL subscribers is to offer ADSL on top of ADSL. Thus, Mr. Warren is mistaken in saying this is technically impossible. Earle Robinson ------------------------------ From: Danny Burstein Subject: Correction, was Re: Migrating to ADSL -- Questions For the Tech Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2004 02:41:08 +0000 (UTC) Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC In an earlier posting I wrote the following about ISDN (excerpted): > The standard setup for ISDN in the US uses the exact same type of > (physical) wire pair that a regular phone line would, but the > signalling on it -- even though it's using the same frequencies as a > standard voice line -- is very different. While most of my post was correct, I've since discovered that I should have paid more attention to my kindergarten teacher. The common ISDN circuits in the US actually do use more frequencies on the copper wire than just the regular voice ones. My apologies. Now to crawl back under my rock. _____________________________________________________ Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key dannyb@panix.com [to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded] ------------------------------ From: Chris@chris-s.co.uk (www.gorover.com) Subject: N-Gage Date: 31 Dec 2003 16:02:15 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com http://www.n-gage-help.com Seems to be best for Nokia N-gage at the moment! Chris ------------------------------ 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, Yahoo Groups, 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: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 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 V23 #1 **************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Jan 2 14:57:15 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i02JvFc15467; Fri, 2 Jan 2004 14:57:15 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2004 14:57:15 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200401021957.i02JvFc15467@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 V23 #2 TELECOM Digest Fri, 2 Jan 2004 14:57:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 2 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson My Upgraded Computer System (TELECOM Digest Editor) ReplayTV Announces New Flexible Pricing Model (Monty Solomon) ReplayTV Price Drop Bait-and-Switch (Monty Solomon) Is TiVo Really All That Great? (Monty Solomon) Century-old Math Problem May Have Been Solved (Monty Solomon) Rumor: Apple iBox (Monty Solomon) Re: Step, Panel and XP (Joe@nospamcity.com) Re: Step, Panel and XP (Joseph) Problem With Distorted Fax Using VoIP (Rob) Re: Taxes on Phone Bills - Ouch (David) How are Cellphone 911 Calls Handled? (W Randolph Franklin) Twenty Years Ago Today 1-Jan-2004, back on 1-Jan-1984 (Mark J Cuccia) Soft Channel Bank? (Chay) Re: California Plan Would Halt Trucks Remotely in Attack (Walt Howard) Re: Barbers (was Re: 10-Digit) (Marcus Jervis) Re: Barbers (was Re: 10-Digit) (Dave Close) Re: Then Benjamin Franklin Must be a Terrorist Too? (Joe@nospamcity.com) 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, 1 Jan 2004 22:51:27 EST From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: My Upgraded Computer System Starting at about 5 PM New Year's Eve and continuing until way past my usual bedtime, then continuing after I woke up Thursday morning, I made some expansions to my computer. For one, I installed an additional hard drive. I still have my original hard drive of 20 GB, which is partioned into Windows 2000 (12 GB) and Linux sections (8 GB). In addition I now have a new 80 GB drive. The original drive is 'C', the new hard drive is 'F'. My original CD player was 'D' which it still is. For two, I now have a CD/DVD player/burner which is known as 'E'. It is Hewlitt Packard DVD300i by model number. The main reason for the additional hard 80 GB hard drive was to insure lots of swap space when burning new CDs, to make the manufacture of same go as quickly as possible. The little removable 62 MB drive in the USB slot (a tiny little thing about the size of my finger) is now 'G'. And I still have the floppy device, which is 'A'. I have been giving some thought to moving Windows 2000 onto the new 80 GB drive (F) and expanding Linux to the full 20 GB drive (C) which used to be split between Windows and Linux. I presume I would still have to partition the new 80 GB drive (F) to give the new HP writer and reader about 60 GB of swap space. Yes or No? Will 60 GB be adequate for the CD/DVD burner swap space? Yes or No? I do not want to have to load and unload the swap space repeatedly to get my work done. Another project I have in mind: Although I still maintain that my old Toshiba Satellite 220 Windows 95 is the sturdiest work horse in my network, I have pretty much given up on expanding it to anything larger. It just won't handle the added work load. It *might* be upgradeable to Windows 98, or maybe not, but Micrsoft has said their support of Win 98 is ending in a few months, and I really do not think that old (1996) laptop running 122 megs would go to anymore than that. I know it certainly would not be able to handle 2000 or XP. So the 95 just sits there with its old parallel port camera (from Zoom Telephonics, remember those?) and sends pictures out to whoever wants to see them at http://patricktownson.us.tf . But I have thought the Windows 98 (which is on a Winbook XL2 laptop) might be an ideal candidate for conversion to Windows 2000 or Linux. Any thoughts from readers on this? Good idea? Bad idea? And why? It has a 6 GB hard drive. At the present time (as Windows 98) it has numerous problems: For one, it tends to just turn itself off on an arbitrary basis. Other times, it will not permit itself to be turned off short of forcing it down with the master switch. Mostly it is used for feeding out to http://weatherforecast.us.tf the data from the weather station mechanicals on my back porch roof. Although each computer has its own display screen, keyboard and mouse, I can view them on a jumbo monitor using a KVM switch which is handy at times. From the master keyboard, doing 1 through 3 gets me control over each computer. 4 blanks the screen, and F1 gets me a continuously rotating display from the various computers. Any suggestions for improving/cleaning up this mess will be appreciated. PAT ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2004 23:36:50 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: ReplayTV Announces New Flexible Pricing Model for Its The Industry's Premium Quality DVRs, and Best Overall Value ... ReplayTV Announces New Flexible Pricing Model for Its Award-Winning 5500 Series Digital Video Recorders SANTA CLARA, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Dec. 22, 2003-- Purchasers Now Have Choice of Buying the ReplayTV Service Monthly or for a Single Onetime Fee ReplayTV(R), the inventor and creator of personal television, today announced a new flexible pricing model for its acclaimed 5500 Series Digital Video Recorders (DVR). Beginning immediately, consumers will be able to purchase ReplayTV 5500 Series DVRs at the following prices: $149.99 for the 40-hour Model RTV5504; $299.99 for the 80-hour RTV5508; $449.99 for the 160-hour RTV5516; and $799.99 for the new 320-hour RTV5532. With each model, consumers will have the choice of either purchasing the ReplayTV Service for a $12.95 monthly fee, or choosing lifetime service bundled with the product for a single, onetime payment of $299. ReplayTV 5500 Series customers who have already purchased 3-year subscriptions to the ReplayTV Service under the previous pricing model will have their services automatically extended for the lifetime of the product at no additional charge. http://finance.lycos.com/qc/news/story.aspx?story=200312222009_BWR__BW5508 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2004 00:30:27 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: ReplayTV Price Drop Bait-and-Switch Posted by michael on Thursday December 25, @11:30AM from the falco dept. jkeyes writes "Last week on 12/17 DNNA (new parent company of Replay TV) decided to drop the Replay TV 5504 model down to $149, yet the boxes and website said that it came with three years free service. So immediately it appeared on deal sites like FatWallet with Replay telling people on the phone who called that yes all 5504 models include 3 years of service so immediately Circuit City & Amazon sold out. Then on the 12/22 DNNA released a press release annoucing the new price and claiming that the 5504 models NO LONGER have 3 years free with them and blamed the retailers for dropping the price too soon. Even though their own Customer Service Reps were saying when it first dropped that you got 3 years free. Also to add to the issue the actual devices have giant green stickers on them saying Three Years Free AND a paper inside telling you this. Replay went on to say that if you had a problem with this or your replay was deactivated to just return it to the retailer you purchased it from." http://slashdot.org/articles/03/12/25/1428233.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2004 00:34:03 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Is TiVo Really All That Great? Cable companies slashing fees, crafting services in bid to get consumers to hop on the TV replay bandwagon. By Ron Lieber The Wall Street Journal Originally published December 29, 2003 LOS ANGELES -- The future of TiVo may be uncertain, but the TiVolution has never been more accessible than it is this holiday season. TiVo, which is both popular usage for newfangled alternatives to VCRs and the brand-name of the company that helped popularize them, once required an initial investment of hundreds of dollars. But, as new competitors continue to emerge, most people can now try the new way of watching and recording television for far less. Last week, ReplayTV lowered the price on its cheapest machine to $149 and stopped forcing consumers to buy three years of service upfront, cutting the initial cost by more than $300. Time Warner Cable this year began a widespread rollout of a service that has a TiVo-like digital video recorder built into the cable box and costs less than $10 a month. Some of Cox Communications Inc.'s customers already have cable DVR service, and Comcast Corp. plans to roll it out to all of its subscribers next year. Hate your cable company? EchoStar Communications Corp.'s Dish Network has started offering a free DVR box to new satellite TV subscribers. Though only a tiny fraction of households now have the service, TiVo and its progeny offer features that radically change the way people watch television. They make it easy to record shows so you can watch what you want, when you want. Then, they make it easy to skip commercials [or, in the case of the Super Bowl, watch them repeatedly]. http://www.sunspot.net/technology/bal-tivo122903,0,1069107.story ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2004 03:46:02 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Century-Old Math Problem May Have Been Solved By Jascha Hoffman, Globe Correspondent, 12/30/2003 BERKELEY, Calif. -- A reclusive Russian mathematician appears to have answered a question that has stumped mathematicians for more than a century. After a decade of isolation in St. Petersburg, over the last year Grigory Perelman posted a few papers to an online archive. Although he has no known plans to publish them, his work has sent shock waves through what is usually a quiet field. At two conferences held during the last two weeks in California, a range of specialists scrutinized Perelman's work, trying to grasp all the details and look for potential flaws. If Perelman really has proved the so-called Poincare Conjecture, as many believe he has, he will become known as one of the great mathematicians of the 21st century and will be first in line for a $1 million prize offered by the Clay Mathematics Institute in Cambridge. http://www.boston.com/news/science/articles/2003/12/30/century_old_math_problem_may_have_been_solved/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2004 12:22:30 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Rumor: Apple iBox in Production We just recently received information from a alleged member of a testing program at Apple. MacOSX.com isn't in the business of spreading rumors, nor do we wish to put ourselves into harms way, but we felt this is news worthy. We are trying to find out as much as we can. More on this if we get it, here you go: The Apple iBox is a project that, in one form or another, the company has been working on for years. The prototypes for the first set top mac are still found on eBay today. Little is known about these, but I do know some interesting things about what's now called the iBox. The iBox has a small, sleek encasement that is about 10 inches long, 6 inches wide and 1 - 1 1/2 inches thick. Its optical drive is slot loading and it has an on button that resembles the cube's power "button." Its case is made of the same material found on the G5, even sports the same grey logo on the top. The front, or face, of the iBox is pearl white, similar to an iPod. http://www.macosx.com/content/article.php?cid=53 ------------------------------ From: Joe@nospamcity.com Subject: Re: Step, Panel and XP Date: Fri, 02 Jan 2004 05:56:50 -0800 Organization: Cox Communications jsw@ivgate.omahug.org wrote: > The Manawa office in Council Bluffs, IA (Omaha, NE area, 712-366) used > what was called 'Directorized SxS'. This was an outboard conversion > used on some Ma Bell (and maybe others) step offices to approach > common control. This conversion was most likely done in the 1960's, > and provided dial tone to the subscriber, and recorded the dialed > number, either in dial pulses or touch-tone tones. For interoffice > calls it then drove the switch train, and for intra-office it provided > the signaling (MF, dial-pulse, possibly even revertive - I dunno) that > the called office expected. This installation lasted until the mid > 1980's when the Manawa office was cut to a DMS-10. General Telephone used directors on the SxS switches extensively after the advent of DID. I had the misfortune of living in a Los Angeles suburb from 1969 until 1979 served by General Telephone of California. The director didn't create a problem until you made a toll call, which brought the yellow punch tape AMA kludge into play. I made lots and lots of long distance calls, and my failure rate was close to 50%. The thing would sit there in silence for 90 seconds, then provide overflow tone. I finally brought in a foreign exchange line from a contiguous Pacific Bell exchange served by a then-new 1ESS. But, GT put it on analog carrier and the sound quality was lousy with echo and tinnines. I raised cain and they finally cut it to PCM carrier with proper supervision, no less, and I finally was in business. I left the area in 1979, but GT didn't cut that office to a GTD5 until 1987. Now, today, in 2004, the former GTE, now Verizon, is probably better for local service in California than SBC (former Pacific Telephone, then Pacific Bell). ------------------------------ From: Joseph Subject: Re: Step, Panel and XP Date: Fri, 02 Jan 2004 08:51:28 -0800 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com On Thu, 1 Jan 2004 10:37:17 CST, jsw@ivgate.omahug.org wrote: > It seems like many of Ma Bell's step offices used a similar type of > tone plant, one with the 'flatulent' ringback, and that most of their > panel offices (as well as most 1XB and many 5XB) used the very > familiar 'metropolitan' tone plant, but I know of many exceptions, > making it not trivial to determine the CO type just by the > dial/ring/busy tones. You are probably speaking of a Western Electric #355 (Terminal Per Station) or #356 (Terminal Per Line) CDO (community dial office.) > I do remember, for example, that some of Ma Bell's step offices had a > ring tone that appeared to come from the same type of tone plant used > in the newer 5XB offices, one that to the untrained ear sounded very > much like today's standard ring tone. Saugus, Massachusetts was one of these. You can find many of these illustrated on the "Phone Trips" web site Lots of stuff to look at and listen to. Be sure to check out "Network sounds of the '70s" parts 1 and 2. > And then there was this strange ring tone best described as a 'low > rumble' that occasionally appeared on some of Ma Bell's 5XB offices. I > never figured that one out. It was barely audible on some LD calls. > It almost sounded like only the spurious harmonics of the ring signal. Saugus, Massachusetts had this for their #5XB. Of course now most everything's the same boring ESS with the same basic tone everywhere in Canada and the US. ------------------------------ From: sushilover111@hotmail.com (Rob) Subject: Problem With Distorted Fax Using VoIP Date: 2 Jan 2004 06:54:55 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Hi, I currently use a Cisco VoIP system that works very well for voice calls. We use CallManager 3.2.2c. We use 6608 gateways to access the PSTN via several PRI lines. These PRI's support both voice calls and fax machines to and from the PSTN. We use both 6624 and VG248 gateways to connect to fax machines. Voice calls to and from the PSTN work very well -- excellent quality, reliability, etc. Fax calls are sporadically problematic. Some faxes are received with part of a page "scrunched." That is, the entire page of the fax is present (and mostly readable), but an inch or two of the page will have been compressed on the received fax to a space much smaller -- a half inch or so. This distortion is very noticable. Usually you can still read the "compressed" text, but obviously the quality of that section is very poor. It doesn't appear to happen nearly all the time. Also it "seems" like it is more likely to happen from a caller outside of New England. We are located in Eastern Massachusetts, so I'm wondering if the problem occurs when calls travel via AT&T (before being delivered to us by Verizon) as opposed to calls that strictly stay on Verizon's network (as calls within New England are likely to do)?? Since the problem only occurs on 5-10% (just a guess) of faxes, identifying possible problem sources is difficult. Any ideas? Thanks - Rob. ------------------------------ From: David Subject: Re: Taxes on Phone Bills - Ouch Organization: SBC http://yahoo.sbc.com Date: Fri, 02 Jan 2004 15:48:51 GMT wrote in message news:telecom23.1.16@telecom-digest.org: > Second line for basic charge of $8.95? Wow! > David wrote: >> I recently got ADSL service and looked at what it would take to keep >> my second phone line for fax use. >> Monthly fee: >> Line with local service: $8.95 >> Taxes: 911 Tax, Al Gore Tax, Spanish American War Tax, State Utility >> Tax,Sales Tax =$6.00. >> I dropped the second line because of 67% taxes. If not for that, I >> would have kept it. >> David I guess I should have stated, monthly fee = $8.95 + $6.00 = $14.95, if I do not make a single call. David ------------------------------ Subject: How Are Cellphone 911 Calls Handled? From: W Randolph Franklin Date: Fri, 02 Jan 2004 16:23:10 GMT How centralized is the processing of 911 calls from cellphones? Here's my story: My Verizon cellphone is 703-447-xxxx. Last November I was waiting at a stop light in Troy NY (local area code: 518) when an accident occurred a few feet from me. So I picked up my phone: 911 person: "What's your emergency?" me: "I'm reporting an accident at Hoosick and 8th." 911 person: "Huh?" me: "in Troy NY". 911 person: "OK, I'll transfer" me: "I'm reporting an accident at Hoosick and 8th." new 911 person: "Huh?" me: "in Troy NY". new 911 person: "OK, I'll transfer" me: "I'm reporting an accident at Hoosick and 8th." 3rd 911 person: "OK, we'll send someone. Was anyone hurt? ... What's your number" me: "Can't you get that from the ANI?" 3rd 911 person: "Not from a cellphone." Also does the other end lock the phone against further use after the call, or in cellphones is it the cellphone that does this? Thanks, /Wm. Randolph Franklin [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I don't think it is because it is a cell phone that they cannot get the number. I think it was because of the call being transferred around and the original calling number being lost in the switching as a result. I feel certain the first 911 person had your number, getting transferred to a second then a third person is what lost the number. I do know that when I lived in Chicago and listened to the police scanner, I would hear calls where the police officer would ask the dispatcher, 'what phone number did the call come from?' and the dispatcher would say 'do not have a number ... it came through the operator.' When people call the operator to report an emergency, the operator is *supposed to* relay the original calling number when she dials 312-787-0000 to report the matter. She is *supposed to* give that number to the dispatcher. But things do not always go as they should. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2004 22:44:11 -0600 (CST) From: Mark J Cuccia Subject: Twenty Years Ago Today 1-Jan-2004, back on 1-Jan-1984 Pat: I assume that the final issue for v.22/2003 was #816, which was dated and time-stamped at: Wed, 31 Dec 2003 17:06:00 EST There was no mention by you as a Administrivia or such that this was indeed the last issue anywhere in the issue (as far as I can tell... maybe I overlooked something?) I do know that v.23 #1, the first issue for 2004 has been prepared and emailed, as I have received my copy. In previous "year-ends", you noted the final issue of the year/volume by reprinting Lauren Weinstein's "The Day the Bell System Died", sung to the tune of "The Day the Music Died/ Bye Bye Miss American Pie" WHICH, BTW ... reminds me... It was *** TWENTY YEARS AGO TODAY *** (1-Jan-2004) on 1-Jan-1984, that the Bell System *DID* "officially" die as a single unit. Divestiture was announced in press/news releases by AT&T when approved by the Court (Green) and DOJ in early 1982 (8-January-1982 to be exact). Preparations began throughout 1982 for the official breakup of Bell to take effect "officially" on 1-Jan-1984. And on 1-Jan-1983, exactly one earlier than the actual official/final date of 1-Jan-1984, there were some major steps taken in preparation for divestiture that took effect, but it wasn't actually until 1-Jan-1984 when divestiture officially happened. And even though the official date of divestiture taking effect was twenty years ago today, on 1-Jan-1984, it still took a number of years before many "joint Bell System" functions, such as Calling Cards, Operator Services, toll and tandem switch functions and operations, etc. could be separated where the divested BOCs and AT&T Communications (formerly AT&T Long Lines) were each providing their own separate facilities. Even today, there are *STILL* some remaining legacy vestiges of a BOC "sharing" from AT&T or vice-versa, in network operations. Other thing *HAVE* changed in the past twenty years ... What "was" Western Electric, the manufacturing and equipment arm of the (one) Bell Telephone System, with Bell Telephone Laboratories, was retained by AT&T in 1984. However, a little over ten years later, in the 1995/96 timeframe, AT&T spun-off its equipment and (Bell) Labs operations into Lucent, which itself has had its ups-and-downs over the past eight or so years. (BTW, AT&T did retain a "labs" unit for switched network operations, which was separated from "Bell Labs" shortly before spinning off what would be known as Lucent). I'm not going to attempt any predictions on the future, but I am reposting what I submitted to the Digest almost seven years ago, on Wednesday 8-Jan-1997, on the fifteenth anniversary of the *announcement* of "forthcoming" divestiture (originally on 8-Jan-1982). Ironically also on Thursday, 8-Jan-2004 (about a week away) will be the twenty-second anniversary of the *announcement* of forthcoming divestiture. This can also be found in the Archives in the back-issues: massis.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/back.issues/1997.volume.17/vol17.iss001-050 - - - - Date: Wed, 08 Jan 1997 10:52:50 -0800 From: Mark J. Cuccia Subject: This Date in Telecom History - Divestiture It was on this date (8-January) fifteen years ago in 1982, that the 'old' AT&T (as head of the "one Bell System") announced to the U.S. Dept. of (in)Justice, that it would divest itself of its (twenty-two) wholly-owned local Bell Operating (telephone) Companies. This consent decree was supposed end the federal antitrust lawsuit that DOJ filed against the Bell System in the mid-70's. Back in the mid-70's, DOJ wanted AT&T to divest itself of Western Electric and possibly Bell Labs. However, in the divestiture announced on 8-January-1982 (which took effect 1-January-1984), AT&T kept Western Electric and Bell Labs, but spun-off the twenty-two local BOC's into seven new regional Bell holding companies. More recently, AT&T spun-off Bell Labs and what used to be known as Western Electric, into Lucent. The count of twenty-two BOC's doesn't include Southern New England Telephone nor Cincinnati Bell, of which AT&T only held a minority share back in the old Bell System days. And at the time of divestiture, both 'went their own ways' as 'independent' telcos and were *not* placed under NYNEX nor Ameritech. However, the total of twenty-two BOC's *does* count C&P (Chesapeake and Potomac) *four* times, as: C & P - Maryland C & P - D.C. C & P - Virginia C & P - West Virginia BTW, Bell Canada is *not* counted in this total of twenty-two BOC's. Since the 1956 consent-decree, Bell Canada with Northern Electric became more and more separated from AT&T and Western Electric. By the early 1970's, AT&T only held about two percent of holdings of Bell Canada. Also in the early 1970's, Bell Northern Research was created by Bell Canada and Northern Electric as a uniquely Canadian R&D version similar to AT&T/WECo's Bell Labs. In 1975, AT&T/WECo and NECo/Bell-Canada officially terminated what remained of their license and service agreements. Northern Electric had become Northern Telecom; BNR and NT are presently referred to as Nortel. As for divestiture and competition ... it never seems to end. There are more entities out there than ever, involved as carriers, resellers, manufacturers, promoters, etc. of all forms of telecommunications. Also, there is the "Telecommunications Bill" of 1996, signed into law last year. But fifteen years ago, who would have thought that the "one Bell System" would have agreed to split itself up at all! - - - - AND, that is what I posted (almost) seven years ago on what was the fifteenth anniversary of the *announcement* of forthcoming (at that time) divestiture, which officially occurred on 1-January-1984, exactly twenty years ago today (today being Thursday 1-January-2004). I have removed the original sig-line that appeared in my original post. Some information in it is no longer valid (specifically the postal mailing address). The telephone contact info is still valid, the email address is now a shorter domain name as appears below. Happy New Year! Mark J. Cuccia mcuccia@tulane.edu New Orleans LA CSA (in the Land of DIXIE!) [TELECOM Digest Edtor's Note: It seems hard to believe that this Digest dates back to when there was *one* phone system -- the Bell System -- for almost everyone. In 1981-82, the Bell System ruled, there were no cell phones, very little 'enhanced' phone features like ESS, certainly no VOIP. Nor were there any other electronic publica- tions on the internet dealing with phone service except for TELECOM Digest. Now there are at least a dozen e-publications dealing with phone service (in a generic sense) on the net. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Chay Subject: Soft Channel Bank ? Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2004 23:30:32 -0500 I am looking for a software driven / defined Channel Bank. What I have in mind is a single board PC and backplane board that supports 12 or more PCI slots, into which you could then slot your FXO / FXS cards. Ideally this channel bank would then connect to a CTI softswitch via a T1 / E1 interface. If anyone know of or has heard of such a thing would you please let me know. Thanks. ------------------------------ From: howard@rumba.ee.ualberta.ca (Walt Howard) Subject: Re: California Plan Would Halt Trucks Remotely in Attack Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2004 04:45:40 UTC Organization: A poorly-installed InterNetNews site In article , Monty Solomon wrote: > By Daniel Sorid > SAN FRANCISCO, Jan 1 (Reuters) - Three years after a truck driver > slammed an 18-wheeler into California's state capitol building, > lawmakers are considering a plan to link trucks carrying hazardous > material to a satellite tracking system that would halt them if they > were used in a terror attack. > The trucks would be equipped with devices that would either cut off > fuel to the engine or turn on the brakes when activated. The proposed > bill would implement the country's most stringent safety regulations > for trucks carrying fuel and other hazardous materials, but it faces > fierce opposition from local trucking companies who complain that the > rules would make California truckers uncompetitive. > Assemblyman John Dutra, unhappy with the slow federal pace in > addressing the issue, introduced the bill in February 2003, and it > passed easily in the state assembly. Amid protest from industry > groups, the bill failed to get past the transportation committee in > the state senate, where it will be reconsidered this year. If they aren't real careful with this, they are going to make hijacking a truck as easy as crashing Microsoft Windows. It is very important that only a very few people be able to activate such a system, and that the system operator be able to guarantee this. The level of reliability required exceeds anything that the state of California is capable of doing now. It will also be interesting to see how they can make such a system resist being disabled by a disgruntled (for whatever reason) owner. Walt Howard /"\ ASCII Ribbon Campaign InterNet: whoward@ieee.org \ / No HTML in mail or news! BellNet: +1 780 492 6306 X / \ ------------------------------ From: Marcus Jervis Subject: Re: Barbers (was Re: 10-Digit) Date: Fri, 02 Jan 2004 08:17:05 +0000 Dave Close wrote: >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The Palmer House Hotel in Chicago and >> the Conrad Hilton Hotel both had (maybe still) multi-chair shops. The >> lead barber was also the cashier. Of course in addition to a haircut >> many guys went in the shop every day to also get a shave and a facial. >> Palmer House had twelve chairs I think; but it used to be that all >> guys would get a haircut once a week or every two weeks at least. No >> more. PAT] > I've been going to a four-chair shop in Fountain Valley California for > most of the last ten years. Fountain Valley is in Orange County, the > epitome of suburbia by some reconning. The owner just retired and sold > the shop last month, but it still has four chairs and stays busy. > However, what has disappeared are real haircuts. I'm told that using a > straight razor is essentially optional on the California license exam > and most barbers skip that. A few places seem to recognize the > problem, but solve it by pretending to shave my neck, not really doing > it. Since I can't see the process, I can only infer their action by > the lack of a smooth result. I feel like such an old-timer! Me too! I was born in 1952, and can remember going with my dad to a barber shop in the little San Joaquin valley town where we lived around 1956 or so. A real barber shop, with multiple chairs, and a guy named Doc with a waxed moustache who could give you a real close shave. Recently after growing a beard for a few months and seeing how old I looked when it came out all gray, I decided it would be fun to visit a barber shop and have a real old fashioned shave, where they mix up the hot lather in a little bowl and shave REALLY close ... not like I get with my plastic Bic razor and aerosol canned lather. I called around to inquire how much this would cost, and was incredulous when after calling shop after shop, not only couldn't I find anyone who would shave me, a lot of them weren't even sure what I was talking about. One of them said he'd seen a barber give a shave in a movie once (Remember The Untouchables movie, with Robert De Niro as Al Capone, starting his day with a close shave from his barber?). Finally I called what sounded like an old neighborhood barber shop in Wedgewood (Seattle). The guy said, sure, he could shave me. I got there and discovered this old neighborhood shop, the kind that years ago probably had stacks of Stag magazines and Field and Stream. Operating the shop was a Middle Eastern fellow and an Asian woman, who I think was his wife. Apparently he went to barber college overseas where they still taught straight razor technique. I imagined that he had bought the shop a few years earlier perhaps from a retiring barber. He did the whole routine with a very sharp razor and the hot lather. It was great! An amazingly close shave, unlike any I'd had before. The best part and most unbelievable was when I asked him the price. "Three dollars!" I thought I'd been transported back to the 1950s of my early childhood! I think I gave him seven dollars, and said I'd be back. Which reminds me of another story (I really am getting old). Barbering went into decline in the late 60s and early 70s because fewer men were getting regular haircuts. I remember once in the mid-60s I was at Red's Barber Shop in North City (also Seattle), and Red was complaining about the Beatles and their long hair. Then he launched into some fantasy about getting "one of those long-haired kids" in there, and how he'd like to shave all their hair off. I think one of the guys complained about not being able to "tell the boys from the girls these days". So Red's was an old fashioned barber shop, but this was just before the decline of barbering, and those that survived had to adapt. Sometime, maybe seven years later I was driving down 15th Ave NE in North City, and I looked at where Red's had stood. It was still there, only different. It was the early 70s, and the little shop was now covered with cedar shake shingles, and there was a fern hanging in the window. The sign was different too. It now said, "Red's Unisex Styling Salon". My, how things changed so fast back then. _________________________________________________________________ Working moms: Find helpful tips here on managing kids, home, work and yourself. http://special.msn.com/msnbc/workingmom.armx ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2004 22:59:32 -0800 From: Dave Close Subject: Barbers (was 10-Digit Dialing) Date: 31 Dec 2003 23:52:08 -0800 Organization: Compata, Costa Mesa, California > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The Palmer House Hotel in Chicago and > the Conrad Hilton Hotel both had (maybe still) multi-chair shops. The > lead barber was also the cashier. Of course in addition to a haircut > many guys went in the shop every day to also get a shave and a facial. > Palmer House had twelve chairs I think; but it used to be that all > guys would get a haircut once a week or every two weeks at least. No > more. PAT] I've been going to a four-chair shop in Fountain Valley California for most of the last ten years. Fountain Valley is in Orange County, the epitome of suburbia by some reconning. The owner just retired and sold the shop last month, but it still has four chairs and stays busy. However, what has disappeared are real haircuts. I'm told that using a straight razor is essentially optional on the California license exam and most barbers skip that. A few places seem to recognize the problem, but solve it by pretending to shave my neck, not really doing it. Since I can't see the process, I can only infer their action by the lack of a smooth result. I feel like such an old-timer! -- Dave Close, Compata, Costa Mesa CA dave@compata.com, +1 714 434 7359 dhclose@alumni,caltech.edu The cost of silicon chips has been steady at about $1bn per acre for 40 years." --Gordon Moore ------------------------------ From: Joe@nospamcity.com Subject: Re: Then Benjamin Franklin Must be a Terrorist Too? Date: Fri, 02 Jan 2004 06:00:58 -0800 Organization: Cox Communications > But you see, its not just the sore losers here in the USA who hate > Bush, a lot of people in the rest of the world don't like him (or > his father) either. PAT] Hey, what about folks like me who voted for Bush and now feel like I elected Adolf Hitler? Trouble is, I can't stand any of the Democrats so it is time to stay home. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well a lot of people feel like yourself, but many are too sheepish to say how they now feel. 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, Yahoo Groups, 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: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 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 V23 #2 **************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat Jan 3 19:43:50 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i040hoc22607; Sat, 3 Jan 2004 19:43:50 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2004 19:43:50 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200401040043.i040hoc22607@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 V23 #3 TELECOM Digest Sat, 3 Jan 2004 19:44:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 3 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson BBC Writer Can't Fathom the Internet (Ronda Hauben) Re: Twenty Years Ago Today 1-Jan-2004 Back on 1-Jan-1984 (Lisa Hancock) Re: 10-Digit Dialing (Lisa Hancock) Re: NANP Numbering (Earle Robinson) Re: How Are Cellphone 911 Calls Handled? (John R. Levine) Re: How Are Cellphone 911 Calls Handled? (Steven J Sobol) Re: California Plan Would Halt Trucks Remotely in Attack (Tom Horsley) Re: Step, Panel and XP (Wesrock@aol.com) Re: My Upgraded Computer System (Gene Gaines) Re: Then Benjamin Franklin Must be a Terrorist Too? (Tom Betz) Re: Then Benjamin Franklin Must be a Terrorist Too? (Lisa Hancock) 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: Ronda Hauben Subject: BBC Writer Can't Fathom the Internet Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2004 17:26:44 UTC Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC Is there some reason the BBC can't understand what the Internet is about, or take the trouble to spread an accurate understanding of it, rather than a mistaken conception that makes the Internet into the one network ARPANET? Specifically the Internet is a network of networks -- or a metasystem of networks. It makes it possible for diverse networks to speak to each other. The ARPANET was a connection of different computers and operating systems, not at all as the BBC story portrays it. See the following which is the BBC version of the ARPANET and Internet. And below I have included a quote from a paper where the creation of the Internet is described: On Thu, 1 Jan 2004, Dave Farber wrote on his IP list posted: > What the net did next > By Mark Ward > BBC News Online technology correspondent (...) > TCP/IP was key to turning the Arpanet into the internet. > Small start > The Arpanet came before the net and demanded that all computers that > connect to it do so with the same hardware and software. > By contrast, the net, thanks to TCP/IP, could let people on > different sorts of computers running different software, swap > information. The real contrast is quite different, however. From a paper about the ARPANET and the Internet: "The ARPANET solved the difficult problem of communication in a network with dissimilar computers and dissimilar operating systems. However, when the objective is to share resources across the boundaries of dissimilar networks, the problems to be solved are compounded. Different networks mean that there can be different packet sizes to accommodate, different network parameters such as different communication media rates, different buffering and signaling strategies, different ways of routing packets, and different propagation delays. Also dissimilar networks can have different error control techniques and different ways of determining the status of network components." The challenge in accommodating dissimilar networks is at once a conceptual and architectural problem. Kahn recognized the need for a communications protocol to transmit packets from one network, and reformat them as needed for transmission through successive networks. This would require that there be black boxes or gateway computers and software that would provide the interfaces between the dissimilar networks and which would route the packets to their destination. (18) Also there would need to be software to carry out the functions required by the protocol. Appropriate software modules, and perhaps other modifications to allow efficient performance, would then have to be embedded in the operating systems of the host computers in each of the participating networks and gateways would have to be introduced between them. The design for such a protocol would be a guide to create the specification standard for the software and hardware that each network would agree to implement to become part of an internetwork communications system. The standards or agreements to cooperate would be set out in the protocol." (from The Birth of the Internet: An Architectural Conception for Solving the Multiple Network Problem) http://www.columbia.edu/~rh120/other/birth_internet.txt We want the Internet to grow and flourish. It would seem important than to start the new year off with accurate information about its development. Ronda ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Jeff nor Lisa) Subject: Re: Twenty Years Ago Today 1-Jan-2004, back on 1-Jan-1984 Date: 2 Jan 2004 20:51:56 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com > [TELECOM Digest Edtor's Note: It seems hard to believe that this > Digest dates back to when there was *one* phone system -- the Bell > System -- for almost everyone. At the time, I really thought quality telephone service this country took for granted was doomed. It didn't work out that way, thank goodness. The Bell System generally (there are exceptions) ran an excellent service. It was the right system for the technology of the time. But the cost of electronics were on a downhill slide in those years. Look what an IBM plain PC cost and what kind of machine you'd get today with the same money. Cheap electronics revolutionized the ability to provide local and long distance telephone service. In electro-mechanical days, where a single piece of switchgear could cost $1,000, engineers had to be judicious how many they ordered for an exchange and how they all linked together. But today, cheap electronics lets them be inexact, as does cheap fiber optic links. They still have to plan for traffic of course, but it's a lot simpler and easier. Computer programming is a lot today easier when it was back then -- we don't have to count our bits like we did, even in 1984, which led to the Y2K mess. In reading the histories, it's amazing the stuff they no longer have to worry about because of cheap high capacity and electronic flexibility. The breakup of the Bell System had two big separate parts two it: One was the discontinuance of the rental policy. The company realized that the cost of renting out phones was now exceeded by the cost of servicing them, and let that revenue source go. I think that generally has been good for consumers, however, many telephone sets out there today are pure junk. The other was long distance competition. That has always bothered me and I think consumers and investors got screwed and still get screwed. Look at MCI/Worldcom. As far as I'm concerned, if newcomers want a piece of the action, let them pay to build their own infrastructure. The Cable TV company managed to build a line to my house independent of Bell. So should local competitors -- bypass the existing company completely, and that would eliminate all the disputes and finger pointing over the cost of the local loop. It might actually leave the newcomers better off with a modern loop plant while Bell struggles with old copper conduits. I'm sad to say IMHO AT&T has gone really downhill. I no longer use them. All the companies are interested in marketing -- they have sales people now who know nothing of phones nor care; not the well trained service reps of the past. But despite that, the system still seems to work. > Nor were there any other electronic publications on the internet Was there even a publicly accessible Internet back then? I thought it was just locally run BBS's in those days. Back then they seemed to be converting to ESS like crazy. I had it in 1983. When did cell phones come out? Originally they were a replacement for mobile phones, and built into an automobile. I recall watching a "90210" rerun episode, and the guy was talking on a corded phone in the car, which struck me as strange. I then realized that episode was old, and it was advanced for its day. Then they came out with bag phones, then hand held ones, progressing getting smaller and smaller. It blew my mind when I got my first Motorola "flip phone" -- for free no less, with a $20/month (limited usage) rental. I was just like "Captain Kirk" and his communicator; and it amazed me the power it had at such an affordable price. I recall reading articles in the Bell Laboratories Record about "AMPS" which was cell phones. I presume Bell Labs invented the concept. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Cell phones began about 1981. Chicago was the first city to have cellular service. Sometime around 1984 I got my first cellular phone. It was a large thing shaped like a brick, and you wore it in a shoulder holster like thing. I got it from Radio Shack and it cost me about seven hundred dollars and you *had* to have a contract with Ameritech for a year or two to even be allowed to buy a phone. TELECOM Digest began in August, 1981, and it was originally an ARPA group, called arpa.telecom. For a few years, the connection to Usenet was through a gateway computer. PAT] (Lisa then continues) wesrock@aol.com wrote: > As I mentioned, the first dial office in Oklahoma City, in > 1920, used A.E. SxS because there was no W.E. SxS equipment. By 1927, > there was #1 SxS from W.E., and it was installed in the downtown > office in Oklahoma City. Yes, originally WE had to buy its steppers from AE, but eventually built their own. > I'm not sure how the usage of long distance and premises > equipment particularly affected the type of central office equipment > to be installed. Those were all the smae for all types of offices, > Panel, step, #1XB. Well, my response was based on the comment that the Bell System didn't care much for SxS. I'm suggesting that perhaps the more tougher networking needs of bigger or major cities resulted in their getting more attention. Those cities generated more revenue and had more traffic to justify that attention. I dare say that a east coast small city might have more telephone traffic than a mid west or southwest city of the same population. This is because the east was more interconnected and had more national commerce that went by phone than smaller towns which were likely more insular back then. In other words, a small bank in Philadelphia probably had more long distance traffic and sophistication than a bank of the same size in say a city like Houston. > The vast majority of interoffice trunking in cities with more > than one office was local trunking between offices. Los Angeles was > probably almost unique in having substantial operator dialing to > interzone (or "multiple message unit") and toll offices before World > War II. I'm not sure when message units went into effect in big eastern cities like Phila or NYC, to save on writing toll tickets for very short haul toll calls. IIRC, the Bell System history says Los Angeles had a pioneer AMA system which generated a full ticket rather than just a counter increment. > One issue, of course, was of interoperability between dial and > manual offices. But a more pressing issue in places that were all SxS > and had grown to where the trunking arrangement, directly controlled > by the pulses the customer dialed, had become complex and was rapidly > becoming more complex, had no way of interfacing with offices designed > for such complex arrangements. I think the Bell System history mentions an SxS tandem. I also wonder if pre-war or early postwar calling volumes were that large to be that troublesome. By "large" I mean by today's standards. Today no one would blink at spending 15c for a toll call, but back then even 5c was equivalent to $2.00 today. Not a lot, but something to make people pause or limit their use of long distance. Also, the suburbs had yet to have their big postwar book. When the boom hit, the suburbs did have inadequate telephone capacity -- some places didn't even have phones except for some corner phonebanks, others had mandatory party lines. > just accepting that there were some local routes that couldn't be > economically automated and requiring customers to dial "operator," > who then completed the call for the customer (a solution that was > adopted in Houston). We forget that automation, especially sophisticated common control, was very expensive, and it took a lot of volume to justify eliminating manual service. Indeed, well into the 1960s, long distance still required an operating to get the caller's number before ANI. > "Britton, OK", no doubt to the confusion of many callers. (That, of > course, is not unique anywhere around the country -- there are many > rate points like that around the country that, in many cases, have no > current place name to give you a clue.) In suburban Philadelphia, there were two towns that were their own rate center, but actually served by city exchanges. One was MElrose 5 in Melrose Park (also Elkins Park*) which is served out of the city's WAVerly exchange. The other was ESsex 9 in Cheltenham, served out of the city's FIdelity/PI exchange. (There were separate PIoneer and PIlgrim buildings, and I always get them confused, both served northeast Phila.) *The very same Elkins Park mentioned recently in this newsgroup. ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Jeff nor Lisa) Subject: Re: 10-Digit Dialing Date: 2 Jan 2004 16:25:10 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: > The old style manual exchanges had two groups of holes. > Along the top the holes were tie lines to other exchanges and closer > to the bottom were the numbers on that exchange. In cities, there was not enough room on a boardface for all the jacks. To accomodate, traffic was split between "A" and "B" operators. The A operator answered the subscriber and listened for the exchange and number. She plugged into the exchange only and reached a "B" operator for that exchange. The "B" operator was told the number and plugged into that jack. > The operators' training was very intense *before* an operator was > allowed to work alone at a position. I talked to our town's now retired switchboard operator. When she started on the town manual board, things were pretty informal. The operators acted as they did in the "Mayberry" literature -- knowing where the doctor and other public safety people were, etc. She said operating procedures were pretty informal. Any complex calls (ie long distance) were forwarded to the next town. When the town went dial in 1954, she transferred to a nearby city. That was more as you described -- extremely regimented and structured and certainly not as pleasant to work at. > Because the operators were very well trained, call set up time was > usually the same as or slightly less than in automated dialing days, > at least in the earliest of days when 'rotary dialing' was done. By > the time the subscriber got the phone to his ear, heard the dial > tone, and dialed out all seven digits and the call got set up in > the equipment the manual office operators would have finished two or > three such calls. Don't forget that in small towns often only a few digits were required to dial a call, so dialing was fast. Long distance, on the other hand, was slow and expensive. Until about the late 1950s, it was cheaper to send a telegram, and people wrote letters for social conversation to distant relatives. People from those days tell me service was pretty fast in normal conditions. But it would be slow in abnormal conditions. It cities there was no social conversation. The Bell System history says way back ringing was automated and provided a signal, and a busy signal was provided too. There was high turnover in the job. In the early days, they fired girls when they got married. In later years, people just got tired of it and quit. Some women went on to become PBX operators, being "Bell trained" was an important job requirement. PBX operations varied greatly -- some big boards were as bustling and impersonal as a central office, while others provided more personal service. After WW II, traffic went up but the system didn't have enough capacity to support it. Service quality suffered in some places. People take the telephone for granted these days, and have done so since the 1960s. But in the 1950s and earlier, the telephone was an expensive appliance. Not everyone even had one, and a great many had party lines to save money. The flip side is that people tended to live much closer together in the cities and towns and didn't need the telephone to stay in touch -- they'd just walk down to the corner drugstore/soda fountain. For rural people it was a lifeline. Once the Bell System got the postwar capacity trouble under control in the 1960s, it began to advertise the telephone as a luxury--extensions, premium sets, teenager extensions and later separate lines. Inflation note: Prices in the WW II era are roughly 20 times for today. That is, a 5c coin phone call back then would cost $2.00 today. A $2/month phone bill would equate to $40 today, and I suspect most local service back then ran about $3-$4, equivalent to $60 to $80 today for very basic service. ------------------------------ From: Earle Robinson Subject: Re: NANP Numbering Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2004 01:36:35 +0100 Please hide my email address. Thank you. > A better question is why the system in the rest of the world is > different from the system in the US since North America had long > distance dialing first. > The technical difference between the two is that the NANP uses "en > bloc" signalling which collects all the dialed digits and then > >attempts to complete the call, while the ITU system uses > "compelled" signalling which routes calls a few digits at a time. > This means that the NANP system needed phone numbers where the > originating switch could tell how many digits would be in the > number, so numbers are fixed length, while> the ITU system just sent > digits down the line and let the remote switch ask for as many as it > wanted, permitting variable length numbers. While the NANP system had its merits as you point out, the ITU nowadays is more logical. First of all, it avoids all those area code changes that occur periodically in the states. It also is simpler and more flexible. In countries like Germany, you can dial the number and the extension number. There is no limit on the number of digits, as you point out, with the ITU system. Here in France we have an implementation that permits easy dialing around for long distance calls, too. The initial 0 signifies that the phone company selected as the designate local carrier is to be used. (Note that one may choose another one quite easily.) Then the country is divided into 5 areas, 1 for the Paris area, 2 for the Northeast, 3 for the Northwest, 4 for the Southwest and 5 for the Southeast. Cell numbers are use the 6 and 8 is for special numbers. So, a call say to the Paris area might be 01-4444-5555. However, if you wished to use say tele2 for the call, you'd dial 41-4444-5555. International calls are initiated using the standard 00. But, if you wish to use say tele2 you'd dial 40, then the country code, and finally the number. For example, a call to New York City might be 401-212-444-5555. For those carriers that aren't fortunate enough to have their own single digit a 4 digit prefix must be used. An example using budgetelecom to call New York City would be 3111-00-1212-444-5555. Earle Robinson ------------------------------ Date: 2 Jan 2004 20:13:10 -0000 From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: How Are Cellphone 911 Calls Handled? Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > My Verizon cellphone is 703-447-xxxx. Last November I was waiting at > a stop light in Troy NY (local area code: 518) when an accident > occurred a few feet from me. So I picked up my phone: I believe that cellular 911 goes to the state police here in NY. But I don't know why you'd need two transfers to get to the right department. Usually they'd transfer you directly to the correct place. In our county, there's one PSAP run by the county sheriff's department that handles all the 911 dispatching. The city and village police cover their respective municipalities, the university departments cover Cornell and Ithaca college, and the sheriff's deputies cover everything else. Some of the departments don't have 24/7 coverage so the PSAP has the schedule to know when a department has a car on call and when to call the sheriff. They might have transferred you to the county and the city does its own dispatch. Regards, John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 330 5711 johnl@iecc.com Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner http://iecc.com/johnl Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail ------------------------------ From: Steven J Sobol Subject: Re: How Are Cellphone 911 Calls Handled? Date: Fri, 02 Jan 2004 18:14:46 -0600 W Randolph Franklin wrote: > me: "Can't you get that from the ANI?" > 3rd 911 person: "Not from a cellphone." Of course they can't get your location from a cellphone. :) The best they can do is get an approximate location based on which cell towers you are connecting to/have connected to in the past few minutes. Remember that a cellphone can physically be located ANYWHERE, unlike a landline. The carriers are working to fix this, but the 911 call centers have to upgrade their equipment too ... > of the call being transferred around and the original calling number > being lost in the switching as a result. I feel certain the first > 911 person had your number, getting transferred to a second then a > third person is what lost the number. But you're still not guaranteed that the call from a cell will be from any given location. I could be at my house in Apple Valley when calling from my cell, or I could be clear across the country in New York City, for example. JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services 22674 Motnocab Road * Apple Valley, CA 92307-1950 Steve Sobol, Geek In Charge * 888.480.4NET (4638) * sjsobol@JustThe.net [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I do not think she asked the man where he was located .. she asked him *what his number was*. PAT ------------------------------ Subject: Re: California Plan Would Halt Trucks Remotely in Attack From: tom.horsley@att.net (Thomas A. Horsley) Organization: AT&T Worldnet Date: Sat, 03 Jan 2004 00:01:58 GMT > If they aren't real careful with this, they are going to make > hijacking a truck as easy as crashing Microsoft Windows. Yea. On a similar (but possibly even more frightening note) there was a segment on the news the other day about technology being developed to take over the controls of airplanes and divert them automatically from "no fly" zones. My first reaction was: "Great, now terrorists won't need suicide missions to take over airplanes, they can just hijack the technology the manufacturers will be conveniently adding for them to allow the control system to take over the plane and override the pilot ...". >>==>> The *Best* political site >>==+ email: Tom.Horsley@worldnet.att.net icbm: Delray Beach, FL | Free Software and Politics <<==+ ------------------------------ From: Wesrock@aol.com Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2004 20:35:04 EST Subject: Re: Step, Panel and XP In a message dated Thu, 1 Jan 2004 10:37:17 CST jsw@ivgate.omahug.org wrote: > The Manawa office in Council Bluffs, IA (Omaha, NE area, 712-366) used > what was called 'Directorized SxS'. This was an outboard conversion > used on some Ma Bell (and maybe others) step offices to approach > common control. This conversion was most likely done in the 1960's, > and provided dial tone to the subscriber, and recorded the dialed > number, either in dial pulses or touch-tone tones. For interoffice > calls it then drove the switch train, and for intra-office it provided > the signaling (MF, dial-pulse, possibly even revertive - I dunno) that > the called office expected. This installation lasted until the mid > 1980's when the Manawa office was cut to a DMS-10. The senders used in the London (UK) exchange (all step at the time) were called directors. For some reason I got the idea that "Director" was perhaps the trademark of a particular manufacturer. Someone else commented about the "directors" used by General Telephone on step offices in the L.A. area, so perhaps A.E. owned the rights to the name in the U.S.A. I think you have "interoffice" and "intra-office" reversed in your description. And not only did the sender of director put out the type of signalling needed by the office being called, or offices which it tandemed through, it translated the routing based on the prefix digit dialed, permitting routing that might bear no resemblance to the original three digits and perhaps even adding additional prefix digits as needed to reach the desired office. Originally this was the only purpose of it; putting out signalling other than dial pulses was not part of its original function. >> Panel Type and 1XB had no provision for dealing with SxS pulsing. When >> 1XB came around, presumably the easterners assumed that any place which >> would need them would be panel. > Panel used the 'revertive' signaling method, possibly invented by Rube > Goldberg which, to make it very simple, the called office > advanced the contact and the calling office told the called office > when to stop. This was emulated in the #1 crossbar, as it was > intended to be compatible with the panel system. (I also vaguely > remember that the 1ESS was able to speak revertive as well.) In reading the descriptions of #1XB, I was amused to learn, with what seemed the narrow and short-sighted ideas of the invenstors and designers, that revertive signalling, indeed a Rube Goldberg system, was used between two #1 XB offices, emulating panel even when there was no panel office involved. > When placing a call from a panel office, the revertive pulse sounds > could often be heard as a distinctive 'scratch-scratch' sound during > dialing. > I'm familiar with the way both the Omaha and NYC phone systems were > back in the electromechanical days, and both used panel and 1XB > extensively with lots of revertive pulsing between the various > offices. (Ma Bell's first full-scale panel office was in the Atlantic > office in Omaha. Years ago I provided information about this to the > Digest here.) Both areas used 5XB for newer installations until the > early 1970's. > There were pockets of SxS around both Omaha and NYC, often appearing > as DID implementations, but occasionally for POTS, as in the Manawa > office I mentioned above. (I remember specifically that Columbia U in > Manhattan and Union Pacific in Omaha used such a scheme.) Did these two users own their own switching equipment? Railroads were entitled to, as "right-of-way" companies; don't know about educational institutions. Fort Sam Houston, Texas, and Fort Sill, Oklahoma. Both of those were Signal Corps owned and operated SxS systems. It turned out that DID worked just fine by giving them prefixes and treating them as any other SxS office. (This is, of course, simplifying, since the incoming and outgoing trunking had to be greatly changed, but basically it was no big problem.) The Bell offices they worked out of were either SxS or #5XB, so that presented no problem. Wes Leatherock wesrock@aol.com wleathus@yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2004 15:15:15 -0500 From: Gene Gaines Organization: Gaines Group Subject: Re: My Upgraded Computer System Pat, I have an old Sharp laptop (same CPU speed as yours) running Windows 95. I just does the job, and I love it. I sympathize with you in giving up an old "favorite hunting dog" like this. You never can tell about that old stuff. Last week a friend of mine was throwing out an old IBM Wi-Fi card, my wife grabbed it and brought it home, we threw it into the old 95 laptop, installed the software, and the darned thing is doing Wi-Fi wireless all over the house (course, the battery gave up holding a charge about two years ago, has to operate on house power.) On Windows 98 ... I have downloaded ALL the fixes and upgrades for Windows 98 II from Microsoft, can send them to you on a CD if they would help you. Good luck with the housecleaning. Gene gene.gaines@gainesgroup.com ------------------------------ From: Tom Betz Subject: Re: Then Benjamin Franklin Must be a Terrorist Too? Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2004 22:21:08 +0000 (UTC) Organization: XOme Quoth Joe@nospamcity.com in news:telecom23.2.17@telecom-digest.org: >> But you see, its not just the sore losers here in the USA who hate >> Bush, a lot of people in the rest of the world don't like him (or >> his father) either. PAT] > Hey, what about folks like me who voted for Bush and now feel like I > elected Adolf Hitler? Trouble is, I can't stand any of the Democrats > so it is time to stay home. You can't seriously tell me that you prefer Hitler to Dean. Staying home is how the non-Nazi Germans got Hitler in the 30's. The Nazis didn't stay home -- they elected him democratically on August 19, 1934. One man, one vote, one time. We need to make sure to vote in the 2004 election, or we may not be permitted to do so in 2008. And no, I'm not exaggerating. Democracy is always tenuous, but this year it is more tenuous than most years. "I am afeard there are few die well that die in a battle; for how can they charitably dispose of anything when blood is their argument? Now, if these men do not die well, it will be a black matter for the King that led them to it; who to disobey were against all proportion of subjection." - W.S. ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Jeff nor Lisa) Subject: Re: Then Benjamin Franklin Must be a Terrorist Too? Date: 3 Jan 2004 10:15:08 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com A Nony Mous wrote: > According to the last news reports I read, Bush actually won the > elections in Florida (a group of news organizations had their own, > unofficial, recount) which gave him the Electoral College majority > required. That is true. I don't understand why Bush critics don't focus on the real spoiler of that election -- Ralph Nader. Had he pulled out, Gore would've won with an unquestioned majority. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: > But I do believe if Mr. Gore had taken (through whatever rationale) > the office of President there is a reasonably good chance that > 9/11/01 would have not occurred ... But Bush II went into office a > bit more belicose and beligerant than his predecessor ... I must disagree with that. IIRC, the enemy planned the attack well before Bush entered office and attempted to destroy the WTC during Clinton's term, as well as attacked other U.S. targets world wide. > almost daring the folks in the middle east to cause trouble, which > of course they did. I disagree with the notion that the attack on the U.S. was the result of anything the U.S. said or did. The attack was not rational in the sense it was designed to change US foreign policy or limit US military capability. The attack was simply to murder innocent people and destroy property -- as an end in itself. > ... Clinton was too laid back for anything like that; so, I suspect, > would have been Gore. I can't help but wonder if Clinton was distracted by the impeachment proceedings and Monicagate nonsense to the extent he ignored warning signs or lost credibility to use legitimate military action against those who attempted to destroy the WTC the first time. He tried one limited effort and was roundly criticized for doing so. > But you see, its not just the sore losers here in the USA who hate > Bush... Both Clinton and Bush Jr are passionately hated by their critics and I find this very disturbing. The conservatives hated Clinton since he (to them) represented everything wrong about the 1960s. Newsweek reported that they were indeed out to get him and looking for something when Paula Jones came along and they jumped on that with big money and legal resources. That was bad for the country. But the liberals hated Bush the moment he was elected. Many think the U.S. somehow "deserved" 9/11 because of its foreign policy which is absurb (unless you believe that the U.S. should be 100% isolated from the rest of the world without any trade.) And screaming about every decision Bush makes isn't good for the country either. > a lot of people in the rest of the world don't like him (or his > father) either. PAT] That is something I don't understand and makes no sense. When Bush declared his intent to go into Iraq, the critics went nuts, seeing Bush as far worse than Saddam. If that were really true, then these people would be demanding Saddam be restored to power since Bush had no business removing him, yet I don't hear anyone suggesting that. ------------------------------ 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, Yahoo Groups, 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: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 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 V23 #3 **************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun Jan 4 18:31:02 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i04NV2m28308; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 18:31:02 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2004 18:31:02 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200401042331.i04NV2m28308@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 V23 #4 TELECOM Digest Sun, 4 Jan 2004 18:31:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 4 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Twenty Years Ago Today 1-Jan-2004, back on 1-Jan-1984 (Kd1s) Re: Twenty Years Ago Today 1-Jan-2004, back on 1-Jan-1984 (M. Sullivan) Re: Twenty Years Ago Today 1-Jan-2004, back on 1-Jan-1984 (Joseph) Re: NANP Numbering (Mark J Cuccia) From the Archives: The Day the Bell System Died (TELECOM Digest Editor) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== 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: kd1s@aol.com (Kd1s) Date: 04 Jan 2004 01:14:04 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Subject: Re: Twenty Years Ago Today 1-Jan-2004, back on 1-Jan-1984 > Well, my response was based on the comment that the Bell System > didn't care much for SxS. I'm suggesting that perhaps the more > tougher networking needs of bigger or major cities resulted in > their getting more attention. Those cities generated more revenue > and had more traffic to justify that attention. I dare say that > a east coast small city might have more telephone traffic than > a mid west or southwest city of the same population. This is > because the east was more interconnected and had more national > commerce that went by phone than smaller towns which were likely > more insular back then. In other words, a small bank in Philadelphia > probably had more long distance traffic and sophistication than a > bank of the same size in say a city like Houston. Under Bell System management it wasn't that the smaller cities were more interconnected to begin with (They probably were - especially New England) but that wasn't the prime motivator for things like Providence having a Panel swtich, or RI being an all digital state way before the rest of the country. Instead it all has to do with profitability. Those Bell Operating Companies that consistently showed profit got the best of the best. It's why New York city had some of the worst telecom gear in the 60's through the early 80's. They simply weren't profitable. I believe the term is diseconomies of scale. ------------------------------ From: Michael D. Sullivan Subject: Re: Twenty Years Ago Today 1-Jan-2004, back on 1-Jan-1984 Date: Sun, 04 Jan 2004 06:44:31 GMT On 2 Jan 2004 20:51:56 -0800, Jeff nor Lisa posted the following to comp.dcom.telecom: > The breakup of the Bell System had two big separate parts two it: > One was the discontinuance of the rental policy. The company > realized that the cost of renting out phones was now exceeded by > the cost of servicing them, and let that revenue source go. > I think that generally has been good for consumers, however, many > telephone sets out there today are pure junk. The "discontinuance of the rental policy" was not an economic decision by the telcos. Telephone rentals were a cash cow, pure gravy. They would never have discontinued them if it was up to them, and they opposed the end of phone rentals vigorously. In fact, the FCC forced this in a series of decisions, summarized (with some simplifications) as follows: First, it decided to allow competition in the provision of telecom equipment and the attachment of such equipment to the telephone network, provided it met certain standards. The telcos fought this, unsuccessfully, but nevertheless managed to suppress equipment competition to some extent by continuing to require equipment rental by requiring it in the tariff for phone service. Next, in the Second Computer Inquiry, also known as Computer II, the FCC decided to separate telecom service from customer premises equipment (CPE); the former was to be a common carrier service and the latter a non-common-carrier matter. The telcos appealed this and lost. The FCC then decided that CPE could not be offered as part of a tariffed service and required a phase-out of all such arrangements. Telcos had to offer customers with in-place equipment the opportunity to buy it or have it removed, or to continue leasing it. The telcos appealed this and lost. > The other was long distance competition. That has always bothered > me and I think consumers and investors got screwed and still get > screwed. Look at MCI/Worldcom. Investors in MCI did very well until the service became a commodity and MCI couldn't make a profit the old-fashioned way. Consumers unquestionably benefited from long-distance competition. If there had not been an MCI or a Sprint, you'd still be paying $1 or more per minute for a long-distance call, in 1975 dollars. Now, long-distance is practically free. How are consumers screwed? The only ones who are screwed are the ones who use a major carrier's "standard" rates, which apply to nobody except those who don't even try to find a reasonable rate. > As far as I'm concerned, if newcomers want a piece of the action, > let them pay to build their own infrastructure. The Cable TV > company managed to build a line to my house independent of Bell. > So should local competitors -- bypass the existing company completely, > and that would eliminate all the disputes and finger pointing over > the cost of the local loop. It might actually leave the newcomers > better off with a modern loop plant while Bell struggles with old > copper conduits. I agree completely, except that Congress decided otherwise in the 1996 Telecom Act. > When did cell phones come out? Originally they were a replacement for > mobile phones, and built into an automobile. I recall watching a > "90210" rerun episode, and the guy was talking on a corded phone in > the car, which struck me as strange. I then realized that episode was > old, and it was advanced for its day. Then they came out with bag > phones, then hand held ones, progressing getting smaller and smaller. > It blew my mind when I got my first Motorola "flip phone" -- for free > no less, with a $20/month (limited usage) rental. I was just like > "Captain Kirk" and his communicator; and it amazed me the power it had > at such an affordable price. > I recall reading articles in the Bell Laboratories Record about "AMPS" > which was cell phones. I presume Bell Labs invented the concept. Bell Labs invented the "concept" of cellular phone service, which was first publicly set forth in a 1971 technical report filed with the FCC. AT&T had lobbied for "hi-cap" mobile phone service for years before that and the FCC had begun an inquiry into the issue in 1968 in response. The FCC allocated spectrum for cellphones in 1974-75, but before setting rules for licensing wanted pilot programs. The Bell Systems Technical Journal devoted an entire issue (in 1975 or 1976, I think) to the subject. There were two pilot "developmental" programs, in the late 1970s: AT&T/Bell Labs' program, as implemented by Illinois Bell in Chicago, and Motorola's program, as implemented by Advanced Radio Telephone Service in Washington/Baltimore. These went online in the 1977-1978 timeframe. Based on the results of the experiments, the FCC initiated a proceedig at the end of 1979 to set rules for commercial cellular service and adopted rules in 1981, which were further refined numerous times. Regular commercial service commenced in late 1983. At that point, the customer equipment was mostly limited to vehicular mobile phones (a box in the trunk, connected to a handset in the car), although Motorola made a limited number of brick-sized handhelds available. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Cell phones began about > 1981. Chicago was the first city to have cellular service. Sometime > around 1984 I got my first cellular phone. It was a large thing > shaped like a brick, and you wore it in a shoulder holster like > thing. I got it from Radio Shack and it cost me about seven hundred > dollars and you *had* to have a contract with Ameritech for a year > or two to even be allowed to buy a phone. TELECOM Digest began in > August, 1981, and it was originally an ARPA group, called > arpa.telecom. For a few years, the connection to Usenet was through > a gateway computer. PAT] See above. Michael D. Sullivan Bethesda, MD, USA Delete nospam from my address and it won't work. ------------------------------ From: Joseph Subject: Re: Twenty Years Ago Today 1-Jan-2004, back on 1-Jan-1984 Date: Sun, 04 Jan 2004 07:01:56 -0800 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.NOcom On 2 Jan 2004 20:51:56 -0800, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Jeff nor Lisa) wrote: > I recall reading articles in the Bell Laboratories Record about "AMPS" > which was cell phones. I presume Bell Labs invented the concept. http://inventors.about.com/library/weekly/aa070899.htm "By 1982, the slow-moving FCC finally authorized commercial cellular service for the USA. A year later, the first American commercial analog cellular service or AMPS (Advanced Mobile Phone Service) was made available in Chicago by Ameritech." remove NO from .NOcom to reply ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2004 20:36:12 CST From: Mark J Cuccia Subject: Re: NANP Numbering Earle Robinson (no email address indicated) wrote: > While the NANP system had its merits as you point out, the ITU > nowadays is more logical. First of all, it avoids all those area code > changes that occur periodically in the states. It also is simpler and > more flexible. In countries like Germany, you can dial the number and > the extension number. There is no limit on the number of digits, as > you point out, with the ITU system. Well, I beg to differ. The NANP system has *always* been more logical than "other countries". (and note that I don't say "ITU" system). First, the ITU is mostly concerned with country codes and with few exceptions doesn't dictate what *internal* domestic national numbering plans must be like. There are certain standards, in that the DECIMAL system of numeric digits will be used for basic numbering/addressing, even though the "*/#" and sometimes even fourth-column DTMF "A/B/C/D" are valid DTMF signals ... but for the most part, the ITU stays *OUT* of national numbering schemes. The NANP -- the US and Canada for the most part -- is "more-or-less" the same as it was 50+ years ago in 1947. We are still using the same "basic" ten-digit intra-NANP numbering format, although generallized a bit more. In 1947, the basic format was: N 0/1 X + NNX + xxxx Today, the basic format is: NXX + NXX + xxxx where N = any possible digit from 2 thru 9 (eight possiblities), and X = ANY of the ten possible decimal digits 0 thru 9. Actually, in the 1940s/50s and even early 60s (and in some places into the 1970s), the "office code" portion, the D-E-F position digits of the ten-digit NANP number were even generally a bit more restricted than the "general" NNX format. When using pure numeric-digits for the office code of the NNX format, you could have a theoretical possibility of 640 office codes (aka exchanges, prefixes, etc) within an area code ... Doing the Math for N-N-X gives 8 x 8 x 10 = 640 However, because the US/Canada was still using "EXchange NAme DIaling" in the 1950s era, where the first two letters of a name were indicated, there were certain word/letter combinations rarely used or impossible to come up with, meaning that those corresponding numeric combinations were un-used altogether. For the most part, this was the 55x, 57x, 95x, 97x ranges, since there are no (regular) vowels on the 5 (JKL), 7 (PRS), W (WXY), it was difficult to impossible to come up with a word having its first two letters correspond with these numeric combinations. Also, the third digit of '0' (zero), the 'F' position digit in the office code (D-E-F position digits) was usually avoided because it might be confused with the letter 'O' (oh) which is traditionally on the '6' on NANP dials. So, back in "the days", the usually expected theoretical maximum of office-codes (D-E-F) was only 540: Doing the Math: NNX = 8x8x10 = 640 but remove the four possible ranges 55, 57, 95, 97 from the sixty-four 'NN' ranges, and you only get 60 possible *use-able* 'NN' ranges, for the first two digits of the D-E-F office code. Then for the third digit, you multiply by '9' rather than '10' since you are not (usually) using a third digit of '0'. You only get 540. Today, the "theoretical" max for both area codes and for office codes is 800, both are generally of the NXX format, 8x10x10, but you subtract *CERTAIN* possiblities, such as the eight possible 'N11' codes which are used as three-digit "short" special services codes. But, as for the NANP's superiority over the "rest-of-the-world" ... We've maintained a basic *TEN* digit "national" structure for 50+ years. NO OTHER COUNTRY IN THE WORLD can make such a similar claim! And the US/Canada (like it or not) *IS* the leader of the world in modern 20th/21st Century technology, culture, development, etc. OTHER countries have had MAJOR modifications to their numbering plans, including the UK, *FRANCE*, Germany, Italy, Spain, Greece, the Scandanavian countries, Aussie/NZ, Japan, etc. Sometimes it is major modifications only to certain cities, other times it is a wholesale change nationwide, and it could be anything in-between. Usually other countries of the world keep adding more digits to their national numbering. Again, the NANP's basic numbering scheme is still at TEN-digits, which was what officially began in Oct.1947, and was even proposed by Bell Labs in 1944/45. *DIALING* has expanded in most places, some to ten or 1+ten-digits where it had been only seven-digits for local calling, some places expanded from local dialing of less-than-seven to seven back in the 1950s/early 60s to conform with a standard (and now might even be at ten or 1+ten), but the BASIC NANP Numbering/Routing/Switching/Signaling format is *STILL* TEN-digit as was proposed in the 1940s and began the earliest implementation even as far back as then as well. YES, we've had our painful splits. Especially in the later 1990s and all the way up to and through 2001. BUT THOSE DAYS SEEM TO BE OVER FOREVER, now that there are safeguards in place in numbering/ assignment policies. 2002 had only eight new area codes in the US, some of them were overlays. 2003 only had three new area codes in the US, two of them from a single three-way split of 915 in west Texas, the third was an overlay to 903 in northeastern TX ... AND THAT WAS IT ... 2004 will have only two "known" new area codes, only ONE of them being a split (909/951 in southern California), and the other one being 684, which are identical to the currently assigned (ITU) digits +684 for the "Country" code for American Samoa, a US territory which migrates its numbering/dialing into the NANP beginning Oct.2004. There *MIGHT* be one other southern California split in later 2004, if it is determined that 310 will finally split off 424 this year rather than early/mid 2005. But as for splits ... VIRTUALLY EACH AND EVERY ONE OF THEM of the 1990 (thru 2001) time-frame could have been an OVERLAY rather than a split, which would have meant *NO* "changes" to observers of anyone dialing TO the EXISTING numbers/customers in the affected area. Even locally, the area code (if used) remained the same -- of course it HAS to be dialed for local calls.... BUT IN FRANCE... THESE DAYS ALL DOMESTIC (including LOCAL) calling now *HAS* to be dialed on a full "national" basis! (I think that there's a case of "pot calling the kettle black" somewhere in here! :-) As for: > There is no limit on the number of digits ... with the ITU system. Ummm ... well there *IS* a limit on the number of national/domestic digits if that country wants to receive calls to its "POTS" (regular) numbers/ customers on the automated *worldwide* network from ALL countries with automated customer outbound Interantional Calling, and here is where the ITU *DOES* get involved... The MINIMUM LIMIT (ooooh there's that word LIMIT!) for a significant worldwide number is SEVEN-digits. This means a domestic number minimum of four-digits if they have a three-digit country-code, and a domestic minimum of five-digits if they have a two-digit country-code. (and if +7 Russia and +1 NANP wanted a mimimum of less than what they each already have, it would be six-digits for a national mimimum matched up with the single-digit country codes). The MAXIMUM LIMIT -- it used to be TWELVE, it is now FIFTEEN -- for a significant worldwide number, as a matter of a standard. And one of the primary reasons that the ITU finally expanded it from twelve to fifteen which took effect circa 1996, was because of auto direct-dial-in to PABX systems mostly in Germany, Austria, and a few other European countries which were NON-standard in having LONGER than twelve-digit worldwide numbers when you include the country-code "itself" (+49, +43, etc) as well as the extension-digits of the PABX. Yes, some European countries were able to implement added customer-dialed-digit capacity in their systems to accommodate these LONGER-than-ITU-standard numbers, but since the ITU didn't "require" a max of greater-than-twelve at the time (until the expansion of the requirment of the max to 15-digits circa 1996), many countries such as carriers in the NANP didn't necessarily allow customer automated dialing to such longer-than-twelve-significant-digit-numbers. Again, me-thinks somewhere there is a "pot calling the kettle black" attitude here! :-) > Here in France we have an implementation that permits easy dialing > around for long distance calls, too. The initial 0 signifies that the > phone company selected as the designate local carrier is to be used. > (Note that one may choose another one quite easily.) ... So, a call > say to the Paris area might be 01-4444-5555. However, if you wished > to use say tele2 for the call, you'd dial 41-4444-5555. International > calls are initiated using the standard 00. But, if you wish to use say > tele2 you'd dial 40, then the country code, and finally the number. > For example, a call to New York City might be 401-212-444-5555. For > those carriers that aren't fortunate enough to have their own single > digit a 4 digit prefix must be used. An example using budgetelecom to > call New York City would be 3111-00-1212-444-5555. Here in the NANP, your "chosen" LD-carrier is accessed (in most cases) when you simply dial 1+/0+ for NANP-calls (1+ for station-sent-paid, 0+ being ONE method for "alternate billing" such as Card, Collect, 3d-Pty billing, etc), and 011+/01+ for IDDD-calls (011+ for station-sent-paid, 01+ for special-billing such as Card/Collect/etc). If you want to use a DIFFERENT carrier than your "chosen" carrier, you dial a STANDARD code of 101-XXXX+. It used to be 10-XXX+ but it was expanded to 101-XXXX+ in the 1990s. Yes, it is LONGER than what is used in France, but let's look at the geographic-size, population of, and the overall length of time that there has been such competitive LD in the US (and even Canada), when compared to ... France. Also, while there was a variable length of both 10-XXX+ and 101-XXXX+ "side-by-side" in the 1994-98 timeframe while existing/previous 10-XXX+ codes were expanding to 101-0XXX+ and NEW codes were assigned first out of the 101-5XXX+ and 101-6XXX+ ranges, until 101-0XXX+ became mandatory for previously existing 10-XXX+ codes in 1998, and now ANY 101-XXXX+ range is assigned ... you just COULD NEVER have such variable length code formats as a general practice in the US/Canada. Technical standards in the long run is one reason -- simplicity and streamlining, and an EASY and EFFICIENT way to expand when necessary... but variable length alternate-carrier-code-dialing would be deemed *ANTI* competitive, and even monopolistic. The "long-time" carriers would have shorter, easier to dial/remember codes, while the upstarts would have longer, more difficult to dial/remember codes. Of course, one "could" claim that the older/longer carriers were there first and had a much larger customer base, but things still need to be carrier/competitive NEUTRAL in the NANP and I would even tend to think in other countries as well... I don't know how government regulation of the telecom industry/standards is within France, but I tend to think that MOST other developed countries with LD competition and carrier-selection-code dialing ten to have STANDARD/ UNIFORM length carrier-codes, or are trending to standard uniform length codes, for the reasons I describe above as they are here in the NANP. There are indeed benefits to certain aspects of various non-NANP "most-of-the-rest-of-the-world" numbering/dialing/routing/switching/ signaling... but in the long run, I know that the NANP's formats and standards have stood up to the test of time, and will CONTINUE to do so. Now that the "scare" of running out of numbers, and WASTE of area codes in rash splits and over-assignments of the 1990s-thru-2001 time frame is FINALLY over with FOR GOOD(!), here in the NANP, the current projections to where the existing ten-digit format MIGHT need to expand to eleven or MAYBE even twelve-digits, is for the 2040 to 2050 timeframe. And even that projection could be pushed out further into the future as time continues and projections are made in later years. BTW, in the 199e/94 timeframe, just prior to the NANP area code format generalizing from N-0/1-X to NXX with an overall increase in the possible number of area codes, the projections for an "exhaust" of a ten-digit NXX-NXX-xxxx NANP was going to be circa 2040 to 2050, same as the current projections. There *WAS* the "scare" that the NANP might run-out of numbers and/or codes by 2007-2010, made back in 1998/99, but that was (IMO) mostly "crying wolf". Of course, area code assignments/activations (splits) in that 1998/99 period was INSANE, but that insanity is finally over. The NANP has had changes over the years, but NO-where NEARLY as crazy as virtually every other (developed and under-developed/non-developed) in the world has had since the 1960s/70s... Mark J. Cuccia mcuccia@tulane.edu New Orleans LA CSA (in the LAND OF DIXIE!) ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2004 20:05:45 -0500 (EST) From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: From the Archives: The Day the Bell System Died It was twenty years ago (1984) that AT&T was divested under orders from Judge Harold Greene, or twenty-two years ago in this next week that the idea of divestiture of AT&T first came up, January 8, 1982 I think. Mark Cuccia suggested that this old archive file first submitted by Lauren Weinstein in the summer of 1983. So, here it is, Mark, and others. PAT 12-Jul-83 09:14:32-PDT,4930;000000000001 Return-path: <@LBL-CSAM:vortex!lauren@LBL-CSAM> Received: from LBL-CSAM by USC-ECLB; Tue 12 Jul 83 09:12:46-PDT Date: Tuesday, 12-Jul-83 01:18:19-PDT From: Lauren Weinstein Subject: "The Day Bell System Died" Return-Path: Message-Id: <8307121614.AA17341@LBL-CSAM.ARPA> Received: by LBL-CSAM.ARPA (3.327/3.21) id AA17341; 12 Jul 83 09:14:35 PDT (Tue) To: TELECOM@ECLB Greetings. With the massive changes now taking place in the telecommunications industry, we're all being inundated with seemingly endless news items and points of information regarding the various effects now beginning to take place. However, one important element has been missing: a song! Since the great Tom Lehrer has retired from the composing world, I will now attempt to fill this void with my own light-hearted, non-serious look at a possible future of telecommunications. This work is entirely satirical, and none of its lyrics are meant to be interpreted in a non-satirical manner. The song should be sung to the tune of Don Mclean's classic "American Pie". I call my version "The Day Bell System Died"... --Lauren-- ************************************************************************** *==================================* * Notice: This is a satirical work * *==================================* "The Day Bell System Died" Lyrics Copyright (C) 1983 by Lauren Weinstein (To the tune of "American Pie") (With apologies to Don McLean) ARPA: vortex!lauren@LBL-CSAM UUCP: {decvax, ihnp4, harpo, ucbvax!lbl-csam, randvax}!vortex!lauren ************************************************************************** Long, long, time ago, I can still remember, When the local calls were "free". And I knew if I paid my bill, And never wished them any ill, That the phone company would let me be... But Uncle Sam said he knew better, Split 'em up, for all and ever! We'll foster competition: It's good capital-ism! I can't remember if I cried, When my phone bill first tripled in size. But something touched me deep inside, The day... Bell System... died. And we were singing... Bye, bye, Ma Bell, why did you die? We get static from Sprint and echo from MCI, "Our local calls have us in hock!" we all cry. Oh Ma Bell why did you have to die? Ma Bell why did you have to die? Is your office Step by Step, Or have you gotten some Crossbar yet? Everybody used to ask... Oh, is TSPS coming soon? IDDD will be a boon! And, I hope to get a Touch-Tone phone, real soon... The color phones are really neat, And direct dialing can't be beat! My area code is "low": The prestige way to go! Oh, they just raised phone booths to a dime! Well, I suppose it's about time. I remember how the payphones chimed, The day... Bell System... died. And we were singing... Bye, bye, Ma Bell, why did you die? We get static from Sprint and echo from MCI, "Our local calls have us in hock!" we all cry. Oh Ma Bell why did you have to die? Ma Bell why did you have to die? Back then we were all at one rate, Phone installs didn't cause debate, About who'd put which wire where... Installers came right out to you, No "phone stores" with their ballyhoo, And 411 was free, seemed very fair! But FCC wanted it seems, To let others skim long-distance creams, No matter 'bout the locals, They're mostly all just yokels! And so one day it came to pass, That the great Bell System did collapse, In rubble now, we all do mass, The day... Bell System... died. So bye, bye, Ma Bell, why did you die? We get static from Sprint and echo from MCI, "Our local calls have us in hock!" we all cry. Oh Ma Bell why did you have to die? Ma Bell why did you have to die? I drove on out to Murray Hill, To see Bell Labs, some time to kill, But the sign there said the Labs were gone. I went back to my old CO, Where I'd had my phone lines, years ago, But it was empty, dark, and ever so forlorn... No relays pulsed, No data crooned, No MF tones did play their tunes, There wasn't a word spoken, All carrier paths were broken... And so that's how it all occurred, Microwave horns just nests for birds, Everything became so absurd, The day... Bell System... died. So bye, bye, Ma Bell, why did you die? We get static from Sprint and echo from MCI, "Our local calls have us in hock!" we all cry. Oh Ma Bell why did you have to die? Ma Bell why did you have to die? We were singing: Bye, bye, Ma Bell, why did you die? We get static from Sprint and echo from MCI, "Our local calls have us in hock!" we all cry. Oh Ma Bell why did you have to die? ------------------------------ 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, Yahoo Groups, 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: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 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 V23 #4 **************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun Jan 4 19:36:58 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i050aw528802; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 19:36:58 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2004 19:36:58 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200401050036.i050aw528802@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 V23 #5 TELECOM Digest Sun, 4 Jan 2004 19:37:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 5 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Forget Your Bank Balance? It's Available on Internet (Monty Solomon) Apple's Tablet Computer Might Finally Be That Link (Monty Solomon) Re: NANP Numbering (John R. Levine) Re: NANP Numbering (Bob Goudreau) Fore ESX-3810 (bleed-22) Re: Is TiVo Really All That Great? (Rob) IN Billing (Ajith) Re: My Upgraded Computer System (Greg T. Knopf) Re: BBC Writer Can't Fathom the Internet (Rob) Re: BBC Writer Fathoms the Internet Pretty Well (Ronda Hauben) Re: BBC Writer Fathoms the Internet Pretty Well (John Levine) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== 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: Sun, 4 Jan 2004 01:33:52 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Forget Your Bank Balance? It's Available on the Internet Consumers' financial details easy pickings on the Net By Bruce Mohl, Globe Staff, 1/4/2004 Eric F. Bourassa, a privacy advocate at the Massachusetts Public Interest Research Group, knows how difficult it is to keep personal financial information personal. But even he was surprised at how easy it was for The Boston Globe to obtain his private bank account information. Trafficking in confidential financial information is commonplace on the Web, with a quick Google search turning up more than a dozen sites selling everything from Social Security numbers to bank balances. The Globe tested one of the sites in September, paying $125 for Governor Mitt Romney's credit report and in the process discovering a major security weakness in the nation's credit reporting network. In November, with Bourassa's blessing, the Globe began to explore the shadowy world of asset search firms, which advertise that they can unlock the financial secrets of virtually anyone. The mystery is where these firms get their information. Does it come directly from financial institutions? Or does it come through more indirect, possibly illegal, methods? The Globe agreed to pay Ohio-based I.C.U. Inc., whose Web address is Tracerservices.com, $475 for Bourassa's bank account information and his stock and bond holdings. Not all of the information the website provided was accurate, but the bank account information, with the balance listed right down to the penny, was so close that it made Bourassa feel violated. http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/004/business/Forget_your_bank_balance_It_s_available_on_the_Internet+.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2004 12:11:30 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Apple's Tablet Computer Might Finally Be That Link Digital Hubris: Apple's Tablet Computer Might Finally Be That Link Between Your PC and TV By Robert X. Cringely High-tech is relentlessly optimistic and for good reason: the good times -- ALL the good times -- are caused by product transitions. New stuff costs more, has higher profit margins, and occasionally leads to changes in market leadership. A year or two later, these products will have been commoditized, the profit sucked out of them by intense competition, and it will be time to move on to the next big thing. Four years ago, the cheapest 802.11b access point you could buy cost $299. This week, I saw one advertised that with rebates brought the final cost down to zero, nothing, nada, zilch. Time to move on. So high-tech is always looking forward, never back, and taking a gamble on something new isn't perceived so much as a gamble but as a way of life. The techniques for getting us to buy new stuff vary. In the best of cases, these new sales are driven by new functionality -- a color printer instead of black-and-white, a notebook computer instead of a desktop, a DVD instead of a VCR. At other times, the upgrade is driven by bloat as new MIPS-burning applications and operating systems make our old stuff too painfully slow. This doesn't happen by accident, folks. And into this performance abyss we throw not just new products but new TYPES of products, because industrial dynasties come from defining new market niches. Hewlett-Packard, for all its glorious history, is more than anything else a laser printer company. Cisco Systems, for all its desire to be something more, is a router company. These are niches they defined and that have led to decades of success. And that brings us to the tablet computer, a tightly-defined product still in search of success. http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20031127.html ------------------------------ From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: NANP Numbering Date: 3 Jan 2004 20:19:32 -0500 Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > While the NANP system had its merits as you point out, the ITU > nowadays is more logical. I think all you can conclude is that people like what they're used to. If you want to start an instant religious war, for example, ask people from different parts of the NANP whether you should be able to dial a short distance toll call without dialing 1 first. > First of all, it avoids all those area code changes that occur > periodically in the states. Um, the UK and France have had their share of renumbering, too. The NANP could have avoided most of the area code changes if state regulators had looked ahead and done overlays sooner. It's a political problem, not a technical one. > It also is simpler and more flexible. In countries like Germany, you > can dial the number and the extension number. That's Direct Inward Dialing. We have that here in NANP-land, too. We probably had it first. > There is no limit on the number of digits, as you point out, with > the ITU system. Actually, the limit is 15 digits, raised from 12 a few years ago when German PBXes got really long extension numbers. > Here in France we have an implementation that permits easy dialing > around for long distance calls, too. We have that, too. Dial 011-33-1-23-45-67-89-00 for a call to Paris with your normal carrier, dial 1010XXXX first to pick a different carrier. Yeah, it's a lot of digits, we have a lot of phone companies. Like I said, people like what they're used to. Regards, John Levine johnl@iecc.com Primary Perpetrator of The Internet for Dummies Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://iecc.com/johnl, Sewer Commissioner "A book is a sneeze." - E.B. White, on the writing of Charlotte's Web ------------------------------ From: Bob Goudreau Subject: Re: NANP Numbering Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2004 21:03:31 -0500 [Please eliminate my email address too. Thanks.] Earle Robinson wrote: > While the NANP system had its merits as you point out, the ITU > nowadays is more logical. First of all, it avoids all those area code > changes that occur periodically in the states. It certainly hasn't worked out that way. In fact, I would wager that a great proportion of people in Europe have had their phone numbers change in the past two decades than in the NANP. For instance, in the UK, *every* POTS number has changed its area code at least once. Remember when London used to be +44 1? Then it was +44 71/81. It may have been +44 171/181 for awhile after that, before it went to the current +44 20. Similarly, every landline number in France is now dialed differently than it was 20 years ago. Check out the WTNG for details on the incredible amount of numbering changes that have taken place in Europe in recent years. Meanwhile, in the NANP, there are tens of millions of people who still have the same area code that they had 30 or 40 years ago. Even the ones who have encountered an area code split got to keep their local numbers. And, with overlay area codes now the most common way to expand the numbering space, most of us will probably never be forced to change our numbers again. > It also is simpler and more flexible. More flexible, yes. Simpler, no. A numbering plan in which all numbers are of uniform length is simpler for people to grasp than one in which number lengths may vary wildly even within a single town. But even most European countries these days employ (or are moving toward) closed numbering plans in which the total nationally- significant phone number length is uniform (though the breakdown between area code length and local number length may differ from area to area). As you note, even France now has a completely uniform numbering-length scheme, just like the NANP. I believe that Germany is now probably the greatest remaining European example of fully variable numbering, in which the number of digits in numbers can vary even within a single exchange. (Other, smaller examples such as Austria remain too.) > In countries like Germany, you can dial the number and > the extension number. There is no limit on the number of digits, as > you point out, with the ITU system. Yes, there is. The ITU limit is 15 significant digits, including the country code (but not including intra-national long distance access codes such as "0", which are not actually part of the area code). The ITU limit used to be 12 until less than a decade ago. Bob Goudreau Cary, NC ------------------------------ From: wink_1000@yahoo.com (bleed-22) Subject: Fore ESX-3810 Date: 3 Jan 2004 18:04:31 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Anyone ever have a Fore 3810 freeze up on you when you reset the counters? It happened to me last night, and no one believes me. Ugh. As soon as I typed 'yes' and pressed enter to confirm I wanted to clear the counters, the switch froze. The customer's network engineer got an automated page (via SNMP poll failure) at 6:00 in the morning that the switch went down. Any ideas? Prior to resetting the counters, I viewed the System parameters (to get uptime), viewed SONET/ATM counters and the counters on B* (ethernet ports). TIA. ------------------------------ From: rob51166@yahoo.com (Rob) Subject: Re: Is TiVo Really All That Great? Date: 4 Jan 2004 04:27:29 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Monty Solomon wrote in message news:: > Cable companies slashing fees, crafting services in bid to get > consumers to hop on the TV replay bandwagon. > By Ron Lieber > The Wall Street Journal > Originally published December 29, 2003 > LOS ANGELES -- The future of TiVo may be uncertain, but the TiVolution > has never been more accessible than it is this holiday season. > TiVo, which is both popular usage for newfangled alternatives to VCRs > and the brand-name of the company that helped popularize them, once > required an initial investment of hundreds of dollars. But, as new > competitors continue to emerge, most people can now try the new way of > watching and recording television for far less. > Last week, ReplayTV lowered the price on its cheapest machine to $149 > and stopped forcing consumers to buy three years of service upfront, > cutting the initial cost by more than $300. Time Warner Cable this > year began a widespread rollout of a service that has a TiVo-like > digital video recorder built into the cable box and costs less than > $10 a month. > Some of Cox Communications Inc.'s customers already have cable DVR > service, and Comcast Corp. plans to roll it out to all of its > subscribers next year. > Hate your cable company? EchoStar Communications Corp.'s Dish Network > has started offering a free DVR box to new satellite TV subscribers. > Though only a tiny fraction of households now have the service, TiVo > and its progeny offer features that radically change the way people > watch television. They make it easy to record shows so you can watch > what you want, when you want. Then, they make it easy to skip > commercials [or, in the case of the Super Bowl, watch them > repeatedly]. > http://www.sunspot.net/technology/bal-tivo122903,0,1069107.story I remember TiVo being advertised over here in the UK several years ago, but it never took off. In fact, I'd say it died a death. I put it down to Sky TV (the satellite TV company) introducing a system called Sky+. This is a digital satellite set-top box which can record programmes onto a hard drive without the need of a VCR or recordable DVD. OK, Sky+ isn't exactly cheap as you have to pay to upgrade your current digital set-top box, but it's becoming much more popular than TiVo ever did. ------------------------------ From: kaajith@hotmail.com (Ajith) Subject: IN Billing Date: 4 Jan 2004 11:02:28 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Can anybody explain how the IN Billing in telecom takes place? ------------------------------ From: Greg T. Knopf Subject: Re: My Upgraded Computer System Date: 03 Jan 2004 18:36:48 EST Organization: Concentric Internet Services Reply-To: gtknopf@concentric.net Hello, Just a quick note and perhaps a caveat: TELECOM Digest Editor wrote: > Starting at about 5 PM New Year's Eve > ... > I have been giving some thought to moving Windows 2000 onto the new > 80 GB drive (F) and expanding Linux to the full 20 GB drive (C) which > used to be split between Windows and Linux. I know that with numerous Windows versions I have used the OS requires that it's boot partition and home drive be on C:. This has caused me so much grief in the past that when I'm fooling around changing operating systems and loading linux, etc., that I just make sure to include the Windows partition and operating system on my first IDE drive and in fact on the first partitions. I would rather put my linux swap as the first partition, for access speed reasons, but after being driven near to madness with the @%$#! Windows assumptions I have given up trying to move it. This is just a little point, but it might save you some grief to keep it in mind. - Greg gtknopf@concentric.net info@knopfnet.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What I did was first use a program called 'Digital Lifeguard' to entirely format the new hard drive (known as 'F') and move all the contents of 'C' to 'F'. Then I took the computer apart and removed the ribbon connector and power cable from the 'C' drive. Then I put the computer back together and booted it up to make sure it would work. Computer *did* attempt to boot and run Windows from 'C' but finding 'C' unavailable it moved along to 'F' and ran okay from there. Then I took the computer apart again, went back inside it and moved the slave/master jumpers in reverse, so that (the now old) 'F' drive impostered C ... and vice versa with 'F', also making the required changes on the ribbon connector so that the 'primary' connection went to 'C' and the secondary connection was 'F'. Then I put the computer back together again, and was now booting from 'C' normally with 'F' as the backup drive. I presume I could have skipped a step here and moved the jumpers and the ribbons first, before screwing it all back together, but having brain desease as badly as I do, I was scared of trying to do it that way. I wanted to make sure it would work first. Trouble now is I have no way to boot into Linux, but my Canadian expert said he is meditating on that problem for me. Nor can I get Windows to recognize the full 80 GB; the Digital Lifeguard program could only do FAT up to about 34-35 GB. I would have had it do NTFS for the full 80 but that would prevent Linux from being able to use the data files of Windows. (On the old partioned C drive although I could boot Linux or Windows, I used FAT rather that NTFS so Linux could move around as it wished through the files, etc.) If the Canadian guy is unable to 'convince' the computer to allow bootup choice of Linux/Windows with Linux on (what will now be 'F') and Windows to continue to default to (what is now) 'C' then I may wind up re-opening the computer, reversing the slave/master relationship, restoring 'C' back to where it was and use the entire 80 on 'F' like I had it planned originally. Yeah, and I may check into Stormont-Vail Medical Center next week and get brain surgery again, also. (wink). PAT] ------------------------------ From: rob51166@yahoo.com (Rob) Subject: Re: BBC Writer Can't Fathom the Internet Date: 4 Jan 2004 04:12:00 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Ronda Hauben wrote in message news:: > Is there some reason the BBC can't understand what the Internet is > about, or take the trouble to spread an accurate understanding of it, > rather than a mistaken conception that makes the Internet into the one > network ARPANET? No doubt because it's just that -- the BBC! They've never *QUITE* got the grasp of the words 'technology' and 'modernisation' -- especially the fatcats who have offices on the top floor of Broadcasting House in London. They seem to have the opinion that all equipment dating back to the 1960s is still perfectly suitable for the 21st Century; while anything introduced since then is no use whatsoever! BTW, as you can probably guess, I'm British! ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2004 12:15:52 EST From: Ronda Hauben Subject: Re: BBC Writer Fathoms the Internet Pretty Well On Sat, 4 Jan 2004, John Levine wrote: >> Is there some reason the BBC can't understand what the Internet is >> about, > Not that I can see. The description of the difference between the > ARPANET and Internet in the BBC article that you quoted is quite > accurate: Are you saying that the ARPANET is the same as the IMP subnetwork of the ARPANET? The whole point of the IMP subnetwork is to connect diverse computers and diverse operating systems. The ARPANET is the connection of these diverse computers and operating systems. It isn't the IMP subnetwork. The IMP subnetwork is the means of connecting the diverse computers, but is *not* the ARPANET. >>> The Arpanet came before the net and demanded that all computers that >>> connect to it do so with the same hardware and software. Essentially this is saying that the Arpanet is the IMP an interconnection of the same hardware and software. That is an inaccurate presentation of the reality. The ARPANET was the solution to the problem of resource sharing among diverse computers and operating systems and their respective users. The BBC quote above says that all of the computers that connect to the ARPANET need the same hardware and software. This does *not* describe the ARPANET. The BBC reporter doesn't say that all diverse computers in the ARPANET that connected to each other used an IMP subnetwork and NCP protocol. But even that would not be helpful in understanding and spreading the essence of the ARPANET among people. >>> By contrast, the net, thanks to TCP/IP, could let people on >>> different sorts of computers running different software, swap >>> information. > You comment: >> Specifically the Internet is a network of networks -- or a metasystem >> of networks. It makes it possible for diverse networks to speak to > Right. >> The ARPANET was a connection of different computers and operating >> systems > Nope. The ARPANET consisted entirely of IMPs and TIPs, which were > built from Honeywell 316 minis and later BBN's own C/30s which ran the > IMP code after Honeywell stopped making the 316 and the occasional > experimental machine like the multiprocessor Pluribus IMP. Are you claiming that the ARPANET was the IMP subnetwork? And that the Hosts were something different? The IMP subnetwork was part of the ARPANET, but *not* the ARPANET. The Hosts were part of the ARPANET. > Lots of different hosts attached to the IMPs, but the hosts were not > part of the packet switching network. It is true that the Arpanet > researchers did all sorts of work trying to deal with incompatible > data formats on the various hosts, but that was above the level of > the ARPANET IMPs which just sent packets around. You say "ARPANET IMPs" - I am saying the IMP subnetwork of the ARPANET. There is a difference between these statements. The ARPANET includes diverse computers and operating systems such as the SDS Sigma 7 computer system at UCLA using the SEX operating system, the SDS-940 using GENIE at SRI, the IBM 360/75 using OS/MVT at UCSB and the DEC PDP-10 using TENEX at the University of Utah. These along with the IMP subnetwork are what are referred to as the ARPANET, at its earliest stages. The significant is that all these 4 host computers were different computers using different operating systems. It is the diversity of computers and operating systems that were connected, that is the essence of the ARPANET. > One of the key differences between the ARPANET and the Internet is > that the Internet doesn't need IMPs -- the host to host protocols are > all well defined and any kind of computer that can talk IP can play. So are you saying that the essence of the difference between the ARPANET and the Internet is that the Internet makes it possible to connect computers without using IMPs? I am saying the important difference between the INTERNET and the ARPANET is that the Internet made it possible to connect different networks, not just different computers. The ARPANET made it possible to connect different computers. > The Unix box on which I'm typing this runs its own TCP and IP software > and connects to other hosts that speak IP, as do my Windows laptop and > the occasional visiting Mac. My router also happens to be a PC > running Unix but it could be a dedicated Cisco box or anything else > that can move IP packets from one network to another. The architectural conception that made it possible to create TCP/IP wasn't the effort to connect different computers and operating sytems. It was the effort to create a way to connect different packet switching networks. Originally the idea was to try to connect the US ARPANET, the French CYCLADES, and the British NPL. That wasn't what happened, but that was the impetus for the architectural conception. One couldn't expect the French CYCLADES to become part of the ARPANET. The French CYCLADES was a packet switching network using different technical aspects, and was under the ownership and control of different political and administrative entities. >> We want the Internet to grow and flourish. It would seem important >> than to start the new year off with accurate information about its >> development. What would you suggest I revise? Perhaps you might find it of interest to read the paper. It is about the difference between the ARPANET and the Internet. It does seem it would be good if there were the effort to help reporters like those of the BBC understand the difference. > Regards, > John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet > for Dummies$ > Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://iecc.com/johnl, > Sewer Commission$ > "A book is a sneeze." - E.B. White, on the writing of Charlotte's Web With best wishes, Ronda ------------------------------ Date: 4 Jan 2004 01:11:14 -0000 From: John Levine Subject: Re: BBC Writer Fathoms the Internet Pretty Well Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > Is there some reason the BBC can't understand what the Internet is > about, Not that I can see. The description of the difference between the ARPANET and Internet in the BBC article that you quoted is quite accurate: >> The Arpanet came before the net and demanded that all computers that >> connect to it do so with the same hardware and software. >> By contrast, the net, thanks to TCP/IP, could let people on >> different sorts of computers running different software, swap >> information. You comment: > Specifically the Internet is a network of networks -- or a metasystem > of networks. It makes it possible for diverse networks to speak to > each other. Right. > The ARPANET was a connection of different computers and operating > systems Nope. The ARPANET consisted entirely of IMPs and TIPs, which were built from Honeywell 316 minis and later BBN's own C/30s which ran the IMP code after Honeywell stopped making the 316 and the occasional experimental machine like the multiprocessor Pluribus IMP. Lots of different hosts attached to the IMPs, but the hosts were not part of the packet switching network. It is true that the Arpanet researchers did all sorts of work trying to deal with incompatible data formats on the various hosts, but that was above the level of the ARPANET IMPs which just sent packets around. One of the key differences between the ARPANET and the Internet is that the Internet doesn't need IMPs -- the host to host protocols are all well defined and any kind of computer that can talk IP can play. The Unix box on which I'm typing this runs its own TCP and IP software and connects to other hosts that speak IP, as do my Windows laptop and the occasional visiting Mac. My router also happens to be a PC running Unix but it could be a dedicated Cisco box or anything else that can move IP packets from one network to another. > We want the Internet to grow and flourish. It would seem important > than to start the new year off with accurate information about its > development. Agreed. Perhaps now would be a good time to go back and revise the paper of yours that you quoted. > I am saying the important difference between the INTERNET and the > ARPANET is that the Internet made it possible to connect different > networks, not just different computers. The ARPANET made it possible > to connect different computers. This must be some different ARPANET than the one that BBN built and that ran solely on Honeywell 316s and C/30s. Like I said, they did indeed connect all sorts of different computers to the ARPANET, but the network itself was a closed system running on a single fairly exotic set of equipment. The redesign of the Internet that let it run on any old hardware that people chose to connect was and is a crucial difference and one of the most important reasons the Internet succeeded while many other single-architecture networks didn't. The Internet's design to permit multiple networks was important, too, but SNA (remember SNA?) also could handle multiple networks yet didn't go anywhere largely due to its closed design that ran mostly on pricey IBM communication processors. These facts are well known and easily checked by anyone who cares to do so, and you only make yourself look foolish by trying to argue that the situation was and is otherwise. I have no interest in arguing about facts, so this is my last message on this topic. Regards, John Levine johnl@iecc.com Primary Perpetrator of The Internet for Dummies Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://iecc.com/johnl, Sewer Commissioner "I dropped the toothpaste", said Tom, crestfallenly. ------------------------------ 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, Yahoo Groups, 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: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 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 V23 #5 **************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Jan 5 14:30:56 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i05JUui04028; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 14:30:56 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 14:30:56 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200401051930.i05JUui04028@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 V23 #6 TELECOM Digest Mon, 5 Jan 2004 14:31:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 6 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Telecom Update (Canada) #414, January 5, 2004 (Angus TeleManagement) Re: NANP Numbering (Mark J Cuccia) Re: Twenty Years Ago Today 1-Jan-2004 on 1-Jan-1984 (Lincoln King-Cliby) AlchemyTV DVR / Digital Video Recorder for your PowerMac (Monty Solomon) TiVo Inc. Invites You to Join Conference Call, Webcast (Monty Solomon) Last Laugh! 15 Year Old Gets Caught With $71,000!!! (free$$$) 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: Mon, 05 Jan 2004 10:31:08 -0500 From: Angus TeleManagement Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #414, January 5, 2004 ************************************************************ TELECOM UPDATE ************************************************************ published weekly by Angus TeleManagement Group http://www.angustel.ca Number 414: January 5, 2004 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: ** Colville Reappointed to CRTC ** Bell Can Appeal CRTC Contract Ruling ** Telus Wants Re-Auction of Inukshuk Spectrum ** Notice Required on Automatic Contract Renewals ** Telus Apologizes to Customers ** MTS Raises Business Line Rates ** SaskTel Wants EMI, Voice Messaging Forborne ** Bell, Aliant Must Provide Detailed Bills ** Cybersurf Wins Order Against Shaw ** RIM Results Swing to Profit ** DBRS Upgrades Telus Debt ** Nortel Files Final Restated Results ** Emergis Exits U.S. Health Business ** UBS Takes Control of Look ** Canada Payphone Cuts Loss ** Telemanagement Goes Online ============================================================ COLVILLE REAPPOINTED TO CRTC: Telecom Update congratulates David Colville, the CRTC's Vice-Chairperson of Telecommunications and Atlantic regional Commissioner on his re-appointment to the Commission for a further one-year term. BELL CAN APPEAL CRTC CONTRACT RULING: The Federal Court has granted Bell Canada leave to appeal CRTC Telecom Decision 2003-63 (see Telecom Update #405). The appeal is restricted to the question of whether the Commission should have elicited customer views before ordering that details of their contracts with Bell be made public. TELUS WANTS RE-AUCTION OF INUKSHUK SPECTRUM: In December, Telus Mobility asked Industry Canada to revoke Inukshuk's MCS licence for failing to meet license conditions. Telus says the spectrum should be offered again in the upcoming 2.3/3.5 GHz spectrum auction. (See Telecom Update #413) NOTICE REQUIRED ON AUTOMATIC CONTRACT RENEWALS: The CRTC has decided not to remove the automatic contract renewal provisions in Bell and Telus business local service contracts, but Telecom Decision 2003-85 requires both telcos to notify customers at least 60 days before and within 35 days after automatic renewal occurs. Customers will have 30 days from the latter notice to cancel the contract. ** No business customers participated in this proceeding. www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Decisions/2003/dt2003-85.htm TELUS APOLOGIZES TO CUSTOMERS: In a letter sent to two million customers last week, Telus CEO Darren Entwistle says: "Recently, some aspects of our service have not been at the levels you deserve ... If you have been inconvenienced in your dealings with Telus in any way, we sincerely apologize." He says the company is "on track to meet and exceed industry standards in all areas in December 2003." http://about.telus.com/media/customerletter.html MTS RAISES BUSINESS LINE RATES: CRTC Telecom Order 2003-519 approves a proposal by MTS Communications to increase monthly rates for multi-line business service, effective February 1. Non-contracted service goes up $1.45 in bands A to C and $1.65 in bands D to G. Contracted service in all bands increases $1.40, $1.15, and $0.80 for 1, 3 and 5-year contracts respectively. www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Orders/2003/o2003-519.htm SASKTEL WANTS EMI, VOICE MESSAGING FORBORNE: SaskTel has asked the CRTC to forbear from regulating its Electronic Messaging and Voice Messaging services and any similar services that may be developed in the future. www.crtc.gc.ca/PartVII/eng/2003/8640/8640_03.htm#200318560 BELL, ALIANT MUST PROVIDE DETAILED BILLS: CRTC Telecom Decision 2003-86 orders Bell Canada and Aliant to provide monthly itemized bills to all customers, effective mid-2004. The costs are to be borne by the carriers as a normal cost of business. www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Decisions/2003/dt2003-86.htm CYBERSURF WINS ORDER AGAINST SHAW: Responding to a complaint by Calgary ISP Cybersurf (see Telecom Update #388), the CRTC has ordered Shaw Cablesystems, as a condition of providing its own high-speed Internet service, to provide the same service to ISPs for resale at $22.46/sub/month (25% off Shaw's lowest retail rate) until it provides Third Party Internet Access to its underlying network. ** The CRTC adds, "where TPIA can be technically provided ... cable companies must ensure that TPIA is made available forthwith." www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Decisions/2003/dt2003-87.htm RIM RESULTS SWING TO PROFIT: Research In Motion reports a profit of US$16.3-million in the quarter ended November 29, compared to a $92.8-million loss a year ago. The company netted a record 154,000 new Blackberry subscribers in the quarter, reaching 865,000. DBRS UPGRADES TELUS DEBT: Dominion Bond Rating Service has upgraded its rating of Telus Communications Inc.'s long-term debt to BBB (high) and confirmed its rating of Telus Corp. at the same level. While generally positive, DBRS expressed concern about technology substitution and competition in Telus's wireline business, and about the possibility of a strike by unionized workers. NORTEL FILES FINAL RESTATED RESULTS: On December 23, Nortel Networks filed restated results for 2000, 2001, 2002, and the first half of 2003. Revenue was reduced to $60.62 billion, and its loss for the period is now $505 million less than previously stated. The previously reported 2Q 2003 loss of $14-million changed to a $37 million profit. EMERGIS EXITS U.S. HEALTH BUSINESS: BCE Emergis says that it is selling its 400-employee U.S. health services business to MultiPlan Inc. for US$213-million, and hopes to sell its U.S. care management operations as well. ** As a result of this change and related writedowns, BCE Emergis is restating its 2003 results to show a loss of between $0.95 and $1.03 per share. UBS TAKES CONTROL OF LOOK: As expected, Unique Broadband Systems has increased its stake in Look Communications to 51% by buying six million shares from Telesystem Ltd. Craig Wireless International has appealed a CRTC ruling that permitted the takeover. (See Telecom Update #409) CANADA PAYPHONE CUTS LOSS: Canada Payphone Corporation reports a loss of $1.8 million in the year ended September 30, 2003, compared to $5.0 million in the previous year. Total revenue was up 12.5%. TELEMANAGEMENT GOES ONLINE: Starting next week: a new subscribers-only section of the Angus Telemanagement website will feature current and past issues of Telemanagement, detailed indexes, feature reports, and more. Watch for full details, including a money-saving Charter Subscription Offer, in next week's Telecom Update. ============================================================ 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 2004 Angus TeleManagement Group Inc. All rights reserved. For further information, including permission to reprint or reproduce, please e-mail rosita@angustel.ca or phone 905-686-5050 ext 500. The information and data included has been obtained from sources which we believe to be reliable, but Angus TeleManagement makes no warranties or representations whatsoever regarding accuracy, completeness, or adequacy. Opinions expressed are based on interpretation of available information, and are subject to change. If expert advice on the subject matter is required, the services of a competent professional should be obtained. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2004 21:55:45 CST From: Mark J Cuccia Subject: Re: NANP Numbering Bob Goudreau wrote (in reply to Earle Robinson): > Check out the WTNG for details on the incredible amount of numbering > changes that have taken place in Europe in recent years. Meanwhile, > in the NANP, there are tens of millions of people who still have the > same area code that they had 30 or 40 years ago. Even the ones who have > encountered an area code split got to keep their local numbers. And, > with overlay area codes now the most common way to expand the numbering > space, most of us will probably never be forced to change our numbers > again. That is, most of us in the NANP will (probably) never be forced to change our numbers again, until that time "sometime" in the future, when the NANP might ultimately have to expand to something "longer-than-ten-digits", by adding one (or two) digits somewhere within the existing ten-digit number, to create a subsequent eleven (or twelve) digit NANP number. That number "change" is going to affect ANY/EVERY one in the NANP in one big swoop, as well as anyone who needs to call NANP-based numbers from outside of the NANP. But there will be a "permissive/parallel" dialing period for both intra-NANP usage, as well as "intl/ovs"-to-NANP calling. But current projections have that an expansion to an eleven or even twelve digit NANP based number is now anticipated to happen in the 2040 to 2050 time frame. And IMO, as time continues, that 2040/2050 timeframe will be pushed out even further into the future! Mark J. Cuccia mcuccia@tulane.edu New Orleans LA CSA (in the LAND of DIXIE!) ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 04 Jan 2004 23:12:55 -0800 From: Lincoln King-Cliby Reply-To: linwebmain@pe.net Organization: Is the sign of a sick mind Subject: Re: Twenty Years Ago Today 1-Jan-2004, back on 1-Jan-1984 [Pat - Please remove my email address. Thanks!] Mark J Cuccia wrote: > It was *** TWENTY YEARS AGO TODAY *** (1-Jan-2004) on 1-Jan-1984, > that the Bell System *DID* "officially" die as a single unit. > Other thing *HAVE* changed in the past twenty years ... What "was" > Western Electric, the manufacturing and equipment arm of the (one) > Bell Telephone System, with Bell Telephone Laboratories, was retained > by AT&T in 1984. However, a little over ten years later, in the > 1995/96 timeframe, AT&T spun-off its equipment and (Bell) Labs > operations into Lucent, which itself has had its ups-and-downs over > the past eight or so years. (BTW, AT&T did retain a "labs" unit for > switched network operations, which was separated from "Bell Labs" > shortly before spinning off what would be known as Lucent). You know, it's amazing -- I was born 5 months after divestiture [14-May-1984 to be exact] but I have a strong respect for -- and am amazed by "The Bell System" [Yes, I know about the problems with the NIH syndrome, and various other things -- I'm not sure I'd want to live under an iron fisted Bell System where I couldn't do my own wiring, so no flames, please] But speaking of the Bell System and Western Electric -- my Grandparents are preparing to move out of their Northern California home and into what has been their vacation home (St. Ignace, MI -- a beautiful area, and from what I've been told one of the last places to cut over to direct dial service) ... when my mother and I visited them for Christmas they were offering that they weren't moving for the taking, I seized the opportuntiy for something they thought was odd -- their phones. An old, WE rotary desk set (white 500-series) and a WE rotary wall (white 554) phone. The same Western Electric "Bell System Property - Not For Sale" phones that were installed when built the house 40 years ago and had used day in and day out. Down to the same handset cords that had faithfully carried many hundreds of hours of conversations -- the phones are at least twice as old as I am and is still working flawlessly! (The wall phone was used likely hundreds of times a week -- my grandmother is a teacher and has lots of friends, family, and parents that she keeps in touch with). When the 554 came off the wall for the first time in I don't know how many years, a pristine, stainless steel jack was exposed, down to the Bell System logo embossed in the lower right corner ... I had to resist the urge to take that along too. I remember back when my Grandparents had their 2nd line installed to access the Internet my grandfather (a recently retired Civil Engineer) reminisced about how it used to be so easy -- there was just one phone company and they were responsible for everything, including the phones. If something didn't work, they couldn't blame it on your wiring -- they knew exactly whose responsibility it was to fix the problem. He mentioned that when he was building their home he left one night and the next day when he stopped by the house after his day job a Pacific (Telegraph & Telephone Co? Bell? Telesis? ???) employee had added a notation to the effect of "What about the phones?" on the blueprints. He made the notations about jack locations on the prints, did some work on the house and left. A short time later, the jacks were installed in the locations that he noted by the local BOC. Service was ordered, and the phones installed ... and not one visit from the BOC until they had this 2nd line added roughly 35 years later. I was away from my computer on the 1st, but still wanted to take this opportunity to "Pay my respects" on the 20th anniversary of the death of the Bell System. Lincoln [BTW - Anyone happen to know why, with the exception of the wall jack round jacks and boxes were used? I've always kind of wondered.] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 02:40:32 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: AlchemyTV DVR / Digital Video Recorder For Your PowerMac Featuring a high performance Philips tuner and full QuickTime support, AlchemyTV DVR lets you watch TV in full screen mode on your PowerMac. AlchemyTV DVR features a scheduled recording functionality allowing you program the time and date for your recordings in a few easy steps.Your favourite TV program will be recorded onto your hard drive for later viewing or export to VCD or DVD. http://www.miglia.com/products/video/alchemytvdvr/index.html AlchemyTV DVR FAQ http://www.miglia.com/Support/alchemytvdvr_faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 09:21:46 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: TiVo Inc. Invites You to Join Its Conference Call and Webcast TiVo Inc. Invites You to Join Its Conference Call and Webcast from the 2004 International Consumer Electronics Show - Jan 5, 2004 08:00 AM (PR Newswire) - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40121190 ------------------------------ From: free$$$ <'free_money@cox.net> Subject: Last Laugh! 15 Year Old Gets Caught With $71,000!!! Reply-To: 'free_money@cox.net Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2004 22:34:40 -0700 Organization: Cox Communications [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have received this spam at least five or six times in the past month or so. I have never yet seen the so-called 'original item' in the papers or on televison or heard it on the radio. However, it has obviously inspired some guys (no doubt competing for the idiot-of-the-year award) to try the plan for them- selves. In addition to the five or six times I have received this proposition, I've had twice that many emails from the guys testing it out. My comments inserted below as we read through this, and please accept my apologies if you have also received this many times around. PAT] EARN EXTRA INCOME FROM HOME! As seen on National Television.. PARENTS OF 15 YEAR OLD FIND $71,000 CASH HIDDEN IN HIS CLOSET ! You most likely have just seen this story recently featured on a major nightly news program (USA). And reported elsewhere in the world. His mother was cleaning and putting laundry away when she came across a large brown paper bag that was suspiciously buried beneath some clothes and a skateboard in the back of her 15-year-old sons closet. Nothing could have prepared her for the shock she got when she opened the bag and found it was full of cash. Five-dollar bills, twenties, fifties and hundreds - all neatly rubber-banded in labeled piles. "My first thought was that he had robbed a bank", says the 41-year-old woman, "There was over $71,000 dollars in that bag -- that's more than my husband earns in a year". [TEL Editor: My first thought would have been that he had taken a position as a Usenet group moderator and 'spammed his own newsgroup' on a regular basis. Same as is accused of me, and everyone knows I have bags of money neatly stacked and banded in my closet. PAT] The woman immediately called her husband at the car-dealership where he worked to tell him what she had discovered. He came home right away and they drove together to the boys school and picked him up. Little did they suspect that where the money came from was more shocking than actually finding it in the closet. As it turns out, the boy had been sending out, via E-mail, a type of "Report" to E-mail addresses that he obtained off the Internet. Everyday after school for the past 2 months, he had been doing this right on his computer in his bedroom. [Well I can think of other things guys do with bedroom computers.] "I just got the E-mail one day and I figured what the heck, I put my name on it like the instructions said and I started sending it out", says the clever 15-year-old. The E-mail letter listed 5 addresses and contained instructions to send one $5 dollar bill to each person on the list, then delete the address at the top and move the others addresses Down, and finally to add your name to the top of the list. The letter goes on to state that you would receive several thousand dollars in five-dollar bills within 2 weeks if you sent out the letter with your name at the top of the 5-address list. "I get junk E-mail all the time, and really did not think it was going to work", the boy continues. Within the first few days of sending out the E-mail, the Post Office Box that his parents had gotten him for his video-game magazine subscriptions began to fill up with not magazines, but envelopes containing $5 bills. "About a week later I rode [my bike] down to the post office and my box had 1 magazine and about 300 envelops stuffed in it. There was also a yellow slip that said I had to go up to the [post office] counter. I thought I was in trouble or something (laughs)". He goes on, "I went up to the counter and they had a whole box of more mail for me. I had to ride back home and empty out my backpack because I could not carry it all". [Tel Ed: I'd be most reluctant to let the post office sorting room clerks find out I was getting 'money in my box'; remind me to tell you sometime about a charity in Chicago (Missionary Fathers) or a US-based television evangelist with a box in Toronto, Ontario and what happened to them when a postal clerk got wise to what they were getting in the mail. PAT] Over the next few weeks, the boy continued sending out the E-mail. "The money just kept coming in and I just kept sorting it and stashing it in the closet, barely had time for my homework". He had also been riding his bike to several of the banks in his area and exchanging the $5 bills for twenties, fifties and hundreds. "I didn't want the banks to get suspicious so I kept riding to different banks with like five thousand at a time in my backpack. I would usually tell the lady at the bank counter that my dad had sent me in to exchange the money and he was outside waiting for me. One time the lady gave me a really strange look and told me that she would not be able to do it for me and my dad would have to come in and do it, but I just rode to the next bank down the street (laughs)." Surprisingly, the boy did not have any reason to be afraid. The reporting news team examined and investigated the so-called "chain-letter" the boy was sending out and found that it was not a chain-letter at all. In fact, it was completely legal according to US Postal and Lottery Laws, Title 18, Section 1302 and 1341, or Title 18, Section 3005 in the US code, also in the code of federal regulations, Volume 16, Sections 255 and 436, which state a product or service must be exchanged for money received. Every five-dollar bill that he received contained a little note that read, "Please send me report number XYX". This simple note made the letter legal because he was exchanging a service (A Report on how-to) for a five-dollar fee. ITS TRUE! THE TEENAGE BOY LEGITIMATELY EARNED $71,000. YOU SHOULD PRINT THIS, READ IT AND FOLLOW THE SIMPLE INSTRUCTIONS. YOU TOO CAN MAKE $71,000 AND MORE. IT IS WORKING SO WELL, MANY PEOPLE ARE ENTERING THE PROGRAM FOR SECOND AND THIRD TIMES. SOME ARE REPORTING THEY ARE EARNING ENOUGH TO GIVE UP THEIR JOBS AND THEY ARE SPENDING JUST A FEW HOURS A DAY SENDING OUT E-MAILS! Dear Friend, You can earn $50,000 or more in next the 90 days sending e-mail. Seem impossible? Read on for details; is there a catch; NO, there is no catch, just send your emails and be on your way to financial freedom. AS SEEN ON NATIONAL TELEVISION with a whole segment on "20/20". Thank you for your time and Interest. This is the letter you've been reading about in the news lately. Due to the popularity of this letter on the Internet, a major nightly news program recently devoted an entire show to the investigation of the program described below to see, if it really can make people money. =========================================== Dear Friends & Future Millionaires: AS SEEN ON NATIONAL TV: Make over half a million dollars every 4 to 5 months from your home for an investment of only $25 U.S. dollars expense - ONE TIME!! THANKS TO THE COMPUTER AGE AND THE INTERNET!! =========================================== BE A MILLIONAIRE LIKE OTHERS WITHIN A YEAR!!! Before you say 'BULL', please read the following. This is the letter you have been hearing about on the News lately.....the Oprah Winfrey Show...etc. Due to the popularity of this letter on the Internet, a national weekly news program recently devoted an entire show to the investigation of this program described below, to see if it really can make people money. The show also investigated whether or not the program was legal. Their findings proved once and for all that there are ''absolutely NO Laws prohibiting the participation in the program and if people can follow the simple instructions, they are bound to make some mega bucks with only $25 out of pocket cost''. DUE TO THE RECENT INCREASE OF POPULARITY & RESPECT THIS PROGRAM HAS ATTAINED, IT IS CURRENTLY WORKING BETTER THAN EVER! This is what one had to say: ''Thanks to this profitable opportunity. I was approached many times before, but each time I passed on it. I am so glad I finally joined just to see what one could expect in return for the minimal effort and money required. To my astonishment, I received a total of $610,470.00 in 21 weeks, with money still coming in!" Pam Hedland, Fort Lee, New Jersey. ===== PRINT THIS NOW FOR YOUR FUTURE REFERENCE ====== ORDER YOUR REPORTS TODAY AND GET STARTED ON YOUR ROAD TO FINANCIAL FREEDOM!! If you have any questions as to the legality of this program, contact the Office of Associate Director for Marketing Practices, Bureau of Consumer Protection, Washington, D.C. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I mercifully deleted another 20 K of text, i.e. all the names of the suckers who had bought into this scheme; the names of all the 'valuable reports' you would receive (worthless trash paper is more like it); how to go about manipulating and editing the various names on your list, etc. Its all an old, old story, which began back in the 1930's during the Great Depression, or maybe before that ... of course in those days we did not have the great miracle called 'computers' to store our lists of names and do our mailing for us. Or, as the German Infomatics Society (IBM) said in their 1990 convention in Stuttgart, "computers will change the way we live for the better". Neil Postner replied in a message given at the same convention, "We will inform ourselves to death is what will happen." In twenty-plus years of this Digest -- something I should think would be a *real report* of value -- I have yet to come anywhere close to making what this alleged fifteen year old boy allegedly made in one month with his pseudo-reports. I gave you all a vacation holiday from my usual end-of-the-month spam, but will resume it later in January. Here's to a happy, prosperous and spam-free (dream on!) New Year. 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, Yahoo Groups, 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: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 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 V23 #6 **************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Jan 6 01:57:38 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i066vci07351; Tue, 6 Jan 2004 01:57:38 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 01:57:38 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200401060657.i066vci07351@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 V23 #7 TELECOM Digest Tue, 6 Jan 2004 01:58:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 7 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Using PIX 501 With Vonage VoIP (P Lane) FCC vs. fax.com, Again (Danny Burstein) "Wireless and Internet Phones Not Yet Reliable For 911 (The Old Bear) Is 'Next Year' Finally Here for Wireless Technology? (Joseph) TiVo Says EchoStar Infringed on DVR Patents (Monty Solomon) TiVo Files Patent Infringement Suit Against EchoStar (Monty Solomon) iTunes DRM Cracked Wide Open for GNU/Linux. Seriously. (Monty Solomon) Gadget Sales to U.S. Consumers Seen Growing 5 Percent (Monty Solomon) Holidays Helped Drive 2003 Web Sales Higher - Reports (Monty Solomon) Pop-up Seller Loses Round in Court (Monty Solomon) Cable Wiring Seen as Key to the Digital Home (Monty Solomon) Re: BBC Writer Fathoms the Internet Pretty Well (Craig Partridge) Re: BBC Writer Fathoms the Internet Pretty Well (Mark Crispin) San Diego Startup Stars In Mobile Video Market (Eric Friedebach) Re: How Are Cellphone 911 Calls Handled? (W Randolph Franklin) Re: Forget Your Bank Balance? It's Available on the Internet (Franklin) Re: Is TiVo Really All That Great? (Clarence Dold) Re: Twenty Years Ago Today 1-Jan-2004, Back on 1-Jan-1984 (Lisa Hancock) Re: Last Laugh! 15 Year Old Gets Caught With $71,000!!! (Paul Vader) Spam Origins (Marise_A_Klapka) 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: paul_lane@supplyworks.com (P Lane) Subject: Using PIX 501 With Vonage VoIP Date: 5 Jan 2004 13:39:41 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com I thinking of signing up for a test drive of Vonage VoIP. My current setup is a cable modem to the outside interface of a PIX 501. The inside interface is plugged into an 8 port hub. I have 2 servers and a Linksys AP plugged into hub. My questions are will the ATA work on my setup? Do I need to open up ports for it on the PIX? Any documentation on setting this up? Thanks, Paul Lane [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I honestly do not know. I *think* as long as the ATA can see the world and the Vonage people can see the Linksys, it should work okay. I'll recuse from any further answers on this, since I do supply anyone who asks for it with a test drive e-coupon for a month of free service on Vonage. In my case I plugged the ATA directly into a Linksys port (.100 as a matter of fact) and it worked fine. Your PIX-501 confuses me, however. 'Documentation' basically consists of just this: plug a phone into the modular jack on the back of the ATA; then plug the ATA into your internet connection. A few seconds later, Vonage sees it out there, blinks a little red light at you, and you are connected to make/recieve calls. Someone who knows about PIX-501 can answer that part better. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Danny Burstein Subject: FCC vs. fax.com, Again Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 17:17:26 -0500 Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC FCC FINES FAX.COM OVER $5 MILLION FOR SENDING "JUNK FAXES". The Commission imposed a forfeiture of $5,379,000 against Fax.com, Inc., for willful and repeated violations of the Commission's Rules and the TCPA. News Release. News Media Contact: Suzanne.Tetreault@fcc.gov EB. Contact Suzanne Tetreault at (202) 418-7450 and Kurt Schroeder at (202) 418-7320, TTY: 1 (888) 835-5322 FAX.COM, INC., APPARENT LIABILITY FOR FORFEITURE. Assessed a monetary forfeiture of $5,379,000 against Fax.com, Inc. for willfull and repeated violations of the Communications Act and the Commission's rules and orders concerning the TCPA. Action by: the Commission. Adopted: 12/31/2003 by Forfeiture Order. (FCC No. 04-2). EB danny " did my bit in forwarding some over, which is almost as good a feeling as getting the $500 would be " burstein ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2004 13:12:53 -0500 From: The Old Bear Subject: "Wireless and Internet Phones not Yet Reliable For 911 As summarized in NewsScan for January 5, 2004: WIRELESS AND INTERNET PHONES NOT YET RELIABLE FOR 911 SERVICE Consumer advocates are concerned that people don't realize that when they replace their traditional wired phones with cellular or Internet services they may be losing reliable 911 access. For example, most Internet phone companies offer no 911 service at all. Surveys suggest that 18% of the country's wireless phone owners use them as their primary phone, and that perhaps 5% of cellphone users have given up their wired phones. Regina Costa of The Utility Reform Network says: "I think people are crazy to rely on a wireless phone to contact authorities in an emergency. Sure, it can be very handy. But I wouldn't want to bet my life on it." On the other hand, Ravi Sakaria, president of a New Jersey Internet phone service provider, is confident the problem will be solved in due course: "It will happen because as the number of customers grow, it will become a bigger obstacle to the industry." source: San Jose Mercury News (2 Jan 2004) http://www.siliconvalley.com/mld/siliconvalley/7619455.htm [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Again, talking about Vonage for a minute. When I got my Vonage account several months ago, the Vonage people stressed to me that I should register my '911 service' with them as soon as possible. If you travel around a lot, and take the ATA with you, then you are correct, it is not yet perfected. But as soon as I gave them my street address, it went on the 911 PSAP records that way. I got back email a few days later confirming that my address had been registered, and the same day I got a letter from the City of Independence telling me they had also recorded my street address for public safety purposes based on the request from Vonage. However, I have never moved anywhere or had the box out of service, except to reboot it a couple of times. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Joseph Subject: Is 'Next Year' Finally Here For Wireless Technology? Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2004 11:20:23 -0800 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.NOcom By Jon Fortt Knight Ridder Newspapers Mike McCamon is clearly frustrated, but he's doing well at holding it together. He is Mr. Bluetooth. That's Bluetooth, the wireless technology. You might have heard of it -- the cable-replacement miracle that was supposed to clear the clutter around your personal computer, banish the annoying wire from your cellphone headset and "cure the common cold," as McCamon wryly put it. McCamon is executive director of the Bluetooth Special Interest Group, an outfit based in Kansas whose mission is to perfect and promote the technical standard. He is wise not to make promises. Like most everything else technology-related, Bluetooth got over-hyped during the late '90s. Bluetooth boosters from companies long bankrupt kept promising it would be everywhere "next year." http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/2001829652_bluetooth05.html remove NO from .NOcom to reply ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 17:58:05 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: TiVo Says EchoStar Infringed on DVR Patents NEW YORK, Jan 5 (Reuters) - Television recording technology company TiVo Inc.(NASDAQ:TIVO) on Monday said it has filed a patent infringement suit against satellite TV provider EchoStar Communications Corp.(NASDAQ:DISH), related to digital video recorders (DVR). - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40124166 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 17:59:32 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: TiVo Files Patent Infringement Suit Against EchoStar SAN JOSE, Calif., Jan. 5 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- TiVo Inc. (Nasdaq: TIVO) today filed a patent infringement suit against EchoStar Communications Corporation in federal district court in Texas alleging the satellite television service provider is violating claims of U.S. Patent No. 6,233,389 issued to TiVo in May 2001, known as the "Time Warp" patent. Key TiVo inventions protected by the Time Warp patent include a method for recording one program while playing back another, watching a program as it is recording, and a storage format that supports advanced TrickPlay(TM) capabilities (i.e. pausing live television broadcast, fast-forwarding, rewinding, instant replays, and slow motion). - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40124132 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 21:26:46 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: iTunes DRM Cracked Wide Open For GNU/Linux. Seriously. By Andrew Orlowski in San Francisco Exclusive Norwegian programmer Jon Lech Johansen, who broke the DVD encryption scheme, has opened iTunes locked music a tad further, by allowing people to play songs they've purchased on iTunes Music Store on their GNU/Linux computers. http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/34712.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 21:33:45 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Gadget Sales to U.S. Consumers Seen Growing 5 Percent By Eric Auchard NEW YORK, Jan 5 (Reuters) - U.S. consumer electronics sales are set to pickup this year following a lackluster 2003, when gadgets ranging from camera phones to crystal-clear TVs failed to offset declines in audio and car electronics sales. The Consumer Electronics Association of Washington, D.C. on Monday forecast that the wholesale electronics market in 2004 is likely to grow to $100.99 billion, up 5 percent over 2003, rebounding from three years of negative or minimal growth. The U.S. trade group representing audio, video and mobile electronics makers projected 2003 sales would total $96.35 billion, up 2.3 percent over the downward revised sales estimate of $94.17 billion reported in 2002. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40125612 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 21:34:30 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Holidays Helped Drive 2003 Web Sales Higher - Reports By Lisa Baertlein SAN FRANCISCO, Jan 5 (Reuters) - Online holiday shoppers spent 35 percent more in 2003, helping to ring up the biggest year yet for Web sales, according to a new report issued on Monday. During the 2003 holiday season, Web shoppers parted with a record $18.5 billion, excluding travel, compared with $13.7 billion in the year-earlier period, Goldman, Sachs & Co. (NYSE:GS), Harris Interactive and Nielsen/NetRatings said in their latest eSpending Report. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40125694 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 22:52:16 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Pop-up Seller Loses Round in Court By Stefanie Olsen Staff Writer, CNET News.com A U.S. district court judge recently barred WhenU from delivering pop-up advertisements to some Net visitors, going against decisions in favor of the software maker's controversial ad tactics. In late December, as part of a lawsuit filed against WhenU by 1-800-Contacts, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York granted a preliminary injunction that prohibits WhenU from triggering pop-ups when people visit 1-800-Contacts' Web site. In the past, WhenU delivered pop-up ads that promoted rivals of 1-800-Contacts, including another defendant, Vision Direct. In issuing the injunction, the judge said the practice constitutes trademark infringement and violates the Lanham Act, the U.S. trademark act. http://news.com.com/2100-1024-5135313.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 22:58:12 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Cable Wiring Seen as Key to the Digital Home By Marguerite Reardon Staff Writer, CNET News.com A group of vendors and service providers have banded together to help promote technology that would enable homeowners to use existing cable to link their household appliances into a single network. The Multimedia over Coax Alliance (MoCA) plans to formally announce its formation Wednesday at the Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas. Founding members include networking giant Cisco Systems, cable provider Comcast, satellite provider EchoStar Communications, chipmaker Entropic Communications, retailer RadioShack and consumer electronics makers Panasonic, Motorola and Toshiba. The purpose of the alliance is to develop standards and promote the use of coaxial cable to send high-quality video, voice and data between a variety of household devices, such as TVs, digital video recorders and PCs. Coax cable is already deployed in millions of U.S. households, providing customers with cable television and, in some cases, broadband Internet access. One of the most important tasks of the alliance is to develop a set of standards so that consumers can easily link devices from several different vendors. http://news.com.com/2100-1034-5135390.html ------------------------------ From: Craig Partridge Subject: Re: BBC Writer Fathoms the Internet Pretty Well Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 19:17:15 +0000 (UTC) Organization: The World : www.TheWorld.com : Since 1989 Ronda Hauben writes: >> Nope. The ARPANET consisted entirely of IMPs and TIPs, which were >> built from Honeywell 316 minis and later BBN's own C/30s which ran the >> IMP code after Honeywell stopped making the 316 and the occasional >> experimental machine like the multiprocessor Pluribus IMP. > Are you claiming that the ARPANET was the IMP subnetwork? And that > the Hosts were something different? That is a very accurate description of the ARPANET. Craig ------------------------------ From: Mark Crispin Subject: Re: BBC Writer Fathoms the Internet Pretty Well Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 16:40:29 -0800 Organization: Networks & Distributed Computing On Sun, 4 Jan 2004, Ronda Hauben wrote: > Are you saying that the ARPANET is the same as the IMP subnetwork > of the ARPANET? The whole point of the IMP subnetwork is to connect > diverse computers and diverse operating systems. The ARPANET is the > connection of these diverse computers and operating systems. It isn't > the IMP subnetwork. The IMP subnetwork is the means of connecting the > diverse computers, but is *not* the ARPANET. Ronda, were you a user of the ARPAnet in its halcyon days (1970-1982)? I was. I implemented the first 96-bit leader (32-bit address) ARPAnet NCP for the PDP-10 in 1978. I was very much part of the TCP/IP transition in 1983, and the subsequent ARPAnet/Milnet split. I wrote some of the earliest implementations of Telnet and SMTP. I even wrote an EGP. I have never heard the term "IMP subnetwork" used. Nor have I ever heard of this strange case which you seem to be making. The notion that the wires of an LH or DH connection are part of a "network" is rather, uh, strange to anyone who actually dealt with it on an electrical basis. A better case may be made for a VDH interface, but that in turn was more of a point-to-point network. So is the notion that the hosts on the ARPAnet were part of the network. It's akin to saying that a human user of a telephone is "part of the telephone network." The notion that the only important difference between ARPAnet and Internet is that "Internet made it possible to connect different networks, not just different computers" is laughable to anyone who was actually there. In conclusion, I will echo John Levine: > These facts are well known and easily checked by anyone who cares to > do so, and you only make yourself look foolish by trying to argue > that the situation was and is otherwise. > I have no interest in arguing about facts, so this is my last > message on this topic. -- Mark -- http://staff.washington.edu/mrc Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate. Si vis pacem, para bellum. ------------------------------ From: friedebach@yahoo.com (Eric Friedebach) Subject: San Diego Startup Stars In Mobile Video Market Date: 5 Jan 2004 15:39:09 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Jennifer Davies, 01.05.04, Forbes.com Jim Brailean, chief executive of San Diego's PacketVideo, says he's developed a thick skin. He's had to. His predictions about the coming of video on mobile devices has had more stops and starts than rush hour traffic at the Interstates 5 and 805 merge. During the height of the New Economy hype, Brailean founded PacketVideo to provide technology for mobile video, which allows users to record, view and transmit video clips on wireless devices. The company raised about $40 million and filed for an initial public offering in 2000. But as the tech economy swooned, PacketVideo canceled its stock offering and raised money from private sources. In early 2001, the company said it had brought in $100 million from such industry giants as Texas Instruments , Motorola and Qualcomm. But even with its substantial war chest, PacketVideo was unable to outlast the turmoil in the wireless telecommunications market. It was forced to cut costs and restructure itself in August 2002. http://www.forbes.com/2004/01/05/105mobilevideopinnacor_ii.html Eric Friedebach /It's a Hockey Night in Minnesota!/ ------------------------------ Subject: Re: How Are Cellphone 911 Calls Handled? From: W Randolph Franklin Reply-To: W Randolph Franklin Organization: none Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2004 03:32:39 GMT According to Steven J Sobol : > W Randolph Franklin wrote: >> me: "Can't you get that from the ANI?" >> 3rd 911 person: "Not from a cellphone." > Of course they can't get your location from a cellphone. :) > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I do not think she asked the man where > he was located ... she asked him *what his number was*. PAT Correct, they wanted my phone number. I'd already told them the accident location, 3 times. However, the Troy NY police did respond quite fast. (FYI, a drunk driver turned left as a light was changing. Unlike many other drivers who go thru this intersection on red, he didn't make it, was hit, and spun within 10 feet of me.) Wm Randolph Franklin wrf@ecse.rpi.edoocyashunaldomane (Plaintext preferred; attachments deprecated) http://www.ecse.rpi.edoocyashunaldomane/Homepages/wrf/ [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Its good to hear of a DUI motorist getting what he deserved instead of some poor innocent guy being the victim. Or was there an innocent victim as well? Back to reliance on cellular phones (or any portable phone with a fixed number such as Vonage: I used my cellular phone to call police once a year ago at Christmas when I was with my Salvation Army kettle in front of Marvins Supermarket. A woman pulled into the Marvin's parking lot and went in the store. A few minutes later, a man pulling out of Marvins with his groceries backed into her car. I got his license plate when he chose to drive away hoping not to get caught. When the woman came out of Marvins a few minutes later she saw the damage to her car. I volunteered to call the police for her, but I did not call 911 -- instead I dialed 332-1700 which is the City of Independence Police administrative number. (No matter, really, since the same person answers 911 and also the 1700 line.) I asked if she would have an officer come by Marvins and see this lady. The police dispatchers are very well trained here. She knew exactly where Marvins is located (10th and Myrtle Streets). I think they know every street and almost every house number in town. The officer showed up a minute or two later; the lady was quite annoyed that the 'coward' had hit her car then driven off. I gave the officer the license plate number; it seems the guy's street address was about four or five blocks away. The officer got the guy's phone number and called him on the phone. The conversation went like this: "You get your ass back over here to Marvins and take care of this! I don't think you really want for me to have to drive over to your house! Imagine what would happen then!" Sure enough, about five minutes later the guy came back over, very sheepish looking, gave his name and address to the lady whose car he had banged, as the officer looked on. I know this would not work in a larger city or on a highway, etc but in a small town like ours, if the person can see any sort of street sign at all, or any 'landmark' or store; i.e. Walmart, Marvins, the doctor's office building, the library, the high school, the college, etc the dispatcher knows exactly where he is, cellular or landline phone, or even Vonage phone. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Forget Your Bank Balance? It's Available on the Internet From: W Randolph Franklin Reply-To: W Randolph Franklin Organization: none Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2004 03:26:44 GMT This isn't really new to the internet. Banks have provided a balance verification service to merchants for decades. If you call a bank and type in a checking account number and a dollar amount, the service will tell you if that account's balance is at least that large. It's all automated, no social engineering required. There are also no messy formalities about proving that you are verifying a real check. Quite a nice simple user interface. IIRC, no bank that I've ever used has bothered to mention this service to me. However, IMHO they will disable it when asked. Wm Randolph Franklin wrf@ecse.rpi.educationaldomain (Plaintext preferred; attachments deprecated) http://www.ecse.rpi.educationaldomain/Homepages/wrf/ ------------------------------ From: dold@IsXTiVoXRe.usenet.us.com Subject: Re: Is TiVo Really All That Great? Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 19:47:40 +0000 Organization: a2i network Rob wrote: > I remember TiVo being advertised over here in the UK several years > ago, but it never took off. In fact, I'd say it died a death. I put I certainly see more posts in alt.video.ptv.tivo from the UK than I would expect from a dead product. Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley (Lake County) CA USA 38.8-122.5 ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Jeff nor Lisa) Subject: Re: Twenty Years Ago Today 1-Jan-2004, back on 1-Jan-1984 Date: 5 Jan 2004 12:39:35 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Michael D. Sullivan wrote: > The "discontinuance of the rental policy" was not an economic decision > by the telcos. Telephone rentals were a cash cow, pure gravy. They > would never have discontinued them if it was up to them, and they > opposed the end of phone rentals vigorously. I wish I could recall where I read a telco manager's observation that cost of having a fleet of service trucks and crews to go out and service the rented sets was starting to become uneconomical. Undoubtedly the FCC policies you quoted played a part. > Consumers unquestionably benefited from long-distance competition. > If there had not been an MCI or a Sprint, you'd still be paying $1 > or more per minute for a long-distance call, in 1975 dollars. Now, > long-distance is practically free. I don't agree. Right up until divesture AT&T was lowering its long distance rates because of technology improvements. Those improvements would have continued to drive the rates downward. Of course, not all LD rates went down. Some have skyrocketed, such as LD calls from coin phones or 3rd number billing. (Sorry, but when I was at the hospital unexpectedly due to medical emergencies, I didn't have the proper 'calling card' special phone number.) LD D/A is no longer free. Operator assistance is hard to get or charged for a high amounts. Remember too, local service costs went up at the same time. Administrative and interconnect costs went up, too. From the consumer's point of view, the monthly phone bill didn't go down. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: From the consumer's point of view, the overall bill which had to be paid each month went *up*, considerably. The phone company quit the system of long distance subsidizing local service. PAT] ------------------------------ From: pv+usenet@pobox.com (Paul Vader) Subject: Re: Last Laugh! 15 Year Old Gets Caught With $71,000!!! Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2004 20:40:40 -0000 Organization: Inline Software Creations 'free_money@cox.net writes: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have received this spam at least five > or six times in the past month or so.] Is that all? This isn't a new one -- though it shows some effort to deal with past 'giggle test' parts of it. For example, the kid has his own PO box now, to explain how the parents didn't discover more than 14,000 envelopes coming to the house, and there's a note about him having no time to do homework -- it would take 20 hours continuous work, at five seconds per (I don't know about you, but I can't go that fast) to open all those envelopes, and your profit might get wiped out from paper cuts! But still, this one part always boggles me: > chain-letter at all. In fact, it was completely legal according to US > Postal and Lottery Laws, Title 18, Section 1302 and 1341, or Title 18, > Section 3005 in the US code, also in the code of federal regulations, > Volume 16, Sections 255 and 436, which state a product or service must > be exchanged for money received. Those references are correct, and there is indeed that last sentence in them. But if you read the rest of the law, which you're bound to do if you've bothered to look it up, you know the 'reports' figleaf will not work. I understand that the postmaster general just *loves* to get copies of chain letters that mention this, because it makes proving fraud fairly trivial. You might claim ignorance of a law and get leniency, but when a cite to the law is right in your pitch, documenting that what you're doing is illegal ... > [Tel Ed: I'd be most reluctant to let the post office sorting room > clerks find out I was getting 'money in my box'; remind me to tell > you sometime about a charity in Chicago (Missionary Fathers) or a > US-based television evangelist with a box in Toronto, Ontario and > what happened to them when a postal clerk got wise to what they were > getting in the mail. PAT] This member of the audience is always up for one of your stories, but I think I know how this one ends -- with fines bigger than the money in the envelopes, right? * * PV something like badgers -- something like lizards -- and something like corkscrews. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I forgot how much Jimmy Swaggart got ripped for when the postal clerk in Toronto took a liking to Swaggart's Canadian post office box. I think it was around a million dollars. On the other hand, the Missionary Fathers had a box at the same post office in Chicago I used to go to. The evening shift super- visor and the three employees who got caught with their hands in the till there got away with about 150 thousand dollars in cash donations. I remember that incident well. I used to go into the downtown post office box area (zips 60690 through 60699 [all just 'paper zip codes' used for sorting purposes, no physical location for those zip codes]) to pick up my mail late at night, several nights per week, and got aquainted on a first name basis with the counter clerks there. I went in one night to get my mail, none of the regular clerks were there except one lady I knew. "Where is Joe tonight, or Amanda?" Amanda was the supervisor at night. "Oh," said Jean, sort of giggling. "I guess you did not hear that the postal inspectors came in last night and cleaned the whole place out. They caught her and Joe on hidden videotape; she was getting into the (metal holding) tray for Missionary Fathers, and taking a huge handful of envelopes with her then going into the ladies restroom. When she would come out a few minutes later she had none of the envelopes. Then Joe would take a handful of envelopes and disappear into the men's room the same way. And there were two other workers in the sorting room caught doing the same thing. Postal inspectors came in last night about 10 PM, played the video tapes for the entire staff to watch, then asked 'if anyone wants to make confessions, it will go easier on you'. No one would confess until those videos were played showing Amanda and Joe going into the stalls, sitting there and ripping open envelopes, pocketing the cash and flushing the checks and prayer requests, etc down the toilets. The silence was deafening and those four workers were fired on the spot." (I am sure federal indictments followed soon therefter.) Missionary Fathers is that bunch (who under various names) send out the pictures of the pitiful little children who have sent you their cheesy Christmas gift: often times pencils, or mailing address labels or sometimes a crappy string of beads, etc. And wouldn't you like to send a Christmas gift by return mail to these children to show them how much you care about their welfare? A few dollars or whatever God puts on your heart to spare will go to the Crappy Pitiful Children's School where we see that they get at least one square meal each day and a new pair of overalls to wear. Always real tear-jerking letters and pictures designed to tug at your heart strings. If its not Christmas then maybe its Fourth of July. Always a sad story, always a free gift because the indigent children love you so much. $150 thousand is all Joe and Amanda would 'fess up to; their take and the others in on it was *much more*. It was so bad that the one bunch of crooks (Missionary Fathers) finally decided to abandon their post office box and moved it out to one of the suburbs when the second bunch of crooks (postal employees) took them so badly. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Spam Origins From: Marise_A_Klapka@NDGSTP.COM Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 15:07:38 -0600 I recently saw this article in my monthly e-newsletter from CyberAtlas and thought it might be of interest. If you choose to pose, please withhold my name/e-mail address. Thanks. U.S. Named as Biggest Spammer, Spammee By Robyn Greenspan The United States may not have to look past its own backyard to enforce the Anti-Spam bill the president is expected to sign by 2004. The United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) 2003 e-commerce and development report identifies the U.S. as the top perpetrator, responsible for more than half of the spam received in the world. |-------------------------------| | Spam Origins, March 2003 | |-------------------------------| |United States58.4% | |-------------------------------| |China5.6% | |-------------------------------| |United Kingdom5.2% | |-------------------------------| |Brazil4.9% | |-------------------------------| |Canada4.1% | |-------------------------------| |Others21.8% | |-------------------------------| |Source: UNCTAD | |-------------------------------| The majority of spam victims are in the U.S. as well, the report finds, and David Schatsky, senior vice president of research, Jupiter Research (a unit of this site's corporate parent) says simply, "That's where the money is." Schatsky explains that the U.S. is the largest marketplace in the world, making it an attractive target. http://cyberatlas.internet.com/big_picture/geographics/article/0,,5911_3113611,00.html [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Does that 58.4 percent of all spam sent out include that snotty, bratty little 15 year old boy with the 71,000 dollars hidden away in his closet? 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, Yahoo Groups, 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: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 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 V23 #7 **************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Jan 6 14:47:27 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i06JlRH11621; Tue, 6 Jan 2004 14:47:27 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 14:47:27 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200401061947.i06JlRH11621@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 V23 #8 TELECOM Digest Tue, 6 Jan 2004 14:47:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 8 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Coax Chipset Enables Home Net Backbones (Monty Solomon) ATI Spins Digital TV Tuner/Decoder chip (Monty Solomon) Siemens Gigabit 2420/8825 Voicemail Quesstion (Steve Fitzgerald) Re: NANP Numbering (Earle Robinson) New Videophone Hailed As Breakthrough For The Deaf (Eric Friedebach) Re: Twenty Years Ago Today 1-Jan-2004, back on 1-Jan-1984 (John Levine) Re: Twenty Years Ago Today 1-Jan-2004, back on 1-Jan-1984 (Kilo Sierra) Re: Using PIX 501 With Vonage VoIP (Kilo Delta One Sierra) Re: Is TiVo Really All That Great? (Rob) Re: Then Benjamin Franklin Must be a Terrorist Too? (Michael Chance) Re: Last Laugh! 15 Year Old Gets Caught With $71,000 (Charles Cryderman) 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: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 23:34:04 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Coax Chipset Enables Home Net Backbones By Robert Keenan EE Times Wayne, N.J. - A chip set from startup Entropic Communications lets end users turn their coaxial connections into a backbone network in the home. Wireless connections -- mostly wireless-LAN links --are quickly becoming the de facto approach for distributing broadband connections and multimedia content from a router to a node, such as a laptop. But Wi-Fi systems struggle to penetrate some walls and thus fall short in providing total coverage in a home. That coverage issue will loom larger as end users start to distribute HDTV connections over Wi-Fi channels. To help solve the problem, equipment vendors have considered establishing a backbone network in the home. With the EN1010 RF front-end IC and the EN2010 baseband controller IC, Entropic (San Diego) gives equipment vendors a way to tap into coaxial connections and establish a backbone that can deliver a peak performance of 270 Mbits/second and real throughput of better than 100 Mbits/s. http://www.commsdesign.com/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=17200154 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 00:58:53 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: ATI Spins Digital TV Tuner/Decoder Chip By Junko Yoshida EE Times PARIS - ATI Technologies Inc. is rolling out a digital TV chip that integrates front-end digital terrestrial and cable demodulators and a back-end high-definition MPEG-2 decoder. The X210VC "DTV-on-chip" will give ATI "at least a two-year jump" on DTV silicon competitors, said director of marketing Mike Gittings. While many semiconductor companies continue to sit on the fence or have given up on the U.S. terrestrial DTV market, consumer electronics suppliers are scrambling to meet the Federal Communications Commission's digital tuner mandate, which requires TV makers to equip at least 50 percent of their 36-inch and larger TVs with a terrestrial digital TV tuner/decoder by July 1 (see story, page 18). http://www.eet.com/semi/news/OEG20040105S0040 ------------------------------ From: sf@mnetsys.com (Steve Fitzgerald) Subject: Siemens Gigabit 2420/8825 Voicemail Question Date: 6 Jan 2004 04:22:56 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Does anyone know if on the 2420 or 8825 it is possible to disable the answering machine on only one of the lines? I have two lines and only want the answering machine to answer one of the them. The other line has dedicated voicemail service off-site. Thanks. ------------------------------ From: Earle Robinson
Subject: Re: NANP Numbering Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 14:58:41 +0100 (Please mask my email address. Thank you.) Mr. Cuccia and others have replied extensively to my messages. Rather than using quote backs, I'll attempt to address the major points raised. You say that the USA is the leader for technology, etc. Yes, that is true, but the brains behind much of this come from Europeans and, more recently, Asians. Andy Grove is Hungarian, as was von Neumann. American rocket technology was brought by von Braun from Germany after the 2nd World War. The nuclear research was mostly done by men from Europe, too. Turing was English, the diesel engine was invented in Germany, movies in France, and the only commercial supersonic aircraft was created by the French and the English. I can travel from Paris to London in a couple of hours at over 200mph, down to Marseille in a few hours, too. Radar and the decryption of German code were done in England. I could go on and on. You speak of how the American phone system already had 7 digits from the 40s on. Well, yes in cities like New York. But, I was growing up in Greenwich Connecticut where our phone number was Greenwich 102. Given the many small non-bell companies and the fact that different bell subsidiaries used differing technologies the American system was far from that good. Granted it was much better than in Europe. But, Europe had gone through 2 devastating wars, bombed and the scene of so many battles. I well remember how awful the telephone systems here were until action was taken beginning in the late 1960s through the 1970s. Today, overall the systems here are often better than what is in the states. I also recall how awful phone service was in west Los Angeles in the late 70s and into the 80s (also mentioned by another writer in a message here the other day). We were served (an oxymoron) by General Telephone. It was virtually impossible to obtain a reliable connection to CompuServe, whose nodes were in PacBell territory only a few miles away. Even today many Americans have problems with dialup connections. Further, ISDN was never developed as it was here in Europe. Cell phones? Here in Europe we are approaching 90% market penetration everywhere. Not so in the states. Here in France if I dial a number, and there is no call waiting on that line, I get a busy signal, just as in the states. But, all I need do is to punch the 5 on the touch pad and hang up. When my correspondent hangs up my number rings, I pick up the phone and the phone is ringing at the other end. No extra charge, no monthly fee. It's free. Interested in ADSL? All I need do is provide my phone number and address on a web page and I am told how many meters I am from the central office and told I qualify because it is 473 meters. If I prefer a phone company other than France telecom I can choose from 6 or 7. Try that in the states! If you are in NYC you have Verizon , if in Miami Bell South. No choice. ADSL? I have a choice among nearly 10 ISP's. And, often quite cheap. Though I now have cable access I could sign up with one ISP which offers not only 2048/256 internet service, but VOIP phone (and phone number) with free phone calls within France and unbeatable rates for international calls, e.g. 3 cents to call the states, plus up to 100 television channels, too. All this for $35 per month and using that copper pair. You point out that the national phone systems were a hodge podge in the past. Yes, this was true. But, not today. There was a change in numbers several years ago here in France, to 10 digit dialing. Since this allows up to nearly 500 million phone numbers it is clear that with a population of 60 million France is covered for many years. The UK, alas, made a bollocks of things, so that they have had to endure 3 or 4 different changes in the past 10 years or so until they got it right. But, in other countries it was done correctly. I stand corrected as concerns the maximum number of digits mandated by the itu. But, this could be readily extended, as it was when it went from 12 to 15. The American system seems so cumbersome in comparison. While I can merely replace the first digit to use one of the major alternate carriers, in the states I'd have to dial several digits to do this. We also have features, like the handling if a busy signal that I already mentioned, which you don't have. For example, I can add other data to my directory listing using the internet, to provide the names of other people who use my number, email addresses and other numbers, too. Cellular phone numbers will be listed shortly, though one may opt out if one wishes. Call blocking here may be done on an individual basis or globally. Naturally, there is an emergency number, 112, valid everywhere in Europe. But there is also an emergency number for abused women to call, too. Finally, to address your vaunted 7 digit dialing. Well it ain't so in many places any more. In Miami you have to dial 10 digits to call a local number and I think it is the same in NYC, too. Given this, many people are confused between long distance dialing, 11 digits (1 digit more than here in Europe) and local calling. With our 10 digit dialing norm there is no confusion. Earle Robinson ------------------------------ From: friedebach@yahoo.com (Eric Friedebach) Subject: New Videophone Hailed As Breakthrough For The Deaf Date: 6 Jan 2004 09:18:33 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Thomas J. Fitzgerald, 01.05.04, Forbes.com The spread of high-speed Internet access and the increasing sophistication of videoconferencing tools have given the deaf broad new access to a simple pleasure that most people take for granted: chatting on the telephone. New products and services promise to liberate the deaf from the slow text-based telecommunications systems that have been their primary option for decades. One offering, a videophone and relay service introduced by Sorenson Media, enables users to sign with each other or with banks of interpreters who translate live phone conversations between the deaf and those who hear. The Sorenson videophone is a breakthrough, said Genie Gertz, an assistant professor of deaf studies at California State University at Northridge, because it enables the deaf to use what many consider to be their native language American Sign Language with unprecedented simplicity and clarity. This is a gigantic step for the deaf community, Gertz, who is deaf, said through an interpreter. The Sorenson VP-100 is a stand-alone videophone that works with a television and broadband Internet connection. It has a remote control and a flashing light that can be used instead of a ringer to signal incoming calls. Users can sign directly with another deaf person or with a Sorenson interpreter. Because of the high quality of the video, the interpreter can read the deaf user's signing while simultaneously translating and speaking to the telephone user, and vice versa. http://www.forbes.com/2004/01/05/105videophonepinnacor_ii.html Eric Friedebach /Mortgage your Viagra!/ ------------------------------ Date: 6 Jan 2004 07:18:56 -0000 From: John Levine Subject: Re: Twenty Years Ago Today 1-Jan-2004, back on 1-Jan-1984 Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > Of course, not all LD rates went down. Some have skyrocketed, such as > LD calls from coin phones or 3rd number billing. Payphone operators finally seem to have figured out that if you don't totally rip people off, they might use your service. I see a lot of payphones that offer long distance anywhere in the country for 25 cents/minute with a three or four minute minumum. That's not exactly cheap, but it's back down in the range where if you want to call someone, you'd be inclined to dump in the quarters rather than go to extraordinary lengths to avoid using the phone. I've seen phones in NYC with stickers offering similar international rates, 25 cents/min to most of Europe and plausible rates to other countries. Those of us old enough to remember the Bell system will remember that calls across the country cost 25 cents/min back when a quarter could still buy two or three candy bars. > Remember too, local service costs went up at the same time. > Administrative and interconnect costs went up, too. From the > consumer's point of view, the monthly phone bill didn't go down. It's true, if you don't make a lot of toll calls, your bill has gone up, although I haven't seen overall numbers comparing monthly rates (the real ones, with all of the fee and tax junk added on) to inflation. If I had to guess, I'd guess that the cost of local service in constant dollars is about the same as it was 20 or 30 years ago, but long distance, particularly international, is much cheaper. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 330 5711 johnl@iecc.com Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner http://iecc.com/johnl Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail ------------------------------ From: kd1s@aol.comremvthis (Kilo Delta One Sierra) Date: 06 Jan 2004 09:16:11 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Subject: Re: Twenty Years Ago Today 1-Jan-2004, back on 1-Jan-1984 > Remember too, local service costs went up at the same time. > Administrative and interconnect costs went up, too. From the > consumer's point of view, the monthly phone bill didn't go down. Indeed. In 1982 I got my own phone line. I was all of 16 at the time and had my first modem so I was always tying the line up. I had a job so my father had them hook the line up, and every month I paid the bill in cash. I paid a total of $12 a month. That included the phone rental (A red 2500 set of course!) and the Touch-Tone surcharge and taxes. Now the line charge alone is $17.26, then add in the damned fees and taxes and it come out close to $30. That's what is killing any savings. The phone companies and the government saw a golden opportunity to rape and pilage as usual and we end up footing the bill. Know what? Universal Service charges should have gone away a long time ago. If people want to move out to the burbs and rural areas let them pay to have the lines strung. Nail the damned contractors that are building up the suburbs and rural areas -- and also screwing the cities at the same time. But the main culprit here is plain old corporate dominance. I do wish that some day we get an administration willing to put the corpo-military complex in their place. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Interesting how you mention your very own first telephone. I first got subscribed under my own name back in 1960, when I moved out from living with Mommie Dearest to my own little place in Hyde Park (the U of C neighborhood on the south side of Chicago.) The monthly bill was around six or seven dollars and my roomate and I agreed to split the bill but each be responsible for our own long distance charges and or telegrams which were sent by phone. Illinois Bell did not ask for deposits, or run credit checks, etc. You simply called them one day and they came out the next day to put the phone in. They trusted you to pay the bill when it arrived. We decided on a green 'palmolive' color rotary dial phone and since we lived in an apartment-hotel with a switchboard the phone man put in a phone with a turn-button: one side of the turn button was the switch- board phone (DOrchester 3-7500), the other side of the turn button was our private phone (HYDe Park 3-3714). We did have a bell-chime device to ring the phone (it sounded like a doorbell) and we had to pay fifty-cents per month for that side ringer. Touch tone was not available. ESS features were still ten years distant for the downtown Chicago area and fifteen years distant for the other areas of Chicago. PAT] ------------------------------ From: kd1s@aol.comremvthis (Kilo Delta One Sierra) Date: 06 Jan 2004 09:21:55 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Subject: Re: Using PIX 501 With Vonage VoIP > My questions are will the ATA work on my setup? Do I need to open up > ports for it on the PIX? Any documentation on setting this up? You may have to open a port or two. The folks at Vonage should be able to help you with it. I have not yet tried Vonage but I run a Netgear FVS318 which is a router/firewall/vpn device and has 8 ports. I use a total of four -- I like having the expansion option available to me. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That's why I have two 'root USB hubs' on my main computer with a powered four-way connection on both of them. I do not use all eight sockets (four cameras, printer, expandable 'hard drive' with a couple vacancies.) I like the idea of instant expansion also. PAT] ------------------------------ From: rob51166@yahoo.com (Rob) Subject: Re: Is TiVo Really All That Great? Date: 6 Jan 2004 07:49:45 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com dold@IsXTiVoXRe.usenet.us.com wrote in message news:: > Rob wrote: >> I remember TiVo being advertised over here in the UK several years >> ago, but it never took off. In fact, I'd say it died a death. I put > I certainly see more posts in alt.video.ptv.tivo from the UK than I > would expect from a dead product. > Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley (Lake County) CA USA 38.8-122.5 Ask people on a general high street in the UK what TiVo is and they'll no doubt look at you askance. Ask them what Sky+ is and there's every possibility that they'll know exactly what it is. The biggest problem TiVo had in the UK was the lack of proper marketing and advertising. Plus it wasn't a name that people here recognised. As far as Sky's concerned, however, every household in the UK has heard of it, and a lot of people have their TV service through Sky Digital, if not Sky+. ------------------------------ From: Michael Chance Subject: Re: Then Benjamin Franklin Must be a Terrorist Too? Organization: SBC http://yahoo.sbc.com Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2004 13:01:11 GMT In article , Joe@nospamcity.com says: > Hey, what about folks like me who voted for Bush and now feel like I > elected Adolf Hitler? Trouble is, I can't stand any of the Democrats > so it is time to stay home. The recent spate of comparisons of President Bush to Adolf Hitler are so outrageous, it's almost impossible to write a calm, rational response. Since he's done it so much better than me, here's the response of Jack Rosen, president of the American Jewish Congress, from his recent article in the Wall Street Journal: "The Holocaust was the worst crime in history. The Nazis killed ... millions ... in a systematic genocide. ... "The last survivors of that horror will soon pass from among us. It is for them that we guard against the danger that the memory of the Holocaust will be trivialized. That danger is abetted when people devalue this monumental evil for political gain. "Comparing the commander-in-chief of a democratic nation to the murderous tyrant Hitler is not only historically specious, it is morally outrageous. " Please remember to think of those remaining Holocaust survivors before you go calling someone -- anyone -- another Hitler. Never again. Michael Chance ------------------------------ From: Charles Cryderman Subject: Re: Last Laugh! 15 Year Old Gets Caught With $7 Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 10:04:36 -0500 Pat, The note you had provided stated that "20/20" did an investigation. Here is their response: http://abcnews.go.com/sections/2020/DailyNews/2020_marketingscam021008.html Marketing Scheme Falsely Using 20/20's Name Internet Ploy Seeks Cash From Respondents N E W Y O R K, Oct. 8 -Internet stories with headlines like "ABC's 20-20 'Boy 15 Makes 71 Thousand in 5 Weeks'" have been falsely using ABC's and 20/20's names. The schemes claim that you can get rich by doing little more than spending $25 on various Internet marketing reports. They also claim that ABC's 20/20 broadcast a news report that investigated this scheme and concluded it was legal. This statement is patently false. ABC has never investigated this scheme and has not broadcast a news report validating it. For further information on chain letter/get-rich-quick schemes, contact postal authorities or go to their Web site at: http://usps.com/websites/depart/inspect/chainlet.htm. Happy New Year old man and may you see many more. Chip Cryderman ------------------------------ 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, Yahoo Groups, 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: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 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 V23 #8 **************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Jan 6 23:02:57 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i0742uJ14023; Tue, 6 Jan 2004 23:02:57 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 23:02:57 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200401070402.i0742uJ14023@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 V23 #9 TELECOM Digest Tue, 6 Jan 2004 23:03:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 9 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: NANP Numbering (Jay Hennigan) Re: NANP Numbering (Mark J Cuccia) Re: NANP Numbering (Joseph) Re: Twenty Years Ago Today 1-Jan-2004, back on 1-Jan-1984 (Kilo Sierra) Re: Twenty Years Ago Today 1-Jan-2004, back on 1-Jan-1984 (John Levine) Re: Is TiVo Really All That Great? (Clarence Dold) Re: OnStar's Scare Tactics (Proprclr) AT&T Long Lines Web Site, Cold War Comms E-mail List (Albert LaFrance) Re: NANP Numbering (Joey's Advice to Unwashed Masses) (Joey Lindstrom) Apple Macworld Expo Press Releases (Monty Solomon) 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: Jay Hennigan Organization: Disgruntled Postal Workers Against Gun Control Subject: Re: NANP Numbering Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2004 16:46:24 -0800 On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 11:42:53 -0800, Rob wrote: > OK, I know that this may very well seem a dumb question, but why is > the NANP numbering system different to other phone systems throughout > the world? > The vast majority of countries in the world have area codes beginning > with '0', whereas in NANP countries the area code commences with '1', > and then numbers on the same area code, or even numbers in > neighbouring codes (i.e. 919, 252 and 304), aren't always regarded as > local, as they are here in the UK. The area code doesn't start with a '1' in the NANP. A leading '1' may or may not be necessary depending on the locality and how it is set up. It so happens that the country code for the NANP is also '1', which can be a bit confusing. Area codes, also referred to as NPA for "Number Plan Area", are three digits long. The first digit is 2 through 9. Within each area code are exchange codes, also three digits in length, the leading digit of which is also 2 through 9. Each exchange code can support up to 10,000 lines, so four more digits follow. A full NANP telephone number is ten digits, usually written with a hyphen between each group such as xxx-yyy-zzzz. You may also see an older form (xxx) yyy-zzzz, where xxx is the area code, yyy is the exchange code, and zzzz is the individual line within the exchange. Early on, the second digit of an area code was either a 1 or a 0, and the second digit of an exchange code was never a 1 or 0. Thus, it was possible to examine the dialed digits on-the-fly and determine by the end of the second digit whether a call was within or outside of the NPA. If the second digit is a 1 or 0, the customer is dialing an NPA, expect a total of ten digits. If the second digit is 2 through 9, the customer is dialing an exchange code, expect a total of seven digits. Letters on the dial were used in positions 2 through 9 and exchanges were given names corresponding to th efirst two digits. The leading digit "1" was not used, as it could be a switchhook bounce. The leading digit "0" got you an operator. Toll vs. local calling is determined by mileage, not by number pattern. It is possible that calls within the same NPA are toll, or that calls to an adjacent NPA are local. Typically anything beyond 12 to 16 miles is toll. An NPA can cover up to an entire state, which can be hundreds of miles. At some point, some telephone companies began to require a leading "1" to place a toll call, as it was not possible to tell from a 7-digit number if it was toll or not. Often a second, higher pitched dial tone followed the "1" to further caution the customer that it was a toll call. With population growth, area codes would "split", new lines would be drawn on the map, and exchange codes could then be re-used in both the new and old area codes. After a while this ceased to scale and the digits 0 and 1 were allowed as the second digit of exchange codes. This broke the convention of using names as there are no letters on the dial in the 0 and 1 positions. The abandonment of exchange names caused a political hue-and-cry at the time, but it allowed the number of exchanges within an NPA to grow by 20%. Now it was no longer possible to tell from the second digit whether a call was within or outside the local NPA. The leading 1 was changed from an optional "this is a toll call" to "An NPA follows." For example, if I'm calling a number in NPA 512, I would dial 1-512-yyy-zzzz. There might also be a 512 exchange within my local NPA, which I would dial as 512-zzzz with no leading 1. Much later, the requirement that the second digit of an NPA be 1 or 0 was also dropped, which allowed many more NPAs. In some localities with rapid growth, area code splits became frequent. This is a problem with reprinting stationery, educating customers, reprogramming automatic dialers, etc. People got upset about the nuisance of this, and "overlay" vs "split" area codes were born. This meant that the area code no longer really represented an area, as two area codes would cover the same geographic area. As exchange codes are unique only to an NPA, you could have a phone number of 512-555-0166 and your next door neighbor would have 789-555-0166. and, you would be local calls to each other. In these localities, customers would frequently misdial by omitting the area code. Telcos then mandated ten-digit dialing, where the customer was required to dial the NPA even if it was the same as his own. > For example, my local calling area not only covers my own exchange > (01685) but also all numbers on the neighbouring exchanges of 01443, > 01639, 01874 and 01495. Not only is it not possible to tell from the digits dialed if a number is local or toll, we have "LATAs", or geographic boundaries that are quasi-toll and don't line up with NPAs at all. Within a LATA, the local telco usually handles these quasi-toll calls, but if aa call crosses into a different LATA (even if it might be in the same NPA), the call must be handled by a long distance carrier, usually other than the local exchange telco. > Also, how are calls charged between countries within NANP -- that > is, is a call from Canada or the US to Bermuda or Barbados regarded > as international, even though they're technically (I think!) on the > same phone system? They're charged based on the calling and called country, not by the digits dialed, handled by a long distance carrier. This all probably seems very confusing to someone who hasn't grown up with it, but it kind of makes sense to those of us who have. The driving force is to have fixed-length numbers of seven or ten digits, and delay the need to go beyond ten digits for a fully unique number for as long as possible. From a technical perspective, it would have been easier to put wireless services in their own unique NPAs, as the growth in wireless is what drove many NPA splits. The wireless folks fought this politically. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 14:44:45 -0600 (CST) From: Mark J Cuccia Subject: Re: NANP Numbering Earle Robinson (no email address indicated), from France, claims: (BIG snip) > ... [Finally] to address your vaunted 7 digit dialing. Well it ain't so > in many places any more. In Miami you have to dial 10 digits to call a > local number and I think it is the same in NYC, too. But whoever said in this thread that seven-digit (local and/or same-NPA) dialing is still in force "everywhere" in the NANP? The NANP was intended as a ten-digit numbering plan from the beginning, on a "3+3+4" format (or "3+7") even though in the 1940s thru early 1960s, there were *MANY* areas that still had less-than-seven-digit local numbering/dialing. And most all of us are *QUITE WELL AWARE* that there are the overlay areas with *mandatory* (1+)ten-digit local/same-NPA dialing, such as the entire state of Maryland (301/240, 410/443), New York City (212/646, 718/347, 917), most of southeast Florida (305/786, 954/754), a large part of southern/southeastern Ontario/Toronto Metro (416/647, 905/289), a large part of southwest BC/Vancouver Metro (604/778), the northern suburbs of Chicago (847/224), Atlanta Metro (404/770/678/470), Houston Metro (713/281/832), just about ALL of northeastern (903/430) TX (including but not just Dallas (214/972/469) and Ft.Worth (817/682) Metro), Charlotte NC Metro (704/980), the VA suburbs of DC (703/571), the Portland OR extended area (503/971), Denver CO Metro (303/720), a portion of southeastern MI (248/947), parts of northeastern (330/224) and all of northwestern (419/567) Ohio, Philadelphia (215/267) and southeastern (610/484) PA, most of northern NJ (201/551, 973/862, 732/848), eastern MA/Boston Metro/etc (617/857, 508/774, 781/339, 978/351), Pittsburgh PA Metro (412/724/878), ALL of Puerto Rico (787/939), Orlando Metro/Central Florida (407/321). I THINK that I've covered all of the overlay areas (which all have mandatory (1+)ten-digit local/same-NPA dialing). And there are more areas which are planned to go overlay whenever it is actually determined that another area code is really needed. (Disclaimer ... I hope I don't have any typograhical errors in listing the actual code-numerics neither). The NANP has adapted to the numerous technological and regulatory changes over the past 50 years, with the least noticeable changes in actual numbering/dailing when compared to OTHER parts of the world ... and again I'll say that the NANP *IS THE BEST* numbering/dialing plan IN THE WORLD, despite some "flaws" which could be corrected with industry/regulatory agreement/co-operation. > Given this, many people are confused between long distance dialing, > 11 digits (1 digit more than here in Europe) and local calling. With > our 10 digit dialing norm there is no confusion. YEAH... You're RIGHT! and *THAT's* because YOU don't really have ANY real "FREE" local calling. In (most parts of) Europe (including France and the UK), you PAY for even your shortest distance local calls. True, some of the more populated largest urban areas in the US have measured/message rate/unit "local" calling (and I guess that many parts of the NON-US Caribbean parts of the NANP have measured "local" calling too), but the LARGE BULK of the US, as well as ALL of Canada, do have *TRUE* "free" (monthly flat rate) local calling. And, those parts of the US (and all of Canada) *DO* usually have a clear indication in the *dialing* procedure as to when a call would or would not incur toll charges -- i.e., (other than 800/888/877/866/etc. toll-free where 1+ always still seems to be required), the "requirement" of a 1+ before a ten-digit number when dialed from those areas means that toll charges are most likely incurred, while calls that do not incurr extra toll charges (with the exeption of the 8YY+nxx-xxxx toll-free numbers as stated above) are dialable as 'straight' ten-digits. Unfortunately, dialing rules are not uniform throughout the NANP. BUT ... I'll take the NANP methods over *ANY* other numbering/dialing plans. The NANP has *MOST CERTAINLY* stood the test of time! And it covers one of the largest geographic areas of the world, as well as THE most *populated* parts of the world. Mark J. Cuccia New Orleans LA CSA ... in the LAND of DIXIE! [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Actually, I think the most populated part of the world is China. They are way ahead of the USA population, even if you include Canada which somehow got included in the scheme intended for the USA and the several islands south of Florida put together. But the NANP is strange because of the political games which have been played with it over the years. Canada is 'good' so they got included; Cuba is 'bad' so they were excluded, even though it (Cuba) is surrounded by other islands which are included in NANP. Even though Hawaii and Alaska are states and therefore entitled to be NANP, two other relatively insignificant and tiny islands thousands of miles away had their international codes swapped into the NANP. Mexico is no further away than Canada, yet it (Mexico) is not NANP. Why does a large island to the northeast of Canada get included in NANP (as 709?) but St. P&M (much closer to mainland USA not get included? So Mark, it seems to me NANP is not such a great deal; there were lots of politics played in who got to be included, and why. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Joseph Subject: Re: NANP Numbering Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2004 13:39:12 -0800 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.NOcom On Tue, 6 Jan 2004 14:58:41 +0100, Earle Robinson
wrote: > You speak of how the American phone system already had 7 digits from > the 40s on. Well, yes in cities like New York. But, I was growing up > in Greenwich Connecticut where our phone number was Greenwich 102. Well, it's no different than what other places went through. Smaller places had differing length phone numbers. Many places in the UK had three digit telephone numbers up until a few years ago. Many places in the US if they were small enough might have had as few as 3 digit telephone numbers as well. The North American system has been basically the same from 1947 though to the present with some changes. Yes, there's not always continuity between dialing from one area to the other, but basically everything has remained the same since 1947. > Today, overall the systems here are often better than what is in the > states. > I also recall how awful phone service was in west Los Angeles in the > late 70s and into the 80s (also mentioned by another writer in a > message here the other day). We were served (an oxymoron) by General > Telephone. I really don't think you can judge American telephone quality by a second-rate telephone company such as GTE. > Here in France if I dial a number, and there is no call waiting on > that line, I get a busy signal, just as in the states. But, all I need > do is to punch the 5 on the touch pad and hang up. When my > correspondent hangs up my number rings, I pick up the phone and the > phone is ringing at the other end. And that service is also available in North America as well. > If you are in NYC you have Verizon , if in Miami Bell South. No > choice. Perhaps this was so at one time. You are free to get local service from numerous companies now. > Finally, to address your vaunted 7 digit dialing. Well it ain't so in > many places any more. In Miami you have to dial 10 digits to call a > local number and I think it is the same in NYC, too. Given this, many > people are confused between long distance dialing, 11 digits (1 digit > more than here in Europe) and local calling. With our 10 digit dialing > norm there is no confusion. No, it isn't available in all places any longer, but then again you have to dial 10 digits on all your calls in France so there's no advantage for you either. remove NO from .NOcom to reply ------------------------------ From: kd1s@aol.comremvthis (Kilo Delta One Sierra) Date: 06 Jan 2004 21:01:03 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Subject: Re: Twenty Years Ago Today 1-Jan-2004, back on 1-Jan-1984 > The monthly bill was around six or seven dollars and my > roomate and I agreed to split the bill but each be responsible for > our own long distance charges and or telegrams which were sent by > phone. So in 22 years the price changed about $5.00, and I got a Touch Tone phone to boot! So that does support the argument that a regulated monopoly was better for us than the current scheme although I see now that Verizon is offering an unlimited plan here in RI for $54 a month. I pay about $45 a month now for all my services -- and my LD runs anywhere from $5.00 a month to $20 a month. So my total telecom costs range from $50 a month to $65 a month at an average of $57.50. The plan might just be worth it. ------------------------------ Date: 7 Jan 2004 01:18:55 -0000 From: John Levine Subject: Re: Twenty Years Ago Today 1-Jan-2004, back on 1-Jan-1984 Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > I paid a total of $12 a month. That included the phone rental (A red > 2500 set of course!) and the Touch-Tone surcharge and taxes. > Now the line charge alone is $17.26, then add in the damned fees and > taxes and it come out close to $30. Twelve bucks in 1982 is worth about $24 now, so the local rate has gone up by about 25%. In the meantime, long distance rates have gone from over 25 cents/min (worth about 50 cents/min now) to 5 cents/min or lower, so they've dropped by 90%. If you make no long distance calls at all you lose, if you make a lot you win, if you make an average number, it's a wash. > That's what is killing any savings. The phone companies and the > government saw a golden opportunity to rape and pilage as usual and we > end up footing the bill. I've got news for you, there were plenty of taxes in 1982 as well. Local rates deliberately went up because the subsidy from long distance is almost gone. > Know what? Universal Service charges should have gone away a long > time ago. If people want to move out to the burbs and rural areas let > them pay to have the lines strung. I don't think it's a good idea to start an inter-regional war. The current implementation of USF certainly leavs something to be desired, but the theory is as good as ever: the more people you can call, the more useful your phone is. There are lots of involuntary transfers from one part of the country to another, and I sure hope you don't live in California because if you do, I'd like to have a few words about your water bill. ------------------------------ From: dold@IsXTiVoXRe.usenet.us.com Subject: Re: Is TiVo Really All That Great? Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 20:24:44 UTC Organization: a2i network Rob wrote: > Ask people on a general high street in the UK what TiVo is and they'll > no doubt look at you askance. Ask them what Sky+ is and there's every > possibility that they'll know exactly what it is. That is the same as in the US. But I consider Tivo a growing product. Ask people on the street in the US what Dean Witter is and they'll recognize the name. The fact that the company no longer exists is irrelevant. Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley (Lake County) CA USA 38.8-122.5 ------------------------------ From: balanco01@yahoo.com (Proprclr) Subject: Re: OnStar's Scare Tactics Date: 6 Jan 2004 13:14:17 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com joe@home.com.eu (joe@home.com.eu) said: > I leased a GMC vehicle for 3 years starting in Feb 2002. It had one > year's free Onstar (I call it Offfstar ;-) > It is absolutely worthless. The clerks that they employ speak > terrible English, are for the mostpart stupid, and some are even > surely. Let me guess, Onstar "outsourced" it's call center to India. > If you have a roll-over crash the antenna will probably break off, > thus preventing the cell phone connection. > OTOH, if you have an on-highway crash, the odds are overwhelming that > help will come first from the sources used by the 99% of folks and > entities who do not have Offstar. > The optional personal calling feature sucks, too. Although it sounds > good in the vehicle the person on the other end hears a very tinny > voice. And, there is no way of sending out DMTF for after-connect tone > prompts. Hmmm ... will holding up one of those hand held DTMF dialers to the microphone work? > And, getting directions is good for a real belly laugh. > Anyone who subscribes to this service is apparently too dumb to get > their own cell phone and real auto GPS navigation unit. I've heard their recent ads, what a dumb campaign. General Bullmoose created a real loser, and is force-feeding it to keep it alive. I doubt I will get another GM vehicle so long as they force me to pay for that equipment (it's a mandatory install in many of their lines of vehicles). ------------------------------ From: Albert LaFrance Subject: AT&T Long Lines Web Site, Cold War Comms E-mail List Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 18:03:22 -0500 Mr. Townson, First of all, I wanted to let you know how interesting and useful the Telecom Digest and Archive has been to me -- it's a very valuable resource! Also, I maintain a web site which you might want to add to your Links page. It's devoted to the former AT&T Long Lines microwave and cable networks: http://long-lines.net . And finally, there's an e-mail list on the Yahoo Groups service which deals with all types of communications networks, C3I systems and facilities of the Cold War era. The group's web page, where you can join or view archived messages, is: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/coldwarcomms . Again, thanks for your excellent work in preserving telecom history. Regards, Albert LaFrance [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thanks very much for your kind words, Albert. I do appreciate it when someone tells me they like the hard work that has gone into the Archives over the years. In correspondence I receive now and then from someone who absolutely hates me as the moderator here (and he claims there are just whole bunches like himself, but never comes up with any names), a recent letter from him pointed out 'how obvious it was that the Digest was not any good lately as a quick look at the Archives would easily indicate.' But what the Moderator Hater tends to ignore is the fact that when this Digest began there was no web, and there were *no* other telecom forums around. I was sort of like Ma Bell ... if you wanted to talk telecom you did it here, in this newsgroup. And like the late Ma Bell, now I have literally dozens of 'competitors' around on the web and the various ISPs, like Yahoo and AOL and others. Everyone has a telecom forum these days, it seems. I've invited him to go use a few of them, and maybe he does, but he still comes around here to pester me also. If I had *anything* at all to do with a few of the other forums getting started -- and I know I did for a few of them -- then I am humbly grateful. Anyway, thanks again for your kind note, and I hope this mention in the Digest gets you a few new subscribers/readers. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 13:33:58 -0700 From: Joey Lindstrom Reply-To: Joey Lindstrom Organization: Telus Sucks! Subject: Re: NANP Numbering; Joey's Advice to the Unwashed Masses Tuesday, January 6, 2004, 12:47:27 PM, Earle Robinson wrote: > You say that the USA is the leader for technology, etc. Yes, that is > true, but the brains behind much of this come from Europeans and, > more recently, Asians. Andy Grove is Hungarian, as was von Neumann. > American rocket technology was brought by von Braun from German > after the 2nd World War. (more examples snipped) And the zipper, basketball, the snowmobile, and (Eureka!) the telephone all came out of Canada. Innovation comes from all over. Mark's point is that the USA is a world leader in innovation, and despite your examples to the contrary, Mark's statement is perfectly true. > Here in France if I dial a number, and there is no call waiting on > that line, I get a busy signal, just as in the states. But, all I need > do is to punch the 5 on the touch pad and hang up. When my corres- > pondent hangs up my number rings, I pick up the phone and the > phone is ringing at the other end. No extra charge, no monthly > fee. It's free. You are intimating that this service is unavailable here (later, in your original post, you clearly state that we "don't have" this feature). In fact we do, and depending on the phone company you're with, it might be pay-per-use, or a flat-fee charged monthly, or may be included in a service bundle. But we do have this feature. Granted, it takes three keys rather than one, but hey. > Interested in ADSL? All I need do is provide my phone number and > address on a web page and I am told how many meters I am from the > central office and told I qualify because it is 473 meters. If I > prefer a phone company other than France telecom I can choose from 6 > or 7. Try that in the states! Try that in Germany or the UK. My German friends tell me that ADSL is completely unavailable where they live (outside Muenchen) but they've got ISDN at some whopping huge monthly rate. Ditto my friend in London, England. She lives in one of the most important cities in the world, and they can't even get broadband together (she calls it "steam-powered internet"). Before moving recently, she could not get ADSL or cablemodem service for love or money. Now she's got cablemodem (still no ADSL available), and is paying as much as I'm paying for "business class" service here in Canada, and getting about a tenth of the bandwidth. There are exceptions to everything, Earle. This other point you make, though, is interesting. You're telling me that there are six or seven companies competing for local dialtone service for residential customers? Hey, I'll take your word for it, but this I find extremely hard to believe. Long distance, maybe. Dialtone? Wow, that's unbelievable. Here in the wilds of Western Canada, we've got two local dialtone providers (for residential: six or seven for business) and umpteen dozen long distance companies all vying for our 3 cents per minute. > If you are in NYC you have Verizon , if in Miami Bell South. No > choice. Perhaps some of our American readers can respond to this point, but I'm sure that there are alternatives to the ILEC available in these markets. Or am I wrong? > I stand corrected as concerns the maximum number of digits mandated > by the ITU. But, this could be readily extended, as it was when it > went from 12 to 15. The American system seems so cumbersome in > comparison. Why would more than 15 ever be necessary? How many people can this world support? Personally I thought it was ridiculous moving from 12 to 15 in the first place, in order to allow for this direct-dial-in variable-number-length scheme in Germany and Austria. Fixed length good, variable length bad. :-) > While I can merely replace the first digit to use one of the major > alternate carriers, in the states I'd have to dial several digits to > do this. You have to dial "several" digits to select SOME carriers, as you illustrated in your example. The NANP system probably has one or two digits too many, but it allows for a maximum of 10,000 long distance carriers. That's a lot. > We also have features, like the handling if a busy signal > that I already mentioned, which you don't have. See above. > For example, I can add other data to my directory listing using the > internet, to provide the names of other people who use my number, > email addresses and other numbers, too. Cellular phone numbers will > be listed shortly, though one may opt out if one wishes. Call > blocking here may be done on an individual basis or > globally. Naturally, there is an emergency number, 112, valid > everywhere in Europe. But there is also an emergency number for > abused women to call, too. Ah, yes. Aren't standards a wonderful thing? 112 gets you an emergency operator, and that's all well and good. Works throughout Europe, you say? Great. But you'll pardon us if we grimace a bit when you brag about these things, because our standards existed FIRST. Why should we change "911" to "112"? Look at it from our point of view. Here's what we see: a bunch of johnny-come-latelys take a look at our standards, decide they need changing (mostly so that they're not "American" anymore), implement those changes, then can't understand why the rest of the world won't join their new and improved "standard". Nobody asked us for our opinion, and even if they had, it has not been demonstrated that this new standard is in any way superior to what we've got, which works and works well. It's a model of efficiency. 10 digits is just fine for 350 million people and leaves lots of room for growth. > Finally, to address your vaunted 7 digit dialing. Well it ain't so > in many places any more. In Miami you have to dial 10 digits to call > a local number and I think it is the same in NYC, too. Given this, > many people are confused between long distance dialing, 11 digits (1 > digit more than here in Europe) and local calling. With our 10 digit > dialing norm there is no confusion. Exsqueeze me? Baking soda? If I'm in France, I dial 10 digits to reach across the country or to the restaurant across the street. Explain to me how a Frenchman is *NOT* confused over what is long distance and what is local, where an American WOULD be. You're talking out of your ass on this one. As for me, here in Calgary I dial local calls as 7-digit, though I have the option also of dialing as 10-digit (with area code) or even 11-digit (1+area code). If I dial a long-distance number with only 7 digits, my call will not go through, which alerts me that this is a call I'm going to have to pay for. (but let's not start that jihad again -- some people are adamantly opposed to toll-alerting) And that brings me to the most basic, fundamental difference between "my" phone system and "your" phone system. I can pick up my phone and call my friend across the city and chat for hours, and never even *THINK* about what this call is costing me. Because it's not costing me anything over and above my monthly flat-rate. When you adopt THAT, let me know, and I'll reconsider this quaint notion that your phone system is somehow "better" than ours. Y'know, the way you really, really stretch credulity in order to construct an argument -- ANY argument -- that something French is better than something American, reminds me a whole lot of something that Robin Williams said in his recent concert video. Imagine, if you will, Robin speaking in an over-the-top French accent, and saying something like the following (paraphrased to keep it in a g-rated context): "Ah, screw you Americans, we hate you ... What's that? Ze Germans are coming? 'ALLO, AMERICANS! WE LOVE YOU!!!" Joey Lindstrom [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There you go, Earle! Did Joey get you straightened out, or didn't he? Don't you just love Canadians who like to pretend they are arrogant USA citizens, with their general dislike for so much of the customs of the rest of the world? PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 14:22:30 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Apple Macworld Expo Press Releases Apple Introduces iPod mini 6 January 2004, 2:02pm ET, PR Newswire http://finance.lycos.com/qc/news/story.aspx?symbols=NASDAQ:AAPL&story=200401061902_PRN__SFTU087 Over Two Million iPods Sold 6 January 2004, 2:02pm ET, PR Newswire http://finance.lycos.com/qc/news/story.aspx?symbols=NASDAQ:AAPL&story=200401061902_PRN__SFTU088 Apple Announces iLife '04 6 January 2004, 2:04pm ET, PR Newswire http://finance.lycos.com/qc/news/story.aspx?symbols=NASDAQ:AAPL&story=200401061904_PRN__SFTU089 Apple Introduces Jam Pack 6 January 2004, 2:05pm ET, PR Newswire http://finance.lycos.com/qc/news/story.aspx?symbols=NASDAQ:AAPL&story=200401061905_PRN__SFTU090 Apple Introduces Xserve G5 6 January 2004, 2:06pm ET, PR Newswire http://finance.lycos.com/qc/news/story.aspx?symbols=NASDAQ:AAPL&story=200401061906_PRN__SFTU091 Apple Unveils New Xserve RAID Storage System 6 January 2004, 2:07pm ET, PR Newswire http://finance.lycos.com/qc/news/story.aspx?symbols=NASDAQ:AAPL&story=200401061907_PRN__SFTU092 Apple Introduces Final Cut Express 2 6 January 2004, 2:07pm ET, PR Newswire http://finance.lycos.com/qc/news/story.aspx?symbols=NASDAQ:AAPL&story=200401061907_PRN__SFTU093 Mac OS X Users Approach 10 Million 6 January 2004, 2:09pm ET, PR Newswire http://finance.lycos.com/qc/news/story.aspx?symbols=NASDAQ:AAPL&story=200401061909_PRN__SFTU094 Apple Previews Xgrid Technology 6 January 2004, 2:09pm ET, PR Newswire http://finance.lycos.com/qc/news/story.aspx?symbols=NASDAQ:AAPL&story=200401061909_PRN__SFTU095 ------------------------------ 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, Yahoo Groups, 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: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 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 V23 #9 **************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Jan 7 02:21:55 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i077LsR15298; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 02:21:55 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 02:21:55 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200401070721.i077LsR15298@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 V23 #10 TELECOM Digest Wed, 7 Jan 2004 02:17:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 10 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Bonanza for Errors [Diebold] (Marcus Didius Falco) Internet Telephones Challenge Social Contract (Marcus Didius Falco) Caller-ID on Regular Phones Using a PBX (Chainsman) Automated Attendant Systems (JamminDJ) Re: Using PIX 501 With Vonage VoIP (Chainsman) Re: Last Laugh! 15 Year Old Gets Caught With $71,000!!! (Marcus D Falco) ReplayTV Apologizes for Service Flap (Monty Solomon) Delphi Unveils Mobile Satellite TV Antenna System at CES (Monty Solomon) Intel Launches $200 Million Fund For 'Digital Home' (Monty Solomon) Re: NANP Numbering and Splits (John Levine) The NANP, and Comments by the Digest's Editor (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. =========================== 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: Tue, 06 Jan 2004 22:52:52 -0500 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Bonanza for Errors [Diebold] By DER SPIEGEL http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/05/international/europe/05SPIEGEL.html Published: January 5, 2004 America's Electronic Voting Machines Are Susceptible to Manipulation Walden O'Dell is entitled to call himself a "Pioneer." The business leader from North Canton, Ohio, has qualified for the honorific because he collected 600,000 dollars for George W. Bush's election campaign. He accompanied this with a pledge to do everything possible to help Ohio "deliver its electoral votes to the president" in 2004. But with this statement O'Dell has caused more of a stir than he could have wished. For the "Pioneer" is also chief executive of Diebold Inc., a company that among other things manufactures voting machines. About 40,000 of these are installed in 37 states and are supposed to record and count votes on November 2. Diebold is in second place, right behind the market leader, Election Systems and Software which achieved its top ranking under Chuck Hagel before he, a Republican, was elected senator from Nebraska. Recently the states have left decisions about the technological side of voting procedures to private companies. It is shocking enough that the giants of the trade are vying to get close to the government. But in addition, O'Dell has inadvertently called attention to how susceptible the machines are to manipulation. In principle, voting machines work like ATMs: The voter touches the name of his candidate on the screen. But instead of receiving some sort of receipt at the end of the transaction as he does from a money machine, he gets no receipt at all for the vote he has cast. Thus there is no way to check whether the machine has really recorded what it was supposed to have recorded. And discrepancies are not rare, as was revealed a year and a half ago during spot checks performed in Dallas and Georgia: in thousands of cases the computerized voting machines had either allocated votes to the wrong candidate or not counted them at all. The lame excuse was that the screen had wrongly calibrated itself because of frequent use. In the meantime, legions of computer freaks have tackled both the computers' software and hardware, discovering plenty of sources for errors. Since the exact time of the transaction is not recorded as it is with ATMs, some sinister forces could arrange ex post facto for a desired result without attracting attention during the customarily low voter turnout. Diebold even admitted that the database had not been encoded before the counting of the votes -- a windfall for hackers. Ironically, the electronic voting machines are supposed to prevent a repetition of the embarrassments that occurred in Florida in 2000, and which tinged the election of Bush with suspicion. Antiquated equipment was unable to read voting cards that had not been properly punched - and consequently they were not counted. The U.S. Congress is spending just under four billion dollars on modernization of the voting process. A changeover to the digital era will be complete by 2006. By November 2nd this year, new computer screens should be operational at about 20 percent of all polling places. Now Diebold is thrashing about with all sorts of inadequate explanations for the defective software. Yet the company could learn a lesson from its small, keen competitor. The Avante company combines digital high tech with old-fashioned paper statements. In this way each voter can make sure that the computer has really done what the voter wanted it to do -- and manipulation is, at least for the most part, made more difficult. [translated from the German by Margot Bettauer Dembo] Distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2004 23:52:30 -0500 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Internet Telephones Challenge Social Contract It's a not terribly accurate description of the subsidies in the past, or the current issues. But, can the good grey Times be wrong? http://www.iht.com/articles/123613.html http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/05/technology/05voip.html Matt Richtel Monday, January 5, 2004 Charles Davidson, a self-proclaimed gadget freak in Tallahassee, Florida, began using Internet-based telephone service last week. He can call anyone -- not just the other 100,000 pioneers around the United States using such service, but also any of the millions of people still making do with conventional telephones, like his parents in Elizabethton, Tennessee. But Davidson is more than an adventuresome consumer. He is also a member of the Florida Public Service Commission, a regulator who is anxious to see Internet telephone service spread because he predicts it can make the nation's phone services less expensive and richer in features. That is why Davidson wants the U.S. and state governments to allow Internet-based phone service to blossom, free from regulation, taxes and surcharges. Like a growing number of officials who advocate minimal oversight of the service -- including Michael Powell, the chairman of the Federal Communications Commission -- Davidson says Internet telephone service should be treated just like other unregulated Internet services, like e-mail messaging and Web surfing. But unlike some proponents of deregulation, Davidson also has a nagging concern. Because Internet-based phone service currently rides over traditional telephone or cable lines, it simply will not work unless the conventional phone network is intact. The government has long regarded that network as a national asset akin to roads and highways, and it is a communications system whose reliability and virtual ubiquity make it the envy of most of the rest of the world. So Internet telephone service raises a key public policy question: If the government does not continue to play a role in ensuring that the telephone network is reliable and universally available, does the nation risk losing a vital asset? Davidson, a former antitrust lawyer appointed to the Florida commission by the Republican governor, Jeb Bush, says he tends to believe that markets are more efficient than regulators. But some of Davidson's counterparts in other states sound just as certain that only government referees can preserve the decades-old tradition of universal, reliable telephone service. "If somebody doesn't regulate this, it's buyer beware," said Loretta Lynch, a member of the California Public Utilities Commission, who was appointed by the former governor, Gray Davis, a Democrat. Lynch, a lawyer, said the telephone's role in society was too important to leave in the hands of market forces. "Telecommunications is essential to our democracy," she said. "It's essential, in fact, to keeping an informed populace." The communications commission has embarked on a series of public hearings around the country on whether and how to regulate Internet telephony. The policy questions go to the heart of a social compact born in the 1930's. Back then, the government granted regulated monopolies in individual markets to AT&T and other, smaller companies. In exchange, policy makers exacted a price: the telephone monopolies had to meet service-quality standards and collect taxes and surcharges to support affordable, universal access even in rural areas where free-market economics would not have made it cost-effective. Some of the lower costs of Internet telephone service are a result of the underlying architecture. In the conventional telephone network, voice calls travel over a line that stretches from the home to a piece of phone company equipment called a circuit switch. The switch, and many others like it along the way, routes the call to its destination over local or long-distance networks. The switches can be expensive, as much as $10 million apiece, said John Hodulik, a telecommunications analyst with UBS Securities. Were telephone companies to build a network from scratch today, they likely would do so using the less expensive Internet architecture that has enabled start-up companies like Vonage Holdings, based in Edison, New Jersey, to enter the market. Vonage, the industry leader, has invested a mere $12 million in technology, according to Jeffrey Citron, the company's chief executive. That, he said, is a far cry from the $75 million to $100 million that some companies must spend to begin offering conventional telephone service. But some critics say a big reason Vonage and other Internet-based phone providers can cut costs is because they do not have to adhere to the same rules and regulations as the conventional telephone companies on whose local and national networks the Internet providers depend. Even an Internet telephony fan like Jeff Pulver, who was formerly on the Vonage board, acknowledged that a substantial amount of cost savings comes from avoiding the taxes, surcharges, and access fees used to support the traditional phone network. The fact that Vonage is not regulated and did not pay to build the national network may obscure the real cost of providing Internet-based phone service. Likewise, the cost to customers is not as low as it may seem. While consumers may pay less each month for Internet telephone service than for regular phone service, they cannot obtain the service unless they first have high-speed Internet access -- on which they are likely to spend $40 to $70 a month. That is why policy makers like Lynch of the California regulatory panel resist the idea that Internet telephone service will lead to a telecommunications market so competitive that government regulation becomes unnecessary. She said that if conventional telephone companies like Qwest were allowed to avoid regulation by moving their business to Internet-based service, it would drain money from the universal service funds that have enabled low-income residents, as well as schools and libraries, to afford basic phone service. The New York Times Copyright 2003 the International Herald Tribune All Rights Reserved *** 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, in this instance, International Herald Tribune and the New York Times Company. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ From: Chainsman Subject: Caller-ID on Regular Phones using a PBX Date: 6 Jan 2004 19:27:59 -0800 Organization: http://netscape.net/ Hi, I have a home telephone system which I'm very pleased with but my family is distraught that it won't pass caller-ID to their regular phones. I have looked around for systems that pass caller-ID to regular old phones but haven't found any so far. I have heard that there is a new Panasonic unit that will pass caller-ID to regular phones. Does anyone know of any systems that will do this? My requirements are for a minimum of 2 outside lines and 6 extensions. Thanks! ------------------------------ From: JamminDJ Subject: Automated Attendant Systems Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2004 02:30:33 GMT Organization: Road Runner High Speed Online http://www.rr.com Hello, I am a tech consonant for a computer help desk at a mid to large size university. Currently all calls to the centre go through an initial auto attendant system, then are forwarded to dept. depending on need. One of these options is password change. This is all done by human operator right now, we take their SSN numbers and get fed a new password out. This becomes quite tiresome, and some higher ups have actually threatened to quit due to the infinite number of calls for change password requests. My question is, is there a piece of software or hardware, capable of taking a purely numeric SSN number, feeding to one of our mainframes, and spit out the purely alphaic password? I know it can be done, this is evident in the CVS 'Rapid Refill' system. I just wonder if there is any third party software that can do this, and do it at a university price. Thank you for your time, Paul Miller ------------------------------ From: Chainsman Subject: Re: Using PIX 501 With Vonage VoIP Date: 6 Jan 2004 19:34:14 -0800 Organization: http://netscape.net/ Hi, I use Vonage VoIP with my home telephone system in a NATted and firewalled network and it works fine. If you order Vonage now, the current device has a simple firewall and NAT function so you can use it like a gateway. The most important reason to do this is that your firewall will probably not pass-through the Quality-of-Service (QoS) tagged packets. If you use the Vonage device between your gateway and your cable/DSL modem then the QoS tags are used and, probably more importantly, the VoIP network activity gets the highest priority over your networks' internally-generated traffic. The layout that gives VoIP the highest priority (via QoS over the cable modem network and priority over all your internal network's traffic): network --> gateway/router --> Vonage device --> cable modem I have used it in both modes and if you are doing online games you will probably not like the firewall and NAT function but if you depend on the Vonage for your primary phone line (I do not) you will want it as the last device before the modem. It should be noted that Cisco was not interested in adding the NAT/Firewall feature to their VoIP box so that's why Vonage is only using the Motorola box now. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2004 23:39:41 -0500 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Re: Last Laugh! 15 Year Old Gets Caught With $71,000!!! pv+usenet@pobox.com (Paul Vader) wrote about Re: Last Laugh! 15 Year Old Gets Caught With $71,000!!! > 'free_money@cox.net writes: <> > But still, this one part always boggles me: >> chain-letter at all. In fact, it was completely legal according to US >> Postal and Lottery Laws, Title 18, Section 1302 and 1341, or Title 18, >> Section 3005 in the US code, also in the code of federal regulations, >> Volume 16, Sections 255 and 436, which state a product or service must >> be exchanged for money received. > Those references are correct, and there is indeed that last sentence > in them. But if you read the rest of the law, which you're bound to > do if you've bothered to look it up, you know the 'reports' figleaf > will not work. I understand that the postmaster general just *loves* > to get copies of chain letters that mention this, because it makes > proving fraud fairly trivial. You might claim ignorance of a law and > get leniency, but when a cite to the law is right in your pitch, > documenting that what you're doing is illegal ... Unfortunately, the post office isn't set up to deal with Email spam, or wasn't the last time I checked. And the IRS isn't set up to deal with Email that purports to show how you don't have to pay taxes. And the FCC doesn't care about the cable boxes that allow you to pirate CATV. The SEC does seem to care (or at least respond) when I forward spam investment opportunities (or faxed ones, though these now have to be faxed to the SEC because their incoming mail is irradiated and this destroys non-plain-paper faxes. The FTC is supposed to be doing something about spam, and I just heard of another large case filed. And some of the 419 frauds sent to the secret service <419.fcd@usss.treas.gov> do seem to get prosecuted. But, mostly, there isn't much point in forwarding spam to the authorities other than the SEC, FTC or USSS. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 00:18:36 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: ReplayTV Apologizes for Service Flap SANTA CLARA, Calif. (AP) -- Digital video recorder maker ReplayTV is apologizing to customers after many were lured to buy a machine through an offer of three years' of free service that the company now says it made by mistake. The Santa Clara-based company said Tuesday that boxes of its lowest-end model were "mistakenly labeled" with the reduced price offer, which has been rescinded. In addition, ReplayTV says the company's call center employees mistakenly told some customers the new lower $149 price for the unit included three years of service. ReplayTV said it would honor the three years of service offer "for those customers who were confused by these mistakes." A spokeswoman was unsure how many customers qualified. http://finance.lycos.com/qc/news/story.aspx?story=200401070256_APO_V6448 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 00:34:15 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Delphi Unveils Mobile Satellite TV Antenna System at CES Delphi Demonstrates Consistent TV Reception That Will Bring the 'Best Seat' Into the Vehicle LAS VEGAS, Jan. 6 /PRNewswire/ -- Delphi Corp. (NYSE:DPH) will display another industry-first at the 2004 International Consumer Electronics Show this week (Las Vegas Convention Center, North Hall, Booths #5206 and #5213). Delphi's innovative antenna system tracks a geo-stationary satellite from a moving passenger vehicle. The technology is the first-known application to achieve this functionality while adhering to the stringent compact packaging and styling, cost and performance constraints associated with passenger car requirements. While there are currently military and other specialty vehicles that utilize geo-stationary satellite tracking technologies with large radomes, none exists in low-profile form or without modifications in the vehicle contour. http://finance.lycos.com/qc/news/story.aspx?story=200401061500_PRN__DETU008 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 00:37:27 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Intel Launches $200 Million Fund For 'Digital Home' By Ben Berkowitz and Daniel Sorid LAS VEGAS/SAN FRANCISCO, Jan 7 (Reuters) - Intel Corp. (NASDAQ:INTC), the world's largest microchip maker and an eager entrant into the consumer electronics business, is backing up its vision of a PC-centric digital home with a new $200 million investment fund. The fund, to be operated by Intel's venture capital arm, will focus on technologies that allow content such as movies and music to travel wirelessly between electronic devices around the home, Intel said on Tuesday. Intel stands to profit handsomely should PC technology, which is heavily reliant on Intel chips and Microsoft Corp. (NASDAQ:MSFT) software -- spread into televisions, DVD players and stereos. Major PC makers and computer chip companies, unsatisfied with thin margins and slowing sales in traditional computer businesses, are pushing actively into consumer electronics. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40133201 ------------------------------ Date: 7 Jan 2004 05:43:58 -0000 From: John Levine Subject: Re: NANP Numbering and Splits Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > From a technical perspective, it would have been easier to put > wireless services in their own unique NPAs, as the growth in wireless > is what drove many NPA splits. The wireless folks fought this > politically. The conventional wisdom is that wireless, fax machines, and dialup modems were the main reason for all those area code splits, but in this case the conventional wisdom is wrong. The main reason was local competition. Because call routing and billing were both based on NPA-NXX, every CLEC had to get an entire prefix in every rate center where it planned to offer service, even if it really only needed a few dozen numbers. Lots of CLECs started up, they all got allocated prefixes all over the place, which needed a whole lot of area codes. Since then the number of CLECs has shrunk, and a combination of local portability and thousands allocation has vastly slowed the rate at which new prefixes are needed, but you still have inane situations like Middlebury VT, with a population of less than 10,000, having eleven prefixes (three Bell, one each for three cell carriers, and five for other carriers.) Putting wireless in separate NPAs would have been a terrible idea for both policy and technical reasons. It'd have been bad policy since it'd have maintained an increasingly irrelevant distinction between the two, and the price and service competition we're now seeing between wireline and wireless wouldn't have developed as fast if it all. With integrated numbering, cell carriers could hook up to the existing phone network either like PBXes for small locations or like an non-Bell ILEC switch in larger ones, with no changes to the existing wireline switches other than what they already did anytime a new prefix was opened. If they'd made separate area codes, they'd have had to overlay a new area code on top of every existing area code, forcing switches to upgrade to permit overlays long before they actually did. It would have used up a lot more area codes than actually happened, since there are plenty of NPAs where all the cell numbers fit into the existing area code and no overlay or split has been needed. Regards, John Levine johnl@iecc.com Primary Perpetrator of The Internet for Dummies Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://iecc.com/johnl Sewer Commissioner "I dropped the toothpaste", said Tom, crestfallenly. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 22:51:50 -0600 (CST) From: Mark J Cuccia Subject: The NANP, and Comments by the Digest's Editor The Digest editor had interjected comments at the end of two submissions in a recent Digest issue (issue #9), on the subject of the NANP. The editor first commented at the end of my previous submission: > ... it seems to me NANP is not such a great deal; there were lots of > politics played in who got to be included, and why. Patrick, my reply post was MOSTLY concerned with the numbering and dialing aspects of the NANP, not so much the politics involved. And for the most part, the politics wasn't so much governmental as BUSINESS associations and relationships. Yes, government policy did have some influence (i.e., Cuba and Mexico), but for the most part it wasn't the US government as much as it was the *CUBAN* and *MEXICAN* governments that didn't want to be part of the NANP back in the 1960s/70s/era, and that has all become legacy. SP&M is FRENCH (as are Guadeloupe, Martinique, etc. in the Caribbean) and again, it was the *FRENCH* that wanted European-French-like telephone aspects on those islands. Geography is mostly centered around the mainland US/Canada, even though there are the US-Pacific (and AK/HI states) and NANP-Caribbean. Yes, I probably erred in saying that the US/Canada is the most populated part of the world, when in actuality it would be China. I should have known because I have always heard all of those "old sayings" about the number of Chinam ... Chinese ... But the US/Canada is the largest in *TELEPHONE* population of the world, i.e., telephone penetration, in the world, as far as I can tell. So, as the MAIN intent of my posts was the actual NUMBERING/DIALING aspects of the NANP (with geography and "some" politics" thrown in), I'll reply to one of your comments in that light ... if you don't think that the NANP is "such a great deal" afterall, I don't know what you've been placing calls on for the past 50-some years. Maybe you should move to the UK (especially LONDON) or some other country where there are *wholesale* numbering changes in the major cities (locally too) or even nationally, every few years. And later on, the Editor makes a comment at the end of Joey Lindstrom's reply post; > There you go, Earle! Did Joey get you straightened out, or didn't he? > Don't you just love Canadians who like to pretend they are arrogant USA > citizens, with their general dislike for so much of the customs of the > rest of the world? Actually, Patrick, it's the other way around. Pot calling the kettle black here, me-thinks. YES, I will admit that there are those US/Canadians who travel to Europe/etc. and try to run their lives. I also admit that the US government has *FOR DECADES* tried to "run the world" and *THAT* is why most-of-the-rest-of-the-world (especially many Arab countries and Arabs IN EXILE) seem to HATE "us" for the foreign policy of the US Government (which seems to be managed by a certain foreign country anyhows! :( ) BUT ... I really want to get back to TELEPHONY, mainly numbering/dialing. MY obsevations are that for the most part, most of us in the NANP are mostly happy with our own numbering and dialing plan. Those of us who "know" the telephone industry are well aware of what other parts of the world had, as well as currently have, or will be modifying to, in the way of numbering/dialing/etc. And it does make for some intersting comparison. But we here in the NANP, while "happy" to advise/consult WHEN ASKED, are NOT really all that interested in chaning or "forcing" NANP-like policies on other parts of the world. HOWEVER ... It certainly seems to me that the Euros (and other "rest-of-the-worlders") or at least CERTAIN individuals from those non-NANP parts of the world, who post to TELECOM Digest AND another telecom (numbering) forum on the Internet, seem to take an arrogant attitude towards the NANP *EVERY TIME THEY THINK THEY CAN GET AWAY WITH IT*, especially when "unprovoked". And there are those of us in the NANP who are quite defensive of our own numbering/dialing systems, and don't like to see it WRONGLY "trashed". ESPECIALLY when most of us really keep to ourselves and try NOT to dictate NANP policies on other countries, but ALSO we can come up with FACTUAL refutations to those other "claims" from non-NANP-ers. And, Patrick (and others), as a matter of fact, the trend in "other parts of the world", FOR THE MOST PART, but probably not "universally" nor "ironclad", seems to be in their current numbering/dialing modifications of the 1990s+, is to become more "NANP-like" in the fact that they are migrating to fixed-length "overall" numbering, whether or not "parsing" is becoming uniform. And in some cases, there is fixed-length *dialing* in some of these countries. It might not be a "carbon copy" of the NANP, but it is migrating to fixed-length aspects which have mostly been a major aspect of NANP "numbering" (and to a great but not universal extent, dialing) since the NANP's inception. AGAIN, I will say (especially because the Editor here who has lived in the NANP all his life, makes the statement that he doesn't think the NANP is "such a great deal") ... the NANP has most CERTAINLY stood up to the test of time over the past five-plus decades, and will probably stand up to the test of time over the NEXT five (maybe even more) decades, in the fact that it remains a ten-digit format, only now generalized to NXX-NXX-xxxx. AND NO OTHER COUNTRY/NUMBERING PLAN can make such a claim, at least not for anything in the PAST years/decades. (I can't speak for the future because I dont know what the growth trend projections are in other parts of the world). Mark J. Cuccia New Orleans LA CSA (in the LAND of DIXIE!) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You can always tell when Mark becomes angry because (a) he spends an entire line or more yelling (large case) and (b) because he takes my name in vain, using it in every paragraph or two. I do not know what you are talking about when you say our numbering system is stable. So stable, in fact, that during the 1990-2000 time period I had to change my number four times on account of changes in area codes. I started out in 312, had it for many years, along with all of northern Illinois. Then it became 773 because the crybaby banks and financial houses downtown kept wanting more and more and more and more phones, and *they* thought it was unfair to make *them* change to 773, so everyone else in Chicago had to move to 773 to accomodate them (maybe so they would quit crying about what an expense it would be to make *them* have to change their stationary, etc ... so a few million rest of us had to change ours instead). If we had had a 'flexible' numbering system such as parts of Europe, then the stupid bankers could have had fifteen digit numbers if they wanted to cover all their PBX-extensions and the rest of us would have stayed in 312, since the banks and large corp- orations downtown refused to give it up. Well then they changed to 708 for the suburbs -- all of them. Well okay, so I had to start dialing ten digits to the McDonalds right across the street, literally less than fifty feet away, to order my lunch and have it delivered. Or eleven digits if you count the damnable '1' on the front of different (than yourself) area codes. Then as I started to wise up to Chicago politics, etc and fled to live in Skokie I myself became a 708-er ... but it doesn't stop there. Soon after moving to Skokie and handing out my 'new' telephone number, more crybabies came along and said now you will be 847 (as in 'VIP') and only the south and close in west suburbs will keep 708. Again, the very idea of making *them* dial additional digits just wouldn't do. After all, we have this fabulous NANP system, and *they* want more phone numbers for their faxes, their cell phones, their teenager lines, etc so YOU will move to 847 ... I don't live there now, but I understand that now the 847 people have all been evacuated once again to 224 along the lakefront area. The stench from politics in Chicago got to be so awful I knew I had to move *really far away* in order to breath fresh air once again, so I came to 316-ville. No sooner had I gotten here, give or take a few months, and the Boeing Aircraft people in Wichita and the state government people in Topeka all decided they wanted more, more, more, more phones, so after making sufficient stink with the Kansas Commission they got to keep 316 and I got moved to 620. Then South- western Bell, in their wisdom, decided I had to go back to dialing '1' before *anything* that was not in the City of Independence itself. Even directory assistance, '1411'. Even rinky-dinky Prairie Stream Communications is not that insane. And you say that NANP is a stable system that has served me well? Oh, by the way, in case of dire emergency, which is the only valid reason for calling '911' it is still shorter and easier for users of rotary phones to dial '112' (four pulses/pulls) than 911 (eleven pulses/pulls). But that would involve some changes in our system, in our way of doing things, right Mark? 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, Yahoo Groups, 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: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 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 V23 #10 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Jan 7 21:02:55 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i0822ta20388; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 21:02:55 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 21:02:55 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200401080202.i0822ta20388@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 V23 #11 TELECOM Digest Wed, 7 Jan 2004 21:03:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 11 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson JetBlue to Add Fox Video Entertainment System; Debut XM (Monty Solomon) AT&T 'Unlimited Country Plans' (Monty Solomon) Re: Caller-ID on Regular Phones Using a PBX (Carl Navarro) Re: Twenty Years Ago Today 1-Jan-2004,on 1-Jan-1984 (Kilo Delta Sierra) Re: NANP Numbering (Wesrock@aol.com) Re: NANP Numbering; Joey's Advice to the Unwashed Masses (David Winfrey) Re: The NANP, and Comments by the Digest's Editor (Joseph) NANP and Mr. Cuccia (Earle Robinson) Inventions (was Re: NANP Numbering) (Mark Brader) 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, 7 Jan 2004 09:03:31 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: JetBlue to Add Fox Video Entertainment System and Debut XM NEW YORK--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Jan. 7, 2004-- Low-Fare Carrier Will Offer up to 100 Channels of Satellite Radio Free of Charge and Add Movies and Episodes of "The Simpsons" JetBlue Airways (Nasdaq:JBLU) will make flights even more entertaining in 2004. JetBlue was the first carrier to debut up to 24 channels of live DIRECTV(R)(a) programming in-flight in 2000, and remains the only carrier offering satellite TV free at every seat. Now, in agreements with XM Satellite Radio (Nasdaq:XMSR) and News Corporation (NYSE:NWS), (NYSE:NWS.A); (ASX:NCP), (ASX:NCPDP), JetBlue will add up to 100 channels of digital satellite radio and movie channels featuring 20th Century Fox movies and episodes of Fox's popular TV series "The Simpsons." XM Satellite Radio's free in-flight service will allow JetBlue customers to choose from XM's unmatched variety of music, news, sports, information and entertainment, all with digital-quality audio and coast-to-coast coverage. Current artist information and song title playing will be displayed on JetBlue's seat-back TV screens to provide a comprehensive audio-visual experience. The system is expected to be introduced fleet-wide on JetBlue's Airbus A320 aircraft this year and on the airline's new fleet of EMBRAER 190 aircraft as they are introduced into service in 2005. In 2004, JetBlue will also add movie channels which will be offered for a nominal fee. The first dedicated in-flight service created by News Corporation's Fox Entertainment Group will offer JetBlue customers first-run movies, television shows, sports and news programming plus other original entertainment developed by Fox. The digital video system will feature an in-seat credit card payment system, whereby JetBlue customers can purchase Fox entertainment options through a convenient credit card reader. LiveTV, LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of JetBlue, will install the onboard systems that will deliver the XM Satellite Radio and digital video services. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40133815 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 09:06:04 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: AT&T 'Unlimited Country Plans' AT&T Leads Market with Innovative 'Unlimited Country Plans' - Jan 7, 2004 07:30 AM (PR Newswire) Unique New Plans Offer Unlimited International Calling To 17 Countries. Consumers Also Offered An Unlimited Asia Select And Unlimited Europe Select Plan. MORRISTOWN, N.J., Jan. 7 /PRNewswire/ -- AT&T today announced a groundbreaking and industry-leading offer with its "AT&T Unlimited Country(SM) Plans." These exclusive AT&T calling plans provide unlimited international calling to 17 popular countries for a specific monthly plan fee.* As the industry leader in unlimited long distance for domestic calling, AT&T continues to break new ground by broadening its portfolio to include unlimited international calling to 17 countries. With a monthly plan fee as low as $39.95 for unlimited calling to the United Kingdom, calling across the ocean or around the world has never been easier or more economical. Consumers will enjoy the ease and convenience of one low monthly plan fee for unlimited international calls to the eligible country of their choice -- 24 hours a day, seven days a week -- on direct-dialed calls made from home. In addition, subscribers who call any other country will receive AT&T's already low international rates through the AT&T AnyHour Advantage Plan. As a special value at no additional charge, subscribers to any Unlimited Country Plan will receive a flat rate on domestic long distance of 7 cents per minute on all interstate and in-state calls direct-dialed from home.** - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40134455 ------------------------------ From: Carl Navarro Subject: Re: Caller-ID on Regular Phones using a PBX Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2004 10:07:38 -0500 Organization: Airnews.net! at Internet America On 6 Jan 2004 19:27:59 -0800, Chainsman wrote: > Hi, I have a home telephone system which I'm very pleased with but my > family is distraught that it won't pass caller-ID to their regular > phones. I have looked around for systems that pass caller-ID to > regular old phones but haven't found any so far. I have heard that > there is a new Panasonic unit that will pass caller-ID to regular > phones. Does anyone know of any systems that will do this? My > requirements are for a minimum of 2 outside lines and 6 extensions. The Comdial DX-80 will pass CID to 4 S/L sets. Since a system would probably come with a couple of multi line sets, or you could double up extensions, it might not be a problem. I would guess that correspondingly the Vodavi STS might do the same. The Panasonic digital 308 will pass CID to one S/L station and you could drive a couple of CID boxes. I don't remember if the new systems coming out will do CID to sets. Carl Navarro ------------------------------ From: kd1s@aol.comremvthis (Kilo Delta One Sierra) Date: 07 Jan 2004 18:39:29 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Subject: Re: Twenty Years Ago Today 1-Jan-2004, back on 1-Jan-1984 > I don't think it's a good idea to start an inter-regional war. The > current implementation of USF certainly leavs something to be desired, > but the theory is as good as ever: the more people you can call, the > more useful your phone is. There are lots of involuntary transfers > from one part of the country to another, and I sure hope you don't > live in California because if you do, I'd like to have a few words > about your water bill. No, not California but Rhode Island. New England in general gets screwed in the federal tax scheme. We put much more money in than we get back, even when you include the Big Dig in Boston. What blew my mind about the Big Dig is that most of it is 6 lane highway. If you've ever driven the highways through Boston or even Providence you know that six lanes isn't adequate. The difference is obvious here in Providence. Once you break past downtown Providence and points south, I-95 becomes 4 lanes. And every day -- in the afternoon there's a huge pile-up during the commute at the change from 4 to 3 lanes coming north. For those living in Cranston and parts of Warwick they can take either RI-10 in or I-295 to RI-6 which then dumps in at the end of RI-10 which then connects back to I-95 near the I-195 interchange. Stupidity of government agencies never fails to amaze me. ------------------------------ From: Wesrock@aol.com Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 09:51:21 EST Subject: Re: NANP Numbering In a message dated Tue, 06 Jan 2004 13:39:12 -0800 Joseph writes: > Well, it's no different than what other places went through. Smaller > places had differing length phone numbers. Many places in the UK had > three digit telephone numbers up until a few years ago. Many places > in the US if they were small enough might have had as few as 3 digit > telephone numbers as well. When I lived in Konawa, Oklahoma, during the early 1950s and was owner of the Konawa Leader (weekly newspaper), the office number was 234 and my home number was, I believe, 287. This was a dial exchange. The NANP, while in existence, was still in its preliminary stages of being implemented. Wes Leatherock wesrock@aol.com wleathus@yahoo.com ------------------------------ From: David Winfrey Subject: Re: NANP Numbering; Joey's Advice to the Unwashed Masses Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2004 13:04:58 -0000 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There you go, Earle! Did Joey get you > straightened out, or didn't he? Don't you just love Canadians who > like to pretend they are arrogant USA citizens, with their general > dislike for so much of the customs of the rest of the world? PAT] The editor's credibility might be improved substantially if he would present facts to demonstrate why Joey's various points are not correct. Accusations of arrogance are not particularly useful; rational argument requires actual data. But this is Usenet. Sorry, I forgot. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You are forgiven for forgetting this time around. But this Usenet (the very same!) is where Joey Lindstrom can make comments to Earle such as: (Quoting from the back issue a couple days ago:) > Y'know, the way you really, really stretch credulity in order to > construct an argument -- ANY argument -- that something French is better > than something American, reminds me a whole lot of something that > Robin Williams said in his recent concert video. Imagine, if you > will, Robin speaking in an over-the-top French accent, and saying > something like the following (paraphrased to keep it in a g-rated > context): > "Ah, screw you Americans, we hate you ... What's that? Ze Germans are > coming? 'ALLO, AMERICANS! WE LOVE YOU!!!" > Joey Lindstrom So while you are reminising about Usenet and the things you have for- gotten about it, please remember the above as well. In no *moderated* newsgroup would the above total disdain for an entire nation of people be permitted, as Joey has done. And those final two lines above which begin, "ah screw you Americans" was the basis of my response to Joey Lindstrom. So while you complain about my dearth of factual matter, perhaps you might ask Mr. Lindstrom to explain where the above fits in to anything. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Joseph Subject: Re: The NANP, and Comments by the Digest's Editor Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2004 15:27:32 -0800 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.NOcom On Tue, 6 Jan 2004 22:51:50 -0600 (CST), [Pat the comp.dcom.telecom editor] wrote: > [I do not know what you are talking about when you > say our numbering system is stable. So stable, in fact, that during > the 1990-2000 time period I had to change my number four times on > account of changes in area codes. I started out in 312, had it for > many years, along with all of northern Illinois. Then it became 773 > because the crybaby banks and financial houses downtown kept wanting > more and more and more and more phones, and *they* thought it was > unfair to make *them* change to 773, so everyone else in Chicago had > to move to 773 to accomodate them (maybe so they would quit crying > about what an expense it would be to make *them* have to change their > stationary, etc ... so a few million rest of us had to change ours > instead). If we had had a 'flexible' numbering system such as parts > of Europe, then the stupid bankers could have had fifteen digit > numbers if they wanted to cover all their PBX-extensions and the > rest of us would have stayed in 312, since the banks and large corp- > orations downtown refused to give it up. The reality is that the form of the NANP has remained pretty much the same since 1947. The changes to area codes have happened because of growth and also because of politics. As was mentioned in another previous bit on this subject the fault for you having to change your number the many times you had to was because everyone did every possible thing that they could do to fight the "inevitable" that instead of carving up areas into smaller and smaller areas they instead did overlays and put another area code in the same area where an area code already served. In retrospect if people knew what they do now about how there was going to be a run on procuring new numbers between 1995 and 2002 they perhaps might have done things differently. Then again some areas probably wouldn't such as Californians who have a fear of dialing extra digits on a local call even though 80% of their calls require them to dial extra digits anyway. Politics has played a big part in the mess. Not only in Chicago, but in Boston among other places. Places with clout got to keep their old area code. Places that didn't have clout were relegated to getting a new area code with all the trouble and expense that goes with it. remove NO from .NOcom to reply ------------------------------ From: Earle Robinson
Subject: NANP and Mr. Cuccia Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 00:53:22 +0100 (Please mask my email address. Thank you.) First all, Mr. Cuccia taxes as arrogant anyone who disagrees with him. Why an ad hominem attack? Mr. Cuccia, not only are there far more people in China than in the USA, but Europe has more people, too. While the UK did fumble its modernization of the telephone numbering system, this didn't occur in the rest of Europe. My number in Paris has remained the same for 20 years now. Friends of mine in the states have endured 3, 4 or more area code changes during this time. In the USA the dialing system is also very confusing. In some areas you dial 7 digits for a local call, in others 10, and in others 11. Why? Mr. Cuccia also praises and repraises the "free" local calls in much of the states. However, he omits a couple of salient points. First, one pays much more monthly for a telephone line in the states than here in France. So, someone who doesn't make many local calls is out of pocket much less here than in the USA. Further, there are now plans that offer a fixed number of minutes per month at a very reasonable rate, too, and some that are unlimited usage. Unlike Mr. Cuccia, I have used both the NANP system and the French system extensively. How can one write without experience? Earle Robinson ------------------------------ Subject: Inventions (was: NANP Numbering) Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 20:12:23 EST From: msb@vex.net (Mark Brader) Earle Robinson writes: > The nuclear research was mostly done by men from Europe, too. Turing > was English, the diesel engine was invented in Germany, movies in France > ... Radar and the decryption of German code were done in England. ... The Enigma cipher was first broken in Poland, although the later developments that enabled the Allies to continue breaking it throughout the war, as well as the breaking of the more difficult Geheimschreiber (code name "Fish") ciphers, did take place in England. As for radar, the Germans, the British, the Americans, the French, and the Japanese *all* invented it independently, and all kept it secret from each other until the outbreak of war. The first to complete a working radar system was Rudolf Kühnold (Kuehnold) of Germany, in 1933-34. The Germans were initially interested in naval applications, and they had the first shipboard installation, in 1935. Robert Watson-Watt of Britain invented radar independently in 1935, and was determining the distance to targets months ahead of the Germans. The British government committed to using it for air defense the same year, and by 1937 the British also had airborne radar systems. In the US, work on radar began in 1934 but proceeded more slowly and a working system was not developed until 1936. After the war began, British and US researchers worked together to develop better systems than either country had individually; much of this work was in the US, which also contributed the word "radar" in 1940. -- Mark Brader, Toronto "Unjutsly malinged? I think not." msb@vex.net -- Ross Howard My text in this article is in the public domain. ------------------------------ 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, Yahoo Groups, 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: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 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 V23 #11 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Jan 8 14:56:12 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i08JuC424986; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 14:56:12 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 14:56:12 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200401081956.i08JuC424986@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 V23 #12 TELECOM Digest Thu, 8 Jan 2004 14:55:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 12 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson DISH Network Introduces One-Stop Lowest Price One-Stop Shop (M Solomon) Philips Unveils First Internet-ready TV Set (Monty Solomon) Gates Unveils Innovative New Products and Services at CES (M Solomon) Humax USA to Deliver TiVo(R)-Powered DVR and DVD Recordable (M Solomon) Finnish Study Shows Handset Radiation Within Limits (Monty Solomon) TiVo and Sonic Team Up to Put TiVo on the Go (Monty Solomon) Netscape Launches Low-Cost Internet Access Service (Monty Solomon) Verizon Wireless Announces Roll Out National 3G Network (Monty Solomon) Sony Ericsson Starts Web Gaming Service (Monty Solomon) Verizon Outlines Leadership Strategy for Broadband Era (Monty Solomon) Re: Inventions (was: NANP Numbering) (Kilo Delta One Sierra) Re: AT&T 'Unlimited Country Plans' (Joseph) 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, 8 Jan 2004 14:40:18 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: DISH Network Introduces Lowest Priced One-Stop Shop DISH Network Introduces Lowest Priced One-Stop Shop for High-Definition TV System - Jan 8, 2004 09:10 AM (BusinessWire) ENGLEWOOD, Colo.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Jan. 8, 2004-- HD Leader Rolls out Everything You Need for Living Life in HD: Monitor, Satellite TV Receiver, Delivery and Installation for Less Than $1,000 EchoStar Communications Corporation (Nasdaq:DISH) announced today at the 2004 International Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas that the company's DISH Network(TM), a leading American satellite subscription television service, is offering the most affordable high definition television (HDTV) package in the nation. The DISH Network HDTV System provides consumers with everything they need to start enjoying HDTV: a 16:9 HD television monitor, an HD satellite TV receiver, a satellite dish, home delivery and standard professional installation, all for less than $1,000. Further establishing itself as the leader in high definition TV, DISH Network offers a package of popular HD channels, including ESPN HD, Discovery HD Theater, HDNet and HDNet Movies for $9.99 per month or $109.89 annually, the lowest prices in the industry. DISH Network also offers high definition channels such as CBS-HD, HBO-HD, Showtime HD, and DISH-On-Demand pay-per-view HD movies. Offered to new and existing residential customers through a special promotion through Jan. 31, 2004, the DISH Network HD System includes a DISH 811 HD satellite TV receiver/decoder and the customer's choice of a 34-inch CRT or a 40-inch rear-projection wide-screen HD monitor, all for only $999. Delivery and installation are included. Customers must agree to purchase at least America's Top 60 programming package (formerly America's Top 50) for $24.99 per month and the HD package for $9.99 per month for one year. For new customers who already have an HD monitor, DISH Network offers a promotion making the DISH 811 HD satellite TV receiver available for free. This is a savings from the MSRP of $399. DISH Network has further strengthened its HD product line with the introduction of the first-of-its-kind high definition digital video recorder (DVR). The DISH Player-DVR 921 is available now for a $600 upgrade when customers purchase the DISH Network HDTV System. The DISH Player-DVR 921 features a 250-gigabyte hard drive capable of recording up to 25 hours of high definition video or up to 180 hours of standard definition content, or a combination of both. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40144695 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 13:31:52 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Philips Unveils First Internet-Ready TV Set LAS VEGAS, Jan 7 (Reuters) - Dutch Philips Electronics (AMS:PHG) (NYSE:PHG) on Wednesday unveiled a television set featuring a wireless connection to the Internet and personal computers, enabling it to play music, pictures and video from the Web or PCs. The product, which was shown at the Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas and which is not yet on sale, adds to a range of networked products manufactured by Europe's largest consumer electronics maker. Philips is already selling an Internet-connected HiFi set which can play radio channels that are available on the Web. It has also announced home servers which can pull music and video from the Net and transport it to the TVs and HiFi sets which consumers already have in their homes. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40141144 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 13:34:07 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Gates Unveils Innovative New Products and Services at CES Gates Unveils Innovative New Products and Services at CES, Details Vision of 'Seamless Computing' for Consumers - Jan 7, 2004 09:50 PM (PR Newswire) Keynote Address Features New Media Center Technologies, MSN Services and Smart Watches For MSN Direct; Gates Highlights Growing Role of Software in Consumer Electronics. LAS VEGAS, Jan. 7 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- In his keynote address at the 2004 International Consumer Electronics Show (CES), Microsoft Corp. Chairman and Chief Software Architect Bill Gates expanded on the company's vision for "seamless computing," demonstrating software breakthroughs that deliver unified digital experiences and make the technology in consumers' lives work as a connected whole. Gates introduced a number of products and services that bring the power of software to the world of consumer electronics, including MSN(R) Premium and enhanced MSN services for broadband Internet users; and new Microsoft(R) Windows(R) Media Center Extender Technologies and Portable Media Centers, which make the digital entertainment experiences of Media Center PCs available throughout the home and on the go. Gates also announced retail availability of Smart Watches for MSN Direct, which provide discreet and convenient access to personalized information. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40141782 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 13:44:38 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Humax USA to Deliver TiVo(R)-Powered DVR and DVD Recordable Details Product Specifications and Distribution Strategy; Signs on Good Guys and Tweeter LAS VEGAS, Jan. 8 /PRNewswire/ -- Humax, an international leader of digital satellite set-top box manufacturing, today disclosed details of its plan to sell innovative DVRs and DVD recordable products powered by TiVo. Humax has licensed TiVo-technology that will be incorporated into a full line of digital video recorders and DVD recordable products. In the start of the second quarter of 2004, Humax will introduce two standalone TiVo Series 2(R) DVRs consisting of an entry-level 80-hour model and a step-up 250-hour model. Later in the third quarter, Humax plans to deliver two combination DVD recordable models integrated with TiVo's best-of-breed service and robust features including home networking capability, progressive scan output and DV input. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40142910 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 13:45:35 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Finnish Study Shows Handset Radiation Within Limits By Brett Young HELSINKI, Jan 8 (Reuters) - A survey of some of the world's most popular cell phones found they emit radiation well below agreed limits and largely in line with the data published by manufacturers, a Finnish regulator's study showed on Thursday. The survey by Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority Finland (STUK) covered 12 models made by the world's top handset makers, including Finland's Nokia (HELS:NOK1V), Motorola (NYSE:MOT) of the U.S. and South Korea's Samsung (KOREA:005930). The publication comes at a time that global demand for mobile phones is booming but concern also is rising among consumers and some in the scientific community that mobile phone use can lead to problems ranging from headaches to tumours. Nokia, the world's top player, has forecast 2003 global industry sales of 460 million handsets alone, and some of its rivals expect an even higher number. It foresees 1.6 billion mobile subscribers by 2005. All models tested showed the radiation emitted, or the specific absorption rate (SAR), was well below the agreed level in Europe of two watts per kilogram. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40143058 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 13:46:26 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: TiVo and Sonic Team Up to Put TiVo on the Go LAS VEGAS--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Jan. 8, 2004-- Sonic(R) Enables TiVo(R) Series2(TM) Subscribers with Home Media Option(TM) to View Recorded Programming on Laptops, Burn Recorded Programming to DVD on their PCs Sonic Solutions (NASDAQ:SNIC), the leader in DVD creation software, announced today that it has teamed with TiVo (NASDAQ:TIVO), Inc., the creator of television services for digital video recorders (DVRs), to allow TiVo Series2 subscribers with Home Media Option to burn recorded programming onto DVD using Sonic MyDVD(R) and play their TiVo content on their PCs wherever they go with Sonic CinePlayer(TM). The combination of TiVo and Sonic technologies will, for the first time, allow TiVo subscribers to take advantage of their PC to access content on their TiVo DVR, burn to DVD, and enjoy TiVo on the go. The new software is being demonstrated by TiVo and Sonic at CES. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40143266 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 13:47:55 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Netscape Launches Low-Cost Internet Access Service New Dial-Up Service Offers Unlimited Usage For $9.95 Per Month Online Charity Auction of New Netscape.com E-Mail Addresses Kicks-Off Today on eBay(R) to Benefit City Year Netscape, one of the original pioneers of the Internet, today announced the introduction of a new, affordably priced dial-up Internet service for consumers who want a reliable and low-cost way to get online. The Netscape(R) service costs $9.95 per month for unlimited use and is available now at www.getnetscape.com or the Netscape(R) portal ( www.netscape.com ). With a simple approach of "Just the Net You Need," the Netscape Internet service offers e-mail with built-in spam filters, a convenient start page with news headlines, Internet search enhanced by Google(TM) technology and unlimited dial-up Internet access through an extensive nationwide network with thousands of access numbers, allowing subscribers across the country to get online easily and stay reliably connected. And, with the new service, Netscape.com e-mail addresses are available publicly for the first time, giving subscribers a unique opportunity to create a personalized online address at a renowned Internet brand. To kick off the launch, a special online charity auction of new "@Netscape.com" e-mail addresses begins today on eBay, The World's Online Marketplace(R) (found at www.getnetscape.com/ebay ). Two hundred personalized e-mail addresses of the most popular female and male first names will be up for bid on eBay from January 8 through January 14. In addition to the personalized e-mail address, winning bidders will receive a free year of the Netscape service membership. Minimum bids start at $9.95 and proceeds will go to City Year, which unites a diverse corps of young adults for a demanding year of full-time community service, leadership development and civic engagement. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40143653 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 13:49:27 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Verizon Wireless Announces Roll Out of National 3G Network BroadbandAccess Provides Fastest Wide-Area Wireless Data Connections BEDMINSTER, N.J., and LAS VEGAS, Jan. 8 /PRNewswire/ -- Verizon Wireless, the nation's largest and most reliable wireless voice network and the leader in next generation technology deployment, will begin immediately to expand its BroadbandAccess service nationally. Powered by Evolution-Data Optimized (EV-DO) third generation (3G) wide-area network, BroadbandAccess commercial service, with average user speeds of 300-500 kilobits per second (kbps), is expected to be available in many major U.S. cities this summer. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40143779 QUALCOMM Congratulates Verizon Wireless on Planned Nationwide Deployment of CDMA2000 1xEV-DO Services - Jan 8, 2004 07:30 AM (PR Newswire) - First Nationwide Deployment in the United States Will Bring High-Speed Wireless Data Services to Consumers and Businesses - SAN DIEGO, Jan. 8 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- QUALCOMM Incorporated (Nasdaq: QCOM), pioneer and world leader of Code Division Multiple Access (CDMA) digital wireless technology, congratulates Verizon Wireless on its plan to commercially deploy CDMA2000 1xEV-DO services nationwide. The third-generation (3G), high-speed data network, marketed under the name BroadbandAccess, will be available to customers in major markets this summer, with continued deployments across the nation throughout 2004 and 2005. The nationwide deployment of BroadbandAccess comes on the heels of Verizon Wireless' successful commercial deployments in San Diego and Washington, D.C. in October 2003, which signified the first time that CDMA2000 1xEV-DO access was made available in any major metropolitan area in the United States. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40143634 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 13:51:12 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Sony Ericsson Starts Web Gaming Service STOCKHOLM, Sweden (AP) -- Sony Ericsson said Thursday it launched a trial version of its own online gaming service for users of some of its phones, joining others in the bid to bring gaming to cell users. But unlike Finland's Nokia, which released its much-hyped gaming deck N-Gage, Sony Ericsson's service is usable on most of its higher end phones and doesn't use Bluetooth to let gamers play each other head to head. The games, the London-based company said, are online, not stored in a multimedia card inserted into the phone. The first games available include a Rally racer (a four-player game) and RC Battle (an eight-player game). The trial service will let users download the game and then play other users via the online service. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40144216 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 14:03:49 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Verizon Outlines Leadership Strategy for Broadband Era Verizon Outlines Leadership Strategy for Broadband Era; Announces Major New 3G Mobile Data and Wireline IP Network Expansions Verizon Chairman and CEO Ivan Seidenberg, at the Consumer Electronics Show, Says Company Will Invest $3 Billion Over Next Two Years to Bring Broadband to Mass Market LAS VEGAS, Jan. 8 /PRNewswire/ -- Verizon Chairman and CEO Ivan Seidenberg today unveiled the company's plans for leadership in the emerging broadband industry. He outlined two major new network expansions that are key to bringing the benefits of this new era to homes and businesses across America and said Verizon was committed to investing a total of $3 billion in its networks over the next two years to bring broadband to the mass market. To illustrate Verizon's unique ability to lead in the broadband revolution, Seidenberg also announced a new service, iobism, and new product, Verizon One, that will help families and businesses create a personal network to manage their communications devices and activities. The network expansion initiatives involve both Verizon's wireless and wireline networks. Verizon Wireless will expand its third-generation (3G) mobile data BroadbandAccess network nationwide. In addition to its ongoing annual capital investment program to build network capacity and coverage, the company will invest $1 billion over the next two years to further deploy its broadband technology, known as EV-DO (Evolution-Data Optimized). Verizon also will dramatically accelerate the evolution of its nationwide wireline network to packet-switching technology and, as announced yesterday, has selected Nortel Networks as its voice over Internet protocol (VoIP) equipment provider. Both moves are major steps toward creating a new growth-market for communications services in the wireless and broadband era. Seidenberg will outline the company's plans and Verizon's vision for the future in an address scheduled for 2:30 p.m. PST today at the Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40144501 ------------------------------ From: kd1s@aol.comremvthis (Kilo Delta One Sierra) Date: 08 Jan 2004 05:22:48 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Subject: Re: Inventions (was: NANP Numbering) > In the US, work on radar began in 1934 but proceeded more > slowly and a working system was not developed until 1936. But the critical thing that did happen regarding RADAR happened here in the U.S. It essentially got Raytheon to where it is today. Seems the British had to machine the cavity of the magnetron in a fairly robust piece of metal -- it was time consuming and expensive. An engineer from the U.S. whose name escapes me came up with the idea of using stacked plates of the same dimension to form the magnetron cavities. ------------------------------ From: Joseph Subject: Re: AT&T 'Unlimited Country Plans' Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2004 08:19:19 -0800 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.NOcom On Wed, 7 Jan 2004 09:06:04 -0500, Monty Solomon wrote: > With a monthly plan fee as low as $39.95 for unlimited calling to the > United Kingdom, calling across the ocean or around the world has never > been easier or more economical. Consumers will enjoy the ease and > convenience of one low monthly plan fee for unlimited international > calls to the eligible country of their choice -- 24 hours a day, seven > days a week -- on direct-dialed calls made from home. In addition, > subscribers who call any other country will receive AT&T's already low > international rates through the AT&T AnyHour Advantage Plan. As a > special value at no additional charge, subscribers to any Unlimited > Country Plan will receive a flat rate on domestic long distance of 7 > cents per minute on all interstate and in-state calls direct-dialed > from home.** How much you wanna bet that once they start selling these all you can eat international plans that they'll introduce (after the fact) limits to prevent people from camping on the line 24 hours a day. We've seen this before several times with Sprint and MCI/Worldcom. And pardon me, but I can't get excited about domestic calls for 7 cents per minute when it's quite easy to find LD carriers giving 2.9 cents/minute and also bill in less than full minute increments as well. remove NO from .NOcom to reply ------------------------------ 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, Yahoo Groups, 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: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 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 V23 #12 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Jan 9 01:27:18 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i096RIu27241; Fri, 9 Jan 2004 01:27:18 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 01:27:18 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200401090627.i096RIu27241@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 V23 #13 TELECOM Digest Fri, 9 Jan 2004 01:27:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 13 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson XM Satellite, Adobe, Picasa, MoodLogic Bring New Digital Music (Solomon) New TiVo(R) Powered Products in 2004 Include DVD Recorders (M Solomon) New TiVo(R) Service Release Ushers in Era of 'TiVo to Go' (M Solomon) Do Web Search Engines Suppress Controversy? (Monty Solomon) DIRECTV to Add High-Definition Network Signals to its Channel (Solomon) Rhapsody on Home Stereos (Monty Solomon) Philips Shows Off "Contactless" Payment Prototype (Monty Solomon) Murdoch Might Give Away Some Set-Top Boxes - Report (Monty Solomon) Echostar, Viacom Still Talking Toward CBS Deal (Monty Solomon) Annoying Phone Calls (Andy Nelson) Re: Inventions (was: NANP Numbering) (Scott Dorsey) Re: Gates Unveils Innovative New Products and Services at CES (jmeissen) Re: Netscape Launches Low-Cost Internet Access Service (John McHarry) My First Phone (was Re: Twenty Years Ago Today 1-Jan-2004 (Al Gillis) Touchtone Accuracy Tests (Pete Romfh) 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, 8 Jan 2004 15:15:48 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: XM Satellite, Adobe, Picasa, MoodLogic Bring New Digital Music XM Satellite, Adobe, Picasa, MoodLogic Bring New Digital Music, Photo Services To TiVo(R) Via Home Media Option(TM) - Jan 8, 2004 01:00 PM (PR Newswire) Leading Digital Content Companies Recognize Simplicity, Control of Home Media Option To Create Enjoyable Living Room Entertainment Experience LAS VEGAS, INTERNATIONAL CONSUMER ELECTRONICS SHOW, Jan. 8 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- TiVo Inc. (Nasdaq: TIVO), the creator of digital video recorders (DVRs), said new development partnerships with leading digital photo and music companies will expand the features and capabilities of the TiVo service through its groundbreaking Home Media Option(TM). Home Media Option is the easy-to-use solution for transporting digital content stored on the PC to the television where it can be enjoyed by the entire family. Now top digital media companies are extending their products so they easily and simply communicate with TiVo connected to the home network through Home Media Option. At the International Consumer Electronics Show, TiVo demonstrated new digital media services that are being developed by XM Satellite Radio (Nasdaq: XMSR), that will bring satellite radio to the home entertainment center. Other new services from Adobe (Nasdaq: ADBE), MoodLogic and Picasa were also showcased by TiVo at CES. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40146769 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 15:17:14 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: New TiVo(R) Powered Products in 2004 Include DVD Recorders, HD New TiVo(R) Powered Products in 2004 Include DVD Recorders, HD DVR, and Home Network Enabled Products - Jan 8, 2004 01:00 PM (PR Newswire) TiVo Hallmarks of Simplicity and Control Fuel Proliferation of New Products LAS VEGAS, INTERNATIONAL CONSUMER ELECTRONICS SHOW, Jan. 8 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- TiVo (Nasdaq: TIVO) today said new products powered by TiVo in 2004 will include DVD recorders, high-definition DVRs, and home network enabled products. These new products point to growing opportunities for TiVo in the marketplace, as the simplicity and control that TiVo is known for becomes a sought after differentiator by consumer electronics companies to drive adoption for many new digital entertainment products. In 2004, consumers will be able to experience TiVo in ways never before possible. From DVD recorders that deliver on the unfulfilled promise of the VCR, to the HD enabled DIRECTV (NYSE:GMH) DVR, to the most popular standalone DVR on the market, the TiVo Series2(TM), TiVo is offering consumers unparalleled functionality and ease of use, in packages to fit any lifestyle. In fact, consumers will be able to choose from over a dozen TiVo powered products from industry leaders including DIRECTV, Hughes, Humax, Philips, Pioneer, RCA, Samsung and Toshiba this year. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40146764 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 16:12:16 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: New TiVo(R) Service Release Ushers in Era of 'TiVo to Go' TiVo Service Upgrade, Software from Sonic Solutions, TiVo Content Security Key, Lets You Easily Transfer Recordings to a PC and Take Them On the Road LAS VEGAS, INTERNATIONAL CONSUMER ELECTRONICS SHOW, Jan. 8 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- TiVo (Nasdaq: TIVO) announced today it intends to deliver a new service release in the Fall of 2004 called "TiVoToGo(TM)." For the first time, TiVo subscribers with Home Media Option(TM) will be able to move their favorite programs stored on a TiVo DVR to a laptop for viewing on the road, or to any PC. For those who have a PC equipped with a DVD burner, programs can then be burned to DVD so users can take the TiVo experience with them wherever they go. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40146765 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 16:50:58 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Do Web Search Engines Suppress Controversy? by Susan L. Gerhart Abstract Web behavior depends upon three interlocking communities: (1) authors whose Web pages link to other pages; (2) search engines indexing and ranking those pages; and (3) information seekers whose queries and surfing reward authors and support search engines. Systematic suppression of controversial topics would indicate a flaw in the Web's ideology of openness and informativeness. This paper explores search engines' bias by asking: Is a specific well-known controversy revealed in a simple search? Experimental topics include: distance learning, Albert Einstein, St. John's Wort, female astronauts, and Belize. The experiments suggest simple queries tend to overly present the "sunnny side" of these topics, with minimal controversy. A more "Objective Web" is analyzed where: (a) Web page authors adopt research citation practices; (b) search engines balance organizational and analytic content; and, (c) searchers practice more wary multi-searching. Contents Understanding Web behavior: Politics, technology and users. Why does visibility of controversy matter? Case studies of controversial topics Summary of case studies: How much is controversy suppressed? Limits of the experiments Explanations for controversy revealing/suppression General explanations Toward a more objective Web A simulated objective Web Conclusions http://firstmonday.org/issues/issue9_1/gerhart/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 18:04:15 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: DIRECTV to Add High-Definition Network Signals to its Channel DIRECTV to Add High-Definition Network Signals to its Channel Lineup; Agreement in Place to Offer CBS-HD Programming 8 January 2004, 11:00am ET LAS VEGAS--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Jan. 8, 2004--Continuing to expand its high-definition and enhanced digital television programming, DIRECTV, Inc., the nation's leading digital multichannel television service provider, announced today that it plans to offer CBS-HD programming -- including hit primetime series "CSI: Crime Scene Investigation" and "Everybody Loves Raymond," as well as the Sunday, Feb. 1 broadcast of Super Bowl XXXVIII -- in the coming weeks. A similar agreement with FOX is expected to be reached in the next several weeks. The CBS-HD programming, from WCBS in New York and KCBS in Los Angeles, will be available to eligible DIRECTV customers in markets where CBS owns and operates stations, including Chicago; Philadelphia; San Francisco; Boston; Dallas; Detroit; Minneapolis; Miami; Denver; Pittsburgh; Baltimore; Salt Lake City; Austin, Texas; and Green Bay, Wis. Similarly, FOX programming is also expected to be offered to customers in FOX O&O markets. http://finance.lycos.com/qc/news/story.aspx?story=200401081600_BWR__BW5448 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 22:24:51 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Rhapsody on Home Stereos PRISMIQ Teams with RealNetworks To Give Consumers Access to Rhapsody on Home Stereos PRISMIQ/Rhapsody Combo On Display During CES; Visit TechHome TechZone (Booth #17695, South Hall 2) and RealNetworks booth (#22611, South Hall) at Las Vegas Convention Center. SAN MATEO, Calif., Jan. 8 /PRNewswire/ -- PRISMIQ, Inc. ( www.PRISMIQ.com ), a leader in networked entertainment devices and software, today announced it has joined together with RealNetworks, Inc. ( http://www.real.com ), the leading creator of digital media services and software, to enable its customers to listen to RealNetworks' award-winning Rhapsody Internet jukebox service on their home stereo via a wireless or wired home network. PRISMIQ's award-winning entertainment gateway product line, the PRISMIQ MediaPlayer and the PRISMIQ MediaPlayer/Recorder, are next generation entertainment gateways that sit on or near the home theater system and connect to the home network to access PC Media and Internet services. RealNetworks' Rhapsody is the #1 Internet jukebox service, offering unlimited access to more than 30,000 CDs of music for just $9.95 per month. By working together, the companies will enable consumers to enjoy Rhapsody's wide-ranging library of music and the service's high-fidelity Internet radio on their home entertainment systems. PRISMIQ and RealNetworks both embrace the UPnP(TM) (Universal Plug and Play) standard to communicate and share information and media across consumers' home networks. PRISMIQ recently completed integration of RealNetworks' Rhapsody SDK, which ensures that consumers enjoy unlimited remote access to their entire Rhapsody library while still honoring copyrights. Only networked home audio components that are certified to be compliant with RealNetworks' security enhancements can bring the Rhapsody experience to the digital home. The next public release of PRISMIQ software, currently scheduled for early February, will contain code that enables existing and future customers to enjoy Rhapsody. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40150831 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 22:27:38 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Philips Shows Off "Contactless" Payment Prototype By Ben Berkowitz LAS VEGAS, Jan 8 (Reuters) - Philips Semiconductors on Thursday unveiled a new technology in cooperation with credit card provider Visa International that it said promises to make wireless commerce as easy as the wave of a hand. Philips Semiconductors, a unit of Philips Electronics (AMS:PHG), on Thursday took the wraps off Near Field Communication, or NFC, a technology to enable a new kind of "contactless" payment. As opposed to well-known limited-distance wireless standards like Bluetooth, NFC has a much shorter range -- 4 inches or so -- and does not require secured pairings as Bluetooth devices do. Philips executives said their goal was to incorporate the NFC technology in a wide range of computers, handheld devices and cell phones. Visa said the technology could also be built into a new generation of credit cards. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40151054 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 22:29:46 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Murdoch Might Give Away Some Set-Top Boxes - Report NEW YORK, Jan 8 (Reuters) - News Corp. (AUS:NCP) (NYSE:NWS) chairman Rupert Murdoch said he might give away some digital video recorder set-top boxes to lure cable subscribers to News Corp.'s newly acquired satellite TV provider DirecTV, according to an interview in Business Week magazine. A spokesman for News Corp. in New York was not immediately available for comment on Thursday. Last month, the Federal Communications Commission and antitrust enforcers approved the $6.78 billion plan by News Corp. to gain control of DirecTV, the No. 1 U.S. satellite television provider and a pipeline into millions of American television sets with 12 million subscribers. In an interview in the latest issue of Business Week magazine, Murdoch was asked whether he would give away set-top boxes to lure cable subscribers. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40151141 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 23:53:15 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Echostar, Viacom Still Talking Toward CBS Deal LOS ANGELES, Jan 8 (Reuters) - Satellite TV provider EchoStar Communications Corp. (NASDAQ:DISH) and Viacom Inc. (NYSE:VIAb) have extended talks into next week on a deal that would include broadcast rights for CBS stations in major cities, including New York and Los Angeles, both sides said on Thursday. EchoStar also said that while negotiations continued, it has asked the U.S. District Court in San Francisco to hold in abeyance a lawsuit it filed a day earlier. EchoStar's suit seeks to block Viacom from withdrawing rebroadcast rights for its CBS-owned stations. The suit says Viacom has insisted that any deal for rights to its CBS affiliates must include arrangements for Viacom-owned cable networks such as a new offering, Nicktoons. By making that link, Viacom's actions amounted to an illegal restraint on trade, the lawsuit said. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40151063 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 11:54:07 PST From: Andy Nelson Subject: Annoying Phone Calls Can someone explain this? One day last week, on New Year's Eve in the afternoon, I'm at home since I have the day off from work. My phone rings once, briefly. I try to answer it and get a dial tone. I hang up, thinking someone must have dialed a wrong number and hung up but my phone rang anyway. Within three seconds, my phone rings again. Briefly. Almost as short as the courtesy ring when I forward my calls. So nothing can come through on call display. Again, every time I answer, they have hung up or disconnected and all I have is a dial tone. This happens many times in just a two or three minute period! So, I do a *69 to get a quote of the calling number if possible. It quotes back a local area number, a number which ends in all zeros. I forget exactly what the Name displayed, but it was a four character name like a company's abbreviation. I remember trying to look them up in the latest phone book but couldn't find any entry for them. I also never heard of this company or that abbreviation before. I also try to do a Call Block on that number, and whether I let the system try to block the "last incoming call" or I try to manually enter that number in myself, I get a message that "this number cannot be added to your call block list". I even tried calling back to that number, but I get a recording that says that the number is not a good or working number! Huh? I called into my voicemail to see if somehow those calls forwarded to my voicemail and maybe someone left a message. While trying to navigate my voicemail, I keep getting a Call Waiting beep tone every five seconds, and the Call Display shows that very same number, each time I get a beep, every time it takes up another slot on my Call Display box! It almost seems like SPAM, where every few seconds, another spam pops into your inbox, where you get fifty or sixty porno spams in a very short period of time! All like I'm being attacked! HELP! After a few minutes, the phone call attacks seem to stop. And so far it hasn't happened again, thankfully! Do telephone companies still provide Annoyance Call Bureaus? With competition these days, you wonder if one company can file official complaints about customers with a different phone company because of annoying, obscene or threatening calls from the customer of the other phone company, or if anything can be followed through. But has this happened to anyone else before? Thanks, Andy ------------------------------ From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) Subject: Re: Inventions (was: NANP Numbering) Date: 8 Jan 2004 15:51:17 -0500 Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000) Mark Brader wrote: > As for radar, the Germans, the British, the Americans, the French, and > the Japanese *all* invented it independently, and all kept it secret > from each other until the outbreak of war. The first to complete a > working radar system was Rudolf Kühnold (Kuehnold) of Germany, in > 1933-34. The Germans were initially interested in naval applications, > and they had the first shipboard installation, in 1935. Right, BUT, what the English had was the magnetron. Everybody else was limited to very long wavelengths, which made their systems comparatively less useful. > Robert Watson-Watt of Britain invented radar independently in 1935, > and was determining the distance to targets months ahead of the > Germans. The British government committed to using it for air defense > the same year, and by 1937 the British also had airborne radar > systems. This was the CHAIN HOME system, which operated on 45 MHz. The German gear of the same era was also working on similarly long wavelengths. > In the US, work on radar began in 1934 but proceeded more > slowly and a working system was not developed until 1936. After the > war began, British and US researchers worked together to develop > better systems than either country had individually; much of this work > was in the US, which also contributed the word "radar" in 1940. -- The concept of radar is fairly intuitive and it's not surprising that many different groups in the thirties came up with it at the same time. What is amazing is the magnetron tube with the ability to generate extremely short wavelength signals for high resolution images. --scott "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." ------------------------------ From: jmeissen@aracnet.com Subject: Re: Gates Unveils Innovative New Products and Services at CES Date: 8 Jan 2004 23:05:54 GMT Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com In article , Monty Solomon wrote: > Software in Consumer Electronics. > LAS VEGAS, Jan. 7 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- In his keynote address at > the 2004 International Consumer Electronics Show (CES), Microsoft > Corp. Chairman and Chief Software Architect Bill Gates expanded on the > company's vision for "seamless computing," ..... > Gates introduced a number of products and services that bring the > power of software to the world of consumer electronics, including > MSN(R) Premium and enhanced MSN services for broadband Internet > users; and new Microsoft(R) Windows(R) Media Center Extender > Technologies and Portable Media Centers, which make the digital > entertainment experiences of Media Center PCs available throughout > the home and on the go. Gates also announced retail availability of > Smart Watches for MSN Direct, which provide discreet and convenient > access to personalized information. So this is how far CES has fallen? The keynote address is now a product announcement platform for Microsoft. I think Bill Gates should be banned from making the keynote addresses in the future because he has bastardized it like this. I'm sure there are REAL industry visionaries out there who can think of more than what will make Microsoft richer. John Meissen jmeissen@aracnet.com ------------------------------ From: John McHarry Subject: Re: Netscape Launches Low-Cost Internet Access Service Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2004 19:35:16 -0500 Monty Solomon wrote: > New Dial-Up Service Offers Unlimited Usage For $9.95 Per Month > Online Charity Auction of New Netscape.com E-Mail Addresses > Kicks-Off Today on eBay(R) to Benefit City Year > Netscape, one of the original pioneers of the Internet, today > announced the introduction of a new, affordably priced dial-up > Internet service for consumers who want a reliable and low-cost way to > get online. The Netscape(R) service costs $9.95 per month for > unlimited use and is available now at www.getnetscape.com or the > Netscape(R) portal ( www.netscape.com ). I couldn't find a list of dialup numbers. While Netscape has a good name, I wouldn't sign up without knowing they offer local access where I live. This looks like they have a couple bugs to work out in their marketing presentation. ------------------------------ From: Al Gillis Subject: My First Phone (was Re: Twenty Years Ago Today 1-Jan-2004) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 16:13:59 -0800 Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com (Much snippage...) > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Interesting how you mention your very > own first telephone. I first got subscribed under my own name back in > 1960, when I moved out from living with Mommie Dearest to my own > little place in Hyde Park (the U of C neighborhood on the south side > of Chicago.) The monthly bill was around six or seven dollars and my > roomate and I agreed to split the bill but each be responsible for > our own long distance charges and or telegrams which were sent by > phone. Illinois Bell did not ask for deposits, or run credit checks, > etc. You simply called them one day and they came out the next day to > put the phone in. They trusted you to pay the bill when it arrived. > We decided on a green 'palmolive' color rotary dial phone and since > we lived in an apartment-hotel with a switchboard the phone man put in > a phone with a turn-button: one side of the turn button was the switch- > board phone (DOrchester 3-7500), the other side of the turn button > was our private phone (HYDe Park 3-3714). We did have a bell-chime > device to ring the phone (it sounded like a doorbell) and we had to > pay fifty-cents per month for that side ringer. Touch tone was not > available. ESS features were still ten years distant for the > downtown Chicago area and fifteen years distant for the other areas of > Chicago. PAT] When I ordered My First Telephone the Business Office customer service representative finally got to the question about color. Somehow I was evidently thinking of television and responded that I'd like "a black and white set". Well -- that clearly touched a raw nerve for this Lily Tomlin-like CSR. She spent several minutes explaining to me that this was the TELEPHONE and should not be compared to other services I might use and that two-tone telephone sets were not available and would I prefer a BLACK set or one of the half-dozen colors they offered? Feeling sufficiently chastised, I asked for plain black and we went on with the ordering process. Hoping to save a much money as possible I selected a rotary dial and no extensions! Them were the days! Al [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There were a lot of Lilly Tomlin-like service reps in those days. But truth be told, telco employees got a lot of grief from the customers also. Somewhere around, I have a sort of ragged, torn up copy of a 1923 directory from Chicago Telephone Company. I think it was the last year of Chicago Telephone, before they were bought out by the Bell consortium and changed into Illinois Bell. On the front cover down in the corner was a little announcement saying, 'Our subscribers are requested to speak in the same courteous, non-abusive way to our operators which they expect to hear in return. Would you want our operators to curse at you? It is not their fault if a line is engaged when you try to reach it.' And that was altogether too common: A rude, crude person (usually a man but not always) would ask for a number that historically was always busy -- such as the train or bus station information line -- and upon being told for the umpteenth time that 'the lion is busy' and respond with a string of curse words in the operator's ear, as if she could have corrected the problem had she been competent and not too lazy to do so. And anytime an operator or customer service rep cursed at a subscriber -- and they sometimes lost their 'cool' and did so, chances are likely they were fired on the spot. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Pete Romfh Subject: Touchtone Accuracy Tests Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 21:46:27 -0600 Organization: Not Organized As part of evaluating some proposed systems I need to find a simple way to verify that DTMF is passed accurately over various parts of a TDM/VoIP network. Obviously I could dial a series of extensions and verify they are reached but I'm looking for something like the old CO test number where you could call in, hit digits 1 through 0 and get a couple of beeps or the dialed digits read) back. Failing that, is there an inexpensive test set that will give me some quantifiable test results? I'm open to creative ideas. Pete Romfh, Telecom Geek & Amateur Gourmet. promfh at Texas dot net [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Check Mike Sandman's catalog online at http://www.sandman.com . He sells a device which prints out with LED the digits that are heard. 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, Yahoo Groups, 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: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 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 V23 #13 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat Jan 10 00:17:03 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i0A5H3a03589; Sat, 10 Jan 2004 00:17:03 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2004 00:17:03 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200401100517.i0A5H3a03589@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 V23 #14 TELECOM Digest Sat, 10 Jan 2004 00:17:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 14 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Caller ID and Spying??? (desiv) Vonage Virtual Number Crap Shoot (Sam Nickerson) Re: Netscape Launches Low-Cost Internet Access Service (John Levine) AT&T High Speed Service Question (BMN) One-Stop Shopping Approach to HDTV (Monty Solomon) Norvergence (n-line@juno.com) Maverick Wireless Corporation Launches Wireless Broadband (Eworldwire) Posting FAQ (Brett M Nelson) 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: desiv Subject: Caller ID and Spying??? Organization: Comcast Online Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2004 01:53:58 GMT OK, being the tech in the family, I get an email from my mom. Her friend is freaked out. Her friend has CallWave. She was online when my mom called, but here's the thing ... For the phone number, it shows my mom's number. BUT for the name, it shows someone else's name!!! Now, this is the first time she's seen it with this other name, so she's freaked out. (She even took pics of the screen with her digicam..) Now, here's where I get concerned ... The "other person" is involved in a messy divorce with my sister. (I'm not taking sides, just stating facts) ... and ... The "other person" works for a security company. Surveillance type stuff ... My first reaction, knowing a little (just a little) about Caller ID was that ... that shouldn't happen. My mom's number and someone else's name. As far as I know, Caller ID is data sent over the phone line from the phone company. When my mom called this lady, QWest detects that this woman is on the phone, and forwards the call and ANI info to Callwave. They (Callwave) then sends it to this woman's PC. So, if this my mom calls, it should be her number AND name. If this other person called, it should be his number and name. But how is it my mom's number and his name? Now, I'm not asking how HE did it (if he did) ... What I want to know is how would that be possible??? Something like call forwarding or transferring?? Some way someone could monitor phone calls??? I do computer networking, not telco, so I'm not "up" on this stuff ... I told my mom that even tho I was a tech, I wasn't a phreak. Or even someone who uses this stuff enough to know. I don't even have a home phone. :-) Cable modem ... Any ideas on what it might be? What they should look for? She called QWest and they confirmed his name is not on the account and hasn't ever been ... Thanx in advance. signed, confused ... P.S. I've read abit more about Caller ID since.. Apparently QWest would have sent the number to Callwave, and they would have checked a database to get the name??? (right?) So, it could be that the database they checked happens to have this other name. Still weird and a heck of a coincidence if it is. ------------------------------ From: Sam Nickerson Subject: Vonage Virtual Number Crap Shoot Organization: Comcast Online Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2004 03:14:42 GMT Just a quick warning to anyone thinking about going Vonage for the "Virtual Number" feature. I am a new customer to them; jumped on board because of the virtual number idea. I have a mother in Florida living on a fixed income and it would help her alot to be able to call me when she needs to. After getting set up and generating a virtual number, mom in Florida at the same area code could not make a non-toll call. I called Vonage customer no care and they said the prefix generated was not in her calling region ... sorry. Was there any way for them to refund the 14 bucks I spent on a useless number ... nope. But they did give me a list of prefixes that would work for her, and that all I need to do was generate another and look at the number before final submit and I would not get charged, just hit back and try another until a working number magically appears and hit submit to accept it. Tried that, then found the generated number does not show prior to submit and I get hit with another 14 bucks charge. 28 bucks of worthless numbers I, and mom, can not use. Called Vonage Customer no care again, guy says sorry, let me put a credit against your account for the 14 bucks so you can try again at no charge. Thru the dice again, no good. Well sorry sir, guess we don't have numbers in her local area; nothing I can do about the 28 bucks you have spent so far, no managers around that can help, send us an email and they will review. Sheeeesh, for a company looking to break into an emerging market you would think they would handle customers better, their marketing group is spending a lot of time, money and effort only to have customer no care mess it up. Just my experience; your mileage may vary. Sam [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, Sam, I am really sorry to hear about your bad experience with Vonage thus far. But if you do send a copy of the same letter you sent here to them, they will in fact read it, and very likely help you out. My other suggestion at this point would be to select (from among the various Florida area codes and prefixes on display in the drop down menus) a number that, even if not absolutely local to your mom is in some sort of 'extended' area that she could call for 'almost' nothing extra. In fact, since I am a user of Vonage with fairly good standing with them, include this note from me when you email Vonage, and ask their personal assistance in resolving the matter. I feel certain they will resolve it in a favorable way to you. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: 9 Jan 2004 07:44:48 -0000 From: John Levine Subject: Re: Netscape Launches Low-Cost Internet Access Service Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > I couldn't find a list of dialup numbers. While Netscape has a good > name, I wouldn't sign up without knowing they offer local access > where I live. This looks like they have a couple bugs to work out in > their marketing presentation. It's AOL, it's the same enormous list of dialups. ------------------------------ Reply-To: BMN From: BMN Subject: AT&T High Speed Service Question Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 07:06:32 -0500 Organization: Bell Sympatico Anyone have any experience with AT&T high speed service. I have a corp client that has a bill for approx $5K monthly for a data service which looks as though it is connecting two sites. There are no other details on the bill and it seems very expensive, even for a private line. Site A is in Indiana and Site B is in Wisconsin. Site A is $3500 with a $1400 credit and B is $5000 with a $2000 credit, but no other info. Further investigation with the CSR and the client will tell me, but this is the second time I have seen one of these inexplicable AT&T high speed service bills. The last one tuned out to be some FR services. But the amounts on this bill are astronomical. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 08:57:20 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: One-Stop Shopping Approach to HDTV By ERIC A. TAUB The satellite retransmission industry hopes to push the popularity of high-definition television by taking a page from the shopping mall playbook. On Jan. 1, PanAmSat, a satellite operator that beams programming to local cable operators for transmission to their customers, switched many of its HDTV channels to a new satellite that the company is positioning into something it calls an HDTV neighborhood. Trading on a successful marketing approach used for analog television since the 1980's, the company, which is owned primarily by Hughes Electronics, says it thinks that cable operators will be more likely to offer HDTV programming if they, like shoppers who go to a mall, can find the good things all in one place. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/05/business/media/05sat.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 15:49:28 GMT Subject: Norvergence From: N-Line@juno.com Patrick, You seem to have the most insight to this company. (From looking at forums.) They've approached us with their "service" and I'm in the process of trying to figure out if they are reputable. Can you help? Chad [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I would suggest two things: one, look and scan through our back issues file for December just past and read some of the messages there, none of which are very favorable. I also suggest you wait a day or two while this inquiry from you makes the rounds on comp.dcom.telecom (and other participating newsgroups) and see if some of the readers wake up and respond to you directly; again, the most recent replies were not very favorable from Norvergence's point of view. The company seems rather litigous, or anxious to sue anyone who gives them a bum rap. For instance, they threatened to sue me if I did not remove the most disparaging messages about them from our archives. I did not remove the messages, but its not that they did not try to make me (short of suit), including an inquiry they made of MIT's legal counsel. I'd review their contract they'll ask you to sign as a condition of getting the 'Matrix box' **very carefully** and let's see if any readers write you direct with responses. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Eworldwire Subject: Maverick Wireless Corporation Launches City-Wide Wireless Services Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 16:33:53 -0500 Maverick Wireless Corporation Successfully Launches City-Wide Wireless Broadband Services Maverick Wireless Proves Its CITYWIDE WiFi(TM) Services Are the Answer to Rural America's Broadband Needs BOTHELL, Wash/EWORLDWIRE/Jan. 9, 2004 --- Maverick Wireless Corporation today announced the successful launch of its CITYWIDE WiFi(TM) services in Benton County, Washington. It is the first community in the United States to enjoy what Maverick Wireless proclaims will be commonplace throughout the nation. "Recent technological advances and the international adoption of wireless broadband standards have made the viability of city-wide wireless broadband services a reality. The technology is now at a point where skilled wireless broadband service providers can offer their services across entire cities and even address the needs of communities that do not have access to traditional broadband options," David Schmelke, President and founder of Maverick Wireless Corporation. "Broadband is essential to the economic growth of our community and making it available throughout the county is among our highest priorities. The experts at Maverick Wireless are without a doubt the best at what they do and they have been an important part of our success," said a Benton PUD Representative. According to Mr. Schmelke, it is up to wireless experts to lead the charge into this new era of broadband. Schmelke, the former Director of Wireless Data at T-Mobile, USA, says that the successful commercialization of city-wide WiFi networks depend entirely on the wireless expertise and the abilities of the service providers to design, deploy, and support their customers. "The successful deployment of a carrier grade, community-wide WiFi network is as complex a challenge as one can imagine. The reason we're emerging as a leading authority on this subject is because of our deep rooted wireless knowledge. Benton County's successful launch is our proof that we understand the technology, the unique challenges surrounding such a deployment, and how to successfully overcome those challenges," says Schmelke. He adds, "Contrary to the belief of many traditional Internet Service Providers, you can't simply throw up towers and have a robust network that is truly ready for subscribers." Maverick's CITYWIDE WiFi(TM) network in Benton County covers an area of 40 square miles. Subscribers enjoy the freedom of accessing the Internet at broadband speeds anytime, from anywhere within the wide area network. CITYWIDE WiFi(TM) monthly rate plans range from $19.95 for a 128Kbps account to $49.95 for a 1Mbps account. To address security concerns the service also boasts 256bit encryption, user authentication, and certificate-based protection. Skilled sales, installation, customer care and technical support representatives are available to ensure that the service is easy to use. Gayle Cook, a CITYWIDE WiFi(TM) Subscriber states, "Maverick Wireless provided one of the best sales and service experiences I've ever had. The people at Maverick helped me understand the advantages of wireless broadband and they helped me select the best CITYWIDE WiFi(TM) service plan for my needs. I couldn't be happier with my decision to use their services." About Maverick Wireless Corporation Maverick Wireless Corporation is a leading authority on community-wide wireless broadband services. Founded by the former Director of Wireless Data at T-Mobile, USA, Maverick is a privately held wireless services corporation based in Bothell, Washington. For more information on CITYWIDE WiFi(TM) Services from Maverick Wireless Corporation, please visit www.citywidewifi.com HTML: http://newsroom.eworldwire.com/wr/010904/2037.htm PDF: http://newsroom.eworldwire.com/pdf/010904/2037.pdf ONLINE NEWSROOM: http://newsroom.eworldwire.com/2071.htm LOGO: http://newsroom.eworldwire.com/2071.htm CONTACT: Rolf DeDamm Maverick Wireless Corporation Bothell, WA PHONE. (425) 444-2945 EMAIL: dedamm@maverickwireless.com http://www.maverickwireless.com WEBSITES: http://www.maverickwireless.com, http://www.citywidewifi.com SOURCE: Maverick Wireless ATTACHED MEDIA: Logo: Maverick Wireless Logo (size: 40.0 k) Maverick Wireless Logo http://newsroom.eworldwire.com/media_uploads/Maverick_Wireless.jpg Logo: CityWide WiFi Large (size: 40.0 k) CityWide Logo large http://newsroom.eworldwire.com/media_uploads/Citywide_WiFi_Large.jpg Copyright 2003 Eworldwire, All rights reserved. Press Relase Distribution By EWORLDWIRE http://www.eworldwire.com (973)252-6800. For Media Questions: http://www.eworldwire.com/forthemedia.htm ------------------------------ Reply-To: From: Brett M Nelson Subject: Posting FAQ Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 19:43:50 -0500 Is there an FAQ about posting to the newsgroup? My posts aren't going through and would like to know if I am not following a required format. Regards, Brett Nelson Corporate Head Office Associate Director Consultant Development Schooley Mitchell Telecom Consultants 211 Ontario Street Stratford, Ontario N5A 3H3 main number (519)275-3339 auto-attendant (519)273-5163 x223 facsimile (519)273-5331 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I answered this gentleman in email and the answer is worth repeating here: "I am the moderator of TELECOM Digest, which is the newsletter-digest format for the comp.dcom.telecom newsgroup. There really are very few 'rules' to follow for posting to the newsgroup; here they are: "Send your posting as email to 'editor@telecom-digest.org'. "Make a copy for yourself at least until it is printed/answered. "After you post it in email, within a few seconds or minutes you should recieve an auto acknowlegment that it was recieved. "Most submissions are printed the same day received or the next day at the latest. A few I choose not to use for whatever reasons. "Try and edit what you sent to make my work easier, correcting spelling errors and formatting, etc. "Your message actually goes several places: 1) to the TELECOM Digest newsletter, which is published 1-2 times each day; 2) to the comp.dcom.telecom newsgroup. (A batch of messages is released each time an issue of the Digest is published.) 3) to supplemental telecom newsgroups such as Yahoo groups telecom_news, AOL, and Compuserve. "You should have received an auto-ack to this message of inquiry you sent to me. That *should* arrive each time you write here. "If you read the Digest version of the group http://telecom-digest.org for a few days before writing you will see the general format to use, etc." Patrick Townson TELECOM Moderator ------------------------------ 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, Yahoo Groups, 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: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 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 V23 #14 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat Jan 10 22:21:33 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i0B3LXA08855; Sat, 10 Jan 2004 22:21:33 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2004 22:21:33 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200401110321.i0B3LXA08855@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 V23 #15 TELECOM Digest Sat, 10 Jan 2004 22:21:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 15 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson FBI, Justice Dept. Seek Wiretaps For VoIP (Marcus Didius Falco) "Talibanism in Technology" (Marcus Didius Falco) Casino Chips to Carry RFID Tags (Monty Solomon) The Click Heard Round The World (Monty Solomon) C-Band TX'er In PCI Form Factor (Chay) Re: Caller ID and Spying??? (Ray Normandeau) Re: Vonage Virtual Number Crap Shoot (John Levine) Re: Vonage Virtual Number Crap Shoot (Joe@nospancity.com) Re: Maverick Wireless Corporation Launches City-Wide WISP (Dan Burstein) Verizon DSL - Idiots (Kilo Delta One Sierra) Verizon RI Pricing (Kilo Delta One Sierra) You Didn't Forget Did You? Do it Now! (TELECOM Digest Editor) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== 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: Sat, 10 Jan 2004 19:41:51 -0500 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: FBI, Justice Dept. Seek Wiretaps For VoIP X-URL: http://www.mccullagh.org/ http://news.com.com/2100-7352-5137344.html Feds seek wiretap access via VoIP Last modified: January 8, 2004, 7:42 AM PST By Declan McCullagh The FBI and the Justice Department have renewed their efforts to wiretap voice conversations carried across the Internet. The agencies have asked the Federal Communications Commission to order companies offering voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) service to rewire their networks to guarantee police the ability to eavesdrop on subscribers' conversations. Without such mandatory rules, the two agencies predicted in a letter to the FCC last month that "criminals, terrorists, and spies (could) use VoIP services to avoid lawfully authorized surveillance." The letter also was signed by the Drug Enforcement Administration. [...] One unusual section of the FBI letter is that it claims the bureau is seeking to protect Americans' privacy rights: "Mandatory CALEA compliance by VoIP providers would better protect the privacy of VoIP users than a voluntary approach. CALEA protects the privacy of surveillance suspects by requiring carriers to provision the surveillance in a confidential manner." Otherwise, the FBI argues, a VoIP company might turn over a "full pipe" to police that would include conversations of more people than necessary. [...] Politech mailing list Archived at http://www.politechbot.com/ Moderated by Declan McCullagh (http://www.mccullagh.org/) Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2004 19:47:33 -0500 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: "Talibanism in Technology" From: K.Ellis To: David Farber Sent: Jan 10, 2004 11:24 AM Subject: "Talibanism in Technology" Interesting read. "Talibanism in Technology" deals with seven reasons why women in technology are invisible http://www.dqindia.com/content/special/103022602.asp Karen Ellis <>~~~~~<>~~~~~<>~~~~~<>~~~~~<>~~~~~<>~~~~~<>~~~~~<> The Educational CyberPlayGround http://www.edu-cyberpg.com/ Hot List of Schools Online Net Happenings,K12 Newsletters, Network Newsletters http://www.edu-cyberpg.com/Community/index.html "Standing in the Shadows of Motown" Funk Brothers http://www.edu-cyberpg.com//funkbrothers.html 7 Hot Site Awards New York Times, USA Today , MSNBC, Earthlink, USA Today Best Bets For Educators, Macworld Top Fifty <>~~~~~<>~~~~~<>~~~~~<>~~~~~<>~~~~~<>~~~~~<>~~~~~<> Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2004 16:48:52 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Casino Chips to Carry RFID Tags 11:48 09 January 04 New Scientist When rumours surfaced in 2003 that the European Central Bank was quietly planning to put RFID (radio frequency identification) tags in euro banknotes to combat fraud and money laundering, privacy groups balked at the possibility that anybody with an RFID reader could count the money in wallets of passers by. While the rumours have not been confirmed or denied a new generation of casino chips with built-in RFID tags is giving an insight into the way banks and shops could keep track of real money if it were tagged. The chips will be launched later in 2004 and will allow casino operators to spot counterfeits and thefts, and also to monitor the behaviour of gamblers. RFID tags are tiny silicon chips that broadcast a unique identification code when prompted by a reader device. The tags do not need batteries, since they simply modify the radio signal fired at them by the reader. The readers work over distances ranging from a few centimetres to a few dozen metres, depending on the type of tag. http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99994542 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2004 17:04:09 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: The Click Heard Round The World The Click Heard Round The World It was December 1968. An obscure scientist from Stanford Research Institute stood before a hushed San Francisco crowd and blew every mind in the room. His 90-minute demo rolled out virtually all that would come to define modern computing: videoconferencing, hyperlinks, networked collaboration, digital text editing, and something called a "mouse." Doug Engelbart tells writer Ken Jordan what it felt like to launch the point-and-click revolution 15 years before the Mac. http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/12.01/mouse.html ------------------------------ From: Chay Subject: C-Band TX'er In PCI Form Factor Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2004 13:51:22 -0500 Looking for a transmitter for C-Band frequencies in PCI form factor. For DVB/IP two way internet access. Similiar to those used by Gilat and Web-Sat. Anyone know of any? ------------------------------ From: rayta@msn.com (Ray Normandeau) Subject: Re: Caller ID and Spying??? Date: 10 Jan 2004 11:51:31 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com desiv wrote in message news:: > For the phone number, it shows my mom's number. BUT for the name, it > shows someone else's name!!! It is almost AS IF your mom's outgoing calls were being routed thru someone else who was passing thru the Caller ID but goofed up on the name. ------------------------------ Date: 10 Jan 2004 05:45:01 -0000 From: John Levine Subject: Re: Vonage Virtual Number Crap Shoot Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > I have a mother in Florida living on a fixed income and it would help > her alot to be able to call me when she needs to. After getting set > up and generating a virtual number, mom in Florida at the same area > code could not make a non-toll call. I called Vonage customer no care > and they said the prefix generated was not in her calling region > ... sorry. When you get a Vonage number, you can specify the exact rate center where you want the number. For example, if you pick 954, then you can pick Coral Springs, Fort Lauderdale, Hollywood, or Pompano Beach. It is not exactly a state secret that local calling areas have nothing to do with area code boundaries, but are a list of rate centers. I got a virtual number last week so my sister in Vermont could call me as a local call, and it took about 10 seconds to look through the list of Vermont rate centers to find one local to her. If you and your mother can't figure out what's a local call for her, visit http://members.dandy.net/~czg/search.html which has an extensive data base of local calling area information. Regards, John Levine johnl@iecc.com Primary Perpetrator of The Internet for Dummies Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://iecc.com/johnl, Sewer Commissioner "I dropped the toothpaste", said Tom, crestfallenly. ------------------------------ From: Joe@nospancity.com Subject: Re: Vonage Virtual Number Crap Shoot Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2004 08:59:18 -0800 Organization: Cox Communications Sam Nickerson wrote: > Just a quick warning to anyone thinking about going Vonage for the > "Virtual Number" feature. I am a new customer to them; jumped on board > because of the virtual number idea. > I have a mother in Florida living on a fixed income and it would help > her alot to be able to call me when she needs to. After getting set up > and generating a virtual number, mom in Florida at the same area code > could not make a non-toll call. I called Vonage customer no care and > they said the prefix generated was not in her calling region ... sorry. > Was there any way for them to refund the 14 bucks I > spent on a useless number ... nope. But they did give me a list of > prefixes that would work for her, and that all I need to do was > generate another and look at the number before final submit and I > would not get charged, just hit back and try another until a working > number magically appears and hit submit to accept it. Tried that, then > found the generated number does not show prior to submit and I get hit > with another 14 bucks charge. 28 bucks of worthless numbers I, and > mom, can not use. > Called Vonage Customer no care again, guy says sorry, let me put a > credit against your account for the 14 bucks so you can try again at > no charge. Thru the dice again, no good. Well sorry sir, guess we don't > have numbers in her local area; nothing I can do about the 28 bucks you > have spent so far, no managers around that can help, send us an email > and they will review. > Sheeeesh, for a company looking to break into an emerging market you > would think they would handle customers better, their marketing group > is spending a lot of time, money and effort only to have customer no > care mess it up. Just my experience; your mileage may vary. > Sam I think the problem may be with you and your mother. In my part of California when I selected Area Code 949, it gives me the option of selecting one of four locations. Those locations have exactly the same name as the SBC exchanges in the 949 area code. What could be simpler? Sure, either you or your mother has to figure out which of the listed exchanges, if any, are a local call for her. But, that can easily be done before you hit "go." ------------------------------ From: danny burstein Subject: Re: Maverick Wireless Corporation Launches City-Wide WISP Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2004 06:41:18 UTC Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC In Eworldwire writes: > Maverick Wireless Corporation Successfully Launches > City-Wide Wireless Broadband Services > Maverick Wireless Proves Its CITYWIDE WiFi(TM) Services Are > the Answer to Rural America's Broadband Needs [ snip of the usual press release boilerplate ] A key problem here is that this company is asking customers to pay $20 (or more) per month for access to the network. Which is, perhaps, a realistic business model. Except for one little point: This company, like the vast majority of others, is using the *publicly available* 802.11 frequencies. There is *no* exclusivity on these channels. So, anyone else in the service area can (and many will ...) set up their own base stations and networks, and cause lots and lots of interference. This company (and the others) have no bumping privileges whatsoever on these frequencies. _____________________________________________________ Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key dannyb@panix.com [to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded] ------------------------------ From: kd1s@aol.comremvthis (Kilo Delta One Sierra) Date: 10 Jan 2004 15:46:33 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Subject: Verizon DSL - Idiots I wanted to install DSL (Cable company finally pissed me off enough that I went to the local office, threw my cable box on the desk and told them to shove their crappy service. It's Cox btw.) but Verizon droids tell me it's not available, that I'm close to 5 miles from the CO. Now I know for a fact that I'm nowhere near 5 miles from the CO. More like a mile maximum. So I went on their web site and sure enough I get the 'future notification' page. I plug in the phone number of the restaurant below me which is served on the same cable group, same CO and guess what, it's available. Time to call the morons back. Tony ------------------------------ From: kd1s@aol.comremvthis (Kilo Delta One Sierra) Date: 10 Jan 2004 15:44:27 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Subject: Verizon RI Pricing Well -- looks like Verizon has caught on. Residential for $54 a month includes VM, CLID and a raft of other features. I just might bite because in a given month my phone bills add up to about $54 as it is now, but they do range a bit. Having a fixed cost might be nice. I note business is $38 but there's a little disclaimer about "Excludes line charge". Typical Verizon -- so the line charge is probably about $15 but it makes it somewhat cheaper than Vonage especially when you consider the broadband connection charges. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2004 01:04:41 EST From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: You Didn't Forget Did You? Please Do it Now! On several occassions around the end of December I put a message in the Digest saying the mailing list was being rebuilt. I asked for people who wanted to remain on the email list (mail from editor@telecom-digest.org each day) to tell me if they wanted to remain on the list or not. A large number of you responded, but John suggested waiting a few more days for the stragglers to get in. **THIS IS THE LAST CHANCE**. (now I suppose I have bought myself a couple more days of waiting time as a result.) If you want to remain on the list of folks who get email from me each day (often times two or three times in a day) you MUST send me a notice in one line or less saying "subscribe email.address (your name)." IN that order, nothing more or less. If you were attentive and responded during December or the first few days in January, **do not** respond again. If you somehow overlooked those daily messages during the last week of December (for example, on vacation, whatever) then please do it over the weekend or Monday at latest. If you read this through comp.dcom.telecom then don't bother. If you read this through http://telecom-digest.org then don't bother. Only reply if you get email from me and wish to continue receiving it. Please do it now. Thanks. Patrick Townson ------------------------------ 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, Yahoo Groups, 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: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 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 V23 #15 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun Jan 11 23:47:05 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i0C4l5114958; Sun, 11 Jan 2004 23:47:05 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2004 23:47:05 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200401120447.i0C4l5114958@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 V23 #16 TELECOM Digest Sun, 11 Jan 2004 23:47:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 16 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Verizon DSL - Idiots (Charles P.) Re: Verizon DSL - Idiots (Steven J Sobol) Re: Verizon DSL - Idiots (Joe@nospancity.com) Re: Vonage Virtual Number Crap Shoot (Sam Nickerson) Re: Vonage Virtual Number Crap Shoot (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) NEC and Centigram (Tvargas) Re: Siemens Gigabit 2420/8825 Voicemail Question (Rupa Schomaker) Trouble Getting Into Archives (DC) More on NANP Numbering Compared to Europe (Bob Goudreau) Re: BBC Writer Fathoms the Internet Pretty Well (Ronda Hauben) Re: Automated Attendant Systems (Carl Navarro) Doubling Down on Digital Entertainment (Monty Solomon) New TVs Are Easy to Admire, Tougher to Comprehend (Monty Solomon) Mars Info on NASA Web Site Gets Inundated (Monty Solomon) 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: Sun, 11 Jan 2004 03:53:27 +0000 (GMT) From: Charles P. Subject: Re: Verizon DSL - Idiots Organization: Optimum Online I had Verizon tell one customer they couldn't do it, even though their neighbor had it. They then called Earthlink who said no problem and put it in on Verizon's wires. cp Kilo Delta One Sierra wrote in message news:telecom23.15.10@telecom-digest.org ... > I wanted to install DSL (Cable company finally pissed me off enough > that I went to the local office, threw my cable box on the desk and > told them to shove their crappy service. It's Cox btw.) but Verizon > droids tell me it's not available, that I'm close to 5 miles from the > CO. > Now I know for a fact that I'm nowhere near 5 miles from the CO. More > like a mile maximum. So I went on their web site and sure enough I get > the 'future notification' page. I plug in the phone number of the > restaurant below me which is served on the same cable group, same CO > and guess what, it's available. > Time to call the morons back. > Tony ------------------------------ From: Steven J Sobol Subject: Re: Verizon DSL - Idiots Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2004 23:57:29 -0600 Kilo Delta One Sierra wrote: > I wanted to install DSL (Cable company finally pissed me off enough > that I went to the local office, threw my cable box on the desk and > told them to shove their crappy service. It's Cox btw.) but Verizon > droids tell me it's not available, that I'm close to 5 miles from the > CO. Telco droids are idiots. Upper-level repair techs are usually clued, but the front-level people are stupid. What did you expect from a phone company? (And Verizon's not as bad as the other ILECs, in my opinion!) JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services 22674 Motnocab Road * Apple Valley, CA 92307-1950 Steve Sobol, Geek In Charge * 888.480.4NET (4638) * sjsobol@JustThe.net ------------------------------ From: Joe@nospancity.com Subject: Re: Verizon DSL - Idiots Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2004 02:03:12 -0800 Organization: Cox Communications If the web site tests the line and says it's eligible why not place the order on-line so you don't have to deal with the "morons." Kilo Delta One Sierra wrote: > I wanted to install DSL (Cable company finally pissed me off enough > that I went to the local office, threw my cable box on the desk and > told them to shove their crappy service. It's Cox btw.) but Verizon > droids tell me it's not available, that I'm close to 5 miles from the > CO. > Now I know for a fact that I'm nowhere near 5 miles from the CO. More > like a mile maximum. So I went on their web site and sure enough I get > the 'future notification' page. I plug in the phone number of the > restaurant below me which is served on the same cable group, same CO > and guess what, it's available. > Time to call the morons back. > Tony ------------------------------ From: Sam Nickerson Subject: Re: Vonage Virtual Number Crap Shoot Organization: Comcast Online Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2004 06:31:31 GMT On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 08:59:18 -0800, Joe wrote: > Sam Nickerson wrote: >> Just a quick warning to anyone thinking about going Vonage for the >> "Virtual Number" feature. I am a new customer to them; jumped on board >> because of the virtual number idea. >> I have a mother in Florida living on a fixed income and it would help >> her alot to be able to call me when she needs to. After getting set up >> and generating a virtual number, mom in Florida at the same area code >> could not make a non-toll call. I called Vonage customer no care and >> they said the prefix generated was not in her calling region ... sorry. >> Was there any way for them to refund the 14 bucks I >> spent on a useless number ... nope. But they did give me a list of >> prefixes that would work for her, and that all I need to do was >> generate another and look at the number before final submit and I >> would not get charged, just hit back and try another until a working >> number magically appears and hit submit to accept it. Tried that, then >> found the generated number does not show prior to submit and I get hit >> with another 14 bucks charge. 28 bucks of worthless numbers I, and >> mom, can not use. >> Called Vonage Customer no care again, guy says sorry, let me put a >> credit against your account for the 14 bucks so you can try again at >> no charge. Thru the dice again, no good. Well sorry sir, guess we don't >> have numbers in her local area; nothing I can do about the 28 bucks you >> have spent so far, no managers around that can help, send us an email >> and they will review. >> Sheeeesh, for a company looking to break into an emerging market you >> would think they would handle customers better, their marketing group >> is spending a lot of time, money and effort only to have customer no >> care mess it up. Just my experience; your mileage may vary. >> Sam > I think the problem may be with you and your mother. In my part of > California when I selected Area Code 949, it gives me the option of > selecting one of four locations. Those locations have exactly the > same name as the SBC exchanges in the 949 area code. > What could be simpler? Sure, either you or your mother has to figure > out which of the listed exchanges, if any, are a local call for her. > But, that can easily be done before you hit "go." Perhaps you don't get out much, perhaps English is not your first language, in either case I forgive your misinterpretation of my post. As posted Vonage Technical Support was not able to discern a correct exchange, so how should a customer? Not all areas of the U.S. are as over populated and well defined as the California region, and the majority of this country lies outside of California. Per Vonage Tech support you take a throw of the dice, get charged against your credit card, and hope for a prefix in the desired area. Whoa dude surfs up, Sam ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2004 16:47:38 GMT From: joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Subject: Re: Vonage Virtual Number Crap Shoot Organization: Excelsior Computer Services > I have a mother in Florida living on a fixed income and it would help > her alot to be able to call me when she needs to. After getting set up If you call the business office, you can probably get a business number in any exchange you want, and then have it forward anywhere you want. Should be about $25/month, plus usage. -Joel [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yeah, but if he did that, why not just get an 800 number -- much cheaper -- for mom's use in calling him using Bell all the way. In that case, a long haul via Bell from mom to him would be much cheaper that a combination of 'extended toll' for mom and a Vonage virtual number for himself. PAT] ------------------------------ From: tvargas@networld.com (Tvargas) Subject: NEC and Centigram Date: 11 Jan 2004 11:27:29 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Has anyone ever integrated a NEC 2000 IVS system to a Centigram Model 70 Voicemail system? If so, how was your template configured? ------------------------------ From: Rupa Schomaker Subject: Re: Siemens Gigabit 2420/8825 Voicemail Question Date: 11 Jan 2004 12:13:38 -0600 sf@mnetsys.com (Steve Fitzgerald) writes: > Does anyone know if on the 2420 or 8825 it is possible to disable the > answering machine on only one of the lines? I have two lines and only > want the answering machine to answer one of the them. The other line > has dedicated voicemail service off-site. Don't know about the 2420. My 8825 allows you to configure answering machine, auto attendant, etc for each line independently. Now if I could just get it to detect when the other end hangs up on my Vonage line. For now I limit the message length to 1 min and have to suffer up to 1 min of "off hook notification beeps" ... > Thanks. -rupa [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Mike Sandman ( http://www.sandman.com ) and I did some testing on this recently. Unfortunatly, Vonage does not do call supervision if that is a critical point with you. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2004 11:15:20 -0800 From: DC Subject: Trouble Getting Into Archives I would like to look at vol 15, issue 362 but there seems to be a problem getting into that directory. It just hangs when I click on that directory. Is there something wrong? Thank You, Darold Coffey [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I sent a copy of Vol15_#362 to Mr. Coffey today. Anyone who wants something from the archives and for whatever reason gets hung up or has trouble finding what they want is welcome to ask for help in getting it. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Bob Goudreau Subject: More on NANP Numbering Compared to Europe Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2004 21:49:16 -0500 [Patrick, it occurs to me that I never received the usual auto-acknowledgement to the message I submitted several days ago, so it apparently never made it. Here's another attempt.] [Please continue to omit my email address too.] Earle Robinson writes: > While the UK did fumble its modernization of the telephone numbering > system, this didn't occur in the rest of Europe. Er, actually if you'll check the WTNG, you'll see quite a lot of examples of European numbering plans that endured wholesale changes over the past couple of decades (adding digits, rearranging entire area code schemes, etc.) It's not just a UK thing by any means. Greece, Italy, Denmark, Norway, Netherlands, etc. Not to mention France ... > My number in Paris has remained the same for 20 years now. Was it the early 1980s that Paris changed from 7D to 8D numbers? Of course, from a dialing perspective, your number has only remained unchanged to those callers who were outside of France, who have been able to dial you as +33 1 AB CD EF GH for that entire period. Inside France, the dialing of your number (and every other POTS number) has certainly changed in that time. You used to be dialable as AB CD EF GH from within the Paris region (+33 1), and as AB CD EF GH from the rest of the country, IIRC. (Wasn't the access code something like 16-1 or 19-1?) But now you are reachable as 01 AB CD EF GH from everywhere in the country. > Friends of mine in the states > have endured 3, 4 or more area code changes during this time. I think you'll find that the number of people living in areas that have undergone that many NPA splits is proportionally very tiny compared to the number who have undergone no changes at all. (Mark & Co., are there actually *any* areas at all that have undergone *four* splits since 1984? PAT complained about having four area codes over the years, but bear in mind that he moved to different cities at least a couple of times, which isn't at all the same as having your number change due to an area code split.) Of course *most* of France had to change its numbers during the past decade; the entire "rest of the country" outside the Paris (+33 1) region had their numbers lengthened by prefixing an area code to their existing numbers (+33 AB CD EF GH became +33 X AB CD EF GH). I.e., their numbers changed from everyone's perspective (international and intranational). > In the USA the dialing system is also very confusing. In some areas > you dial 7 digits for a local call, in others 10, and in others 11. > Why? In Europe, the dialing system is even more confusing. In some areas you dial 5 digits for a local call, in others 6, in others 7, in others 8, in others 9 or 10. > Mr. Cuccia also praises and repraises the "free" local calls in much > of the states. However, he omits a couple of salient points. First, > one pays much more monthly for a telephone line in the states than > here in France. What does monthly service for a POTS line from FT cost these days (including any fees/taxes)? I thought it was in the EUR 15 range, which is certainly comparable with many areas of the US. (Canada tends to be slightly cheaper.) Regards, Bob Goudreau Cary, NC [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I do not remember the *exact* order of things from back when I was living in Chicago but let us take a hypothetical person living in Evanston/Skokie, IL for thirty years or so. They began with 312 for all of northern Illinois. Then they went to 708 when all suburbs were split away from Chicago. Then they would have gone to 847 when the northern suburbs were split away from the southern/western suburbs. Now they have gone to 224 when the northeastern suburbs were split away from the northwestern suburbs. That would appear to be four potential area code splits in a bit over twenty years wouldn't it? Yes, I did move from Chicago to Skokie but I got 312/773 even though I was gone from the area before 847/224 took place. I am talking now about the hypothetical person who never moved out of the same house in Evanston for 20 plus years, of which there have been many folks. Or, let's take Northwestern University, which has been in the same spot for more than a century: 312 --> 708 --> 847 --> 224. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Ronda Hauben Subject: Re: BBC Writer Fathoms the Internet Pretty Well Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 03:40:07 +0000 (UTC) Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC Mark Crispin wrote: > On Sun, 4 Jan 2004, Ronda Hauben wrote: >> Are you saying that the ARPANET is the same as the IMP subnetwork >> of the ARPANET? The whole point of the IMP subnetwork is to connect >> diverse computers and diverse operating systems. The ARPANET is the >> connection of these diverse computers and operating systems. It isn't >> the IMP subnetwork. The IMP subnetwork is the means of connecting the >> diverse computers, but is *not* the ARPANET. > Ronda, were you a user of the ARPAnet in its halcyon days (1970-1982)? > I was. I implemented the first 96-bit leader (32-bit address) ARPAnet > NCP for the PDP-10 in 1978. I was very much part of the TCP/IP > transition in 1983, and the subsequent ARPAnet/Milnet split. I wrote > some of the earliest implementations of Telnet and SMTP. I even wrote > an EGP. I know you were Mark, as I have written you several years ago based on my research on TCP/IP digest and other early Internet documentation. And I wrote some about how you spoke out with regard to issues you disagreed about on the tcp/ip digest. That you now complain when I speak out about issues that are a problem is a bit of a surprise. I am glad that there are people like you online who were involved with the early development of the ARPANET. But then I would hope you would be helpful in spreading accurate knowledge about the technical developments. To ask if I was online then isn't quite relevant, is it? I have read many of the documents and been in contact with many who were online then. And I hav2 done substantial research both by being in contact with people who were there and by researching the documents created at the time. I an co-author of one of the early books about the history and development of the ARPANET, Usenet and the Internet. The book was written on the basis of help from people who had been involved in the early developments of the Net. > I have never heard the term "IMP subnetwork" used. I don't understand the point of your saying this? Whether or not you have heard of it, it has been used. I didn't make it up. If you were interested in helping to sort this out you might take a look back at some of the RFC's that a short search on google shows used the term "IMP subnetwork." A short search turns up: RFC 687 by David C. Walden from June 1975 NIC #32654 http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc687.html RFC 410 by John M. McQuillan 10 November 1970 http://www.apps.ietf.org/rfc/rfc410.html RFC 528 by J. McQuillan 20 June 1973 NIC: 17164 http://rfc-528.rfc-search.org/ RFC 533 by David Walden July 17, 1973 NIC: 17452 So though you may not have noticed "IMP subnetwork" in those RFC's, it has been a term used and it expresses a helpful concept. > Nor have I ever heard of this strange case which you seem to be making. > The notion that the wires of an LH or DH connection are part of a > "network" is rather, uh, strange to anyone who actually dealt with it > on an electrical basis. A better case may be made for a VDH > interface, but that in turn was more of a point-to-point network. > So is the notion that the hosts on the ARPAnet were part of the > network. It's akin to saying that a human user of a telephone is > "part of the telephone network." Mark, are you saying that the telephone isn't part of the telephone network? It is important that people have some understanding of the technology. Do you disagree? The hosts are more akin to the telephone. They were the different computers and different operating systems that were part of the ARPANET. This is more akin to the telephone being part of the telephone network, than to refer to the human telephone user or human computer user. The question whether the human telephone user or the human computer user is part of their respective networks is a serious question, but doesn't seem relevant to trying to clarify whether the ARPANET was made up of both the IMPs and HOSTs and whether the telephone network is made up of the switching network and the phones that make the communication possible. > The notion that the only important difference between ARPAnet and > Internet is that "Internet made it possible to connect different > networks, not just different computers" is laughable to anyone who was > actually there. Are you stressing "only" here? I am stressing that an "important difference" between them is that the ARPANET connected different operating systems and different computer systems, and the Internet connected different networks. I wasn't focusing on whether there is only one important difference or more. To say "laughable" doesn't help to clarify anything. Instead it can serve to intimidate any disagreement. Similarly to refer to anyone "who was actually there" as the being the deciding factor, is not helpful. There will in the not too distant future be no one who was "actually there" to refer to. It is important that knowledge of these developments be made available to those who weren't there. That is why I took the trouble to comment on the BBC reporter's article, as it didn't help clarify, but only spread sand in the eyes of anyone trying to understand the ARPANET and Internet. > In conclusion, I will echo John Levine: >> These facts are well known and easily checked by anyone who cares to >> do so, and you only make yourself look foolish by trying to argue >> do so, and you only make yourself look foolish by trying to argue >> that the situation was and is otherwise. If these facts are easily checked, I wondered why neither you nor John tried to look up "IMP subnetwork" instead of insisting it is a phantom term. >> I have no interest in arguing about facts, so this is my last >> message on this topic. > -- Mark -- That is your perogative of course. It is the 10th anniversary this weekend of Michael and I putting the online book "Netizens" online. We worked on the book and put it online because we felt it was important to spread an understanding of the history and impact of the Net as it seemed it was not understood by many online who were enthralled by what it made possible, but had no idea where it had come from. The book was an early history of the Net and explored its potential impact. Michael, particularly, and I had been encouraged by many online at the time to do our work and we got help from many online. Michael still continues to get numerous emails that say that people have found his work very helpful to them, especially the chapters of Netizens that he had done about the creation of the ARPANET. Based on this work, many other efforts to write about the history were begun. So it is sad to see the state of the situation now, where when one makes an effort to clarify a misrepresentation that a BBC reporter makes which is being spread via the powerful distribution mechanisms of the BBC and also online, that there is an attack on the effort to make the clarification. How can the BBC reporter care to try to understand the ARPANET and Internet if there isn't an effort to correct misrepresentations. The IMP subnetwork was not the ARPA network (as the ARPANET was sometimes called before the creation of the Internet). The ARPANET is the interconnection of different computers and operating systems and the IMP subnetwork. The Internet was the interconnection of diverse networks, or a network of networks (or a metasystem of networks). Usenet is about disagreements, so hopefully it can help to have discussion over the differences. I wrote a paper on the tcp/ip digest where I refer to the role you played there Mark. It was a very helpful role. It is online at: A Study of the ARPANET TCP/IP Digest and of the Role of Online Communication in the Transition from the ARPANET to the Internet http://umcc.ais.org/~ronda/new.papers/tcpdraft.txt I am working on a paper about the early development of the Internet as an international collaboration. And I welcome input into that process. Ronda Netizens is online at http://www.columbia.edu/~hauben/netbook/ A draft paper on the 10th anniversary of Netizens http://www.columbia.edu/~hauben/netizens2004.doc ------------------------------ From: Carl Navarro Subject: Re: Automated Attendant Systems Reply-To: cnavarro@wcnet.org Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 00:52:29 GMT Organization: Road Runner High Speed Online http://www.rr.com On Wed, 07 Jan 2004 02:30:33 GMT, JamminDJ wrote: > Hello, I am a tech consonant for a computer help desk at a mid to > large size university. Currently all calls to the centre go through an > initial auto attendant system, then are forwarded to dept. depending > on need. One of these options is password change. This is all done by > human operator right now, we take their SSN numbers and get fed a new > password out. This becomes quite tiresome, and some higher ups have > actually threatened to quit due to the infinite number of calls for > change password requests. My question is, is there a piece of software > or hardware, capable of taking a purely numeric SSN number, feeding to > one of our mainframes, and spit out the purely alphaic password? I > know it can be done, this is evident in the CVS 'Rapid Refill' > system. I just wonder if there is any third party software that can do > this, and do it at a university price. I have never done this, but Amanda does simple comma delimited or ODBC compliant database lookups, depending on which system you buy. Try www.taa.com and look at Amanda @work.group or Amanda Portal. The former is fairly inexpensive for what it does, about $2500 retail, and the latter about $5200 for 4 port systems. Carl Navarro > Thank you for your time, > Paul Miller ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2004 21:22:30 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Doubling Down on Digital Entertainment By Cynthia L. Webb washingtonpost.com Staff Writer When the world's technology heavyweights get together every January to tout their flashy gadgets, you know it's more than just "Vegas, baby." It's the International Consumer Electronics Show , and this year's event kicked off with the latest installment in Microsoft Corp. Chairman Bill Gates's vision of the wired future. That future will play out in a seamless melange of connected PCs, TVs and a host of other electronics devices -- a digital entertainment system with the computer as its central nervous system, Gates said in his opening keynote. And in a familiar refrain, Gates wants Microsoft to be the market leader. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A64733-2004Jan8.html ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2004 21:28:37 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: New TVs Are Easy to Admire, Tougher to Comprehend By Rob Pegoraro LAS VEGAS It is becoming harder to buy a television set than a personal computer. The unheralded side effect of the digital transformation that promises to bring TV sets new levels of quality and performance is that they've become much harder to decipher. These things were once commodity items that anybody could buy based largely on brand and price, but the evidence on the show floor at the Consumer Electronics Show here indicates that they're all shifting painfully back into the status of "exclusive" products, each with a unique mix of innovations, limitations and, most of the time, higher prices. This tension between creativity and commodity is part of this industry's way of life. A product can't be born without creativity, but it can't be a success until it hits commodity status. In between, it's a mess for consumers to sort out. That's the story behind three big stories of this year's CES: flat-panel digital televisions, digital video recording and wireless media networks. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A5386-2004Jan10.html ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2004 10:57:35 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Mars Info on NASA Web Site Gets Inundated By ANICK JESDANUN AP Internet Writer NEW YORK (AP) -- Think of the Library of Congress' entire print collections _ and then some _ to get an idea of how much data space enthusiasts have downloaded from NASA's Web sites this week. Visitors had obtained more than 34.6 terabytes of images, video and other information as of Friday afternoon, the bulk related to the Mars rover Spirit. By some estimates, all the words in every book in the Library of Congress total 20 terabytes. So far, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration has posted all raw images from Spirit, some within a half-hour of the data reaching Earth. At least 10 to 30 images are expected daily, with some even available in 3-D. NASA also created panoramic views by piecing several images together and plans interactive features in which viewers control the view with a mouse (sorry, but you won't be able to control the spacecraft's camera directly). Once the rover begins moving, NASA plans video summaries at least weekly by combining still images. For now, video is largely limited to animation of the spacecraft's journey, documentary-style clips and streaming of the NASA TV cable channel. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=40157493 ------------------------------ 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, Yahoo Groups, 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: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 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 V23 #16 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Jan 12 00:26:02 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i0C5Q2415266; Mon, 12 Jan 2004 00:26:02 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 00:26:02 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200401120526.i0C5Q2415266@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 V23 #17 TELECOM Digest Mon, 12 Jan 2004 00:26:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 17 Inside This Special Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Wall Street Journal Special Report on VoIP (Marcus Didius Falco) 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: Sun, 11 Jan 2004 22:21:49 -0500 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Wall Street Journal Special Report on VoIP [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This special issue of the Digest is devoted to VOIP phone service. It will appear in the Telecom Archives in the