TELECOM Digest     Fri, 23 Mar 2007 19:08:00 EDT    Volume 26 : Issue 81

Inside This Issue:                            Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Mossberg: Congress Must Make Clear Copyright Laws To Protect (M Solomon)
    Cisco ISG (Lasse)
    CommunicationsDirect News Daily Update (communicationsdirect_daily)
    Telecom Update #572, March 23, 2007 (Angus TeleManagement Group)
    AT&T to Serve up TV Channels on PCs, Mobile Phones (USTelecom dailyLead)
    Re: NANP Number Lengths (John Levine)
    Re: NANP Number Lengths (Chris Farrar)
    Re: NANP Number Lengths (Linc Madison)
    Re: Unlisted Phone Number (Mr Joseph Singer)
    Re: "Please Enter Your ID Number" So We May Ignore it (Stan)
    Re: "Please Enter Your ID Number" So We May Ignore it (Rick Merrill)
    Re: "Please Enter Your ID Number" So We May Ignore it (Lisa Hancock)

NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the
daily media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra/more-news.html . Hundreds of new
articles daily. And, discuss this and other topics in our forum at
http://telecom-digest.org/forum (or)
http://telecom-digest.org/chat/index.html

*** 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, 

For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2007 14:32:41 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Mossberg: Congress Must Make Clear Copyright Laws To Protect


http://ptech.wsj.com/archive/ptech-20070322.html

Congress Must Make Clear Copyright Laws To Protect Consumers

By Walter S. Mossberg

Here comes another in the long line of lawsuits between media
companies and Internet companies over who gets to distribute content.
This time it's Viacom, the enormously rich owner of properties like
Paramount Pictures and Comedy Central, suing Google, the enormously
rich owner of YouTube.

The issue: Viacom wants to get paid more than Google wants to pay it
for all of those fuzzy, two-minute clips from programs like "The Daily
Show" that users post to YouTube. The companies tried to negotiate a
deal, but the talks failed, so Viacom is suing for $1 billion.

I am not a lawyer, and I have no idea how this lawsuit will wind up.
I suspect it is mainly a bargaining tactic by Viacom. But I know one
thing: This fight isn't primarily about consumers and their rights,
and its outcome won't necessarily make things better for Internet
users.

Consumers won't be a party to this case any more than they were in the
room when the latest major copyright law was passed by Congress.  That
law, the 1998 Digital Millennium Copyright Act, was enacted at the
behest of record labels and movie studios. Their purpose was to stop
people from using computers and the Internet to distribute digital
copies of material to which they didn't hold either the copyright or a
distribution license.

That idea makes sense. Unlike some Internet zealots, I believe that
intellectual property is real and that some form of copyright is
appropriate to protect it. I am against the unlicensed copying of DVDs
for sale on street corners, or the mass uploading of songs to
so-called sharing sites.

The Internet and technology companies managed to insert a clause in
the DMCA sparing them from penalties for carrying copyright content on
grounds they were just innocent conduits. That will be a big issue in
the Viacom case. But consumers got no such get-out-of-jail-free card.

In fact, the DMCA, and other recent laws and regulations passed under
pressure from media companies, are pretty hostile when it comes to
consumers. They turn essentially innocent actions into unlawful
behavior, because they define copyright infringement too broadly.
They have given rise to a technology called Digital Rights Management
that causes too many hassles for honest people and discriminates
against the new digital forms of distribution.

Even Apple CEO Steve Jobs, who created a DRM system for music that
actually has worked, recently called for an end to copy protection of
legally sold music, mainly because the record labels apply that
protection only to online sales, not to physical compact discs.

Most honest people wouldn't consider it piracy to buy a CD, copy it to
a computer and email one of the song files to a spouse or friend.  But
the record industry, backed by the laws it essentially wrote,
does. Most honest people wouldn't think that uploading to YouTube a
two-minute TV clip, which they paid their cable company to receive, is
piracy. But Viacom, backed by the laws its industry essentially wrote,
is demanding that Google remove all such clips.

To be fair, Viacom, unlike the misguided record labels, isn't suing
the actual consumers who posted these clips. It's suing Google because
it claims Google is making money from them and refusing to pay for
that privilege.

Google isn't blameless here, either. It does make money, at least
indirectly, from other companies' copyright material, for which it
didn't pay, even though it has negotiated some paid deals and says it
is willing to negotiate others. And while Google says it diligently
removes all copyright clips for which it hasn't secured paid rights,
every YouTube visitor knows that this system is, at best, imperfect.

As a nonlawyer, I think these clips seem like "fair use," an old
copyright concept that seems to have weakened under the advent of the
new laws. Under fair use, as most nonlawyers have understood it, you
could quote this sentence in another publication without permission,
though you'd need the permission of the newspaper to reprint the
entire column or a large part of it. A two-minute portion of a
30-minute TV show seems like the same thing to me.

But why should I have to guess about that? What consumers need is
real clarity on the whole issue of what is or isn't permissible use
of the digital content they have legally obtained. And that can come
only from Congress. Congress is the real villain here, for having
failed to pass a modern copyright law that protects average
consumers, not just big content companies.

We need a new digital copyright law that would draw a line between
modest sharing of a few songs or video clips and the real piracy of
mass distribution. We need a new law that would define fair use for
the digital era and lay out clearly the rights of consumers who pay
for digital content, as well as the rights and responsibilities of
Internet companies.

If you don't like all of the restrictions on the use of digital
content, the solution isn't to steal the stuff. A better course is to
pressure Congress to pass a new copyright law, one that protects the
little guy and the Internet itself.

Email me at mossberg@wsj.com.

Copyright 2007 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

------------------------------

Reply-To: Lasse <Lars.Kalsen@jubii.dk>
From: Lasse <Lars.Kalsen@jubii.dk>
Subject: Cisco ISG
Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2007 23:21:46 +0100
Organization: TDC Totalloesninger


Hi,

We are considering bying an Cisco ISG for access controller on some 
hotspots.

Does any of you have any experiences about this product -- good or
bad. Or have you heard anything about it?  Is it a mature product?

Any experiences whatsoever is interesting for me.

Lasse

------------------------------

Subject: CommunicationsDirect News Daily Update
From: communicationsdirect_daily <communicationsdirect@communications.com>
Reply-To: communicationsdirect_daily-owner@communicationsdirectnews.com
Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2007 11:44:59 EDT


********************************
PricewaterhouseCoopers Presents
The CommunicationsDirect Daily Update
For March 23, 2007
********************************

Our new poll: What is most important to you when deciding to stay with
your existing mobile service provider? Visit our web site to
vote.

Alcatel-Lucent in Pole Position to Take Over Nortel's GSM Unit
http://communicationsdirectnews.com/do.php/120/23415?11228

     Alcatel-Lucent is in pole position to buy Nortel's GSM business,
     Les Echos reports. According to the newspaper, the companies signed
     an agreement granting Alcatel-Lucent a call option giving it the
     right of first refusal if Nortel was to put its GSM unit up for sale.
     Alcatel had acquired Nortel's UMTS RAN business in September ...

EU Lawmakers Divided over Mobile Roaming Charges
http://communicationsdirectnews.com/do.php/130/23413?11228

     European Union (EU) lawmakers have failed to reach a consensus on
     how the proposed reduction in mobile roaming charges will be
     enforced.  While the centre-left deputies in the consumer
     protection committee and the EU's executive commission want a
     mandatory price cap with consumers opting out at will,
     centre-right parliamentarians, ...

Tutorial: Building Carrier Grade Applications Using a Highly Available
Data base Management System
http://communicationsdirectnews.com/do.php/140/23409?11228

     In many areas, including the network infrastructure, developers are
     challenged with the task of building applications that run for very
     long periods without appreciable downtime. These are called highly
     available applications. Because they often manage large amounts of
     data, such applications are well-served by a high-availability ...

FMC Picks Up Steam
http://communicationsdirectnews.com/do.php/140/23405?11228

     Worldwide, the number of dual-mode, Wi-Fi/cellular phones has
     accelerated quickly, and most telecom operators -- both fixed and
     mobile -- are expected to have some kind of dual-mode strategy
     this decade. But this one-phone-fits-all scenario presents
     opportunities as well as challenges.  The Wi-Fi Alliance said
     recently it has ...

BT Stares Down 21CN 'Complexity'
http://communicationsdirectnews.com/do.php/120/23402?11228

     SAN JOSE, Calif. -- Spring VON -- BT Group plc is already feeling
     deadline pressure from its ambitious plan to go all-IP and unplug
     from the PSTN in 2011.  BT's Silicon Valley-based VP of
     technology and innovation, Jean-Marc Frangos, who spoke here
     yesterday, says his company is already facing a mountain of
     technical ...

Cellular South, Kyocera Trial Wireless Wallet
http://communicationsdirectnews.com/do.php/150/23399?11228

     Cellular South, a privately held wireless network provider, and
     handset maker Kyocera will launch what they're calling a Wireless
     Wallet trial in two markets starting in May. The trial makes use
     of near-field communications (NFC) technology and will be
     available to Cellular South subscribers in Jackson, Miss., and
     Memphis, ...

Oh No, Moto: Shock & Awe In Schaumburg
http://communicationsdirectnews.com/do.php/120/23397?11228

     Admitting that its January estimates of the disaster in its cell
     phone business were at least a billion bucks too low and that
     it's operating in the red, Motorola has named a new president and
     COO, replaced its CFO, hinted at more layoffs to come and
     announced what amounts to a $2 billion attempt to side-track
     corporate raider Carl ...

Copyright (C) 2007 PricewaterhouseCoopers.

------------------------------

From: Angus TeleManagement Group <jriddell@angustel.ca>
Subject: Telecom Update #572, March 23, 2007
Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2007 09:04:46 -0800


Here is a link to this week's copy of Telecom Update from Canada.
http://www.angustel.ca/update/up.html

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2007 12:37:40 CDT
From: USTelecom dailyLead <ustelecom@dailylead.com>
Subject: AT&T to Serve Up TV Channels on PCs, Mobile Phones


USTelecom dailyLead
March 23, 2007
http://r.smartbrief.com/resp/gvlMfDtusXoxdWCibuddmTZQ

TODAY'S HEADLINES


NEWS OF THE DAY
* AT&T to serve up TV channels on PCs, mobile phones
BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH
* Verizon seeks injunction against Vonage
* NBCU, News Corp. team up for online video site
* Former FCC chairman joins Cisco's board
* Report: Alcatel-Lucent gets first choice of Nortel GSM rights
* Analysts say Motorola won't rebound soon
* France Telecom backs national fiber-optics network in Slovakia
USTELECOM SPOTLIGHT
* Register for NXTcomm today!
TECHNOLOGY TRENDS
* Linksys goes after more small business
* Opinion: Apple TV shines
IP DOWNLOAD
* Skype integrates peer-to-peer PayPal option into VoIP offering
* Calcutta Telephones plans IPTV service launch in India
REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE
* FCC changes rules for wireless Internet
* FCC to examine broadband service

Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others.
http://r.smartbrief.com/resp/gvlMfDtusXoxdWCibuddmTZQ

------------------------------

Date: 22 Mar 2007 21:08:57 -0000
From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
Subject: Re: NANP Number Lengths


In article <telecom26.80.3@telecom-digest.org> you write:

> I've been told by a UK carier that eleven digit numbers beginning 09
> are in use in Canada and diallable by the public - 1 09x xxx xxxx y.

Your carrier is quite mistaken.  Canada is tightly integrated into the
NANP and has the same NXX-NXX-XXXX phone numbers as the US and the
small NANP countries.

> As far as I'm aware, although the 09 number space /is/ used, it is
> only for internal network routing purposes and even then will still
> only contain ten digits.

You can see the actual area codes and dialing plan in use at
http://www.cnac.ca.

If they use 09X numbers, it's buried deep in the network.

R's,

John

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 17:38:35 -0400
From: Chris Farrar <cfarrar@sympatico.ca>
Subject: Re: NANP Number Lengths


Quick try of dialing anything 1 09X XXX XXXX Y on a Bell Canada line
(with Bell Canada as the long distance carrier) goes to an intercept
after a long pause (no ringing at all) "We're sorry, the carrier
access code you dialed is not in service."

To parse your numbers another way is 109XX XXX XXX Y, which is what
most phone companies probably would, it would be interperted as
carrier access code, area code, exchange, and mising 3 more digits.
Given the above, I gather that Bell Canada is looking at 1 09X XXX
XXXX Y and then timing out waiting for the last 3 digits.

Especially as 10XXXXX is the format for alternative long distance
carrier access.

Chris

------------------------------

Subject: Re: NANP Number Lengths
Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2007 03:07:58 -0700
From: Linc Madison <lincmad@suespammers.org>
Organization: Linc Mad dot com


In article <telecom26.80.3@telecom-digest.org>, Marc
<marc.p.cornelius@googlemail.com> wrote:

> I've been told by a UK carier that eleven digit numbers beginning 09
> are in use in Canada and diallable by the public - 1 09x xxx xxxx y.

Categorically false. Within the US and Canada, any customer dialed
string beginning with 10 is a carrier selection code, and none of
those begins with 109. Furthermore, any customer-dialable number
(other than short codes) consists of a 3-digit area code followed by
exactly 7 digits.  The sequence is:

*XX service codes, optionally dialed as 11XX (esp. on rotary phones)
101XXXX  carrier selection code
1 or 0   trunk code
NXX      area code  (always  [2-9] [0-8] [0-9] )
NXX-XXXX local number

Not all of the elements are used on every call, and local rules vary
as to whether it is necessary to dial 1+NPA or just NPA or neither,
for a given calling destination. In particular, about 2/3 of the US
and all of Canada use 1+ to indicate a toll call, but areas such as
California and New York use it only to indicate that the area code
follows, without respect to local/toll distinctions.

Also, no area codes for any customer-dialable number either begin with
'0' nor have '9' as the middle digit. The N9X range is reserved for
transition to longer numbers, and the 0XX range will not be available
at least until all calls within the NANP must be dialed with the full
NSN.

> As far as I'm aware, although the 09 number space /is/ used, it is
> only for internal network routing purposes and even then will still
> only contain ten digits.

I'm much less of an expert on this area of numbering, but to my
knowledge, *all* internal routing and billing numbers are fixed ten
digits. I once had a calling card attached to a non-dialable billing
number of the form (NXX) 090-XXXX.


Linc Madison * San Francisco, California * Telecom at Linc Mad d0t c0m
URL: < http://www.lincmad.com >  *  North American Area Codes & Splits
Read my political blog, "The Third Path" <http://LincMad.blogspot.com>
US, California, and Washington State laws apply to LINCMAD.COM e-mail.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2007 01:13:28 -0700 (PDT)
From: Mr Joseph Singer <joeofseattle@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Unlisted Phone Number


hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com 21 Mar 2007 13:11:54 -0700 wrote:

> The same article reported that Direct Distance Dialing (1+) was
> available for all NYC subscribers.  They could dial up to 39 states
> and provinces.  Obviously many areas couldn't yet receive DDD calls in
1960.

New York City subscribers never used 1+ they either dialed 7 digits or
a 3 digit area code and 7 digits since they were mostly running panel
and crossbar offices.  1+ and 112+ were mostly used for step-by-step
offices though 1+ was adopted for DDD in areas that did have common
control switching (panel and crossbar.)

------------------------------

From: Stan <stanncno1spam@noispam.yaho0.com>
Subject: Re: "Please Enter Your ID Number" So We May Ignore it
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 18:31:10 -0400


<hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote in message
news:telecom26.79.3@telecom-digest.org:

> I telephoned a large business today.  As usual, the answering machine
> asked me to enter my account number "for faster service".  I did so.
> After the usual parade through many menus I was connected to an actual
> human being.  The first thing she asked me for was my account number,
> even though I had keyed it in "for faster service".

> I find this happens all the time.

> What is the point of requesting an account number if it isn't going to
> be automatically forwarded to the person handling the call?

> With today's fancy computer systems, the idea is that after getting my
> account number, my account screen is immediately displayed to the
> person handling my call, saving the time to ask for my account number
> and her to key it it.  But this never happens.  (Some systems are
> fancy enough to check the caller ID of your phone number and use that
> to bring up your account, but these get fouled if you call from work
> or a different phone.)

> Anyone familiar with the programming of these 'automated' systems and
> would care to comment?   Thanks.

In many large contact centers, the account data is sent along with the
call so that the agent screen has your account information displayed
when you pop into their headset. In a perfect world, this even works
when your call is automagically transferred by the system before the
agent gets your call.

Many companies have this integration working correctly. Many aren't
even aware that it isn't working. And even when it does work, you have
to account for intermittent system outages, IP hiccups, etc.

Here's one vendor that sells the stuff that drives that feature:
http://www.genesyslab.com/

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 16:25:36 -0400
From: Rick Merrill <rick0.merrill@NOSPAM.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: "Please Enter Your ID Number" So We May Ignore it


Ron Kritzman wrote:

> I don't know why they bothered to ask for your account number if they
> had no mechanism for passing the info back to the attendant. ...

One reason is that they use a central phone number, then use your
account ID to switch your call to a centering handling your area.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But as long as they are going to that
trouble to start with (of transferring your call between centers), why
not just transfer your enti
------------------------------

From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Subject: Re: "Please Enter Your ID Number" So We May Ignore it
Date: 22 Mar 2007 14:00:23 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com


On Mar 22, 10:41 am, davide...@gmail.com wrote:
> I recently called the local Blue Cross.  I waded through the
> voicemail, and then they asked for subscriber id.  This is now done
> with voice recognition since the subscriber ID now has letters. (Why?
> We moved away from SS numbers, but why add letters?  10 billion ids
> aren't enough?)  Then I connect and they ask my ID number again!  Why
> waste my time and their money on the voice system?

Oh boy, does voice recognition drive me crazy and raise my blood
pressure!  (Ironically from calling to Blue Cross!  Do they know
they're making their subscribers sicker?)

Voice recognition never seems to work for me.  I don't like it at
all.  I complain to the human who eventually answers and they say "oh
yes, we have a lot of complaints on that".  Well, get rid of it, damn
it!

I don't mind--as much--keying an ID into a Touch Tone phone, at least
that's hopefully clear to them what I'm doing.

Back in the 1960s the movies/TV had spoofs of future life, with
frustrated people trying to order a computer to do something.  I think
"Get Smart" made fun of instructions that the computer or robot
(Hymie) took absolutely literally instead of figuratively.  (e.g. "Run
this through the computer" meant he would physically run through the
computer gear.)  Other sci-fi movies did so, sometimes with seriously
unpleasant results.  Generally, they mocked the upcoming technical
revolution.

And they were right.  Reciting your 16 digits is harder than tapping
them in, especially when the machine comes back "Sorry, I do not
understand" five times and you go crazy trying to get through it.

And the S.O.B. administrators won't let you enter zero to get a human,
they freakin' force you to go through their hell.


These same $&*%# people encourage you to use the web, but they screw
you over on that as well.  It's not a simple enter your name and
secret code and you immediately get the data you need.  No, they want
to sell you something first, then make you agree to some microfine-
print contract, etc.  I tried getting on to a credit card company but
I rejected the terms of their contract which authorized lots of spam
from them.  No matter, I still get the spam and they tell me there's
nothing we can do about it.  No, I can't change credit cards because
they all credit cards come from very few places these days.

Very frustrating.

I suspect the managers who order these irritating systems don't have
to use them themselves, they have executive assistances or spouses to
worry about that sort of thing.

To all who replied, thanks for your responses.

On Mar 21, 8:56 pm, The Kaminsky Family <kamin...@kaminsky.org> wrote:

> The problem with all of these automated systems is that it is much
> easier to create a bad application than a good one.  Both companies
> provided a way to build applications which did not require a
> programmer -- for the voice mail product, anyone with the proper
> access to the system could sit there with a telephone and create an
> application.  For the platform product, an application could be
> created with "drag and drop" programming and some simple
> configuration.  However, to build a good application requires
> programming skills -- such as making sure that all paths work, and all
> error conditions are handled properly.

Skills that most non-programmers don't have.  Indeed, in today's
highly automated environments, many programmers don't have a good
understanding of error conditions and the necessity to trap EVERYONE
of them properly and provide a smooth exit, not just an infinite loop.

In the old days, sloppy programming would result in a program abend, a
phone call in the middle night, and an angry boss the next morning.
After one such experience, programmers were damn careful to be sure it
didn't happen again.

In my programs, I always put in provision for "soft failures",
situations I never expected to occur, but if they did, at least I'd
stop running with displays of all relevant data and the circumstances.
These traps came in handy years later when someone changed a program
improperly and caused a logical error.  The information displayed by
the trap enabled debugging to be quick.

In other words, if a customer is to be transferred to another number,
what happens if that other number is closed?  Is there a voice mail?
What happens if the voice mailbox is full?  What about emergency
calls?

> Many of our customers built their applications themselves, rather than
> hiring our development teams.  

In the old Bell System days trained Bell professionals would work with
businesses to set up their call distribution systems.  Not only the
hardware, but the operating techniques as well.  Bell wanted its
customers to give good telephone service and provided support and
training to make that happen.  It might even have been free.

> As far as I know, neither company had any program to evaluate our
> customers' applications and let them know how they did -- that would
> have been a great suggestion while I was working there!

That was a service Bell provided to large business customers, they
would audit response times, service quality, etc.

> In the last few years, voice recognition has become good enough to use...
> opportunity to escape from the limited interface provided by the
> twelve buttons on a telephone.

Years ago I believed that basic telephones would all come equipped
with a little keyboard and simple small screen so that customers could
use the keyboard to enter things like their name and address or more
sophisticated answers than could be keyed in a pad.  The read out
screen would provide answers, maybe a small adding-machine type
printer along with it.  I still think this would be a very useful
feature.  But the Internet came along and all data entry goes via
that.

The problem is that using the Internet for many tasks is like using a
tractor-trailer to deliver one pair of shoes.  Complex overkill and
way too much overhead.

While some businesses took a long time to answer their phone, a great
many stores and movies answered it promptly with a knowledgeable human
able to answer questions quickly.  I figured that telephone keyboard
would be easy and quick to get movie information, for example.

> So the technology is available to build far better applications than
> most of the ones we get stuck using.  If enough people complain when
> they find a bad application, perhaps companies will realize how much
> bad applications are costing them -- which might motivate them to
> improve.  I'm not holding my breath ...

Unfortunately, it is impossible for us individual consumers to
complain.

Companies are huge today, thanks to mega mergers.  If you can reach a
human, they're thousands of miles away in a boiler room being watched
by the millisecond.  They have a quota to meet.  They and their
immediately supervisors care about that quota and perhaps sales, not
complaints, esp about something they have no control over.

If you write a traditional letter these days it will be ignored.

Years ago companies once maintained public relations people who
actually read complaint letters and tried, within reason, to resolve
the complaint if practical.  They would track complaints and
suggestions and pass them on; the company would respond if practical.
With megamergers and huge companies, the volume of complaints is too
high and such support people are expensive.  So letters are ignored.

They do have an assembly line operation for email complaints, but they
basically send you a coupon for your next purchase and a gushy form
letter, but no effort at all to resolve your concerns.

If you don't like a food product, there's a good chance a "competing"
label is actually now owned by the same company thanks to mega
mergers.  So, you can't just change brands anymore.

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Lisa is correct; there is little or
nothing of significance any of us small, individual users can
do. Except one thing -- we can attempt, for whatever it is worth, to
use the Ayn Rand philosphy: go on strike, use as little of the world's 
resources as possible, live in a small, rural area of Kansas or
Colorado or perhaps Montana, deal with them when we absolutely have to
and get by on our own when that works instead. Long time ago I
quit dealing with _any_ of the large communications carriers for
example. Not a one of them has the morals of a snake. Withdraw your
talents and abilities; give them only to people YOU choose. I live in
a very small town, pinch my pennies very closely in a small number of
stores (mostly family owned, local businesses), am _very careful_ with
whom I give my money. Refuse to be part of their system as much as you
can. That is the only way to do something you (and maybe one or two
other people) consider 'significant'; _refuse to play along with them._
Won't it be great to see Iran/Iraq/whoever eventually get enough of us
and bomb us back into the stone-age? And you know they probably will
some day.  It will force many others to come around to our way of 
thinking. And what's with whoever decided last week to poison all the
dog and cat food?  These harmless little creatures!   PAT] 

------------------------------


TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly to telecomm-
unications 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: 620-402-0134
                        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 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)

RSS Syndication of TELECOM Digest: http://telecom-digest.org/rss.html
  For syndication examples see http://feeds.feedburner.com/telecomDigest

*************************************************************************
*   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 2007 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved.
Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA.

              ************************

DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO
YOUR CREDIT CARD!  REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST
AND EASY411.COM   SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest !

              ************************

Visit http://www.mstm.okstate.edu and take the next step in your
career with a Master of Science in Telecommunications Management
(MSTM) degree from Oklahoma State University (OSU). This 35
credit-hour interdisciplinary program is designed to give you the
skills necessary to manage telecommunications networks, including
data, video, and voice networks.

The MSTM degree draws on the expertise of the OSU's College
of Business Administration; the College of Arts and Sciences; and the
College of Engineering, Architecture and Technology. The program has
state-of-the-art lab facilities on the Stillwater and Tulsa campus
offering hands-on learning to enhance the program curriculum.  Classes
are available in Stillwater, Tulsa, or through distance learning.

Please contact Jay Boyington for additional information at
405-744-9000, mstm-osu@okstate.edu, or visit the MSTM web site at
http://www.mstm.okstate.edu

              ************************

   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. 

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 V26 #81
*****************************