From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Jan 23 20:46:57 2003 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id h0O1kvX19530; Thu, 23 Jan 2003 20:46:57 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 20:46:57 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200301240146.h0O1kvX19530@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #251 TELECOM Digest Thu, 23 Jan 2003 20:47:00 EST Volume 22 : Issue 251 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Public Interest Registry to Recap Events of .Org Cutover (Anne Shroeder) Sprint DSL's Gaping Security Hole (Monty Solomon) More Checks on U.S. Travelers (Monty Solomon) Site Protests Telco Patent Claim (Monty Solomon) TRACE Used to Increase the Dangers of XSS (Monty Solomon) QUALCOMM Announces Record 1st Quarter Fiscal 2003 Results (Monty Solomon) Phone Wiring Question (No) Re: DMCA: Ma Bell Would Be Proud (Louis Collins) 11-Digit Dialing (John Waters) Re: Westchester DA (NYC Suburb) vs. Nigerian Scammers (Jim Thompson) Re: The Digest Was Spammed Again! (Tom Betz) Re: Looking for Satellite TV, Internet, Phone Provider (S Falke) Re: 666 (Russell Blau) Re: 666 (Brandon Turok) More 666 Fun - or Truth in Advertising? (John Waters) Re: Last Laugh! I Made $60,000 in Two Months!!! (Jim Thompson) Last Laugh! A Full Monty! (Fred Goldstein) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRUSES. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Anne Shroeder Subject: Public Interest Registry to Recap Events of .ORG Registry Cutover Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 11:14:13 -0500 WHAT: During this press conference the Public Interest Registry and its back-end provider, Afilias Limited, will recap the events of the technical cutover of the .ORG registry from VeriSign Global Registry Service to Afilias system which will occur on January 25, 2003. WHO: David Maher, Chairman of the Board of Public Interest Registry Bruce Beckwith, Vice President of Operations of Public Interest Registry Ram Mohan, Vice President and Chief Technology Officer, Afilias WHEN: Monday, January 27, 2003 12:00 p.m. EST/9:00 a.m. PST/ 17:00 GMT DURATION: Approximately 30 minutes (including Q&A) WHY: Attending this workshop will provide you the following benefits: - Detailed synopsis of the events and results of the technical cutover of the .ORG registry to a new provider - Access to key executives at PIR and Afilias involved in the transition - The opportunity to ask any questions you have regarding the cutover to PIR and the completion of the transition to a full thick, EPP registry. DIAL-IN: Please use the following dial-in information to attend the press conference call: Domestic Dial-in: 800.268.8047 International Dial-in: 312.461.0644 Ask to attend the '.ORG Transition Recap' press conference call. REPLAY: A digital replay of the press conference will be available for one (1) week until February 3, 2003. To access the replay please use the following dial-in information: Domestic Dial-in: 800.839.6713 International Dial-in: 402.222.2306 Pin code: 5445970 PIR CONTACT: Julie Williams Tel: +1.703.464.7005 x111 Cell: +1.703.402.6715 jwilliams@pir.org AFILIAS CONTACT: Heather Carle Tel: +1.215.706.5777 Cell: +1.732.277.8125 hcarle@afilias.info ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 17:32:44 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Sprint DSL's Gaping Security Hole By Brian McWilliams 02:00 AM Jan. 23, 2003 PT Sprint DSL customers are at risk of having their e-mail addresses and passwords stolen -- even when their computers are powered off -- due to weak security controls on their DSL modems. Experts warned this week that the security problem could enable Internet vandals to wreak havoc from afar with the ZyXel Communications DSL modems issued by Sprint to tens of thousands of its FastConnect broadband customers. Sprint officials acknowledged that remote access to the administrative software embedded in the ZyXel Prestige 642 and 645 modems is by default protected with a password of "1234." But the company said users are responsible for securing the equipment, which stores login data, including the user's e-mail address and password. http://www.wired.com/news/infostructure/0,1377,57342,00.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 17:41:52 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: More Checks on U.S. Travelers By Ryan Singel Connecting the dots is usually child's play. But privacy advocates say that a government plan to apply sophisticated computer algorithms and "fuzzy logic" to unconnected databases to sniff out terrorists violates the privacy of American travelers. Transportation Department officials counter that it's just another way they're using technology to rout terrorism. Last week, the Transportation Security Agency announced its intent to create a new passenger-screening database that will be the centerpiece of a system to scan for potential terrorists by instantly checking every domestic traveler's credit history, arrest record and property tax data. Unlike the controversial Total Information Awareness research project, the central database of the Computer Assisted Passenger Pre-Screening Program II, or CAPPS II will contain permanent financial records, intelligence reports and law enforcement records only on those suspected of posing a national security risk, according to the Jan. 15 Privacy Act notice. While data about nonthreatening passengers will be purged when a trip is completed, all travelers will be checked before departure against other public databases as well as private data sources like Axciom and ChoicePoint, which keep a database of 18 billion records. ChoicePoint, used by financial services groups and every government law enforcement agency, aggregates information from publicly available records -- including telephone directories, bankruptcy filings, business license registrations and court filings -- to create comprehensive reports on individuals. http://www.wired.com/news/privacy/0,1848,57354,00.html [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have to wonder why the airlines are permitting this to go on? I wonder why more travelers don't do like myself and travel by bus or train? PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 17:48:21 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Site Protests Telco Patent Claim By Joanna Glasner 02:00 AM Jan. 23, 2003 PT Although she's always been fond of her website, Marilynne Eichinger never thought there was anything particularly unusual about its layout. "We like to think that our graphics are nice, but in terms of the format and in terms of using different frames and links, it's a common type of design," said Eichinger, who has been running Museum Tour, which sells educational toys, for the past seven years. To her thinking, the homepage, which features colorful photos of sample products flanked by navigation buttons on top and down the left margin, resembles dozens of other e-commerce websites. That's why Eichinger was caught off guard last week when she received a letter from the intellectual property division of telecommunications giant SBC alleging that the Museum Tour site violates two of its patents. The letter, signed by Harlie Frost, president of SBC Intellectual Property, alleges that the Museum Tour site infringes on related patents filed in 1996 covering what the company calls a "structured document browser." http://www.wired.com/news/business/0,1367,57344,00.html [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Let's all of us who maintain web sites go to Eichinger's web site and copy her source code and put up sites identical to hers in design. Then SBC can sue all of us, or maybe throw their weight around and find a friendly judge somewhere to ban all of us. PAT] ------------------------------ Reply-To: Monty Solomon From: Monty Solomon Subject: TRACE Used to Increase the Dangers of XSS Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 17:23:12 -0500 http://online.securityfocus.com/archive/1/307624 From: Jeremiah Grossman Date: 22 Jan 2003 12:32:58 -0800 Subject: TRACE used to increase the dangerous of XSS. WhiteHat Security has released a new white paper discussing a new class of web-app-sec attack (XST) which potentially affects all web servers supporting TRACE. The white paper explains all the detailed technical results we have found so far. We are fairly certain this particular issue will spark much debate and encourage those interested to read and comment. White Paper Mirrors: http://www.betanews.com/whitehat/WH-WhitePaper_XST_ebook.pdf http://www.cgisecurity.com/whitehat-mirror/WhitePaper_screen.pdf http://www.boarder.org/WH-WhitePaper_XST_ebook.pdf http://www.forumgalaxy.com/whmirror/WhitePaper_screen.pdf Press Release http://www.whitehatsec.com/press_releases/WH-PR-20030120.txt ------------------------------ Reply-To: Monty Solomon From: Monty Solomon Subject: QUALCOMM Announces Record First Quarter Fiscal 2003 Results Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 18:59:45 -0500 GAAP Reported Revenues $1.1 Billion and $0.30 EPS Revenues $1.1 Billion and $0.42 EPS Excluding QSI Segment QUALCOMM's first quarter fiscal 2003 earnings conference call will be broadcast live on January 22, 2003 beginning at 2:30 p.m. Pacific Standard Time on the Company's web site at: www.qualcomm.com. This conference call may contain forward-looking financial information. The taped audio replay will be available for five business days. To listen to the replay, U.S. callers may dial (800) 633-8284 and international callers may dial (402) 977-9140. Both U.S. and international callers should use reservation number 21095067. SAN DIEGO, Jan. 22 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- QUALCOMM Incorporated (NASDAQ:QCOM) today announced its first quarter fiscal 2003 results ended December 29, 2002. GAAP reported revenues were $1.1 billion in the first fiscal quarter, up 26 percent sequentially and 57 percent year-over-year. Revenues increased primarily due to record demand for CDMA products across global markets. GAAP reported net income was $241 million or $0.30 per share in the first fiscal quarter, up 30 percent sequentially and 76 percent year-over-year. Revenues excluding the QUALCOMM Strategic Initiatives (QSI) segment were $1.1 billion in the first fiscal quarter, up 27 percent sequentially and 54 percent year-over-year. Net income excluding the QSI segment was $345 million or $0.42 per share in the first fiscal quarter, up 35 percent sequentially and 83 percent year-over-year. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=31062871 ------------------------------ From: No Subject: Phone Wiring Question Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 18:28:21 -0600 I'm going to rewire my house and I know just enough about telecom to get myself in trouble. I purchased the following products: Bridged telephone expansion board 4 lines with 9 locations; voice grade jack 6 position, 6 conductor category 5e jack 8 position, 8 conductor I have three lines coming into my house; I ran the main lines to the bridge and then to the locations. The part I do not quite understand is this: I have a 4 line telephone in my office which has 2 lines that go from the phone to the wall plate, those lines split the phone lines. one line has lines 1&2 the other has 3&4. My question is on the voice grade jack, I'm assuming that a 6 position, 6 conductor jack can handle 3 lines if needed. The way I plan to hook then up is, main lines 1&2 on one 6 position, 6 conductor main line 3 on another 6 position, 6 conductor Jack for future use: category 5e jack 8 position, 8 conductor I am running category 5e wire for all of these jacks. Am I doing this correctly? I would like different views on this so feel free to reply. Thanks in advance. ------------------------------ From: Louis Collins Subject: Re: DMCA: Ma Bell Would Be Proud Date: 23 Jan 2003 23:42:04 GMT Organization: Concentric Internet Services Monty Solomon wrote: > http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,57268,00.html Sounds like a good article, but alas, when I click it I get this: WebWasher is configured to block the requested page: 'http://a1112.g.akamai.net/7/1112/492/2002091423/www.wired.com/news/v/20020914/css/cs4/wnScreen.css'. Is my browser messed up or what? lc ------------------------------ From: John Waters Subject: 11-Digit Dialing Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 18:55:45 -0500 > 11-digit dialing is coming to NYC on February 1, 2003. NYC had > managed to hang onto 7 digit dialing even with its overlays for a few > years, thanks to the NYS PSC who fought the FCC and lost over this > issue. > Besides the general stupidity of having to dial an area code when > calling within the same area code, this new scheme makes even less > sense, since dialing a 1 will now be required for *all* calls, except > things like 911, 411, and 0." It's a heck of a lot easier than trying to figure out a dialing plan like Toronto has. 10 *or* 11 digit dial, depending on where you are calling. From the point of view of someone who has to program dialing rules into equipment, all-11 digit dial is FAR easier to work with. Ameritech did something right (IMHO) a few years back when they allowed the greater Detroit area to be dialed with either 10 or 11 digits. Made equipment setup a breeze compaired to Toronto. John W. Waters Northern Digital Conversions (Happy in 7 digit dial land again) ------------------------------ From: Jim Thompson Subject: Re: Westchester DA (NYC Suburb) vs. Nigerian Scammers Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 00:18:39 GMT Organization: Cox Communications On Thu, 23 Jan 2003 18:13:21 -0500, Danny Burstein , in , wrote the following: > TWO INDICTED IN NIGERIAN BUSINESS SCAM > Westchester County District Attorney Jeanine Pirro and Ardsley Police > Chief Emil Califano announced the indictment of Chuks Nwogu (DOB > 9/12/70) of 63 West 7th Street, Mt. Vernon, New York and his wife, > Svitlana Nwogu (DOB 2/18/77) of 3039 Kingsland Ave. Bronx, New York > for Grand Larceny in the Second and Third Degree. It is alleged that > over the course of the past year, the two defendants and others > solicited more than $200,000 in cash payments from a Wisconsin > businessman on the pretext that the money would be used to ship > $50,000,000 into the United States from Nigeria, at which time the > victim would receive one third of the money. > [ snippety snip, rest at: > http://www.da.westchester.ny.us/detailp.cfm?page=793 ] > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have to wonder what sort of > 'businessman' the guy in Wisconsin would be to give away two hundred > thousand in cash on a Nigerian promise to send him fifty million > dollars. I've seen those scams forever and did not realize there are > some people who fall for them. PAT] Must be my long-lost daddy ;-) | James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens | | Analog Innovations, Inc. | et | | Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus | | Phoenix, Arizona Voice:(480)460-2350 | | | Jim-T@analog_innovations.com Fax:(480)460-2142 | Brass Rat | | http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 | For proper E-mail replies SWAP "-" and "_" I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food. ------------------------------ From: Tom Betz Subject: Re: The Digest Was Spammed Again! Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 18:51:09 UTC Organization: Anything > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: May I ask, of curiosity, *who told you* > this was spam, and more specifically, 'bad' (that is, mostly useless) > spam? I had never seen it prior to getting in the mail > yesterday. Most 'bad' spam I get frequently, like everyone else. PAT] Oh, by the way, Pat, for the scoop on the Evidence Eliminator software that was being advertised in that spam, see . ------------------------------ From: s falke Subject: Re: Looking for Satellite TV, Internet, Phone Provider Organization: Prodigy Internet http://www.prodigy.com Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 21:22:18 GMT Long Shot: Starband/Gilat {if in US} --s falke > I'm looking for companies that would be able to provide phone, tv and > internet from a satellite dish. Would appreciate any info. ------------------------------ From: Russell Blau Subject: Re: 666 Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 15:47:03 -0500 Neal McLain wrote in message news:telecom22.248.15@telecom-digest.org: > Speaking of area codes, I should note that the 801/385 split (Utah) has > been postponed again. The latest target date is 2005. > The local high school students are probably disappointed by this delay. > They've already figured out what 385 spells, and (at least according to > rumor) some of them are anxious to start using it. Utah, huh? They must be thinking "DUL". ------------------------------ From: Brandon Turok Subject: Re: 666 Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 20:07:28 -0800 Organization: Astound Broadband Neal McLain wrote in message news:telecom22.248.15@telecom-digest.org: > PAT Wrote: >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Why do you suppose it is there >> is not (and is unlikely to ever be) an area code '666'? Same >> reason. Americans are very superstitious people.... 510-666 is a Pacbell prefix in Berkeley, CA. I plan to get all my numbers assigned in that prefix when I move to Berkeley :) Brandon Turok http://www.loonquawl.com/ Dial-A-Machine (925) 288-9825 Free when you call from work ------------------------------ From: John Waters Subject: More 666 Fun - or Truth in Advertising? Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 18:50:26 -0500 Joey Lindstrom submitted: > VANCLEVE, Kentucky (AP) -- A small > Appalachian Bible college is fighting to change its telephone number > because the 666 prefix is disturbing to Christians who recognize it as > the biblical mark of the beast. I lived in Whitby, ON, where one of the local exchanges there is 666. There is a neon sign in an office window in the old downtown of Whitby. It says "Lawyers 666-2666" John W. Waters Northern Digital Conversions ------------------------------ From: Jim Thompson Subject: Re: Last Laugh! I Made $60,000 in Two Months!!! Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 23:37:18 GMT Organization: Cox Communications On Thu, 23 Jan 2003 00:09:45 -0100, , in article: , wrote the following: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It seems to be not enough that we each > get tons of spam every day; now there is a netizen who wishes to sell > us material on how to create new, additional spam. I thought this > thing which I found in my spam bucket yesterday was really very > interesting. PAT] > I'm a college dropout. I work about two hours a day. I'm ambitious, > but extremely lazy, and I make over $30,000 a month. Are you curious > yet? > In a minute I'm going to tell you my secret, it's the dirty little > secret of the Internet ... [snip] > To order the Spambook right > now for only $29.99 with any major credit card or Paypal, please click > on the link below. This will take you to a secure server where > you may place your order. >

Product: "The Spambook" Price: $29.99

> HOW TO ORDER BY MAIL: Print out this order form and send cash, > personal check, money order or cashier's check to the address listed > below: [snip] > IMPORTANT LEGAL NOTE: There are no criminal laws against the > non-fraudulent sending of unsolicited commercial email in the United > States. However, other countries have passed laws against this form > of marketing, so non-US residents should check local regulations > before ordering. To view US State and Federal guidelines concerning > bulk email, and to check foreign regulations, please visit > http://www.spamlaws.com > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well Blair, maybe there are no laws > against Spam in Canada or the USA right now, but there certainly > should be. To other readers: Did you ever see a spammmer this brassy > before? Not only sending it, but teaching the other guys how to send > it also. Geeze! PAT] I think you are reading the wrong thing into this kind of ad. If the poster were truly doing as well as claimed why would he stoop to distributing "educational" materials? Certainly if I had a truly-working get-rich-scheme I'd keep it to myself ;-) | James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens | | Analog Innovations, Inc. | et | | Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus | | Phoenix, Arizona Voice:(480)460-2350 | | | Jim-T@analog_innovations.com Fax:(480)460-2142 | Brass Rat | | http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 | For proper E-mail replies SWAP "-" and "_" I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: *No one* is earning thirty thousand dollars per month on the Internet. It just isn't happening. If you deduct the overhead involved, the postage in mailing out his book (or does he send it entirely in email?) the labor and payroll costs which are involved, its impossible. Even the 'established' and more reputable internet businesses (after deducting overhead, etc) are not making that much profit for their owners. I don't think so, at least. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Fred Goldstein Subject: Last Laugh! The Full Monty Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 18:47:23 -0500 Oh no! This issue was THE FULL MONTY! [Well, I'll ignore the "last laugh" article for the sake of a pun.] On Thursday 23 January 2003 06:07 pm, editor@telecom-digest.org wrote: > TELECOM Digest Thu, 23 Jan 2003 18:07:00 EST Volume 22 : Issue 249 > Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson > Two From Europe Make Brazil Phone Deal (Monty Solomon) > DMCA: Ma Bell Would Be Proud (Monty Solomon) > Article | Telecom Undone - A Cautionary Tale (Monty Solomon) > Johansen Verdict Appealed by Norwegian Prosecutors (Monty Solomon) > EchoStar in Talks With Murdoch, Liberty Media - WSJ (Monty Solomon) > Verizon Must Reveal Internet Song-Swapper - Judge (Monty Solomon) > Verizon Must Comply With RIAA's DMCA Subpoena, Judge Sez (Monty Solomon) > How to Destroy Data, From Software to Sledgehammer (Monty Solomon) > Lucent Technologies Reports Results for 1st Quarter (Monty Solomon) > AT&T Reports Fourth-Quarter and Full-Year Results (Monty Solomon) > Motorola Unveils Location-Based Services Software For Wireless (Solomon) > Zingy Powers Polyphonic Ringtones for Nextel Wireless Phones (M Solomon) > Master-Keyed Lock Vulnerability (Monty Solomon) > Illegal Snooping Costs Allstate Access to Online DMV (Monty Solomon) > Motorola Reports Fourth-Quarter and Full-Year Financial (Monty Solomon) > TiVo Announces Resignation of Morgan Guenther, President (Monty Solomon) > In Re: Verizon Internet Services, Inc. (Monty Solomon) Fred Goldstein fgoldstein@ionary.com ionary Consulting http://www.ionary.com/ [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That is correct, and it is as I predicted when we had that long discussion here in the Digest a few months ago, when I had been running all his news in a single Digest article each day. Some readers asked me to split them out for the benefit of indexing, etc. I did that with the caveat and 'some issues the entire thing will be Monty' ... :( PAT] ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-330-6774 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 Fax 3: 775-642-0603 Fax 4: 530-309-7234 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2003 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. In addition, gifts from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert have enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V22 #251 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Jan 23 23:56:41 2003 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id h0O4uff21512; Thu, 23 Jan 2003 23:56:41 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 23:56:41 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200301240456.h0O4uff21512@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #252 TELECOM Digest Thu, 23 Jan 2003 23:56:00 EST Volume 22 : Issue 252 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Area Codes, C.O.Codes, etc., re: 666 (Mark J Cuccia) 1+Ten-Digits Mandatory in NYCity (Mark J Cuccia) Re: 11-Digit Dialing Comes to NYC (John R. Levine) Re: 11-Digit Dialing Comes to NYC (John Higdon) Re: DSL vs Cable (David Clayton) Re: DSL vs Cable (Dave Phelps) Talk With Less Radiation (Eric Friedebach) Re: Rat Shack and Future Slop (tonypo1@cox.net) Re: Rat Shack and Future Slop (Brandon Turok) Re: Mobile Operators' Regulatory Time Bomb (John R. Levine) E1 (foo) Who's Calling Whom? TeleGeography Points the Way (Heather Tinsley) Prepaid Local Phone Companies (Phone Jack) Exchange Problem (David Esan) Verizon Must Reveal Internet Song Swapper (Joey Lindstrom) Supafly: Be Your Best Worst Self (Monty Solomon) Re: Modernizing the "555" Exchange (John Higdon) Re: Modernizing the "555" Exchange (Tony Pelliccio) Re: Remember Locksmith for the Apple ][ and //e (tonypo1@cox.net) Re: The Digest Was Spammed Again! (John R. Levine) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRUSES. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 19:15:10 CST From: Mark J Cuccia Subject: Area Codes, C.O.Codes, etc., re: 666 Pat wrote: > TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Why do you suppose it is there is not > (and is unlikely to ever be) an area code '666'? Same reason. Americans > are very superstitious people.... Neal McLain replied: > Not the mention the fact that all "YYY" combination (all three digits > the same) are reserved for some unspecified future use. Or, as our > friends at put it, YYY combos are "Unassigned > easy-to-recognize." For that matter, so are all NYY combinations. (snip) > And this raises a question I've been wondering about: what *is* that > "unspecified future use"? Anybody know? Well, *all* 'Nyy' area code (NPA) combinations, where the second and third digits are identical (and -22, -33, -44, ..., -88, but NOT -99, but *does* include -00) are classified by the NANP industry (Neustar-NANPA, SAIC-Telcordia-TRA, and the service providers) as "Easy to Recognize" codes for "special" or "SAC" purposes, whether they are presently *IN USE* or 'reserved' for a future 'expansion' purposes of an already existing function, OR for ... just what it is ... a *presently* "unspecified and future" use or function. The SAC "area" codes of the 'Nyy' format presently in use are: 800, 888, 877, 866 for toll-free 900 for PAY-per-call 700 for LD-carrier services (this is very non-specific) 600 for "Canadian services" (also very non-specific) 500 for "personal numbering" although this isn't well defined neither. (and current uses of 500 don't necessarily fall into the 'personal' or 'follow-me' numbering functions as well). 855, 844, 833, 822 are reserved for future toll-free. 522, 533, 544, (NOT 555), 566, 577, 588 are reserved for future "personal numbering". 622, 633, 644, 655, 666, 677, 688 are reserved for future use by SAIC-Canadian Numbering Administration's purposes... There is NOTHING assigned nor specifically reserved functions in the '2yy', '3yy', '4yy' ranges, not even for 200, 300, 400. But they are all reserved for future "easy-to-recognize" SAC functions, as *AREA* codes. There are also some SAC codes presently *in use*, or for 'future' use that are NOT of the 'Nyy' area code format. These include 456 for "International Inbound" (whatever that means, if even really utilized), and... 710 for US Federal Government purposes (again this is quite vague-- 710-NCS-GETS is the only known 'published' use, but I understand that the 710 SAC area code is also used for other 'non-published' government purposes). And 'breaking' the 'Nyy' format is future toll-free if ever they need to use 822 (after 833 after 844 after 855) and then 822 fills up... the 88x format codes (880, 881, 882, ... , 887, 889) area 'supposedly' now reserved for future toll-free. 888 is already in use as such. The previous use of 881, 882, 883, 885 for billing-identification purposes on calls to rural non-dial ring-down points in Mexico as well as 886, 887, 889 for billing-identification purposes on calls to rural non-dial ring-down points in the US/Canada/Caribbean (NANP) has become 'obsolete'. Apparantly there finally are no more non-dial rural ring-down points in the NANP or Mexico. The ranges of 37x and 96x as *AREA* codes (NPAs) are 'reserved' for some "future" UN-specified purpose/fuction, where such a function might require a BLOCK of ten CONSECUTIVE codes -- 370 thru 379, 960 thru 969... could be used for such. The N9X blocks are still reserved for future (if ever needed) expansion of the NANP ten-digit format to a longer-than-ten-digit format. But *any* of this could change per industry consensus process. Doug Krause added: > But there are 666 exchanges. At least 714 (Houston, et al) has it. YES, Doug, there *ARE* and could CONTINUE to be (even NEW) *CENTRAL OFFICE* (Exchange) codes 666. Neal (and at one point, even Pat) was referring to *AREA* codes, not c.o./exchange codes. Pat replied: > TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But many of the '666 exchanges' are > quite old and were around as names (such as MONroe in Chicago) prior > to going to numbers. I wonder what 666 exchanges are newer (in the > last ten or twenty years) and began life merely as '666' rather than > as a name combination? Well, check the NANPA website http://www.nanpa.com and then under c.o.code assignments. You can download .txt or .xls or MS-Access files of Central Office Code assignments in area codes of US jurisdictions. I know that the toll-free "area" codes all have '666' as potential exchange or c.o.codes ... For the use of '666' as a c.o.code within Canada's area codes, see the c.o.code assignment charts (by area code) within the CNAC website, http://www.cnac.ca I have *NEVER* seen any telco industry documentation that specifically allows telco or NANPA to flag '666' as 'not' assignable as a central office (so-called exchange) code. But also I haven't checked to see if there are "new" uses of c.o.code 666 within any specific area code (other than the fact that there are possible assignable toll-free nubmers as 800-666, 888-666, 877-666, 866-666, all relatively 'new'). Mark J. Cuccia ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 19:41:51 -0600 (CST) From: Mark J Cuccia Subject: 1+Ten-Digits Mandatory in NYCity The reason that there will be a 1+ before mandatory ten-digits for calls within your own area code in New York City is that there are several *CODE/NUMERIC CONFLICTS* where a c.o.code's digits are also in use as an adjacent or overlaying area code. Presently in such places like that (New York City, Chicago, etc), if you are dialing a ten-digit call, you have to dial a '1+' before the ten-digits, while if you are dialing a seven-digit call within the same area code, you just dial 'straight' seven-digits. Of course, in the 847 area code in the northern Chicago suburbs, since there is the new 224 area code overlaying, all calls even to numbers with the same area code MUST be dialed as '1+' before ten-digits. BTW, 0+ type dialing is supposed to be dialed now as 0+ten-digits everywhere within the NANP, regardless of where you area calling from or calling to if within the NANP. I don't have the specific code conflicts handy right now, but they have been documented in the past in previous posts. New York City and Chicago (and other places) have never used '1+' as a requirement for toll calls. AND they have that cumbersome and outdated required measured rate/unit local system, so in effect EVERY call you make costs something. *I HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO IDEA* if after a year or two, the 1+ will become "optional" in Chicago's 847/224 overlay region or if it will become "optional" in New York City's 212/646 and 718/347 overlay (also all five boroughs collectively overlaid with 917)... But because ten-digit calls have required a 1+, BECAUSE of code-conflicts, it (the mandatory 1+) is being extended to calls within one's area code. This is mainly for a smooth transition period. BTW, PERMISSIVE dialing within one's own area code in NYCity (and most likely Chicago, and throughout most/all of California, etc) as 1+ten-digits has existed for a number of years now! So, it isn't really anything "new", only now to become MANDATORY in New York City. It has been hashed and re-hashed over and over here (and elsewhere), but IMO, it WOULD be nice to ULTIMATELY have dialing procedures universal ... - where local/free calls (including to 800/888/877/866/etc. toll free "area" codes) would be the ONLY calls dialable as "straight" ten-digits (without the 1+) as well as (at the customer's whim) as 1+ten-digits, and regardless of area code, it would be (at least) ten-digits required. - and where *Toll* calls (whether in the same "area" code or to adjacent area codes) would *REQUIRE* a 1+ before the ten-digits. I know that there are those out there who think that "toll alerting" or "toll indication" insults their ... "intelligence" ... however, this whole situation of 1+ vs. lack-of-1+, local vs. toll, 7-vs-10, etc. is all a CONSUMER issue. Those who oppose the use of 1+ as a "toll indication" prefix MUST realize that the Telcos would just LOVE for you to start dialing away without thinking or knowing, and rack up quite a bill. BTW, according to industry documentation (although I don't know if it really works this way in actual practice, and with cellulars, PBX/Centrex systems, cocots, CLECs, etc. not all being 'standardized' these days it's even more questionable), if someone were to dial 1+911 or 0+911, the call is SUPPOSED to go thru and for FREE. However, it isn't to be 'publicly promoted' that one 'could' dial 1+/0+ 911 and such. Only that it is 'supposed' to work just like 'straight' 911 works. Also, during this transition period, telco COULD have allowed "straight" ten-digit dialing even with code conflicts, but all (or many) seven-digit calls within the same area code might require a post-dial delay since if the intended c.o.code numerics was also in use as a local/nearby area code numerics, the switch wouldn't 'instantly' know at the seventh dialed digit whether you intended to dial further digits. If you stopped dialing, the switch has to WAIT three-to-five seconds (post-dial-delay), just in case you were going to dial an eighth/ninth/tenth digit of a ten-digit string. Such "delays-to-timeouts" on seven-digit calls can be cancelled with the use of the optional trailing POUND '#' button, but the general public really isn't aware of this, regardless of any promotions by telco. Thus, post-dial-delays-to-timeouts are undesirable and should be avoided where possible. Of course, there are still instances of their use, such as in IDDD calling (variable length worldwide numbers), single-0-(minus) vs. double '0' (00 for the LD Operator) vs. 0+ vs 01(1)+ IDDD ... When I start off by dialing '0', the switch doesn't 'yet' know if I'm dialing JUST a SINGLE '0' for the local telco Operator, or if I'm going to continue dialing the above mentioned 0-type dialstrings. SO, there is a three-to-five second delay after JUST a '0', 'just-in-case' I might follow with more digits. I can cancel this delay-to-timeout when calling the local telco operator by dialing '0+#' (zero-pound) and cut-thru to TOPS much faster. Also, there are 'custom calling' and 'CLASS' features which might use dialing a single 'N' digit or a two-digits 'NX', such as "Speed Calling". Telco does try to inform the public to use the (optional) trailing '#' (POUND) button in these cases. But these above uses of post-dial-delay-to-timeout as well as the optional trailing '#' pound button are 'specialty' cases, and should not be required in calling regular numbers in the case of code-conflicts. Thus, the use of a mandatory 1+ for ten-digit (local) calls in code-conflict places like New York City, California, Chicago, etc. during any transition and for an unspecific period of time following the cut-to-mandatory. Mark J. Cuccia ------------------------------ From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: 11-Digit Dialing Comes to NYC Date: 23 Jan 2003 20:41:25 -0500 Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That dialing '1' in front of everything >> is a dumb move. > It's a revenue enhancer. Used to be that 1 was the toll indicator ... Oh, please, not this tired old disinformation again. New York never had toll alerting. In most of upstate NY, calls within your area code are dialed with seven digits, calls outside of your area code are dialed with 11 digits. This has no relation to toll vs. local; where I am some seven digit numbers are local, some are intra-LATA toll, and some are inter-LATA toll. It happens that all 11 digits numbers I can call are toll, but on the other side of the lake there are local calls into an adjacent area code dialed with 11 digits. Despite frequent predictions of doom, people do not go bankrupt due to unexpected toll call bills. So drop it, OK? John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 johnl@iecc.com Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner http://iecc.com/johnl Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail ------------------------------ From: John Higdon Subject: Re: 11-Digit Dialing Comes to NYC Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 17:52:58 -0800 In article , Tony Pelliccio wrote: > It's a revenue enhancer. Used to be that 1 was the toll indicator , now > people will just blindly dial away and get hit with the toll when the > bill comes in. > Typical predatory tactics. The '1' was never a "toll indicator" in California, only a 7/10 digit signal to the switch. Besides, what is "toll" anymore? In many areas, "local" calls charge by the minute, and long distance is so cheap it isn't even worth worrying about. If the number in question is a frequently called number, then I suspect it would be worth the caller's while to do a bit of homework. Otherwise, it is a non-issue. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | Anytown, USA | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ From: David Clayton Subject: Re: DSL vs Cable Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 19:54:28 +1100 Organization: Customer of Connect.com.au Pty. Ltd. Reply-To: dcstar@acslink.net.au Jack Adams contributed the following: Has anyone out there got any info or experience with DSL degradation when multiple DSL services are provisioned in the same cable? I would imagine that "early adopter" DSL users would get good data rates initially, but as more people take up DSL the crosstalk from these would cause a gradual reduction in maximum (reliable) throughput as the individual copper cables carry more of these services. Regards, David Clayton, e-mail: dcstar@acslink.net.au Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. Dilbert's words of wisdom #18: Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. ------------------------------ From: Dave Phelps Subject: Re: DSL vs Cable Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 22:45:16 -0600 In article , jackadams@lucent.com says: > Christopher Wolf wrote in message their > >> computers get a lot of spies reading their files, etc. True? PAT] >> Depends on the cable system. My understanding is that the most common >> DSL tops out below 1.5Mb/sec and drops off quickly as you move away >> from the CO. Meanwhile, Time Warner cable modem service in Houston >> gives 1.5Mb/sec everywhere, and I often see my residential service >> peak at 2Mb/sec. > Actually cable modem service also depends on the topology of how the > vendor provisions it's segments. Cable is a "shared media" transport > whereas DSL is not. Sharing of the bandwidth on cable is fine as long > as there aren't too many other active subscribers hogging it. Sharing the bandwidth is fine as long as there aren't too many active subscribers *on the same segment*. I can't speak for other companies, but I've never seen a problem in my area with segment oversubscription. > DOCSIS standards still don't provide for individual dynamic bandwidth > mediation (AFAIK?) and thus your neighbor who is uploading (narrowest > bandwidth) his or her entire electronic photo collection is going > bring cable modem transport for other users to a grinding halt. It Normally upstream and downstream bandwidth are rate-limited. It would take a significant number of subscribers all uploading at the same time to saturate the upload bandwidth of a particular segment. > can also occur in the downstream side, but there it is generally less > of a problem due to a much larger spectrum allocation. See for > yourself if your cable modem has an "activity LED" on it. It is quite > similar to the NIC active LEDs in that it indicates packets moving > somewhere on the segment that you are attached to. Dave Phelps Phone Masters Ltd. deadspam=tippenring ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 09:37:26 PST From: Eric Friedebach Reply-To: friedebach@yahoo.com Subject: Talk With Less Radiation Arik Hesseldahl, 01.22.03, Forbes.com NEW YORK - When it comes down to it, there are two big reasons why people buy hands-free headsets for their mobile phones. The first was legislative. Many municipal governments and state legislatures around the country have laid down the law that whenever you're at the steering wheel, thou shalt not use a mobile phone without a hands-free headset. It's the result of a media blitz focused on the dubious claim that a driver using a mobile phone without a headset is too distracted to drive safely. All these laws were enacted before scientists had a chance to weigh in on the matter in a definitive way. The other main reason for buying a headset has to do with another dubious scientific claim -- that the electromagnetic radiation coming from mobile phones might be a cause of brain cancer. Again, science has yet to come to a final judgment on this matter, but the very question was enough to fuel the first round of headset buyers. Not terribly long ago, it was unusual to see mobile-phone users seemingly having in-depth conversations with the air in front of them. Now it's a fairly routine occurrence. Yet we were still interested to come upon a brand of headset known as RadFree, created by an Israeli startup called Sygnet Technologies. The headsets have recently come to the U.S. wireless market and work with several models of phones. The Radfree line of headsets is aimed at those wireless users who still harbor nagging doubts about their exposure to electromagnetic emanations from their phone. Chief Executive Sean Elidan argues that most headsets on the market act like antennae and can actually function as a conduit for radiation from the phone, thereby canceling the very reason you may have bought it. http://www.forbes.com/2003/01/22/cx_ah_0122tentech.html ------------------------------ From: tonypo1@cox.net Subject: Re: Rat Shack and Future Slop Organization: The Ace Tomatoe and Cement Company Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 03:58:04 GMT In article , PaulCoxwell@aol.com says: >>> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Let's hope the new policy is national >>> in scope and applies to dealers and agency stores alike. At our local >>> Radio Shack agency store here in Independence it was not much of an >>> issue since the two guys who manage and own the store know almost >>> everyone in town, and everyone knows them. But in the Chicago area for >>> many years, this was quite a bone of contention. To buy a set of >>> batteries for cash, they wanted to know names, addresses, etc. PAT] >> My experience with Rat Shack here in Calgary isn't quite as bad, but >> still annoying. Generally, buying some batteries for cash is an >> in-the-door, out-the-door proposition. Buying anything more than that >> -- for example, I recently bought a laser pointer (as a toy for my >> cats -- they *LOVE* chasing that red dot!) -- and you get the request >> for all that personal info. > The Radio Shack stores in the U.K. go by the name of Tandy, but the > same principle applies. It's very seldom I use them (too expensive > for most items), but they go through the same routine of asking for > name, address, phone number, what you had for breakfast etc. on every > little purchase. The Radio Shack stores here in Providence, RI do not ask for name, address etc. I buy little crap there - an a/v switch, nimh batteries, etc. It's close and reasonable. But oh how I miss the Radio Shack of old. You used to be able to get all sorts of parts and such. Now it's a little 4'x4' drawer system for parts. Tony [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Since about 1975, all most people know about is Radio Shack as it exists today. During the early to middle 1970's, the stores in Chicago at least where known as 'Allied-Radio Shack' while they attempted to phase out the ham radio operator's grief over losing 'Allied Radio' which the Tandy Corporation had bought. From whenever until 1965 'Allied Radio' was *the* place in Chicago for every kind of electronic gizmo there was in those days. And right across the street from Allied Radio at Randolph/Western Ave. was 'Olson Electronics' another warehouse of radio gizmos. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Brandon Turok Subject: Re: Rat Shack and Future Slop Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 20:09:31 -0800 Organization: Astound Broadband wrote in message news:telecom22.248.6@telecom-digest.org: >>> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Let's hope the new policy is national >>> in scope and applies to dealers and agency stores alike. At our local >>> Radio Shack agency store here in Independence it was not much of an >>> issue since the two guys who manage and own the store know almost >>> everyone in town, and everyone knows them. But in the Chicago area for >>> many years, this was quite a bone of contention. To buy a set of >>> batteries for cash, they wanted to know names, addresses, etc. PAT] >> My experience with Rat Shack here in Calgary isn't quite as bad, but >> still annoying. Generally, buying some batteries for cash is an >> in-the-door, out-the-door proposition. Buying anything more than that >> -- for example, I recently bought a laser pointer (as a toy for my >> cats -- they *LOVE* chasing that red dot!) -- and you get the request >> for all that personal info. > The Radio Shack stores in the U.K. go by the name of Tandy, but the > same principle applies. It's very seldom I use them (too expensive > for most items), but they go through the same routine of asking for > name, address, phone number, what you had for breakfast etc. on every > little purchase. > Paul Coxwell > Norfolk, U.K. Having worked for Radio Shack in the past (shudder), you were always allowed to decline to give your name and address. Or you could just give a fake one. Brandon Turok http://www.loonquawl.com/ Dial-A-Machine (925) 288-9825 Free when you call from work [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: How well that declination worked depended on the District Managers and the Regional Managers and how realistic they were. In the Chicago north suburban district, (where I was located when I worked for the Radio Shack in Skokie, IL) at the 8:00 AM Saturday morning monthly meetings (which you were only excused from attending if you *had* to be in the store on that work shift that day) the District Manager was to cheap to even supply coffee and donuts. Talking to him about changing corporate rules on name/address collecting was a useless, futile gesture. He had some sort of formula worked out for 'his stores' on the acceptable ratio of names/addresses to sales. It was so bad that once a month or so everyone sat down and scribbled out some bogus names/addresses on sales tickets to catch up. And once you got a 'real name/address' on a large ticket item, you kept that name on the register-computer and used it over and over again as needed. Ditto on the 'extended warranty' sales. You *had* to get a certain number of them to stay even on the expected ratio. A horrible working environment. PAT] ------------------------------ From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: Mobile Operators' Regulatory Time Bomb Date: 22 Jan 2003 00:50:10 -0500 Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA Mike Hartley wrote: > Old threads never die, they just go to sleep for a while ;+) Note I > don't want to stir up a 'my system's better than yours ya boo sucks' > exchange here. Oh, we agree. Technically our system sucks, but subscriber pays means that we have a lot more future flexibility. >> experience in the U.S. with that of Canada <..> and the effect of >> U.S. fragmentation is clear. > Don't forget that there are also two new standards, CDMA and GSM - I'm > sure this doesn't help much either, even if you have a dual mode > handset. There are actually three different systems in use in the 1900 MHz bands, CDMA, GSM, and Nextel's IDEN. They're all different, and I don't know of any handsets that handles more than one of them. >> The worldwide success of GSM is easily attributable to the >> fact that GSM was designed later than and is technically >> superior to AMPS. > Don't forget roaming, and frequency standardisation. The AMPS frequencies are perfectly well standardized, and an AMPS phone will work anywhere in the world there's still an analog AMPS system, whereas GSM is 1900 MHz here because the 1800 MHz used in other places was busy. But TDMA vs. CDMA is a pain. > [ re caller pays premium ] > To be fair, one of the main reasons for the premium is the termination > cost charged by the mobile operators. This is about to take a beating > from the UK telecoms regulator OFTEL ... which won't help my annual bonus > one little bit, let me tell you. :+(( We have reciprocal compensation here, too, where the calling network pays the terminating network to complete the call. Many mobile networks used to charge an extra 3 cents/min nuisance fee, but that's now all gone since the advent of bundled minutes. >> The combination of subscriber pays and our >> integrated phone numbering means that cellular and landline >> compete head-to-head, both in price and service. > Not sure what you mean by service in this context, here in the UK > mobile nets certainly offer more fautures, and you don't usually have > to pay extra for them; for example my mobiel subscripion has > incluisive voicemail, call waiting and CLID which would all attract an > additional charge if I wanted them on my PSTN line. There are various bundles for landline service, here, too. By service I meant that they can compete on features if they want to. >> As a result we're now seeing mobile service replace landline >> service, particularly for students and others who move >> frequently. > Fair point, but is number portability really that important in the US > market? From what I've seen, it is. Mobile portability isn't all that important since people tend not to give their mobile numbers to a lot of other people, but there's a lot of resistance to changing the landline number that's been published in the phone book for 10 years. We don't have portability between landline and mobile yet, but there's no technical barrier to implementing it, just foot dragging by the mobile carriers. > See my point on OFTELs investigation of mobile termination costs above. > You can probably always use a low cost calling card operator though. Not for calls from here -- no matter how you call, you end up paying an extra 35 cents/min or so if you call a UK mobile number. > In the end I don't think there's a 'winning' solution- both methods of > charging have their advantages and disavantages, and advocates of > either method are influenced to a large degree by what you're used > to. The one thing you can be certain of is that there is serious > downward pressure on call costs -- both regulatory and market driven. The point I was trying to make was that caller pays provides an incentive to push the charges onto inbound callers who don't have a chance to negotiate the price of the call, so those charges don't go away without regulartory meddling. With subscriber pays, we've now gotten to the point where for many if not most mobile customers, even though our carriers could charge us for inbound calls, in practice they don't do so, either with "first inbound minute free", or bundles that make the per-minute charges go away. Although I didn't want to get into it in the letter I wrote, there's no way we could have implemented caller pays here even had the regulators wanted to do so. North America has fixed length phone numbers, and there weren't enough unused area codes to overlay the whole country with a set of separate cellular codes so callers would know when they were calling a mobile. Nobody would have put up with caller pays codes intermixed with regular numbers. Most telcos have a few prefixes like 976 for surcharged services, and they're widely blocked by PBX managers since they're so subject to abuse. The same would have happened to caller pays cellular. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 johnl@iecc.com Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner http://iecc.com/johnl Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail ------------------------------ From: di00enad@ing.hj.se (foo) Subject: E1 Date: 22 Jan 2003 06:37:17 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ If you use E1, then timeslot 16 is used for signaling. The signaling packets are a sort of HDLC packets. With HDLC you use a flag 01111110 to mark the beginning and end of a packet. If the same bitpattern as the flag comes in the data, you insert an extra 0 after the 5:th bit (bitstuffing). Then you must transmit 9 bits instead of 8. The timeslot in E1 is only 8 bit, so how is this problem solved? ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 10:23:45 -0500 From: Heather Tinsley Subject: Who's Calling Whom? TeleGeography Points the Way Washington, DC - January 22, 2003 -- In 2001, Americans made 37 billion minutes of international telephone calls, just under a quarter of the 154 billion minutes of international calls made worldwide. Mexico was the country dialed most frequently by Americans, with 5.2 billion minutes, followed by Canada, with 5.1 billion minutes. The fastest growing major destination, however, has been India. In the past decade, U.S. phone calls to India surged from 59 million minutes to more than 1.4 billion minutes in 2001. "Whom we call says a lot about who we are," commented TeleGeography Research Director Stephan Beckert. "Canada received almost twice as much U.S.-originated traffic as Mexico 10 years ago -- but calls to Mexico have grown more than twice as fast." These findings are presented in a new report, _TeleGeography 2003_, which details international calling patterns for over 120 countries. In 1991, Americans made just over half an hour of international calls per person. By 2001, they made more than two hours of international calls per capita, representing growth of more than 15 percent per year -- impressive growth for an industry that's more than 125 years old. While the United States is by far the largest single source of international telephone calls, Americans make fewer international calls per person than many smaller countries. Luxembourg tops the list, with almost 900 minutes -- just under 15 hours -- of international calls per person, followed by the United Arab Emirates, Singapore, and Switzerland, which each boast approximately 450 minutes of international calls per person. India lies at the opposite end of the spectrum. While India is a huge destination for incoming phone calls, Indians on average make less than 30 seconds of international telephone calls per person, suggesting that the industry's best years may yet lie ahead. The source of these statistics, _TeleGeography 2003_, is the 13th annual survey of international telecommunications from TeleGeography, Inc., the Washington, DC-based research group. The report provides route-by-route call volumes for over 120 countries, plus carrier market shares, Voice-over-IP route rankings, mobile traffic statistics, and detailed analyses of international call costs, prices, and revenues. U.S. International Traffic by Destination (million minutes) Destination Country Change 1991 2001 91 - 01 Mexico 1,037.5 5,193.1 401% Canada 1,929.0 5,105.9 165% United Kingdom 659.8 2,066.3 213% Philippines 182.5 1,627.3 792% India 59.0 1,444.7 2,349% Germany 559.9 1,214.0 117% Japan 338.0 1,003.5 197% Dominican Republic 195.6 994.3 408% Brazil 122.3 849.6 595% France 210.2 816.7 289% U.S. Total Outgoing 8,814.3 37,272.0 323% Note: Growth figures include PSTN traffic only; VoIP is excluded. Source: TeleGeography research For more information, please contact: Heather Tinsley Press Relations Tel: +1 202 741 0066 htinsley@telegeography.com Stephan Beckert Research Director Tel: +1 202 741 0042 sbeckert@telegeography.com http://www.telegeography.com About TeleGeography: Washington, D.C.-based TeleGeography, Inc. is the authoritative source for international telecom statistics and analysis. An independent subsidiary of Band-X Ltd., TeleGeography publishes reports, databases, and maps used by thousands of leading communication companies, consultancies, and financial institutions in over 100 countries. TeleGeography's flagship report -- the self-titled TeleGeography series -- has been published annually since 1989. ------------------------------ From: lawson.key@centurytel.com (Phone Jack) Subject: Prepaid Local Phone Companies Date: 22 Jan 2003 07:41:22 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ I am looking to assemble a list of companies that sell prepaid local service. I am talking about companies that companies that have interconnection agreements with the local phone company and market their service to disconnected and credit-challenged customers. I am not talking about prepaid wireless or prepaid calling cards. Those are different. If you know a company that is not listed below, please post a reply or email to me. I would also be interested in any additional info about your experience from these companies. Now Communications 1-800-Reconnex Smoke Signals Communications CommSouth NewSouth Communications TeleConex EZ Talk Communications ------------------------------ From: david_esan@hotmail.com (David Esan) Subject: Exchange Problem Date: 22 Jan 2003 08:45:14 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Ky. Bible College Shuns 666 Phone Number By ROGER ALFORD, Associated Press Writer VANCLEVE, Ky. - A small Appalachian Bible college is fighting to change its telephone number because the 666 prefix is disturbing to Christians who recognize it as the biblical mark of the beast. The rest of the story is at: http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=519&ncid=519&e=68&u=/ap/20030118/ap_on_re_us/mark_of_the_beast_1 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: We did summarize this item earlier this week, but above is another place where you can read the entire story if interested. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 11:05:10 -0700 From: Joey Lindstrom Subject: Verizon Must Reveal Internet Song Swapper Reply-To: joey@garynuman.info WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Recording companies won a victory in their fight against online piracy on Tuesday when a U.S. court ordered Verizon Communications VZ.N to turn over the name of a customer suspected of downloading more than 600 songs in one day over the Internet. U.S. District Judge John Bates said Verizon must cooperate with recording industry efforts to track down online song swappers, rejecting the telecommunications giant's assertion that such a move would violate customer privacy and turn it into an online copyright cop. Verizon said it would appeal the decision. http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=2084541 ------------------------------ Reply-To: Monty Solomon From: Monty Solomon Subject: Supafly: Be Your Best Worst Self Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 13:53:45 -0500 By Michael Stroud Had an urge lately to slap your boyfriend, send flowers to your best friend's girlfriend or send a hoot after a babe in the street? Want to see your nastiness chronicled in the tabloids? European and Asian cell-phone subscribers can do exactly that this spring, albeit as part of the first game to mix virtual characters, wireless phones and the Internet. Supafly -- named for the famous 1970s blaxploitation film -- sets up a world where players either rise or fall in standings based on how they zap each other with short messages from their cell phones. The juiciest trysts and tangles are automatically tabulated and published as a gossipy Internet news rag. http://www.wired.com/news/games/0,2101,57303,00.html ------------------------------ From: John Higdon Subject: Re: Modernizing the "555" Exchange Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 17:47:54 -0800 In article , Gordon S. Hlavenka wrote: > It had to happen sooner or later. > On last week's episode of "John Doe" a murder suspect communicates > mostly by emailed voice files. He's got a girlfriend (remember, > this is fiction :-). John asks him for her IP address (!) and he > replies, "127.21.01.43". John says, "Hmmm ... local web sex site." > Yeah, VERY local. Hmm ... maybe some day the folks in that show will learn about DNS, rather than trying to remember those dotted quads. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | Anytown, USA | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ From: Tony Pelliccio Subject: Re: Modernizing the "555" Exchange Organization: The Ace Tomatoe and Cement Company Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 03:54:33 GMT In article , nospam@crashelex.com says: > It had to happen sooner or later. > On last week's episode of "John Doe" a murder suspect communicates > mostly by emailed voice files. He's got a girlfriend (remember, > this is fiction :-). John asks him for her IP address (!) and he > replies, "127.21.01.43". John says, "Hmmm ... local web sex site." > Yeah, VERY local. That's ok -- when I left my prior job I told the network engineer the address of a Cisco router is n.n.2.200, he forgot and told the new I.T. director it was n.n.2.300 and the new director was wondering why he couldn't telnet to it. The new director also managed to completely screw up the entire dialup functionality of the router, even though I'd printed four copies of the configuration and left them with the threee other people in the unit and one if the filing cabinet. It's what happens when you make a former cop your I.T. director. I'll tell you this much, I'll never take another government job again where my employment is contigent upon an election. Tony ------------------------------ From: tonypo1@cox.net Subject: Re: Remember Locksmith for the Apple ][ and //e Organization: The Ace Tomatoe and Cement Company Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 04:00:36 GMT In article , RGilbert@dval.com says: > This article, and the general copy protection for DVD/CD discussions, > put me in mind of the old Locksmith program for the Apple ][ and //e > computers. This was a great program for copying disks that could not > normally be copied. It handle such advanced (for the time) techniques > to prevent copying like half tracking, 1/4 tracking, etc. It seemed > like everyone playing with Apple computers those days had a copy of > Locksmith, and the was always a mad rush when a new version came out. > Now, with DMCA, I don't expect to see such comprehensive tools like > Locksmith available. Any one else have fond memories of this program? You won't see them through normal commercial channels, but there are still plenty of hack utilities on the net and that won't ever go away. What does the U.S. gov't do when the site that distributes that software is in a country that doesn't have a friendly compact with the U.S. courts? Nothing, that's what. I see such abuses of the DMCA that it's pitiful. Our congress critters really put the shaft to all of us when they passed that bill. Tony ------------------------------ Date: 23 Jan 2003 20:50:57 -0500 From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: The Digest Was Spammed Again! Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA Yeah, it was spam. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What about the writer's allegation of > three hundred thousand 'suspects' and 'hundreds of arrests already > made'. Was there any truth to any of that? PAT] There was a big child porn roundup a month or so ago. I think the 300K number was the number of lines in a site's web log, but they did make a lot of arrests. Someone pointed out that the "teen lolita" spam abruptly stopped about that time. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 johnl@iecc.com Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner http://iecc.com/johnl Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-330-6774 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 Fax 3: 775-642-0603 Fax 4: 530-309-7234 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2003 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. In addition, gifts from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert have enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V22 #252 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Jan 24 00:34:54 2003 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id h0O5Ysj22231; Fri, 24 Jan 2003 00:34:54 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 00:34:54 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200301240534.h0O5Ysj22231@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #253 TELECOM Digest Fri, 24 Jan 2003 00:35:00 EST Volume 22 : Issue 253 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: 11-Digit Dialing Comes to NYC (Ernie Klein) Re: The Digest Was Spammed Again! (William Warren) Re: Rat Shack and Future Slop (Gerry Belanger) Re: Rat Shack and Future Slop (Al Gillis) Re: Looking for Satellite TV, Internet, Phone Provider (John R. Levine) Re: Westchester DA (NYC Suburb) vs. Nigerian Scammers (William Warren) Now, XM Satellite Radio Has Gear to Match Programming (Monty Solomon) U.S. Opens Online Portal to Rulemaking (Monty Solomon) Network Solutions Spills E-mail Addresses (Monty Solomon) BellSouth Reports Fourth Quarter Earnings (Monty Solomon) Cingular loses customers for second straight qtr (Monty Solomon) High-Definition Broadcast Of Super Bowl XXXVII (Monty Solomon) Nortel Networks Reports Results for 4th Quarter and Year 2002 (M Solomon) Because It's There: Putting Everest Online (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. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRUSES. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ernie Klein Subject: Re: 11-Digit Dialing Comes to NYC Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 18:11:53 -0800 Organization: Not very organized In article , Lisa Miller wrote: > Allston Parking Refugee wrote: >> 11-digit dialing is coming to NYC on February 1, 2003. NYC had >> managed to hang onto 7 digit dialing even with its overlays for a few >> years, thanks to the NYS PSC who fought the FCC and lost over this >> issue. > I can understand why the area code has to be dialed, but why is Verizon > (or the NY PUC?) mandating the 1+ too? Verizon has already implemented > 10 digit dialing up and down its territory, as have many other places > too. In these areas, Verizon has repeated over and over that the 1+ is > not necessary, and to just dial 10 digits, not 11. > But in New York City, 11 (1+ 10digits) apparently will be mandated. I > suspect it is the PUC that is requiring this strangeness, but who knows. > Verizon obviously has the technology to do just 10 digits. It would make > a lot more sense to keep things consistent across the land where the area > code must be used for all calls. > Reference: http://tinyurl.com/4qbq (Verizon Web Page) Once upon a time, long, long, ago -- before CLEC's, before cellphones, when the communications world was a simpler place, there were more than enough area codes and prefixes to go around. There were rules to make it simple; all area codes had to have either a '0' or a '1' as the second digit (215, 213, 408, etc). Prefixes could not use a '0' or '1' as the second digit (334, 543, 344. etc). As soon as the second digit was dialed the switch would know if this was going to be a 10 digit call or a 7 digit call. As more and more demand came for prefixes, and area codes had to be split, the finite number of area codes (and prefix coded) ran out. We now have area code '217' and prefix '217' for example. The switch can no longer know if you are going to dial 217-6041 (a local call), or 217-604-1234 (a long distance call). There are two ways to resolve this dilemma: 1) Wait after the 7th digit to see if the customer has finished dialing, or is still trying to dial the rest of the number. Normal interdigital timing is usually 3-5 seconds to allow customers who are slow to dial (my 102 year old aunt for example). 2) Dial a '1' at the start of a 10 digit call to let the switch know that 10 more digits are coming. Either option could be used, however the first usually is not because most calls in a given central office are 7 digit, local calls, and to stop and wait after the 7th digit for 3-5 seconds to see if more digits are going to come, would delay the majority of calls from completing. This wait not only annoys customers, it can tie up central office equipment for an additional 3-5 seconds per call, requiring more equipment for the same number of calls. Thus, dial '1' before a 10 digit call. -Ernie- [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But there can also be the use of the 'carriage return' or # symbol at the end of the number to indicate the dialing is completed, but that isn't used very often. PAT] ------------------------------ From: William Warren Subject: Re: The Digest Was Spammed Again! Organization: Church of the Swimming Bullfrog Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 02:19:26 GMT > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What about the writer's allegation of > three hundred thousand 'suspects' and 'hundreds of arrests already > made'. Was there any truth to any of that? PAT] Pat, Pu-leeze. Surely the media would have covered such a massive dragnet? Bill [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, you would think so; but as John Levine noted in the previous issue of the Digest Thursday night, there was a kiddie porn raid somewhere; numerous arrests were made from that; but I don't remember reading about in the papers or seeing it noted on the net news, etc. PAT] ------------------------------ From: glb1202@cognitronics.com (Gerry Belanger) Subject: Re: Rat Shack and Future Slop Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 03:09:41 GMT In article , PaulCoxwell@aol.com wrote: > The Radio Shack stores in the U.K. go by the name of Tandy, but the > same principle applies. It's very seldom I use them (too expensive > for most items), but they go through the same routine of asking for > name, address, phone number, what you had for breakfast etc. on every > little purchase. Last week I purchased something at my local dealer owned RS. Surprised me when the clerk did not ask for the name or phone number. Gerry Belanger Address valid til the spam drowns it. ------------------------------ From: Al Gillis Subject: Re: Rat Shack and Future Slop Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 19:58:17 -0800 Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com At my local Radio Shack they follow the company line, asking for my name, telephone number and such on each purchase. Several years ago I told the clerk "Just put me down as cash." He asked "Would that be Johnny Cash?" I said "sure!". Since then that's the way it's been! I'm sure he has this little joke with many of his customers -- for me it removed the edge from the questions he's expected to ask and I didn't have to submit to their interrogation! One thing that surprises me is that this same guy has lasted several years at this store -- he doesn't seem like the owner, either! wrote in message news:telecom22.248.6@telecom-digest.org: >>> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Let's hope the new policy is national >>> in scope and applies to dealers and agency stores alike. At our local >>> Radio Shack agency store here in Independence it was not much of an >>> issue since the two guys who manage and own the store know almost >>> everyone in town, and everyone knows them. But in the Chicago area for >>> many years, this was quite a bone of contention. To buy a set of >>> batteries for cash, they wanted to know names, addresses, etc. PAT] >> My experience with Rat Shack here in Calgary isn't quite as bad, but >> still annoying. Generally, buying some batteries for cash is an >> in-the-door, out-the-door proposition. Buying anything more than that >> -- for example, I recently bought a laser pointer (as a toy for my >> cats -- they *LOVE* chasing that red dot!) -- and you get the request >> for all that personal info. > The Radio Shack stores in the U.K. go by the name of Tandy, but the > same principle applies. It's very seldom I use them (too expensive > for most items), but they go through the same routine of asking for > name, address, phone number, what you had for breakfast etc. on every > little purchase. > Paul Coxwell > Norfolk, U.K. ------------------------------ Date: 23 Jan 2003 22:21:12 -0500 From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: Looking for Satellite TV, Internet, Phone Provider Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA >> I'm looking for companies that would be able to provide phone, tv and >> internet from a satellite dish. Would appreciate any info. > Would you REALLY want to talk on a phone served by a satellite in > synchronous orbit? I've done it, it's not that bad. About 20 years ago, in the dawn of the competitive long distance era was Satellite Business Systems, funded by IBM, Sears, and (I think) Aetna insurance. After they found that the VSAT data market wasn't all they'd hoped for, they got into the long distance telephone biz. They had geosync satellites with very sophisticated ground systems that did time division multiplexing of slots that were maybe a millisecond wide. They offered what was at the time very low cost long distance, 10 cents anywhere in your state or an adjacent one, 25 cents anywhere in the country. Since they used 950 access and this predated the pay phone surcharge, you could use them from a payphone without putting in a dime, unlike anyone else other than Ma, and their rates were way better than Ma's. The satellite delay was certainly noticable, about a quarter of a second round trip. Some people found it really annoying, but it didn't bother me much, particularly since the call quality, other than the delay, was very good and the price was unbeatable. (They were among the first to use the FG B 950-xxxx access, which is technically much better than the FG A POTS access that MCI and others were using.) SBS was later sold to MCI and lives on only as the 1010888 PIC code for long distance. To return to the original question, there are plenty of sources of satellite TV and Internet (Echostar and DirectTV being the best known.) For satellite phones, you can get an Iridium phone for about $600 used, service is $20/mo and calls are $1.45/minute using their LEO satellites. Inmarsat phones are about $2000 (and are now only the size of a laptop computer), rates are from $2 to $10/minute depending on where you are and your call volume, using more reliable geosync satellites, with data also available. Or Globalstar uses a combination of cellular where available and satellite where not with more reasonable rates, phone is $300, service plans include one at $50/mo including 120 minutes. No matter how badly your phone company stinks, it's unlikely that sat phones would be the alternative you want. I'd consider fixed cellular with an antenna on the roof pointing at the nearest cell tower. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 johnl@iecc.com Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner http://iecc.com/johnl Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail ------------------------------ From: William Warren Subject: Re: Westchester DA (NYC Suburb) vs. Nigerian Scammers Organization: Church of the Swimming Bullfrog Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 03:30:50 GMT Danny Burstein wrote in message news:telecom22.250.6@telecom-digest.org: > TWO INDICTED IN NIGERIAN BUSINESS SCAM [snip] > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have to wonder what sort of 'businessman' > the guy in Wisconsin would be to give away two hundred thousand in > cash on a Nigerian promise to send him fifty million dollars. I've > seen those scams forever and did not realize there are some people > who fall for them. PAT] Pat, If nobody fell for them, they would have vanished from the net years ago. "There's a sucker born every minute, and five more born to take him" Bill ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 22:22:43 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Now, XM Satellite Radio Has Gear to Match Programming By WALTER S. MOSSBERG One of the great things about the fast-moving technology field is that companies can improve their products in major ways fairly quickly. Today's example is XM Satellite Radio, the leader in the nascent business of beaming numerous channels of music and talk to subscribers with special radios. When I reviewed XM last year, I gave high marks to its 100 channels of programming (now 101), which feature dedicated stations for everything from classic country, folk, comedy and oldies to multiple flavors of rock, rap, jazz and blues. With each song, XM displays the singer and song title. The service is a fabulous alternative to the increasingly stultified choices on the FM dial. But I panned the actual radios that were being sold to receive all this stuff. I found them cramped, hard to use and a poor fit for the service. They were mainly based on existing FM radios that were never designed to navigate 100 channels quickly or to display XM's song information properly. I also noted that they were expensive -- $400 to $600, including installation. Today, however, I am pleased to say that the hardware has caught up to the content. XM's rich programming is now available through a new, very well-designed radio that works in a car or a home and is much less expensive -- around $200. And that makes XM Radio a service I can wholeheartedly recommend. http://ptech.wsj.com/archive/ptech-20030123.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 22:26:41 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: U.S. Opens Online Portal to Rulemaking Web Site Invites Wider Participation in the Regulatory Process By Cindy Skrzycki Washington Post Staff Writer It may not be as entertaining as browsing for bargains on eBay, but Americans increasingly are using the Internet to participate in the federal regulatory process. Mariners at sea and truckers on the road, for instance, have voiced their opinions on rules at the Department of Transportation, helping increase the number of public comments twentyfold in three years. With the introduction today of www.regulations.gov, the Bush administration is taking the first step to expand this budding interest in electronic rulemaking to the entire government and populace. The goal is to enable anyone with a computer and Internet access to find every federal regulation that is open for comment, read it and submit their views. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A30469-2003Jan22.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 22:29:14 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Network Solutions Spills E-mail Addresses Company to Apologize; Customers Fear 'Spam' By David McGuire washingtonpost.com Friday, January 24, 2003; Page E05 Herndon-based Internet address seller Network Solutions Inc. said it will apologize to tens of thousands of customers whose e-mail addresses the company inadvertently released yesterday. "A few thousand" Network Solutions customers received e-mail messages that contained more than 85,000 e-mail addresses of other Network Solutions customers, said spokesman Patrick Burns of VeriSign Inc., the parent company of Network Solutions. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A35318-2003Jan23.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 22:31:05 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: BellSouth Reports Fourth Quarter Earnings DSL High-Speed Internet Customers Surpass 1 Million; Long Distance Approval In All Markets; Company to Expense Stock Options Granted After January 1, 2003 ATLANTA, Jan. 23 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- BellSouth Corporation (NYSE:BLS) reported earnings per share (EPS) of 32 cents in the fourth quarter of 2002, compared to EPS of 42 cents in the same quarter of 2001. Normalized for special items, detailed below, EPS in the fourth quarter of 2002 was 50 cents, compared to normalized EPS of 63 cents in the same quarter a year ago. Capital expenditures for 2002 were $3.8 billion, a reduction of 36.9 percent compared to $6.0 billion in 2001. Operating free cash flow (defined as cash flow from operations less capital expenditures) was $791 million in the fourth quarter of 2002, and totaled $4.5 billion for the year as a whole. Including asset sales and note repayments to BellSouth during the year, the company generated free cash flow of $6.8 billion in 2002. The company reduced net debt to $14.9 billion in 2002 from $19.5 billion in 2001, or 23.6 percent, and increased its quarterly per share cash dividend 5.3 percent. Consolidated revenues, which do not include BellSouth's 40 percent share of Cingular Wireless, were $5.69 billion, compared to $6.21 billion in the fourth quarter of 2001. Normalized total operating revenues, which include Cingular, were $7.12 billion, a decline of 6.8 percent versus the fourth quarter of 2001. BellSouth reduced consolidated total operating expenses, which exclude Cingular, by 4.2 percent in the fourth quarter of 2002, compared to the same three months a year ago. Net income in the quarter was $597 million, compared to $792 million in the fourth quarter of the previous year. Normalized net income was $936 million, compared to $1.19 billion in the final quarter of 2001. For the year, EPS was 76 cents in 2002, compared to $1.36 in 2001. Normalized EPS was $2.09 in the latest year, compared to $2.34 in 2001. Foreign currency losses in 2002 totaled 32 cents per share, compared to 12 cents per share in the previous year. Including Cingular, revenues were $28.4 billion in 2002, a decline of 3.9 percent for the year. Net income was $1.42 billion in 2002, compared to $2.57 billion a year earlier. Normalized net income in 2002 was $3.92 billion, compared to $4.42 billion in 2001. BellSouth's operating results continued to reflect weak demand for communications services, both in the United States and Latin America. Bankruptcies continued to affect both retail and wholesale demand, as well as bad debt expense. Retail access line market share loss in the U.S., as well as currency devaluations in Argentina and Venezuela, also continued to impact results. http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=31081053 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 22:38:25 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Cingular Loses Customers For Second Straight Quarter By Yukari Iwatani CHICAGO, Jan 23 (Reuters) - Telecommunications company BellSouth Corp. (NYSE:BLS) on Thursday said its Cingular Wireless joint venture with SBC Communications Inc. (NYSE:SBC) posted slightly higher revenue but lost customers for the second straight quarter. The No. 2 wireless telephone company, behind Verizon Wireless, said it lost 121,000 customers in the fourth quarter, ending the period with a total of 21.9 million customers. The results were a big disappointment for analysts who had been expecting the Atlanta-based company to add between 100,000 and 200,000 customers. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=31089657 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 22:48:04 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: High-Definition Broadcast Of Super Bowl XXXVII ABC Sports Teams with Motorola for High-Definition Broadcast Of Super Bowl XXXVII ABC Sports Selects Motorola's DigiCipher(R) II Transmission System to Encode The Critical Back Haul High-Definition Feed From San Diego's QUALCOMM Stadium SAN DIEGO, Jan. 23 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Motorola, Inc. (NYSE:MOT) Broadband Communications Sector today announced that it will provide ABC Sports with its DigiCipher(R) II High-Definition (HD) digital transmission equipment to broadcast Super Bowl XXXVII live from San Diego's QUALCOMM Stadium on January 26, 2003. Motorola's DigiCipher II HD Encoders are a critical link in the broadcast chain for Super Bowl XXXVII. The Motorola equipment will perform the original back haul digital compression from the field-based high-definition cameras, so the quality of all subsequent feeds will depend upon the efficiency and transparency of Motorola's first stage compression. Extensive testing of the Motorola HD encoder determined that it will ensure the best possible transmission of the game. The source feeds from QUALCOMM Stadium will be produced in the ATSC 720P high-definition format. The Motorola encoder will then compress the source feeds to the backhaul rate of 41 megabits/second for transmission over satellite to ABC production studios in New York. There, HD decoders will translate the feed back to a baseband HD signal for the addition of graphics and commercials. The finished, production-quality signal will then be recompressed for the distribution feed to ABC affiliates. Finally, the signal will go through one more decode/encode cycle at the affiliates for the final 19.39 Mbps ATSC broadcast to consumers. With a total of three compression cycles, the quality of the original compression stage is critical to the quality of the final on-air program. http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=31094851 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 22:52:33 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Nortel Networks Reports Results for Fourth Quarter and Year 2002 TORONTO--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Jan. 23, 2003--Nortel Networks Corporation (NYSE:NT)(TSX:NT): -- Q4 2002 revenues: US$2.52 billion, up sequentially approximately 7 percent -- Q4 2002: net loss per common share of US$0.06; pro forma net loss(a) per common share of US$0.01 -- Strong cash performance in Q4, 2002; "net cash positive" at the end of Q4 2002 -- Expensing stock options, effective January 1, 2003 Nortel Networks Corporation (NYSE:NT)(TSX:NT) today reported results for the fourth quarter and the year 2002 prepared in accordance with United States generally accepted accounting principles, except as noted with respect to pro forma results(a). Fourth Quarter 2002 Results Revenues from continuing operations were US$2.52 billion for the fourth quarter of 2002 compared to US$3.46 billion in the same period in 2001. Nortel Networks reported a net loss in the fourth quarter of 2002 of US$248 million, or US$0.06 per common share, compared to a net loss of US$1.83 billion, or US$0.57 per common share, in the fourth quarter of 2001(b). Pro forma net loss from continuing operations(a) for the fourth quarter of 2002 was US$62 million, or US$0.01 per common share, compared to pro forma net loss from continuing operations(a) of US$506 million, or US$0.16 per common share, in the fourth quarter of 2001. Pro forma net loss from continuing operations(a) for the fourth quarter of 2002 excluded US$186 million, comprised of: special charges related to restructuring of US$214 million; gain on repurchases of outstanding debt securities of US$60 million; certain costs related to acquisitions of US$58 million; and gain on sale of business of US$26 million. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=31097504 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 23:01:06 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Because It's There: Putting Everest Online By NANCY GOHRING IF the 25-below-zero temperature, howling wind and grim effects of altitude sickness do not make most of those trying to scale Mount Everest feel a world away from home, the near-complete lack of communications on and around Everest surely does. This year, just in time for the 50th anniversary of Sir Edmund Hillary's first ascent of Everest, climbers on the mountain will have the chance to connect with the world below by e-mail. That is because Tsering Gyaltsen, the grandson of the only surviving Sherpa to have accompanied Hillary on that famed climb, is planning to build the world's highest Internet cafe at base camp. It is fitting that the added comfort comes courtesy of a Sherpa, one of the clan of Nepalese who take charge of getting most everything up the mountain for the usually wealthy adventurers seeking the thrill of topping the world's highest peak. But in contrast to many climber services, this one does not stand to benefit foreign-run outfitters primarily. Although it is an obvious perk for the climbers, the residents of a nearby town may get Internet access because of it, and the mountain may get a bit cleaner. The technical challenge is significant. Wireless radios will be positioned on moving glaciers, and gear must be insulated against temperatures far colder than they were designed to withstand. And at the helm of the project is Mr. Gyaltsen, who is not wealthy and has no formal technical training. But tenacious he is. From halfway around the world, Mr. Gyaltsen has attracted an all-star cast of technologists in the United States dedicated to furthering his goal. http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/23/technology/circuits/23sher.html ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-330-6774 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 Fax 3: 775-642-0603 Fax 4: 530-309-7234 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2003 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. In addition, gifts from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert have enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V22 #253 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat Jan 25 18:14:05 2003 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id h0PNE5C11677; Sat, 25 Jan 2003 18:14:05 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 18:14:05 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200301252314.h0PNE5C11677@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #254 TELECOM Digest Sat, 25 Jan 2003 18:14:00 EST Volume 22 : Issue 254 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: DMCA: Ma Bell Would Be Proud (Monty Solomon) Re: DMCA: Ma Bell Would Be Proud (Michael D. Sullivan) Re: E1 (Richard H. E. Smith) Re: E1 (Michael Will) Re: E1 (Tom) Re: Looking for Satellite TV, Internet, Phone Provider (John Higdon) Radio Wishlist, was Re: Now, XM Satellite Radio Has Gear (Danny Burstein) Submarine Fiber Optic Cabling and Equipment (W. Joseph Ritchotte II) Re: Verizon Must Reveal Internet Song Swapper (John Higdon) Re: Rat Shack and Future Slop (Dave Garland) Re: The Digest Was Spammed Again! (Monty Solomon) Re: The Digest Was Spammed Again! (Tom Betz) Internet Calls Stir Up Static in Phone Fight (Monty Solomon) Re: Prison Call Overcharging (Linc Madison) Re: The Digest Was Spammed Again! (Gail M. Hall) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRUSES. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 00:36:24 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Re: DMCA: Ma Bell Would Be Proud WebWasher shouldn't block that URI by default. Does that URI match one of the regular expressions in your WebWasher URL filter? That URI is for one of the cached (by Akamai) CSS (cascading style sheets) files used by Wired. Take a look at the following for more info ... Wired News Celebrates 6th Anniversary with Cutting-Edge Redesign Using The Latest Web Standards http://www.terralycos.com/press/pr_10_10e_02.html Wired News: A Site for Your Eyes http://www.wired.com/news/culture/0,1284,55675,00.html Behind the Wired News Design http://wired.com/news/explanation.html An Interview With Douglas Bowman of Wired News http://devedge.netscape.com/viewsource/2002/wired-interview/ Zeldman on the Wired News redesign http://www.zeldman.com/daily/1002a.html#wired Louis Collins wrote: > From: Louis Collins > Subject: Re: DMCA: Ma Bell Would Be Proud > Date: 23 Jan 2003 23:42:04 GMT > Organization: Concentric Internet Services > Monty Solomon wrote: >> http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,57268,00.html > Sounds like a good article, but alas, when I click it I get this: > WebWasher is configured to block the requested page: > 'http://a1112.g.akamai.net/7/1112/492/2002091423/www.wired.com/news/v/20020914/css/cs4/wnScreen.css'. > Is my browser messed up or what? ------------------------------ From: Michael D. Sullivan Subject: Re: DMCA: Ma Bell Would Be Proud Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 07:16:01 GMT On 23 Jan 2003 23:42:04 GMT, Louis Collins posted the following to comp.dcom.telecom: > Monty Solomon wrote: >> http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,57268,00.html > Sounds like a good article, but alas, when I click it I get this: > WebWasher is configured to block the requested page: > 'http://a1112.g.akamai.net/7/1112/492/2002091423/www.wired.com/news/v/20020914/css/cs4/wnScreen.css'. > Is my browser messed up or what? Sounds like your ad-blocker, WebWasher, is blocking content. Check to see if it's blocking akamai.net, which is often used to host ads, but also hosts wired.com, Supreme Court opinions, and lots of other stuff. Michael D. Sullivan Bethesda, MD, USA (delete NOSPAM from address to mail me) ------------------------------ From: Richard H. E. Smith Subject: Re: E1 Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 23:56:25 -0600 Organization: The Smiths foo wrote: > If you use E1, then timeslot 16 is used for signaling. The signaling > packets are a sort of HDLC packets. With HDLC you use a flag 01111110 > to mark the beginning and end of a packet. If the same bitpattern as > the flag comes in the data, you insert an extra 0 after the 5:th bit > (bitstuffing). Then you must transmit 9 bits instead of 8. The > timeslot in E1 is only 8 bit, so how is this problem solved? The "bytes" of the messages aren't necessarily alligned with the 8 bit slot in each frame... if you need to send nine bits, then it stretches into the next frame, and then the eight bits follow that. You have to think of timeslot 16 (or whichever) as a continuous stream of bits, and ignore that it's delivered eight bits at a time. Hope that makes sense. Dick Smith rhes@enteract.com Software Consultant ------------------------------ From: Michael Will Subject: Re: E1 Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 07:44:32 GMT Organization: RoadRunner - Tampa Bay foo wrote: > If you use E1, then timeslot 16 is used for signaling. The signaling > packets are a sort of HDLC packets. With HDLC you use a flag 01111110 > to mark the beginning and end of a packet. If the same bitpattern as > the flag comes in the data, you insert an extra 0 after the 5:th bit > (bitstuffing). Then you must transmit 9 bits instead of 8. The > timeslot in E1 is only 8 bit, so how is this problem solved? There is no problem :) One just needs to see that in a data context the timeslot itself a just a bitstream, meaning not every symbol in the delivery stream has to align with the actual transport frame. Just because audio data is traditionally (and nearly exclusively) sent one octet per frame doesn't mean that's the only way to interpret the data being transmitted. Consider the same condition in an X.25 HDLC circuit - the link speed may be static, but that doesn't mean the data stream doesn't run slower from time to time to accommodate the same symbol transmission issues. Look at the E1 as what it is - a multiplexed set of streams, and in the D-channel case (or any generic Data-Channel interpretation, including multi-timeslot video, etc.) one just has to strip out the appropriate bitsream and *then* interpret it by its particular rules. At that point, alignment within the multiplexed transmission of 31 other channels doesn't matter a whole lot :) - Michael ------------------------------ From: Tom Subject: Re: E1 Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 11:43:20 -0000 Organization: ntlworld News Service foo wrote in message news:telecom22.252.11@telecom-digest.org... > If you use E1, then timeslot 16 is used for signaling. The signaling > packets are a sort of HDLC packets. With HDLC you use a flag 01111110 > to mark the beginning and end of a packet. If the same bitpattern as > the flag comes in the data, you insert an extra 0 after the 5:th bit > (bitstuffing). Then you must transmit 9 bits instead of 8. The > timeslot in E1 is only 8 bit, so how is this problem solved? It's not really a problem. HDLC is bit-oriented. The 8 bits transmitted in each E1 frame don't necessarily correspond with an HDLC field. ------------------------------ From: John Higdon Subject: Re: Looking for Satellite TV, Internet, Phone Provider Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 21:39:28 -0800 In article , johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) wrote: > I've done it, it's not that bad. About 20 years ago, in the dawn of > the competitive long distance era was Satellite Business Systems, > funded by IBM, Sears, and (I think) Aetna insurance. Back when I owned a real company, we got SBS to save money on long distance. We even hid the onerous Feature Group B access behind our PBX (which was capable of transparently dialing all the necessary access numbers and codes). The workers hated it. One CS representative said that it lowered apparent IQs about thirty points with all the delay and the resultant tripping over words of the other party. One wise guy started saying "over" when making long distance calls. We got rid of it within a year. > No matter how badly your phone company stinks, it's unlikely that sat > phones would be the alternative you want. I'd consider fixed cellular > with an antenna on the roof pointing at the nearest cell tower. At my house, the signal is good enough to use any old handheld like a cordless phone. If it were not for the fact that I have so much other wired communications, I would seriously consider dumping my wireline service. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | Anytown, USA | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ From: Danny Burstein Subject: Radio Wishlist, was Re: Now, XM Satellite Radio Has Gear .. Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 05:57:06 +0000 (UTC) Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC In Monty Solomon writes: > By WALTER S. MOSSBERG > One of the great things about the fast-moving technology field is > that companies can improve their products in major ways fairly > quickly. Today's example is XM Satellite Radio, the leader in the > nascent business of beaming numerous channels of music and talk to > subscribers with special radios. [ rest snipped ] While not a directly telecom related item, high on my wish list is a tivo/replay-tv like radio. When, oh when, will we have a radio that can be set to record as easily as a vcr? (well, let's hope it's easier...) Current choices include either kludging radio output to a vcr (which doesn't give you channel setting) or using an expensive, limited edition product like: http://www.radioprogramrecorder.com/ (url included for info. no connection to them. not an endorsement, etc.) And more immediately, why hasn't someone, anyone, put out a line of car radios with a back-buffer? How many times do you hear something on the radio where you'd really, really, like to listen to it again? Even for something as mundane as the weather, or traffic. And, of course, all the EBS broadcasts ... Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key dannyb@panix.com [to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded] ------------------------------ From: bjr@thedigitaldeli.net (W. Joseph Ritchotte II) Subject: Submarine Fiber Optic Cabling and Equipment Organization: Toltec Business Systems and Holdings Inc. Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 05:14:18 GMT Dear Telecom: I am with the commercial house of B. Joseph Gordon and Company. My firm has been retained to sell a consigned lot for Lifecycle Business Partners of approximately 100 million in submarine fiber optic cabling equipment. Lifecycle's orders are to try and recoup 20% of the retail value of the lot. As we are approaching the large companies that specialize in this type of construction, we intend to leave no stone unturned. That is why we are publishing the website where the materials are listed and you can check off items you are interested in and have that list shipped to our agents for further discussion. In no way are you obligated to purchase. All items are new in the OEM packaging and were designed for undersea use but the extra strength and highly reduced prices would not prohibit some of the equipment and cable from being used in a land project. The link is: http://65.96.189.204:8880/SubmarineTelecomEquipList.asp Thank you for your time. Regards, William Ritchotte - CEO Like radio shows? Jack Benny, Abbott and Costello, Zero Hour, CBS Radio Theatre? Remember who you spent your Sunday nights with listening to the radio? Would you like to relive those memories? Come to http://www.digitaldeliftp.com ------------------------------ From: John Higdon Subject: Re: Verizon Must Reveal Internet Song Swapper Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 21:29:34 -0800 In article , Joey Lindstrom wrote: > U.S. District Judge John Bates said Verizon must cooperate with > recording industry efforts to track down online song swappers, > rejecting the telecommunications giant's assertion that such a move > would violate customer privacy and turn it into an online copyright cop. > Verizon said it would appeal the decision. And well it should. The key issue is probable cause. The RIAA is simply making an accusation, backed up with no credible evidence. If this decision stands and becomes precedent, anyone could get anyone else's private information from a provider by simply claiming "copyright violation". John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | Anytown, USA | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ From: Dave Garland Subject: Re: Rat Shack and Future Slop Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 23:35:22 -0600 Organization: Wizard Information > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: ... From whenever until 1965 'Allied > Radio' was *the* place in Chicago for every kind of electronic gizmo > there was in those days.] In Chicago? In the USA. Well, along with Lafayette (NY) and Radio Shack (before Tandy got involved). And Olson, too. And Meshna and Fair Radio for the surplus hounds. Curiously, the small surplus outfits are the only ones still around. Fair Radio doesn't seem to have changed much, not even the praying hands. And (ObTelecom) will ya look at that, their front page (http://www.fairradio.com) features a surplus ringing generator. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 01:07:01 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Re: The Digest Was Spammed Again! > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, you would think so; but as John > Levine noted in the previous issue of the Digest Thursday night, there > was a kiddie porn raid somewhere; numerous arrests were made from > that; but I don't remember reading about in the papers or seeing it > noted on the net news, etc. PAT] Some old and recent news stories ... Police arrest 25 members of child porn ring By Drew Cullen Posted: 23/04/2002 at 12:34 GMT http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/24986.html UK police swoop in child porn raids By Tim Richardson Posted: 25/04/2002 at 10:45 GMT http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/25023.html Paedophile net raids across UK Care workers, teachers and a teenage boy are among those arrested in dawn raids as part of the UK's biggest internet paedophile crackdown yet. Wednesday, 24 April, 2002, 15:34 GMT 16:34 UK http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/newsid_1947000/1947778.stm Q&A: Paedophile net raids The BBC's home affairs correspondent, Jon Silverman, answers key questions about Wednesday's internet paedophile crackdown. Wednesday, 24 April, 2002, 15:33 GMT 16:33 UK http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/newsid_1949000/1949092.stm Operation Ore: Can the UK cope? Monday, 13 January, 2003, 10:33 GMT http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2652465.stm British Child-Pornography Investigation Is Broadening By SARAH LYALL January 14, 2003 http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/14/international/14CND_PORN.html Britain's Hunt for Child Pornography Users Nets Hundreds Besides Pete Townshend By SARAH LYALL January 15, 2003 http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/15/international/europe/15PORN.html 'I cannot admit what I am to myself' Thursday January 23, 2003 The Guardian http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,3604,880237,00.html [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: So I guess the spam posting at least made a good point or two, even if apparently it was spam. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Tom Betz Subject: Re: The Digest Was Spammed Again! Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 06:12:58 UTC Organization: XOme Quoth Pat in news:telecom22.250.9@telecom-digest.org: > Do you know, Tom, if there was any truth at all to his allegations > regards the number of 'suspects', inquistioned persons, etc? Or was > that all just a lot of crap as well? See for the FBI's press release about Operation Candyman. An excerpt: "Through the issuance of a court order to Yahoo!, FBI Houston concentrating on the Candyman Egroup, identified 7,000 unique E-mail addresses with 2,400 of the addresses outside of United States and 4,600 located domestically." ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 01:27:05 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Internet Calls Stir Up Static in Phone Fight By DENNIS K. BERMAN Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL A battle is heating up in the phone industry over the growing number of voice calls sent over the Internet, pitting local phone companies against long-distance providers. At issue: whether long-distance companies must pay local phone systems the full fare for sending these Internet-based calls to and from houses and offices. Currently, most long-distance companies do pay such "access fees" since the carriers generally don't own the lines that go into homes and businesses. But long-distance companies say they shouldn't have to pay as much to transmit Internet calls to customers as they pay for calls sent over traditional long-distance networks. http://online.wsj.com/article_email/0,,SB1043372661755750904,00.html ------------------------------ From: Linc Madison Subject: Re: Prison Call Overcharging Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 23:39:08 -0800 Organization: LincMad.com Consulting Reply-To: Telecom@LincMad.com In article , Gail M. Hall wrote: > I'll be interested to hear if this "Save a buck or two" company > really does save people money for collect call charges. I must say > they have some cute commercials! Read the fine print: "Savings vs. dialing '0' with AT&T for interstate calls." Not compared to dialing 0-NPA-NXX-XXXX, not compared to dialing 1-800-CALL-ATT, but compared to dialing just 0. The recipient pays a substantial surcharge if the operator has to punch the number in for you, but 1-800-COLLECT gives you that service for free. Woo-hoo. (Never mind that you don't get an AT&T operator if you just dial 0. You have to dial 1010288-0 or 00 if the phone is pre-subscribed to AT&T, but AT&T recommends dialing 1-800-CALL-ATT instead.) Only an ABSOLUTE IDIOT would dial just '0' to place a collect call. There's no excuse, at least for those of us whose age has made it into double-digits. A very useful clue as to what 1-800-COLLECT will charge can be gleaned from the simple fact that they don't list any rates on their web site. Their contact form offers several options for the subject of your inquiry, but "rates" is not one of them. Of course, I'm sure the reason they don't tell you the rates is that they're so low you don't need to even think about them.... Also, many of the commercials feature situations in which only an absolute idiot would call collect to begin with; for instance, the kids at the mall calling Mom to come pick them up. How many kids get dropped off at a mall that's so far away from home that it's a toll call? Give the kid 50 cents to call home from the payphone! The continued business success of companies like 1-800-COLLECT and 10-10-220 (pay extra on every call!) only proves the gullibility of the American consumer. To borrow a phrase for which 1-800-COLLECT's spokesman is famous, "I pity the fool" who ever uses 1-800-COLLECT. www dot LincMad dot com / Telecom at LincMad dot com Linc Madison * San Francisco, California ------------------------------ From: Gail M. Hall Subject: Re: The Digest Was Spammed Again! Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 04:07:34 -0500 Reply-To: gmhall@apk.net On Thu, 23 Jan 2003 01:33:40 UTC, in comp.dcom.telecom message , overworked Pat wrote: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You know, it may get to the point real > soon here on this list that I start accepting incoming mail *only* > from a trusted whitelist of readers/contributors, with all other mail > going into the bit bucket. There simply is not enough time in the day > for *me* to go around the web looking for hiding places for spam. All > trusted whitelist contributors will have a list giving the correct > email addresses of others on the list. Then all email addresses > printed here will vanish also. That seems to me like a horrible way to > be part of the net, and extremely arrogant. Do you knoww, Tom, if > there was any truth at all to his allegations regards the number of > 'suspects', inquistioned persons, etc? Or was that all just a lot of > crap as well? PAT] Is it possible that you will have better luck by closing off the usenet gateway and having everyone subscribe to the mailing list instead? I would hate to see that because the ISPs I have used preferred us to use the news service instead of e-mail if there was a choice. However, that would be one way to limit the number of people who can harvest addresses from the group. I am aware that this group's addresses are harvested by spammers. Some spammers actually spam the list and members privately, too. So they are easy to detect. One of the worst spammers I get messages from is something called "iAgentNetwork E-Blast". They spam a lot of telecom "services" and CLAIM that I subscribed to their list. They LIE! I filtered them out by the name iAgent and by their IP number. I recently found out that my ISP uses a certain software to process mail and there is a way that we can munge our addresses in a way that we would still get the mail but we could identify where the sender using that edited address got our address because of what we did in the "munge". I don't want to give details because you are likely to post this to the group, and I don't want spammers to catch on to what this "trick" is if they don't already know it. If I just posted under this "new" address, you would probably consider me "unknown" and reject the address. Some lists do allow for subscribers to post from "alternate" e-mail addresses so a person could give YOU the real address but post with another address, even a munged address that you would recognize as being from the real subscriber. If you do decide to continue the usenet newsgroup gateway, you might require people who read from there to "register" with you before being allowed to post. This might include giving some personal information such as real name and city of residence but nothing too personal. Please don't require credit card numbers or anything like that. This information would be kept by the moderator and not be available to anyone else. Some list servers do allow members to get a list of all subscribers' e-mail addresses by sending a special command, but subscribers can send a command to opt out of that feature -- thanks be!! I would go along with your idea of accepting posts from known subscribers. Anyone wanting to join would fill out some kind of form that you would devise. If they are approved, then they would be accepted like now. I also think the moderator should maintain an "admin" address for people to write about stuff doing with subscribing, changing addresses, etc., and a "list" address for posting messages to the group. That way we could write to you, Pat, about details of our addresses, etc., without having to worry about our remarks going out to the whole world. You know, I could tell you more about the mail software quirk. I hope some of these ideas can cut down on your work. Gail in Ohio USA [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You raise so many issues I won't even take the time here and now to respond to all of them. I am NOT interested in collecting names and email addresses for 'approval' purposes here in the Digest. It is simply easier to continue as I do now, and use a large scoop shovel to get rid of large amounts of spam each day. Gail, there is an 'administrative' address for list changes. It is: Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org (quoting above from the closing message in each issue of the Digest as seen by Digest [not Usenet] readers). I do *not* handle subscriptions to the Digest personally. You have to use the majordomo at the addresses shown above. I check the things at the above address every few days. I suggest if you wish to change from one email address to another that you subscribe the new one first, wait a few days until things start coming there, *then* go back and unsubscribe the old address. That's because new subscribes only take effect after I 'approve' them to keep spammers/hucksters out. Unsubscribes take effect when you write the above address. To avoid missing an issue, do not unsubscribe the old address until you see the new one has been installed. Regards other matters, if you say 'do not publish' as your subject line then either I will not or at the very least I will remove your name/email address if I decide to use it. And I do give the spam bucket at least a cursory glance prior to deleting it each day. Maybe that will help a little. To avoid absolutely all spam in the Usenet version, I suggest you read *my* Usenet version which is on the web site as http://telecom-digest.org/TELECOM_Digest_Online and maybe you do or do not need the final trailing slash. That is message by message Usenet style, put out by myself. PAT] ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-330-6774 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 Fax 3: 775-642-0603 Fax 4: 530-309-7234 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2003 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. In addition, gifts from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert have enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V22 #254 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat Jan 25 19:45:53 2003 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id h0Q0jrq13399; Sat, 25 Jan 2003 19:45:53 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 19:45:53 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200301260045.h0Q0jrq13399@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #255 TELECOM Digest Sat, 25 Jan 2003 19:46:51 EST Volume 22 : Issue 255 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Second Avenue Story: The NY Tel Fire, 1975 (TELECOM Digest Editor) Finally Got My Cellphone to Roam (Linc Madison) Re: 11-Digit Dialing Comes to NYC (Scott D Fybush) Re: 11-Digit Dialing Comes to NYC (John Stahl) Re: 11-Digit Dialing Comes to NYC (Joey Lindstrom) Re: 11-Digit Dialing Comes to NYC (Lisa Miller) Re: Rat Shack and Future Slop (John Hines) Multiple DSL Services on Same Cable (Joey Lindstrom) Re: Master-Keyed Lock Vulnerability (Michael D. Sullivan) Re: Calling Party Pays to Cellular (Michael D. Sullivan) BellSouth Completes Year With More Than 1 Million DSL Customers (Solomon) Trouble With Prime Numbers: DeCSS, DVD and Protection (Monty Solomon) Re: The Digest Was Spammed Again! (Hank Fung) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRUSES. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 18:52:35 EST From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Second Avenue Story: The NY Tel Fire, 1975 We now have the *complete* story (as told by AT&T and NY Telephone) of the 1975 disasterous file in the telephone building in New York City in February, 1975. This is in our archives, in the history section as follows: http://telecom-digest.org/history/fire-in-newyork-1975 This fifty-page booklet, published by NY Telephone in the summer of 1975 was totally scanned into .jpg files by Kevin Bluml of Eden Prairie Minnesota, then emailed to me a page at a time (all two million bytes of *each* page). I then in turn used FTP to get the individual pages (about two million bytes per page) over to massis, and sat them up in a directory. Kevin and I worked on this project over several nights with him emailing me one .jpg file at a time. To keep them from choking the mail system, I had to retrieve them as each page was sent. You are welcome to make copies for yourself, and I hope you will. This twenty-eight year old book is no longer in print as far as I know, and I am very grateful to Kevin for the work he did getting it all scanned in and emailed to me. You can attempt to read it all on line but that might be dreadfully hard to do. You can go to the index of that directory (/fire-in-newyork-1975) and click the pages out one at a time if you have a browser capable of handling several million bytes but that will take a long time. A better solution is to FTP the entire directory back to your site, then use some kind of viewer to set the page magnification properly and click-click-click through the pages with ease, at your leisure. Acrobat is a good choice of readers to use; so is Pagis. There are many millions of bytes involved, so the FTP transfer (at high, DSL speed) will take about an hour or more of your time. If you are on dialup then you might as well forget it. The FTP address to MGET the files is: ftp massis.lcs.mit.edu login your name, password set binary mget telecom-archives/archives/history/fire-in-newyork/"ny tel fire"* MGET with the wild card at the end (and you will need to quote the file names) will allow all the pages one after another to get downloaded to you. It goes on and on and on and on (and on!) ... like I said above, it took me over an hour to MPUT it all there. Lots of pictures, lots of text in this interesting book from the fire, 28 years ago in February. I'll be interested in hearing reactions, rememberances, etc, and I hope you all will enjoy reading it. And you might wish to drop a note to Kevin Bluml saying thanks for his work on it. Patrick Townosn ------------------------------ From: Linc Madison Subject: Finally Got My Cellphone to Roam Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 13:38:18 -0800 Organization: LincMad.com Consulting Reply-To: Telecom@LincMad.com I posted here earlier about my struggles trying to get my cellphone (a Samsung SCH-3500 on SprintPCS) to roam. Back in September, I was in Susanville, CA, and tried to roam. The nearest Sprint service is at least 60 miles as the crow flies, so I knew I would be roaming. I switched the roaming mode from "Sprint only" to "analog only." I acquired signal from an analog network, with a full measure of signal strength (4 of 4 bars), but my call would not complete. The little icon for "trying to get a circuit" just blinked at me endlessly. About a month later, I was near Woodbury, TN, when a friend had a tire blow out. Worse yet, the spare tire that the used tire dealer had put in the car, didn't fit the wheel! We needed AAA. We were probably only about 25 miles outside the Sprint network, but to the same effect as in Susanville. I also tried some experiments here in San Francisco. Again, I was able to get a signal on the analog network, but I couldn't complete a call. John Levine pointed out the differences with the third choice in the roaming mode menu, "Automatic." It will look for Sprint first, then any other digital service, then analog. Frank H., a local Sprint user with a 3500 who lives right here in San Francisco, helped me check some other handset-specific issues. The alt.cellular.sprintpcs newsgroup helped with some discussion about PRLs (Preferred Roaming Lists, what the phone uses to determine which networks to try in what order). My PRL 10009 was three years out of date, but the update to the brand new (issued less than two weeks ago) PRL 10018 didn't cure my problem. I took the phone down to the SprintPCS retail store at the foot of Market Street. They were a bit clueless at first, giving me some genuinely wrong information. I had the phone in analog roam mode, and the rep asked what number I wanted to try dialing. I said, "Just press 1-TALK and it will dial my home number." (That's true, using the abbreviated dialing feature of the phonebook in the SCH-3500.) She told me that I had to dial the entire 10-digit number when roaming (true, but not relevant -- accessing entry #1 in my phone book would dial 415-xxx-xxxx). I finally demonstrated to her that I could dial the full 10-digit number, and the call would never complete. The tech took the phone off to the back room and said it would be about 15 minutes. I read all the comics and did all the puzzles, and they brought my phone back. The tech said that he had upgraded the software; he wasn't sure if that would fix it, but that was all he could do with it there. The good news is, it did fix it! I now have software version VK05. I don't know what the previous version was, but either it was outdated or my copy was somehow subtly corrupted. Anyway, thanks to "the awesome power of the Internet," not least Telecom Digest, for helping me get my phone to work! www dot LincMad dot com / Telecom at LincMad dot com Linc Madison * San Francisco, California ------------------------------ From: fybush@world.std.com (Scott D Fybush) Subject: Re: 11-Digit Dialing Comes to NYC Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 20:32:59 GMT johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) writes: > Oh, please, not this tired old disinformation again. New York never > had toll alerting. Careful with those generalizations! :-) This may have been true of NYTel/NYNEX/BA/Verizon territory, but Rochester Tel/Frontierland *did* use the leading "1+" for toll alerting until the mid-nineties. Rochester to Buffalo (an inter-LATA toll call, within the 716 area code) was dialed "1-856-1414" back then. Rochester to Dansville (an intra-LATA toll call, within the 716 area code) was dialed "1-335-1111." With the coming of NXX-style NPAs, this had to change to avoid ambiguity, so the "1+seven digits" went away and was replaced by just seven digits - "856-1414" for Buffalo, "335-1111" for Dansville. RochTel/Frontier allowed full eleven-digit dialing as well - "1-716-856-1414" to call Buffalo - and those of us who knew what was coming started dialing our Buffalo calls that way in anticipation of last year's 716 split, which left Rochester on the "wrong" side. But I'm off my target here, which is to point out that at least SOME of New York State did have toll alerting, which was probably a good thing in the days when a 1-minute daytime call to Buffalo cost a quarter and a quarter was worth something. With 4.9-cent long distance, it really doesn't matter anymore ... s ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 06:05:53 -0500 From: John Stahl Subject: Re: 11-Digit Dialing Comes to NYC John R. Levine, said: > Oh, please, not this tired old disinformation again. New York never > had toll alerting. The best way I found to make sure that I don't get charged for a LD call: I have no LD carrier assigned to one of my telephone lines which I use for outgoing on those occasions where I'm not sure of a phone number. If it is a LD call, the intercept message indicates that the call can't be completed as there is no LD carrier assigned. No worries then about being charged for LD! John Stahl Aljon Enterprises Telecommunications and Data Consultant ------------------------------ From: Joey Lindstrom Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 10:29:48 -0700 Subject: Re: 11-Digit Dialing Comes to NYC Reply-To: joey@telussucks.info On Fri, 24 Jan 2003 00:34:54 -0500 (EST), Ernie Klein wrote: > Once upon a time, long, long, ago -- before CLEC's, before cellphones, > when the communications world was a simpler place, there were more than > enough area codes and prefixes to go around. There were rules to make > it simple; all area codes had to have either a '0' or a '1' as the > second digit (215, 213, 408, etc). Prefixes could not use a '0' or '1' > as the second digit (334, 543, 344. etc). As soon as the second digit > was dialed the switch would know if this was going to be a 10 digit call > or a 7 digit call. As more and more demand came for prefixes, and area > codes had to be split, the finite number of area codes (and prefix > coded) ran out. We now have area code '217' and prefix '217' for > example. The switch can no longer know if you are going to dial > 217-6041 (a local call), or 217-604-1234 (a long distance call). > There are two ways to resolve this dilemma: 1) Wait after the 7th > digit to see if the customer has finished dialing, or is still trying > to dial the rest of the number. Normal interdigital timing is usually > 3-5 seconds to allow customers who are slow to dial (my 102 year old > aunt for example). 2) Dial a '1' at the start of a 10 digit call to > let the switch know that 10 more digits are coming. Or 3) Mandate 10-digit dialing on all (local) calls (instead of 11). Program the switches not to expect 7-digit calls at all - the first three digits dialed will always be the area code. Here in Alberta (and I think most of Canada and much of the USA), prior to about 1993 you dialed toll calls within your area code as 1-nxx-xxxx. Thus, the leading "1" told the switch to expect *EITHER* 7 or 10 digits. The number of digits to expect would be determined by the second digit dialed after the "1": if 0 or 1, then 10 digits. If 2 through 9, then 7 digits. In Alberta, this changed in 1993 (or maybe 1992) to pave the way for expansion of the NANP to use area codes with middle digits 2 through 9. At this point, all long-distance calls had to be dialed with the area code, even within your own code. A call to Edmonton that used to be dialed 1-444-4444 was now 1-403-444-4444. (And then of course in 1999, 403 was split with Edmonton moving to 780. Recently, the "403-444" prefix mentioned has been reassigned to a CLEC here in Calgary, so now I just dial 444-4444 :-) ) -- Joey Lindstrom -- Telus Sucks http://www.telussucks.info ------------------------------ From: Lisa Miller Organization: TELECOM Subject: Re: 11-Digit Dialing Comes to NYC Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 19:36:45 -0500 Ernie Klein wrote: > In article , Lisa Miller > wrote: >> Allston Parking Refugee wrote: >>> 11-digit dialing is coming to NYC on February 1, 2003. NYC had >>> managed to hang onto 7 digit dialing even with its overlays for a few >>> years, thanks to the NYS PSC who fought the FCC and lost over this >>> issue. >> I can understand why the area code has to be dialed, but why is Verizon >> (or the NY PUC?) mandating the 1+ too? Verizon has already implemented >> 10 digit dialing up and down its territory, as have many other places >> too. In these areas, Verizon has repeated over and over that the 1+ is >> not necessary, and to just dial 10 digits, not 11. >> But in New York City, 11 (1+ 10digits) apparently will be mandated. I >> suspect it is the PUC that is requiring this strangeness, but who knows. >> Verizon obviously has the technology to do just 10 digits. It would make >> a lot more sense to keep things consistent across the land where the area >> code must be used for all calls. >> Reference: http://tinyurl.com/4qbq (Verizon Web Page) > Once upon a time, long, long, ago -- before CLEC's, before cellphones, > when the communications world was a simpler place, there were more than > enough area codes and prefixes to go around. There were rules to make > it simple; all area codes had to have either a '0' or a '1' as the > second digit (215, 213, 408, etc). Prefixes could not use a '0' or '1' > as the second digit (334, 543, 344. etc). As soon as the second digit > was dialed the switch would know if this was going to be a 10 digit call > or a 7 digit call. As more and more demand came for prefixes, and area > codes had to be split, the finite number of area codes (and prefix > coded) ran out. We now have area code '217' and prefix '217' for > example. The switch can no longer know if you are going to dial > 217-6041 (a local call), or 217-604-1234 (a long distance call). > There are two ways to resolve this dilemma: 1) Wait after the 7th > digit to see if the customer has finished dialing, or is still trying > to dial the rest of the number. Normal interdigital timing is usually > 3-5 seconds to allow customers who are slow to dial (my 102 year old > aunt for example). 2) Dial a '1' at the start of a 10 digit call to > let the switch know that 10 more digits are coming. > Either option could be used, however the first usually is not because > most calls in a given central office are 7 digit, local calls, and to > stop and wait after the 7th digit for 3-5 seconds to see if more digits > are going to come, would delay the majority of calls from completing. > This wait not only annoys customers, it can tie up central office > equipment for an additional 3-5 seconds per call, requiring more > equipment for the same number of calls. > Thus, dial '1' before a 10 digit call. I don't buy that, because 10 digit dialing (no 1+) works just fine just about everywhere else in Verizon land where there are overlays and area codes must always be dialed. ------------------------------ From: John Hines Subject: Re: Rat Shack and Future Slop Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 08:12:10 -0600 Organization: www.jhines.org Reply-To: john@jhines.org glb1202@cognitronics.com (Gerry Belanger) wrote: > In article , PaulCoxwell@aol.com > wrote: >> The Radio Shack stores in the U.K. go by the name of Tandy, but the >> same principle applies. It's very seldom I use them (too expensive >> for most items), but they go through the same routine of asking for >> name, address, phone number, what you had for breakfast etc. on every >> little purchase. > Last week I purchased something at my local dealer owned RS. > Surprised me when the clerk did not ask for the name or phone number. There was a news story a few months ago that RS has stopped the practice. Sorry I don't have a copy. ------------------------------ From: Joey Lindstrom Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 10:03:38 -0700 Subject: Multiple DSL services on same cable Reply-To: joey@telussucks.info On Thu, 23 Jan 2003 23:56:41 -0500 (EST), David Clayton wrote: > From: David Clayton > Subject: Re: DSL vs Cable > Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 19:54:28 +1100 > Organization: Customer of Connect.com.au Pty. Ltd. > Reply-To: dcstar@acslink.net.au > Jack Adams contributed the following: > Has anyone out there got any info or experience with DSL degradation > when multiple DSL services are provisioned in the same cable? > I would imagine that "early adopter" DSL users would get good data rates > initially, but as more people take up DSL the crosstalk from these would > cause a gradual reduction in maximum (reliable) throughput as the > individual copper cables carry more of these services. I can offer my own personal experience. When I moved into my current home, which was my late grandparents' home, the house had a single pair of phone wires coming in. That cable was not underground, but overhead and connected to a telephone pole out in the alleyway. I had DSL installed and it worked fine, although my distance to the switch means that I can't quite reach the maximum of 640k (upstream, which is what I care about -- I'm running web and FTP servers). At that time, I was achiving maybe 350k. I later needed to add a second DSL line. This meant a trip out to my place by telco. The fellow had a big spool of four-pair wire (two lines) and was going to replace my two-pair wire. I suggested to him that it might be a good idea to install cable with more capacity, as I may need to add additional DSL lines down the road. He had some 12-pair (6 line) cable in the truck but it wasn't spooled, so I hadda help the guy string it up (through trees and stuff). While he was installing it, he upgraded my old (circa 1953) lightning protector on my first line. After that, my speed increased on the first line from 350 to 390. Speed on the second line was about 450. As time went on, I added a third, then fourth, then fifth line. At *NO* stage along the way did I ever suffer a decrease in performance on existing lines when a new line went in. Indeed, over the course of time, I've gradually seen better upstream rates. A few months ago, I returned all of my 3COM rental DSL modems to my ISP and replaced them with DLink modems that I purchased (subsidized by my telco -- usual price $300CAD, I got 'em for $70CAD -- and they'd be pissed to find out I'm using 'em with a different ISP!). The result was an immediate bump up in speed. The first line is now cruising at 450 to 480, while the other lines vary from 490 to 560 (depending on weather conditions, which DEFINITELY affect my situation). I don't know if the wire pairs in telcos pole-to-pole wiring are adjacent, but this 12-pair cable running from the pole to my house is carrying six phone circuits, five of which also have DSL on 'em. It's all working just great. -- Joey Lindstrom -- Telus Sucks http://www.telussucks.info ------------------------------ From: Michael D. Sullivan Subject: Re: Master-Keyed Lock Vulnerability Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 08:05:27 GMT On Thu, 23 Jan 2003 10:08:10 -0500, Monty Solomon posted the following to comp.dcom.telecom: > In a recent research paper, we describe weaknesses in most > master-keyed lock systems, such as those used by offices, schools, and > businesses as well as by some residential facilities (particularly > apartment complexes, dormitories, and condominiums). These weaknesses > allow anyone with access to the key to a single lock to create easily > the "master" key that opens every lock in the entire system. Creating > such a key requires no special skill, leaves behind no evidence, and > does not require engaging in recognizably suspicious behavior. The > only materials required are a metal file and a small number of blank > keys, which are often easy to obtain. All of these vulnerabilities were well known in the 1970s, when I attended college. An additional vulnerability not discussed is that many institutions use removable-core locks, which allow adminstrations to rapidly change the individual keying of a given lock by using a "core key" to remove the guts of the lock and replace it. This makes the "core key" an additional master key, which operates on a separate ring. In college in the 1970s, I had a friend who had cracked not only the master key combo, but the "core key" combo. He could remove the core from any lock and replace it with the one from his dorm room, and then open the lock with his room key. Michael D. Sullivan Bethesda, MD, USA (delete NOSPAM from address to mail me) ------------------------------ From: Michael D. Sullivan Subject: Re: Calling Party Pays to Cellular Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 06:40:48 GMT On Thu, 23 Jan 2003 12:15:20 -0600, Randal Hayes posted the following to comp.dcom.telecom: > In December 2001, the FCC lifted its ban on technology-specific area > codes. > However, the FCC's policy change does not automatically assure > approval of a request for such an area code. It requires state > regulatory agencies to request such area codes on an individual basis, > and each will be approved/disapproved based on the merits of the > request. I'm not sure what this has to do with calling-party-pays (CPP), other than that a wireless-only area code is now theoretically possible, which would appear to facilitate CPP billing. I say "appear to" because the FCC has also required the wireless industry to implement number portability by November 24, 2003, which would result in wireless numbers from any wireless-only area code being ported to wireline phones and vice versa. As a result, one could not rely on the area code of either a wireless or wireline number for determining whether the calling party would pay a surcharge. Also, the FCC's decision to lift the ban on specialized overlays (such as a wireless area code) has been appealed (I represent Sprint in the appeal). Two wireless overlays have been proposed by states (California and Connecticut), but neither has been addressed by the FCC yet. Michael D. Sullivan Bethesda, MD, USA (delete NOSPAM from address to mail me) ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 10:11:47 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: BellSouth Completes Year with More Than 1,000,000 DSL Customers ATLANTA--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Jan. 24, 2003--BellSouth Corp. (NYSE:BLS) today announced that it has increased its DSL customer base to 1,021,000 DSL subscribers, including both retail and wholesale customers. BellSouth added 97,000 DSL customers in the fourth quarter. During 2002, BellSouth added approximately 400,000 total customers, representing a growth rate of 64 percent. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=31111905 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 13:39:23 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Trouble with Prime Numbers: DeCSS, DVD and the Protection of Andres Guadamuz Gonzolez Law Lecturer University of Edinburgh a.guadamuz@ed.ac.uk Abstract The DVD video format has become one of the most important developments in the home entertainment market since the popularisation of the magnetic video recording. The film industry delivered this format with a built in security system which was supposed to avoid illegal copying of the discs, much as what is taking place with the music CD and the almost indiscriminate copying of music into MP3 format over the Internet. This was achieved by means of encryption technology. This essay deals with the cracking of DVD encryption and its further diffusion as a computer programme named DeCSS, which has been made available over the Internet in various formats, including t-shirts and a numerical representation of the code. There are three court cases based on the online posting of this programme, two in the United States and one in Norway. The article starts by describing the technology involved, as it is felt by the author that some of these technical issues are of importance to the legal implications of the case and should be understood properly. The article then deals with the developments in all of the three cases up to this date. The essay then finishes with a look at the legal issues involved, including hyper-linking, trade secrets, freedom of speech and the translation of DeCSS into numerical format. Keywords: Encryption, Prime Numbers, DVD, Hyper-linking, DeCSS This is a Refereed article published on 6 December 2002. Citation: Guadamuz A,'Trouble with Prime Numbers: DeCSS, DVD and the Protection of Proprietary Encryption Tools', The Journal of Information, Law and Technology (JILT) 2002 (3) . http://elj.warwick.ac.uk/jilt/02-3/guadamuz.html ------------------------------ From: fungus@OCF.Berkeley.EDU (Hank Fung) Subject: Re: The Digest Was Spammed Again! Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 21:33:21 UTC Organization: Univ. of California Berkeley Open Computing Facility In article , Tom Betz wrote: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You know, it may get to the point real > soon here on this list that I start accepting incoming mail *only* > from a trusted whitelist of readers/contributors, with all other mail > going into the bit bucket. There simply is not enough time in the day > for *me* to go around the web looking for hiding places for spam. All > trusted whitelist contributors will have a list giving the correct > email addresses of others on the list. Then all email addresses > printed here will vanish also. That seems to me like a horrible way to > be part of the net, and extremely arrogant. Do you know, Tom, if > there was any truth at all to his allegations regards the number of > 'suspects', inquistioned persons, etc? Or was that all just a lot of > crap as well? PAT] Please don't. I don't mind the occasional spam, and I think you do a good job at filtering it out. What would be more of a loss would be if the average user couldn't ask a question or comment on something. The variety of opinions is why I read the digest. Hank Fung fungus@ocf.berkeley.edu Go Bears! http://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~fungus [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That is one reason, Hank, why I have decided not to implement a 'white list' sort of structure here, no matter how often I get stung with spam. Like yourself, I really want to have questions/comments/rude gestures handed off to the readers here from time to time. Of course what that means (manual editing and processing the Digest) is that I will continue to spend six or eight hours daily working on the Digest. Heck, I would still be doing the mailing list by hand also (instead of majordomo) if it had not been for John Levine setting it up. But, I can see the handwriting on the wall: one of these days, maybe not for a few years yet, this Digest will have to be totally automated, or else go out of business totally like so much of the 'old' Usenet has these days. Don't forget to look in the history section of the Archives and get your copy of 'Second Avenue Story; the NY Tel fire in 1975'. Messages like yours and Linc's (in this issue) and the work done by Kevin Bluml on the fire story is what *still* makes this Digest worth working on each day for me. PAT] ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-330-6774 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 Fax 3: 775-642-0603 Fax 4: 530-309-7234 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2003 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. In addition, gifts from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert have enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V22 #255 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat Jan 25 23:49:51 2003 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id h0Q4npv17704; Sat, 25 Jan 2003 23:49:51 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 23:49:51 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200301260449.h0Q4npv17704@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #256 TELECOM Digest Sat, 25 Jan 2003 23:49:00 EST Volume 22 : Issue 256 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Changing the Social Meaning of Privacy in Cyberspace (Monty Solomon) Federal Charges Filed in Conference Call Eavesdropping Case (M. Solomon) Ethics Questions Hounnd Telecom Advisor (Monty Solomon) FCC Telephone Changes Worry Lawmakers (Monty Solomon) N.M. Preps ID Management System (Monty Solomon) Instant Insecurity: Security Issues of Instant Messaging (Monty Solomon) Spammer Exposes Customer Data (Monty Solomon) AT&T Spam Filter Loses Valid E-Mail (Monty Solomon) Cell Industry Balks at FCC Rules (Monty Solomon) Office Surfers May Face Wipeout (Monty Solomon) Unlimited Service Ends for Palm.net (Monty Solomon) The Most Annoying Spam of 2002 (Monty Solomon) Re: Looking for Satellite TV, Internet, Phone Provider (Scott Dorsey) Re: AT&T Broadband Raises Prices For Cablemodem Service (Herb Stein) Re: Site Protests Telco Patent Claim (Herb Stein) Re: 666 (Paul Coxwell) Last Laugh! Will Someone Explain Why This Actually Works? (J. Neal) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRUSES. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 13:56:43 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Changing the Social Meaning of Privacy in Cyberspace Steven Hetcher Harvard Journal of Law & Technology Volume 15, No. 1: Fall, 2001 http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/articles/pdf/15HarvJLTech149.pdf ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 14:16:25 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Federal Charges Filed in Party Conference Call Eavesdropping Case By THE NEW YORK TIMES RICHMOND, Va., Jan. 23 - The former executive director of the Republican Party of Virginia was indicted today on five federal charges accusing him of eavesdropping on a Democratic conference call last year. Each count carries a maximum penalty of five years in prison and a $250,000 fine. Paul McNulty, United States attorney for the Fourth District, announced the indictment of the former Republican official, Edmund A. Matricardi III, at a news conference at the federal courthouse here. Mr. Matricardi, 34, who resigned from his leadership post last year after being indicted on state charges in the matter, is charged with two counts of unlawful interception of a wire communication, two counts of unlawful disclosure of the communications and one count of aiding and abetting the interception of a wire communication. After resigning in Virginia, Mr. Matricardi became executive director of the Republican Party of South Carolina; he resigned that post this afternoon. Mr. Matricardi was accused last March of using a telephone number and access codes to listen in on a teleconference of the Joint Democratic Caucus, which included Gov. Mark Warner. The topic of the teleconference was redistricting, after a Circuit Court judge in Roanoke County ruled that the districts were racially gerrymandered. http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/24/national/24VIRG.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 22:19:26 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Ethics Questions Hound Telecom Advisor A second telephone lobbyist disclosed Friday that his company paid for part of a $3,000 reception for 80 guests honoring President Bush's top telecommunications adviser, contrary to federal ethics rules. Rich Barth of Motorola Inc. said his employer reimbursed him in 2001 for the $487 personal check he wrote to organizers of the party for Nancy Victory, an assistant secretary at the Commerce Department. Earlier this week, SBC Communications Inc. disclosed that it sent a corporate check directly to the event's organizers on behalf of its lobbyist, Priscilla Hill-Ardoin, who was a co-host for the party. Federal ethics rules prohibit officials from accepting gifts from corporations that may be affected by the officials' decisions. Victory heads the National Telecommunications and Information Administration, which oversees communications-spectrum matters. http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=31127327 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 22:24:16 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: FCC Telephone Changes Worry Lawmakers Twenty members on Congress told the Federal Communications Commission Friday that changes involving telephone companies the agency is considering could harm consumers and small businesses. "These proposals may delay our economic recovery by forcing consumers to pay more for their local telephone service and raising the costs of many small businesses," the group of 15 Democrats and five Republicans wrote in a letter to FCC Chairman Michael Powell and the agency's other four commissioners. The letter was a response to testimony that Powell and the commissioners gave before the Senate Commerce Committee on Jan. 14. Powell sought then to assure lawmakers that the agency's upcoming decisions on local phone competition and media ownership would not harm consumers. The most contentious issue at the hearing involved an FCC review of rules involving the leasing of telephone networks. The regional Bell companies _ BellSouth Corp., SBC Communications, Verizon Communications and Qwest Communications _ have been required to provide parts of their local networks to competitors like AT&T Corp. and WorldCom Inc. at discount rates. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=31128067 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 23:10:41 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: N.M. Preps ID Management System BY Dibya Sarkar Jan. 16, 2003 New Mexico soon will implement a centralized, enterprise identity management platform so that citizens and employees can access Web applications more securely. http://www.fcw.com/geb/articles/2003/0113/web-nm-01-16-03.asp ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 23:16:48 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Instant Insecurity: Security Issues of Instant Messaging by Neal Hindocha Instant messaging is an increasingly popular method for communicating over the Internet. Instant messaging (IM) is a real-time supplement to and, in some regards, a replacement for e-mailing. Unlike e-mail, instant messaging allows users to see whether a chosen friend or co-worker is connected to the Internet. Typically, the instant messaging service will alert a user if somebody on the user's list of correspondents is on-line. Instant messaging also differs from e-mail in that messages are exchanged directly almost instantly, allowing for a two-way communication in real-time. Because of the almost immediate two-way nature of communication, many users feel that the use of instant messaging in the workplace leads to more effective and efficient workplace communications and, therefore, to higher productivity. As a result, IM is increasing in popularity in both professional and personal applications. However, as with most things Internet based, the increasing use of instant messaging has led to an associated increase in the number of security risks. This paper will describe instant messaging and offer a brief overview of some of the security threats associated with the service. This article is based on a previously published Symantec white paper called Threats to Instant Messaging. http://online.securityfocus.com/infocus/1657 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 23:19:39 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Spammer Exposes Customer Data By Beth Cox A notorious spammer who pitches pirated software from Symantec's Norton product line over the Internet has left vast amounts of customer data exposed for the world to see. And apparently, that is not at all uncommon. One of the Web sites operated by this particular spammer is called salesscape.com, and links related to the site showed hundreds of customer orders in .txt files. The exposed data includes what item was purchased, customer names, street addresses, phone numbers and e-mail addresses, but apparently not credit card numbers. http://www.internetnews.com/IAR/article.php/1569901 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 23:27:09 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: AT&T Spam Filter Loses Valid E-Mail By Stefanie Olsen Staff Writer, CNET News.com AT&T WorldNet this week activated a risky spam-filtering technique that it shortly had to defuse after subscribers discovered they were losing legitimate e-mail. Late Wednesday night, the Web access provider instituted a new junk e-mail filtering rule in an attempt to stanch an ever-rising tide of unsolicited commercial messages to its subscribers, which number in the millions. But because of the unreliable nature of the technique, some messages from friends and colleagues to AT&T subscribers were never delivered, without either sender or recipient being notified of the missed message. http://news.com.com/2100-1023-982118.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 23:39:51 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Cell Industry Balks at FCC Rules By Elisa Batista Disgruntled over Federal Communications Commission rules meant to protect cell-phone customers, deaf Americans and historical sites near cell towers, a major cell-phone industry lobbying group has decided to take its grievances to Capitol Hill. In a move one government watchdog group called "unusual," the lobbying group -- Cellular Telecommunications and Internet Association -- vented its frustration over some FCC rules in a 339-page document (PDF) submitted to Congress last week. While it isn't unusual for lawmakers to hear from lobbyists, it is rare for the president's executive Office of Management and Budget to relay public opinion to Congress on the policies of an independent regulatory agency like the FCC, said Shan Ferguson, a writer and programmer for OMB Watch. http://www.wired.com/news/wireless/0,1382,57343,00.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 23:41:12 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Office Surfers May Face Wipeout By Stefanie Olsen and Lisa M. Bowman Staff Writer, CNET News.com January 24, 2003, 4:00 AM PT Employee Internet privileges took a beating when cable giant Liberty Media revamped its post-production businesses last year. Before the consolidation, some units had allowed 9-to-5 access to the Web's most popular diversions. Shortly after the company unveiled its new Ascent Media division, however, many staffers faced a new era of austerity: no more eBay, no more "Sims Online," no more Match.com. http://news.com.com/2100-1023-981877.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 23:43:06 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Unlimited Service Ends for Palm.net By Richard Shim Staff Writer, CNET News.com Subscribers to Palm's wireless service are going on a data diet as an all-you-can-eat plan comes to an end. The Milpitas, Calif.-based handheld maker has announced changes to pricing plans for its Palm.net wireless data service. Starting Monday, new customers or those who are renewing the $39.99 plan will see the service change from unlimited monthly access to 1MB of data transfer per month and 10 cents for each additional kilobyte. Subscribers can also get 1MB of data for $34.99 and 8 cents for each additional kilobyte if they agree to a one-year commitment. Subscribers who are already locked into a one-year contract will continue to get unlimited access at $39.99 until their contract ends. The service allows Palm's VII series and i705 devices to wirelessly access e-mail and the Web. http://news.com.com/2100-1033-981897.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 23:48:12 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: The Most Annoying Spam of 2002 Every person on the net has one thing in common. They all hate spam. Anyone who has an e-mail account will have received these unsolicited commercial messages that offer you things you do not want, at prices you will not pay, from companies you will never call. 2002 was a bumper year for these messages and now 30% of all mail flying around the net is thought to be spam. Filtering firm Surf Control has compiled a list of the top 10 most annoying spam messages sent across the net in the last 12 months. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/2688619.stm ------------------------------ From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) Subject: Re: Looking for Satellite TV, Internet, Phone Provider Date: 24 Jan 2003 18:42:09 -0500 Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000) John Higdon wrote: > In article , *selah* > wrote: >> I'm looking for companies that would be able to provide phone, tv and >> internet from a satellite dish. Would appreciate any info. > Would you REALLY want to talk on a phone served by a satellite in > synchronous orbit? If the alternative is talking on a phone served by troposcatter, absolutely. scott "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." ------------------------------ From: Herb Stein Subject: Re: AT&T Broadband Raises Prices For Cablemodem Service Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 20:19:03 -0600 Dave Phelps wrote in message news:telecom22.250.11@telecom-digest.org: > In article , herb@herbstein.com > says: >> Not to defend SBC, even though I retired from there, but I've actually >> had very good service on the DSL side. I just spent 2 hours on the >> phone with them after my wife f**ked up her DSL install and they were >> pleasant the entire time. I'm in St. Louis BTW. I prefer to think that >> an old retired fart gets no better service that the general public, > AccessUS, from my limited experience, is a shambles. From what I've > seen, I can't believe they're still around. Like everyone else out there, they have crapped on me and also given good service. > I just installed another SBC ADSL connection today. SLA=128/384. Actual, > about 110/150-170. We'll see how it goes. > When I called them, they fed me a line about leaving the DSL modem on > for ten days for "optimization". Anyone know what SBC does during the > ten day "optimization" period? Firmware upgrade? I just got a CD from Access with a bunch of instructions about installing. But if I don't have a MS machine, I'm messed up. I'd think that a real customer with an SDSL line (real money) could easily NOT have Windows installed on anything. Oh well. > Dave Phelps > Phone Masters Ltd. > deadspam=tippenring Dave, if you are a St. Louis area customer, I'd be glad to have the opportunity to talk to you. Email me off-line and I'll call you. Herb Stein The Herb Stein Group www.herbstein.com herb@herbstein.com 314 952-4601 ------------------------------ From: Herb Stein Subject: Re: Site Protests Telco Patent Claim Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 20:41:04 -0600 Monty Solomon wrote in message news:telecom22.251.4@telecom-digest.org: > By Joanna Glasner > 02:00 AM Jan. 23, 2003 PT > Although she's always been fond of her website, Marilynne Eichinger > never thought there was anything particularly unusual about its > layout. > "We like to think that our graphics are nice, but in terms of the > format and in terms of using different frames and links, it's a common > type of design," said Eichinger, who has been running Museum Tour, > which sells educational toys, for the past seven years. > To her thinking, the homepage, which features colorful photos of > sample products flanked by navigation buttons on top and down the > left margin, resembles dozens of other e-commerce websites. > That's why Eichinger was caught off guard last week when she received > a letter from the intellectual property division of telecommunications > giant SBC alleging that the Museum Tour site violates two of its > patents. > The letter, signed by Harlie Frost, president of SBC Intellectual > Property, alleges that the Museum Tour site infringes on related > patents filed in 1996 covering what the company calls a "structured > document browser." > http://www.wired.com/news/business/0,1367,57344,00.html > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Let's all of us who maintain web sites > go to Eichinger's web site and copy her source code and put up sites > identical to hers in design. Then SBC can sue all of us, or maybe > throw their weight around and find a friendly judge somewhere to ban > all of us. PAT] Were I to have the financial resources of Microsoft, I'd give it some thought. I have enough problems without SBC on my ass. Herb Stein The Herb Stein Group www.herbstein.com herb@herbstein.com 314 952-4601 ------------------------------ From: PaulCoxwell@aol.com Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 15:22:49 EST Subject: Re: 666 > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But many of the '666 exchanges' are > quite old and were around as names (such as MONroe in Chicago) prior > to going to numbers. I wonder what 666 exchanges are newer (in the > last ten or twenty years) and began life merely as '666' rather than > as a name combination? PAT] In the U.K. it's the other way around. In director (7 digit areas) the 666 c.o. code wasn't generally used back in the pre-all-figure days, because numbering was 3L-4N and on British dials the letter O was on the zero. With only M and N on the 6, it would have been quite difficult to find a suitable exchange name for 666! After letters were dropped in the 1960s, some director areas adopted 666 as a c.o. code. 666 has been used in London, Birmingham, Edinburgh, Liverpool, and Manchester, but not apparently in Glasgow. It's rather more difficult to assess in the smaller places, because of the variable-length numbering schemes used. In my area, for example, most exchanges are determined by the first 2 digits of the 6-digit number, but some smaller offices can only be determined on the third digit. Area code 0666 (now 01666) was allocated though. Paul Coxwell Norfolk, U.K. ------------------------------ From: misterjorneal@yahoo.com (J. Neal) Subject: Last Laugh! Will Someone Explain Why This Actually Works? Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2003 00:48:31 GMT Organization: Road Runner High Speed Online -- Northeast Ohio Normally, I don't get involved with this crap, but this one really works. I sent the money, put my name on the list and posted it to a few message boards hoping for results but expecting none. In all honesty, I was extremely surprised the day that I got my first five dollars - it didn't end there. Sure the message below sounds like most of the others (I often wonder: 'who writes this crap, does this person actually speak this way?'), but, strangely enough, it actually works. This makes me wonder about some of the other 'get rich quick schemes' that I have dismissed. You don't have to read the propaganda below if you don't want to - here's basically what you do: send $1 to each of the individuals on the list of names/addresses below. Delete the top name and address from the list and put your name/address at the bottom of the list, post it everywhere that you can (newsgroups, message boards, etc.) It won't make you rich, but it does bring in some extra money. I don't know If my situation is typical, but I started posting about a month and a half ago and for the past three weeks, I have not had a day where I have not recieved at least seven dollars; one day I got $84. I average around $40. Here are some statistics based on my earnings over a three week period (21 days): Mean daily income: $42.7 (USD) Median daily income: $44.2 Mode: $35 (2 days) Min: $7 Max: $84 As you can see from the mean and the median, there is a relatively symmetrical distribution of daily income over the three week period in question. The fact that I sometimes recieve foreign currency explains the fact that the median (of a 21 day spread) is not a whole number. I will admit that I have given you all of this information because I am trying to convince you that this works. I will also admit that I am not doing this for you, but because I want my dollar (I am trying to see if I can improve my earnings). You can use this information to benefit yourself or not. ********** MAKE ALOT OF MONEY, FAST AND RISK FREE!!! READ THIS!!! > Turn Six Dollars Into Thousands!!! HOW TO TURN SIX DOLLARS INTO > THOUSANDS OR MORE IN LESS THAN A MONTH. READING THIS COULD CHANGE > YOUR LIFE! IT DOES WORK! JUST GIVE IT A CHANCE!! I found this on > a bulletin board and decided to try it. A little while back, I was > browsing through newsgroups, just like you are now, and came across > an article similar to this that said you could make thousands of > dollars within weeks with only an initial investment of $6.00! > So I thought, "Yeah right, this must be a scam", but like most of > us, I was curious, so I kept reading. Anyway, it said that you send > $1.00 to each of the 6 names and address stated in the article. You > then place your own name and address in the bottom of the list at > #6, and that was it. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The other 15 K bytes of text in the original screed have been mercifully eliminated. We have all seen it time and time again. The *reason* it works is because most people are mathematically challenged; nothing more, nothing less. They fail to realize, apparently, that no matter how many people get into this scheme, the only ones who make anything at all are the ones who thought of it -- about a hundred years ago. Long before Al Gore invented the internet -- even before computers were invented -- this same scheme was making the rounds in paper mail. The postal inspectors declared it to be a scam fifty or sixty years ago; you have to have *something of value* to make it 'legal' and marginally ethical. To accomplish that legality, some smart person printed up a series of one-page 'business reports' which you 'purchased' from him for the dollar or six dollars or whatever, which you were then free to reprint and resell to other suckers. You have to have something 'of value' in exchange for the consideration (money) given to you. That seems to satisfy the postal inspectors. Yes, Mr. Neal, the scam will work *in small numbers* because just as there are always people around who are smarter than you, there are a considerable number who are dumber than you also. But eventually you are going to run out of people to use. If you made $84 in 21 days (a far cry from the 'thousands per month' I have seen advertised some places) I would say you are already starting to scrape the bottom of the barrel. More important, is the $84 you made last month on this scam worth the anger and frustrations you have caused many netters who see those messages all the time? PAT] ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-330-6774 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 Fax 3: 775-642-0603 Fax 4: 530-309-7234 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2003 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. In addition, gifts from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert have enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V22 #256 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun Jan 26 00:31:41 2003 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id h0Q5VfC18760; Sun, 26 Jan 2003 00:31:41 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2003 00:31:41 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200301260531.h0Q5VfC18760@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #257 TELECOM Digest Sun, 26 Jan 2003 00:32:00 EST Volume 22 : Issue 257 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Vonage (PaulCoxwell@aol.com) Re: 1+Ten-Digits Mandatory in NYCity (Dave Mausner) Re: Who's Calling Whom? TeleGeography Points the Way (Steve Fleckenstein) Wireless Gaming: Finally No Fantasy (Monty Solomon) Virus Overwhelms Global Internet Systems (Monty Solomon) Computer Worm Slows Net, Grounds S. Korean Surfers (Monty Solomon) False Alarm: Suspected Car Bomb Turns Out to Be Tracking Device (Solomon) Unbleeped Bleep Words Spread on Network TV (Monty Solomon) Brain Cancer Patient in WA Sues Over Arrest at Walgreen's (Monty Solomon) Court Record System to Go Online Next Year (Monty Solomon) Bank of America ATMs Disrupted by Virus (Monty Solomon) Re: Looking for Satellite TV, Internet, Phone Provider (jbl) Re: AT&T Broadband Users See 3rd E-Mail Shift (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Re: The Digest Was Spammed Again! (Robert Woolley) Telecom Digest Spamming - Possible Solution? (3yeadqp02@sneakemail.com) Re: Instant Insecurity: Security Issues With Instant Msgs. (John Higdon) Re: Last Laugh! Will Someone Explain How This Works? (John Higdon) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRUSES. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: PaulCoxwell@aol.com Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 15:22:54 EST Subject: Re: Vonage Thanks for the replies. I'm actually looking into the possibility of using the service from France, where rates to/from the U.S.A. aren't quite so favorable as between the NANP and the U.K. Being able to be called directly from the States at normal DDD rates would be a bonus, along with a few other benefits such as being able to dial direct into U.S. directory assistance without having to go via a local operator (outgoing U.S. calls to 555-1212 are automatically barred by many networks in Europe). I'd probably not need the unlimited option though; the lower-rate plan with 500 minutes of calling included would be sufficient. The possibility of a long-ish transmission delay and the actual quality of audio is one of my main concerns. Paul Coxwell, Norfolk, U.K. ------------------------------ Reply-To: Dave Mausner From: Dave Mausner Subject: Re: 1+Ten-Digits Mandatory in NYCity Organization: Prodigy Internet http://www.prodigy.com Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 22:01:26 GMT Is it technologically feasible to promote a standard of dialing such that if the # is used, then the digits entered are suplemented to the left by your own NPA and CO? For example if I am 708-848-2775, and i dial 5432#, the call would go to 708-848-5432. If I dial 369-9999#, the call would go to 708-369-9999. In overlay regions, this might preserve the ability to dial 7 digits in your own NPA, and add the feature of being able to dial 4 within your own CO. Dave Mausner / v.+1-708-848-2775 / f.+1-708-848-2569 / c.+1-312-wake-my-i Mark J Cuccia wrote: > "delays-to-timeouts" on seven-digit calls can be cancelled with the > use of the optional trailing POUND '#' button, but the general public > really isn't aware of this, regardless of any promotions by telco. ------------------------------ From: Steve Fleckenstein Subject: Re: Who's Calling Whom? TeleGeography Points the Way Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 16:57:14 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Reply-To: Steve Fleckenstein Heather Tinsley wrote in message news:telecom22.252.12@telecom-digest.org: > Washington, DC - January 22, 2003 -- In 2001, Americans made 37 > billion minutes of international telephone calls, just under a quarter > of the 154 billion minutes of international calls made worldwide. > Mexico was the country dialed most frequently by Americans, with 5.2 > billion minutes, followed by Canada, with 5.1 billion minutes. The > fastest growing major destination, however, has been India. In the > past decade, U.S. phone calls to India surged from 59 million minutes > to more than 1.4 billion minutes in 2001. I wonder if the increase in India calls has something to do with all the help desk out sourcing? ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 00:01:09 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Wireless Gaming: Finally No Fantasy As handset hardware and networks improve, carriers see cell-phone fun as the Next Big Thing for firing up subscribers' spending. Ever since the idea occurred to some programming whiz, wireless online gaming has looked like one of those goofy Internet fantasies that was just too far ahead of its time. For years, cell-phone owners had to satisfy themselves with Snake, an amoebic version of the two decade-old Pac-Man electronic game, in which a line devours tiny dots on a phone's screen. In fact, Snake remained state-of-the-art even after Nextel (NXTL ), which now has 10 million subscribers, introduced the first Java-based phones nearly two years ago. Suddenly, however, the technology of wireless gaming is catching up with the concept, and carriers, phone makers, and game developers are jumping onto the bandwagon. Phones with large color screens more suitable for gaming began selling in the U.S. last year. Since then, carriers have also developed back-end systems flexible enough to bill for individual games. And starting last fall, most cell-phone networks became fast enough for games to function well. http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/jan2003/tc20030122_7509.htm ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 12:25:48 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Virus Overwhelms Global Internet Systems http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=31132434 Traffic on the Internet slowed dramatically for hours early Saturday, the effects of a fast-spreading, virus-like infection that overwhelmed the world's digital pipelines and broadly interfered with Web browsing and delivery of e-mail. Sites monitoring the health of the Internet reported significant slowdowns globally, although recovery efforts appeared to be succeeding. Millions of Internet users in South Korea were stranded when computers at Korea Telecom Freetel and SK Telecom failed. Service was restored but remained slow, officials said. In Japan, NHK television reported heavy data traffic swamped some of the country's Internet connections, and Finnish phone operator TeliaSonera reported some problems. On the Net: Technical details: http://www.eeye.com/html/Research/Flash/AL20030125.html More details: http://www.iss.net/security_center/static/10031.php Microsoft fix: http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/bulletin/MS02-039.asp ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 12:27:33 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Computer Worm Slows Net; Grounds S.Korean Surfers By Jane Macartney and Bernhard Warner SEOUL/LONDON, Jan 25 (Reuters) - A rapidly spreading computer worm infested networks and bogged down Internet traffic across the globe on Saturday, crippling online services in one of the world's most wired countries, South Korea. Called "Sapphire" or "SQL Slammer," the worm carries a self-regenerating mechanism that enables it to multiply quickly across the web, said Mikko Hypponen, manager of anti-virus research at F-Secure, a Helsinki-based computer security firm. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=31132872 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 14:30:19 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: False Alarm: Suspected Car Bomb Turns Out to Be Tracking Device By BRADEN BUNCH Item Staff Writer A device that appeared to be a bomb on a vehicle parked outside Simpson's Hardware and Sports on Wesmark Boulevard kept local and state authorities busy for nearly four hours Friday before the object was found to be a tracking system placed on the car by the driver's wife. ... Described as a "very professional-looking device," the object was thought to be several sticks of dynamite with a remote detonation transmitter attached. The entire device, authorities said, was attached to the vehicle with duct tape. http://www.theitem.com/CityDesk/030118a_news.cfm ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 16:04:09 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Unbleeped Bleep Words Spread on Network TV By JIM RUTENBERG Last Sunday was a banner day for obscenity on network television. Bono barked out the four-letter word par excellence when he accepted the award for best song at the Golden Globe ceremony, and it was delivered live to East Coast viewers of NBC. A few hours earlier, a CBS microphone caught a man using the same word during the American Football Conference championship game between the Oakland Raiders and the Tennessee Titans. About the same time, back on NBC, the actor Colin Farrell made a scatological reference, traditionally verboten on network TV, during a preceremony Golden Globes show. The telephones hardly rang at the Federal Communications Commission, which tends to act only in response to formal consumer complaints of indecency and avoids moving too aggressively. Broadcast television, under intensifying attack by saltier cable competitors, is pushing the limits of decorum further by the year, and hardly anyone is pushing back. Though the changing standards of prime time have evolved gradually, the pace has accelerated in recent years. But the falloff in protests over those changes has been sudden. http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/25/arts/television/25TUBE.html ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 17:14:45 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Brain Cancer Patient in Washington Sues Over Arrest at Walgreen's TACOMA, Wash. (AP) A woman with a brain tumor filed a lawsuit against Walgreens Advance Care Inc., saying when she arrived to pick up her painkiller prescription one day, a pharmacist had her arrested. In a lawsuit filed Thursday in Pierce County Superior Court, Shannon O'Brien, 35, said she went to the drive-up window at a Walgreen Drug Store two blocks from her home last July 7. The pharmacist on duty thought she had faked her Percocet prescription and called police, the lawsuit stated. http://www.boston.com/dailynews/024/nation/Brain_cancer_patient_in_Washin:.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 17:20:14 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Court Record System to go Online Next Year By Ralph Ranalli, Globe Staff, 1/24/2003 As the drumbeat of dire warnings about state finances continues, court officials announced some rare good news yesterday: An often- criticized and long-awaited computerization project will be completed within budget and ahead of schedule thanks in large part to the weak economy. Court officials told a meeting of the Massachusetts Bar Association's board of delegates that their ambitious MassCourts project - a system that will electronically tie together records from the Berkshires to Boston in all seven state court departments - will be completed early next year, almost a year ahead of the 2005 deadline set by the Legislature. In a hotel ballroom just a stone's throw from shoppers grabbing up deeply discounted fashions and merchandise in the Prudential Center mall, the grinning chief of the project, Superior Court Judge Timothy Hillman, announced that court leaders had snagged an after-Christmas bargain of their own. Under a contract signed yesterday, Hillman said the state will pay one of the country's leading legal technology companies $13 million for a computer system complete with ''all the bells and whistles'' the courts wanted. The contract, he said, will allow completion of the project within the $75 million bond authorization approved by the Legislature in 1994 - a financial feat deemed virtually impossible by a legislative watchdog committee in a scathing report two years ago. http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/024/metro/Court_record_system_to_go_online_next_year+.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 23:26:16 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Bank of America ATMs Disrupted by Virus SEATTLE (Reuters) - Bank of America Corp. said on Saturday that customers at a majority of its 13,000 automatic teller machines were unable to process customer transactions after a malicious computer worm nearly froze Internet traffic worldwide. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A43267-2003Jan25.html ------------------------------ From: jbl Subject: Re: Looking for Satellite TV, Internet, Phone Provider Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 17:45:45 -0700 Organization: On the desert Reply-To: jbl@spamblocked.com In , John Higdon wrote: > In article , > johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) wrote: >> I've done it, it's not that bad. About 20 years ago, in the dawn of >> the competitive long distance era was Satellite Business Systems, > funded by IBM, Sears, and (I think) Aetna insurance. > Back when I owned a real company, we got SBS to save money on long > distance. We even hid the onerous Feature Group B access behind our > PBX (which was capable of transparently dialing all the necessary > access numbers and codes). The workers hated it. One CS > representative said that it lowered apparent IQs about thirty points > with all the delay and the resultant tripping over words of the > other party. One wise guy started saying "over" when making long > distance calls. We got rid of it within a year. A long time ago (around '83) I was doing some WAN installations that involved dedicated 9600 KB lines across the country. (We were making do prior to installation with two way dial-up and some fancy, for the time, modems.) We had to "work with" the phone company (AT&T long lines) to be sure no satellite links were involved in either direction, because our application (packet switching) was sensitive to that kind of delay. It turned out at the time, and perhaps it is still the case, that when a long haul call was routed, one direction was frequently via satellite. A call that went both ways by satellite was noticeably bad (those who frequently called overseas were well aware of this), but if one direction was on land-lines, the performance was adequate for the casual caller not to be bothered by the delay one way. /JBL ------------------------------ Subject: Re: AT&T Broadband Users See 3rd E-Mail Shift Organization: Excelsior Computer Services From: joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2003 01:24:41 GMT > AT&T spokeswoman Jennifer L. Khoury said the company expects to begin > making the switch from e-mail addresses ending in attbi.com to > comcast.net starting in March. It will affect more than 2 million I don't understand why, as part of the buy-out, comcast.net can't buy attbi.com as well. Is this really so hard? Joel ------------------------------ From: Robert Woolley Subject: Re: The Digest Was Spammed Again! Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2003 00:20:58 +0000 On Fri, 24 Jan 2003 06:12:58 UTC, Tom Betz wrote: > Quoth Pat in news:telecom22.250.9@telecom-digest.org: >> Do you know, Tom, if there was any truth at all to his allegations >> regards the number of 'suspects', inquistioned persons, etc? Or was >> that all just a lot of crap as well? > See for the FBI's > press release about Operation Candyman. The UK equivalent is Operation Ore. Rob rob at robertwoolley dot co dot uk ------------------------------ From: 3yeadqp02@sneakemail.com Subject: Telecom Digest Spamming Problems Possible Solution? Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2003 04:10:57 +0200 To reply by e-mail, reply to the address in the headers, but ensure that the phrase "Telecom Digest" appears in the subject line: Pat, regarding the spamming problem, and the way they pull addresses from this NG .... well, I came across something tonight that I like, and *might* be at least a partial solution for regulars. (By the way, I posted here a couple days back as january20003 - that address was swamped with porno-spam almost within hours of appearing here -- and I only ever used it here -- it died a very premature death!!) Anyway ... I came across http:/www.sneakemail.com tonight; they essentially exist as a mail anonymiser, but you have full control over the what/when/how it handles things for you, and can drop/change the alias at whatever whim takes your fancy ... it's also possible to have several variants and use them in different places with different rules for the different variants ... Amongst other things, you can set a given alias (as I will have this one set up) to default to BOUNCE all mail, EXCEPT for something with "Telecom Digest" in the Subject line, which will be forwarded to a "real address" that I have given (actually a "throw away" address for now, until I see how well they operate !) There's a lot of permutations possible, and it does take a bit of exploring to figure it all out, but it shouldn't be too difficult for the regulars here ... anyway, their links are freely scattered about where ever they might be needed ... There's a free version that would probably help many regulars out, and the paid version at a whole $2.00 per month is a bit more powerful, and gives a bit more bandwidth ... If I might add my 2c worth on another subject: Those "Monty Solomon" posts -- I find them frequently interesting, but I wish they weren't here ... I also find them frustrating, as I usually read off-line, so I can't simply follow the story link without dialing in again. Regards, Frank R.P. ------------------------------ From: John Higdon Subject: Re: Instant Insecurity: Security Issues of Instant Messaging Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 21:12:32 -0800 In article , Monty Solomon wrote: > by Neal Hindocha > Because of the almost immediate two-way nature of communication, many > users feel that the use of instant messaging in the workplace leads to > more effective and efficient workplace communications and, therefore, > to higher productivity. Actually, I have always felt just the opposite. What makes email such a powerful messaging tool is its "queuing functionality". The messages are dealt with at the recipient's convenience, when he is prepared to follow up with replies or action, or can schedule such action. The messages are easily saved or printed out for reference. Email communication is folded into both the sender's and recipient's own schedule of tasks. IM, on the other hand, is an interruption, demanding immediate response. It has all the annoyance value of the telephone without any of the capability of communicating the subtleties of an immediate conversation. Rather than being a balanced communication as is email, IM is at the convenience and insistence of the sender. An involved conversation takes far more time than a phone conversation, and it provides no easy, default record. I don't use it. If I have an immediate communication that must be delivered, I use the phone. Otherwise, email works just fine. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | Anytown, USA | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ From: John Higdon Subject: Re: Last Laugh! Will Someone Explain Why This Actually Works? Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 21:01:37 -0800 In article , misterjorneal@yahoo.com (J. Neal) wrote: > If you made $84 in 21 days (a far cry from the 'thousands per month' > I have seen advertised some places) I would say you are already > starting to scrape the bottom of the barrel. More important, is the > $84 you made last month on this scam worth the anger and frustrations > you have caused many netters who see those messages all the time? PAT] One can probably pull in more cash by making up a tear-jerking story in which you plead for a dollar to help you out of the crisis, sending out that story by spamming millions of people, and then waiting for the envelopes to arrive. Simply change the story and your identity every month, and you are guaranteed to at least pull in bus fare. At the very least, cyber-begging can probably pay for your Internet connection (which you may have to change regularly as you are booted off ISPs). John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | Anytown, USA | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-330-6774 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 Fax 3: 775-642-0603 Fax 4: 530-309-7234 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2003 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. In addition, gifts from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert have enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V22 #257 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun Jan 26 20:19:57 2003 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id h0R1JvK07613; Sun, 26 Jan 2003 20:19:57 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2003 20:19:57 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200301270119.h0R1JvK07613@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #258 TELECOM Digest Sun, 26 Jan 2003 20:20:00 EST Volume 22 : Issue 258 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Actually Just To Be a Devil ... (TELECOM Digest Editor) Re: Calling Party Pays to Cellular (Randal Hayes) Re: 11-Digit Dialing (Walter Dnes) Re: Court Record System to go Online Next Year (tonypo1@cox.net) Re: 1+Ten-Digits Mandatory in NYCity (Danny Burstein) Re: Submarine Fiber Optic Cabling and Equipment (Dave Phelps) Re: Instant Insecurity: Security Issues Instant Messaging (Dave Phelps) Re: The Digest Was Spammed Again! (3yeadqp02@sneakemail.com) FCC Chief's Plan Would Ease Line-Sharing Rules (Monty Solomon) Tri-State Identity Theft a Ring That Included Store Workers (M. Solomon) Re: Last Laugh! Will Someone Explain Why This Actually Works? (jbl) Re: No Laugh! Please Explain Why This Actually Doesn't Work? (LincMad) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRUSES. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2003 00:51:17 EST From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Actually Just To Be a Devil ... ... I gave you a *slightly* wrong URL on the Second Avenue fire story in New York. I think it should have been '-1-75' on the end as in 'fire in newyork-1-75' . Anyway, just look at the /history area in the archives. It should be obvious. The stats for the archives says there have been many people there today. I hope you enjoy the book NY Telephone published in the summer of 1975. PAT ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2003 15:02:54 -0600 From: Randal Hayes Subject: RE: Calling Party Pays to Cellular > I'm not sure what this has to do with calling-party-pays (CPP), other > than that a wireless-only area code is now theoretically possible, > which would appear to facilitate CPP billing. Although I've researched CPP, primarily in Europe, I've also researched the issue in the U.S. for a national organization. The CPP issue gained momentum (momentarily) in the U.S. when past FCC Chair William Kennard took a trip to Europe, thought CPP was the greatest thing in the world, and came back to the U.S., announcing it should be implemented here. His staff was probably too embarrassed to point-out to their boss the major differences in the telecom environments that would make CPP less attractive and accepted in the U.S. In any event, although there have been a few CPP trials in the U.S., it has failed to catch-on to any great degree. The issue of "facilitating CPP billing," is much more important than the passing comment inference gives it. In comments to the FCC regarding CPP, it was mentioned that large, multiline systems or campus environments could have much difficulty in billing-back CPP-type calls within their companies, institutions, university campuses, etc., depending on the processes and procedures involving in their call accounting. For entities who have established cost-per-minute pricing in their call accounting systems, and don't necessarily match-up their vendor billing, it would be very difficult to properly bill-back such calls, as the proposals called for wireless vendors to be able to charge differing amounts, etc., so an accurate fixed per-minute cost could not just be programmed into a call accounting system. With technology-specific area codes, however, it would at least provide an opportunity to place a ballpark surcharge into the call accounting system, so departments in businesses, faculty/staff/students on higher ed campuses, etc., could be properly billed-back for such calls. I mentioned technology-specific area codes because it was mentioned in the thread, and it is related to the overall issue of CPP. The aspect of technology-specific area codes, modified city codes, exchanges, etc., has virtually everything to do with the surcharges assessed against calls to wireless devices, as they can provide the simple identifier for billing purposes. Please note that prior to these types of identifiers being implemented in other areas of the world, the long distance carriers in the U.S. were not assessing such surcharges, but were in fact being assessed them from any number of providers in other areas of the world. AT&T, WorldCom, and Sprint all have information on this on their websites, as do a number of others, such as the ITU web site, the European Commission web site, the former Telecom Policy Online website (which included a number of articles on fixed-mobile interconnection, including an article by Ewan Sutherland, of INTUG). DUNDEE Investment Research also issued a very extensive report in late 2000 on the changing economics of the global wireless industry, which included good information on fixed-wireless interconnection. Many sites with articles pertaining to European telecommunications explain the surcharge issue very well, including the aspect of tromboning. In addition, I wrote an article explaining the aspects of fixed-to-wireless surcharges for the national organization I mentioned above. Thanks, Randy Hayes University of Northern Iowa ------------------------------ From: Walter Dnes Subject: Re: 11-Digit Dialing Date: 26 Jan 2003 21:22:52 GMT Reply-To: waltdnes@waltdnes.org On Thu, 23 Jan 2003 18:55:45 -0500, John Waters, wrote: > It's a heck of a lot easier than trying to figure out a dialing plan > like Toronto has. 10 *or* 11 digit dial, depending on where you are > calling. From the point of view of someone who has to program dialing > rules into equipment, all-11 digit dial is FAR easier to work with. That's the toll signal. From Toronto, calling either of the two local (overlay) area codes 416 or 647 is a local call, so 10 digits are used. The sprawling 905/289 (overlay) area codes are adjacent to 416/647, surrounding Toronto almost entirely, except on the Lake Ontario waterfront. Nearby parts of 905/289 are local calls from Toronto, so 10 digits work. More distant portions of 905/289 are toll calls, and the leading '1' is required. What's so difficult. > Ameritech did something right (IMHO) a few years back when they > allowed the greater Detroit area to be dialed with either 10 or 11 > digits. Made equipment setup a breeze compaired to Toronto. Tradeoff time. So 10/11 digits makes things difficult for *YOU*. What about employers who don't mind employees making local calls during lunch? Under the current setup, blocking leading 0 and 1 allows local toll-free calls to 905/289, but blocks toll calls to that code. How do they handle that with all calls being an identical number of digits? Walter Dnes I'm not repeating myself; I'm an X Window user, I'm an ex-Windows user Palladium ain't done till linux won't run ------------------------------ From: tonypo1@cox.net Subject: Re: Court Record System to go Online Next Year Organization: The Ace Tomatoe and Cement Company Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2003 06:14:37 GMT In article , monty@roscom.com says: > By Ralph Ranalli, Globe Staff, 1/24/2003 > As the drumbeat of dire warnings about state finances continues, > court officials announced some rare good news yesterday: An often- > criticized and long-awaited computerization project will be completed > within budget and ahead of schedule thanks in large part to the weak > economy. > Court officials told a meeting of the Massachusetts Bar Association's > board of delegates that their ambitious MassCourts project - a system > that will electronically tie together records from the Berkshires to > Boston in all seven state court departments - will be completed early > next year, almost a year ahead of the 2005 deadline set by the > Legislature. Rhode Island has had their court records online for more than a year now. It's a very nice system but causes no end of headache because there isn't synchronization between charge and disposition data. Tony ------------------------------ From: Danny Burstein Subject: Re: 1+Ten-Digits Mandatory in NYCity Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2003 06:58:42 UTC Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC In Dave Mausner writes: > Is it technologically feasible to promote a standard of dialing such > that if the # is used, then the digits entered are suplemented to the > left by your own NPA and CO? > For example if I am 708-848-2775, and i dial 5432#, the call would go > to 708-848-5432. If I dial 369-9999#, the call would go to > 708-369-9999. Yes, but let's NOT go there. Thank you. There's no good reason to do this sort of silliness, and many, many, to not do so. Thank you. Oh, as an aside: Our Esteemed Moderator asked whether 1-911 would work. I had the opportunity to request NYC's Finest a couple of days ago and used it. Sure enough, 1-911 got me NYC's dispatch center. (I made the call from a cellphone so I can't say anything definitve about landline, PBX, or public payphones. Or, for that matter, cellphones from the other companies). Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key dannyb@panix.com [to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded] [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The suggestion he made, of four or seven digits followed by '#' *was* used in Chicago (although quite by accident; telco did not seem to know or approve of it) for a few years, but only for customers with the 'home centrex' (I forgot the actual name of the service). The way telco sold the service, if you had, let's say, three outside lines in your house, or two lines, from either of the actual outside lines you could call the other line(s) by dialing just 2# or 3#. The service also offered off-premises transfer of incoming calls, call pickup from one of the lines by another extension, etc. What did Illinois Bell call that service? Anyway, a friend clued me in to a small 'bug' in the system which was you could dial just the last four digits of any number on the same exchange (whether one of your lines or not) and the '#' symbol and the call would go through. And it worked. I was on the 312-743 exchange at that time, and called any number I wished (from one of my phones on that hybrid centrex service to a 743 phone) just with four digits and the '#' sign. You got all the centrex features Bell had to offer, even if you only had two or three phone lines. Someone please remind me what the service was called ... anyway it had that 'bug' in how it could be operated. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Dave Phelps Subject: Re: Submarine Fiber Optic Cabling and Equipment Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2003 01:05:53 -0600 In article , bjr@thedigitaldeli.net says: > I am with the commercial house of B. Joseph Gordon and Company. > My firm has been retained to sell a consigned lot for Lifecycle > Business Partners of approximately 100 million in submarine fiber > optic cabling equipment. Dear Mr Itch-Crotch - CEO Do I have to pull it up from the bottom of the ocean, or will you do that? Dave Phelps Phone Masters Ltd. deadspam=tippenring ------------------------------ From: Dave Phelps Subject: Re: Instant Insecurity: Security Issues of Instant Messaging Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2003 01:23:16 -0600 In article , no- spam@amadeus.kome.com says: > Actually, I have always felt just the opposite. What makes email such > a powerful messaging tool is its "queuing functionality". The messages [snip] > IM, on the other hand, is an interruption, demanding immediate > response. [snip] I don't agree. I use IM extensively. I have about 60 people in my IM list. IM is certainly not a disruption to me. When I receive an IM, I ignore the taskbar icon until I'm ready to read and respond to it. It is much easier than the phone to pass quick msgs back and forth, and you can have several conversations going at once if need be. Another nice thing about IM is that you can log everything. I can go back and review what was discussed if it's ever an issue. Yes, I know the log is easily tampered with, but it's adequate for me. Another benefit is the pros of the written word, in addition to instant transfer to the recipient. I'm certainly not saying IM will replace the phone, but I believe it can increase productivity -- enough that it seems easily justified in many cases ... as long as recreational IM is kept to a minimum. Dave Phelps Phone Masters Ltd. deadspam=tippenring ------------------------------ From: 3yeadqp02@sneakemail.com Subject: Re: The Digest Was Spammed Again! Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2003 13:59:07 +0200 ++++++++++ To reply by e-mail, reply to the address in the headers, but ensure that the phrase "Telecom Digest" appears in the subject line: ++++++++++ > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You know, it may get to the point real > soon here on this list that I start accepting incoming mail *only* > from a trusted whitelist of readers/contributors, with all other mail > going into the bit bucket. There simply is not enough time in the day Pat, as I remember it, something like that was instituted here while you were on your "extended absence" where an initial "confirmatory exchange" had to take place before mail from a would-be poster could be accepted .... It seemed to work well enough then, so why can't we have something like it now ?? As far as I recall, it was setup as a 'bot, so it wouldn't really to make much demand on your time once it was up-and-running, and might even free up some of the time you waste now sorting through the spam ... I'm not suggesting that a 'bot replace you (It couldn't anyway - I especially missed your pithy comments during that "period of absence") but rather that it just weed out oddities before passing the "verified poster's stuff" to you for you to do your usual thing with ... On a related point - I'll report back in a day or two if any spam gets past sneakemail ... Cheers, Frank R.P. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: A good point; let me run it past John Levine who functioned here while I was away. John, can that robo thing you were running here be implemented so the *first* message from a new person requires them to confirm it, but then you pass subseqent messages through to me rather than building a Digest at your end? PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2003 00:19:29 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: FCC Chief's Plan Would Ease Line-Sharing Rules By Jonathan Krim Washington Post Staff Writer The nation's big regional telephone companies would be able to provide ultra-fast Internet and video services over new fiber-optic lines without having to lease those lines to competitors, under a draft plan circulated by the chairman of the Federal Communications Commission. Sources familiar with the proposals by Michael K. Powell said that in "new-build" areas, where copper phone lines aren't in place and where the phone companies run fiber cables directly to homes or businesses, requirements to share those lines would be eliminated. If approved by the five-member commission, the change would be a victory for the regional telephone companies. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A40257-2003Jan24.html ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2003 00:49:19 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Tri-State Identity Theft Tied to Ring That Included Store Workers By WILLIAM K. RASHBAUM Cashiers and clerks at pharmacies, shoe stores and other retail businesses in New York, New Jersey and Connecticut stole credit card numbers from thousands of shoppers as part of a mob-connected identity-theft ring, the authorities said yesterday. Detectives from Queens on Thursday arrested the ring's leader and four others on forgery and identity-theft charges and were seeking the store clerks, whom they said were paid $50 for each credit card number they stole. The ring used the numbers to make phony cards, which they sold for $1,000 apiece. They also bought expensive merchandise with the fake cards and resold it at heavy discounts, making a profit of millions of dollars, officials said. The cashiers and clerks, using small, battery-powered, cellphone-sized devices called skimmers, captured the credit card information by swiping customers' cards through the device beneath a counter, inside a bag or while the customer wasn't looking, said Police Commissioner Raymond W. Kelly. The credit card numbers were then downloaded into laptop computers and the ring members used a combination of sophisticated scanners, magnetic strip encoders and holograph machines along with a basic embossing tool to manufacture credit card clones, Mr. Kelly said. http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/25/nyregion/25IDEN.html ------------------------------ From: jbl Subject: Re: Last Laugh! Will Someone Explain Why This Actually Works? Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2003 00:23:31 -0700 Organization: On the desert Reply-To: jbl@spamblocked.com In , misterjorneal@yahoo.com (J. Neal) wrote: > Mean daily income: $42.7 (USD) > Median daily income: $44.2 > Mode: $35 (2 days) > Min: $7 > Max: $84 PAT adds: > I have seen advertised some places) I would say you are already > starting to scrape the bottom of the barrel. More important, is the > $84 you made last month on this scam worth the anger and frustrations > you have caused many netters who see those messages all the time? PAT] He claims he made about $897 over three weeks -- the $84 was the most for a single day. It means the suckers haven't all been clean off the network, or that new ones are coming on faster than they can be scammed, I guess. JBL (that is, of course, if you believe this guy's numbers) ------------------------------ From: Linc Madison Subject: Re: No Laugh! Will Someone Explain Why This Actually Doesn't Work? Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2003 02:15:40 -0800 Organization: LincMad.com Consulting Reply-To: Telecom@LincMad.com In article , J. Neal wrote: > [send one dollar to six names, etc.] Pat, you left out a very important point. This "money-making scheme," whether or not it actually makes any money at all, is a federal felony under US and Canadian laws, and illegal in most other countries. In the US, it is punishable by up to 2 to 5 years in federal prison on a first offense (18 USC 1302 and 1341). Prosecution is, to say the least, unlikely, but the fact remains that it *IS* illegal. Besides that, it's also an excellent way to lose your Internet access. Give me your real name and address, and I'll be happy to turn it over to the Postal Inspectors for criminal investigation. www dot LincMad dot com / Telecom at LincMad dot com Linc Madison * San Francisco, California [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I could be mistaken, and will stand corrected if so. I *think* as long as 'something' of value is traded for the one dollar bill (i.e. a 'business report') you satisfy the legal requirements to stay out of the slammer. Its when you offer nothing except a chain letter that you get in trouble. You do not have to publish a one page bogus, useless 'business report' to send along on reciept of the money (they were usually saying they wanted five dollars from each of six names on the list; a dollar just would not cut it, after you paid postage and copy costs). Just copy the ones you got from someone else. I even once got a gospel tract from a fellow who said for 'a donation of at least five dollars' he would send me more gospel tracts to 'give to my family and friends.' That sort of thing apparently makes it all quite 'legitimate'. Am I right or wrong? I wrote back to the gospel tract fellow saying 'god bless you for the work you are doing; I have considered what you sent me to be a love offering'. Then I pitched them in the trash can. What he sent me were those little very homophobic comic book/gospel tracts from Chick Publications in Chico, CA. I told him in my return letter I could buy those damn things direct from Chick in lots of a thousand for a couple dollars if I wanted to go stick them on neighbor's doors, etc. PAT] ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-330-6774 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 Fax 3: 775-642-0603 Fax 4: 530-309-7234 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2003 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. In addition, gifts from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert have enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V22 #258 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Jan 27 10:20:56 2003 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id h0PNE5C11677; Sat, 25 Jan 2003 18:14:05 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 18:14:05 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200301252314.h0PNE5C11677@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #254 TELECOM Digest Sat, 25 Jan 2003 18:14:00 EST Volume 22 : Issue 254 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: DMCA: Ma Bell Would Be Proud (Monty Solomon) Re: DMCA: Ma Bell Would Be Proud (Michael D. Sullivan) Re: E1 (Richard H. E. Smith) Re: E1 (Michael Will) Re: E1 (Tom) Re: Looking for Satellite TV, Internet, Phone Provider (John Higdon) Radio Wishlist, was Re: Now, XM Satellite Radio Has Gear (Danny Burstein) Submarine Fiber Optic Cabling and Equipment (W. Joseph Ritchotte II) Re: Verizon Must Reveal Internet Song Swapper (John Higdon) Re: Rat Shack and Future Slop (Dave Garland) Re: The Digest Was Spammed Again! (Monty Solomon) Re: The Digest Was Spammed Again! (Tom Betz) Internet Calls Stir Up Static in Phone Fight (Monty Solomon) Re: Prison Call Overcharging (Linc Madison) Re: The Digest Was Spammed Again! (Gail M. Hall) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRUSES. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 00:36:24 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Re: DMCA: Ma Bell Would Be Proud WebWasher shouldn't block that URI by default. Does that URI match one of the regular expressions in your WebWasher URL filter? That URI is for one of the cached (by Akamai) CSS (cascading style sheets) files used by Wired. Take a look at the following for more info ... Wired News Celebrates 6th Anniversary with Cutting-Edge Redesign Using The Latest Web Standards http://www.terralycos.com/press/pr_10_10e_02.html Wired News: A Site for Your Eyes http://www.wired.com/news/culture/0,1284,55675,00.html Behind the Wired News Design http://wired.com/news/explanation.html An Interview With Douglas Bowman of Wired News http://devedge.netscape.com/viewsource/2002/wired-interview/ Zeldman on the Wired News redesign http://www.zeldman.com/daily/1002a.html#wired Louis Collins wrote: > From: Louis Collins > Subject: Re: DMCA: Ma Bell Would Be Proud > Date: 23 Jan 2003 23:42:04 GMT > Organization: Concentric Internet Services > Monty Solomon wrote: >> http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,57268,00.html > Sounds like a good article, but alas, when I click it I get this: > WebWasher is configured to block the requested page: > 'http://a1112.g.akamai.net/7/1112/492/2002091423/www.wired.com/news/v/20020914/css/cs4/wnScreen.css'. > Is my browser messed up or what? ------------------------------ From: Michael D. Sullivan Subject: Re: DMCA: Ma Bell Would Be Proud Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 07:16:01 GMT On 23 Jan 2003 23:42:04 GMT, Louis Collins posted the following to comp.dcom.telecom: > Monty Solomon wrote: >> http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,57268,00.html > Sounds like a good article, but alas, when I click it I get this: > WebWasher is configured to block the requested page: > 'http://a1112.g.akamai.net/7/1112/492/2002091423/www.wired.com/news/v/20020914/css/cs4/wnScreen.css'. > Is my browser messed up or what? Sounds like your ad-blocker, WebWasher, is blocking content. Check to see if it's blocking akamai.net, which is often used to host ads, but also hosts wired.com, Supreme Court opinions, and lots of other stuff. Michael D. Sullivan Bethesda, MD, USA (delete NOSPAM from address to mail me) ------------------------------ From: Richard H. E. Smith Subject: Re: E1 Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 23:56:25 -0600 Organization: The Smiths foo wrote: > If you use E1, then timeslot 16 is used for signaling. The signaling > packets are a sort of HDLC packets. With HDLC you use a flag 01111110 > to mark the beginning and end of a packet. If the same bitpattern as > the flag comes in the data, you insert an extra 0 after the 5:th bit > (bitstuffing). Then you must transmit 9 bits instead of 8. The > timeslot in E1 is only 8 bit, so how is this problem solved? The "bytes" of the messages aren't necessarily alligned with the 8 bit slot in each frame... if you need to send nine bits, then it stretches into the next frame, and then the eight bits follow that. You have to think of timeslot 16 (or whichever) as a continuous stream of bits, and ignore that it's delivered eight bits at a time. Hope that makes sense. Dick Smith rhes@enteract.com Software Consultant ------------------------------ From: Michael Will Subject: Re: E1 Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 07:44:32 GMT Organization: RoadRunner - Tampa Bay foo wrote: > If you use E1, then timeslot 16 is used for signaling. The signaling > packets are a sort of HDLC packets. With HDLC you use a flag 01111110 > to mark the beginning and end of a packet. If the same bitpattern as > the flag comes in the data, you insert an extra 0 after the 5:th bit > (bitstuffing). Then you must transmit 9 bits instead of 8. The > timeslot in E1 is only 8 bit, so how is this problem solved? There is no problem :) One just needs to see that in a data context the timeslot itself a just a bitstream, meaning not every symbol in the delivery stream has to align with the actual transport frame. Just because audio data is traditionally (and nearly exclusively) sent one octet per frame doesn't mean that's the only way to interpret the data being transmitted. Consider the same condition in an X.25 HDLC circuit - the link speed may be static, but that doesn't mean the data stream doesn't run slower from time to time to accommodate the same symbol transmission issues. Look at the E1 as what it is - a multiplexed set of streams, and in the D-channel case (or any generic Data-Channel interpretation, including multi-timeslot video, etc.) one just has to strip out the appropriate bitsream and *then* interpret it by its particular rules. At that point, alignment within the multiplexed transmission of 31 other channels doesn't matter a whole lot :) - Michael ------------------------------ From: Tom Subject: Re: E1 Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 11:43:20 -0000 Organization: ntlworld News Service foo wrote in message news:telecom22.252.11@telecom-digest.org... > If you use E1, then timeslot 16 is used for signaling. The signaling > packets are a sort of HDLC packets. With HDLC you use a flag 01111110 > to mark the beginning and end of a packet. If the same bitpattern as > the flag comes in the data, you insert an extra 0 after the 5:th bit > (bitstuffing). Then you must transmit 9 bits instead of 8. The > timeslot in E1 is only 8 bit, so how is this problem solved? It's not really a problem. HDLC is bit-oriented. The 8 bits transmitted in each E1 frame don't necessarily correspond with an HDLC field. ------------------------------ From: John Higdon Subject: Re: Looking for Satellite TV, Internet, Phone Provider Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 21:39:28 -0800 In article , johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) wrote: > I've done it, it's not that bad. About 20 years ago, in the dawn of > the competitive long distance era was Satellite Business Systems, > funded by IBM, Sears, and (I think) Aetna insurance. Back when I owned a real company, we got SBS to save money on long distance. We even hid the onerous Feature Group B access behind our PBX (which was capable of transparently dialing all the necessary access numbers and codes). The workers hated it. One CS representative said that it lowered apparent IQs about thirty points with all the delay and the resultant tripping over words of the other party. One wise guy started saying "over" when making long distance calls. We got rid of it within a year. > No matter how badly your phone company stinks, it's unlikely that sat > phones would be the alternative you want. I'd consider fixed cellular > with an antenna on the roof pointing at the nearest cell tower. At my house, the signal is good enough to use any old handheld like a cordless phone. If it were not for the fact that I have so much other wired communications, I would seriously consider dumping my wireline service. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | Anytown, USA | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ From: Danny Burstein Subject: Radio Wishlist, was Re: Now, XM Satellite Radio Has Gear .. Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 05:57:06 +0000 (UTC) Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC In Monty Solomon writes: > By WALTER S. MOSSBERG > One of the great things about the fast-moving technology field is > that companies can improve their products in major ways fairly > quickly. Today's example is XM Satellite Radio, the leader in the > nascent business of beaming numerous channels of music and talk to > subscribers with special radios. [ rest snipped ] While not a directly telecom related item, high on my wish list is a tivo/replay-tv like radio. When, oh when, will we have a radio that can be set to record as easily as a vcr? (well, let's hope it's easier...) Current choices include either kludging radio output to a vcr (which doesn't give you channel setting) or using an expensive, limited edition product like: http://www.radioprogramrecorder.com/ (url included for info. no connection to them. not an endorsement, etc.) And more immediately, why hasn't someone, anyone, put out a line of car radios with a back-buffer? How many times do you hear something on the radio where you'd really, really, like to listen to it again? Even for something as mundane as the weather, or traffic. And, of course, all the EBS broadcasts ... Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key dannyb@panix.com [to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded] ------------------------------ From: bjr@thedigitaldeli.net (W. Joseph Ritchotte II) Subject: Submarine Fiber Optic Cabling and Equipment Organization: Toltec Business Systems and Holdings Inc. Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 05:14:18 GMT Dear Telecom: I am with the commercial house of B. Joseph Gordon and Company. My firm has been retained to sell a consigned lot for Lifecycle Business Partners of approximately 100 million in submarine fiber optic cabling equipment. Lifecycle's orders are to try and recoup 20% of the retail value of the lot. As we are approaching the large companies that specialize in this type of construction, we intend to leave no stone unturned. That is why we are publishing the website where the materials are listed and you can check off items you are interested in and have that list shipped to our agents for further discussion. In no way are you obligated to purchase. All items are new in the OEM packaging and were designed for undersea use but the extra strength and highly reduced prices would not prohibit some of the equipment and cable from being used in a land project. The link is: http://65.96.189.204:8880/SubmarineTelecomEquipList.asp Thank you for your time. Regards, William Ritchotte - CEO Like radio shows? Jack Benny, Abbott and Costello, Zero Hour, CBS Radio Theatre? Remember who you spent your Sunday nights with listening to the radio? Would you like to relive those memories? Come to http://www.digitaldeliftp.com ------------------------------ From: John Higdon Subject: Re: Verizon Must Reveal Internet Song Swapper Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 21:29:34 -0800 In article , Joey Lindstrom wrote: > U.S. District Judge John Bates said Verizon must cooperate with > recording industry efforts to track down online song swappers, > rejecting the telecommunications giant's assertion that such a move > would violate customer privacy and turn it into an online copyright cop. > Verizon said it would appeal the decision. And well it should. The key issue is probable cause. The RIAA is simply making an accusation, backed up with no credible evidence. If this decision stands and becomes precedent, anyone could get anyone else's private information from a provider by simply claiming "copyright violation". John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | Anytown, USA | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ From: Dave Garland Subject: Re: Rat Shack and Future Slop Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 23:35:22 -0600 Organization: Wizard Information > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: ... From whenever until 1965 'Allied > Radio' was *the* place in Chicago for every kind of electronic gizmo > there was in those days.] In Chicago? In the USA. Well, along with Lafayette (NY) and Radio Shack (before Tandy got involved). And Olson, too. And Meshna and Fair Radio for the surplus hounds. Curiously, the small surplus outfits are the only ones still around. Fair Radio doesn't seem to have changed much, not even the praying hands. And (ObTelecom) will ya look at that, their front page (http://www.fairradio.com) features a surplus ringing generator. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 01:07:01 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Re: The Digest Was Spammed Again! > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, you would think so; but as John > Levine noted in the previous issue of the Digest Thursday night, there > was a kiddie porn raid somewhere; numerous arrests were made from > that; but I don't remember reading about in the papers or seeing it > noted on the net news, etc. PAT] Some old and recent news stories ... Police arrest 25 members of child porn ring By Drew Cullen Posted: 23/04/2002 at 12:34 GMT http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/24986.html UK police swoop in child porn raids By Tim Richardson Posted: 25/04/2002 at 10:45 GMT http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/25023.html Paedophile net raids across UK Care workers, teachers and a teenage boy are among those arrested in dawn raids as part of the UK's biggest internet paedophile crackdown yet. Wednesday, 24 April, 2002, 15:34 GMT 16:34 UK http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/newsid_1947000/1947778.stm Q&A: Paedophile net raids The BBC's home affairs correspondent, Jon Silverman, answers key questions about Wednesday's internet paedophile crackdown. Wednesday, 24 April, 2002, 15:33 GMT 16:33 UK http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/newsid_1949000/1949092.stm Operation Ore: Can the UK cope? Monday, 13 January, 2003, 10:33 GMT http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2652465.stm British Child-Pornography Investigation Is Broadening By SARAH LYALL January 14, 2003 http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/14/international/14CND_PORN.html Britain's Hunt for Child Pornography Users Nets Hundreds Besides Pete Townshend By SARAH LYALL January 15, 2003 http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/15/international/europe/15PORN.html 'I cannot admit what I am to myself' Thursday January 23, 2003 The Guardian http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,3604,880237,00.html [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: So I guess the spam posting at least made a good point or two, even if apparently it was spam. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Tom Betz Subject: Re: The Digest Was Spammed Again! Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 06:12:58 UTC Organization: XOme Quoth Pat in news:telecom22.250.9@telecom-digest.org: > Do you know, Tom, if there was any truth at all to his allegations > regards the number of 'suspects', inquistioned persons, etc? Or was > that all just a lot of crap as well? See for the FBI's press release about Operation Candyman. An excerpt: "Through the issuance of a court order to Yahoo!, FBI Houston concentrating on the Candyman Egroup, identified 7,000 unique E-mail addresses with 2,400 of the addresses outside of United States and 4,600 located domestically." ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 01:27:05 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Internet Calls Stir Up Static in Phone Fight By DENNIS K. BERMAN Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL A battle is heating up in the phone industry over the growing number of voice calls sent over the Internet, pitting local phone companies against long-distance providers. At issue: whether long-distance companies must pay local phone systems the full fare for sending these Internet-based calls to and from houses and offices. Currently, most long-distance companies do pay such "access fees" since the carriers generally don't own the lines that go into homes and businesses. But long-distance companies say they shouldn't have to pay as much to transmit Internet calls to customers as they pay for calls sent over traditional long-distance networks. http://online.wsj.com/article_email/0,,SB1043372661755750904,00.html ------------------------------ From: Linc Madison Subject: Re: Prison Call Overcharging Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 23:39:08 -0800 Organization: LincMad.com Consulting Reply-To: Telecom@LincMad.com In article , Gail M. Hall wrote: > I'll be interested to hear if this "Save a buck or two" company > really does save people money for collect call charges. I must say > they have some cute commercials! Read the fine print: "Savings vs. dialing '0' with AT&T for interstate calls." Not compared to dialing 0-NPA-NXX-XXXX, not compared to dialing 1-800-CALL-ATT, but compared to dialing just 0. The recipient pays a substantial surcharge if the operator has to punch the number in for you, but 1-800-COLLECT gives you that service for free. Woo-hoo. (Never mind that you don't get an AT&T operator if you just dial 0. You have to dial 1010288-0 or 00 if the phone is pre-subscribed to AT&T, but AT&T recommends dialing 1-800-CALL-ATT instead.) Only an ABSOLUTE IDIOT would dial just '0' to place a collect call. There's no excuse, at least for those of us whose age has made it into double-digits. A very useful clue as to what 1-800-COLLECT will charge can be gleaned from the simple fact that they don't list any rates on their web site. Their contact form offers several options for the subject of your inquiry, but "rates" is not one of them. Of course, I'm sure the reason they don't tell you the rates is that they're so low you don't need to even think about them.... Also, many of the commercials feature situations in which only an absolute idiot would call collect to begin with; for instance, the kids at the mall calling Mom to come pick them up. How many kids get dropped off at a mall that's so far away from home that it's a toll call? Give the kid 50 cents to call home from the payphone! The continued business success of companies like 1-800-COLLECT and 10-10-220 (pay extra on every call!) only proves the gullibility of the American consumer. To borrow a phrase for which 1-800-COLLECT's spokesman is famous, "I pity the fool" who ever uses 1-800-COLLECT. www dot LincMad dot com / Telecom at LincMad dot com Linc Madison * San Francisco, California ------------------------------ From: Gail M. Hall Subject: Re: The Digest Was Spammed Again! Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 04:07:34 -0500 Reply-To: gmhall@apk.net On Thu, 23 Jan 2003 01:33:40 UTC, in comp.dcom.telecom message , overworked Pat wrote: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You know, it may get to the point real > soon here on this list that I start accepting incoming mail *only* > from a trusted whitelist of readers/contributors, with all other mail > going into the bit bucket. There simply is not enough time in the day > for *me* to go around the web looking for hiding places for spam. All > trusted whitelist contributors will have a list giving the correct > email addresses of others on the list. Then all email addresses > printed here will vanish also. That seems to me like a horrible way to > be part of the net, and extremely arrogant. Do you knoww, Tom, if > there was any truth at all to his allegations regards the number of > 'suspects', inquistioned persons, etc? Or was that all just a lot of > crap as well? PAT] Is it possible that you will have better luck by closing off the usenet gateway and having everyone subscribe to the mailing list instead? I would hate to see that because the ISPs I have used preferred us to use the news service instead of e-mail if there was a choice. However, that would be one way to limit the number of people who can harvest addresses from the group. I am aware that this group's addresses are harvested by spammers. Some spammers actually spam the list and members privately, too. So they are easy to detect. One of the worst spammers I get messages from is something called "iAgentNetwork E-Blast". They spam a lot of telecom "services" and CLAIM that I subscribed to their list. They LIE! I filtered them out by the name iAgent and by their IP number. I recently found out that my ISP uses a certain software to process mail and there is a way that we can munge our addresses in a way that we would still get the mail but we could identify where the sender using that edited address got our address because of what we did in the "munge". I don't want to give details because you are likely to post this to the group, and I don't want spammers to catch on to what this "trick" is if they don't already know it. If I just posted under this "new" address, you would probably consider me "unknown" and reject the address. Some lists do allow for subscribers to post from "alternate" e-mail addresses so a person could give YOU the real address but post with another address, even a munged address that you would recognize as being from the real subscriber. If you do decide to continue the usenet newsgroup gateway, you might require people who read from there to "register" with you before being allowed to post. This might include giving some personal information such as real name and city of residence but nothing too personal. Please don't require credit card numbers or anything like that. This information would be kept by the moderator and not be available to anyone else. Some list servers do allow members to get a list of all subscribers' e-mail addresses by sending a special command, but subscribers can send a command to opt out of that feature -- thanks be!! I would go along with your idea of accepting posts from known subscribers. Anyone wanting to join would fill out some kind of form that you would devise. If they are approved, then they would be accepted like now. I also think the moderator should maintain an "admin" address for people to write about stuff doing with subscribing, changing addresses, etc., and a "list" address for posting messages to the group. That way we could write to you, Pat, about details of our addresses, etc., without having to worry about our remarks going out to the whole world. You know, I could tell you more about the mail software quirk. I hope some of these ideas can cut down on your work. Gail in Ohio USA [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You raise so many issues I won't even take the time here and now to respond to all of them. I am NOT interested in collecting names and email addresses for 'approval' purposes here in the Digest. It is simply easier to continue as I do now, and use a large scoop shovel to get rid of large amounts of spam each day. Gail, there is an 'administrative' address for list changes. It is: Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org (quoting above from the closing message in each issue of the Digest as seen by Digest [not Usenet] readers). I do *not* handle subscriptions to the Digest personally. You have to use the majordomo at the addresses shown above. I check the things at the above address every few days. I suggest if you wish to change from one email address to another that you subscribe the new one first, wait a few days until things start coming there, *then* go back and unsubscribe the old address. That's because new subscribes only take effect after I 'approve' them to keep spammers/hucksters out. Unsubscribes take effect when you write the above address. To avoid missing an issue, do not unsubscribe the old address until you see the new one has been installed. Regards other matters, if you say 'do not publish' as your subject line then either I will not or at the very least I will remove your name/email address if I decide to use it. And I do give the spam bucket at least a cursory glance prior to deleting it each day. Maybe that will help a little. To avoid absolutely all spam in the Usenet version, I suggest you read *my* Usenet version which is on the web site as http://telecom-digest.org/TELECOM_Digest_Online and maybe you do or do not need the final trailing slash. That is message by message Usenet style, put out by myself. PAT] ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-330-6774 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 Fax 3: 775-642-0603 Fax 4: 530-309-7234 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2003 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. In addition, gifts from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert have enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V22 #254 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Jan 27 13:15:59 2003 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id h0RIFx401768; Mon, 27 Jan 2003 13:15:59 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 13:15:59 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200301271815.h0RIFx401768@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #259 TELECOM Digest Mon, 27 Jan 2003 13:16:00 EST Volume 22 : Issue 259 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Telecom Update (Canada) #367, January 27, 2003 (Angus TeleManagement) Re: No Laugh! Someone Explain Why This Actually Doesn't Work? (J. Levine) Re: No Laugh! Someone Explain Why This Actually Doesn't Work? (D Johnson) Re: No Laugh! Someone Explain Why This Actually Doesn't Work? (J Minks) Re: No Laugh! Someone Explain Why This Actually Doesn't Work? (Earnhardt) Home Centrex, was Re: 1+Ten-Digits Mandatory in NYCity (Danny Burstein) More on Phone Use and Driving (David Clayton) Assistance Needed Teaching People (Brian) Brain Fart (Joey Lindstrom) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRUSES. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 11:40:17 -0500 From: Angus TeleManagement Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #367, January 27, 2003 ************************************************************ TELECOM UPDATE ************************************************************ published weekly by Angus TeleManagement Group http://www.angustel.ca Number 367: January 27, 2003 Publication of Telecom Update is made possible by generous financial support from: ** BELL CANADA: http://www.bell.ca ** CISCO SYSTEMS CANADA: http://www.cisco.com/ca/letstalk ** CYGCOM INTEGRATED TECHNOLOGIES: http://www.cygcom.com ** ERICSSON CANADA: http://www.ericsson.ca ** JUNIPER NETWORKS: http://www.juniper.net ** PRIMUS CANADA: http://www.primustel.ca ** Q9 NETWORKS: http://www.Q9.com ** TELUS: http://www.telus.com ************************************************************ IN THIS ISSUE: ** Telecom Update Upgrades E-Mail Delivery ** AT&T Canada Unveils Restructuring Plan ** Aliant Plans to Sell Xwave, Stratos ** Government Initiates Spam Discussion ** Nortel Sales Up, Losses Continue ** AT&T Corp Sees Ongoing Sales Decline ** Cross-Border Messaging Begins ** JDS Ottawa Staff Down to 1,300 ** Telus Files Cabinet Appeal ** Call-Net Challenges Telco DSL Policy ** 89 Groups Get Federal Broadband Funding ** Ontario Helps Fund Rural Broadband Project ** High-Speed Internet Comes to Eckville ** Top Court Hears Pay-Equity Case ** Small Telco Confronts Hydro Giant ** TeraGo Raises $3 Million ** Wi-LAN Executive Changes ** Financial Results Avaya Lucent ** Your Telecom Bills Are Too High! ============================================================ TELECOM UPDATE UPGRADES E-MAIL DELIVERY: To improve delivery of Telecom Update, next week we will begin using a new e-mail service. We expect the transition to be transparent, but if you experience any difficulty, please let us know at admin@angustel.ca. AT&T CANADA UNVEILS RESTRUCTURING PLAN: If it is approved at a special meeting on February 20, AT&T Canada's restructuring plan will give the company's bondholders and other creditors just over 17 cents, in cash and shares, for every dollar they are owed. Current shareholders will receive nothing. ** Non-Canadian creditors will receive one-third of the voting shares and will appoint four of the company's nine directors. ALIANT PLANS TO SELL XWAVE, STRATOS: Aliant CEO Jay Forbes said January 24 that his company plans to sell its IT subsidiary, Xwave, and its stake in Stratos Global, a satellite communications company. ** Aliant had revenues of $660.5 million, 0.5% less than a year ago. Writedowns of about $60 million related to Xwave and its ISP subsidiaries resulted in a net loss of $6.9 million. GOVERNMENT INITIATES SPAM DISCUSSION: Industry Canada has posted a discussion paper on possible measures to stop junk e-mail, including placing responsibility on ISPs, improving filtering techniques, and introducing new anti-spam laws. Public comments may be sent to: spam_paper@ic.gc.ca. http://e-com.ic.gc.ca/english/strat/email_marketing.html NORTEL SALES UP, LOSSES CONTINUE: Nortel Networks fourth quarter sales of US$2.52 billion were 7% higher than the previous quarter; Canadian sales rose 28%. Nortel's end-of- March employment target is now 36,000, 1,000 higher than previously announced. ** Fourth-quarter losses were $248 million. Nortel predicts a shrinking global equipment market in 2003 and reduced first-quarter sales. AT&T CORP SEES ONGOING SALES DECLINE: AT&T Corp expects a continuing decline in 2003 in both its own revenues and those of the U.S. telecom industry as a whole. The company's fourth quarter sales of US$9.3 billion were down 8.6% from last year (business sales down 3%; consumer sales down 20%). Operating loss: $280 million. CROSS-BORDER MESSAGING BEGINS: Customers of the major cellular carriers in Canada and the U.S. can now send SMS text messages to each other across the border. The carriers involved are the Bell Alliance companies, Telus, Rogers AT&T, and Microcell in Canada, and AT&T Wireless, Cingular, Nextel, Sprint, T-Mobile, and Verizon in the U.S. (See Telecom Update #327) JDS OTTAWA STAFF DOWN TO 1,300: JDS Uniphase, which had 11,000 employees in Ottawa two years ago, now has only 1,300. The company has eliminated 300 Ottawa-area jobs in the past three months, and expects to cut 600-700 more this year. ** JDS fourth quarter revenues of US$157 million were down 19% on the quarter and 45% on the year. The net loss was $215 million, compared to $521 million the previous quarter. TELUS FILES CABINET APPEAL: On January 22, Telus appealed to Cabinet to change CRTC cost rulings in decisions 2000-745 and 2001-238. Telus wants company-specific costs -- not national costs -- to be used in calculating the subsidy it receives for high-cost serving areas and the prices it can charge competitors for unbundled local loops. CALL-NET CHALLENGES TELCO DSL POLICY: Call-Net Enterprises (parent of Sprint Canada) has asked the CRTC to order the four large incumbent telcos to end their policy of refusing to provide high-speed Internet to customers who obtain their local telephone service from a competitor. Call-Net calls the practice anti-competitive and discriminatory, and says it violates the CRTC's bundling rules. http://www.crtc.gc.ca/PartVII/eng/2003/8622/c25_200300666.htm 89 GROUPS GET FEDERAL BROADBAND FUNDING: Ottawa has announced the first recipients of funding to develop business plans for extending high-speed Internet to First Nations, rural, and remote communities. Eighty-nine applicants, representing over 1,100 communities, will receive up to $30,000 each. (See Telecom Update #363, 348) http://broadband.gc.ca/news/newsroom_e.asp ONTARIO HELPS FUND RURAL BROADBAND PROJECT: The Ontario Government is providing $2.7 million for a fixed-wireless broadband network to serve small towns and rural communities in the Leeds-Grenville area in southeastern Ontario. Additional funding will be provided by lead partner Ripnet Ltd (an ISP headquartered in Brockville) and the Thousand Islands Community Development Corporation. http://www.newswire.ca/government/ontario/english/releases/January2003/14/c9659.html HIGH-SPEED INTERNET COMES TO ECKVILLE: Calgary-based ISP Platinum Communications and Persona, a Newfoundland-based cableco, have combined to offer high-speed Internet service in the rural community of Eckville, Alberta. This is the first commercial service based on the Alberta government's SuperNet. TOP COURT HEARS PAY-EQUITY CASE: On January 23, the Supreme Court of Canada heard Bell Canada's argument that the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to hear the pay equity dispute between the telco and operators represented by the Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union. SMALL TELCO CONFRONTS HYDRO GIANT: The independent telco in Kincardine, Ontario, says that the British-owned Bruce nuclear power plant is illegally providing local telephone service to Ontario Power Generation, an unaffiliated company. After two years of unsuccessful negotiation, Bruce Municipal Telephone System has asked the CRTC to order OPG to establish service directly with BMTS and to compensate the telco for lost revenue. ** Local competition is not permitted in the territories served by independent telephone companies. http://www.crtc.gc.ca/PartVII/eng/2003/8622/b7_200300294.htm TERAGO RAISES $3 MILLION: TeraGo Networks, which provides wireless broadband to business customers in suburban areas of nine Canadian cities, has raised $3 million in new equity financing, for a total of $14 million raised in 2002. WI-LAN EXECUTIVE CHANGES: CFO Steve Bellamy has left Wi-LAN; his acting replacement is Keith Bittner. COO Sayed-Amr El-Hamamsy is now also Wi-LAN's President. FINANCIAL RESULTS: In the fourth quarter: ** Avaya sales were US$1.07 billion, 7.4% less than the previous quarter. Avaya's cash balance increased by $54 million; its net operating loss was $33.4 million. ** Lucent revenues of US$2.08 billion were 9% less than the previous quarter and 42% less than the previous year. Net loss: $264 million. Lucent expects a 20% sales recovery in the coming quarter. YOUR TELECOM BILLS ARE TOO HIGH! Coming issues of Telemanagement will feature exclusive reports on the latest, most effective techniques for reducing the cost of voice and data communications without sacrificing quality or efficiency. They will be published only in Telemanagement, and sent only to subscribers. ** For a limited time, save $50 on a new subscription -- and get an extra issue as a free bonus. Download full details at http://www.angustel.ca/SubscriptionOffer.pdf. (PDF: 349 KB) ============================================================ HOW TO SUBMIT ITEMS FOR TELECOM UPDATE E-MAIL: editors@angustel.ca FAX: 905-686-2655 MAIL: TELECOM UPDATE Angus TeleManagement Group 8 Old Kingston Road Ajax, Ontario Canada L1T 2Z7 =========================================================== HOW TO SUBSCRIBE (OR UNSUBSCRIBE) TELECOM UPDATE is provided in electronic form only. There are two formats available: 1. The fully-formatted edition is posted on the World Wide Web on the first business day of the week at http://www.angustel.ca 2. The e-mail edition is distributed free of charge. To subscribe, send an e-mail message to: TelecomUpdate@add.postmastergeneral.com To stop receiving the e-mail edition, send an e-mail message to: TelecomUpdate@remove.postmastergeneral.com Sending e-mail to these addresses will automatically add or remove the sender's e-mail address from the list. Leave subject line and message area blank. We do not give Telecom Update subscribers' e-mail addresses to any third party. For more information, see http://www.angustel.ca/update/privacy.html. =========================================================== COPYRIGHT AND CONDITIONS OF USE: All contents copyright 2002 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: 26 Jan 2003 20:48:07 -0500 From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: No Laugh! Will Someone Explain Why This Actually Doesn't Work? Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I could be mistaken, and will stand > corrected if so. I *think* as long as 'something' of value is traded > for the one dollar bill (i.e. a 'business report') you satisfy the > legal requirements to stay out of the slammer. Nope. See http://www.usps.com/websites/depart/inspect/chainlet.htm Do not be fooled if the chain letter is used to sell inexpensive reports on credit, mail order sales, mailing lists, or other topics. The primary purpose is to take your money, not to sell information. "Selling" a product does not ensure legality. ... John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 johnl@iecc.com Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner http://iecc.com/johnl Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2003 23:08:32 -0500 From: Daniel W. Johnson Subject: No Laugh! Will Someone Explain Why This Actually Doesn't Work? The postal inspectors are not fooled by the "sale" of a report. They have a page about it here: http://www.usps.com/postalinspectors/chainlet.htm Key paragraph: Do not be fooled if the chain letter is used to sell inexpensive reports on credit, mail order sales, mailing lists, or other topics. The primary purpose is to take your money, not to sell information. "Selling" a product does not ensure legality. Be doubly suspicious if there's a claim that the U.S. Postal Service or U.S. Postal Inspection Service has declared the letter legal. This is said only to mislead you. Neither the Postal Service nor Postal Inspectors give prior approval to any chain letter. Daniel W. Johnson panoptes@iquest.net http://members.iquest.net/~panoptes/ 039 53 36 N / 086 11 55 W ------------------------------ From: Jeff Minks Subject: Re: No Laugh! Will Someone Explain Why This Actually Doesn't Work? Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 00:34:33 -0500 > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I could be mistaken, and will stand > corrected if so. I *think* as long as 'something' of value is traded > for the one dollar bill (i.e. a 'business report') you satisfy the > legal requirements to stay out of the slammer. Its when you offer > nothing except a chain letter that you get in trouble. If the scheme is substantially a ponzi, chain letter, or pyramid scheme, the presence of "something of value" does not make it legal, despite what scammers may claim. The feds have gone after such schemes. ------------------------------ From: Phil Earnhardt Subject: Re: No Laugh! Will Someone Explain Why This Actually Doesn't Work? Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2003 22:54:41 -0700 Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com On Sun, 26 Jan 2003 02:15:40 -0800, TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to Linc Madison : > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I could be mistaken, and will stand > corrected if so. I *think* as long as 'something' of value is traded > for the one dollar bill (i.e. a 'business report') you satisfy the > legal requirements to stay out of the slammer [...] Perhaps true at some point, but no more. See the text of the 2002 FTC crackdown at http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2002/02/eileenspam1.htm What astonishes me is why, AFAICT, the FTC doesn't have a clear page with a short URL explaining the rules and how to complain. To a large extent, the FTC seems to not understand the Internet. Chain e-mail letters are a specific case of Spam. The regulars on the USENET newsgroup news.admin.net-abuse.email have created a set of rules about Spam and Spammers. In short: Rule #0: Spam is theft. Rule #1: Spammers lie. Rule #2: If a spammer seems to be telling the truth, see Rule #1. Rule #3: Spammers are stupid. Rule #4: The natural course of a spamming business is to go bankrupt. One spectactular example of an individual/enterprise who went through all of these rules was Jason Heckel of Oregon. Somewhere around 1997, Heckel was using e-mail Spam to hawk his $39.95 kit for making money from the Internet. The Spam contained amazing claims of people making vast sums of money a month from the schemes outlined in the text. When Heckel was charged and tried under the state of Washington's Spam laws in 1998, his mother asked for leniency. She claimed that Jason was barely able to make a living from his e-mail activities. And this wasn't from a person who read the book; this was from someone who wrote the book! One concludes that the book wasn't worth the paper it was printed on. Anyone who is curious can search in www.deja.com (a Google database) with the keywords of "Jason Heckel" and mother. These rules about spammers are also accompanied by a set of Corollaries, Commentaries, Admonitions, Contradictions, etc. They're interesting reading for anyone who wants to understand the true nature of Spam. Apparently, the list is changing a bit right now; there's a discussion going on in news.admin.net-abuse.email about it right now. Anyone curious can reference the thread at: http://groups.google.com/groups?q=the+rules+of+spam&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&selm=j_WcnSU2NaQo5zCgXTWcpw%40News.GigaNews.Com&rnum=2 If the long URL doesn't work, just go to www.deja.com and enter the words: rules spam proposals the thread entitled "The Rules of Spam: Currently Awaiting Action" is the one you want. --phil ------------------------------ From: Danny Burstein Subject: Home Centrex, was Re: 1+Ten-Digits Mandatory in NYCity Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 01:19:50 UTC Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The suggestion he made, of four or > seven digits followed by '#' *was* used in Chicago (although quite by > accident; telco did not seem to know or approve of it) for a few > years, but only for customers with the 'home centrex' (I forgot the > actual name of the service). In New York Telephone/NY area, it was called "Intellidial". I dropped it because they refused to give me CNID on it claiming it wasn't in the tariff. Sigh. A couple of years later I believe they ended it. _____________________________________________________ Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key dannyb@panix.com [to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded] [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There it is! Thanks very much, Danny. Illinois Bell called it 'Intellidial' also, and it has not been offered for many years now. I dunno about Caller-ID; Intellidial was available in the late seventies/early eighties in Chicago and I do not think Caller-ID was very common then, although Caller-ID (or whatever name it went by) was available at telco operator positions about that time, as was ANI for 911. PAT] ------------------------------ From: David Clayton Subject: More on Phone Use and Driving Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 14:30:26 +1100 Organization: Customer of Connect.com.au Pty. Ltd. Reply-To: dcstar@acslink.net.au http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5478,5890070%255E2862,00.html Car Chat Rings up Big Fines By SUE HEWITT, Transport reporter 26jan03 ABOUT 580 people a week are caught using mobile phones while driving on Victorian roads -- and the number is increasing. In 2001, police caught about 18,000 motorists, who were each fined $135. The figure last year was 30,000 -- an increase of 60 per cent. A woman this week was ordered to stand trial after she allegedly struck and killed a cyclist while using a mobile phone and driving. Silvia Ciach, 22, of Avila Rd, Geelong, allegedly was sending a text message on her phone and witnesses told the court her car had zigzagged on the road. They said her car had moved and in and out of the bicycle lane at least three times before the collision. The body of Anthony Marsh, 36, of Ocean Grove, was thrown 28.7m in the crash on the Geelong-Portarlington Rd, Moolap, on December 20, 2001. Outside court, Acting Superintendent Geoff Alway, of the traffic support division, said the use a hand-held mobile phones was becoming an increasing cause of crashes. "Credible research has concluded that using a hand-held mobile phone while driving has the equivalent effect on driving ability as having exceeded a blood alcohol level of .08," he said. "We see it every day -- the person driving slowly and crossing lines, not paying attention. "I have booked motorists who didn't even see a police car behind them with its lights flashing because they were so engrossed in a conversation. "It affects the concentration of drivers so that they do not pay attention to what is ahead, behind or beside because they are using all their energy on the phone." Supt Alway said research from New York showed the use and presence of mobile phones in cars increased the risk of a fatal crash. He said a study found there was a nine-fold increased risk of a fatality when drivers used mobile phones and a two-fold increase if a phone was present in the vehicle. There was a 10-fold increased risk of crashing travelling at 70km/h in a 60km/h zone, he said. Supt Alway said the "jury's still out" on whether hands-free mobile phones also affect driver attention. He said that while there had been a significant increase in the number of offenders over the year, the impact of tough new penalties was not clear. He said no figures were available since the introduction of a three-demerit point penalty on December 15. A Sunday Herald Sun photographer found four drivers flouting the mobile phone laws on the corner of Flinders and Swanston streets in less than an hour this week. In 2001, a teenager in Brisbane ran down and killed a man while answering a mobile phone. The 17-year-old was found guilty of manslaughter and received a suspended sentence. Regards, David Clayton, e-mail: dcstar@acslink.net.au Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. Dilbert's words of wisdom #18: Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 09:04:08 PST From: PSCDC (Brian) Subject: Assistance Needed to Help Teach People I am trying to locate a club or individuals in Imperial County, CA, that would be interested in providing training and guidance to three affordable housing projects, we operate. We have been committed to bring training and eduction to the low income families at these sites. We do computer training, job training, teach English classes, etc. However, our folks would like to be trained in the use of HAM radio operation and theory. Can you put me in contact with someone or organization there, that could assist? Thank you. Brian Biber PSCDC 858-847-0280 ------------------------------ From: Joey Lindstrom Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 10:04:14 -0700 Subject: Brain Fart Reply-To: joey@telussucks.info On Sat, 25 Jan 2003 19:45:53 -0500 (EST), an overworked Joey wrote: > I later needed to add a second DSL line. This meant a trip out to my > place by telco. The fellow had a big spool of four-pair wire (two > lines) and was going to replace my two-pair wire. I suggested to him > that it might be a good idea to install cable with more capacity, as I > may need to add additional DSL lines down the road. He had some > 12-pair (6 line) cable in the truck but it wasn't spooled, so I hadda > help the guy string it up (through trees and stuff). Of course, in all of the above, whenever I said "-pair" I really meant "-wire". Man, Friday was a long day ... :-) -- Joey Lindstrom -- Telus Sucks http://www.telussucks.info ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-330-6774 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 Fax 3: 775-642-0603 Fax 4: 530-309-7234 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2003 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. In addition, gifts from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert have enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V22 #259 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Jan 27 14:49:20 2003 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id h0RJnKB02942; Mon, 27 Jan 2003 14:49:20 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 14:49:20 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200301271949.h0RJnKB02942@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #260 TELECOM Digest Mon, 27 Jan 2003 14:50:00 EST Volume 22 : Issue 260 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: DMCA: Ma Bell Would Be Proud (Monty Solomon) Six Retailers Plan Venture to Sell Music on the Web (Monty Solomon) Satellite System Seen as a Key Life Saver (Monty Solomon) Change in E-Mail Riles Users (Monty Solomon) So Many Online Sales, So Little in Tax Revenue (Monty Solomon) Other Microsoft Programs Said at Risk For Web Worm (Monty Solomon) More Than a Trend, Cellphones Are a Way of Life (Monty Solomon) Re: Talk With Less Radiation (Ross Oliver) 12 UM Students Accused of High-Tech Cheating (Monty Solomon) T-1 Private Line to Home Network (KJ) Re: 11-Digit Dialing (Joseph) Re: 11-Digit Dialing (John R. Levine) Re: 1+Ten-Digits Mandatory in NYCity (Roy Smith) Re: Calling Party Pays to Cellular (John R. Levine) Creativity Workshops in Europe and New York (Creativity Course) Last Laugh! Free Info to Turn Your Computer in a Moneymachine! (Till) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRUSES. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 07:55:55 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Re: DMCA: Ma Bell Would Be Proud WebWasher shouldn't block that URI by default. Does that URI match one of the regular expressions in your WebWasher URL filter? That URI is for one of the cached (by Akamai) CSS (cascading style sheets) files used by Wired. Take a look at the following for more info ... Wired News Celebrates 6th Anniversary with Cutting-Edge Redesign Using The Latest Web Standards http://www.terralycos.com/press/pr_10_10e_02.html Wired News: A Site for Your Eyes http://www.wired.com/news/culture/0,1284,55675,00.html Behind the Wired News Design http://wired.com/news/explanation.html An Interview With Douglas Bowman of Wired News http://devedge.netscape.com/viewsource/2002/wired-interview/ Zeldman on the Wired News redesign http://www.zeldman.com/daily/1002a.html#wired Louis Collins wrote: > From: Louis Collins > Subject: Re: DMCA: Ma Bell Would Be Proud > Date: 23 Jan 2003 23:42:04 GMT > Organization: Concentric Internet Services > Monty Solomon wrote: >> http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,57268,00.html > Sounds like a good article, but alas, when I click it I get this: > WebWasher is configured to block the requested page: > 'http://a1112.g.akamai.net/7/1112/492/2002091423/www.wired.com/news/v/20020914/css/cs4/wnScreen.css'. > Is my browser messed up or what? ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 07:59:29 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Six Retailers Plan Venture to Sell Music on the Web By LAURA M. HOLSON LOS ANGELES, Jan. 26 - Six of the largest music retailers plan to announce on Monday that they are joining forces to sell music that can be downloaded from the Web. The retailing group, called Echo, consists of Best Buy, the nation's No. 1 electronics retailer; Tower Records; the Virgin Entertainment Group; Wherehouse Entertainment; Hastings Entertainment; and Trans World Entertainment, which operates the FYE store chain. The six retail companies will each own an equity stake in Echo that together will make them majority owners. The new effort is motivated in part by the two-year decline in compact disc sales that has forced recording companies to cut costs and lay off employees and has damaged music retailers, too. Wherehouse Entertainment, for one, announced last week that it was filing for bankruptcy protection from its creditors, in part because of lackluster CD sales. And earlier this month, Best Buy announced that it would close 107 stores. Like the recording companies, music retailers are searching for new sources of revenue. Vinyl albums and cassette tapes have nearly disappeared in recent years, leaving retailers with the CD as their main option for selling music. But a proliferation of free music-swapping services on the Internet has led to a decline in CD sales. According to Nielsen SoundScan, which tracks album sales, 681 million were sold in 2002, down from 785 million in 2000. http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/27/business/media/27TUNE.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 08:30:51 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Satellite System Seen as a Key Life Saver Tracking device crucial in rescues By Jim Geraghty, States News Service, 1/26/2003 WASHINGTON - Environmental satellites with search-and-rescue tracking capability helped save 171 sailors, hikers, downed pilots, and others across the country last year, including 15 people in five incidents off the New England coast. ... The Coast Guard requires all commercial fishing vessels and merchant ships to carry an Emergency Position Indicating Radio Beacon, which sends out a distress signal that NOAA satellites pick up and relay to the appropriate emergency response agency. Since it was launched in 1982, the satellite system is estimated to have saved 4,500 lives in the United States, said NOAA administrator Conrad C. Lautenbacher. http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/026/nation/Satellite_system_seen_as_a_key_life_saver+.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 08:55:40 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Change in E-Mail Riles Users By Peter J. Howe, Globe Staff, 1/27/2003 Plans by Comcast Corp., the new owner of AT&T Broadband, to shift more than 200,000 New England e-mail customers to a new comcast.net e-mail address have touched a deep nerve with Internet users furious that they have to get their third e-mail address in barely a year. As the furor demonstrates, e-mail has become a lifeline for millions since the mid-1990s, when it became a mass-market phenomenon instead of just the domain of technology gurus and academics. Many current attbi.com e-mail subscribers complain the move will be at least as disruptive as getting a new phone number or street address. AT&T's move will affect more than 1.9 million customers nationally, including large numbers in Chicago, Denver, Seattle, San Francisco, and other parts of the United States. Besides the disruption, many local subscribers have complained that they learned about the change from a story in the Globe earlier this month rather than from Comcast. Several say Comcast's plans to phase out attbi.com addresses in as little as 60 days is woefully inadequate notice. Many are still upset they had to switch from mediaone.net to attbi.com last year after AT&T converted the former MediaOne Internet service to its brand. http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/027/business/Change_in_e_mail_riles_users+.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2003 22:53:36 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: So Many Online Sales, So Little in Tax Revenue By NORM ALSTER STATE officials across the country have been keeping their eyes on two sets of numbers, and it is sometimes difficult to tell which is growing faster. One is their projected budget shortfalls. The other is online retail sales, which they would like to tax to help fill the gaps. Forecasters say the states may come up short next year by as much as $80 billion, which would create the biggest state budget crisis since World War II. A merry holiday season in cyberspace, meanwhile, has pumped up the receipts of online retailers - to $78 billion last year, according to Forrester Research, an increase of more than 50 percent over 2001. That does not count the larger categories of business-to-business online sales and catalog sales, for which sales tax is generally not collected. A study by the University of Tennessee estimates that sales tax is not collected on $234 billion in online business-to-business commerce. And tax on most of what the Direct Marketing Association estimates at $125 billion in annual catalog sales is not collected, either. The states cannot currently impose the tax because the Supreme Court has ruled that their multiple tax systems would impose an unfair collection burden on retailers that do not have a physical presence in their buyers' various states. Online buyers are actually required to pay sales taxes directly to their states, but they rarely do. If the states can simplify and coordinate their sales tax systems, they may be able to convince Congress or the courts that collecting the levy will not be an unfair burden. http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/26/business/yourmoney/26TAXX.html [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: For your privacy in reviewing/reading articles in nytimes.com you are welcome to use our group ID and password for access. Username: telecomdigest Password:telecomdigest. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2003 22:04:56 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Other Microsoft Programs Said at Risk For Web Worm SEATTLE, Jan 25 (Reuters) - Microsoft Corp. (NASDAQ:MSFT) said on Saturday that a virus-like attack against its key database software, which slowed Internet traffic around the globe, could spread to its other less frequently used programs unless users protected themselves with key software updates. Although the spread of the computer worm had passed its peak and was coming under control, Microsoft Chief Security Strategist Scott Charney urged companies, the main buyers of Microsoft's SQL (pronounced 'sequel') Server 2000 and other related programs, to download security patches from the world's largest software maker's Web site. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=31135244 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2003 23:54:06 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: More Than a Trend, Cellphones Are a Way of Life BUSINESS INTELLIGENCE By D.C. Denison, 1/26/2003 What happens when an electronic device, the cellphone, becomes so popular it's ubiquitous? It becomes a lifestyle. That was the premise of a recent study by a group of anthropologists who observed cellphone users in seven cities around the world. Context Research, based in Baltimore, uses a network of 3,500 anthropologists to study consumer behavior for major clients like Microsoft and Kodak. Last summer, it focused its anthropologically based analytic tools on cellphone users. The resulting report, just published, appears to support the group's initial assumption. "It's obvious that changes are coming that are much bigger than most businesses expect," said Sean Carton, the chief experience officer at Carton Donofrio Partners Inc., the parent company of Context. "Cellphones and mobile communications in general are much more than just a technological trend." The 36-page report, illustrated with stark documentary photographs of the study's subjects using their cellphones in a wide variety of locations, details a surprising number of lifestyle changes that are emerging from the increasing use and integration of mobile technology. For example, the study found that physical proximity is rapidly decreasing as a barrier to forming communities among individuals. Since wireless technology makes it easier to stay in touch, regardless of location, cellphone users are able to maintain a network of friends and colleagues that doesn't depend on face-to-face communication. ... http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/026/business/More_than_a_trend_cellphones_are_a_way_of_life+.shtml ------------------------------ From: reo@roscoe.airaffair.com (Ross Oliver) Subject: Re: Talk With Less Radiation Date: 27 Jan 2003 01:55:31 GMT Organization: Concentric Internet Services Eric Friedebach wrote: > Arik Hesseldahl, 01.22.03, Forbes.com > NEW YORK - When it comes down to it, there are two big reasons why > people buy hands-free headsets for their mobile phones. I have a third reason for using a headset with a cell phone. I make use of the large number of off-hours minutes offered by carriers to call home in the evenings while travelling, and for long-distance calls relatives on weekends. For conversations longer than 20 minutes or so, the phone starts to get very warm, and becomes uncomfortable to hold against my ear, or even hold in my hand. I became addicted to headsets many years ago while doing telephone tech support. Now all the phones in my home and office have headsets permanently attached. Ross Oliver ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2003 21:24:58 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: 12 UM Students Accused of High-Tech Cheating 6 admit using Web devices to link to site during exam By Stephanie Hanes Sun Staff Twelve University of Maryland undergraduates have been accused of using Web-equipped cell phones or handheld organizers to cheat on a business school final exam last month, according to the school's student-run Honor Council. Six of them have admitted to misconduct during that same test, the council said. The allegations prompted Provost William W. Destler to issue a warning to faculty members about the potential misuse of cell phones and other common handheld electronics, said J. Andrew Cantor, a 20-year-old senior and chairman of the Honor Council. http://www.sunspot.net/news/education/bal-md.cheating26jan26,0,3792093.story ------------------------------ From: KJ Subject: T-1 Private Line to Home Network Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 12:17:10 -0600 I am replacing my DSL VPN connection to my brokerage firm with a T-1 point to point private line. How does this change the hardware I need at home to network my three computers? I currently use an SMC wireless Access Point for a wireless network. Is a wireless netwrok still possible with the T1? Will I be able to connect to the T-1 and the internet through another DSL line at the same time? Thanks, Eric ------------------------------ From: Joseph Subject: Re: 11-Digit Dialing Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 06:35:04 -0800 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Reply-To: joeofseattle@yahoo.com On 26 Jan 2003 21:22:52 GMT, Walter Dnes wrote: > That's the toll signal. From Toronto, calling either of the two local > (overlay) area codes 416 or 647 is a local call, so 10 digits are > used. The sprawling 905/289 (overlay) area codes are adjacent to > 416/647, surrounding Toronto almost entirely, except on the Lake > Ontario waterfront. Nearby parts of 905/289 are local calls from > Toronto, so 10 digits work. More distant portions of 905/289 are toll > calls, and the leading '1' is required. What's so difficult. >> Ameritech did something right (IMHO) a few years back when they >> allowed the greater Detroit area to be dialed with either 10 or 11 >> digits. Made equipment setup a breeze compaired to Toronto. > Tradeoff time. So 10/11 digits makes things difficult for *YOU*. > What about employers who don't mind employees making local calls during > lunch? Under the current setup, blocking leading 0 and 1 allows local This is the same argument that has raged in the digest and elsewhere for years regarding "toll alerting." Neither side really wants to adopt what the other side thinks is "right." As for how do companies restrict when there's always 11 digits the only way to restrict is to restrict *each* CO prefix that is considered long distance/toll. You can't use the simple deny 1+ calls if 1+ does not always mean a toll call. The places where this is mainly a concern or is used is larger cities such as New York, Chicago and Los Angeles. In those cities the meaning of "local" is different as calls are either charged a message units or toll depending on how far away the destination number might be found. Replies are seldom read. Please reply in the group. ------------------------------ Date: 26 Jan 2003 20:59:08 -0500 From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: 11-Digit Dialing Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > ... Nearby parts of 905/289 are local calls from Toronto, so 10 > digits work. More distant portions of 905/289 are toll calls, and > the leading '1' is required. What's so difficult. This must be, what, about the 400th time we've gone around with the toll alerting argument. Personally, I hate toll alerting. I do not care whether a call to Mississauga will cost 0 cents or 3.5 cents, I just want to make the bleeping call. Across the lake here in New York we have never ever had toll alerting, and we get along just fine without it. If regulators insist on putting in toll alerting, they should at least make it permissive so that 1+10D always works. It wasn't clear from the previous discussion whether Toronto has permissive 1+10D, or they have the incredibly stupid Texas plan where you have to memorize every prefix in nearby area codes in order to use your phone, since 1+10D won't work if a prefix happens to be a local call, and 10D won't work if it's a 5 cent toll call. > Tradeoff time. So 10/11 digits makes things difficult for *YOU*. > What about employers who don't mind employees making local calls > during lunch? Under the current setup, blocking leading 0 and 1 > allows local toll-free calls to 905/289, but blocks toll calls to > that code. How do they handle that with all calls being an > identical number of digits? PBXes are much better at remembering lists of prefixes than people are. Every PBX of which I'm aware can easily be programmed to look at the leading digits of dialed calls and to route or block the call depending on what those digits are. Ask any PBX tech for details. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 johnl@iecc.com Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner http://iecc.com/johnl Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail ------------------------------ From: Roy Smith Subject: Re: 1+Ten-Digits Mandatory in NYCity Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2003 21:05:29 -0500 Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC Danny Burstein wrote: >> For example if I am 708-848-2775, and i dial 5432#, the call would go >> to 708-848-5432. If I dial 369-9999#, the call would go to >> 708-369-9999. > Yes, but let's NOT go there. Thank you. There's no good reason to do this > sort of silliness, and many, many, to not do so. Thank you. I live on City Island, which has a single exchange (718-885) covering the entire island. Ask somebody local what their phone number is, and they'll tell you just the last 4 digits. Of course, it doesn't work to dial it that way (probably hasn't in 50 years), but it's interesting that people still think and talk about phone numbers like that. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Ditto for here in Independence, Kansas. People always just give the last four digits of their number *unless they are one of the few rare exceptions* to 620-331, such as 620-332 (city government and the main numbers of a couple 'large' businesses located in the Arco Building [Independence Corporate Center] at 9th and Main Streets) or 620-330 (Montgomery County government and a few cellular phones otherwise.) But for 'regular' phones in houses and places of business around town, people just say four digits when asked for their number. And you know, I sort of like it that way. Coffeyville is likewise all on 620-251 and people there also identify their phones with four digits, but with a caveat when speaking to people in Independence: 'remember, we also have a few special cases of 620-252' as though most of us did not know that. 620-336 is entirely unique to Cherryvale, 620-924 is Liberty, Kansas, and 620-289 is for 'rural Independence/Coffeyville' with the following digit identifying Tyro (4xxx), Blake (5xxx), Dearing, others (3xxx). The entire county is in a hundred page small-size phone book about 4 inches wide by 5 or 6 inches long divided by 'regions' (Independence gets about 20 pages; Coffeyville about 20 pages, the other towns about 10 pages between them. The single part for Yellow Pages (the back part of the book) gets about 50 pages. A few maps and 'special guides' are in the middle section. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: 26 Jan 2003 21:13:29 -0500 From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: Calling Party Pays to Cellular Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > With technology-specific area codes, however, it would at least > provide an opportunity to place a ballpark surcharge into the call > accounting system, so departments in businesses, > faculty/staff/students on higher ed campuses, etc., could be > properly billed-back for such calls. We don't need technology-specific area codes to do that. We already have a perfectly good area code for calls that cost extra because of some wonderful telecom service they provide: 500. The fact that every PBX and pay phone in the country blocks 500 calls, and noting that the code is pretty much abandoned should give us a hint how popular caller-pays cellular would be. > The aspect of technology-specific area codes, modified city codes, > exchanges, etc., has virtually everything to do with the surcharges > assessed against calls to wireless devices, as they can provide the > simple identifier for billing purposes. Please note that prior to > these types of identifiers being implemented in other areas of the > world, the long distance carriers in the U.S. were not assessing > such surcharges, but were in fact being assessed them from any > number of providers in other areas of the world. Even now the assessments are frequently screwed up. For example, in the UK there are a whole bunch of different kinds of surcharged numbers, 3XX for mobile (I think), 870 for "national rate" same charge from everywhere, 7XX 90X for higher per-minute surcharges. My dial-1 carrier charges extra for 8XX, but my dial-around calling card carrier doesn't. Call up three US telcos and ask what their charges are for these calls and get at least three different answers. Call them and look at the bill and get three more. Bundling surcharges above the cost of delivering the call into phone rates is a bad idea that just won't go away. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 johnl@iecc.com Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner http://iecc.com/johnl Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2003 22:43:08 -0500 From: Creativity Course Subject: Creativity Workshops in Europe and New York Winter / Spring / Summer Creativity Workshops: Creative Writing, Personal Memoir, Drawing, Journaling, and Storytelling in New York and Europe: http://www.creativitycourse.net We are all born imaginative, curious, creative, but these qualities can fade with the passage of time. The Creativity Workshop's aim is to help people get their imaginations back. Below you will find a calendar of our workshops and some information on their methods and goals for participants. Hello, My name is Karen Bell, administrative associate of the Creativity Workshop and I want to give you our latest news. Whether you are a writer, a business person, a teacher, or an artist, the Workshop can help you discover and nurture your particular way of expression and break through the fears and blocks that inhibit creativity. Working with more than 2,000 individuals, businesses, and institutions since 1993, the Creativity Workshop helps people believe in and develop their creative process through using a unique series of exercises in memoir, creative writing, visual arts, sense perception, brainstorming, and storytelling. See our website for 2003's calendar of 2, 4, and 7 day workshops in New York City. You will also find links to our 7 and 9 day Creativity Workshops in Prague, Crete, London, Paris, Florence and Barcelona. You can also go directly to our extensive informational site: http://www.creativitycourse.net or contact us at: Tel: (212) 922-1555 info@createcourse.com Regards, Karen Bell Administrative Associate info@createcourse.com The Creativity Workshop has been taught at educational and government institutions and for corporations. The teachers Shelley Berc is a writer and teacher. She was a professor of the International Writing Program at the University of Iowa from 1985-2000. Her novels, plays, and essays which include 'The Shape of Wilderness', 'A Girl's Guide to the Divine Comedy' and 'Theatre of the Mind' have been published by Coffee House Press, Johns Hopkins Press, Heinemann Books, Performing Arts Journal and Theatre Communications Group Press. Her plays have been produced by theatres such as the American Repertory Theatre, the Yale Rep, and the Edinburgh Festival. Alejandro Fogel is a visual artist and teacher working in painting, site installations, video and digital art. He has exhibited his works in galleries and museums in Argentina, Bulgaria, Cuba, France, Hungary, Israel, Italy, Netherlands, Spain, United States and Germany. His ongoing project 'Root to Route' chronicles his father's journey through the Holocaust years. His work is in private collections and museums around the world. Berc and Fogel explain in theory and demonstrate in practice the concepts of originality, 'appropriation', memory and imagination. Under their guidance, participants explore their own creative processes through different writing and drawing exercises. They emphasize the intimate link between personal and public spheres, individual and social practices, history and myth, dream and reality. The focus of the workshop is on process not product and to help participants find life-long tools of creative expression. Shelley Berc and Alejandro Fogel have taught their Creativity Workshop internationally. They have lectured on creativity and their own work at universities and cultural centers throughout the world. ===================================== Contact us through our web site: http://www.creativitycourse.net Tel: (212) 922-1555 ===================================== ------------------------------ From: Till Geissinger Organization: Report all abuse to abuse@myaffiliatefinder.com Subject: Last Laugh! Free Info to turn Your Computer in a Moneymachine! Date: 26 Jan 2003 21:15:33 -0600 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, here is one of those .biz sites that John Higdon warned us about! Note how the chain letter spammers have gotten a bit wiser; they keep their messages short, allow you to opt-in (as if you did not get enough spam without opting-in to get still more of it), and note the anti-spam serial number like thing at the very bottom. This did NOT trigger spam-assassin, probably because it was short, no yelling, no $$, none of the things which spam-assassin looks for. PAT] ------------------------------ Hi friends, I found some information that is really unbelievable, concerning the problem how to earn money on the net. If you need help just answer this message and type 'money' in the subject line and it will be a pleasure for me to help you immediatly and of course for FREE! --- MAF Anti-Spam ID: 20030126145250X2f9UfQ7 -------------------------------- The above was the entire message. I guess he figures your curiosity will lead you to respond and opt-in. PAT] ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-330-6774 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 Fax 3: 775-642-0603 Fax 4: 530-309-7234 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2003 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. In addition, gifts from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert have enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages End of TELECOM Digest V22 #260 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Jan 28 22:04:10 2003 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id h0T34Aq18854; Tue, 28 Jan 2003 22:04:10 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 22:04:10 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200301290304.h0T34Aq18854@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #261 TELECOM Digest Tue, 28 Jan 2003 22:05:00 EST Volume 22 : Issue 261 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: T-1 Private Line to Home Network (Daniel J McDonald) Re: 1+Ten-Digits Mandatory in NYCity (Joey Lindstrom) 'Slammer' Feared to Strike Again (Monty Solomon) Reebok's "Official Linebacker" Gets Larger Audience Than Action (Solomon) Microsoft Was Vulnerable to Worm Virus (Monty Solomon) States' Role Still a Question in US Telecom Reform (Monty Solomon) Internet Worm Still Infecting Some (Monty Solomon) Cell-Phone Couture (Monty Solomon) A $55,000 Net Scam Warning (Monty Solomon) Can Your Cell Phone Impair Your Vision? (Monty Solomon) Plug (the Product) and Play / Advertisers Use Online Games (M Solomon) Kazaa Fires Back at Hollywood, Labels (Monty Solomon) Baseball Test May Show if Web Video's Time Has Come (Monty Solomon) AT&T Wireless to Provide Wi-Fi in Hotels, Airports (Monty Solomon) AT&T Wireless Results & 2003 Actions (Monty Solomon) SBC Reports Fourth-Quarter Earnings (Monty Solomon) AT&T Wireless to Offer Wi-Fi Service at Airports, Hotels (Monty Solomon) Re: Last Laugh! Free Info to turn Your Computer to Moneymachine! (Higdon) Re: Last Laugh! Free Info to turn Your Computer to Moneymachine! (Spyros) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRUSES. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: T-1 Private Line to Home Network Organization: io.com From: djmcdona@io.com (Daniel J McDonald) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 14:19:04 -0600 In article , KJ wrote: > I am replacing my DSL VPN connection to my brokerage firm with a T-1 > point to point private line. > How does this change the hardware I need at home to network my three > computers? Yes, you will need a router - I mean, a real router. This router will need a T1 interface. > I currently use an SMC wireless Access Point for a > wireless network. Is a wireless netwrok still possible with the T1? Yes, you could plug a wireless Access point into the router, but that would open up your company to attack from any war drivers who happen to come by your house and can figure out your SSID and your WEP key (you are running WEP and have changed your SSID, haven't you?) > Will I be able to connect to the T-1 and the internet through another > DSL line at the same time? Yes, but that opens up your corporate network to be as vulnerable as your home firewall -- something the corporate IT guys would probably have a cow about (and rightly so). If your company is giving you a private line, I would recommend that you maintain a work PC and a private PC, and save your IT staff a few headaches. Not to mention you - you would hate to be found to be the root cause of a worm like the Saphire worm that wrecked so much havock this weekend entering your corporate network. Daniel J McDonald CCIE # 2495, CNX Visit my website: http://www.austinnetworkdesign.com ------------------------------ From: Joey Lindstrom Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 13:16:28 -0700 Subject: Re: 1+Ten-Digits Mandatory in NYCity Reply-To: joey@telussucks.info On Sun, 26 Jan 2003 00:31:41 -0500 (EST), Dave Mausner wrote: > Is it technologically feasible to promote a standard of dialing such > that if the # is used, then the digits entered are suplemented to the > left by your own NPA and CO? > For example if I am 708-848-2775, and i dial 5432#, the call would go > to 708-848-5432. If I dial 369-9999#, the call would go to > 708-369-9999. > In overlay regions, this might preserve the ability to dial 7 digits > in your own NPA, and add the feature of being able to dial 4 within > your own CO. In overlay regions, so long as the two (or more) area codes are protected (not used as CO codes within any of these area codes), you don't even have to do that. You could easily allow 7-digit dialing with no special codes. HOWEVER, the FCC (I think) said "no way" to this idea long ago. Rationale: it would be anti-competitive. The ILEC's owned most of the CO's within the "old" area code, and thus CLEC's would get a disproportionate amount of CO's within the "new" area code - and THEIR customers would have to be dialed with 10 digits (by people in the old code). Dunno if there was any such similar ruling for Canada. -- Joey Lindstrom -- Telus Sucks http://www.telussucks.info ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 14:23:10 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: 'Slammer' Feared to Strike Again By Michelle Delio The global worming attack that fried much of the Internet this weekend may return on Monday as unpatched systems and applications boot up at the start of the workweek. The worm can attack a multitude of Microsoft applications as well as applications distributed by other companies including administration, helpdesk, corporate antivirus and assorted security applications. Network administrators may not even be aware that their systems harbor programs that need to be patched. http://www.wired.com/news/infostructure/0,1377,57409,00.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 18:50:53 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Reebok's "Official Linebacker" Gets Larger Audience Than Action January 27, 2003 - SAN JOSE, CA - JANUARY 27, 2003 - A Super Bowl commercial featuring a fictional linebacker got better ratings than any of the real football action, a symbolic reflection that most viewers tune into the annual event to watch the commercials and not the game, according to an analysis by TiVo. Reebok's commercial featuring fictional "Office Linebacker Terry Tate" was the most watched commercial in TiVo households that tuned into Super Bowl. Four commercials, all from Anheuser-Busch, complete the list of the Top 5 commercials viewed on TiVo. Overall, commercial breaks during the game got more viewers than action on the field. http://www.tivo.com/5.3.1.1.asp?article=168 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 22:34:18 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Microsoft Was Vulnerable to Worm Virus Microsoft Corp. itself was exposed to the virus-like attack that crippled global Internet activity last weekend because it failed to install crucial fixes to its own software on many Microsoft computer servers. Although Microsoft contends its failure to keep up with its own updates did not cause major problems, security experts said it points to a larger issue: Microsoft's process for keeping customers' software secure is hugely flawed. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=31168037 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 22:45:01 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: States' Role Still a Question in US Telecom Reform By Andy Sullivan WASHINGTON, Jan 27 (Reuters) - U.S. regulators considering a sweeping reform of telephone competition rules could be stymied by state efforts to preserve a role overseeing their local markets, several sources close to the negotiations said on Monday. Under court order, the Federal Communications Commission is considering whether to scale back rules that require local-phone giants to lease their equipment to rivals at discounted rates. But commissioners are closely divided over whether state regulators should be allowed a strong oversight role, a question that could determine the ultimate impact of any FCC decision. Independent telephone companies say they need to use the networks of incumbent "Baby Bells" like Qwest Communications International Inc.(NYSE:Q) to reach customers, while the Bells say they are losing money on the arrangement. In a 400-page plan sent to commissioners last week, FCC Chairman Michael Powell proposed lifting the network-sharing requirements once certain benchmarks had been reached, sources said. Those benchmarks could be the competitors' share of the market, or the number of network switches they use in a given area. Independent companies would be able to use the telephone lines running from customers' homes or businesses to network offices, but would be required to buy their own equipment to complete the calls. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=31168262 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 22:48:14 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Internet Worm Still Infecting Some The weekend attack on the Internet crippled some sensitive corporate and government systems, including banking operations and 911 centers, far more seriously than many experts believed possible. The nation's largest residential mortgage firm, Countrywide Financial Corp., told customers who called Monday it was still suffering from the attack. Its Web site, where customers usually can make payments and check their loans, was closed with a note about "emergency maintenance." Police and fire dispatchers outside Seattle resorted to paper and pencil for hours Saturday after the virus-like attack disrupted operations for the 911 center that serves two suburban police departments and at least 14 fire departments. American Express Co. confirmed that customers couldn't reach its Web site to check credit statements and account balances during parts of the weekend. Perhaps most surprising, the attack prevented many customers of Bank of America Corp., one of the largest U.S. banks, and some large Canadian banks from withdrawing money from automatic teller machines Saturday. President Bush's No. 2 cyber-security adviser, Howard Schmidt, acknowledged Monday that what he called "collateral damage" stunned even experts who have warned about uncertain effects on the nation's most important electronic systems from mass-scale Internet disruptions. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=31164320 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 22:59:24 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Cell-Phone Couture Arik Hesseldahl, 01.27.03, 6:29 PM ET NEW YORK - Time was that the best way to sell a mobile phone was to brag about its features, the clarity of its sound and how long its battery would last. One of four models of Xelibri mobile phones announced by Siemens.Now handset vendors, still looking for the magic formula that will jolt consumers back into a phone-buying mood, are going after the fashion-conscious. That the mobile phone is widely considered a 21st-century fashion accessory is nothing new, and the latest phone maker to try the fashion angle, German's Siemens (nyse: SI - news - people ), is traveling a path already well-worn by others. Finland's Nokia (nyse: NOK - news - people ) used colored plastic to single-handedly turn the wireless phone into a must-have image accessory and has had its head industrial designer profiled in The New Yorker. More recently, U.S.-based Motorola (nyse: MOT - news - people ) has gone the same route with its relentless "Hello Moto" advertising campaign and attention to eye-catching designs that heated up its constant battle to erode some of Nokia's commanding global market share. http://www.forbes.com/2003/01/27/cx_ah_0127siemens.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 00:22:29 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: A $55,000 Net Scam Warning Think you're too smart to be fooled? So did this veteran Internet user By Bob Sullivan MSNBC Jan. 23 - He's a veteran Internet user, and an accomplished dentist. He has a friend in the FBI, and they have discussed Internet crime. Bruce Lachot is not your typical Net scam victim. But in November, just after the birth of his third child, Lachot decided his family needed a larger car. He was tempted by a great deal on a new BMW M5, and optimistically wired money to the German seller. Now, Lachot finds himself out $55,000, with no new sedan, and no chance to recover the money, a victim of one of the most successful and widespread Internet scams to date. http://www.msnbc.com/news/854552.asp ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 00:35:07 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Can Your Cell Phone Impair Your Vision? By Ben Charny Staff Writer, CNET News.com New research from the University of Utah has revealed a potentially lethal "tunnel vision" that drivers get while talking on a cell phone. Researchers found that drivers using cell phones, even hands-free devices, aren't processing peripheral vision well. The scientists studied twenty volunteers who used a driving simulator to experience all sorts of distractions, from cars suddenly swerving to a stoplight changing. In one test, a driver on a phone and one focused solely on the road were shown the same series of billboards. The driver not yakking remembered seeing 50 percent more billboards than the driver on the phone, the study found. Associate professor David Strayer said this is "inattention blindness," an impairment that slows reaction time by 20 percent and made some drive-and-dial practitioners miss half the red lights they were suddenly presented with in some simulations. http://news.com.com/2100-1033-982325.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 00:39:30 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Plug (the Product) and Play / Advertisers Use Online Games By Ellen Edwards Washington Post Staff Writer Nickelodeon, the popular kids cable network, wanted to draw more attention to the launch of its "Jimmy Neutron" series last year. So during the summer it partnered with Quaker Oats, among others, to create the "Jimmy Neutron Gotta Blast" online racing game. To play, kids needed a code from inside a cereal box to access Nick's Web site and build their own rocket. To sweeten the offer, Nick promised that some of the rockets would be chosen at random to race on-air. Kids called it fun. In marketing, it's called an advergame, the marriage of advertising to computer games. In Nickelodeon's summer-long promotion, more than a half-million people played its game, and the series launch was the highest-rated in the network's history. That's not a bad payoff for a modest investment. Advergames can reinforce a brand image, build a database of information about its users, directly target the market they want to hit -- all very inexpensively when compared to what it costs to advertise in other media. That's one of the reasons they've taken off since being introduced in the late 1990s. In creating advergames, marketers have jumped on a hot consumer trend: electronic gaming. Last year revenue from the electronic gaming industry ($10.3 billion, according to the NPD Group) was bigger than movie ticket revenue ($9.37 billion, reports Exhibitor Relations). Forrester Research, which studies the use of new technologies, projects that advergaming alone will be a billion-dollar-a-year industry by 2005. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A43992-2003Jan25.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 01:04:17 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Kazaa Fires Back at Hollywood, Labels By John Borland Staff Writer, CNET News.com Sharman Networks, owner of the popular Kazaa file-swapping software, has launched a legal counterstrike against the major record labels and Hollywood studios, asserting they have "obscenely" abused their copyright powers. In a lawsuit filed late Monday in federal court in Los Angeles, Sharman claims that major entertainment companies have colluded to drive potential online rivals out of business. The conduct should preclude the industry from being able to defend its copyrights in court, at least until the behavior is corrected, Sharman contends. The lawsuit is a counterstrike by Sharman, which has been sued for allegedly contributing to massive online copyright infringement. Last week, a federal judge ruled that record companies and movie studios can proceed with their lawsuit against Sharman. The entertainment industry considers Sharman to be as much an outlaw as Napster and Aimster, two file-sharing services that have been shuttered. But Sharman executives say their business is fundamentally different because the company was created to take advantage of legal online distribution. http://news.com.com/2100-1023-982344.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 01:09:14 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Baseball Test May Show if Web Video's Time Has Come By SAUL HANSELL The discussion about the Super Bowl has hardly died down, and baseball's spring training is still a month away. But Major League Baseball and RealNetworks are already preparing to use this year's baseball season to test whether Internet broadcasting is more than just a minor league sport. Last year, 200,000 people paid $14.95 to listen to online radio broadcasts of every baseball game and watch video of game highlights, making baseball the most popular paid Webcasting service. This year, baseball will become the first major league sport to broadcast live video feeds online for a major portion of its games. Baseball officials say the time is right for a video service that will cost $6 to $10 a month because nearly 20 percent of American homes have high-speed, or broadband, Internet connections, which can handle high-quality video Webcasts. http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/27/technology/27STRE.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 08:33:44 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: AT&T Wireless to Provide Wi-Fi in Hotels, Airports NEW YORK, Jan 28 (Reuters) - AT&T Wireless Services Inc. (NYSE:AWE) has signed an agreement with Wayport Inc. to give subscribers high-speed, wireless Web access at more than 475 hotels and several airports with a technology called Wi-Fi, the Wall Street Journal reported on Tuesday. AT&T Wireless customers will have to pay for Wayport's Wi-Fi access, a technology for accessing the Internet without a fixed line, even if they already subscribe to the carrier's data service, the newspaper said. The Wi-Fi service, called GoPort, will range in price from $9.99 for unlimited use over a 24-hour period to $69.99 for unlimited use over 30 days. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=31171901 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 09:17:08 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: AT&T Wireless Results & 2003 Actions AT&T Wireless Reports Solid Fourth Quarter Results With 15.3 Percent Growth in Services Revenue - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=31174332 AT&T Wireless Outlines Actions It Will Take to Meet 2003 Goals - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=31177877 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 09:18:45 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: SBC Reports Fourth-Quarter Earnings SBC Reports Fourth-Quarter Earnings Per Diluted Share of $0.71, $0.62 Before Special Items and Expensing Stock Options - Jan 28, 2003 07:11 AM (BusinessWire) Broadcast live via the Internet at 10 a.m. Eastern time, Jan. 28, 2003, at www.sbc.com/investor_relations. SAN ANTONIO--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Jan. 28, 2003--SBC Communications Inc. (NYSE:SBC) today announced that concurrent with its fourth-quarter earnings it now recognizes the fair value of stock options as an expense. This expense is included in reported results for both current and prior-year periods. For the fourth quarter ended Dec. 31, 2002, SBC's reported earnings totaled $2.4 billion, or $0.71 per diluted share, compared with $1.2 billion, or $0.35 per diluted share, in the fourth quarter of 2001. Before special items and the impacts of expensed stock options, SBC's fourth-quarter 2002 earnings were $0.62 per diluted share compared with $0.64 in the year-ago period. (Special items and accounting changes in both quarters are described in detail below.) Fourth-quarter reported revenues totaled $11.2 billion, down 5.8 percent from $11.9 billion in the year-ago period. Together with proportionate revenues from Cingular Wireless, the nationwide wireless company 60 percent owned by SBC, revenues totaled $13.3 billion, down 5.3 percent from $14.0 billion in the year-ago period. Total operating expenses declined 7.2 percent to $9.0 billion on a reported basis and 5.7 percent to $10.2 billion before special items and including proportionate results from Cingular. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=31174005 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 09:21:50 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: AT&T Wireless to Offer Wi-Fi Service at Airports and Hotels REDMOND, Wash.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Jan. 28, 2003-- Company continues aggressive introduction of high-speed wireless data services in North America AT&T Wireless (NYSE:AWE) announced today that it has entered the Wi-Fi (IEEE 802.11b) market with the introduction of GoPort(SM), a high-speed wireless data service designed to keep mobile professionals connected to their corporate information while away from the office. The company also said it has reached an agreement with Wayport, a leading Wi-Fi service provider, to allow roaming on that company's Wi-Fi networks in airports and hundreds of hotels across the United States. Customers can currently sign-up for AT&T Wireless GoPort service directly at Denver International Airport and, in the near future, at Philadelphia International Airport. In addition, starting in mid-February, customers will be able to register for GoPort at www.attws.com/goport and access Wi-Fi service at airports in Austin, Dallas-Fort Worth, San Jose, and Seattle as well as more than 475 major hotels across the United States. Several pricing options are available to meet customers' varied data needs: -- Single connect - $9.99 (good for unlimited connections in one location for 24-hours) -- 5 Connect Multi-Pak - $29.99 ($5.99 per connect/180 day expiration) -- 10 Connect Multi-Pak - $49.99 ($4.99 per connect/30 day expiration) -- Monthly Unlimited - $69.99 (30 day expiration) - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=31177970 ------------------------------ From: John Higdon Subject: Re: Last Laugh! Free Info to turn Your Computer in a Moneymachine! Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 12:25:34 -0800 In article , [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: > Well, here is one of those .biz sites > that John Higdon warned us about! Note how the chain letter spammers > have gotten a bit wiser; they keep their messages short, allow you to > opt-in (as if you did not get enough spam without opting-in to get > still more of it), and note the anti-spam serial number like thing at > the very bottom. This did NOT trigger spam-assassin, probably because > it was short, no yelling, no $$, none of the things which spam-assassin > looks for. PAT] Yes, this is the new wave of marketing in email spam and junk phone calls. The technique is simple: a short tease, absolutely no indication as to who the advertiser might be, and a rigorous avoidance of detector-triggering verbage or formatting. What does this do? Many things. First and foremost, it hides the responsible party. The only way a spam victim can find the party to take action against is to respond. At that point, he can claim (and he has proof) that the complainant actually opted-in. Second, it drastically cuts down on the response-filtering that must be done to follow up on successful mark hits. Third, by taking all the marketing meat out of the message, the likelihood of triggering things such as SpamAssassin is kept to a minimum. The telephonic equivalent goes like this: A call (with valid, typically local Caller ID) comes in with a recorded announcement. "Hello! Would you be interested in lowering or eliminating your debt without having to resort to consolidation or bankruptcy? If the answer is 'yes', then press 'one' now. Otherwise, simply hang up." When you press "one": "Thank you. At the tone, say your name and a telephone number where you can be reached and a convenient time for us to call." Press "one" and you have implicitly given approval to the entire process. All the scammer has to do is clean out the messages, which can be given as a bona fide "permission to call" list to a standard telemarketer. Same elements at work here as the spam: The advertiser is fully hidden; a live person only has to deal with the pre-recorded permissions to call; and it slides right pass any telemarketing protection by using as standard residential phone line with un-blocked Caller ID. Expect a LOT more of this sort of spam and junk call in the future. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | Anytown, USA | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ From: Spyros Bartsocas Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 22:53:23 +0200 Subject: Re: Last Laugh! Free Info to turn Your Computer in a Moneymachine! > If you need help just answer this message and type 'money' > in the subject line and it will be a pleasure for me to > help you immediatly and of course for FREE! What I find amusing is that he uses the keyword in the subject trick (described in the digest recently) in order to filter out unwanted messages. Spyros ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-330-6774 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 Fax 3: 775-642-0603 Fax 4: 530-309-7234 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2003 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. In addition, gifts from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert have enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V22 #261 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Jan 28 22:53:04 2003 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id h0T3r4E20065; Tue, 28 Jan 2003 22:53:04 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 22:53:04 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200301290353.h0T3r4E20065@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #262 TELECOM Digest Tue, 28 Jan 2003 22:53:00 EST Volume 22 : Issue 262 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson PIR Successfully Completes Largest Domain Name Transfer (Julie Williams) A Question About Bellsouth (Mike Khecka) New Virus Warning, Don't Open Attachments (Dave@trekcos.com) Re: T-1 Private Line to Home Network (William Warren) Re: T-1 Private Line to Home Network (Ronald Barron Yokubaitis) Re: T-1 Private Line to Home Network (John R. Levine) Re: T-1 Private Line to Home Network (Dave Phelps) Re: 11-Digit Dialing (Rich Greenberg) Re: 11-Digit Dialing (Joey Lindstrom) Re: Calling Party Pays to Cellular (Randal Hayes) Dialup While Overseas (Austin Dayton Buck) Re: So Many Online Sales, So Little in Tax Revenue (Thomas A. Horsley) Help With Voice Logic VOICE PRO! (Dave Hauss) Looking for T-Metrics P-phone Test Equipment (Steve Swamp) Starting up a CLEC (Unity Corp) Re: Last Laugh! Turn Your Computer To Moneymachine! (William Warren) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRUSES. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Julie Williams Subject: PIR Successfully Completes Largest Domain Name Transfer in History Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 12:29:31 -0500 PUBLIC INTEREST REGISTRY MEDIA ALERT Date: January 27, 2003 Contact: Julie Williams Phone: (703) 464-7005, x111 Cell: 703-402-6715 E-mail: JWilliams@pir.org PUBLIC INTEREST REGISTRY SUCCESSFULLY COMPLETES LARGEST DOMAIN NAME TRANSFER IN HISTORY OF INTERNET .ORG technical systems transitioned from VeriSign Registry Reston, VA - January 27, 2003 - The Public Interest Registry (PIR) today announced in a conference call with reporters that it has successfully transitioned the technical systems for the .ORG registry from former back-end provider VeriSign Global Registry Services to PIR's back-end service provider Afilias Limited. This historic transition marks the largest transfer of data from one registry to another in the history of the Internet, and it was accomplished with no interruption of service to users of .ORG sites and email addresses. PIR officially assumed control of .ORG registry operations on January 1, and the technical services for the registry were cutover this past weekend. "This is an exciting and truly historic moment," said David Maher, chairman of the PIR board. "We have a solid technical team at Afilias and they've done an excellent job making sure that the transition was as smooth as possible. I must also say that the registrars, those who sell domain names directly to the public, have been extremely cooperative. Without their help, this would not have been possible. Now, we can look forward to fulfilling our vision of making improvements to the .ORG domain to better serve noncommercial organizations worldwide." The .ORG domain, which has come to be associated with non-commercial activities, is the Internet's third largest "generic" or non-country specific top-level domain (behind .COM and .NET), housing over 2.6 million domain names worldwide. PIR was created to manage the .ORG registry by the Internet Society, and is committed to setting a new standard for registry services in its management of .ORG that will meet the unique needs and interests of noncommercial organizations around the world. PIR was able to complete the cutover well within the 48 hour window included in the original plan. The zone file - the authoritative source for all .ORG names, published to servers and routers around the world - shifted seamlessly from VeriSign Registry to Afilias. Within the first 30 minutes of reopening the registry after the data was transferred, PIR completed over 18,000 transactions and supported over 170 concurrent connections. The registry began registering domain names at a rate of 1 domain name every 6 seconds. By 10:00 am on the 27th, close to 1800 new domain names had been registered. While new names may be registered, updates and changes to .ORG domain names will not be allowed until January 28, 2003 at 6:00 p.m. EST (23:00 UTC) while the registry continues testing to ensure the stability of the system. Late last year, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Board of Directors selected ISOC's proposal from among 11 organizations bidding to operate the .ORG top-level domain. VeriSign Global Registry Services' contract as registry operator for .ORG expired on December 31, 2002. As such, it is relinquishing .ORG to comply with an agreement they entered into with the ICANN and the U.S. Department of Commerce in May 2001. ABOUT PIR Public Interest Registry (www.pir.org) is a not-for-profit corporation created to manage the .ORG registry. PIR's mission is to manage the .ORG domain in a way that supports the continuing evolution of the Internet as a research, education and communications infrastructure, and educates and empowers the noncommercial community to most effectively utilize the Internet. PIR is based in Reston, Virginia. PIR was created by the Internet Society (www.ISOC.org). ISOC a not-for-profit, open membership organization founded in 1991 and is dedicated to ensuring the open evolution, development and use of the Internet for the benefit of all people. It provides leadership in addressing issues that confront the future of the Internet, and is the organizational home for the groups responsible for Internet infrastructure standards. For additional information on PIR and the .ORG registry please visit www.pir.org. ------------------------------ From: Mike Khecka Subject: A Question About Bellsouth Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 04:29:03 -0600 I remember reading your article BellSouth's Own New "COCOTs" and you seemed to know your stuff. I'm currently in the 504 area and I was wondering if you knew of a backdoor to a op center so I can opdivert since I don't have LD. I can't dial 0 either. I would assume it would be in the 504-557-xxxx but instead of scanning the whole prefix I thought I would ask you any for help on this or pointers about Bellsouth and the 557 exchange would be very appreciated. Thanks, khecka http:\\www.ppchq.org [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Why can't you dial zero for an operator? That seems rather strange. If you have no long distance carrier assigned to your line that would explain why you cannot dial 'double zero' (00) since that defaults to 'your' long distance carrier (and you do not have one of those). But a single zero (0) should get the local operator serving your community (who could be anywhere in the USA it appears). Are you certain you cannot do that? A single zero may have to time out before it goes to the operator and you can rush that along by doing 0# (pound sign following the zero) since the pound sign serves as a carriage return or an "I am finished dialing" signal. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Dave@trekcos.com Subject: New Virus Warning, Don't Open Attachments Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 12:57:49 GMT Organization: Cox Communications W32.SQLExp.Worm The worm sends 376 bytes to UDP port 1434, the SQL Server Resolution Service Port. For more info: http://securityresponse.symantec.com/avcenter/venc/data/w32.sqlexp.worm.html Take care, Dave G. www.trekcs.com www.trekcos.com ------------------------------ From: William Warren Subject: Re: T-1 Private Line to Home Network Organization: Church of the Swimming Bullfrog Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 21:26:19 GMT KJ wrote in message news:telecom22.260.10@telecom-digest.org. > I am replacing my DSL VPN connection to my brokerage firm with a T-1 > point to point private line. > How does this change the hardware I need at home to network my three > computers? I currently use an SMC wireless Access Point for a > wireless network. Is a wireless netwrok still possible with the T1? It doesn't change the network *between* your computers, but you'll need new equipment to interface your home network to the T1 line, and you may need a new ADSL modem. If you have a wireless network setup now with a SEPARATE DSL modem it will still work the same way(1), but if your WAP is ALSO your DSL modem, then it must be replaced. As for the T1: you will need a router and a way to interface with the T1 circuit: if you buy a router with a built in T1 port, that's all you need, but that feature isn't usually available until you get into the Cisco 7200 series, and you might do better with a separate CSU/DSU combination, which will change the T1 line to a V.35 connection that will work with routers in the Cisco 2500 series. > Will I be able to connect to the T-1 and the internet through another > DSL line at the same time? Yes, but be careful what you ask for: BOTH connections must be handled by the same router, and it has to have "traffic shaping" software to balance the loads according to their respective speeds. Since T1 is between two and ten times as fast as ADSL, this is an essential feature. Don't forget that many DSL plans have traffic limits, and huge payments for overage, while a T1 line is 1,544,000 bps all the time. Unless you're planning on using the DSL circuit as a "hot spare", I recommend against it. Bill (1) This assumes that your DSL modem is using an Ethernet connection to get to the WAP. If it's USB, it will probably have to be replaced as well, since routers don't usually support USB connections. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 21:41:16 -0600 From: Ronald Barron Yokubaitis Subject: Re: T-1 Private Line to Home Network On Mon, 27 Jan 2003, KJ wrote: > I am replacing my DSL VPN connection to my brokerage firm with a T-1 > point to point private line. Good move. > How does this change the hardware I need at home to network my three > computers? I currently use an SMC wireless Access Point for a > wireless network. Is a wireless netwrok still possible with the T1? Wireless network connects to the ethernet port on the T1 router just the same as connecting to the ethernet port on the router connected to your old dsl circuit. > Will I be able to connect to the T-1 and the internet through another > DSL line at the same time? ??? RonY Ronald Barron Yokubaitis | AB5LJ | rony@texas.net | www.Texas.net | www.GigaNews.com _.. . ._ _... ..... ._.. ._ _ _ ._ _... ..... ._.. ._ _ _ _._ ------------------------------ From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: T-1 Private Line to Home Network Date: 28 Jan 2003 00:35:53 -0500 Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > I am replacing my DSL VPN connection to my brokerage firm with a T-1 > point to point private line. Sounds like a reasonable upgrade. > How does this change the hardware I need at home to network my three > computers? I currently use an SMC wireless Access Point for a > wireless network. Is a wireless netwrok still possible with the T1? Sure, I have one. But you need some extra hardware. Your DSL line comes in through a DSL modem which connects to your LAN like an Ethernet. A T-1 comes in through a modem-like thing called a CSU/DSU which needs to connect to a router. The largest vendor of routers is Cisco, but there are many others. Configuring a router with a T-1 is a minor pain because there are a whole lot of different ways the T-1 could be set up and the router has to match: full T-1 or fractional for lower speed, direct PPP or Cisco protocol if the ISP is close to you, or frame relay if it's farther away. If your ISP is only giving you a single IP address on your T1, your router also has to provide the DHCP and NAT services the other computers on your network need, and should also provide packet filters (often wrongly called a firewall) as well. Once you have the router set up and plugged into a network hub (or maybe you can find a router that includes a hub), you can plug your access point into your hub for the wireless part of your LAN. > Will I be able to connect to the T-1 and the internet through another > DSL line at the same time? Depends on your router. Is this for backup if the T-1 fails, or something else? John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 johnl@iecc.com Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner http://iecc.com/johnl Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail ------------------------------ From: Dave Phelps Subject: Re: T-1 Private Line to Home Network Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 00:18:06 -0600 Organization: www.tippenring.com In article , nospam@bigfoot.com says: > I am replacing my DSL VPN connection to my brokerage firm with a T-1 > point to point private line. > How does this change the hardware I need at home to network my three > computers? I currently use an SMC wireless Access Point for a > wireless network. Is a wireless network still possible with the T1? > Will I be able to connect to the T-1 and the internet through another > DSL line at the same time? > Thanks, > Eric Yes, you can do all of the above. You will need to get a router that has a serial interface, to which you can connect a T1 CSU/DSU, or, my preference, a router that has a CSU/DSU built in. If you want everything in one box, I'd look at a Cisco 1721, with a T1 CSU/DSU WIC, and an ethernet WIC. It will be able to handle all of your routing. You might want to consult your IT security staff before finalizing your plan though. Dave Phelps Phone Masters Ltd. deadspam=tippenring ------------------------------ From: richgr@panix.com (Rich Greenberg) Subject: Re: 11-Digit Dialing Date: 28 Jan 2003 09:23:12 -0500 Organization: Organized? Me? In article , Joseph wrote: > This is the same argument that has raged in the digest and elsewhere > for years regarding "toll alerting." Neither side really wants to > adopt what the other side thinks is "right." Correct and let's not start it again. I do have one question on a closely related item. Is there anyone on either side of the toll alerting issue who has a strong objection to allowing 11 digit dialing when it is not required? i.e. you can dial 1-npa-nxx-xxxx on any call, from next door to cross country? The advantage of permitting this is that you can program 11 digit numbers into your cell phone or your laptop's fax addressbook and won't have to change them depending on where you are calling from. Bellsouth doesn't permit this here in GA. Rich Greenberg Work: Rich.Greenberg atsign worldspan.com +1 770-563-6656 N6LRT Marietta, GA, USA Play: richgr atsign panix.com +1 770-321-6507 Eastern time zone. I speak for myself & my dogs only. VM'er since CP-67 Canines:Val(Chinook,CGC,TT), Red & Shasta(Husky,(RIP)) Owner:Chinook-L Atlanta Siberian Husky Rescue. www.panix.com/~richgr/ Asst Owner:Sibernet-L ------------------------------ From: Joey Lindstrom Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 14:49:00 -0700 Subject: Re: 11-Digit Dialing Reply-To: joey@telussucks.info On Mon, 27 Jan 2003 14:49:20 -0500 (EST), John R. Levine wrote: >> ... Nearby parts of 905/289 are local calls from Toronto, so 10 >> digits work. More distant portions of 905/289 are toll calls, and >> the leading '1' is required. What's so difficult. > This must be, what, about the 400th time we've gone around with the > toll alerting argument. Personally, I hate toll alerting. I do not > care whether a call to Mississauga will cost 0 cents or 3.5 cents, I > just want to make the bleeping call. Across the lake here in New York > we have never ever had toll alerting, and we get along just fine > without it. > If regulators insist on putting in toll alerting, they should at least > make it permissive so that 1+10D always works. It wasn't clear from > the previous discussion whether Toronto has permissive 1+10D, or they > have the incredibly stupid Texas plan where you have to memorize every > prefix in nearby area codes in order to use your phone, since 1+10D > won't work if a prefix happens to be a local call, and 10D won't work > if it's a 5 cent toll call. But can we at least agree that a toll-alerting system that allowed 1+10D permissively would be something that folks on your (non-toll-alerting) side of the fence could live with comfortably? It would certainly satisfy those of us on the toll-alerting side, and in fact does so: Toronto, and most areas in Canada (if not all), do allow 1+10D permissively, and also implement toll-alerting. At least, the ILEC's do. Sprint Canada, on the other hand, doesn't allow 1+10D permissively (at least here in Calgary). When dialing (from a line provisioned with Sprint Canada local service) 1-403-localnumber, I get "We're sorry, it is not necessary to dial a 1 or 0 when calling this number. Please hang up and try your call again." Dialing 0+10D from the same line nets me a fast busy. Dialing either 1+10D or 0+10D from the one Telus line in this office gets me a brief recording: "Your local call is proceeding. There is no need to dial long distance. Thank you from Telus." and then the call completes. Being a Sprint Canada fan, and a Telus hater, I'm rather chagrined at this situation. :-) -- Joey Lindstrom -- Telus Sucks http://www.telussucks.info ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 16:21:18 -0600 From: Randal Hayes Subject: Re: Calling Party Pays to Cellular > We don't need technology-specific area codes to do that. We already > have a perfectly good area code for calls that cost extra because of > some wonderful telecom service they provide: 500. The fact that every > PBX and pay phone in the country blocks 500 calls, and noting that the > code is pretty much abandoned should give us a hint how popular > caller-pays cellular would be. I believe I already inferred that CPP would not be popular, with my comment regarding Chairman Kennard's "brilliant" idea. I was explaining how these area codes would provide some assistance for billback if CPP was forced upon us. > Even now the assessments are frequently screwed up. For example, in > the UK there are a whole bunch of different >kinds of surcharged > numbers, 3XX for mobile (I think), 870 for "national rate" same charge > from everywhere, 7XX 90X for higher per-minute surcharges. My dial-1 > carrier charges extra for 8XX, but my dial-around calling card carrier > doesn't. Call up three US telcos and ask what their charges are for > these calls and get at least three different answers. Call them and > look at the bill and get three more. Although I totally agree that not only bundled surcharging but unnecessary and essentially "bogus" surcharging is a bad idea and one that totally screws-over the customer, I researched rate and interconnect structures enough to understand the rationale (twisted rationale, but still rationale) of it all, rather than just noticing on the surface that the rates could be different. One example: just as here in the U.S. years ago when some carriers sent intrastate calls to an out-of-state switch and then back in-state to try to justify offering the lower interstate LD rates for intrastate calls (tromboning) -- most carriers got their hands slapped for this, the same rationale has been used in Europe and elsewhere to terminate in-country fixed-to-wireless LD calls by sending them outside the country, and then routed back to either lower their LD rates (getting a lower international settlement rate than having to pay a higher, in-country access charge) or to increase their rates/revenue (a company owning both a landline and wireless service in the country sends the call out of country and then back in to be able to assess what may be a higher international settlement rate or terminating access charge -- artificially inflating the revenue stream of the landline part of the business to shore it up). Actually, it's quite fascinating. I do presume that we in the U.S. are experiencing one of the goals of technology-specific codes in Europe and elsewhere, which is for carriers that are being assessed such surcharges to identify, assess, and billback/pass-through the wireless surcharges to the end user for those specific wireless devices we call, which the carriers previously passed-through as a component of the rates for all international LD calls placed to both wireless or wireline devices, because now these specific surcharges are passed-through only when one calls a wireless device in that country -- not when one calls a wireline device. It places the component cost of the calls (whether you agree with the "right" of anyone to assess this surcharge or not) more directly on the calls which have as their makeup, that component, ie., wireless. Thanks, Randy Hayes University of Northern Iowa ------------------------------ From: a_d_buck@hotmail.com (Austin Dayton Buck) Subject: Dialup While Overseas Date: 27 Jan 2003 14:59:39 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ I travel to Japan and use my laptop to dialup a local Earthlink number which I then use to surf the Internet and retrieve my email. I use Internet Explorer and Outlook Express 6 as my client software. I have run into a situation that I've not experienced before and need some assistance. At some hotels, when I dial the local access number (including the number, usually an 8 or 9, to get an outside line) I can hear a dial tone and the modem dialing all the numbers but get no connection. I can connect by manually dialing the number by lifting the receiver of the phone off the cradle, dialing the number, listening for the carrier tone, then launching Internet Explorer, then hanging up the phone by putting the receiver back in the cradle. The last hotel I stayed at in Tokyo (a very nice new Marriott) knew of the issue/problem and said I need a "PBX box" between my modem and their phone system. They provided me with a little box about the size of a deck of cards which I plugged in between my modem and the data jack in the telephone and, sure enough, I was able to dialup the connection with no problem. So I asked them about this magic little box and where could I get one so I could bring it with me whenever I came to Japan. That they couldn't tell me. I asked several folks in the hotel and no one could seem to tell me what it was and where to get one. There were no identifyng marks on th box either. I don't have this problem at the Tokyo airport (Narita) so I am thinking it must be unique to the hotels. I've experienced the problem at a couple of modern hotels in Japan (Marriott, Hyatt, etc.) So, can anyone tell me what the heck it is that I need and, if possible, where (e.g. a web site) to get one? Thanks in advance. Best, ADBuck ------------------------------ Subject: Re: So Many Online Sales, So Little in Tax Revenue From: tom.horsley@att.net (Thomas A. Horsley) Organization: AT&T Worldnet Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 23:00:52 GMT > The states cannot currently impose the tax because the Supreme Court > has ruled that their multiple tax systems would impose an unfair > collection burden on retailers that do not have a physical presence in > their buyers' various states. The really fascinating thing about this is that the online sites that put up such strong opposition to this include places like amazon.com who can keep track of your preferences and make recommendations, point you to movie theaters in your neighborhood showing films of books you once bought, etc. Yet somehow, despite all this compute power and detailed databases on customer activity, keeping track of sales tax would be a fantastic burden that would drive them out of business :-). It would be so refreshing if they'd just tell the truth: No sales tax means a competitive advantage over brick & mortar. There is no way it would be remotely difficult for them to actually implement (at least compared to the effort of implementing the databases they already have). >>==>> The *Best* political site >>==+ email: Tom.Horsley@worldnet.att.net icbm: Delray Beach, FL | Free Software and Politics <<==+ ------------------------------ From: dahauss@unlimitedsounds.com (Dave Hauss) Subject: Help With Voice Logic VOICE PRO! Date: 27 Jan 2003 19:12:15 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ I hope someone can help. I have a Voice Logic Voice Pro system with software version 2.021 and tonight it decided not to answer any more. it will pick a random number of rings, and then disconnect the caller and never play the main greeting. I can however, access all functions from the phones connected to it. Any help would be appreciated. ------------------------------ From: Steve Swamp Subject: Looking For T-Metrics P-Phone Test Equipment Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 22:37:47 -0500 Organization: MindSpring Enterprises Anyone out there have any Nortel P-phone (also known as the Electronic Business Set - EBS) test equipment? In particular, T-Metrics put out two boxes a bunch of years ago - TM-500 and TM-950. I'm doing some work with p-phones right now, and I'd like to try and get a couple of these boxes. Thanks in advance. Steve Swamp swamp@mindspring.com ------------------------------ From: Unity Corp Subject: Starting up a CLEC Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 23:02:08 -0500 In the process of forming a new LLC company and going to create a UNE-P CLEC in Indiana. Is the process easy? Does anyone have any horror stories about a CLEC UNE-P going sour? Any help that you could give us would be great. Ben Plikerd Benson Communications, Inc. ------------------------------ From: William Warren Subject: Re: Last Laugh! Free Info to turn Your Computer in a Moneymachine! Organization: Church of the Swimming Bullfrog Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 21:01:42 GMT TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to Till Geissinger by writing in message news:telecom22.260.16@telecom-digest.org: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, here is one of those .biz sites > that John Higdon warned us about! Note how the chain letter spammers > have gotten a bit wiser; they keep their messages short, allow you to > opt-in (as if you did not get enough spam without opting-in to get > still more of it), and note the anti-spam serial number like thing at > the very bottom. This did NOT trigger spam-assassin, probably because > it was short, no yelling, no $$, none of the things which spam-assassin > looks for. PAT] > ------------------------------ > Hi friends, > I found some information that is really unbelievable, > concerning the problem how to earn money on the net. > If you need help just answer this message and type 'money' > in the subject line and it will be a pleasure for me to > help you immediatly and of course for FREE! > MAF Anti-Spam ID: 20030126145250X2f9UfQ7 > -------------------------------- > The above was the entire message. I guess he figures your curiosity > will lead you to respond and opt-in. PAT] Pat, The "anti-spam serial number like thing" is actually a standard anti-spamkiller random sequence, designed to prevent spam detection by content hashing. Rule #1: Spammers lie. Bill ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-330-6774 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 Fax 3: 775-642-0603 Fax 4: 530-309-7234 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2003 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. In addition, gifts from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert have enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V22 #262 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Jan 29 20:41:03 2003 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id h0U1f3R02299; Wed, 29 Jan 2003 20:41:03 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 20:41:03 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200301300141.h0U1f3R02299@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #263 TELECOM Digest Wed, 29 Jan 2003 20:41:00 EST Volume 22 : Issue 263 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson A Bunch of Lost Messages Today (TELECOM Digest Editor) Legally Kill All Adult Porn in the United States; Here is How (P Townson) Re: 1+Ten-Digits Mandatory in NYCity (John Higdon) NT Speaker Phone Help (Robert Johnson) You Know You Are Having a Bad Telecom Day When (Jeffrey JB Carpenter) Re: Can Your Cell Phone Impair Your Vision? (Linc Madison) Re: Starting up a CLEC (Justin Time) Re: So Many Online Sales, So Little in Tax Revenue (Dave Garland) .name gTLD Registry is Starting Their Own Registrar (Domain-dude) TiVo Tracking: We Know What You're Replaying (Phil Earnhardt) Spam Filtering Your Telephone (was Re: Last Laugh!) (Gordon S. Hlavenka) Great Site (David Mitchell) Re: Cell-Phone Couture (Joseph) Underground Phone Cable (Tim) Re: 11-Digit Dialing (Paul A Lee) Re: Looking For T-Metrics P-Phone Test Equipment (Don't Email Me) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRUSES. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 19:21:46 EST From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: A Bunch of Lost Messages Today Several ... about a dozen ... messages from readers prematurely hit the bit bucket today in the process of being set up for publication in the Digest. *If* you sent in a message, got an autoreply, and your message does not appear in this issue or the next issue following later tonight then I respectfully ask you to resubmit it. Thanks, and sorry for the screwup. PAT ------------------------------ From: Patrick Townson Subject: Legally Kill All Adult Porn in the United States; Here is How Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 17:53:47 -0600 After a sort of bad day for me, in which I shoveled out more than the usual amount of porn spam, I found the following message posted in the Unitarian-Universalist newsgroup on Usenet. Please do not misunderstand my position here; I beleieve firmly in freedom of speech and use it quite a lot myself. I've nothing especially against porn, at least the more creative and original varieties of it, but the constant flow of it on the net begins to get boring, to say the least, and a great many netizens are offended by it. This person 'Quill' who sent the message to the UUA newsgroup suggests just killing it all once and for all. I wonder how well the US government would (or does) respond? Any thoughts? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Quill" Newsgroups: alt.religion.unitarian-univ Sent: Monday, January 27, 2003 10:15 PM Subject: (7253) - Legally kill all adult porn in the United States, and here is how to do it - (4483) > Federal laws (18 USC 1462 and 1465) prohibit use of the Internet to > distribute obscene material. File an online report about internet > adult obscenity or porn spam. File a report on Sexual Intercourse, > Sadomasochism, Anal Sex, Masturbation Sexual Bestiality, Excretory > Functions, Oral Sex, and Lewd Exhibition of the Genitals. > http://www.obscenitycrimes.org/complaint/default.cfm?action=FOCFormIntro I would suggest a good 'back door' approach to killing spam (since so much of it is pornographic in nature) is to consider the suggestion mentioned above. Thoughts, anyone? PAT ------------------------------ From: John Higdon Subject: Re: 1+Ten-Digits Mandatory in NYCity Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 19:14:06 -0800 In article , Joey Lindstrom wrote: > In overlay regions, so long as the two (or more) area codes are > protected (not used as CO codes within any of these area codes), you > don't even have to do that. You could easily allow 7-digit dialing > with no special codes. HOWEVER, the FCC (I think) said "no way" to > this idea long ago. Rationale: it would be anti-competitive. It would also be confusing. A person does not necessarily know the number of the phone he is using at someone else's home, office, public place. If he doesn't know the number of the phone, he also doesn't know its area code and would have no idea whether to dial seven or ten digits. If 10/11 digits are always required, then all calls from all telephones are dialed the same; there is no worry about the number of the phone being used. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | Anytown, USA | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ From: Robert Johnson Subject: NT Speaker Phone Help Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 06:45:02 GMT Organization: RoadRunner - West I have a NT1L07AA Speaker phone I would like to find a Install sheet for it or something showing a pinout of the RJ45 jack on the bottom ... and help would this would be apreceated Robert Johnson NT1L07AA First line ot Tag RLS-D3 Second Line of Tag 4-88 Third Line of Tag ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 04:42:12 -0000 From: Jeffrey James Bryan Carpenter Subject: You Know You Are Having a Bad Telecom Day When ... You know you are having a bad telecom day when... - You pull of the side of the highway to clear the ice off your windshield wipers and drop your personal mobile phone in the snow. You do not realise this happened until you get to the airport ticket counter. - You call your office to tell them you lost your mobile, and they think you lost your office mobile, and cancel that. - You pull out your personal backup mobile, and the battery is dead, you have no spare and no charger. - You did not bring your 2nd backup, a new AT&T GSM phone you are testing because it was only a day trip, and you would not need it. - You did not bring any of the info you need to change the forwarding for your toll-free number and several local numbers across the country you have that forward to your mobile, and that everyone use to reach you. - You get to the site of your meeting, ask to use a phone because you have no working phone. When you try to make your 5th long distance call, you get the message, "I'm sorry, you call can not be completed because long distance service on this line has been suspended due to potential fraud." - You call your wireless company and they say you will get the replacement phone in 4-6 weeks. You say, how about overnight. They say they can expedite it to 3-5 days. You say how about overnight. They say 3-5 days. (It actually arrived overnight.) - You get home and try to use the remote access to call forwarding for your main local number, to find out that the access number for that service has been disconnected. (Did get the correct number after pressing the telephone company's answering service to call someone.) - Your toll-free service provider says they cannot do an emergency redirection because when they call the number it is not giving a message which indicates service is down. It was saying, "the cellular customer you are calling is out of the service area, blah, blah, blah." (Yes, the wireless provider cut voice mail off when they suspended the phone. I was finally able to convince the toll-free service provider to make the emergency redirection.) I would mention that you rip a hole in the sleeve of your suit jacket on a sharp edge of the hand rail at the site you visited, but that is not telecom related. Moral of the story: no matter how many services you set up to provide redundancy, inadequate testing, lack of preparation, miscommunications, or not taking backup equipment (or all of these together) will foil your backup plans. Completely out of voice communication: 15 long hours. Not a good Monday. jeff ------------------------------ From: Linc Madison Subject: Re: Can Your Cell Phone Impair Your Vision? Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 00:01:43 -0800 Organization: LincMad.com Consulting Reply-To: Telecom@LincMad.com In article , Monty Solomon wrote: > In one test, a driver on a phone and one focused solely on the road > were shown the same series of billboards. The driver not yakking > remembered seeing 50 percent more billboards than the driver on the > phone, the study found. That's a mostly irrelevant point. I can quite safely ignore billboards while talking on the cellphone, without necessarily ignoring traffic conditions, stop lights, etc. I'm sure that the cellphone-using drivers also remembered less about the trees and flowers along the roadway; so what?? To the extent that the study showed drivers being less attentive to their driving, that's a real problem. However, drivers paying less attention to billboards is nothing to be concerned about. I have a hands-free kit for my cellphone, and I have made sure that it does not impair my ability to turn my head. I have also on several occasions told the person on the other end of a call to hold on because I needed to give my full attention to traffic conditions. www dot LincMad dot com / Telecom at LincMad dot com Linc Madison * San Francisco, California ------------------------------ From: a_user2000@yahoo.com (Justin Time) Subject: Re: Starting up a CLEC Date: 29 Jan 2003 06:01:03 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Unity Corp wrote in message news:: > In the process of forming a new LLC company and going to create a > UNE-P CLEC in Indiana. Is the process easy? Does anyone have any > horror stories about a CLEC UNE-P going sour? Any help that you could > give us would be great. > Ben Plikerd > Benson Communications, Inc. The landscape is littered with the detrius of hundreds of CLECs that have gone under the past 3 years. Some of the biggest include Winstar that had a very good business model and lived off the deep pockets of AT&T/Lucent/Avaya for several years. ------------------------------ From: Dave Garland Subject: Re: So Many Online Sales, So Little in Tax Revenue Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 03:21:16 -0600 Organization: Wizard Information > No sales tax means a competitive advantage over brick & mortar. True. And shipping costs mean a competitive advantage to brick & mortar. > There is no way it would be remotely difficult for them to actually > implement (at least compared to the effort of implementing the > databases they already have). Amazon probably could. But I couldn't, as a small business owner. If all states and jurisdictions charged the same amount of tax on the same products, and I could just send a check with the total tax, accompanied by a printout (or handwritten list.. some small businesses like artists and craftspeople may not be computerized) of sales amounts and associated zipcodes, to a single place, I could deal with that. But products taxed vary from place to place and time to time (in Minnesota food and clothing are not taxed ... but carbonated water is taxed; Minneapolis has a 0.5% sales tax that St. Paul does not). If we could bill each of the states for the time and expense it takes to figure it all out, we could make a comfortable living without selling anything at all. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I am reminded of an interesting story on differences in tax rates. In the Chicago area, where the landscape is littered with McDonald restaurants (literally every few blocks), the landscape is also littered with *different suburbs and different tax rates in each*. McDonald's gets their preprogammed cash registers through a central source for each district. If a register goes out of order (god forbid the youngster working at the counter had to calculate the order, the cost for same and the taxes in his head!) the store managers swap the registers around at random as needed. One of Skokie's registers goes out of order; they get a spare register from Chicago or Niles, or Evanston for example. Rather than reprogram the tax rates in the cash register, they just go with whatever it says. So a purchase that costs 89 cents one day with tax included may cost 93 cents the next day, same store, with a different register in use. If you complain, they just give you a blank look, no comprehension at all. If you press the issue, with a call to their corporate customer service office, reminding the CS person that there *are* laws against *claiming* that a tax is due when in fact there is no such tax (or not in that amount) due and that in any event the store is going to only pay the bottom line due on sales tax in that community; then the CS person will send you a refund of the two or three pennies *in the form of a paper check* which you have to deposit in the bank, along with a voucher for a free soft drink (small size) the next time you go to the store. I did that once, and got a phone call three or four days later from a person in the Chicagoland Black McDonald's Operator's Associ- ation giving me hell for making trouble for one of 'his' stores. Chicago has the ONE McDonald's Restaurant in history which filed bank- ruptcy and closed; it was located in a housing project area. Ever notice how McD never actually owns anything, except an occassional 'corporate store'? PAT] ------------------------------ From: londonuk@email.com (Domain-dude) Subject: .name gTLD Registry is Starting Their Own Registrar Date: 29 Jan 2003 03:03:59 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ I read on ICANN blog that the Registry for .name is planning to launch their own Registrar http://www.personalnames.com. What will the rest industry say about this move? They are putting themselves in the same position as Verisign and Network Solutions. ------------------------------ From: Phil Earnhardt Subject: TiVo Tracking: We Know What You're Replaying Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 00:19:16 -0700 Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com The following appeared in www.showbizdata.com on Tuesday; I couldn't find any articles at the LA Times website. I wasn't impressed with the fact that TiVo subscribers were replaying the commercials; I was shocked to hear that TiVo could and would gather and report information on what users were doing with their boxes. Does anyone have any more technical details of this tracking? Or is there some non-technical means (i.e., anecdotes) that TiVo actually gatherd this information? --phil > Owners of the TiVo digital video recorder, who are able to use the > device to run 'instant replays' anytime they choose, used it more > often during the Super Bowl for rerunning commercials than they did > for reviewing plays on the field, the Los Angeles Times reported today > (Tuesday). TiVo Senior V.P. Brodie Keast told the newspaper, 'Viewers > watch the content that they find most compelling, even when the most > compelling content is the commercials.' In the past, network execs > have criticized TiVo for touting a feature that allows viewers to skip > commercials. [...]" ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 01:51:25 -0600 From: Gordon S. Hlavenka Reply-To: nospam@crashelex.com Organization: Crash Electronics, Inc. Subject: Spam Filtering Your Telephone (was Re: Last Laugh! Free Info...) John Higdon wrote: > The telephonic equivalent goes like this: > A call (with valid, typically local Caller ID) comes in... I started getting messages on my answering machine, pretty close to this: "This is Verizon calling for Gordon, it's important that you call us by 4:57pm tomorrow at [888-number]." It's obviously some marketing drone; if they _say_ they're selling something they know you won't call back. Then they throw in a phony deadline to make it sound Important. The deadline is obviously phony, because on every call it's "4:57pm tomorrow". No way I'm calling this goof -- plonk! I got this message every day for about a week. Coincidentally, my cellphone quit working about this time. So I call Verizon ('cause they're my cell provider du jour) and it turns out they've been trying to reach me about an unpaid bill -- since I never called back they just shut the phone off. They're not allowed to say why they're calling "for privacy reasons" in case someone else listens to my messages, I guess. Why they can't call on my CELL PHONE (which was still active while they were calling) I don't know. Anyway, now we have to worry about false positives on telephone "spam filters" too. 'Course it would help if people leaving non-spam messages would include actual information :-) Gordon S. Hlavenka www.crashelex.com nospam@crashelex.com Grammar and spelling flames welcome. Yes, that's really my email address. Don't change it. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 20:54:36 -0800 From: David Mitchell Subject: Great Site Thanks for putting together a very comprehensive portal- WOW! I'm from Canada and wondering if you know of any list of emails for North American Telco executives -- I'm looking mostly to source international routes. Any help or suggestions you may have would be tremendously appreciated. Thanks! David Mitchell Carrier Director Next Generation Telecom Direct: 604-732-5079 Fax: 604-692-0555 ------------------------------ From: Joseph Subject: Re: Cell-Phone Couture Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 08:57:58 -0800 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Reply-To: joeofseattle@yahoo.com On Mon, 27 Jan 2003 22:59:24 -0500, Monty Solomon wrote: > One of four models of Xelibri mobile phones announced by Siemens.Now > handset vendors, still looking for the magic formula that will jolt > consumers back into a phone-buying mood, are going after the > fashion-conscious. Many of these "fashion" phones are more about being unique looking rather than practical. This new "Faberge" looking phone from Siemens while it may look "cool" has limited use as far as practicality. When people are used to phones that have their keypads laid out in the common style we've been used to for 30 years i.e. in rows with 123, 456, 789, and *0# in 4 rows and they make weird designs so that you cannot make a call without studying the phone to make a correctly dialed call something's wrong with the design. The Siemens phone is just their example of poor design. Nokia is guilty of the same thing with several of their new designs. As far as what "gimmicks" sell phones Nokia was first with the interchangeable covers, customizeable ringers and screen graphics so the other manufacturers followed suit. Immitation is the "sincerest" form of flattery. You have to wonder if designers for these phones (and for regular phones for that matter) give any thought to the real practical application of use of their products. When Dreyfus designed the touch tone series phones he designed keys with concave surfaces for a reason: It makes for much more secure dialing. Other designers for other phones came along and decided that convex keys look "cool" never mind that your fingers could easily roll off the keys. You can design consumer products that are fashionable, but making them so odd as just to be different doesn't make sense to me. Replies are seldom read. Please reply in the group. ------------------------------ From: tim_kuntz@cnt.com (Tim) Subject: Underground Phone Cable Date: 29 Jan 2003 09:13:29 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ For Sale: 900' of 75 pair underground phone cable. Make offer. Thanks Tim ------------------------------ From: Paul A Lee Subject: RE: 11-Digit Dialing Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 12:34:35 -0500 In TELECOM Digest V22 #262, richgr@panix.com (Rich Greenberg) wrote (in part): > Is there anyone on either side of the toll alerting issue who has a > strong objection to allowing 11 digit dialing when it is not required? > i.e. you can dial 1-npa-nxx-xxxx on any call, from next door to cross > country? > The advantage of permitting this is that you can program 11 digit > numbers into your cell phone or your laptop's fax addressbook and won't > have to change them depending on where you are calling from. > Bellsouth doesn't permit this here in GA. Also in TELECOM Digest V22 #262, Joey Lindstrom wrote (in part): > But can we at least agree that a toll-alerting system that allowed > 1+10D permissively would be something that folks on your > (non-toll-alerting) side of the fence could live with comfortably? It > would certainly satisfy those of us on the toll-alerting side... Permissive '1'+10D dialing is exactly what I have been advocating for several years. I've encountered the nonsense of blocking '1'+10D in several parts of the country, but it seems to be practiced primarily in the south and in less populous states. I've heard some pretty incredible stories about why '1'+10D is blocked, including: Permitting '1'+10D would cause local calls to be routed and billed as long distance calls (somebody get that telco a trained switch programmer!) ... It's required by the FCC (just in your state??) ... It's required by the state regulatory commission (how can you argue with that one?) ... It's required by county ordinance (exactly where such decisions should be made!) ... Blocking '1'+10D dialing is an inconvenience for travelers, but it is a major headache for deploying customer notification dialer equipment to stores. Imagine the prospect of having to program local dial plan rules into several hundred remote systems in locales where calls must be dialed as 7D, 10D, or '1'+10D, depending on where the call is originated and what number is being dialed. Come to think of it, isn't blocking '1'+10D dialing an impediment to interstate trade ...? Paul A Lee Voice: +1 717 730-8355 Sr Telecom Engineer [Voice & Transmission] Fax: +1 717 975-3789 Rite Aid Corporation, Telecomm, 30 Hunter Lane, Camp Hill, PA 17011-2410 ------------------------------ From: nomailp@netscape.net (Don't email me) Subject: Re: Looking For T-Metrics P-Phone Test Equipment Date: 29 Jan 2003 10:08:37 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ There also used to be a company called Dees (http://www.dees.com). They made loop extenders, buttsets, and message monitoring equipment for those type of phones. If you have access to a DMS (which is what they connect to), there are monitoring tools in the switch which do the same thing. Hope this helps ... questions@telcosupport.net http://www.telcosupport.net Steve Swamp wrote in message news:: > Anyone out there have any Nortel P-phone (also known as the Electronic > Business Set - EBS) test equipment? In particular, T-Metrics put out > two boxes a bunch of years ago - TM-500 and TM-950. I'm doing some > work with p-phones right now, and I'd like to try and get a couple of > these boxes. Thanks in advance. > Steve Swamp > swamp@mindspring.com ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-330-6774 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 Fax 3: 775-642-0603 Fax 4: 530-309-7234 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2003 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. In addition, gifts from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert have enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V22 #263 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Jan 29 21:33:35 2003 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id h0U2XZB03361; Wed, 29 Jan 2003 21:33:35 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 21:33:35 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200301300233.h0U2XZB03361@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #264 TELECOM Digest Wed, 29 Jan 2003 21:23:00 EST Volume 22 : Issue 264 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Introducing Song: The World's Most Innovative Low-Fare Airline (Solomon) EarthLink Reports 2002 Fourth Quarter and Full Year Results (M Solomon) Verizon Communications Reports Strong Yearly Operational Growth (Solomon) Premier High-Tech Community in Atlanta (Monty Solomon) Nine-Digit 'Social' Overused as ID (Monty Solomon) AOL Time Warner Reports Results for 2002 Full Year and 4th Qrtr (Solomon) QUALCOMM Qsec-800 Secure CDMA Phone (Monty Solomon) Symantec's 'Submit a Deal' Flawed (Monty Solomon) Re: 11-Digit Dialing (Herb Stein) Telephony Odds and Ends (Eric De Mund) Re: Legally Kill All Adult Porn in the USA; Here is How (John Higdon) More Tax Money for "Rural Communications" (Danny Burstein) Consumer Products: When Software Bugs Bite (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. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRUSES. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 08:51:13 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Introducing Song: The World's Most Innovative Low-Fare Airline NEW YORK--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Jan. 29, 2003--Song Unique Amenities Such as Video on Demand, Live Satellite TV to Greatly Enhance Travel Experience Fleet to Expand to 36 Boeing 757s Providing 144 Daily Flights Primarily between Northeast and Key Florida Leisure Destinations Song(TM), a new airline service developed to change customer expectations for high-quality, low-fare air travel, was introduced today at a company event in New York City. Song, which will initially service Northeast to Florida routes, will fly its maiden voyage from New York City's JFK to West Palm Beach on Tuesday, April 15, 2003. By October 2003, Song plans to provide 144 daily flights utilizing a fleet of 36 Boeing 757 aircraft. A wholly-owned subsidiary of Delta Air Lines (NYSE:DAL), Song will meet air travelers' individual and ever-changing needs through a variety of innovations, several of which are industry firsts. These include: - The most advanced in-flight entertainment technology available (October 2003). Song is partnering with Matsushita Avionics Systems and EchoStar Communications Corporation (NASDAQ:DISH) and its DISH Network(TM) satellite TV service to provide a complement of on-board amenities, which will include: - Personal video monitors at every seat with "touch screen" technology and credit card "swipe" capability. - Live, all-digital satellite television programming from DISH Network. - Digitally-streamed MP3 audio programming, which will allow passengers to create a personal play list from an extensive library of audio files. - Pay-per-view programming available on demand, which will feature a wide-range of current offerings for all ages. - Multi-player interactive games that allow play between passengers. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=31202248 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 08:53:06 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: EarthLink Reports 2002 Fourth Quarter and Full Year Results Broadband subscribers grew by 98,000 Ends the year with 5.0 million subscribers ATLANTA, Jan. 29 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- EarthLink, Inc. (NASDAQ:ELNK) today announced its financial results for its fourth quarter and full year ending December 31, 2002. EarthLink reported revenue for the fourth quarter grew to $347.9 million, an increase of 6.3 percent from the same period a year ago. Earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization (EBITDA) were $18.0 million for the quarter, improving from $9.1 million in the prior year quarter. Excluding cash facility exit costs incurred in the quarter, EBITDA was $20.2 million. Net loss was $32.9 million, including $3.5 million of total cash and non-cash facility exit costs. http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=31202856 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 08:57:20 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Verizon Communications Reports Strong Yearly Operational Growth FOURTH-QUARTER HIGHLIGHTS * 964,000 Verizon Wireless net customer additions, excluding acquisitions; 32.5 million total customers * 566,000 long-distance net customer additions, for a total of 10.4 million -- making Verizon the U.S.'s third largest long-distance carrier for consumers * 148,000 new net digital subscriber lines (DSL), for a total of 1.8 million lines 2002 HIGHLIGHTS * Met or exceeded year-end targets for revenue growth, diluted EPS (earnings per share), capital expenditures, debt management, and long-distance and DSL customers * Total debt reduced by $10.2 billion, to $54.1 billion from $64.3 billion, a 15.9 percent decrease * Net debt (total debt less cash and cash equivalents) reduced by $10.7 billion, to $52.6 billion from $63.3 billion, a 16.9 percent decrease; commercial paper reduced 83.6 percent, to $2.1 billion from $12.8 billion * $4.8 billion in free cash flow (cash from operating activities less capital expenditures of $12.0 billion, capitalized non-network software and dividends) 2003 GUIDANCE * EPS of $2.70 to $2.80, after offsets from reduced pension income, reduced income from 2002 access line sales, and expensing stock options * Comparable revenue growth of 0 to 2 percent * Capital expenditures (including capitalized non-network software) of $12.5 to $13.5 billion * Net debt of $49 to $51 billion http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=31203329 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 08:55:49 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Premier High-Tech Community in Atlanta BellSouth Assembles Team to Provide Capabilities Enabling Premier High-Tech Community in Atlanta - Governors Towne Club to Integrate Latest Home-Control Technologies and Home Networking Solutions - ATLANTA and TOPEKA, Kan., Jan. 29 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- BellSouth(R) Residential Solutions today announced that BellSouth, Protection One (NYSE:POI) and Kenneth G. Horton Development Corporation have teamed to create one of the most comprehensive digitally wired residential communities in the country, just outside Atlanta. The project, named Governors Towne Club, will integrate high-tech solutions, including BellSouth(R) FastAccess DSL, BellSouth(R) Security Systems from Protection One, community-based Intranet services and home automation technologies, allowing residents to control in-home amenities from remote locations. Governors Towne Club, located in Acworth, a suburb of Atlanta, Georgia, will consist of more than 500 high-tech, digitally wired homes. The homes will feature networking solutions that allow homeowners to have integrated services such as a single Internet connection that can be shared by the entire family using multiple computers and Web-enabled devices. Additionally, residents will be able to choose from a variety of home automation packages that will allow control of amenities such as alarm systems, air conditioning units, sprinkler systems, video signals -- all from inside the home, the back yard or a remote location. Residents of Governors Towne Club will be able to choose from one of three digital home packages. Options within the packages include: * Security systems -- Provides electronic monitoring of every point of entry into a home and other critical safety devices, such as fire protection systems. * Home networking -- Offers advanced communications wiring throughout the home, maximizing high-speed, BellSouth FastAccess connectivity between computers and other peripheral devices. * Closed circuit television -- Enables community surveillance systems that can monitor homes, entry gates and children at the pool, for example. * Digital video distribution -- Helps deliver the highest quality TV picture. * Automated lighting -- Integrates lighting with security and environmental systems allowing residents to automatically adjust brightness within the home, optimizing safety, comfort and efficiency. * Environmental controls -- Allows complete control over heating and air conditioning systems from anywhere anytime. * Irrigation controls -- Adds intelligence to electronic sprinkler systems, enhances features and allows remote access to controls. * Automated appliances -- Leverages state-of-the-art structured wiring throughout the home, enabling the integration of the newest in home automated appliances and Web-enabled devices. * Premium home theater systems -- Maximizes home entertainment by offering customers a full size cinema screen, technologically advanced surround sound and wireless touch screen remote control. http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=31202879 ------------------------------ Reply-To: Monty Solomon From: Monty Solomon Subject: 9-Digit 'Social' Overused as ID Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 13:30:46 -0500 By Joanna Glasner The Social Security number has come a long way in the nearly 70 years since its inception as an identifier for a government retirement program. These days, Social Security participants may be called upon to display the nine-digit numbers for tasks as routine as punching a timecard, checking out library books, looking up a test score or eating at the company cafeteria. Faced with growing pressure from constituents concerned about the risks of identity theft, lawmakers are contemplating ways to curtail use of Social Security numbers for purposes other than taxpayer identification. http://www.wired.com/news/privacy/0,1848,57395,00.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 17:41:12 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: AOL Time Warner Reports Results for 2002 Full Year and 4th Qrtr. Unless otherwise specified, AOL Time Warner's results discussed below have been adjusted to normalize out the effect of certain merger and restructuring costs, as well as certain unusual or nonrecurring items that are discussed in detail in the accompanying footnotes. By presenting normalized results, the Company's management intends to provide a better understanding of the core results and underlying trends from which to consider not only past performance, but also the prospects for the future. Supplemental financial information is attached that provides the Company's reported results and reconciles those results to these normalized results. Users of this financial information should consider the types of events and transactions for which adjustments have been made. In addition, 2001 results have been prepared on a pro forma basis assuming that the acquisitions of AOL Europe and IPC Media, the consolidation of Road Runner, and the adoption of the new accounting standard on Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets ("FAS 142") had occurred on January 1, 2001. These results also reflect the deconsolidation of certain cable systems pursuant to the restructuring of the cable partnership between Time Warner Entertainment Company, L.P. and Advance/Newhouse. NEW YORK--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Jan. 29, 2003--AOL Time Warner Inc. (NYSE:AOL): Full-Year Normalized EBITDA Climbs 5%, Revenues Increase 7% and 2002 Normalized Free Cash Flow Improves 153% to $4.2 Billion Fourth-Quarter Normalized EBITDA Grows 16% and Revenues Rise 8% Company Announces Debt Reduction Plan AOL Time Warner Inc. (NYSE:AOL) today reported financial results for its full year and fourth quarter ended December 31, 2002. For the full year, revenues climbed 7% to $41.1 billion, up from $38.5 billion in 2001. Subscription revenues increased 13% to $19.0 billion, led by growth at the America Online, Cable and Networks divisions. Content and Other revenues rose 9% to $14.4 billion, due primarily to strong growth at Filmed Entertainment. Advertising and Commerce revenues decreased 9% to $7.7 billion, as a result of declines at America Online. Full-year EBITDA rose 5% to $9.1 billion, up from $8.6 billion in 2001, driven by double-digit growth at each of the Company's reporting divisions, except for America Online. The Company generated $4.2 billion in Free Cash Flow in 2002, a significant 153% increase over last year's $1.7 billion, due principally to higher EBITDA, lower working capital requirements and lower capital spending. Free Cash Flow represented 47% of EBITDA during the year. For the fourth quarter, revenues climbed 8% year over year to $11.4 billion. Subscription revenues grew 10% to $4.9 billion, as a result of growth in the Company's America Online, Cable and Networks businesses. Content and Other revenues improved 10% to $4.3 billion, led by the Filmed Entertainment business's home video and theatrical successes. Advertising and Commerce revenues declined 1% to $2.2 billion, stemming from declines at America Online, offset in part by solid gains in advertising at the Networks and Publishing businesses. The quarter's EBITDA rose 16% to $2.8 billion, reflecting strong 46% growth at Networks, as well as double-digit growth at all of the Company's other divisions, except for America Online, where EBITDA declined. The EBITDA margin increased to 24%, compared to 22% in the fourth quarter of 2001. Free Cash Flow totaled $241 million, versus $84 million for the same period last year, due principally to higher EBITDA, and lower working capital requirements. http://www.businesswire.com/cgi-bin/f_headline.cgi?bw.012903/230292513 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 17:57:00 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: QUALCOMM Qsec-800 Secure CDMA Phone QUALCOMM's CDMA Technology Enhances Security Measures at Super Bowl XXXVII - Regional Homeland Security Agencies and Technology Partners Teamed Up To Provide Security Assistance for the Super Bowl - SAN DIEGO, Jan. 29 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- QUALCOMM Incorporated (NASDAQ:QCOM), pioneer and world leader of Code Division Multiple Access (CDMA) digital wireless technology, joined forces with regional homeland security agencies and technology partners to augment existing security measures for Super Bowl XXXVII. QUALCOMM, in partnership with the San Diego Regional Network on Homeland Security (RNHS) and other technology companies, assisted the San Diego Police Department (SDPD) with security preparations for Super Bowl XXXVII by providing technology and products based on CDMA technology. QUALCOMM provided wireless phones capable of carrying government- classified information over commercial cellular networks to federal law enforcement agencies and federal task force entities. These phones, referred to as the Qsec-800(R), are National Security Agency certified cellular phones developed through a U.S. Government contract with QUALCOMM. The phones represent a first step in securing the nation's cellular communications using the extensive CDMA network that is commercially available. In addition to the secure wireless handsets, QUALCOMM had worked out an architecture that allowed the SDPD to access data, such as real time video as supplied by cameras, using digital technology from cVideo, at QUALCOMM Stadium, over commercial CDMA2000 1X networks. QUALCOMM's expertise in security ensured these data capabilities met the high standards set by the United States Department of Justice and local law enforcement. http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=31220472 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 19:15:51 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Symantec's 'Submit a Deal' Flawed By Brian McWilliams A security glitch at Symantec's corporate website revealed to casual Web surfers hundreds of proposals from companies seeking to be bought out by the security firm. The hole at Symantec's Submit a Deal site has some would-be buyout targets fuming over the billion-dollar company's careless handling of their sensitive data. http://www.wired.com/news/infostructure/0,1377,57438,00.html ------------------------------ From: Herb Stein Subject: Re: 11-Digit Dialing Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 16:20:03 -0600 John R. Levine wrote in message news:telecom22.260.12@telecom-digest.org: >> ... Nearby parts of 905/289 are local calls from Toronto, so 10 >> digits work. More distant portions of 905/289 are toll calls, and >> the leading '1' is required. What's so difficult. > This must be, what, about the 400th time we've gone around with the > toll alerting argument. Personally, I hate toll alerting. I do not > care whether a call to Mississauga will cost 0 cents or 3.5 cents, I > just want to make the bleeping call. Across the lake here in New York > we have never ever had toll alerting, and we get along just fine > without it. > If regulators insist on putting in toll alerting, they should at least > make it permissive so that 1+10D always works. It wasn't clear from > the previous discussion whether Toronto has permissive 1+10D, or they > have the incredibly stupid Texas plan where you have to memorize every > prefix in nearby area codes in order to use your phone, since 1+10D > won't work if a prefix happens to be a local call, and 10D won't work > if it's a 5 cent toll call. >> Tradeoff time. So 10/11 digits makes things difficult for *YOU*. >> What about employers who don't mind employees making local calls >> during lunch? Under the current setup, blocking leading 0 and 1 >> allows local toll-free calls to 905/289, but blocks toll calls to >> that code. How do they handle that with all calls being an >> identical number of digits? > PBXes are much better at remembering lists of prefixes than people > are. Every PBX of which I'm aware can easily be programmed to look at > the leading digits of dialed calls and to route or block the call > depending on what those digits are. Ask any PBX tech for details. > John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 > johnl@iecc.com Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner http://iecc.com/johnl > Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail The bottom line you can't keep stupid people from make stupid decisions. Rich Greenberg wrote in message news:telecom22.262.8@telecom-digest.org: > In article , Joseph > wrote: >> This is the same argument that has raged in the digest and elsewhere >> for years regarding "toll alerting." Neither side really wants to >> adopt what the other side thinks is "right." > Correct and let's not start it again. > I do have one question on a closely related item. Is there anyone on > either side of the toll alerting issue who has a strong objection to > allowing 11 digit dialing when it is not required? I don't want toll alerting and I want 10-digit dialing in NAPA to always work. Dialing 1 should also work also. > i.e. you can dial 1-npa-nxx-xxxx on any call, from next door to cross > country? > The advantage of permitting this is that you can program 11 digit > numbers into your cell phone or your laptop's fax addressbook and won't > have to change them depending on where you are calling from. > Bellsouth doesn't permit this here in GA. > Rich Greenberg Work: Rich.Greenberg atsign worldspan.com +1 > 770-563-6656 N6LRT Marietta, GA, USA Play: richgr atsign panix.com > +1 770-321-6507 Eastern time zone. I speak for myself & my dogs > only. VM'er since CP-67 Canines:Val(Chinook,CGC,TT), Red & > Shasta(Husky,(RIP)) Owner:Chinook-L Atlanta Siberian Husky > Rescue. www.panix.com/~richgr/ Asst Owner:Sibernet-L Herb Stein The Herb Stein Group www.herbstein.com herb@herbstein.com 314 952-4601 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 00:16:06 -0800 From: Eric De Mund Subject: Telephony Odds and Ends Reply-To: Eric De Mund Organization: Ixian Systems, Inc. People, From my accumulated notes. Forwarded FYI. o Cellphones: Expect a Call While Rafting? A Way to Keep Your Phone Dry http://www.nytimes.com/2002/08/22/technology/circuits/22GEE3.html o PhoneDeck (freeware; store and easily access addresses and phone numbers; includes phone dialer; compare to the big "Time and Chaos") http://www.lodz.pdi.net/~eristic/free/phonedeck.html o Dialtones (A Telesymphony) - Mobile Phone Concert http://www.telesymphony.com/ Slashdot | Dialtones - A Telesymphony http://slashdot.org/articles/02/10/02/1246204.shtml?tid=141 Regards, Eric De Mund | Ixian Systems, Inc. | 53 49 B2 23 AF 6C 20 81 http://www.ixian.com/ead/ | Mountain View, CA | ED DD 4C 81 AA C9 D1 A5 ------------------------------ From: John Higdon Subject: Re: Legally Kill All Adult Porn in the United States; Here is How Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 17:57:10 -0800 In article , Patrick Townson wrote: > I would suggest a good 'back door' approach to killing spam (since so > much of it is pornographic in nature) is to consider the suggestion > mentioned above. Thoughts, anyone? Two things. First, most of the spam I receive is non-pornographic in nature (cures, refinancing, chain letters, Viagra, organ enlarging, and every variety of trinkets). Around twenty percent or less is porn. Filing porn complaints with the Feds, even if the tactic ultimately worked, would only eliminate an incremental amount of spam in the long run. Second, most folks who are being honest with themselves understand that port is what drove the Internet to its current ubiquity. Truly eliminate porn on the net (if that's even possible) and you will deal a severe blow to the viability of the net as a commercial enterprise. Actually, that sounds pretty good to me ... but we do live in a real world. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | Anytown, USA | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ From: Danny Burstein Subject: More Tax Money For "Rural Telecommunications" Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 20:57:20 -0500 Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC In the finest tradition of the goretaxes, which, somehow or other, wind up in the pockets of entrenched telcos: WASHINGTON, January 29, 2003, Agriculture Secretary Ann M. Veneman today announced that USDA will expand efforts to bring farmers, rural residents and businesses greater access to improved telecommunication technology through the financing of more than $1.4 billion in loans and loan guarantees to rural telecommunications providers. In addition, Veneman announced that President Bush will propose spending $196 million for the program in its FY2004 budget. http://www.usda.gov/news/releases/2003/01/0028.htm Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key dannyb@panix.com [to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 20:45:15 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Consumer Products: When Software Bugs Bite By Debbie Gage Dishwashers, automobiles and other products are increasingly driven by software. But digits don't always do a better job. Where do you turn when your appliance's software goes south? http://www.baselinemag.com/article2/0,3959,833424,00.asp http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/01/17/2126211&mode=thread ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-330-6774 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 Fax 3: 775-642-0603 Fax 4: 530-309-7234 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2003 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. In addition, gifts from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert have enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V22 #264 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Jan 29 22:05:27 2003 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id h0U35RN03964; Wed, 29 Jan 2003 22:05:27 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 22:05:27 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200301300305.h0U35RN03964@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #265 TELECOM Digest Wed, 29 Jan 2003 22:04:00 EST Volume 22 : Issue 265 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Starting up a CLEC (Harbor Diver) Re: Calling Party Pays to Cellular (John R. Levine) Re: 1+ten-digit dialing (Mark J Cuccia) Re: 1+Ten-Digits Mandatory in NYCity (John Higdon) Re: So Many Online Sales, So Little in Tax Revenue (John R. Levine) Re: Thanks For Your Help, Guys! (KJ) Re: PIR Successfully Completes Largest Domain Name Transfer (SELLCOM) NT Speaker Phone Help (Robert Johnson) VoIP Billing Software at Low Price! (Ree) Re: 11-Digit Dialing (John Higdon) Re: TiVo Tracking: We Know What You're Replaying (John Higdon) Re: So Many Online Sales, So Little in Tax Revenue (tonypo1@cox.net) I *Think* I Recovered Them All (TELECOM Digest Editor) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRUSES. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Harbor Diver Subject: Re: Starting up a CLEC Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 23:17:28 -0500 Organization: Fugawi Divers Today, Mon, 27 Jan 2003 23:02:08 -0500, Two Buddha read a post from Unity Corp , and determined his interest in BURP. Where's my beer? Oh and: > In the process of forming a new LLC company and going to create a > UNE-P CLEC in Indiana. Is the process easy? Does anyone have any > horror stories about a CLEC UNE-P going sour? Any help that you could > give us would be great. > Ben Plikerd > Benson Communications, Inc. This is a joke, right? [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I don't think it was intended as a joke. There are still people out there getting into the business. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: 28 Jan 2003 23:18:28 -0500 From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: Calling Party Pays to Cellular Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA [ snip interesting discussion of rate arbitrage ] > ... now these specific surcharges are passed-through only when one > calls a wireless device in that country -- not when one calls a > wireline device. It's not just wireless. The carriers I use (sometimes) surcharge calls to British 07xx, 08xx, and 09xx numbers, which aren't wireless. They're various flavors of location-independent and premium numbers. > It places the component cost of the calls (whether you agree with > the "right" of anyone to assess this surcharge or not) more directly > on the calls which have as their makeup, that component, ie., > wireless. Personally, I'd prefer the approach that long distance carriers take when you call 976 and other surcharged numbers in the U.S. If the terminating carrier will accept the call at the usual wireline rate, the call completes. Otherwise, forget it. As I commented in another message: "if you want me to call you, give me a real phone number." Now that long distance carriers can charge different amounts for subranges of different countries, I can hardly wait for some enterprising Caribbean island in the NANP to set up a "cellular" range for telesleaze so that calls to, say, 1-345-NXX-XXXX normally costs about 25 cents, but calls to 1-345-999-XXXX cost two bucks. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 johnl@iecc.com Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner http://iecc.com/johnl Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 22:23:10 CST From: Mark J Cuccia Subject: Re: 1+Ten-Digit Dialing Rich Greenberg wrote: > I do have one question on a closely related item. Is there anyone on > either side of the toll alerting issue who has a strong objection to > allowing 11 digit dialing when it is not required? > i.e. you can dial 1-npa-nxx-xxxx on any call, from next door to cross > country? > The advantage of permitting this is that you can program 11-digit > numbers into your cell phone or your laptop's fax addressbook and won't > have to change them depending on where you are calling from. Programing into a laptop's fax (or modem-dialup) addressbook ??? Are you going to connect via your Cellular phone with a 'patch'? Or are you going to connect when "on the road", such as from a motel, and maybe various PBX jacks at company offices while travelling? Is the motel or other PBX going to allow you to simply dial 1+ten-digits for reaching any NANP destination? And if so, and if toll, are you really wanting to PAY the charge-billed-back-to-the-room? I am most certainly *NOT* opposed to permissive 1+ten-digit dialing for local/free calls. And I am one who WANTS "toll alerting" (or as I like to call it, "toll-indication-prefix-required") with a mandatory 1+ before (ten-digits) NANP toll. Which would mean that "straight" ten-digits (or seven but I would prefer to see seven-digits evolve to mandatory ten) dialed would only complete if a LOCAL or FREE type (NANP) call. And the idea of being able to put 1+ten-digits as a "universal" method of dialing is appealing and the excuse of how easy it would be for travellers is frequently mentioned (just like many outside of the NANP want to force the NANP to adopt 00+ for IDDD calling). But when you are travelling, and if you aren't using your own cellular phone roaming, THESE days, if you are calling from payphones, motel/PBX phones, even non-PBX 'POTS' lines of 'hosts' ... I tend to think that you would be billing the toll charges to a card of some kind, whether a "credit" card, a telco/LD calling card (post-pay), or a pre-paid card, and these days (with the damned COCOTs and hotel/motel PBXes with their 0+/0- A-O-Scum/Slime/Sleaze) you would be using 1-800/888/etc- type "dialup" numbers to access the card/Operator platform of YOUR choice -- i.e., the one you have an account/card with. So, programing such access to a laptop/etc. when plugging into a hotel/motel PBX regular telephone jack, or accessing via the office PBX (if there are toll restrictions or account codes to key), you might need to either manually "dial-up" or key the card/account codes, or else you might need additional software instructions as to what to dial/key. I think that AT&T has dialing instruction software that you can download from their website, for loading into a laptop/etc. modem, so that it will dial-out to 1-800-CALL-ATT if you do want to use them (billed to your AT&T issued card OR most US/Canada LEC issued cards) for (toll-billed) modem access (or faxing). > Bellsouth doesn't permit this here in GA. Neither does BellSouth permit 1+ten-d for local/free in Louisiana! :( although there are a few exceptions, such as calling to (Louisiana) "Area Plus" points/ratecenters which are outside of the "LOS" region ... for those "Area Plus" subscribers, those points are free/untimed/ unlimited, but these *MUST* be dialed 1+ten-digits from such subscribed Area-Plus lines -- these calls can *NOT* be dialed as "straight" seven/ten digits! :( Yes, 1+ten-digits, IMO *SHOULD* be required to work for any/all NANP calls from 'unrestricted' lines, where 'local/free' calls would complete and still *BE* local/free! But I still want to retain and standardize the true meaning of "toll alerting" or "toll indication prefix required", where "straight" ten-digit dialed calls complete *ONLY* if the destination NPA-NXX/ratecenter is local/free w.r.t. the calling NPA-NXX/ratecenter. And when travelling, if I *know* that the call is toll, or if I'm at a payphone/etc., I'll just use 1-800-CALL-ATT or whatever 800- dialup I choose to use for that call, billed to the carrier/card/account of my choice. (And if I choose to use a cellular phone, that is also my choice, where ten or 1+ten digits usually seem to work, regardless of "local vs. toll". mjc ------------------------------ From: John Higdon Subject: Re: 1+Ten-Digits Mandatory in NYCity Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 19:14:06 -0800 In article , Joey Lindstrom wrote: > In overlay regions, so long as the two (or more) area codes are > protected (not used as CO codes within any of these area codes), you > don't even have to do that. You could easily allow 7-digit dialing > with no special codes. HOWEVER, the FCC (I think) said "no way" to > this idea long ago. Rationale: it would be anti-competitive. It would also be confusing. A person does not necessarily know the number of the phone he is using at someone else's home, office, public place. If he doesn't know the number of the phone, he also doesn't know its area code and would have no idea whether to dial seven or ten digits. If 10/11 digits are always required, then all calls from all telephones are dialed the same; there is no worry about the number of the phone being used. John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | Anytown, USA | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ Date: 28 Jan 2003 23:27:54 -0500 From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: So Many Online Sales, So Little in Tax Revenue Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > Yet somehow, despite all this compute power and detailed databases > on customer activity, keeping track of sales tax would be a > fantastic burden that would drive them out of business :-). They're not entirely blowing smoke. Figuring out the correct tax rate is extremely complicated, and remitting the tax is a nightmare. I'm in New York so I only have to collect tax on sales to New York addresses, but I've ended up looking at a state street atlas to figure out what the rate for an order is, since every county in the state has its own rate, and several dozen cities have tax rates separate from the surrounding counties. Then at the end of the year I have to fill out the sales tax form and tell the state that $1.43 goes to this county and 47 cents goes to that city. And that's just for one state. Multply that by the 45 states that have sales taxes and it's a phenomenal bookkeeping nightmare. The You can buy software packages and databases that translate zip+4 to tax rate and locality and that help you fill out the tax forms, but they cost $100,000. No doubt Amazon could afford it, but I can't. > It would be so refreshing if they'd just tell the truth: No sales > tax means a competitive advantage over brick & mortar. Well, yeah, that, too. But if there were a reasonable way to collect and remit sales tax to the other states, it wouldn't bother me much. The whole "internet sales" issue is a red herring, by the way. The real issue is catalog mail order which avoids tax just as effectively and is much bigger. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 johnl@iecc.com Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner http://iecc.com/johnl Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail ------------------------------ From: KJ Subject: Re: Thanks For Your Help, Guys! Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 22:34:01 -0600 Dave Phelps wrote in message news:telecom22.262.7@telecom-digest.org: > In article , nospam@bigfoot.com > says: >> I am replacing my DSL VPN connection to my brokerage firm with a T-1 >> point to point private line. >> How does this change the hardware I need at home to network my three >> computers? I currently use an SMC wireless Access Point for a >> wireless network. Is a wireless network still possible with the T1? >> Will I be able to connect to the T-1 and the internet through another >> DSL line at the same time? >> Thanks, >> Eric > Yes, you can do all of the above. You will need to get a router that > has a serial interface, to which you can connect a T1 CSU/DSU, or, my > preference, a router that has a CSU/DSU built in. If you want > everything in one box, I'd look at a Cisco 1721, with a T1 CSU/DSU > WIC, and an ethernet WIC. It will be able to handle all of your > routing. You might want to consult your IT security staff before > finalizing your plan though. > Dave Phelps > Phone Masters Ltd. > deadspam=tippenring ------------------------------ From: SELLCOM Tech support Subject: Re: PIR Successfully Completes Largest Domain Name Transfer Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 01:18:18 -0500 Organization: www.sellcom.com Reply-To: support@sellcom.com Julie Williams posted on that vast internet thingie: > PUBLIC INTEREST REGISTRY SUCCESSFULLY COMPLETES LARGEST DOMAIN NAME > TRANSFER IN HISTORY OF INTERNET > .ORG technical systems transitioned from VeriSign Registry > Reston, VA - January 27, 2003 - The Public Interest Registry (PIR) > today announced in a conference call with reporters that it has > successfully I would hardly say "successfully" since the "whois" is trashed. Steve at SELLCOM (who also has a few "org"s) http://www.sellcom.com Discount multihandset cordless phones by Siemens, Vtech 5.8Ghz EnGenius NEW EP436 4line (the longest range), Panasonic, Twinhead notebooks, WatchGuard firewall, Okidata, Polycom! If you sit at a desk www.ergochair.biz you owe it to yourself. ------------------------------ From: Robert Johnson Subject: NT Speaker Phone Help Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 06:45:02 GMT Organization: RoadRunner - West I have a NT1L07AA Speaker phone I would like to find a Install sheet for it or something showing a pinout of the RJ45 jack on the bottom ... and help would this would be apreceated Robert Johnson NT1L07AA First line ot Tag RLS-D3 Second Line of Tag 4-88 Third Line of Tag ------------------------------ From: capricorn75@softhome.net (Ree) Subject: VoIP Billing Software at Low Price Date: 29 Jan 2003 07:54:39 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Hi, I have a VoIP billing Software at low price. It offers: · Call Accounting, · Post-paid Billing, · Prepaid Billing · Prepaid Calling Card Operation · Inter-gateway Settlement · Internet access, web design, web hosting, e-commerce services · Web interface for Customers, Sales Agents, and Customer Service Representatives And much more; Feel free to mail me: capricorn75@softhome.net ------------------------------ From: John Higdon Subject: Re: 11-Digit Dialing Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 18:15:55 -0800 In article , Paul A Lee wrote: > Blocking '1'+10D dialing is an inconvenience for travelers, but it is > a major headache for deploying customer notification dialer equipment > to stores. Imagine the prospect of having to program local dial plan > rules into several hundred remote systems in locales where calls must > be dialed as 7D, 10D, or '1'+10D, depending on where the call is > originated and what number is being dialed. Amen. At least that is one thing SBC does right in my neck of the woods. Any and every call to any telephone located anywhere in the NANP can be dialed with '1'+10D from my telephone. That is the way God intended it. When programming any sort of automatic dialer to be installed anywhere in this SBC service area, you slap in eleven digits regardless of where the dialer will live and what number it is trying to reach. What would be the point of having it any other way? John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | Anytown, USA | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ From: John Higdon Subject: Re: TiVo Tracking: We Know What You're Replaying Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 18:20:17 -0800 In article , Phil Earnhardt wrote: > The following appeared in www.showbizdata.com on Tuesday; I couldn't > find any articles at the LA Times website. I wasn't impressed with the > fact that TiVo subscribers were replaying the commercials; I was > shocked to hear that TiVo could and would gather and report > information on what users were doing with their boxes. > Does anyone have any more technical details of this tracking? Or is > there some non-technical means (i.e., anecdotes) that TiVo actually > gatherd this information? It is absolutely true: TiVo does gather information, as do the rival services. But then, so do the satellite companies, as well as many cable companies. What's new? John Higdon | Email Address Valid | SF: +1 415 428-COWS +1 408 264 4115 | Anytown, USA | FAX: +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ From: tonypo1@cox.net Subject: Re: So Many Online Sales, So Little in Tax Revenue Organization: The Ace Tomatoe and Cement Company Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 02:34:15 GMT In article , TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to dave.garland@wizinfo.com: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I am reminded of an interesting story > on differences in tax rates. In the Chicago area, where the landscape > is littered with McDonald restaurants (literally every few blocks), > the landscape is also littered with *different suburbs and different > tax rates in each*. McDonald's gets their preprogammed cash registers > through a central source for each district. If a register goes out of > order (god forbid the youngster working at the counter had to calculate > the order, the cost for same and the taxes in his head!) the store > managers swap the registers around at random as needed. One of > Skokie's registers goes out of order; they get a spare register from > Chicago or Niles, or Evanston for example. Rather than reprogram the > tax rates in the cash register, they just go with whatever it says. > So a purchase that costs 89 cents one day with tax included may cost > 93 cents the next day, same store, with a different register in use. If > you complain, they just give you a blank look, no comprehension at > all. In a previous job I built servers and POS systems for various companies. We operated over a five state area and it was a major pain in the ass getting the tax codes set up. > If you press the issue, with a call to their corporate customer > service office, reminding the CS person that there *are* laws against > *claiming* that a tax is due when in fact there is no such tax (or not > in that amount) due and that in any event the store is going to only > pay the bottom line due on sales tax in that community; then the CS > person will send you a refund of the two or three pennies *in the form > of a paper check* which you have to deposit in the bank, along with a > voucher for a free soft drink (small size) the next time you go to the > store. I did that once, and got a phone call three or four days later > from a person in the Chicagoland Black McDonald's Operator's Associ- > ation giving me hell for making trouble for one of 'his' stores. Oh, -- I would have had fun with that one. I would have given him hell for even having the nerve to call me, and then called the BBB and reported it. I'm sure he'd love having them crawl up his butt. > Chicago has the ONE McDonald's Restaurant in history which filed bank- > ruptcy and closed; it was located in a housing project area. Ever notice > how McD never actually owns anything, except an occassional 'corporate > store'? PAT] The only two McDonald's in downtown Providence are not shuttered. From what I've heard their $1 promotion cost them dearly, and that coupled with the downturn in the economy meant those stores were operating at a loss for well over six months. It's a crash and burn economy everyone! That means that everything is going to be available for pennies on the dollar very shortly. :) Tony ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 21:42:54 EST From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: I *Think* I Recovered Them All I said a couple issues ago that several messages intended to be used in the Digest today got lost ... I think they were all recovered, but the invitation is still open: If you sent in any messages Tuesday night or Wednesday and the messages have not yet appeared you are welcome and encouraged to resubmit them. Also, so that we are all on the same page, tomorrow and Friday will be the share days for this month. PAT ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-330-6774 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 Fax 3: 775-642-0603 Fax 4: 530-309-7234 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2003 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. In addition, gifts from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert have enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V22 #265 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Jan 30 20:00:43 2003 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id h0V10hW17132; Thu, 30 Jan 2003 20:00:43 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 20:00:43 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200301310100.h0V10hW17132@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #266 TELECOM Digest Thu, 30 Jan 2003 20:01:00 EST Volume 22 : Issue 266 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson FCC Allows Exclusive Contracts Between Apartment Owners/Telecom (Editor) Re: TiVo Tracking: We Know What You're Replaying (Barry Margolin) Re: TiVo Tracking: We Know What You're Replaying (joe@obilivan.net) Re: TiVo Tracking: We Know What You're Replaying (Steve K) Re: TiVo Tracking: We Know What You're Replaying (Clark W Griswold, Jr.) Re: TiVo Tracking: We Know What You're Replaying (Monty Solomon) Re: Legally Kill All Adult Porn in the United States (Robert Bonomi) Re: So Many Online Sales, So Little in Tax Revenue (Hudson Leighton) Re: So Many Online Sales, So Little in Tax Revenue (Daryl R Gibson) Re: Calling Party Pays to Cellular (Randal Hayes) Re: Calling Party Pays to Cellular (Mike Hartley) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRUSES. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 14:54:14 PST From: Patrick Townson Subject: FCC Allows Exclusive Contracts Between Apartment Owners/Telecom In many cities, there are ordinances governing the relationship between condo associations and individual tenants regards the type of and seller of telecom services. It appears some of that is being changed by FCC fiat, in the link given here: FCC Allows Exclusive Contracts Between Apartment Owners and Telecom Providers http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/030130/dcth028_1.html Patrick Townson ------------------------------ From: Barry Margolin Subject: Re: TiVo Tracking: We Know What You're Replaying Organization: Genuity, Woburn, MA Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 15:16:28 GMT In article , Phil Earnhardt wrote: > The following appeared in www.showbizdata.com on Tuesday; I couldn't > find any articles at the LA Times website. I wasn't impressed with the > fact that TiVo subscribers were replaying the commercials; I was > shocked to hear that TiVo could and would gather and report > information on what users were doing with their boxes. > Does anyone have any more technical details of this tracking? Or is > there some non-technical means (i.e., anecdotes) that TiVo actually > gatherd this information? Every night, TiVo dials into a server to download an updated program schedule. At the same time, it uploads information about how the device was used that day, including the times of every remote control button press. Barry Margolin, barmar@genuity.net Genuity, Woburn, MA *** DON'T SEND TECHNICAL QUESTIONS DIRECTLY TO ME, post them to newsgroups. Please DON'T copy followups to me -- I'll assume it wasn't posted to the group. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I wonder what would happen if the Tivo owner did not have his unit plugged into the phone line? My DISH unit is much like that; it has a place where it is to be plugged into the phone line, so they can refresh my card, decide how much to bill me for movies, etc. I have *never*, in the year I have had the unit ever plugged it into the phone line. Of course I mostly leave it tuned into the Sky Angel channels (at 61.5 degrees southeast) and rarely watch 'on demand' movies on it anyway. You think they will ever say anything about it to me? PAT] ------------------------------ From: joe@obilivan.net Subject: Re: TiVo Tracking: We Know What You're Replaying Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 17:36:58 GMT Organization: Cox Communications John Higdon wrote: > It is absolutely true: TiVo does gather information, as do the rival > services. But then, so do the satellite companies, as well as many cable > companies. What's new? Not to mention, LECs, IXCx, credit card companies, banks, etc., etc. etc. So TiVo gathers stats? Yawn ------------------------------ From: stevekl@panix.com (Steve Kl.) Subject: Re: TiVo Tracking: We Know What You're Replaying Date: 30 Jan 2003 15:13:05 -0500 Organization: PANIX -- Public Access Networks Corp. In article , John Higdon wrote: > It is absolutely true: TiVo does gather information, as do the rival > services. But then, so do the satellite companies, as well as many cable > companies. What's new? They tell you this up front. I've known it ever since we've had a TiVo, and frankly, I could care less. Let them try to mine the data however they want, they're not really going to come up with anything earthshattering anyway. Steve Kl. ------------------------------ From: Clark Wilhelm Griswold, Jr. <73115.1041@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: TiVo Tracking: We Know What You're Replaying Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 22:03:59 -0700 John Higdon wrote: >> Does anyone have any more technical details of this tracking? Or is >> there some non-technical means (i.e., anecdotes) that TiVo actually >> gatherd this information? > It is absolutely true: TiVo does gather information, as do the rival > services. But then, so do the satellite companies, as well as many cable > companies. What's new? Tivo collects individual viewer data because of a lawsuit recently filed by our friends in Hollywood. As a part of the discovery process, Tivo was ordered to modify their software to collect data on programs viewed and commercials skipped so that the studio lawyers could assess any potential damages from commercial skipping. DirecTV has a deal with Tivo to provide an integrated PVR/sat receiver, so the same applies to them. Dish Network PVRs pass no viewer habits back to Dish. AFAIK, SonicBlue PVRs do not pass viewer data back to Replay. Very few cable companies have integrated PVR tuners, but I'm sure they are getting channel tuning data from their new digital tuners. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think DISH certainly does study their viewer's habits. If I were 'playing by the rules' I would be leaving my Echostar unit hooked to the phone line at all times so that DISH could download the little card in there which keeps it working. Of course I do not 'really' have DISH services; I do have Sky Angel which uses DISH equipment to operate on. But the installation book which was left here by the installer when he put in the Echostar unit for me was very explicit: keep it plugged in the phone line all the time; you never know when we might be calling. Maybe that accounts for the ring/no one speaks up I get on the phone sometimes. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 01:18:12 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Re: TiVo Tracking: We Know What You're Replaying At 12:40 AM -0500 1/30/03, Monty Solomon wrote: > fact that TiVo subscribers were replaying the commercials; I was > shocked to hear that TiVo could and would gather and report > information on what users were doing with their boxes. > Does anyone have any more technical details of this tracking? Or is > there some non-technical means (i.e., anecdotes) that TiVo actually > gatherd this information? Digital Big Brother Poses Threat to Consumer Privacy Monday, July 26, 1999 http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/1999/07/26/BU56448.DTL When Big Brother knows you watch "Big Brother" Sep. 11, 2000 http://salon.com/tech/view/2000/09/11/tivo/ The Privacy Wars March 7th, 2001 http://archives.theconnection.org/archive/2001/03/0307a.shtml TiVo's Data Collection and Privacy Practices 3/26/01 http://www.privacyfoundation.org/privacywatch/report.asp?id=62&action=0 TiVo: Watching You Watch TV 3/26/01 http://www.privacyfoundation.org/commentary/tipsheet.asp?id=38&action=0 Response to SpyTV, interactive television, and free software 22 Mar 2001 http://www.politechbot.com/p-01843.html TiVo accused of privacy violations; more on "SpyTV" debate 26 Mar 2001 http://www.politechbot.com/p-01850.html More on TiVo and privacy concerns, by Dana Hawkins 26 Mar 2001 http://www.politechbot.com/p-01853.html Video monitoring order blasted by privacy groups May. 03, 2002 http://www.bayarea.com/mld/mercurynews/3194142.htm ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Legally Kill All Adult Porn in the United States; Here is How From: bonomi@c-ns (Robert Bonomi) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 09:27:18 GMT In article , Patrick Townson wrote: > After a sort of bad day for me, in which I shoveled out more than the > usual amount of porn spam, I found the following message posted in > the Unitarian-Universalist newsgroup on Usenet. Please do not > misunderstand my position here; I beleieve firmly in freedom of speech > and use it quite a lot myself. I've nothing especially against porn, > at least the more creative and original varieties of it, but the constant > flow of it on the net begins to get boring, to say the least, and a > great many netizens are offended by it. This person 'Quill' who sent > the message to the UUA newsgroup suggests just killing it all once and > for all. I wonder how well the US government would (or does) respond? > Any thoughts? > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Quill" > Newsgroups: alt.religion.unitarian-univ > Sent: Monday, January 27, 2003 10:15 PM > Subject: (7253) - Legally kill all adult porn in the United States, > and here is how to do it - (4483) >> Federal laws (18 USC 1462 and 1465) prohibit use of the Internet to >> distribute obscene material. File an online report about internet >> adult obscenity or porn spam. File a report on Sexual Intercourse, >> Sadomasochism, Anal Sex, Masturbation Sexual Bestiality, Excretory >> Functions, Oral Sex, and Lewd Exhibition of the Genitals. >> http://www.obscenitycrimes.org/complaint/default.cfm?action=FOCFormIntro > I would suggest a good 'back door' approach to killing spam (since so > much of it is pornographic in nature) is to consider the suggestion > mentioned above. Thoughts, anyone? *Read* the statutes in question. You discover that the language applies to _print_ material as well. Then consider what is available in _any_ "adult" book store. That virtually _all_ of those publications *have* been through _real_ court cases, holding their content to be _legal_. Anything from the Post Office (itself) refusing a mailing permit for Playboy (over-ruled by the courts), to the prosecution of Larry Flynt and Hustler magazine. Consider what runs on the adult "Pay-per-view" Cable TV channels. *legally*. The cited statutes cover _those_ services, too. Which _are_ running within the law. Executive summary: With the exception of _actual_ 'kiddie porn' (and just "offering" it -- i.e. words talking about it, if there aren't any actual images) _is_ legal. It is, _somewhat_ unfortunately, all within the limits of "legal". There are _numerous_ other *viable* legal theories that _could_ be used to go after any kind of spammers. Unfortunately, the government prosecutorial authorities seem "uninterested", unless there are *BIG*DOLLAR* losses involved. With criminal prosecution effectively eliminated from the picture, the only thing left is privat _civil_ suit. There *are* numerous grounds for that, already vetted in the Courts. Starting with "trespass to chattel", and/or "theft by conversion". The downside to this approach is two-fold (at least *sigh*) 1) the victim must track down the actual sender, in order to sue, 2) the victim has to front _all_ the legal costs for pursuing the action, and *hope* that (a) they prevail at trial, and (b) the spammer has enough assets to be siezed to pay for the efforts. I hate to say it, but a good *FEDERAL* law is needed. Something similar to the junk fax law. One that provides relatively _large_ penalties for each and *every* infraction, *WITH* a 'right of private action'. The 'spam' situation is rapidly approaching the unmanageable. The viability of the e-mail medium as a whole _is_ at risk. ------------------------------ From: hudsonl@skypoint.com (Hudson Leighton) Subject: Re: So Many Online Sales, So Little in Tax Revenue Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 22:17:32 -0600 Organization: MRRP > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: snip > Ever notice > how McD never actually owns anything, except an occassional 'corporate > store'? PAT] Acually McD owns alot of land underneath McD stores, not the stores but just the land, this is a big piece of their income, they lease the land to the franchise, the lease is written so the franchise pays all expences includings taxes, etc. Can you say cash cow? -Hudson http://www.skypoint.com/~hudsonl ------------------------------ From: Daryl R Gibson Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 11:04:37 -0700 Subject: Re: So Many Online Sales, So Little in Tax Revenue On 29 Jan 2003 at 20:41, editor@telecom-digest.org wrote: > Chicago has the ONE McDonald's Restaurant in history which filed bank- > ruptcy and closed; it was located in a housing project area. Ever notice > how McD never actually owns anything, except an occassional 'corporate > store'? PAT] Not totally accurate. . Ray Kroc, who made McDonald's into a worldwide brand (the original McDonald's was started by two McDonald brothers in San Bernadino) would tell anyone who asked that he wasn't in the restaurant business -- he was in the real estate business. McDonald's Corporation owns much of the real estate (and surrounding developments) beneath their stores. McDonald's does own some corporate stores, but ordinarily, those stores do not do as well as franchised operations. Many times, the way the corporate stores come about is when a franchisee is unable to make a go of the operation, and McD will take over the store rather than close it, and then find a new franchisee. Sometimes, they will pay a local franchisee to run the store for them while it's being fixed up and sold. They have found over the years that it's better to have the owner watching over the store, than to have it under corporate control; it makes more money for the company, and gives a better experience to the customer. As a matter of fact, over the years, the McDs where I have gotten the worst service were corporate stores. A fascinating (for people who like business biographies) book about this is "McDonalds: Behind the arches" which I read some years ago. Of course, now I eat at Wendys ... Daryl "As you ramble through life, brother, no matter what your goal, keep your eye upon the doughnut, and not upon the hole" --Dr. Murray Banks, quoting a menu http://www.drgibson.com http://www.salesstar.com Personal Motivation and Positive Attitude [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, Wendy's is no different in their ownership routine are they? I think in general they have better hamburgers and salad bars, etc, but aren't they run under the same 'business principles' as the Golden Arches? The McD in Skokie has been there over forty years. As close as Skokie is to Des Plaines (where McD has their famous store number one (the very first franchise, dating from back about fifty years), I think Skokie was number two or number three in their history. I know it has been remodled and refurbished two or three times in its history. And I know Skokie changed from a corporate location to a franchise a few years ago. Now and then I read the legal notices in the newspapers, and I remember seeing one day a few years ago that the McDonald's Real Estate Corporation sold Skokie to a new entity called the '4900 Dempster Boulevard Corporation' which was the shell corporation for the new owners, another corporation. I dunno why none of the owners of McD places ever want to give their names and actual addresses. The one here in Independence is the same way. It is owned by some guy who is represented by a corporate attorney out of Tulsa. He has five or six stores, including Coffeyville. I don't think anyone in town has ever met him. Isn't Pizza Hut operated the same way, store by store? I know the Pizza Hut here in Independence *was* 'owned by' the one in Coffey- ville for many years. Six months ago the corporation built a new Pizza Hut right next door to the old one, then the old one closed totally and new owners took over the new one, no connection to C-ville. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 09:00:12 -0600 From: Randal Hayes Subject: Re: Calling Party Pays to Cellular Fixed-to-wireless surcharging may become less of an issue for callers from the U.S. to other countries in the future, as the FCC will soon be reviewing their international settlements policies, including the fixed-to-wireless surcharge issue. The FCC believes the settlement caps they implemented some time ago may have become benchmarks, which could slow-down or halt international call pricing from dropping still further. As such, they may tweak that aspect of international call pricing, but they also mentioned concern over the surcharge issue, and appeared they intend to do something about it. While they do have some influence on the policies of foreign carriers, they do not have regulatory authority over them. However, they can regulate what U.S. carriers can pay in settlements and surcharges, so their leverage comes in telling U.S. carriers that they cannot do business with any foreign carrier that exceeds x-amount of settlement or surcharge. Hopefully, the FCC will act soon, as policies such as theirs and the WTO helped to greatly reduce the price for international calling. Randy Hayes ------------------------------ From: Mike Hartley Subject: Re: Calling Party Pays to Cellular Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 20:14:00 -0000 > It's not just wireless. The carriers I use (sometimes) > surcharge calls to British 07xx, 08xx, and 09xx numbers, > which aren't wireless. They're various flavors of > location-independent and premium numbers. Nope, UK mobile live in the 07XXX range; Here's the full UK numberspace allocation, from the UK telecom regulator OFTTEL's site: www.oftel.gov.uk/ind_info/numbering/view.htm Geographic Number Ranges - issued in blocks of 10,000 numbers (geographic codes beginning 01 and 02) Code and number blocks - from 1130 00 to 1599 99 Code and number blocks - from 1600 00 to 1997 99 Code and number blocks - from 2000 00 to 2920 99 Geographic Number Ranges - issued in blocks of 1000 numbers ie. Type A Conservation Areas Corporate Numbering (numbers beginning 05) (9-digit numbers starting with 0500 are also contained in this range, but are not available for allocation) Personal Numbering, Paging & Mobile Ranges (numbers beginning 07) Personal Numbering (070 numbers) Paging numbers (076 numbers) Mobile numbers (077 to 079) Special Services Ranges - issued in blocks of 10,000 numbers (numbers beginning 08) Freephone (0808 1X and 0808 2X ranges, and details on allocated 0800 10k ranges) Local Rate (0845 XXX ranges) National Rate (0870 XXX ranges) Up to 5p - non internet (ranges 0844 2XX to 0844 9XX) Up to 10p - non-internet (ranges 0871 2XX to 0871 9XX) Internet for Schools (0820 XXX ranges) Special Services Ranges - issued in blocks of 1000 numbers (numbers beginning 08) Freephone - (0800 XXXX ranges) Internet - FRIACO (Flat Rate Internet Access Call Origination) - 0808 99XX ranges Internet - Free to caller (0808 90XX ranges) Internet - incorporating un-metered access up to 5p (0844 04XX ranges) Internet - metered access up to 5ppm (0844 09XX ranges) Internet - incorporating un-metered access up to 10p (0871 04XX ranges) Internet - metered access up to 10ppm (0871 09XX ranges) Premium Rate Services (numbers beginning 09) 'Content' services (090X XXX ranges) 'Non-Content' services (091X XXX ranges) > message: "if you want me to call you, give me a real phone number." Your choice, based on US experience, as we've discussed before, I think. Fixed line replacement looms large -- in the UK market at least- so effectively you're applying 'telecom apartheid' ;+) Cheers, Mike ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-330-6774 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 775-306-8390 Fax 3: 775-642-0603 Fax 4: 530-309-7234 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2003 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. In addition, gifts from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert have enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V22 #266 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Jan 30 21:14:48 2003 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.3nb1/8.11.3) id h0V2EmK18266; Thu, 30 Jan 2003 21:14:48 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 21:14:48 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200301310214.h0V2EmK18266@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V22 #267 TELECOM Digest Thu, 30 Jan 2003 21:13:00 EST Volume 22 : Issue 267 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: 1+Ten-Digits Mandatory in NYCity (Joey Lindstrom) Re: T-1 Private Line to Home Network (KJ) Re: Starting up a CLEC (Nitoy) International SMS Starting to Work (Chris Kantarjiev) Re: Dialup While Overseas (Patrick t.) McDonald's Doesn't Own Anything (Ron Chapman) Queries on Tones (Swami) Researcher Reconsiders Flaw Disclosures (Monty Solomon) Broadband Briefings: Stop SBC Action Alert (Monty Solomon) Perspective: The New Jailbird Jingle (Monty Solomon) In Net Attacks, Defining the Right to Know (Monty Solomon) Re: E1 (foo) Re: You Know You Are Having a Bad Telecom Day When ... (Barry Margolin) AT&T Branding (sincak@optonline.net) Re: Cell-Phone Couture (Chuk Gleason) Re: Can Your Cell Phone Impair Your Vision? (David Clayton) Share Day for January (TELECOM Digest Editor) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. WE DO NOT PERMIT NAME/EMAIL ADDRESS HARVESTING FROM THIS JOURNAL. 'SALTED' EMAIL ADDRESSES APPEAR HEREIN TO VERIFY THIS. YOU GET SUED IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPAMMING OR SENDING VIRUSES. DON'T DO IT. See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Joey Lindstrom Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 09:46:05 -0700 Subject: Re: 1+Ten-Digits Mandatory in NYCity Reply-To: joey@telussucks.info On Wed, 29 Jan 2003 20:41:03 -0500 (EST), John Higdon wrote: >> In overlay regions, so long as the two (or more) area codes are >> protected (not used as CO codes within any of these area codes), you >> don't even have to do that. You could easily allow 7-digit dialing >> with no special codes. HOWEVER, the FCC (I think) said "no way" to >> this idea long ago. Rationale: it would be anti-competitive. > It would also be confusing. A person does not necessarily know the > number of the phone he is using at someone else's home, office, > public place. If he doesn't know the number of the phone, he also > doesn't know its area code and would have no idea whether to dial > seven or ten digits. If 10/11 digits are always required, then all > calls from all telephones are dialed the same; there is no worry > about the number of the phone being used. The point becomes moot if the area: 1) Allows 7-digit same-NPA calling, and 2) Also allows that same call to be dialed 10D (and 11D) Your person in the above scenario doesn't know the number of the phone he's using. Fine - no problem. Dial 10D (or 11D). Call goes through. The point of this verbal exercise is to come up with a system that, on the one hand, allows people who ARE moving around from phone to phone (as you note above) to be able to dial out without having to ask someone what the dialing rules are, and on the other, to allow those who own those same phones to know for sure if a call is toll or not (toll-alerting). I think we could, most of us, agree that if such a balance could be achieved, it would be A Good Thing. Certainly some couldn't give a rat's ass if toll alerting were available (the argument was made recently that "we've gotten along fine without it"), but if it can be put into place in areas that did not formerly have it, WITHOUT having a negative impact, then why resist it? Toll-alerting isn't an issue in non-toll-alerting areas because most people in those areas don't know any differently, and if toll-alerting suddenly became available, I think you'd see public support for it rise quite a bit. Anyways, point is, I think such a system is well within our reach, and more importantly, if EVERY telco implemented it, we could finally have some uniform dialing rules EVERYWHERE throughout the NANPA. Wouldn't that be nice? :-) In areas that currently still allow 7D: 1) Allow 7D for home NPA non-toll calls. 2) Allow (permissively) both 10D and 11D on home NPA non-toll calls. 3) Require 11D on all calls, to any NPA, that are toll. In areas where 10D is required: 1) Allow 7D for home NPA non-toll calls. 2) Allow (permissively) both 10D and 11D on home NPA non-toll calls. 3) Require 11D on all calls, to any NPA, that are toll. Hey, whaddaya know? The rules are the same in each case! :-) For the purposes of this argument, I define "toll" as a call that's going to incur per-minute charges. Flat-rate message-unit calls don't count here. Those who travel a lot can simply remember "dial 11D all the time". We can program all numbers in our cellphone as 11D (my current provider already allows this). If someone comes and visits me, and wants to call someone (whether across the street, across town, or across the country), he just dials 11D and doesn't need to ask me how to dial. But when I'm using my own phone, I dial 7D (or 10D if applicable) for most calls, and if I'm about to dial an unfamiliar number, I simply dial it as 7D/10D and see if the call goes through. If I get a message telling me this is a toll call that must be dialed with a "1", then I know the call is going to cost me money and then it's up to me to decide whether or not to redial the call as 11D. Another possible wrinkle: when a 7D or 10D call is intercepted due to it being toll and 11D is required, telco could play a recorded announcement along the lines of "the number you have dialed is a toll call. If you do not wish to incur toll charges, please hang up now. Your call will proceed in 10 seconds." 10 seconds later, the call proceeds as if dialed as 1+10D. This recording would be bypassed if the number was dialed as 11D in the first place. Would something like this not satisfy all the arguments? -- Joey Lindstrom -- Telus Sucks http://www.telussucks.info ------------------------------ From: KJ Subject: Re: T-1 Private Line to Home Network Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 17:52:35 -0600 Thanks alot! Dave Phelps wrote in message news:telecom22.262.7@telecom-digest.org: > In article , nospam@bigfoot.com > says: >> I am replacing my DSL VPN connection to my brokerage firm with a T-1 >> point to point private line. >> How does this change the hardware I need at home to network my three >> computers? I currently use an SMC wireless Access Point for a >> wireless network. Is a wireless network still possible with the T1? >> Will I be able to connect to the T-1 and the internet through another >> DSL line at the same time? >> Thanks, >> Eric > Yes, you can do all of the above. You will need to get a router that > has a serial interface, to which you can connect a T1 CSU/DSU, or, my > preference, a router that has a CSU/DSU built in. If you want > everything in one box, I'd look at a Cisco 1721, with a T1 CSU/DSU > WIC, and an ethernet WIC. It will be able to handle all of your > routing. You might want to consult your IT security staff before > finalizing your plan though. > Dave Phelps > Phone Masters Ltd. > deadspam=tippenring ------------------------------ From: nitoy69@hotmail.com (Nitoy) Subject: Re: Starting up a CLEC Date: 30 Jan 2003 17:19:38 -0800 Organ