29 Years of the Digest ... founded August 21, 1981
The Telecom Digest for July 29, 2011
====== 29 years of TELECOM Digest -- Founded August 21, 1981 ======
Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the
Internet. All contents here are copyrighted by Bill Horne 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
Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome.
We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. - Geoffrey Welsh
See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer, and other stuff of interest.
Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2011 17:59:23 -0700 (PDT) From: "Mark J. Cuccia" <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: email@example.com. Subject: NEW/MORE Info re Sint Maarten and the NANP Message-ID: <1311814763.99669.YahooMailClassic@web31102.mail.mud.yahoo.com> NeuStar-NANPA issued a new/updated Planning Letter today, Wednesday 27-July-2011, regarding the upcoming migration of Sint Maarten from the (former) Netherlands Antilles country code +599, to the NANP Country Code +1 as Area Code 721. Planning Letter #423, Wednesday 27-July-2011, http://www.nanpa.com/pdf/PL_423.pdf This PL replaces all previous PLs, as this new one contains all necessary information as it is currently known. The start-date for permissive dialing of the new +1-721 for Sint Maarten, alongside existing (soon obsolete) +599, is still to be Friday 30-September-2011. (There WAS to have been an earlier date for permissive dialing, announced back in Fall 2009, which WOULD have been Monday 31-May-2010). The mandatory dialing date for the new +1-721 for Sint Maarten, when use of +599 will (supposedly) NO LONGER work for reaching Sint Maarten is NOW to be Sunday 30-September-2012. (Initially, the mandatory date was to have been Tuesday 30-November-2010, back when initially announced and the permissive date would have been at the end of May 2010; when the permissive date was first changed to Friday 30-September-2011, announced in Dec.2010/Jan.2011, the mandatory date was to have been Saturday 31-March-2012) Note that while AT&T-LL, VZ-B/MCI, Sprint, will likely eliminate the +599-5xx office codes for Sint Maarten on the mandatory dial date for +1-721-5xx, and the larger Canadian telcos will likely do the same as well, this doesn't necessarily mean that "the rest of the world", or even smaller/mid-size carriers/etc. in the US/Canada will necessarily block +599-5xx Sint Maarten office codes on the mandatory dial date. I remember when Guam and the Mariana Islands both changed from +671 and +670, to +1-670 and +1-671 respectively, back in 1997/98, on the mandatory dial date for NANP dialing (01-July-1998), MCI still allowed 011+670/671 dialing for several more months, maybe even an entire year. However, AT&T-LL actually eliminated 011+670/671 dialing on the PERMISSIVE date of 01-July-1997, only allowing NANP dialing from the US, as 1+/0+ 670/671. When American Samoa migrated from +684 to +1-684, the permissive dial date where both dialing methods would work, was officially in October 2004. Mandatory dialing of +1-684 began (officially) in April 2005. AT&T-LL, MCI, and Sprint did allow +1-684 dialing alongside old 011+684 dialing in October 2004, but AT&T-LL actually did NOT remove 011+684 dialing from the 4ESS translations until around May 2006, over a year AFTER the official mandatory NANP dial date of April 2005! Also note that the other (former) entities of the Netherlands Antilles will retain +599 as their country code, at least for the present time. It is always "possible" that the other islands might in the future choose to join the NANP, but there's nothing yet official at the present time for this. Note that the (former) members of the Netherlands Antilles are all still associated with Holland. This includes Curacao, Sint Eustatius, Saba, and Bonaire. It also even includes Aruba, which broke from the Netherlands Antilles political entity in the early/mid-1980s, but has always maintained ties to Holland. At that time, Aruba changed from being a part of telephone country code +599 to its own +297 country code. This most recent Planning Letter also states that dialing from the Dutch side, Sint Maarten, to the French side of Saint Martin, and also note that both Holland and France each share separate sides of the island (similar to Haiti and the Dominican Republic share separate sides of the island of Hispanola), is "international". Landlines in French Saint Martin dialed from Dutch Sint Maarten will be dialed in the NANP international method, as 011+590+590+seven-d. (Note the use of "repeating" the country code digits '590'). Wireless phones in French Saint Martin dialed from Dutch Sint Maarten will be dialed in the NANP international method as 011+590+690+seven-d note that '690' follows the '590' country code. Dialing to Sint Eustatius and Saba from (NANP-based) Sint Maarten will follow NANP "IDDD" rules, 011+599+, shown in the latest PL as: Saba (BES) 011-599-416 + 4-Digits Statia (BES) (which is really Sint Eustatius) 011-599-318 + 4-Digits At this time, 416 is the only "office code" for Saba, and 318 is the only "office code" for Sint Eustatius. NANP IDDD dialing to Bonaire is not referenced in this latest PL, but it will be 011+599+seven-digits. There are several office codes in Bonaire, of the form 7xx. NANP IDDD dialing to Curacao is not referenced in this latest PL. There are even more office codes in Curacao than there are in Bonarie, and the dialing will be 011+599+9+seven-digits. Note the additional single-digit "area" code of '9' before the seven-digit "local number" in Curacao. The office codes in Curacao are of the form 4xx, 5xx, 6xx, 7xx, 8xx, 9xx. NANP IDDD dialing to Aruba is also not referenced in this latest PL. Prior to joining the NANP, Sint Maarten (and the rest of the former Netherlands Antilles except Aruba) dial to Aruba with their 1980s country code, as 00+297+seven-digits. Sint Maarten will dial Aruba in the NANP IDDD format as 011+297+seven-digits. Since Aruba broke into their own country code in the 1980s, they have their own "office code" assignments, which do not "conform" to any other office code ranges in other (former) Netherlands Antilles islands. IF Saba, Sint Eustatius, and Bonaire choose to join the NANP, as long as they remain in their current c.o.code ranges, and same for Sint Maarten with their +1-721-5xx format, these other islands "could" easily migrate to the NANP under +1-721 without any other changes (except dialing prefix changes to NANP format). However, if Curacao or Aruba ever chooses to join the NANP, there would have to be significant changes in their office codes so as to NOTE conflict with existing office codes in +1-721, if they were to join as +1-721 -- OR, they could get their own new unique +1-NPA area codes. NONE of this -- other (former) islands of the Netherlands Antilles joining the NANP -- has been officially announced or mentioned, but this is always "possible" as some future date. Not mentioned in the latest PL is the dialing codes for special services. Sint Maarten has used formats that other (former) islands of the Netherlands Antilles has used, but I understand that St.Maarten will change to the NANP format of "N11" (411 for Directory, 611 for Repair, 911 for Emergencies, etc). There had been a +599-555 office code for the legacy wireless provider TelCell. (TelCell is "associated" with the incumbent landline provider Telem). This +599-555 code is NOT going to become +1-721-555 for TelCell -- +1-721-555 is to be used for Directory access for the US/Canada (and other countries in the world which might allow access to directory in NANP countries/geographic NPAs as +1-NPA-555), and it could also be used for other "555" services (which has never really been properly defined or even implemented). But I have not been able to determine what HAS happened to the TelCell wireless numbers/customers who might have had +599-555-xxxx numbers! There does NOT seem to be a "brand new" +1-721-5xx office code for TelCell wireless to takeover former +599-555-xxxx TelCell wireless customers... at least nothing that I've seen. It "could" be that TelCell is going to "farm out" +599-555-xxxx wireless customers to "other" pre-existing TelCell +599-5xx wireless office codes, which will become +1-721-5xx codes, however, it would also be very likely that these customers also had to have LINE-NUMBER (xxxx) changes as well! OR... it "could" be that while TelCell wireless was assigned +599-555, TelCell never really ever assigned any customers yet to that office code, thus its elimination with the change form +599-5xx to +1-721-5xx is "moot". But I have never been able to get a clear indication of WHAT is going to happen to +599-555, or what has happened to it.... ALSO NOTE that the TEST-numbers for Sint Maarten are FINALLY announced (officially) in this most recent NANPA Planning Letter 423: Telem (incumbent landline telco) +1-721-622-7836 TelCell (wireless, associated with Telem) +1-721-622-7837 UTS/Radcomm (wireless, new entrant) +1-721-622-7838 NOTE that Telem's landline test number, +1-721=622-7836, "spells out" +1-721-MAARTEN! Also, the +1-721-622 office code for the test-number(s) does NOT "pre-exist" as +599-622. If telcos/carriers in the NANP (or elsewhere in the world) do FULL translation of +599-NXX codes down to the +599-NXX level, anyone "trying" to dial +599-622-xxxx to reach the test-numbers would get "blocked" in the country they are calling from (or maybe somewhere else along the way). I don't know how routing to +599 is handled "within" the former Netherlands Antilles, since it covers various islands -- i.e., do all calls route "first" to Curacao on +599, or do "most" countries' carriers route to the +599-NXX level to determine "which" island to route to? I don't know if "some" countries might actually route +599-622-7836/7/8 to the Sint Maarten test-numbers though. HOPEFULLY, Telem, TelCell, and UTS/Radcomm will NOT return billing supervision on these test-numbers, but I'm not holding my breath on that! If they actually do provide recorded test/greeting announcements (rather than a 1-Kc tone), I expect that the recordings will be multi-lingual -- English and Dutch, and maybe even French and Spanish. NOTE ALSO, that the list of 5xx office codes as shown in the latest NANPA Planning Letter is NOT complete, and even inconsistent in a few spots. I think that Telcordia-TRA's databases/products (BIRRDS, LERG, NNAG/NNACL, etc) have a more correct/comprehensive list of Sint Maarten 5xx codes. The World Telephone Numbering Guide might also have a more correct/ comprehensive list, as they exist under +599 (i.e., +599-555 is included), which comes from ITU lists as well: http://www.itu.int/dms_pub/itu-t/oth/02/02/T02020000F70001PDFE.pdf (from Feb.2011) http://www.wtng.info/wtng-599-an.html but this is still missing a few of the latest assignments: +599 / +1-721 - 510 Radcomm (mobile) +599 / +1-721 - 587 Radcomm (mobile) +599 / +1-721 - 588 Radcomm (mobile) Mark J. Cuccia markjcuccia at yahoo dot com Lafayette LA, formerly of New Orleans LA pre-Katrina
Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2011 22:08:56 -0500 From: John Mayson <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: email@example.com. Subject: Re: Absolute minimum Facebook exposure? Message-ID: <CALtjCnJAui7j8rw5KJT2oT2VrNqpg-zrPw=F5GxA0zJkHqDgVA@mail.gmail.com> On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 2:27 PM, AES <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote: > I guess Facebook is a valid "Telecom" topic, since it seems to be > (maybe along with Google) one of the major users of telecom resources > and telecom activity by individuals at the present time. Stranger things. :-) > If so, could any knowledgeable Facebook user tell me offhand: What > is the _absolute minimum_ amount of personal information that a > prospective Facebook joiner has to give to Facebook to join up and > register? And what is the absolute minimum amount of information > that can then be conveyed to anyone else as a result of my acquiring > a Facebook page? > > [I'm hoping that I can supply nothing but a name and an email > address to Facebook; display nothing but a name and a link to my > university web page on my Facebook page; and have Facebook itself > not transmit any of these bits of information -- particular the > email address -- to anyone further. Is this a realistic > possibility?] At a minimum you have to provide a name and an email address. I believe you also have to provide a location and a birthday (to confirm your age). It's been a long while since I've tried this. You could create a throw-away email address and start to register a dummy account and see what little you can provide. If it's too much, just quit. John -- John Mayson <email@example.com> Austin, Texas, USA
Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2011 10:19:50 -0500 From: Dave Garland <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: email@example.com. Subject: Re: Absolute minimum Facebook exposure? Message-ID: <firstname.lastname@example.org> On 7/27/2011 2:27 PM, AES wrote: > If so, could any knowledgeable Facebook user tell me offhand: What is > the _absolute minimum_ amount of personal information that a > prospective Facebook joiner has to give to Facebook to join up and > register? And what is the absolute minimum amount of information that > can then be conveyed to anyone else as a result of my acquiring a > Facebook page? Absolute minimum information? Zero. Register under a false name using a throwaway email address. And set all the privacy settings to "don't show anything to anyone else". Not that you should necessarily trust Facebook to honor the privacy settings. > > [I'm hoping that I can supply nothing but a name and an email address > to Facebook; display nothing but a name and a link to my university > web page on my Facebook page; and have Facebook itself not transmit > any of these bits of information -- particular the email address -- to > anyone further. Is this a realistic possibility?] > Yes. Though it's more amusing to fill in all the blanks with bogus information. Dave
Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2011 10:44:45 -0500 From: Neal McLain <email@example.com> To: firstname.lastname@example.org. Subject: Comcast fastest ISP in nation; Rhode Island fastest state Message-ID: <4E3183ED.email@example.com> | Comcast fastest ISP in nation; Rhode Island fastest state | By Mike Robuck | CedMagazine.com - July 27, 2011 | | A recent report by Pando Networks found that Comcast was | the fastest ISP in the nation with an average download | speed of 890 kbps, while Rhode Island was first on a | state-by-state basis with an average speed of 894 kbps. | | Pando Networks, which helps companies improve their | download speeds and provides detailed performance data, | tracked 4 million Internet users across the country from | January through June for its study that not only broke | down the fastest download speeds by ISPs and states, but | also by cities and regions. http://bit.ly/r2jPZw
Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2011 20:11:57 +0100 From: "Graham." <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: email@example.com. Subject: Re: Automatic License Plate Readers track your every move Message-ID: <firstname.lastname@example.org> > Knowing about abuses of a system might undermine public trust in other > countries, and I wish it were so here, but (at least in the U.S.), the > public chooses to be fearfully ignorant about the way the government > really works. Bill, I am glad you and your countrymen have a healthy suspicion about this technology. Here in the UK, quite apart from policing red lights, speeding, and the London congestion charging zone, they also used by private companies to police trivial things like overstaying in a supermarket car park. The company can, and does, for a small fee, apply to the DVLC (our DMV) for the name and address of the owner and sends them a ticket. There are enforcement and surveillance cameras just about everywhere you go here. -- Graham. %Profound_observation%
Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2011 18:59:08 +1000 From: David Clayton <email@example.com> To: firstname.lastname@example.org. Subject: Re: Google Search problems Message-ID: <email@example.com> On Tue, 26 Jul 2011 08:57:51 -0500, John Mayson wrote: .......... > Bah! We should be exchanging text files on 5.25" floppies. I still have a few 8" "TurboDOS" ones floating about, 160KB capacity (I think). I hope that one day they will be valuable and fund my retirement! (anyone after an old Osbourne Executive "portable" computer?) ;-) -- Regards, David. David Clayton Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. Knowledge is a measure of how many answers you have, intelligence is a measure of how many questions you have.
Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2011 13:22:21 +0000 (UTC) From: Paul <firstname.lastname@example.org.INVALID> To: email@example.com. Subject: Re: Google Search problems Message-ID: <Xns9F305F58288Senex@184.108.40.206> Paul <firstname.lastname@example.org.INVALID> wrote in news:Xns9F2F7B7276948Senex@220.127.116.11: > I think I have an H-89 somewhere in the basement, which I last > used as a dumb terminal for e-mail and Usenet. If you know anyone > who wants it.... > > It's not the only piece of obsolete electronics down there - I > should get a tuit and bring it all to a Flea one of these days... > but that would mean getting organized, something I had thought > would be easier now that I am retired. > ***** Moderator's Note ***** > > Tell us where you are: I'll bet there is a Heathnik out there who > will take it off your hands. Seacoast NH - I would travel a reasonable distance to give stuff a good home. > As for flea markets, you'll never get what it's worth. Epay, for > all it's faults, is a seller's platform. > > Bill Horne > Moderator I was thinking of the Flea at MIT, e.g. I do not expect to get what it should be worth. I mostly want to avoid paying an "electronics disposal fee" and have some hope that it wouldn't just go to the shredder. I am not good at making deals. If there were only a place to take all this stuff, like taking old clothes to Goodwill or Salvation Army. -- Paul ***** Moderator's Note ***** I suggest you check out http://ww_heco.home.mindspring.com/hecoclub.html . A Google search on "HDOS" turned up hundreds of leads. Bill Horne Moderator
TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly to telecom- munications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition 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 Bill Horne. 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. The Telecom Digest is moderated by Bill Horne.
|Contact information:||Bill Horne|
43 Deerfield Road
Sharon MA 02067-2301
bill at horne dot net
This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Copyright (C) 2009 TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization.