q From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Feb 18 20:00:38 2000 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id UAA25290; Fri, 18 Feb 2000 20:00:38 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2000 20:00:38 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200002190100.UAA25290@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #1 TELECOM Digest Thu, 17 Feb 2000 18:41:41 EST Volume 20 : Issue 1 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson What Happened With Me (TELECOM Digest Editor) Telecom Frequently Asked Questions (Jfonin@worldbank.org) The Feds' Ramsey Electronics Raid Blow by Blow (Monty Solomon) Moderators Fascination with Junction City (Dennis S. Conley) 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-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest 611 East Poplar Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 415-520-9905 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@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: hyperarchive.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 the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has 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. ------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2000 19:46:34 EST From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: What Happened With Me In case you were wondering about me, after I told you to 'have a nice weekend' the Wednesday of Thanksgiving week, I promptly had an anurism (or "brain bleed") which left me comatose for approximatly one month in Topeka, an event which now two months later I am only starting to recover from. This event began in Fort Riley, KS and because there is no *acute* care hospital facility there a call to 911 left me with no where to go to the hospital in the vicinity. Calls to 911 in Fort Riley are answered by the 299th Company of the Military Police and/or their ambulance crew/base firefighters. I was on the base itself, in a fairly remote area of it, when I got a *violent* seizure, which left my head hurting badly. I blacked out for a few seconds, had a case of almost total deafness for close to a minute. I debated what to do for about a minute after that, and decided to find a solution. It was probably good that I made that decision right away, because of the events which followed. I want to stress this delay was not the fault of the military authorities, but rather the geography of the area. If you have maps on your computer, please review the Junction City, Fort Riley, (town of) Riley and surrounding area. Where Junction City has a population of about 10 thousand people Fort Riley has only a population of about 5 thousand troops scattered over an area five times as large. Please look at your atlas or maps; note how Junction City sits in a tiny corner of Fort Riley. Fort Riley is federal land, a huge reserve miles wide and miles long; it used to be a major Army base; now if is just miles and miles of mostly nothing. The base is completely open; anyone is free to visit any part of it at any time; I give computer lessons to the troops, and help the guys make web pages. I have covered this angle a few times here before. The Army today is not the Army of the past. No more barracks, no uniforms except when the guys are actually on duty Monday through Friday, a few high rise buildings for their housing; with two telephones in each room (one for their computers), and it was this environment which had me on the base that Friday night in November. I was to make a web page for the bowling alley on the base. It was there that I had my accident. Fortunatly, I had someone with me who cared and knew I was serious about the incident; he literally ran to a payphone at the bowling alley and and called 911. It was about 30 minutes later that the ambulance arrived, driving at break-neck speed followed by a squad car with two or three MPs in it. They loaded me in the back and we took off. The ambulance came from the nearby town of Milford (also part of the greater Fort Riley base). After about 30 minutes, the ambulance showed up with a car full of Military Police following it. They had apparently been elsewhere on the base and had some trouble in reaching me. I don't blame them at all; Fort Riley is a big place. They loaded me in the aArmy Community Hospital', where they discovered I was not part of the Army and would be sent to Geary Community Hospital instead. At GCH, the medic looked rather shocked at my condition and said to the MPs accompanying me, 'I do not know why he is still alive. His head is full of blood.' Then he advised the MPs that he was not going to keep me either. The closest place for a person in my condition would be Stormont-Vail in Topeka, almost a hundred miles east, going toward Kansas City. He selected a nurse to make the trip with me; they were all afraid I would bump my head in the back of the wagon going to Stormont-Vail, and that would be the end of me for sure. It took about an hour and a half to make the trip to Topeka; two MPs trained in medical procedures and the nurse in the back of the wagon working on me the entire trip down I-70. When we got into Topeka and Stormont-Vail hospital the emergency room physicians were equally shocked to see me in my condition, and wondered how I had made it that far. 'Only through the grace of God' noted a couple of doctors, and it was the consensus of the doctors that they perform emergency surgery on the spot. I did not like that idea and told them so. One of them suggested I tell someone where I was at, so I called my mother to let her know where I was at. I did not remember what came next, but aacording to the doctor I was talking to my mother and lapsed into a coma which did not end for three weeks. My mother came up from her home in Independence, KS the same day convinced I was going to die and met with the physicians. Needless to say I did not die, but instead came out of the coma three weeks later. My mother's friend Paul (and later her friend Joyce) drove her to Topeka to sit with me off and on over the next three weeks. This got me up to New Years' Eve which was my first recollection of anything which had happened to me. My younger brother Dan was prepared to come down here from his home up in Skokie, and he told me in email just two weeks ago, and he said that he almost went into shock after hearing the news from mother that I was 'as good as dead'. He explained it to me this way: he had been at school at Oakton Community College when the call came in from mother. He left to go home, and the radio in his car was playing a selection of George Frederick Handel (Israel in Egypt) which has always been one of his favorites as well as one of mine. He said at that moment he thought of some things he had wanted to tell me which he guessed would now never be said. Like so many other people I had served as his inspiration for getting on the internet. New Year's Eve was my decision to give up on television once and for all. You may recall that this past New Year's Eve there were a variety of movies dealing with among other things, time travel, and the supernatural. All that day and night I was still mostly out in space myself; unable to deal with reality, and drifting in and out of my coma. Those TV movies frankly scared me to death, not knowing if I was awake or dreaming through them. At one point that day, I actually got out of bed (do not remember doing it) and wound up flat on my back on the floor next to my bed, and calling for help. A couple men came in my room and put me back in the bed, after first picking me up out of my own urine and changing my clothes. I had forgotten about that experience also until it was a couple days before I was released. As I think about it now, I can only vaguely recall the incident. After about a month at Stormont-Vail (including three weeks in the intensive care unit) I was transferred to the Kansas Rehabilitation Hospital which happens to be located right across the street and shares some of the same staff with Stormont-Vail. I stayed for about three weeks longer in the rehab unit. The guys who cared for me in the rehab area were all *super*, especially the ones who worked with me in therapy each day. The first week or so in rehab was difficult, as I was learning to walk from scratch, and learning to feed myself, and use the bathroom alone. My helpers were all very patient and kind. Sean Mather, a nineteen year old student from St. Augustine, Florida taking his internship in physical therapy at Kansas Rehabilitation Hospital taught me how to walk from scratch. David McCartney taught me how to take showers and use the toilet when in the first couple weeks such simple efforts would leave me totally frustrated. They were just a couple of the several people involved in my well being over the months of my absence from this newsgroup. My first knowledge of being comotose for three weeks came when Dr. Kyle, my primary physician at the rehab center made me aware of it. Commenting on the amount of improvement I had made, she said 'the difference between today and when you first arrived (over at Stormont-Vail two months ago) is remarkable.' Then she made mention of my being comotose for three weeks. I asked her if she was having a joke at my expense with the comatose comment. She said she was not and invited me to ask the other guys ... I asked Sean and David to come in the office and asked them point blank did they know I had been comatose for three weeks in December. Yes, they said, we knew this, apparently Dr. Kile had said nothing about it. Now very humble, all I could do is tell David, Sean and Dr. Kile thank you very much for being there when I needed you. The rest of the day, as I had a chance to chat with the other therapists I wanted to thank them all in the same way. They were all gracious. A month ago, I was released from rehab on a 'trial visit to home'; a chance to prove to myself I could make it. Now I am going back to Topeka on Thursday, February 17 for another doctor appointment. And that is my story of how I spent Christmas vacation, and the start of the new millenium. Not quite the way I had planned, but hopefully never to go through again. Patrick Townson ------------------------------ From: Jfonin@worldbank.org Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2000 14:32:33 +0100 Subject: Telecom Frequently Asked Questions Dear Mr. Townson, I downloaded the highly valuable document FAQ from the web and will like to thank you for compiling it. I am preparing a Masters in electronicd and Telecommunications in Cameroon and after this a Ph.D. In a country where libraries have no documents on such fields, It is a real pleasure for us to use the web to bridge the gap. Once more thanks a lot. Jerome Fonin Information Technology Analyst World Bank Cameroon Country Office. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You are quite welcome. I have devoted several years to this effort, and now despite my setbacks involving my health I am taking up my cause once again, primarily so you and others similarly situated can have the tools you need. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2000 11:31:33 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: The Feds' Ramsey Electronics Raid Blow by Blow http://slashdot.org/articles/00/01/04/2316228.shtml Posted by emmett on Wednesday January 05, @10:00AM from the straight-from-the-horse's-mouth dept. On November 10th 1999, Ramsey Electronics of Victor, New York, was raided by the United States Customs Service for allegedly manufacturing and distributing 'Electronic Surreptitious Intercept Devices' as defined by Title 18 USC, Section 2512. We spoke to Ramsey Electronics President John Ramsey and Joel Violanti, the federal prosecutor on the case to find out exactly what happened, and why. (Click below for more.) The Raid On the morning of November 10th, radio equipment manufacturer Ramsey Electronics was raided by the United States Customs Service by officers with a search warrant. In addition to building radio testing equipment, Ramsey Electronics is also a well-known vendor of electronic hobby kits used by organizations like the Boy Scouts of America. Like an action movie drug-bust, agents moved in at 10 a.m. to search and seize over $30,000 worth of Ramsey Electronics inventory. Company President John Ramsey offered this play-by-play of that morning's events: They had already been here almost an hour when I walked in. I [had been] at the bank. When I came back in, I saw my controller, Ed VanVoorhis and his face was white as a ghost. There were these two guys wearing suits standing on each side of him. He told me that these guys were from the government and they were here with a search warrant. Then the agents took over; they pretty much bullied me down the hallway and into my office. I went to go sit at my desk, and they said 'No. you sit over here,' pointing to a couch in my office. The two of them proceeded to rattle off a lot of mumble jumble like Title 18 USC Section 2512 and other numbers, flashing badges and being surrealistically intimidating. I'm looking at my accountant. I have never seem him like this. The [agents] are verbally batting me back and forth, and I'm like, 'Hey, wh at's going on?' They proceeded to tell me that they were executing a search warrant to find goods that were in violation of section 2512, and they shove this four or five page search warrant in my face. They said that they were here to find stuff that violated section 2512 and I said, 'Like our wireless FM mic kits?' The one [agent] gave me his card, and I noticed that he was from Buffalo, an hour and a half away. I said, 'you two guys came all the way here from Buffalo?' and he said, 'No. There's seven of us.' Then he said, 'If you don't cooperate with us, we'll shut you down. We'll lock the doors, send all the employees home, we'll go through all of your inventory, records, customer lists and computers. We'll go through your computers bit-by-bit. We have experts that do that, and we don't care if it takes months.' I was escorted out to the production and shipping areas, which they had pretty much commandeered. All the doors had 8 1/2 x 11 pieces of paper taped on them with a large handwritten letter on them - like A, B and C. There was a fellow wearing a photographers vest snapping pictures everywhere; we later counted 5 empty film cans in the trash! About five hours after they arrived, they staged all of the official US government boxes near the back loading dock. They took a huge van and backed it up to my loading dock, and proceeded to load it with my goods. I walked over to the boxes to verify what they were taking; obviously, they would want me to confirm their counts and amounts. I was stunned! They wouldn't let me see what was in the boxes! I have no idea what they took. I went over to look in them, and they told me to get away. They told me they'd give me an inventory sheet. I said, 'That's my stuff and I should be able to check it.' Special Agent Craig Healy turned to me and said 'You can trust us.'" After they had finished loading the van, they presented me with the inventory sheet, a simple handwritten sheet with no names, titles or signatures. There's nothing indicating who it was from on it. I looked at one of the sheets quickly and noticed the very first part number wasn't one of ours and the second item number listed was for a kit that had no function or bearing on their search warrant. They agreed to fish those two items out of the van and sure enough, neither item was correct. One of them said words to the effect of, 'gee, we must have picked up the wrong box from your shelf.' They corrected their mistakes, asked for a recommendation for a good local restaurant and were on their way... After they left, employees told me that they surrounded the building, watching all the entrances while they entered along with a New York state trooper for back-up. This show of force, while maybe necessary for raiding an underground drug lab, was hardly necessary. Our building is located in a typical suburban office park and our showroom is open to all. What's incredible is that two of the agents were here a week earlier, pretending to be customers! This 'recon' obviously would have shown them that no force would be needed, let alone seven agents on a three hour travel time round trip. What's especially aggravating was that during the earlier visit they tried to lead one of my technical people into saying something they wanted to hear. Questions were posed like 'if we placed one of these little kits across the street in that building - for instance - could we hear it over here?' Our technician assured them that although the units work great for model rockets, toy cars and such, they really weren't suited for transmitting out of a building. Steel construction, reinforcing rod and the like limits range. They then asked if they could boost the power to do the job. Our fellow once again reiterated that the kits were hobby stuff and that what they wanted couldn't be found here. After the raid, my technician told me that they were here last week, playing 'customer' and how they had left unsatisfied. So, where do we sit now? I have a Federal Small Business Innovation Grant underway that uses our little FM-5 wireless mike to transmit muscle sensor data to a nearby computer system. The doctors who are partners in the grant specified the FM-5 due to its small size; present technology uses a six pound transmitter that straps to the back of a child. Tough to do on a forty pound kid. The research is on walking disorders on crippled kids. Now what? Shall we violate their interpretation of the law and work with the doctors and the SBIR people? How about all the schools, scout troops and hobbyists who use our kits? We're not talking big money here. The kits amount to a small portion of our business, but what will these folks do now? I have personally received mail from many who say that they are now graduate engineers as a direct result of one of our little kits sparking their interest in electronics. I guess the mobsters, terrorists and kidnappers don't feel the need to write, huh? The Aftermath - and the Feds The raid on Ramsey Electronics has caused quite a stir online, in Ramsey's own discussion forum as well as the submission queue here at Slashdot. People have gotten into intense discussions about freedom of information, freedom of speech, and the importance of using modern electronics in the field of education. At first glance, the raid may look like a cavalcade of constitutional rights issues, but Joel Violanti, the attorney prosecuting this case for the United States Customs Service, disagrees. Here's his take on the Ramsey raid: Slashdot: What happened, Joel? Violanti: On November 10th, there were approximately 13 search warrants issued in New York City and Rochester, New York and Austin, Texas against companies believed to be in the business of selling electronic surreptitious intercept devices, in violation of federal law. Ramsey Electronics was one of those companies. Slashdot: Apparently, Ramsey's been selling this equipment for a very long time. Why did the raid occur last year? Violanti: If something's illegal, it's illegal. pp Slashdot: Is there any reason that Ramsey Electronics wasn't raided earlier? Violanti: Sometimes you can only act upon things when you're informed of them. There's a task force in New York City that's been investigating this for a few years now. They've been shutting down companies or preventing companies from selling these things, and they've been taking several criminal pleas because of this. These people have been pleading guilty in Federal court. San Francisco now has a task force. Other cities are joining in, trying to stop the manufacture and distribution of this equipment. Slashdot: Where does it stop? It seems like I could build something like this on my own, and then be just as guilty. Violanti: The statute prohibits people from manufacturing and distributing these devices, knowing they've been shipped through the mail. Slashdot: Where does the government draw the line at surreptitious use, as opposed to educational use? Violanti: I don't know how to answer that. Use is use. If you place a device in a clock, and you put that clock on the wall, and you monitor someone's conversation that you're not a part of, I think that surreptitious use speaks for itself. Clock, smoke detector, or picture frame, you're taking that device out of its primary use in order to secretly intercept someone else's conversation. We're not necessarily looking for kits or components. We're looking for items like clocks, smoke detectors and picture frames. Mr. Violanti made it clear that the US Customs Service was not in any way attempting to 'crack down' on the hobbyist or educational use of electronic devices. The emphasis remains on specific items that fall under the category of surreptitious use. The specific items the feds were apparently looking for in the Ramsey raid were things like microphones and video cameras mounted inside smoke detectors or alarm clocks, effectively masquerading as something they weren't. Despite Mr. Violanti's reasuurances, the Ramsey Electronics raid still leaves questions for innocent geeks who like to tinker with assorted electronic parts. What if, for instance, you build an alarm clock that will sense motion when it goes off, and will keep going off if it doesn't sense you getting out of bed and stops when you do? What if you rig your smoke detector with a video or audio system so that rescue workers can make sure your family gets out of your house safely in the event of a fire? There are many uses for 'surveillance technology' other than listening in on boring conversations. But even if you made these devices with the most innocent purposes in mind, and sold them through the U.S. Mail to people as innocent as yourself, it looks like the Federal Government would feel justified in taking them away from you just in case one of your customers decided to use one of your gadgets to break the law in some way. It's a scary thought, isn't it? ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Feb 2000 08:05:00 From: Dennis R. Conley Subject: Re: Gradually, United Adopts Sprint Customs, Traditions Esteemed Sir, Clearly, I haven't read your comp.dcom.telecom postings often enough. I'm baffled why anyone would live in that fair city who was not otherwise obligated by external factors? In my own case there ( "before Sprint" ), life revolved around wearing funny green clothes, dealing with annoying bureaucracy and ( occasionally ) flying around in helicopters trying to save lives. Eventually, when I finally grew weary of the military nonsense and left, it was with both relief and a _tiny_ bit of regret. JC did, after all, possess a certain charm and offered its own unique entertainment factor, compared, say, to Ogden or "the Hill". Regards, Dennis R. Conley Senior Systems Analyst Kansas Geological Survey Lawrence, KS [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: 'External factors' in my case referred to employment. I worked on my own doing web page design, and giving programming lessons to new recruits at Fort Riley. I was doing my own thing, happily there, until the day of my anuerism. To tell you how rotten Sprint can be, the month *after* my phone was turned off in Junction City, Sprint sent me a bill for $60 which my mother paid not knowing any better. A bill which was totally bogus and pertained to their insistence on debiting my Chicago bank account even though there was no money in it. I finally got it refunded after hundreds of dollars of my money had been paid to them by my mother. I was perfectly happy at Fort Riley/Junction City and also had a job for a few months as director of internet service for the First United Methodist Church in Junction City, which is a job I hope I can resume some day soon, unless someone offers me a better one. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V20 #1 **************************** Issue 2 comes following issue 5. From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Feb 25 15:06:04 2000 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id PAA22526; Fri, 25 Feb 2000 15:06:04 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2000 15:06:04 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200002252006.PAA22526@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #3 TELECOM Digest Fri, 25 Feb 2000 14:26:50 EST Volume 20 : Issue 3 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson FCC Regulated Charges on Telephone Service (Monty Solomon) Book Review: "Sams Teach Yourself E-Travel Today", Orwoll (Rob Slade) Re: F.C.C. Debates Changes to Cell Phone Fees (Danny Burstein) Re: F.C.C. Debates Changes to Cell Phone Fees (Joseph Singer) 7D Dialing Across NPA Boundaries (Ed Ellers) Directory Number Fee (John Schmerold) TELECOM Archives Censored as "Pornography" (??) (Bennett Haselton) Tektronix/Microwave Logic ST-112 SONET Testset (Glenn Simpson) 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-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 765 Junction City, KS 66441-0765 Phone: 415-520-9905 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@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: hyperarchive.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 the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2000 22:26:38 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: FCC Regulated Charges on Telephone Service http://www.state.ma.us/dor/rul_reg/directiv/2000/dir00_2.htm Directive 00-2 FCC Regulated Charges on Telephone Service Background: The Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996 granted the Federal Communications Commission ("FCC") authority to regulate pricing of telecommunications services. As the result of FCC regulations, some retail customers may see unfamiliar separately stated charges on their telephone bills. The Department has received a number of taxpayer inquiries concerning whether Massachusetts sales or use tax is properly due on these charges. Issue: Are FCC regulated surcharges, which may be separately stated as a recurring monthly charge on a retail customer's telephone bill, subject to the Massachusetts sales and use tax on telecommunications services? Directive: Generally, FCC regulated surcharges, which may be separately stated as a recurring monthly charge on a retail customer's telephone bill, are part of the sales price of telecommunications services subject to tax. The charges include, but are not limited to, local telephone number portability charges, universal service charges, federal subscriber line charges, and Presubscribed Interexchange Carrier Charges. Discussion of Law: Massachusetts has imposed a sales and use tax on telecommuncations services since 1990. Taxable telecommunications services include "any transmission of messages or information by electronic or similar means, between or among points by wire, cable, fiberoptics, microwave, radio satellite or similar facilities but not including cable television." (1) G.L. c. 64H, 1 and G.L. c. 64I,1. Telephone services including separately stated charges for long distance telephone calls are subject to tax. See TIR 99-2 and 830 CMR 64H.1.6. Generally, tax is imposed on the retail sales price of taxable services, which includes the vendor's cost of materials, labor or services, interest charges, losses or other expenses. G.L. c. 64H, 1. Following is a brief explanation of some charges or surcharges that may appear on a retail customer's telephone bill based on information from the F.C.C. The description of these charges on a customer's bill (or whether they are separately stated to the retail customer at all) may vary from one telecommunications vendor to another. These charges are not taxes; they are not remitted to any federal or state government agency. The charges represent part of the vendor's cost of doing business and are retained by the vendor. As part of the regulation of the pricing of telephone services, the FCC permits, but does not require, a telecommunications vendor to recover these costs from its retail customers through a separately stated charge appearing on the retail customer's telephone bill. These charges are part of the sales price of the telecommunications services subject to tax. See generally DD 86-1. These recurring charges are eligible for the thirty dollar per month residential exemption. 830 CMR 64H.1.6(5). The Massachusetts Department of Revenue does not regulate the pricing of telephone services. The following information is provided for general reference purposes only: Local Telephone Number Portability Charges - To increase competition in local telephone market service, Congress directed local telephone companies to offer "telephone number portability," which refers to the customer's ability to retain the same telephone number if the customer elects to change local carriers. In order to provide this capability, local companies had to invest in upgrades to their network. The FCC determined that local companies could (but were not required to) recover these costs through a small, fixed monthly charge assessed to customers. These charges began appearing in February, 1999 in areas where telephone number portability is available and may continue to appear for 5 years. Universal Service Charges (2) - Generally, the FCC's Universal Service support mechanisms ensure that affordable access to telecommunications services is available to low income telephone customers, telephone customers who live in areas where the costs of providing telephone service is high, schools and libraries, and rural health care providers. This federally mandated support is funded by compulsory contributions from all interstate telecommunications carriers, including long distance companies, local telephone companies, wireless telephone companies, paging companies, and payphone providers. The amount of the contribution is less than 4 percent of their billings for the previous year, adjusted quarterly based on projected Universal Service demands. The FCC does not require that companies contributing to Universal Service recover these costs directly from their customers, however they are permitted to do so through a separately stated monthly charge that may be a percentage of the customer's bill or a flat amount. Federal Subscriber Line Charges - Local telephone companies recover some of the costs of the actual lines connecting homes and businesses through a monthly charge appearing on the customer's telephone bill. This charge is usually called the "subscriber line charge," but also may be referred to as the "federal subscriber line charge" because it is regulated and capped by the FCC. Currently, the charge is capped at $3.50 a month for a primary residential line. The charge for additional residential lines at the same service address and business lines is permitted to be higher. Presubscribed Interexchange Carrier Charges ("PICC") - A charge that long distance companies pay to local telephone companies to help them recover the costs of providing the telephone wires, underground conduit, telephone poles, and other facilities that link each telephone customer to the telephone network. A long distance company pays this charge for each residential and business telephone line presubscribed to that long distance company. There is no tax due on PICC charges paid from one telecommunications vendor to another. However, if a retail consumer or business has not selected a long distance company, the local telephone company may bill the consumer or business for the Presubscribed Interexchange Carrier Charge. If the PICC charge is billed to the retail customer, it is subject to sales tax. More detailed information on federal regulation of the pricing of telecommunications services is available from the Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th St., SW, Washington, D.C. 20554 (toll free number: 888-225-5322) and the FCC website at : http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/factsheets. Additional information regarding the pricing of telephone services is also available from the Consumer Division of the Massachusetts Department of Telecommunications and Energy (toll free number 800-392-6066), One South Station, Boston, MA 02110 and the DTE website at www.magnet.state.ma.us. Bernard F. Crowley, Jr. Senior Deputy Commissioner of Revenue January 28, 2000 DD 00-2 Footnotes: 1. A temporary amendment to the definition of taxable telecommunications services which excluded "internet access services, electronic mail services, electronic bulletin board services, web hosting services or similar on-line computer services" expired on July 1, 1999. However, subsequent federal legislation generally created a moratorium on the imposition of new taxes on Internet access charges and electronic commerce until October, 2001. See TIR 99-2 for more details concerning the federal legislation. Despite the expiration of the Massachusetts statutory exclusion for Internet-related services, taxpayers may continue to rely on the lists of taxable and non-taxable services in TIR 99-2 until the expiration of the federal moratorium (and any extensions) or further notice from the Department. (return to text) 2. AT&T currently uses the label "National Access Contribution" when they show the combined charges for Universal Service and the Carrier Access Line Charge (PICC). (return to text) ------------------------------ From: Rob Slade Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2000 08:09:49 -0800 Subject: Book Review: "Sams Teach Yourself E-Travel Today", Mark Orwoll Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca BKETRAVL.RVW 20000119 "Sams Teach Yourself E-Travel Today", Mark Orwoll, 2000, 0-672-31822-9, U$17.99/C$26.95/UK#12.99 %A Mark Orwoll askmark@amexpub.com %C 201 W. 103rd Street, Indianapolis, IN 46290 %D 2000 %G 0-672-31822-9 %I Macmillan Computer Publishing (MCP) %O U$17.99/C$26.95/UK#12.99 800-858-7674 317-581-3743 info@mcp.com %P 302 p. %T "Sams Teach Yourself E-Travel Today" This guide would appear to be aimed primarily at those who are completely comfortable with the Internet, but are totally new to travel planning. There isn't much material on the net and its tools, but more pointers of the "oh yes, you will want to find out this type of information" type. Part one starts out with basic facts. Chapter one is a sampling of travel tools on Web sites, starting out with the suggestion that you learn how to use a search engine. (On your own.) How to bookmark Web sites is explained in chapter two. That might be just a tad patronizing, but chapter three's points on how to evaluate the reliability of a Web site are actually very good. Chapter four introduces the major tour guide sites. Web sites for foreign newspapers are mentioned as a good source of pre-travel info in chapter five, but Orwoll doesn't mention the fact that a very large number of foreign radio stations now also broadcast over the net. Government tourism sites are discussed in chapter six. Part two outlines the process of planning a vacation. Chapter seven gives you a quiz to determine what kind of traveller you are, although this doesn't seem to have an awful lot of relevance to the rest of the book. Chapter eight is a bit odd, and it tersely reprises a look at a couple of search engines. Unusual sources of information, such as the US State Department, the CIA World Factbook, and personal travel sites, are suggested in chapter nine. The sites in chapter ten seem to have been chosen almost randomly. There is limited information on weather and events in chapter eleven. Part three looks at booking travel online, with respective chapters discussing online travel agents, travel planning tools, hotels, airfare (with very good tips), rail, car rentals, and sea transport. Part four deals with other travel preparations. Chapter nineteen covers taking your laptop along, but doesn't mention such areas as taking along proof of purchase, electrical adapters, and phone systems and adapters (for modems). There are sites you can use to obtain information about required documents, discussed in chapter twenty. Digital cameras are recommended in chapter twenty one. Chapter twenty two closes with miscellaneous travel tips. There is a lot of joking around in the writing, to very little purpose. The humour does not really support the material under discussion, and even detracts a bit at times. The Internet content is fairly limited, and I found it a bit surprising how few Web sites were included, among the thousands that are out there. On the other hand, Orwoll does seem to go for quality. For those new to travel planning, this book should provide some valuable and useful suggestions. But you'll have to do a lot of work yourself. copyright Robert M. Slade, 2000 BKETRAVL.RVW 20000119 ====================== (quote inserted randomly by Pegasus Mailer) rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@sprint.ca slade@victoria.tc.ca p1@canada.com Nunc Tutus Exitus Computarus http://victoria.tc.ca/techrev or http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade ------------------------------ From: dannyb@panix.com (Danny Burstein) Subject: Re: F.C.C. Debates Changes to Cell Phone Fees Date: 24 Feb 2000 16:42:11 -0500 Organization: "mostly unorganized" In Monty Solomon writes: > By SETH SCHIESEL > A debate is raging at the Federal Communications Commission about whether > cellular telephone customers must continue to pay to receive calls as > well as to make them. > http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/yr/mo/biztech/articles/22phon.html There is NO federal nor any other legal requirement that the recipient pay for the call. This is a business decision made by the cellular carrier (and, in corresponding turn, endorsed by the subscriber). These companies could, if they wished, end incoming charges tomorrow and simply try to live off the revenue stream from the monthly service fee and outgoing call charges. Gee. just like landline telcos. Clearly the cellular companies want to make money (and there's nothing wrong with that). But what's not so clearly obvious is that they've been running into customer opposition to the incoming airtime charges and are looking for other ways to continue the money stream. Many of them prefer the "caller pays" method since that way they don't have to listen to the hoofbeats of their customers leaving them for less expensive competitors. Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key dannyb@panix.com [to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded] ------------------------------ From: Joseph Singer Subject: Re: F.C.C. Debates Changes to Cell Phone Fees Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2000 15:01:28 -0800 Organization: fuzz'n such Reply-To: dov@mail.oz.net On Mon, 21 Feb 2000 22:38:29 -0500, Monty Solomon wrote: > By SETH SCHIESEL > A debate is raging at the Federal Communications Commission about whether > cellular telephone customers must continue to pay to receive calls as > well as to make them. > http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/yr/mo/biztech/articles/22phon.html In part from the article: "Regarding consumers, the most important issue is to make sure that people who dial a wireless subscriber who uses a caller-pays plan are made aware that they will be charged, and how much." I see this as a major problem in the North American numbering plan. In the US the FCC took great pains to *not* have a separate numbering space for cell providers in the name of "fairness." If they had allowed separate number space for mobile/cell service it would be a lot easier to implement caller pays. As is the caller pays scheme here is just a crap shoot. You're not sure whether a number might or might not be a motile/cell number. People in most of the US are too used to being able to call anyone on what looks like a "local" number and don't expect to pay anything or at least not pay additional charges. Many areas even have "toll alert" to make a subscriber aware that they must dial a 1 and area code before a call because it is a premium rate call. This is not the case everywhere, but in the majority of locations in the US that's the case. "The wireless carriers appear to be in favor of less notification rather than more. " Of course! If they can put one over on people of course they're not going to announce that there would be a premium charge for the call! "In Europe, where the caller-pays system is generally the rule, wireless phone numbers usually include one digit more than do traditional lines. So while European callers do not hear a notification message, the additional digit indicates that additional fees may apply" Many countries have a separate "area code" for mobile/cell phones. That's not the case in the US. Joseph Singer Seattle, Washington USA ------------------------------ From: Ed Ellers Subject: 7D Dialing Across NPA Boundaries Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2000 23:06:33 -0500 Linc Madison (LincMad001@telecom-digest.zzn.com) wrote: "That feature still exists in many places, but fewer and fewer with each passing year. The last major city with such an arrangement was Kansas City, which is currently phasing out 7D FNPA local calling due to the shortage of prefixes." Um, I would suggest that Louisville, Kentucky is also a major city! We still have 7D dialing between parts of the 502 and 812 NPAs, and since the state (wisely IMHO) changed the 270 addition from an overlay to a split I expect we'll have it for some time to come. (The state decision came during the permissive 10D dialing period, and -- guess what? -- permissive 10D hasn't been turned off. Not that it does any harm, of course.) ------------------------------ From: John Schmerold Subject: Directory Number Fee Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2000 00:01:58 -0600 In Missouri, there is no fee for Directory numbers. If you have a business with 6 lines, you get 6 numbers, despite the fact that you only need one number. Indeed, the business is better off without 6 numbers due to prevelance of caller-id. So, why not create a revenue neutral tarrif on directory numbers. If a customer wants multiple numbers, that is fine, but there will be a monthly $3 per line charge. Anyone know if this has been tried? Why not? ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2000 02:29:11 -0800 From: Bennett Haselton Subject: TELECOM Archives Censored as "Pornography" (??) Hi Patrick, I found the URL http://massis.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/ blocked as "pornography" by an Internet blocking program used to censor Internet access in schools. Obviously the people who added that site to the list didn't bother to check what it was -- and you even have an "All ages" label from SafeSurf!... (The RSAC label does give it a "1" for language, but hardly enough to make it illegal for minors and worth censoring from high schools.) Just thought you might like to know :) I'm doing research on this program to see how accurately it blocks sites in the .edu domain. So far it looks like over half the sites it blocks in the .edu domain are errors by the program. There's an article at: http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=00/02/21/1745232 about a project I did, analyzing the error rate of another blocking program called X-Stop. It turned out to have an error rate of 68% for blocking sites in the ".edu" domain. Normally the list of sites blocked by these programs is encrypted, but I also had to write a program that decrypted the list and printed the list of blocked sites. -Bennett bennett@peacefire.org http://www.peacefire.org (425) 649 9024 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Whatever you can do to deal with this will be appreciated. I am still a bit wobbly and not in a mood to start a fight with anyone right now. Let me know whatever results you have. Thanks. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Glenn Simpson Subject: Tektronix/Microwave Logic ST-112 SONET Testset Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2000 13:54:43 -0500 Organization: Nortel Networks Could somebody quickly tell me, Does the Tektronix/Microwave Logic ST-112 SONET testset have STS-3 ECL NRZ clock and data input/output ports (50 Ohm BNC)? From what I can tell there are STS-1 outputs on the front faceplate. Are there additional ports on the back? Glen Simpson ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V20 #3 **************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Feb 28 17:02:36 2000 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id RAA27856; Mon, 28 Feb 2000 17:02:36 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2000 17:02:36 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200002282202.RAA27856@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #4 TELECOM Digest Mon, 28 Feb 2000 15:57:19 EST Volume 20 : Issue 4 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: 7D Dialing Across NPA Boundaries (Arthur L. Rubin) 7D Dialing Across NPA Boundaries (John Beckett) Long Lines Bells (Margaret Hill) Re: TELECOM Archives Censored as "Pornography" (Arthur L. Rubin) DoubleClick Looks to Regain Surfers' Trust (Monty Solomon) http://www.dialpad.com ("contact_phoff") First Long-Distance Call via Underground Cable (Ian Ellis) The DLC Epidemic Spreads to the Northeast (Ed Ellers) Re: TELECOM Archives Censored as "Pornography" (Judith Oppenheimer) An Electronic Spy Scare Is Alarming Europe (Monty Solomon) Prof Can Post His Crypto (Monty Solomon) 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-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest 611 Poplar Street Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 415-520-9905 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@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: hyperarchive.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 the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Arthur L. Rubin <216-5888@mcimail.com> Subject: Re: 7D Dialing Across NPA Boundaries Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2000 07:32:30 GMT Organization: EarthLink Network, Inc. Ed Ellers wrote: > Um, I would suggest that Louisville, Kentucky is also a major city!' > We still have 7D dialing between parts of the 502 and 812 NPAs, and > since the state (wisely IMHO) changed the 270 addition from an overlay > to a split I expect we'll have it for some time to come. (The state > decision came during the permissive 10D dialing period, and -- guess > what? -- permissive 10D hasn't been turned off. Not that it does any > harm, of course.) As an aside, has anyone suggested requiring the local phone companies to have permissive 11D dialing for calls within the same area code? I've been unable (as yet) to program my dialers (under Windows 3.1) to handle the 602/623/480 NPA split. (For those not familiar with the split, calls are 7D within each NPA, 10D between them, and 11D (with, I believe, some 10D exeptions near the border with 520) to other NPAs. All calls within those NPAs are local. Arthur L. Rubin 216-5888@mcimail.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2000 06:50:53 -0500 From: jbeckett Subject: 7D Dialing Across NPA Boundaries > Linc Madison (LincMad001@telecom-digest.zzn.com) wrote: > "That feature still exists in many places, but fewer and fewer with > each passing year. The last major city with such an arrangement was > Kansas City, which is currently phasing out 7D FNPA local calling due > to the shortage of prefixes." Perhaps Chattanooga, TN is no longer considered a "major city" - Arbitron has dropped it from 82 to 101 since I moved here. But we've had 7D FNPA dialing the whole time. John Beckett, Associate Director of Information Systems Southern Adventist University - Collegedale, Tennessee USA jbeckett@southern.edu http://is.southern.edu/internet (423) 238-2701 FAX (423) 238-2431 ------------------------------ From: Margaret Hill Subject: Long Lines Bells Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2000 06:58:34 -0500 Hi Patrick. I recently purchased a charm bracelet with 2 bells on it. The bells look like the "Bell System" bells and are inscribed: "1 Year Attendance Award LONG LINES". Are you familiar with LONG LINES? Was this once a telephone company? Any information you could share would be greatly appreciated. Margaret Hill [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: "Long Lines" was the informal name for AT&T's long distance operation. "Bell System" was another informal name for AT&T. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Arthur L. Rubin <216-5888@mcimail.com> Subject: Re: TELECOM Archives Censored as "Pornography" Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2000 07:32:25 GMT Organization: EarthLink Network, Inc. Bennett Haselton wrote: > Hi Patrick, > I found the URL > http://massis.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/ > Internet access in schools. Are you sure it's not detecting m_ASS_is? (Emphasis mine.) As an aside, I accidentaly activated an Internet blocking program on my machine at work (it's now bypassed, but not technically deactivated), and some computer programs on our intranet were censored. Apparently, where ABCD represents a 4-letter word, some of the code read: t(i)=a(A); /* B(0) */ CDe=tmp Arthur L. Rubin 216-5888@mcimail.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2000 23:02:04 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: DoubleClick Looks to Regain Surfers' Trust http://www.mercurycenter.com/svtech/news/indepth/docs/double022700.htm BY CHRIS O'BRIEN Mercury News Staff Writer HEY, Web surfers. Somebody is watching you. Every time you call up a Web page, somebody, somewhere, is tracking your every more. They're noting which site you visit and how long you spend there. During the infancy of e-commerce, perhaps nobody has done this as routinely and quietly as DoubleClick Inc., the largest online advertising company. The company collects this data, dissects it, and then uses it to create profiles and send you those flashing banner ads that have become the hallmark of most free Web sites. That seemed innocuous enough because the profiles remained anonymous. But now DoubleClick finds itself at the center of a firestorm of bad publicity because it wants to link that information to your real name and address. Critics say this creates the potential for DoubleClick to become a kind of online Big Brother who would know when Web browsers searched for information on jeans, Alzheimer's or sex toys, and then pass this information to our bosses and insurance companies. Should we be scared? For the moment, privacy advocates and DoubleClick officials agree that the information gathered remains fairly basic. And the company's ability to analyze that data and use it to target you with ads remains primitive. DoubleClick wants to change that. The first step is to build more sophisticated profiles that include your shopping habits in the real world and your online patterns. Many of DoubleClick's online advertising competitors plan to do the same. And real world companies have been tracking credit card use for years. But privacy advocates are hoping to prevent this practice from becoming commonplace in cyberspace, where watching your Web surfing is like following along as you wander the aisles of a store and eventually pay the cashier. They say the rapid online exchange of information also creates the opportunity for more abuses. ``The problem is there is an enormous amount of data and there's no protection,'' said Jason Catlett, president of Junkbusters, a non-profit privacy organization. ``They are hurting e-commerce by turning the Web into a surveillance tool.'' How it works DoubleClick, based in New York, is a champion of the banner ad. The company has built its success around a piece of software it developed called DART (Dynamic Advertising Reporting and Targeting). DART works like this: When you visit AltaVista, your computer sends a message over the Internet requesting the Web page. Written into the AltaVista page is a short ``tag'' that sends a request to DoubleClick for a banner ad. If this is the first time you've ever visited a Web site that does business with DoubleClick, DART will place a cookie on your hard drive. The cookie is computer code that gives you an identification number, according to Eddie Smith, DoubleClick's vice president of product and business development. This ID number tells DoubleClick the Internet address of your computer and the approximate geographic location, California or the Bay Area, for example. Every time you visit a page with a DoubleClick banner ad, the company's network will recognize you and place information in your DoubleClick file. That file then keeps a record of which Web sites you visit, which pages you clicked through, which ads have been sent to you and whether you clicked on them. This helps DoubleClick target you in a few ways. The sites you visited are grouped by broad categories, such as travel or sports. As you visit more sites, DoubleClick knows you're more likely to be interested in an ad for day trading rather than an ad for a cruise. In addition, if a shoe company has placed five banner ads with DoubleClick, the system knows you've seen the first three and to send you the fourth next time. But the DoubleClick network has plenty of limitations. The system has only a small fraction of a second to decide which ad to send. So DoubleClick sticks to broad categories that gives it limited insight into your online behavior. DoubleClick also gets only a tiny snapshot of your overall online experience. The company works with 1,500 Web sites, just a few compared with the millions of sites on the Web. Also, cookies have their own problems. If a family of four shares a computer, it has only one DoubleClick cookie, which doesn't distinguish between family members. For now, the company estimates that fewer than 5 percent of the 1.5 billion ads it serves daily are chosen based on a user's profile. In the vast majority of cases, the user is simply getting a sports-related ad because they are visiting a sports Web site, Smith said. Increased precision If DoubleClick could be more precise in targeting you with ads, it could make more money. To increase the sophistication of its system, DoubleClick bought marketing firm Abacus Direct last year for $1.7 billion. Abacus' most attractive feature was a huge database of purchases based on information from 1,500 retail and catalog companies. These individual retailers can't see your entire buying history. Instead, someone who contributes to Abacus might use it to decide which customers to target with a catalog. The company could give the database a list of 1,000 names and Abacus might then identify the 300 most likely to purchase something. This is considered valuable because your past purchases give a more accurate prediction of your future purchases than merely looking at which Web sites you visit. DoubleClick wants to merge your Abacus profile with your online profile, dramatically increasing what they know about you. This won't be easy. There's little overlap between the two databases. So to link them, DoubleClick needs you to provide your name and address online so it can match that to your cookie ID. The company would then find your corresponding file in Abacus. DoubleClick says it will ask permission before gathering this information from users. And executives insist this will be a good deal for consumers because they'll be shown ads that more closely mirror their interests. ``Users will have all the information they need to make an informed decision,'' said Jonathan Shapiro, senior vice president for Abacus. ``What we want most of all is to bring the right message to the right user at the right time.'' Privacy watchdogs But this strategy has angered privacy groups. The Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC), has filed a complaint with the U.S. Federal Trade Commission, which is investigating DoubleClick to see whether it misled consumers about how their data would be used. In addition, the Michigan Attorney General's office and a Marin County woman have filed lawsuits against DoubleClick claiming the company has crossed the privacy boundaries. ``I think a lot of people have the sense that they're losing control of their private information,'' said Marc Rotenberg, executive director of EPIC. ``We'd like to see them go back to the anonymous approach. There's got to be a way to do online advertising that doesn't require them to know who you are.'' DoubleClick executives say they'll work hard to reassure their online partners and consumers that the company can be trusted. They also argue that it's in everyone's interest to make advertising work as efficiently and effectively as possible. ``This has to be done in balance with privacy issues,'' said Smith of DoubleClick. ``But it also has to be balanced with the needs of our constituency and advertisers. It's the people who pay for advertising who allow much of the content on the Web to remain free to the rest of us.'' Contact Chris O'Brien at cobrien@sjmercury.com or (408) 920-5464. copyright 2000 Mercury Center ------------------------------ Reply-To: contact_phoff From: contact_phoff Subject: http://www.dialpad.com Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2000 23:43:34 -0800 Organization: contact_phoff I heard that there might be a sound card available that would enhance the sound quality of the calls made from dialpad.com but have not been able to locate or identify the sound card that would make this difference. Does anyone out there know of the sound card I am looking for. May You Be Blessed With Good Health & Abundance, or as Spock might say, "Live Long and Prosper" :-) Patricia A Hoffman Hoffman Enterprises The "ONE-STOP-SHOP" http://www.OppsKnocks.com Voice Mail: 1-760-280-6459 Fax: 1-954-827-7689 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2000 15:28:07 -0500 From: Ian Ellis Reply-To: ian@iglou.com Subject: First Long-Distance Call via Underground Cable. Elesewhere on the net, I have read: "February 26: In 1914, first long-distance phone conversation via underground cable was made." I cannot find any verification for this date. Can you help? If it is correct, a little more information would be helpful. I will enter it on my "Today in Science History" (educational) site. Thank you. ------------------------------ From: Ed Ellers Subject: The DLC Epidemic Spreads to the Northeast Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2000 01:19:50 -0500 I see from The Washington Post that Bell Atlantic has now started shafting some of its customers in the same way that BellSouth is shafting me -- namely, by using digital loop carrier systems to provide a poor imitation of a phone line, one which unnecessarily distorts the signal and therefore blocks the use of V.90 modem connections. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPcap/2000-02/27/007r-022700-idx.html (no registration required) ------------------------------ From: Judith Oppenheimer Subject: TELECOM Archives Censored as "Pornography" Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2000 21:34:23 -0500 One of the keywords that triggers blocking is "chat." If memory serves correctly, Pat put a chat section on his site. That's probably the (erroneous, inaccurate, inappropriate, inapplicable, and just plain stupid!) problem. Judith Judith Oppenheimer, 1 800 The Expert, 212 684-7210 mailto:joppenheimer@icbtollfree.com Publisher of ICB Toll Free News: http://icbtollfree.com Publisher of WhoSells800.com: http://whosells800.com Moderator TOLLFREE-L: http://www.egroups.com/group/tollfree-l/info.html President of ICB Consultancy: http://1800TheExpert.com: 800 # Acquisition Management, Lost 800 # Retrieval, Litigation Support, Regulatory Navigation, Correlating Domain Name & Trademark Issues. Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2000 02:29:11 -0800 From: Bennett Haselton Subject: TELECOM Archives Censored as "Pornography" (??) Hi Patrick, I found the URL http://massis.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/ blocked as "pornography" by an Internet blocking program used to censor Internet access in schools. Obviously the people who added that site to the list didn't bother to check what it was -- and you even have an "All ages" label from SafeSurf!... (The RSAC label does give it a "1" for language, but hardly enough to make it illegal for minors and worth censoring from high schools.) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2000 22:01:21 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: An Electronic Spy Scare Is Alarming Europe By SUZANNE DALEY PARIS, Feb. 23 -- Fears that the United States, Britain and other English-speaking countries are using a cold-war eavesdropping network to gain a commercial edge roused passions across Europe today, even after Washington and London roundly denied the notion. The subject kept the European Parliament in Brussels entranced for hours and drew banner headlines across the continent. One political cartoon showed Britain in bed with the United States, despite Britain's membership in the European Union. http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/00/02/biztech/articles/24spy.html ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2000 22:30:05 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Prof Can Post His Crypto http://www.wired.com/news/print/0,1294,34550,00.html Prof Can Post His Crypto Reuters WASHINGTON -- The United States will allow a computer scientist to put instructions for writing a powerful computer data-scrambling program on his Web site, but his high-profile lawsuit challenging U.S. export restrictions on encryption may continue, his lawyer said on Thursday. President Bill Clinton in January dramatically liberalized once-strict U.S. export limits on encryption programs, which scramble information and render it unreadable without a password or software "key." The changes recognized that encryption, used in everything from Web browsing software to cellular telephones, has become essential for securing electronic commerce and global communications. The move also followed a 6 May, 1999 decision by a U.S. Appeals Court panel that the old rules barring University of Illinois professor Daniel Bernstein from posting instructions for his "Snuffle" program on the Internet were an unconstitutional violation of the scientist's freedom of speech. In a private advisory letter sent last week, the U.S. Commerce Department confirmed that the new encryption export policy permitted Bernstein to post instructions, called source code, for his program on the Internet for all to see. Any other computer programmer could easily compile the source code into a functioning program. "In light of the changes in licensing and review requirements for publicly available source code, the new regulations do not interfere with his planned activities as you have described them," the Commerce Department letter said in response to a letter from Bernstein's lawyer. Under the old rules, Bernstein had to obtain an export license for each person who wanted to view his Web site from outside the United States -- an impossible task given the Net's global reach. But the new rules allow anyone to post encryption source code on the Internet as long as they also send a copy to the government and do not charge royalties for use of the code. "We are still considering our options," said Cindy Cohn, Bernstein's lawyer. Cohn said the Commerce Department letter failed to clear up some questions about the new rules. The department did make clear that a Web site which merely picked up code posted by someone else, a practice known as mirroring, would not be held responsible for following the export rules. And Bernstein or others would not have to notify the government again each time they posted bug fixes or updates. Bernstein's lawsuit came about because under the old rules, a book containing computer source code could be shipped out of the United States without restriction but the same source code posted on the Internet or put on a floppy disk could not be "exported" without a license. A three-judge panel of the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals last year decided two to one that the old rules violated the First Amendment by restricting Bernstein's speech. But in January, the full court asked the panel to reconsider the ruling in light of the new Clinton policy. Copyright 1999-2000 Reuters Limited. Copyright 1994-2000 Wired Digital Inc. All rights reserved. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V20 #4 **************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Feb 29 17:05:54 2000 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id RAA14868; Tue, 29 Feb 2000 17:05:54 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 17:05:54 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200002292205.RAA14868@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #5 TELECOM Digest Tue, 29 Feb 2000 16:09:37 EST Volume 20 : Issue 5 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: An Electronic Spy Scare Is Alarming Europe (W.D.A. Geary) Re: DoubleClick Looks to Regain Surfers' Trust (John S. Maddaus) Re: DoubleClick Looks to Regain Surfers' Trust (Someone) Re: http://www.dialpad.com (Steve Sobol) Re: http://www.dialpad.com (Susan Chen) Searching: Info on Service Usage Accounting and Billing (Bharat Bhushan) Book Announcement--Stefik (Jud Wolfskill) Regarding FAX Spammers (Steve Winter) Re: Long Lines Bells (Phil Smiley) Re: TELECOM Archives Censored as "Pornography" (Roy Smith) Re: TELECOM Archives Censored as "Pornography" (W.D.A. Geary) 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-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest 611 Poplar Street Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 805-545-5115 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@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: hyperarchive.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 the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: wdag@my-deja.com (W.D.A. Geary) Subject: Re: An Electronic Spy Scare Is Alarming Europe Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 17:03:26 GMT Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy. In article , Monty Solomon wrote: > By SUZANNE DALEY > PARIS, Feb. 23 -- Fears that the United States, Britain and other > English-speaking countries are using a cold-war eavesdropping network > to gain a commercial edge roused passions across Europe today, even > after Washington and London roundly denied the notion. > The subject kept the European Parliament in Brussels entranced for > hours and drew banner headlines across the continent. One political > cartoon showed Britain in bed with the United States, despite > Britain's membership in the European Union. Given the French government's past use of espionage to support its state-owned companies, this reminds me of another (fictional) pronouncement by a French official: "I'm shocked - shocked! - to find gambling going on here!!!" - as he pocketed his winnings. W.D.A.Geary Wardenclyffe Microtechnology Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana. ------------------------------ From: jmaddaus@NO_SPAM.usa.net (John S. Maddaus) Subject: Re: DoubleClick Looks to Regain Surfers' Trust Reply-To: jmaddaus@NO_SPAM.usa.net Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 17:09:01 GMT Organization: AT&T Worldnet Monty Solomon wrote: > If this is the first time you've ever visited a Web site that does > business with DoubleClick, DART will place a cookie on your hard drive. > The cookie is computer code that gives you an identification number, > according to Eddie Smith, DoubleClick's vice president of product and > business development. Which is why I have my browser set to accept only cookies that get sent back to the originating server and to warn me before accepting any cookies. I always manually reject cookies that are associated with advertising and regularly clear both cache and cookies from my machine using a batch file I picked off of either Tucows or Zdnet (can't remember which). Ironically one of the biggest offenders of placing doubleclick ad cookies on my machine has been the home page of my ISP. So, I set my home page to some other location and only visit when necessary. I've actually been able to keep spam down to a manageable level. jmaddaus@usa.net ------------------------------ From: "Someone" Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: DoubleClick Looks to Regain Surfers' Trust Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2000 15:44:33 -0800 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com "Monty Solomon" wrote in message news:telecom20.4.5@telecom-digest.org: > Every time you call up a Web page, somebody, somewhere, is tracking > your every more [by placing] a cookie on your hard drive. Do what I do. Either configure your browser to reject cookies or else routinely delete all cookies. ------------------------------ From: sjsobol@NorthShoreTechnologies.Net (Steve Sobol) Subject: Re: http://www.dialpad.com Date: 28 Feb 2000 21:55:21 GMT Organization: New Age Consulting Service Inc., Cleveland, OH, USA > From 'contact_phoff': > I heard that there might be a sound card available that would enhance the > sound quality of the calls made from dialpad.com but have not been able to > locate or identify the sound card that would make this difference. Does > anyone out there know of the sound card I am looking for. For what it's worth ... A friend called me over Dialpad. I wouldn't have been able to tell the call wasn't made from a phone if he hadn't said so (I was on my regular phone line). But he had some noise and other quality problems on *his* end. (interesting!) North Shore Technologies, Cleveland, OH http://NorthShoreTechnologies.net Steve Sobol, President, Chief Website Architect and Janitor sjsobol@NorthShoreTechnologies.net - 888.480.4NET - 216.619.2NET ------------------------------ From: Susan Chen <1SSC9654@mtsac.edu> Subject: Re: http://www.dialpad.com Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 13:48:33 -0800 Organization: CSUnet Dialpad.com is created by Korean, so you might want to check so Korean sound Card Manufacture. contact_phoff wrote: > I heard that there might be a sound card available that would enhance the > sound quality of the calls made from dialpad.com but have not been able to > locate or identify the sound card that would make this difference. Does > anyone out there know of the sound card I am looking for. > May You Be Blessed With Good Health & Abundance, or as Spock might > say, "Live Long and Prosper" :-) Patricia A Hoffman Hoffman Enterprises The "ONE-STOP-SHOP" http://www.OppsKnocks.com Voice Mail: 1-760-280-6459 Fax: 1-954-827-7689 ------------------------------ From: bhu Subject: Searching: Info on Service Usage Accounting and Billing Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 21:07:21 +0100 Organization: GMD-FIRST Dear Readers, I am searching for information on service usage accounting and billing products and standards (from IETF, TMF, ITU-T, etc.) for our research and development purposes. What we are specifically interested in: * Accounting and billing for Internet services such as VoIP, video conferencing, web and domain hosting, etc. * Information and standards on service usage data record * Tariff schemes and tariff management * Standards (produced by IETF, TMF, ITU-T, etc.) on service usage accounting and billing. * Information on service usage accounting and billing system (both commercial solutions and research prototypes). * Information on systems that are based on an ORB (which version and implementation of ORB is used?) * If we wish to integrate our prototype system into a commercial product, what sort of programmable interfaces do the available systems provide? I would like to give some background information. We are developing a prototype of service usage accounting system for IP-based and telecom networks and we want to enhance the functionality of the prototype to include billing functionality. We want to do this with a view to integrate many vendors into our prototype accounting system. The main purpose of doing this is to develop a prototype of an integrated accounting and billing system that can deal with diverse accounting and billing needs. We would also like to add value to the services provided our prototype. Our prototype provides IDL interfaces for the purpose of integrating other vendors' billing systems. The prototype is being developed using Visibroker, Java and C++ and we also include in our implementation certain concepts of TINA (Telecommunication Information Networking Architecture). I shall be very grateful if you could provide me with information on above mentioned points. If fact, any information, hints or suggestions will be very useful. Please send your answers directly at my email address: bhushan@fokus.gmd.de Many thanks in advance, Best regards, Bharat Bhushan ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 15:27:20 -0400 From: Jud Wolfskill Subject: Book Announcement--Stefik The following is a book which readers of this list might find of interest. For more information please visit http://mitpress.mit.edu/promotions/books/STE1RHF99 The Internet Edge Social, Technical, and Legal Challenges for a Networked World Mark Stefik Sometimes when we face change, we feel conflicting forces driving us forward and pulling us back. This place of tension and confusion can be called an "edge." The "Internet edge" is our collective struggle to change as the world becomes more connected. Turmoil at the Internet edge occurs around interacting social, legal, and technological realms. Examples include issues of on-line privacy, censorship, digital copyright, and untaxed business competition over the Net. Such issues reflect conflicts between values--local and global, individual and corporate, democratic and nondemocratic. This book is an eagle's eye view of the Internet edge. It is about the experiences of those who encountered similar issues as they built precursors to the Net such as videotext, teletext, and the Source. It is about the trends in technology that will make the Net of the next few years a very different experience from the desktop surfing of today. Finally, it is about how old myths of magic, power, and control can help us to understand our fascination and fear of new technologies. Mark Stefik is a Principal Scientist and Manager of the Human Document Interactions Area at the Xerox Palo Alto Research Center and adjunct member of the Secure Document Systems area. He is the author of Internet Dreams (MIT Press, 1996). 6 x 9, 336 pp., 8 illus., cloth ISBN 0-262-19418-X | Jud Wolfskill ||||||| Associate Publicist Phone: (617) 253-2079 ||||||| MIT Press Fax: (617) 253-1709 ||||||| Five Cambridge Center E-mail: wolfskil@mit.edu | Cambridge, MA 02142-1493 http://mitpress.mit.edu ------------------------------ From: steve@sellcom.com (Steve Winter) Subject: Regarding FAX Spammers Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 00:31:15 -0500 Organization: WWW.SELLCOM.COM Reply-To: steve@sellcom.com Update, We had been FAXing spam FAXes over to the FCC, but they have asked that we now mail them. The reason being that they want the top header line intact and re-FAXing often overwrites that top header. So, what we are doing now when we receive a spam FAX is printing it out, noting any caller ID info and dropping it into a Priority mail envelope to send them off once a month or so. Steve http://www.sellcom.com Cyclades Siemens EnGenius Philips Zoom at discount prices. SSL Secure VISA/MC/AMEX Online ordering New Quad Philips color observation systems ------------------------------ From: Phil Smiley Subject: Re: Long Lines Bells Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 13:53:58 GMT Long Lines was shortened name for AT&T Long Lines. Long Lines was the long distance arm of the Bell System. Long Lines' lost it's identity when it was folded into AT&T at divestiture in '84. Long Lines gave us the famous "Reach Out and Touch Someone" ads ... sigh, those were the days. Smiley Margaret Hill wrote: > Hi Patrick. I recently purchased a charm bracelet with 2 bells on it. > The bells look like the "Bell System" bells and are inscribed: > "1 Year Attendance Award LONG LINES". Are you familiar with LONG LINES? > Was this once a telephone company? Any information you could share > would be greatly appreciated. > Margaret Hill > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: "Long Lines" was the informal name for > AT&T's long distance operation. "Bell System" was another informal > name for AT&T. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Roy Smith Subject: Re: TELECOM Archives Censored as "Pornography" Organization: NYU School of Medicine, Educational Computing Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 10:15:01 -0500 Judith Oppenheimer wrote: > One of the keywords that triggers blocking is "chat." If memory serves > correctly, Pat put a chat section on his site. > That's probably the (erroneous, inaccurate, inappropriate, inapplicable, and > just plain stupid!) problem. We had this exact same stupidity happen inside our own intranet. We hired a consulting company to develop an on-line sexual harrasement training course forus. The day after people started taking the course, people in one part of our campus found that the URL had been blocked at one of our own firewalls. And this is in a hospital, where a lot of traffic contains anatomical references. What brain-damage. Roy Smith New York University School of Medicine ------------------------------ From: wdag@my-deja.com (WDA Geary) Subject: Re: TELECOM Archives Censored as "Pornography" Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 16:58:07 GMT Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy. In article , Judith Oppenheimer wrote: > One of the keywords that triggers blocking is "chat." If memory serves > correctly, Pat put a chat section on his site. Tough luck for French feline fanciers, n'est-ce pas? W.D.A.Geary Wardenclyffe Microtechnology Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V20 #5 **************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Mar 1 17:30:24 2000 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id RAA09392; Wed, 1 Mar 2000 17:30:24 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 17:30:24 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200003012230.RAA09392@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #2 TELECOM Digest Wed, 1 Mar 0 16:45:21 EST Volume 20 : Issue 2 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: DoubleClick Looks to Regain Surfers' Trust (Hahn, Ki Suk) Re: DoubleClick Looks to Regain Surfers' Trust (Douglas Dunlop) Re: 7D Dialing Across NPA Boundaries (Blake Droke) Re: Long Lines Bells (Dean Forrest Wright) Re: Long Lines Bells (Fred Goodwin) NXX by NPA (Robert M. Bryant) Your Wireless Phone/Laptop Experience (lorent@point.com) Wireless Extensions (George Yanos) Amazon's Market Conversation (Monty Solomon) 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-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest 611 Poplar Street Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 805-545-5115 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@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: hyperarchive.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 the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Hahn, Ki Suk Subject: Re: DoubleClick Looks to Regain Surfers' Trust Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 09:14:11 -0600 >From: jmaddaus@NO_SPAM.usa.net (John S. Maddaus) > Subject: Re: DoubleClick Looks to Regain Surfers' Trust > Reply-To: jmaddaus@NO_SPAM.usa.net > Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 17:09:01 GMT > Organization: AT&T Worldnet > Which is why I have my browser set to accept only cookies that get > sent back to the originating server and to warn me before accepting > any cookies. I always manually reject cookies that are associated > with advertising and regularly clear both cache and cookies from my > machine using a batch file I picked off of either Tucows or Zdnet > (can't remember which). [...] >jmaddaus@usa.net I've set my Netscape cookies.txt file to read-only as was suggested here some time ago and this works ok. But the IE 4.72... that I sometimes use has a folder that contains these cookies. (NT's windows\profiles\username\cookies folder with files named username@domain.txt ) I've tried to set this folder to read-only but that permission gets changed back. Is there any way to make it stick? Ki Suk Hahn ------------------------------ From: Douglas Dunlop Subject: Re: DoubleClick Looks to Regain Surfers' Trust Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 18:11:18 -0500 Rather than bother with manually accepting and rejecting cookies, I set Netscape to accept all cookies. I also deleted everything below the "do not edit" line in the cookies.txt file and set the file properties to read only. All cookies are accepted, none are stored ... > Which is why I have my browser set to accept only cookies that get > sent back to the originating server and to warn me before accepting > any cookies. I always manually reject cookies that are associated > with advertising and regularly clear both cache and cookies from my > machine using a batch file I picked off of either Tucows or Zdnet > (can't remember which). Ironically one of the biggest offenders of [Dunlop, Douglas [ATC:M004:EXCH]] [snipped] ------------------------------ From: Blake Droke Reply-To: bdroke@sprintmail.com Subject: Re: 7D Dialing Across NPA Boundaries Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2000 03:47:43 GMT Organization: EarthLink Network, Inc. Arthur L. Rubin wrote: > Ed Ellers wrote: >> Um, I would suggest that Louisville, Kentucky is also a major city!' >> We still have 7D dialing between parts of the 502 and 812 NPAs, and >> since the state (wisely IMHO) changed the 270 addition from an > overlay >> to a split I expect we'll have it for some time to come. (The state >> decision came during the permissive 10D dialing period, and -- guess >> what? -- permissive 10D hasn't been turned off. Not that it does any >> harm, of course.) Memphis might also be called a major city and still has 7D cross-NPA dialing between local numbers in 901 (TN), 662 (MS) and 870 (AR). Unlike Louisville, however, no 10D calling is allowed. Of course there are only 13 Mississippi 662 NXXs local from Memphis and 5 Arkansas 870 NXXs. I noticed a potential problem in the Neustar database recently. 901-739 has been assigned to a CLEC in 901, while 870-739 is assigned to Southwestern Bell and is a local call from Memphis 901. Might not be a problem since Tennessee is a toll alerting state. It depends on which rate center will get 901-739. If its in the Metro Memphis area, there will be a dialling conflict. ------------------------------ From: Dean Forrest Wright Subject: Re: Long Lines Bells Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2000 04:00:44 GMT Organization: Wright Engineers P.C. Incidentally, the name Long Lines really meant exactly that. AT&T Long Lines was, with a few exceptions, responsible for carrying telephone calls which crossed state lines, with the local Bell Operating Company (i.e. Mountain States Telephone & Telegraph) being responsible for carrying calls within a given state or related geographical area. -- Dean Forrest Wright, P.E. Telecommunications (Central Office Equipment) Engineer dean at imt dot net "When one lacks a sense of awe, there will be disaster" ------------------------------ From: Goodwin, Fred Subject: Re: Long Lines Bells Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 09:56:15 -0600 Phil Smiley wrote: > Margaret Hill wrote: >> Are you familiar with LONG LINES? Was this once a telephone company? >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: "Long Lines" was the informal name >> for AT&T's long distance operation. PAT] > Long Lines was shortened name for AT&T Long Lines. Long Lines was the > long distance arm of the Bell System. Question on a minor point: didn't the local BOCs own and operate the *intrastate* LD networks prior to Divestiture? I thought LL owned and operated only the AT&T *interstate* LD network, and that the BOCs had to spin off to LL their own intrastate, interLATA LD plant at Divestiture? If you're equating "long distance" to "interstate", then my point is moot. Fred Goodwin, CMA Associate Director -- Technology Program Management SBC Technology Resources, Inc. 9505 Arboretum, 9th Floor, Austin, TX 78759 fgoodwin@tri.sbc.com (512) 372-5921 (512) 372-5991 fax ------------------------------ From: Robert M. Bryant Subject: NXX by NPA Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 11:16:46 -0500 Do you know where I can get a list of NXX's by NPA or by City or State?? Robert M. Bryant DNAE IBM Team 440 Hamilton, 12th. fl. White Plains, NY 10601 (914) 397-8451 Pager: 888-858-7243, pin 116852 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It would be a humongous list to say the least, on several CD Roms, and printing out to hundreds of pages. And the list never ends, and is never entirely up to date. PAT] ------------------------------ From: lorent@point.com Subject: Your Wireless Phone/Laptop Experience Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2000 16:44:11 GMT Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy. I'm researching the use of laptops in conjunction with wireless phones to access the Internet and to fax. Please tell me of your experiences. Is it frustrating? Easy? Too many disconnects? Too slow? (Of course it is). But has it made your life easier in any way? Any good stories of how you use the combo? Please email me at lorent@point.com Thanks, Loren Tanner Staff Editor Point.com (Formerly Wireless Dimension) www.point.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 13:58:42 CST From: George Yanos Subject: Wireless Extensions Several months ago there was at TELECOM Digest discussion of wireless extensions for wireline phones. One sub-topic was "which phone has the longest range". Now, suddenly, I find myself needing such a phone which will work across several hundred, perhaps 1,000, yards of dense suburb. Dense meaning old houses on 40 foot lots with an occassional brick 3-flat apartment house tossed in. I wonder if the old discussion is still definitive or if there is a new winner in the long range contest? George Yanos 312-413-0059(w) 708-848-4221(h) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 23:40:00 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Amazon's Market Conversation http://davenet.userland.com/2000/02/29/amazonsMarketConversation From Scripting News... It's DaveNet! Released on 2/29/00; 8:23:02 AM PST ***Good morning! After yesterday's piece, the net is working it's magic on the Amazon patent situation. Last night's post from Tim O'Reilly got SlashDot moving; and this morning Dale Dougherty, also of O'Reilly, posted a short list of "controversial" patents that relate to the Internet industry. http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/patents/2000/02/29/contro.html ***Jeffrey Wilkinson From Jeffrey Wilkinson. "You might suggest that people write letters. Boycotts are more effective when you write and tell them that you're doing it and exactly why. Just cutting off your links and buying without telling them explicitly is less effective." I totally agree! ***Faisal Jawdat Then I was cc'd by Faisal Jawdat on an email in response to an Amazon promotional mailing. For full effect, a screen shot of the email: http://static.userland.com/misc/snImages/faisalConversesWithAmazon.gif I like how he says he'll come back when Amazon is finished with patents. A message saying "you've lost me forever" might be emotionally satisfying, but probably gets your message into the bit bucket, and might get your name removed from their database. And in reality, many of us *will* come back to Amazon when the pressure is off. Why? Because Amazon has a deserved reputation for being responsive to its customers. I get promotional emails often, and Amazon does it better than anyone else. Their database knows what I like. They sign the emails with the name of a person, an editor or product manager, sometimes even Jeff Bezos himself! I like that because it's personal (even though I know it's a script that wrote the email.) Presumably there's a real person reading the responses. Like a letter to your Congressman, this is the most precise place to register your point of view. It should be the place that Amazon wants to hear from you. So think, and then say what you think, next time you get an email from Amazon. ***Dave Winer PS: Assume there's a real person reading the email, and please treat that person with respect. They almost certainly played no role in Amazon's policy in re patents. Scripting News: ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V20 #2 **************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Mar 2 18:15:29 2000 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id SAA01135; Thu, 2 Mar 2000 18:15:29 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 18:15:29 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200003022315.SAA01135@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #6 TELECOM Digest Thu, 2 Mar 2000 16:38:47 EST Volume 20 : Issue 6 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Telephone-Pole Battle: Steel Takes On Wood (Mike Pollock) Traffic Exchange (Sergey Mosienko) Stop Missing Calls While You're Online! (Mike Pollock) Re: NXX by NPA (Ben Schilling) Re: NXX by NPA (Michael G. Koerner) Re: NXX by NPA (Joe Jensen) Re: NXX by NPA (Fred Daniel) Re: NXX by NPA (Eli Mantel) Re: NXX by NPA (Michael Sullivan) U.S. Wants Less Web Anonymity (Monty Solomon) New '10-10' Call Ads Coming (Monty Solomon) Re: DoubleClick Looks to Regain Surfers' Trust (Ryan Shook) Re: DoubleClick Looks to Regain Surfers' Trust (A. E. Siegman) Re: F.C.C. Debates Changes to Cell Phone Fees (Maxime Flament) Record Telephone Calls (Stephan Lux) Re: 7D Dialing Across NPA Boundaries (Michael G. Koerner) Should Your Boss Know About Those Visits to The Shrink? (Monty Solomon) 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-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest 611 Poplar Street Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 805-545-5115 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@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: hyperarchive.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 the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Mike Pollock Subject: Telephone-Pole Battle: Steel Takes On Wood Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 10:24:36 -0500 Organization: It's A Mike! By ROBERT GUY MATTHEWS Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL March 2, 2000 How many wood poles do woodpeckers peck, since woodpeckers do peck poles? In a typical midsize city, roughly 1,000 telephone poles have to be replaced every year because birds -- and then rain -- cause them to rot. That annoys utilities and sets them back about $200 a pole. It's a needless expense in the opinion of the nation's steel industry, which has decided that the telephone pole is an important niche for steel. Not only are steel poles woodpecker-proof, the industry says; they also don't break as easily -- there are fewer down wires -- and they are better for the environment. One junked car can make four utility poles. Better yet, they come in colors. Places in Texas, Arizona, California and Ohio, among other states, have put up decorator steel poles. Pole Camouflage "We can even make them look like trees," says Richard Favreau, the president of U.S. operations for International Utility Structures Inc., in Calgary, Alberta, which makes steel poles. "There is tree-bark applique that we have. It's bloody expensive, but if you want to hide a steel pole, this is the way." Tree-bark applique, which is an inch-thick plastic coating that can be melded onto steel poles, has yet to catch on in the U.S. But it is big in England, where steel poles resembling tree trunks are a far more common sight. In weather-beaten places like Puerto Rico and the Philippines, steel poles work out much better than wood did. But steel poles face the concerted opposition of the North American Wood Pole Coalition. The group, which represents the big wood-pole manufacturers, mainly concentrated in the Northwest, notes that wood poles don't glare and that linemen who climb poles prefer wood. Every year, there is a Lineman's Rodeo (last year, it was in Kansas City, Mo.) where pros race up wood poles. It isn't as easy to climb a steel pole unless you use clip-on stairs or a cherry picker. The wood-pole people also scoff at the claim that steel poles are good for the environment. "You don't get much greener than a tree," say brochures for the wood poles. Adds Dennis Hayward, chairman of the coalition and also executive director of the Western Wood Preservers Institute in Vancouver, Wash.: "Wood poles soak up carbon and help reduce the accumulation of greenhouse gases." As for the fact that creating a wood pole involves killing a tree, the group says a new tree (Southern pine, Douglas fir or Western red cedar) matures during the life of every wood pole. Sign of Progress But the biggest plus, at this point, is history and market dominance. Wood poles have predominated since 1897, when American Telephone & Telegraph Co. put a line from Washington, D.C., to Norfolk, Va. They were cheap, plentiful and durable. Wood poles up to 50 feet tall were planted in cities, towns and neighborhoods all over the country and fed wires into individual houses. Sure, they were ugly, but they were a welcome part of a new era of comfort. Not much has changed, except that more wires than ever are strung up. Electrical, telephone and even cable-television lines move from pole to pole throughout the U.S. Burying wires might seem like a good way to avoid the eyesore, but it can cost three or four times as much. Because utilities are reluctant to cough up the money, buried lines are reserved mainly for dense commercial areas and expensive new residential neighborhoods. The U.S. currently has about 90 million wood telephone poles. Steel poles have tripled since 1997, but they still represent less than 2% of the market. The key, the steel industry believes, is in the telephone-pole replacement market: Four million wood poles each year need to be replaced because of routine maintenance, accidents, construction, and steel's friend, the woodpecker. George Manning has had a lot of experience with woodpeckers. "Those little fellows can make one heck of a lot of damage. There isn't much that you can do that is environmentally friendly," says the executive vice president of Licking Rural Electrification Inc., Utica, Ohio. Despite the best efforts of utility companies to distract woodpeckers in the past, the birds almost always came back. Companies plugged holes. They sounded loud alarms to scare off birds -- to no avail. Various chemical coverings were tried, but sometimes they seeped into the ground and risked contamination or endangered animals. The average wood pole lasts about 35 years, though a few pampered ones survive from their earliest days at the end of the 19th century. Mr. Manning's company eventually switched to steel. "Woodpeckers are no match for steel," he says. A true believer in steel poles, Mr. Manning, of the Licking utility, has stumped for the steel industry in seminars held in Illinois, Georgia and Texas. He tells developers, utility executives and mayors that steel poles can be resistant to renegade snow plows and to ice storms. They are a little more expensive -- about $266 a pole, compared to $205 for wood -- but will last longer, he says. The debate over wood vs. steel isn't confined to the industry. At Mohican State Park, in north-central Ohio, and other state park lands, steel poles have been tinted greenish and "sky gray" to better blend with grass and trees. In Arizona, industrial plants have painted their poles white to match their water towers. A Texas housing developer says that his company won't take free wood poles that electric companies offer because they are unattractive. Instead, he pays to install steel poles. "Aesthetically, the wood poles wouldn't work. Steel looks cleaner," says Robert Long, director of a Texas company called MK Development. In Austin, at Steiner Ranch, a huge new development west of the city, three neighborhood meetings were held to discuss telephone poles. The utility company presented a slide show of other neighborhoods around the city, some with new steel poles, others with newly replaced wood poles. Consensus couldn't be reached among the people along Koenig Lane, a major thoroughfare in Austin. Residents wanted a nice, soothing brown steel pole that doesn't look like a tree but blends in with the trees. To many an untrained eye, the coating, which over time turns brown as it oxidizes, resembles the color of an old rusty car. Smooth and shiny gives too much of a sterile feeling, residents argued. Businesses, on the other hand, liked smooth and shiny, because it looks clean and sterile. So half the street is shiny and the other half is brown. Claire Barry, an Austin activist, is perplexed by all the fuss over the color or kind of poles. She wants the telephone lines and electricity lines buried, and she has pushed her government representatives to force the electric company to pay for it. "My ultimate goal is to get shade trees," she says. Write to Robert Guy Matthews at robertguy.matthews@wsj.com Copyright Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. ------------------------------ From: Sergey A. Mosienko Subject: Traffic Exchange Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 20:25:22 +0300 Organization: TOR-Info Ltd. Hi, Pls, Where I can find the references for an IPT traffic exchange ( WWW) ? Soon we shall have Moscow - Nakhodka ( Russia ) min E1 ( max 36 E1 ), Router - Tigris AXC-711 ( Ericsson ) and Gateway AXI-511 ( Ericsson ). Best Regards, INCOM Telecom and Datacom Networks Sergey A. Mosienko Deputy Director on Business Development Tel / Fax. +7 - 095 - 795-3323 E-mail: mosienko@incom-svyaz.ru Web: http://www.incom-js.ru [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Would a couple of our readers please correspond with Sergey in Russia and see if his questions can be answered. Thanks very much. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Mike Pollock Subject: Stop Missing Calls While You're Online! Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 09:40:31 -0500 Organization: It's A Mike! This is sort of interesting. ----- Original Message ----- From: "CallWave News" To: Sent: Wednesday, March 01, 2000 12:58 AM Subject: Stop Missing Calls While You're Online! > Dear Mike Pollock, > We have exciting news! In just 4 months, more than 1,000,000 > people have installed CallWave's FREE Internet Answering > Machine (IAM). It's our newest FREE service. We're handling > over 10 million calls a month now - saving our customers money > and time by answering their phone calls while they're on the > Internet! CNET calls IAM "a brilliant alternative to a second > phone line." Have you tried it yet? It's a perfect complement > to your FaxWave service. > > Get it now by clicking here: http://www.callwave.com/?r=FaxWave2 > > What is it? > > The Internet Answering Machine makes it possible for you to > hear who's calling while you are surfing the Internet. You no > longer need to order, install and pay for a separate telephone > line to make sure you don't miss important calls while online. > IAM also eliminates annoying busy signals for callers trying to > reach you when you are on-line. Instead of getting a busy signal, > the caller can leave a voice message WHICH YOU HEAR > INSTANTLY OVER THE SPEAKERS ON YOUR PC! It > also displays incoming calls, plays messages, and saves messages > for later retrieval. > Installing IAM is easy. All you have to do is click here: > http://www.callwave.com/?r=FaxWave2 > > It takes less than a minute to download the FREE software (it's > only 180k!) The small installation program will register the > service and set up the Internet Answering Machine. The software > includes a demonstration and easy-to-follow instructions. > Why not join the 1 million other IAM users who are surfing the > Internet without worrying about missing important phone calls? > The CallWave Team > FREE ALTERNATIVES TO EXPENSIVE PHONE LINES! ------------------------------ From: Ben Schilling Subject: RE: NXX by NPA Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 07:49:29 -0600 You can get the lists from http://www.nanpa.com/ . They are under Central Office Codes (Prefixes). There are sixteen zip files in the entire set. ------------------------------ From: Michael G. Koerner Subject: Re: NXX by NPA Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2000 02:22:37 -0600 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Reply-To: mgk920@dataex.com Robert M. Bryant wrote: > Do you know where I can get a list of NXX's by NPA or by City or State?? > Robert M. Bryant > DNAE IBM Team > 440 Hamilton, 12th. fl. > White Plains, NY 10601 > (914) 397-8451 > Pager: 888-858-7243, pin 116852 > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It would be a humongous list to say > the least, on several CD Roms, and printing out to hundreds of pages. > And the list never ends, and is never entirely up to date. PAT] The best thing I can think of is a copy of the 'NPA-NXX Active Code List' ('NNACL'), available from the TelCordia (formerly 'BellCore') website http://www.trainfo.com. Click on the 'catalog' and look for the product. It is issued quarterly and costs $150/issue. Monthly updates to that list are called the 'NPA-NXX Activity Guide' ('NNAG'), and are also available via the website. Regards, Michael G. Koerner Appleton, WI ------------------------------ From: Joe Jensen Subject: Re:NXX by NPA Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 07:42:49 -0500 > Do you know where I can get a list of NXX's by NPA or by City or State?? Try www.nanpa.com Joe Jensen Buckeye TeleSystem Toledo, Ohio ------------------------------ From: Fred Daniel Organization: @Home Network Subject: Re: NXX by NPA Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2000 03:21:57 GMT Robert M. Bryant wrote: > Do you know where I can get a list of NXX's by NPA or by City or State?? Look at www.stuffsoftware.com for a program called COFinder. Good luck. ------------------------------ From: Eli Mantel Subject: Re: NXX by NPA Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2000 21:11:49 PST Robert Bryant wrote: > Do you know where I can get a list of NXX's by NPA > or by City or State?? Check out my "area code links" page at http://cageyconsumer.com/areacode.html which contains several links to web pages that provide the prefixes that exist in each area code. These are generally unofficial lists, so use them at your own risk. Eli Mantel ------------------------------ From: Michael Sullivan Subject: Re: NXX by NPA Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2000 05:55:34 GMT "Robert M. Bryant" wrote: Go to http://www.nanpa.com and click on the appropriate link, by state or whatever. > Do you know where I can get a list of NXX's by NPA or by City or State?? > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It would be a humongous list to say > the least, on several CD Roms, and printing out to hundreds of pages. > And the list never ends, and is never entirely up to date. PAT] But the NANPA (North American Numbering Plan Administrator) site is relatively up to date and has the files in usable form. Michael D. Sullivan, Bethesda, Md., USA avogadro@bellatlantic.net (also avogadro@well.com) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 00:04:41 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: U.S. Wants Less Web Anonymity by Declan McCullagh 3:00 a.m. 1.Mar.2000 PST WASHINGTON -- The U.S. government may need sweeping new powers to investigate and prosecute future denial-of-service attacks, top law enforcement officials said Tuesday. Anonymous remailers and free trial accounts allow hackers and online pornographers to cloak their identity, deputy attorney general Eric Holder told a joint congressional panel. http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,34659,00.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 00:11:52 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: New '10-10' Call Ads Coming Reuters 7:25 a.m. 1.Mar.2000 PST WASHINGTON -- The government will announce new advertising guidelines Wednesday for long-distance phone companies, to rein in promotions that bombard consumers with confusing promises about the terms of "10-10" services, also known as "dial-around." The rise in the use of the services, which offer an alternative to a consumer's chosen long-distance carrier, has been accompanied by a rising tide of complaints. http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,34663,00.html ------------------------------ From: Ryan Shook Subject: Re: DoubleClick Looks to Regain Surfers' Trust Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 10:54:54 -0500 Organization: University of Waterloo On Wed, 1 Mar 2000, it was written: > I've set my Netscape cookies.txt file to read-only as was suggested > here some time ago and this works ok. But the IE 4.72... that I > sometimes use has a folder that contains these cookies. (NT's > windows\profiles\username\cookies folder with files named > username@domain.txt ) I've tried to set > this folder to read-only but that permission gets changed back. Is > there any way to make it stick? There are several possibilities to get around doubleclick.net. 1) most computers have some sort of hosts file where the TCP/IP drivers try to lookup domain names there before consulting with a DNS. Insert the major doubleclick servers and set their IP address to 127.0.0.1. This makes your browser think that you are doubleclick.net and try to retrieve the banner from your computer which it obviously won't provide. The gotcha is that with IE5 you get sent to "this page can't be loaded" far too often, there is something fancy going on where doubleclick seems to be executing a script or something. 2) because 1) is flawed I found another solution. in IE5 there are security zones set. Tools | Internet Options | Security. You can add domains to a security zone. By default most everything is considered in the internet domain. Instead ad *.doubleclick.net to the restricted sites list. I have *.doubleclick.net and *.ads.*. Then go through the list of rights given to restricted sites and make sure they can't play with cookies. I believe it is set that way by default. The trouble with solutions that completely turn off cookies (you can do that in the above mentinoed "internet domain" is that they are truly useful and sometimes necessary. By the nature of the web it is not really connection based. You make and break hundreds of connections as you surf instead of making a connection when you start at a website and break the connection when you go elsewhere. For this reason it is difficult for web servers to have a sense of state. Cookies allow a sense of state. They allow a server to recognize you and serve content appropriately based on information they saved in their databases. This is used by banks, airlines, car companies that let you "build" a car online, and yahoo finance so it can remember your customizations and many other groups who use the technology properly. Unfortunately it is hard to control abuses. The "security domain" settings in IE4 & 5 are tricky, I'm still trying to find a combination that lets me get what I want productively from websites while not letting me become too much of a statistic. Ryan Shook Mechanical Engineering | RJShook@uwaterloo.ca Amateur (HAM) Radio Lic.:VE3 TKD | www.csclub.uwaterloo.ca/u/rjshook Your mouse has moved, reboot required for the changes to take effect. ------------------------------ From: siegman@stanford.edu (A. E. Siegman) Subject: Re: DoubleClick Looks to Regain Surfers' Trust Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2000 21:31:58 -0800 Organization: Stanford University In article , Douglas Dunlop wrote: > Rather than bother with manually accepting and rejecting cookies, I > set Netscape to accept all cookies. I also deleted everything below > the "do not edit" line in the cookies.txt file and set the file > properties to read only. All cookies are accepted, none are stored ... I'm guessing this is a Unix system. Is there a way to do the same thing with the MagicCookie file in Netscape on a Mac? (Email cc of any replies to siegman@stanford.edu appreciated.) ------------------------------ From: Maxime Flament Subject: Re: F.C.C. Debates Changes to Cell Phone Fees Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2000 14:26:14 +0100 Organization: Chalmers University of Technology Monty Solomon wrote: > By SETH SCHIESEL > A debate is raging at the Federal Communications Commission about whether > cellular telephone customers must continue to pay to receive calls as > well as to make them. > http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/yr/mo/biztech/articles/22phon.html During the CTIA Wireless 2000 a few days ago there was interesting debates about this issue, and especially about the advantage of caller-pay systems: > From PC Week Online, February 28, 2000 3:42 PM ET [snip] Sharp words from Vodafone chief Next Tachikawa, NTT, up was Chris Gent, CEO of Britain's red-hot Vodafone Airtouch, which, with several major alliances in the past few months, including its acquisition of Mannesmann, is arguably the largest wireless network service provider in the world. While Tachikawa concentrated on his own company's success, Gent talked more about U.S. shortcomings. Aside from there being too many competing networks in the States, compared with the pervasive GSM standard in Europe, Gent said the U.S. doesn't offer enough in the way of cell phone services where only the calling party pays. Right now, most cell phone customers pay for incoming calls, so they tend to leave their phones off a lot. "When people leave their phones on all the time, because they don't have to pay for incoming calls, it becomes an integral part of their lives," Gent said. "That hasn't happened in America." In terms of standards, he said, the U.S. may be in trouble there even after everyone begins to adopt 3G. (3G is supposed to be a combination of several network standards.) While that should make things more uniform in the U.S., it may not make things globally uniform because "even now, we're looking at a 3G U.S. and a 3G rest of the world," Gent said. Vodafone, for its part, intends to adopt a WAP (Wireless Access Protocol) platform in July, with plans to move up to GPRS later this year and, eventually, 3G next year. [snip] ---- It is true that since we don't pay for being called we leave the phone always on - even at night - even at meetings (without ring)... A few weeks ago, the Swedish mobile operator started to even pay back people when then answer (http://www.comviq.se/tjanster/abonnemang/kontant.html in Swedish). This holds for only the prepaid card subscription, you get money on your calling account every minutes you spend answering your phone (0.25 re: 3cents/minute). not that much but it is quite amazing!! Regards, Maxime Flament Doktorand Maxime Flament, M.Sc. mailto:Maxime.Flament@s2.chalmers.se Department of Signals and Systems Tel work: +46-31-772 1764 Communication Systems Group Tel home: +46-31-16 38 17 Chalmers University of Technology Tel fax: +46-31-772 1748 SE-412 96 Gteborg - Sweden http://www.s2.chalmers.se/~maxime/ ------------------------------ From: Stephan Lux Subject: Record Telephone Calls Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 13:42:27 +0100 Hello. I am a student and write even my thesis with the title " development and evaluation of a concept for voice recognition in a call center ". I hang even something firmly, since I cannot to be implemented white as I it that the telephone call can be stored separately according to caller and called person as a sound file. My considerations are so far: 1. I handle me into the cable of the Head set and lead the cables in the sound cards from there - input and take up then the discussions separately from each other. 2. I put a PC with ISDN card, with the call center agent with telephone-software telephoned and try the discussions there to separate. 3. I examine the ISDN Protokol and try on the basis of the header the packages there to partition. Those are my considerations, which are however so far only grey theory. Perhaps someone can help me, and to me say whether at all one of these possibilities to be implemented would be and perhaps how. Of course I am to be had also for new suggestions. I am grateful for each tip or each assistance. Stephan lux [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Will you please see what advice can be given to Stephan. Thank you. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Michael G. Koerner Subject: Re: 7D Dialing Across NPA Boundaries Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2000 02:34:58 -0600 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Reply-To: mgk920@dataex.com Blake Droke wrote: > Arthur L. Rubin wrote: >> Ed Ellers wrote: >>> Um, I would suggest that Louisville, Kentucky is also a major city!' >>> We still have 7D dialing between parts of the 502 and 812 NPAs, and >>> since the state (wisely IMHO) changed the 270 addition from an >> overlay >>> to a split I expect we'll have it for some time to come. (The state >> decision came during the permissive 10D dialing period, and -- guess >>> what? -- permissive 10D hasn't been turned off. Not that it does any >>> harm, of course.) > Memphis might also be called a major city and still has 7D cross-NPA > dialing between local numbers in 901 (TN), 662 (MS) and 870 (AR). > Unlike Louisville, however, no 10D calling is allowed. Of course there > are only 13 Mississippi 662 NXXs local from Memphis and 5 Arkansas 870 > NXXs. > I noticed a potential problem in the Neustar database recently. 901-739 > has been assigned to a CLEC in 901, while 870-739 is assigned to > Southwestern Bell and is a local call from Memphis 901. Might not be a > problem since Tennessee is a toll alerting state. It depends on which > rate center will get 901-739. If its in the Metro Memphis area, there > will be a dialling conflict. According to my recent NNAG issues, effective 10-Feb-2000, '901-739' was assigned to a local landline carrier in 'Huntingdon, TN', located about 20 km north of I-40 (about halfway between Memphis and Nashville) and, apparently, WELL outside the local calling area of Memphis. Regards, Michael G. Koerner ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 01:40:35 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Should Your Boss Know About Those Visits to The Shrink? salon.com > Technology March 1, 2000 URL: http://www.salon.com/tech/books/2000/03/01/database_nation Employers sniffing through medical records, would-be forgers having UPS deliver your signature -- Simson Garfinkel reveals a world rife with privacy violations in "Database Nation." By Thomas Scoville When the Berlin Wall came down in October 1989, there was, of course, a lot of gloating in the West. We'd won; capitalism and free markets had triumphed over the dark forces of Soviet tyranny and centralized control, conspicuously vindicating the American way. But what about the age-old advice: Ignore at your peril the ominous shadows cast by the creepy glow of hubris; if there's any time the gods love to strike you down, it's during your victory lap. I was haunted by a half-formed notion that, despite all the economic chest-thumping and political high-fiving in the so-called Free World, we were converging on our own reckoning, a day when we would realize our own failures beneath the weight of unacknowledged Western tyrannies. I had no good idea how this might actually come to pass. But reading Simson Garfinkel's new book, it's starting to become clear: The combination of free markets and ubiquitous information technology imposes its own kind of tyranny, the end results being often as scary as a KGB nightmare. "Database Nation: The Death of Privacy in the 21st Century" is a dense treatise on electronic identification and surveillance technology, as well as a guide to the workings of the modern consumer tracking complex. Garfinkel, a technology writer who runs an ISP on Martha's Vineyard, outlines the laws and policies that make these mechanisms possible and explains the commercial appetites that motivate the relentless corporate mining of the mountains of consumer data. The picture is more than a little hair-raising. Take, for instance, the hazards of corporate credit-tracking databases: In the tangled web of electronic repositories that chronicle your personal credit history, a single mistake or false report can be propagated to multiple agencies, ensuring that you'll never be approved for a credit card or a mortgage. Worse, errors can never be expunged, but only mitigated with supplemental reports. Of course, the burden of proof is on the individual. Equifax, Inc. may have made the mistake, but the consumer suffers the consequences, which can last for years. Then there are the hidden perils of those ubiquitous enticements to give up a few shreds of your identity to the commercial data sphere. Think that supermarket discount card was a bargain? Tell it to the man who slipped and injured himself while shopping, then sued the store. His corporate grocers used his consumer profile against him, courtesy of the discount card. A history of large liquor purchases undermined the credibility of the customer's claim. Then there are the databases tracking your medical history: Garfinkel reports that 35 percent of Fortune 500 companies acknowledge that they have drawn on personal health records to make employment decisions. Think you're in line for a big promotion? Not with your record of psychiatric treatment, or that one-time abnormal T-cell count after a nasty virus. For HMOs, controlling costs also means the permanent suspension of patient confidentiality; the ramifications of this are nightmarish. Suddenly insurance companies, marketers and mass-mailers have access to the most intimate details of your flesh and blood. The deeper Garfinkel digs, the more ghoulish the picture becomes: Near the bottom of the pit, there's the Medical Information Bureau, a widely used clearinghouse of patient data for medical insurers, which cloaks itself as would any sinister covert agency: unlisted phone numbers, a profile so low as to approach invisibility, concentric layers of codes and obfuscation in reporting procedures. And though its data remains invisible to consumers, its effects do not; with the wrong codes affixed to your name in the MIB data cores, you'll never get health insurance again. And you may never know why. Corporate databases also greatly increase the individual's vulnerability to fraud, identity theft and a host of other criminal abuses. I was surprised to read, for instance, that United Parcel Service stores customers' digitized signatures as proof of delivery. UPS will fax you a receiver's signature if you supply them with a package tracking number. It appears to be relatively easy for someone to arrange for UPS to deliver a facsimile of my signature. Garfinkel makes the infuriating revelation that much of the most promising technology that could decrease consumer jeopardy isn't implemented because of the marginal costs to corporations; profits are more important than individual welfare, apparently. Indeed, this inversion of corporate over individual rights emerges as the dominant theme of "Database Nation." Certainly, Garfinkel finds corporate disdain for consumer privacy rights is right out in the open. Most incensing is the attitude of a mass-mailing maven, the kind of marketer who upholsters your mailbox daily with unwanted catalogs: "There is no such thing as 'junk mail' -- only junk people." In other words, corporation über alles. Starting to sound a little like tyranny? Of course, resistance doesn't seem to be coming from the technology sector -- the Internet's masters of the universe are too busy pawing through your e-commerce cookies and profiling your Web surfing to take much notice. The onslaught of corporate privacy abuses has been resisted by only a few: whistleblowers like Garfinkel, underground groups like the Cypherpunks and -- in a most un-Orwellian turn -- by the federal government, which has passed legislation to slow the invasion. There are a few problems with "Database Nation." At times Garfinkel seems to wander outside the implicit charter of the book. For instance, his extended taxonomy of surveillance techniques veers away from credibility and dangerously close to "X-Files" territory with accounts of thought-tapping and remote viewing experiments. At other times he seems to want to write a completely different book on spy technology, more appropriate for, say, Jane's Defense Weekly. Garfinkel also has an annoying habit of creating shocking anecdotes of privacy abuse out of whole cloth, not telling the reader until afterward these horror stories only represent possible portraits of the future. He opens one chapter with an account of his e-mail correspondence with a person who turns out to be a program sucking data about his shopping habits and movie preferences -- then reveals that the scenario is make-believe. This sensationalist technique is more suited to National Enquirer than anything else, and serves to subtly undermine his audience's trust. Overall, though, "Database Nation" is well worth the read. In the face of escalating corporate incursions onto our fundamental liberties, popular opposition is in alarmingly short supply; those determined to galvanize public indignation are performing a valuable service, and deserve to be heard. salon.com | March 1, 2000 - - - - - - - - - - - - About the writer Thomas Scoville is either an Information Age Savant or an ex-Silicon Valley programmer with a bad attitude. He is the author of the Silicon Valley Tarot. Copyright 2000 Salon.com All rights reserved. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V20 #6 **************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Mar 3 12:41:22 2000 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id MAA06126; Fri, 3 Mar 2000 12:41:22 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2000 12:41:22 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200003031741.MAA06126@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #7 TELECOM Digest Fri, 3 Mar 0 10:56:18 EST Volume 20 : Issue 7 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Book Review: "Using Samba" (Rob Slade) ICB: Free Daily Headlines, New Domain Name Content (Judith Oppenheimer) Re: Telephone-Pole Battle: Steel Takes On Wood (anonymous) Re: Telephone-Pole Battle: Steel Takes On Wood (Mark S. Brader) Re: Telephone-Pole Battle: Steel Takes On Wood (Jeremy Greene) Re: U.S. Wants Less Web Anonymity (Herb Stein) FTC Orders Credit Bureau to Stop Selling Marketing Lists (Monty Solomon) Intuit Acts to Curb Quicken Leaks (Monty Solomon) DoubleClick Puts Hold on Tying Personal Info to Online Habits! (M Solomon)) Re: F.C.C. Debates Changes to Cell Phone Fees (Jeremy S. Nichols) Telco 214 Licenced (Clay Nanton) Re: Stop Missing Calls While You're Online! (Ed Ellers) Communication Tower Being Built (Linda Harris) 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-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest 611 Poplar Street Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 805-545-5115 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@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: hyperarchive.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 the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Rob Slade Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 15:38:44 -0800 Subject: Book Review: "Using Samba" Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca BKUSAMBA.RVW 20000126 "Using Samba", Robert Eckstein/David Collier-Brown/Peter Kelly, 2000, 1-56592-449-5, U$34.95/C$51.95 %A Robert Eckstein %A David Collier-Brown %A Peter Kelly %C 103 Morris Street, Suite A, Sebastopol, CA 95472 %D 2000 %G 1-56592-449-5 %I O'Reilly and Associates %O U$34.95/C$51.95 707-829-0515 fax: 707-829-0104 nuts@ora.com %P 416 p. %T "Using Samba" Server Message Block (SMB) is a protocol used for simple client-server networking. More importantly, however, it is the protocol used in Microsoft's basic Windows products. There are Windows clients for other protocols, such as NFS (Network File System), but these are not supplied with the operating system and must be purchased separately. As well, these add-on clients are not as tightly coupled with the Windows operating system and its functions. Samba is a UNIX server program using the SMB protocol. This allows UNIX administrators to set up file and print sharing on UNIX machines, for access and use by Windows PCs without specialized clients on all the workstations. Chapter one is an introduction to Samba and the basic SMB concepts. Compilation and installation of Samba on the UNIX server are covered in chapter two. Setup of Windows clients is dealt with in chapter three, as well as some header level information about the protocol itself. The material details configuration of Windows 9x and NT separately, because of the slight differences in menus and dialogue boxes. The instructions are quite detailed, even down to the information that the IP 192.168.x.x address range can be used for internal LANs, although more time is spent with the 9x versions than with NT. Most of the rest of the book is spent on configuration options for Samba. Chapter four provides an outline of the smb.conf file and the basic preference settings. Browsing (functions advertising and searching for resources) and advanced file sharing choices are given in chapter five. Security related settings are discussed in chapter six, along with some practical tips. Chapter seven looks at printing and name resolution, while miscellaneous functions are presented in chapter eight. Chapter nine outlines not just troubleshooting tools, but also detailed procedures. Appendices list information on the use of SSL (Secure Sockets Layer), performance tuning, daemons and commands, as well as a command reference. The book is aimed at experienced UNIX administrators. The explanations of how Windows works will definitely be of help to these people. However, it is a bit of a pity that slightly more information wasn't included about UNIX for those not familiar with the system. While there certainly are good references for UNIX administration available (many of them coming from O'Reilly), it is arguably the case that the greater "market" for Samba is among those who administer Windows networks, and need the basic and reliable server functions that UNIX can provide. copyright Robert M. Slade, 2000 BKUSAMBA.RVW 20000126 ====================== (quote inserted randomly by Pegasus Mailer) rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@sprint.ca slade@victoria.tc.ca p1@canada.com A European says, `I can't understand this, what's wrong with me?' An American says, `I can't understand this, what's wrong with him?' - Terry Pratchett (author) http://victoria.tc.ca/techrev or http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade ------------------------------ From: Judith Oppenheimer Subject: ICB: Free Daily Headlines, New Domain Name Content Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2000 09:29:57 -0500 Pat, this release went out a month ago, and in your absence I didn't forward it to the Digest. Now that you're back (hooray!), I'd like to submit it. ICB is offering free daily email headlines plus limited site access at no charge; we've upgraded the site (it's now completely databased - load, search, etc., are quite fast.) And we've added a substantial amount of domain name news content. We've also raised the price for full subscription, from $399 to $549. But I'd like to offer Telecom Digest readers the old price through the end of March. Here's the original release. TIA - Judith Company Contact: Judith Oppenheimer ICB Inc. Phone 1 212 684-7210 joppenheimer@icbtollfree.com http://icbtollfree.com FREE DAILY EMAIL DELIVERS HOT DOT COM NEWS HEADLINES Online 800/Domain Name News Service Announces FREE HeadsUp Headlines, Expanded Domain Name News Coverage, and Site Upgrade. New York, NY February 7, 2000 ICB Toll Free News, premier source of toll free 800 and dot com industry intelligence, today announced: ** FREE HeadsUp Headlines ** Expanded Coverage of 800 and Dot Com Industry, Marketing and Political News ** and Faster Web Site Load, Search and Navigation Only one news source specializes in 800 number and domain names news. ICB Toll Free News has covered 800 and dot com politics, power plays, trends, and impacts, delivering competitive intelligence to a business readership of corporate and industry giants, as well as small business owners and entrepreneurs, since 1995. ICBs new HeadsUp Headlines is a free email service that includes news summaries plus modified text and site access. At eight to ten headlines daily, a quick glance flags important 800 and dot com developments for busy execs. Indepth coverage of dot com and 800 news is key for ICB Premium Service readers. 'Success today is measured in Internet time, so its imperative for businesses to move quickly and decisively on multiple fronts,' says Emil G. Michael, Director of Business Development, Tellme Networks, Inc. 'For instance, telecommunications regulations govern customer access channels, which ultimately impact our ability to build a strong, recognizable brand.' "ICB keeps us up on the changing marketplace," he says, "providing intelligence we consider a critical driver of our business." Jim Hawkins, Senior Executive, BellSouth Public Communications, agrees. "ICB is a superb real-time source for staying on top of the growing cross-linkages between toll-free service and the Internet." "ICB delivers great bang for the buck," says Glen Davidson, President of ATG Technologies. "I visit the site almost every day." Richard Sapio, CEO of MUTUALS.COM, agrees. "We've invested a lot of money in our brand," he says. "ICB is our eyes and ears." "ICB delivers great bang for the buck," says Glen Davidson, President of ATG Technologies. "I visit the site almost every day." Richard Sapio, CEO of MUTUALS.COM, agrees. "We've invested a lot of money in our brand," he says. "ICB is our eyes and ears." Register for ICB Toll Free News at http://icbtollfree.com. Registration is free and includes daily HeadsUp Headlines. Registered members can upgrade to Premium Service at any time. ADDITIONAL BACKGROUND In 1993, 800 numbers became 'portable', granting number holders control over their 800 numbers. The brand and monetary impact was immediate. From 800 COLLECT to 800 FLOWERS, commercial and political gamesmanship from the highest levels sprung up everywhere amidst the rising values and awesome returns of 800 vanity numbers. Domain names now join 800 numbers in this arena: witness the recent sale of loans.com for $3 million dollars. Only one news source rides herd, exclusively, on these parallel fast paced industries. ICB Toll Free News, published by ICB Consulting, reports on 800 and dot com politics, power plays, trends, and impacts, delivering competitive intelligence to a business readership of corporate and industry giants, as well as small business owners and entrepreneurs. Consulting since 1993 and online since 1995, today ICB announces three major enhancements. FREE HEADSUP HEADLINES ICBs new HeadsUp Headlines is a free email service that includes news summaries plus modified text and site access. At eight to ten headlines daily, a two-minute review keeps savvy readers on top of 800 and dot com intelligence. Registration for daily ICB HeadsUp Headlines is available at http://icbtollfree.com. There is no cost to register. EXPANDED 800/DOT COM INTELLIGENCE: “...a critical driver of our business.” For corporate and industry execs in the trenches, ICB provides indepth coverage of regulatory, legal, industry and marketing news relating to 800 numbers and domain names. "Success today is measured in Internet time, so its imperative for businesses to move quickly and decisively on multiple fronts," says Emil G. Michael, Director of Business Development, Tellme Networks, Inc. "For instance, telecommunications regulations govern customer access channels, which ultimately impact our ability to build a strong, recognizable brand." Michael is emphatic about ICBs usefulness. "ICB keeps us up on the changing marketplace," he says, "providing intelligence we consider a critical driver of our business." Jim Hawkins, Senior Executive, BellSouth Public Communications, agrees. "ICB is a superb real-time source for staying on top of the growing cross-linkages between toll-free service and the Internet," he says. "With daily review of developments in the toll-free, and now internet marketing industries, I get great value for my annual subscription, plus I've learned a lot about increasing linkages and cross-marketing in these areas." ICB Premium Service subscribers include key executives in telecom, internet, convergence, wireless and VOIP, along with the end users impacted by their decisions: corporate marketers and telecom managers; entrepreneurs and attorneys, as well as regulatory staffers, worldwide. Because ICB is an active presence at the major industry forum working groups under telecom's Alliance of Telecommunications Industry Solutions (ATIS), and the web's Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), ICB's subscribers benefit from a unique insider vantage point. "Both of these industries: toll free, and domain names -- hold your brand in the very palm of their hand," says ICB head Judith Oppenheimer. "The same brand, marketing, and legal issues, often piloted by the same players in adjoining back rooms, impact most companies head on, often when they least expect it." ICB's consulting practice puts out a lot of fires. "Our readers get a daily heads-up. Its a real competitive advantage," Oppenheimer said. "Crisis consulting clients become ICB readers, but rarely the reverse, because ICB readers are better prepared to dodge and duck the 800 pot holes and dot com curve balls." "It just keeps getting better," raves ICB News subscriber Scott Richards, President of Dial 800 Inc. "I don't know how they get it, but the information is extremely useful in running our business." "We've invested a lot of money in our brand," concurs Richard Sapio, CEO of MUTUALS.COM. "ICB is our eyes and ears." WEB SITE UPGRADE ICB upgraded its programming and server for faster load, search and navigation to keep ICB's readers -- many of them daily visitors -- in the fast lane. "I follow regulatory and industry news as well as marketing trends, and find every part of ICB's website exceedingly useful and valuable," says Patricia Miller, President, TeleServices, Inc. "ICB on my daily 'must read' list," says Kim Crowther, President of Regal Results, Inc. agrees. "Its a wonderful, informative service." As Glen Davidson, President of ATG Technologies, sums it up, "ICB delivers great bang for the buck. I visit the site almost every day." Register for ICB Toll Free News at http://icbtollfree.com. Registration is free and includes daily HeadsUp Headlines. Registered members can upgrade to Premium Service at any time. ABOUT ICB ICB Toll Free News (http://icbtollfree.com), premier source of 800 and dot com industry news, is owned by ICB Inc., a consulting practice (http://1800TheExpert.com) founded in 1993 and publisher of the WhoSells800.com Toll Free Service Provider Directory (http://whosells800.com). The sites serve approximately 65,000+ visitors logging in over 90,000 user sessions each month. ICB is an industry leader in toll free and domain name intelligence, advising business owners, corporate marketers and the telecom industries since 1993. For more information contact: Judith Oppenheimer, ICB Inc., 160 East 26 Street, Suite 6E, New York, NY 10010. Phone: (212) 684-7210. Toll Free: (800) 843-3973, Email joppenheimer@icbtollfree.com, ICB News Web Site http://icbtollfree.com. ------------------------------ From: No-reply-required Subject: Re: Telephone-Pole Battle: Steel Takes On Wood Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2000 08:14:41 -0400 Organization: Netcom Canada Thanks for the good read. I think any pole and wire is an eye sore. I await the day when wireless technology rules and hydrogen fuel cells are plentiful. No more poles, steel or wood. I wonder how much copper we've got suspended above ground on this planet. PS - I might be in for a long wait. :-) ------------------------------ From: msb@vex.net Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2000 01:09:01 EST Subject: Re: Telephone-Pole Battle: Steel Takes On Wood Organization: - Mike Pollock quotes Robert Guy Matthews in The Wall Street Journal: > The U.S. currently has about 90 million wood telephone poles. Steel poles > have tripled since 1997, but they still represent less than 2% of the > market. The key, the steel industry believes, is in the telephone-pole > replacement market: Four million wood poles each year need to be replaced > because of routine maintenance, accidents, construction, and steel's > friend, the woodpecker. About two years ago Toronto Hydro, the local electric company, rewired my street and replaced the old wooden poles with concrete ones. Is concrete not a common choice of for utility poles in the US? Is there an important distinction for some reason between *telephone* poles and those for other utilities? Mark Brader, Toronto | Any company large enough to have a research lab msb@vex.net | is large enough not to listen to it. --Alan Kay My text in this article is in the public domain. ------------------------------ From: Jeremy Greene Subject: Re: Telephone-Pole Battle: Steel Takes On Wood Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2000 01:59:47 -0500 How can anyone in their right mind be debating what type of pole to use in a new residential development? Just bury the damn wires! As long as you're digging up the street to lay pavement, sewers, gas, water, etc., why not just bury the electricity, coax, fiber, telephone cable, etc. along with it? You won't have to worry about drunk drivers mowing down poles and knocking out phone and electrical service. Your modems won't choke when squirrels start chewing on the phone lines. And if the phone/cable companies would just spend the extra money for decent infrastructure like fiber optics and good watertight conduit, they won't have to come dig up the sidewalk in 10 years to replace obsolete cables. Why do they sometimes bury residential feeder cables bare, with no conduit? Isn't that just asking for trouble when a woodchuck decides to burrow through your front yard? Jeremy ------------------------------ From: herb@herbstein.com (Herb Stein) Subject: Re: U.S. Wants Less Web Anonymity Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2000 04:19:08 GMT Good grief. Protect us all from more "sweeping new powers" in the hand of the Federal government. If they're the solution, I'd rather live with the problem. In article , Monty Solomon wrote: > by Declan McCullagh > 3:00 a.m. 1.Mar.2000 PST > WASHINGTON -- The U.S. government may need sweeping new powers to > investigate and prosecute future denial-of-service attacks, top law > enforcement officials said Tuesday. > Anonymous remailers and free trial accounts allow hackers and online > pornographers to cloak their identity, deputy attorney general Eric > Holder told a joint congressional panel. > http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,34659,00.html Herb Stein The Herb Stein Group www.herbstein.com herb@herbstein.com 314 215-3584 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 23:19:52 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: FTC Orders Credit Bureau to Stop Selling Marketing Lists http://www.computerworld.com/home/print.nsf/CWFlash/0003024transunione By Sharon Machlis 03/02/2000 The U.S. Federal Trade Commission has ordered Trans Union LLC to stop selling information from its consumer credit reports to third-party marketers. In a statement issued yesterday, the FTC said it told Trans Union to stop selling the target marketing lists through its subsidiary, Performance Data, to outside marketers "who lack an authorized purpose for receiving them under the Fair Credit Reporting Act." Chicago-based Trans Union is one of three nationwide credit bureaus and holds data on roughly 160 million consumers. In a statement issued yesterday, Trans Union vowed to appeal the decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals. Trans Union argues that the portion of the Fair Credit Reporting Act barring the sale of consumer data violates the First Amendment. The company says it doesn't sell confidential credit information in its lists, only "names, addresses and types of credit held by consumers." Consumers also can opt out of having their names on those target-market lists. However, the FTC maintains that target marketing isn't a permissible use of credit bureau data under federal law, which was designed to protect the privacy of such data. The unanimous ruling by the FTC involves a complaint first filed in 1992 against Trans Union for allegedly violating the Fair Credit Reporting Act. The company has 14 days to file a petition for reconsideration. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 23:21:15 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Intuit Acts to Curb Quicken Leaks By Glenn R. Simpson THE WALL STREET JOURNAL March 2 - Personal financial information that consumers key into Intuit Corp.'s popular Quicken Web site has been leaking out to advertisers, and the company moved swiftly to address the problem. http://www.msnbc.com/news/376864.asp ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 23:59:14 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: DoubleClick Puts Hold on tying Personal Info to Online Habits! Forwarded to the Digest, FYI: From: mclark@cdt.org Subject: DoubleClick puts hold on tying Personal Info to Online Habits! Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 15:55:29 -0500 (EST) Internet advertiser DoubleClick announced today that it will NOT move forward with its plans to tie personally identifiable information to Internet users' online surfing habits until government and industry have reached a consensus on privacy rules for the Internet. You can see DoubleClick's statement at: http://www.cdt.org/privacy/000302doubleclick.shtml This would not have happened without you. Thousands of Internet activists joined CDT's DoubleClick campaign opting out of DoubleClick and writing to its chairman and its partners, complaining about the company's new invasive privacy practice. This really made a difference. Please make sure that those to whom you forwarded our alerts on this issue know that, with their help, the tide is beginning to turn in favor of Internet privacy. CDT will continue to keep you informed about privacy legislation and concerns as well as other issues that will affect the Internet. We have ended our targeted campaign against DoubleClick. CDT will let you know when you are needed to contact someone else about privacy or some other Internet related issue. CDT is still urging those concerned about privacy to use our "Operation Opt-Out" tools at http://optout.cdt.org . This site will help you learn how to get off direct marketing, telemarketing, online profiling and other lists. To subscribe to CDT's Activist Network, sign up at: http://www.cdt.org/join/ If you ever wish to remove yourself from the list, unsubscribe at: http://www.cdt.org/action/unsubscribe.shtml If you just want to change your address, you should unsubscribe yourself and then sign up again or contact: mclark@cdt.org Michael Clark, Grassroots Webmaster Center for Democracy and Technology 1634 Eye Street NW, Suite 1100 Washington, DC 20006 voice: 202-637-9800 fax: 202-637-0968 mclark@cdt.org http://www.cdt.org/ PGP Key available on keyservers ------------------------------ From: Jeremy S. Nichols Subject: Re: F.C.C. Debates Changes to Cell Phone Fees Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 18:29:01 -0600 Organization: University of Minnesota, Twin Cities Campus I would like a pair of phone numbers for my phone: one for which I pay the charges, and the other for which the calling party pays. My (U.S.) mobile account gives me first incoming minute free, so I can leave my phone powered on full time risk-free. I am careful to whom I give the number, however, as I don't want to be bombarded with junk calls like I am on my land-line phone. Calling-party-pays would seem to be a disincentive to junk callers and I could be much more free distributing that number. But there are many people who would never call me if it were going to cost them $0.50 US per minute. I would want to give them a free number to call. One potential problem with calling-party-pays is that there is no price pressure. As a mobile subscriber I choose a calling plan to minimize my costs and the carriers compete for my business. As a caller to a mobile I have to accept the price I will be charged and have no way to shop for a better rate. I likely won't call. The calling-party-pays plans I have seen here have a per-minute rate 2-5 times the subscriber's rate. It boils down to who's convenience is being served by the mobile phone. Ideally the extra charge for a mobile call would be paid by the party benefitting the most. Of course, this perspective is from someone in an area where all local non-mobile calls have no per-minute charge. Jeremy S. Nichols, PE j.nichols@ieee.org Minneapolis MN USA jsn@tc.umn.edu Maxime Flament wrote in message > By SETH SCHIESEL >> A debate is raging at the Federal Communications Commission about >> whether cellular telephone customers must continue to pay to >> receive calls as well as to make them. http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/yr/mo/biztech/articles/22phon.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2000 19:33:41 -0500 From: Clay Nanton Subject: Telco 214 Licenced Mr. Townson My name is Noel Nanton. I have found your site to be very informative through my many searches. This specific search is one that has stumped me or possible just been starring me in my face due to poor research techniques on my part. I am in search of Telco 214 licensed companies. I am starting my own small business and I am in need of information on these specific licensed companies because I am looking for the same licensing. If possible would you know of any possible areas where I might find some information. If this is a shot in the air It's ok to tell me. I thank you so much for your help and keep this site moving strong. Looking forward to hearing from you. Noel Nanton e-mail - reyel40@aol.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I hope readers with information on the licensing required by Mr. Nanton will write to him to share their information. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Ed Ellers Subject: Re: Stop Missing Calls While You're Online! Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 22:38:08 -0500 My answer to the same problem was to set up Call Forwarding On Busy to go to a digital wireless phone with voice mail. This gives me coverage any time that the wireline phone is in use -- for Internet access or otherwise. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I did basically the same thing but I included 'Call Forwarding on No Answer' as well as on Busy. This for me allows not having to remember if I turned on forwarding or not. Then if I am on the computer calls go to my voicemail but they will also go there if I walk away from my phone. The nice thing that Southwestern Bell (no United Tel/Sprint here in Independence; they are in Junction City and Fort Riley) only charges $1 per month for the service instead of $8 like Sprint. I forward all those calls to my 800 number which in turn rings my cell phone first and my voicemail second. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Linda Harris Subject: Communication Tower Being Built Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2000 15:38:53 GMT We have been approached by a communications company, who wish to put a cellular communications tower on our property. We meet all their requirements regarding site, elevation etc., They had done all their homework before they approached us, and they know its in a prime site. Its known throughout this district, that our area is a black spot for cellular phones. We would like to know, before we go any further, as to the payment for the lease offered by them. The lease is to run for over 50 years. Is there anyone who has had similar dealings with having towers put on their property, and could give us an Idea as to what they were given as payment. Its obvious that they offer you the very minimum as an opening offer. We are curious as to the "going" rate. We live in western PA. Yours Faithfully, Linda Harris e-mail address....Tamworth@voicenet.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V20 #7 **************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Mar 3 20:50:57 2000 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id UAA25237; Fri, 3 Mar 2000 20:50:57 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2000 20:50:57 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200003040150.UAA25237@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #8 TELECOM Digest Fri, 3 Mar 2000 17:59:48 EST Volume 20 : Issue 8 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Infamous Hacker Sought for Advice (David Chessler) Book Review: "NFS Illustrated", Brent Callaghan (Rob Slade) Re: NXX by NPA (Jim Orr) Re: NXX by NPA (Clarence Dold) Re: NXX by NPA (Larry Finch) Re: NXX by NPA (Tony Pelliccio) Re: DoubleClick Looks to Regain Surfers' Trust (Walter Dnes) Re: DoubleClick Looks to Regain Surfers' Trust (marc_k) What's That Smell? Oh, It's DoubleClick (Monty Solomon) North American Numbering Plan Proposals - New Discussion Forum (Goldstein)N Re: The DLC Epidemic Spreads to the Northeast (Bill Horne) Re: Wireless Extensions (joe) Latin American Telecom Summit (Laura Garcia) Re: Telephone-Pole Battle: Steel Takes On Wood (John Hines) Re: Communication Tower Being Built (Andrew) Netscape Cookies on a Mac (Isaac Wingfield) Re: Directory Number Fee (Clint CRG) Surf Watch (Rory Matthews) Court Blocks WA School from Suspending Student Over Web Site (M Solomon) 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-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest 611 Poplar Street Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 805-545-5115 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@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: hyperarchive.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 the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2000 16:41:20 -0500 From: David Chessler Subject: Re: Infamous Hacker Sought for Advice Content-Location: "http://www.latimes.com/wires/20000302/ tCB00V0757.html" Thursday, March 2, 2000 By TED BRIDIS, AP Technology Writer WASHINGTON--The government is seeking advice from the world's most infamous computer hacker, just weeks after his release from federal prison, about keeping its own electronic networks safe from intruders. In a bizarre twist to the federal prosecution of Kevin Mitnick, a Senate panel today asked him to explain ways hackers infiltrate sensitive computer systems, and to suggest solutions to lawmakers. "I have gained unauthorized access to computer systems at some of the largest corporations on the planet and have successfully penetrated some of the most resilient computer systems ever developed," Mitnick said in prepared remarks. Mitnick, 36, also boasted that over 20 years, he broke into all but one computer system he targeted -- including a California college he victimized that eventually paid him as its consultant in an unusual arrangement he called "hire the hacker." Mitnick, who is prohibited from using any computer or even a cellular telephone for the next three years, was released from prison Jan. 21 after almost five years. He became an underground cause celebre after leading the FBI on a three-year manhunt that ended when investigators traced his electronic signals to an apartment in 1995. The Senate Governmental Affairs Committee is considering a wide-ranging bill to require agencies to create anti-hacker programs and seek approval from the Office of Management and Budget that such plans are adequate. Mitnick called the legislation "a good first step" and offered a half-dozen suggestions -- such as requiring agencies to assess what data is most valuable and training employees to recognize attacks under way. Sen. Joe Lieberman, D-Conn., the bill's co-sponsor, said previously "it's only a matter of time" before an intruder into government computers commits serious damage. Another expert, Jack L. Brock Jr. of the General Accounting Office, said nearly all government agencies "are plagued by poor computer security," and cited recent audits that 22 of the largest ones were "not adequately protecting critical federal operations and assets from computer-based attacks." The Environmental Protection Agency temporarily closed its Internet connection weeks ago after GAO found serious risks. The interest from the Senate comes on the heels of sensational electronic attacks against some of the Internet's flagship Web sites. Those attacks didn't compromise the security of the companies, just overwhelmed their services for hours. James Adams, head of Infrastructure Defense Inc., called them "mere pinpricks on the body of e-commerce" and warned that worse -much worse -was possible. He urged Congress to create a new "Office of Business Assurance." The hearing also comes amid a fledgling effort by the government to encourage private companies to collectively share information about computer attacks. Mitnick recently acknowledged that, "I would have never been found or arrested unless several -- not only the federal government but several Internet service providers and telephone companies cooperated together to track my location." But Mitnick also suggested that computer security must include more than updated software or firewalls to keep hackers out. He described in detail his successful efforts to break into AT&T Corp.'s worldwide network: He posed as an executive, he recounted, and called a receptionist, convincing her to fax to him an important password. Copyright 2000 Los Angeles Times [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: If I were in Kevin's position I am not sure at all that I would have cooperated. I would have sent back a note to the investigative committee and told them "you are about five years too late asking for my advice, and furthermore the terms of my probation forbid me to use any sort of computer necessary to assist you." I do not think I would give them any cooperation at all. I think the terms of his probation require him to cooperate with *FBI* and other *investigators*, not with the Congress of the United States. That's just how I feel. Those congress- critters could have had him out of prison at the snap of their fingers years ago if they wanted to. They obviously did not care about him either way; now I would show the same concern for them and their dillema. If I were cited for contempt as a result, I would ask them, "what do you plan to do, lock me up for another four years without a trial like last time?" His case left me feeling very bitter about the US Government's role in his case. If he does decide to 'work along' with Congress I hope he gets up there and rips them into shreds for their dishonesty in calculating the amount of 'damages' he supposedly caused. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Rob Slade Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2000 08:15:16 -0800 Subject: Book Review: "NFS Illustrated, Brent Callaghan Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca BKNFSILL.RVW 20000129 "NFS Illustrated", Brent Callaghan, 2000, 0-201-32570-5, U$49.95/C$74.95 %A Brent Callaghan %C P.O. Box 520, 26 Prince Andrew Place, Don Mills, Ontario M3C 2T8 %D 2000 %G 0-201-32570-5 %I Addison-Wesley Publishing Co. %O U$49.95/C$74.95 416-447-5101 fax: 416-443-0948 bkexpress@aw.com %P 513 p. %T "NFS Illustrated" For simple network file and print services, the Network File System (NFS) protocol is a basic cross-platform utility. Frequently referenced in networking texts, NFS is often not covered in detail. This work makes good that shortfall. Chapter one provides a history, including a kind of family tree of previous protocols. External Data Representation (XDR), explained in chapter two, is the data format used by NFS. Open Network Computing (ONC) Remote Procedure Calls (RPC) are outlined in chapter three. Chapter four discusses the various levels available for RPC authentication. The file system model and file/path name considerations, are covered in chapter five. Chapters six and seven detail the functions of NFS 2 and 3 respectively. Common operations of implementations are dealt with in chapter eight. Chapter nine looks at the MOUNT protocol, chapter ten the Lock Manager, and chapter eleven automounting. Variants of NFS are reviewed in chapter twelve. Other distributed file systems are discussed in chapter thirteen, including AFS (Andrew File System), DCE/DFS (Distributed Computing Environment/Distributed File System), and SMB/CIFS (Server Message Block/Common Internet File System). PCNFS is covered in chapter fourteen. Chapter fifteen explains both the considerations in, and programs for, NFS benchmarking. WebNFS is a simplified version, outlined in chapter sixteen. The book closes in chapter seventeen with discussion of the Internet requirements for NFS 4, and the work going on in the Internet Engineering Task Force. Callaghan's text is not bad, but it isn't particularly readable, either. The illustrations are sometimes more puzzling than illuminating. Overall, the book has the necessary information, but it is demanding of the reader, and requires some application. copyright Robert M. Slade, 2000 BKNFSILL.RVW 20000129 ====================== (quote inserted randomly by Pegasus Mailer) rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@sprint.ca slade@victoria.tc.ca p1@canada.com Failure is not an option. It is a privilege reserved only for those who try. http://victoria.tc.ca/techrev or http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade ------------------------------ From: Jim Orr Organization: GST Telecom Subject: Re: NXX by NPA Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2000 09:25:12 -0800 No code can go active until it is registered in the LERG (Local Exchange Routing Guide). The company I work for gets it monthly on a CD in Access form. The Database has several other aspects as well, including the associated LEC Access Tandem, Rate Center association, Wire Center association and Portability information. The monthly update version is $1,500/year from Telcordia. "Robert M. Bryant" wrote: > Do you know where I can get a list of NXX's by NPA or by City or State?? > Robert M. Bryant > DNAE IBM Team > 440 Hamilton, 12th. fl. > White Plains, NY 10601 > (914) 397-8451 > Pager: 888-858-7243, pin 116852 > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It would be a humongous list to say > the least, on several CD Roms, and printing out to hundreds of pages. > And the list never ends, and is never entirely up to date. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Clarence Dold Subject: Re: NXX by NPA Date: 2 Mar 2000 02:02:34 GMT Organization: a2i network Reply-To: dold@email.rahul.net Robert M. Bryant wrote: > Do you know where I can get a list of NXX's by NPA or by City or State?? > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It would be a humongous list to say > the least, on several CD Roms, and printing out to hundreds of pages. > And the list never ends, and is never entirely up to date. PAT] Not several CDs, only one. http://www.trainfo.com/tra/catalog.htm The LERG is about $700, and contains _all_ the data. The V&H Terminating Point listing has NPA-NXX, city, V&H, about $250. "City" might not be what you think it is, though. Changes are downloadable for free, but I've never looked at that format. The TPM CD includes flat ASCII and MS-Access databases. Clarence A Dold - dold@email.rahul.net - Pope Valley & Napa CA. ------------------------------ From: Larry Finch Reply-To: LarryFinch@worldnet.att.net Subject: Re: NXX by NPA Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2000 02:02:26 GMT Organization: AT&T Worldnet "Robert M. Bryant" wrote: > Do you know where I can get a list of NXX's by NPA or by City or State?? > Robert M. Bryant > DNAE IBM Team > 440 Hamilton, 12th. fl. > White Plains, NY 10601 > (914) 397-8451 > Pager: 888-858-7243, pin 116852 > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It would be a humongous list to say > the least, on several CD Roms, and printing out to hundreds of pages. > And the list never ends, and is never entirely up to date. PAT] I used to have a program that had it called "NPA" It also had the CO town name, latitude & longitude, V&H, zip code, etc. Took about 4 MB as I recall. The publisher also sold the database separately for ~$500. Bellcore publishes the information on electronic media as the Terminating Point Master (TPM). There is also an ITPM (International). This has other useful information, including special use flags for NXXs such as Cellular, Pager, etc. You subscribe to TPM; it includes monthly updates. I don't remember the cost, but it was reasonable for a business to buy. Larry Finch ::LarryFinch@worldnet.att.net larry@prolifics.com ::LarryFinch@aol.com ::(whew!) N 40º 53' 47" W 74º 03' 56" ------------------------------ From: nospam.tonypo1@nospam.home.com (Tony Pelliccio) Subject: Re: NXX by NPA Organization: Providence Network Partners Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2000 00:37:19 GMT In article , rmbryant@att.com says: > Do you know where I can get a list of NXX's by NPA or by City or State?? > Robert M. Bryant > DNAE IBM Team > 440 Hamilton, 12th. fl. > White Plains, NY 10601 > (914) 397-8451 > Pager: 888-858-7243, pin 116852 > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It would be a humongous list to say > the least, on several CD Roms, and printing out to hundreds of pages. > And the list never ends, and is never entirely up to date. PAT] Quite some time ago someone posted an address for a program by the name of NPA for Windows. The web address is http://www.pcconsultant.com and their phone number is 888-456-7950. For $35.00 you get the full version but I'll be honest, it's VERY accurate. Even the newer cell prefixes are listed in it. == Tony Pelliccio, KD1S formerly KD1NR == Trustee WE1RD ------------------------------ From: Walter Dnes Subject: Re: DoubleClick Looks to Regain Surfers' Trust Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2000 21:07:46 -0500 On Wed, 1 Mar 2000 09:14:11 -0600 , Hahn, Ki Suk wrote in article : > I've set my Netscape cookies.txt file to read-only as was suggested > here some time ago and this works ok. But the IE 4.72... that I > sometimes use has a folder that contains these cookies. (NT's > windows\profiles\username\cookies folder with files named > username@domain.txt ) I've tried to set > this folder to read-only but that permission gets changed back. Is > there any way to make it stick? Given how often you have to reboot Windows, try the following line in your AUTOEXEC.BAT... ECHO Y|DEL C:\WINDOWS\COOKIES\*.* Walter Dnes http://www.waltdnes.org SpamDunk Project procmail spamfilters. A picture is worth a thousand words; unfortunately, it consumes the bandwidth of ten thousand words. ------------------------------ From: marc_k@walrus.com (marc_k) Subject: Re: DoubleClick Looks to Regain Surfers' Trust Date: 2 Mar 2000 01:57:50 GMT Organization: Walrus Internet Hahn wrote: > From: jmaddaus@NO_SPAM.usa.net (John S. Maddaus) > Subject: Re: DoubleClick Looks to Regain Surfers' Trust > Reply-To: jmaddaus@NO_SPAM.usa.net > Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 17:09:01 GMT > Organization: AT&T Worldnet >> Which is why I have my browser set to accept only cookies that get >> sent back to the originating server and to warn me before accepting >> any cookies. I always manually reject cookies that are associated >> with advertising and regularly clear both cache and cookies from my >> machine using a batch file I picked off of either Tucows or Zdnet >> (can't remember which). [...] > I've set my Netscape cookies.txt file to read-only as was suggested > here some time ago and this works ok. But the IE 4.72... that I > sometimes use has a folder that contains these cookies. (NT's > windows\profiles\username\cookies folder with files named > username@domain.txt ) I've tried to set > this folder to read-only but that permission gets changed back. Is > there any way to make it stick? > Ki Suk Hahn You might try setting the system flag, as well as the read-only one. Perhaps Windows will respect a system flag better. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 01:35:29 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: What's That Smell? Oh, It's DoubleClick http://www.thestandard.com/article/display/0,1151,12440,00.html What's That Smell? Oh, It's DoubleClick No stink is more pungent than that of a loser. DoubleClick may not have attained that lowly status just yet, but it's on the ropes. The online advertising company's ongoing tussle with privacy advocates is prompting some clients to walk away, according to a widely cited report in this morning's Wall Street Journal. A News.com report suggests that bucks - not ethics - prompted at least one of the defections. While DoubleClick CEO Kevin O'Connor was copping his typically bullish pose on Net advertising at a New York conference, Kozmo.com CEO Joseph Park was telling the Journal that his company wants out of the DoubleClick circle. The home-delivery site plans a relaunch next month and was planning to dump banner ads even before the DoubleClick controversy arose, Park told the Journal. The brouhaha just confirmed the wisdom of that move, he said. Of course the move had nothing to do with reports that DoubleClick was siphoning the video-rental data of Kozmo customers. AltaVista has also backed away from DoubleClick, according to Journal reporters Glenn Simpson and Andrea Petersen. The search engine will switch to an opt-in model, meaning that DoubleClick will only be able to round up the stats of Web surfers who have OK'd the scrutiny. AltaVista's distancing is bad news for DoubleClick, which rakes in 20 percent of its revenues from the portal. For its part, Kozmo hopes it's exchanging the nose-holding aroma of DoubleClick for the sweet smell of greenbacks. News.com identified unnamed sources as the basis for its report that Kozmo is about to file for an IPO. In November, online grocer Webvan made its debut at $15 and opened at $26. Webvan is now trading for less that $12, but hey - isn't it the opening-day pop that counts the most? - Deborah Asbrand AltaVista, Kozmo Distance Themselves From DoubleClick Over Privacy Worries http://interactive.wsj.com/articles/SB951880945433278787.htm [Paid subscription required.] DoubleClick held at arm's length by partners (Reuters) http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1005-200-1561080.html?tag=st.ne.1002.thed.1005-200-1561080 DoubleClick: Collecting User Data Is No Crime http://www.zdnet.com/sr/stories/news/0,4538,2453151,00.html Kozmo May Deliver Itself to the Public http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1007-200-1560962.html?tag=st.ne.1002.tgif?st.ne.fd.gif.c ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2000 21:41:09 -0500 From: Fred Goldstein Subject: North American Numbering Plan Proposals - New Discussion Forum The North American Numbering Plan, the rules by which telephone numbers are assigned in the USA, Canada, and some Caribbean countries, is a popular discussion topic here on the Digest. Last November, in response to a previous posting, I mentioned a proposed design for a new NANP that I was working on. I've finished drafting the description of my proposed plan, and I've put it up on a web discussion site. Interested parties are welcome to check in to http://www.delphi.com/nanp . (Delphi is now a discussion-forum web site with free membership. Some might remember it as an early on-line service provider, one of the first to offer Internet access. But that's another tale.) I'm not reopening the usual issues of overlay vs. split, etc. I'm instead taking the long view: What should the NANP be in the future, after the current plan runs out of area codes? There are of course discussions going on in industry forums already. But they're mostly based on making a larger, uglier version of the existing (1947) plan, usually requiring 11 or 12 digit dialing for all calls, even local. (Parenthetically, I realize that number conservation measures such as unassigned number pooling can stretch out the existing number supply well beyond its planned late-aughts exhaust. But that too is a digression.) The proposal I've put up has a different approach. Taking into account the way the telephone network works in North America (i.e., the need for deterministic number length, its special codes like 911, and its uses of 1 and 0), the proposed plan is still more like, say, the British one than the US one. An ideal plan has large enough "areas" so that an "area code" covers as much territory as one did back in the '80s; this means that 8-digit local numbers are permitted. But 7-digit numbers can exist too, so long as an area is all one or the other -- I suggest the Caribbean microstates, for instance, will stay with 7 digits. Area codes in this plan are *always* dialed with a 1 (the UK equivalent is the leading 0), so they are written that way -- 1267, for instance, instead of 1-1267. Geographic USA area codes always begin with 12 or 13; 14 is for non-USA areas. The whole 18 space is for free calls (800, 888, etc... assume that there will be a lot of them) and 19 for premium-rate calls. The 15 space is for nongeographic services, be they voice or data, which will become more important, while 17 is reserved for carrier-specific and subscriber-specific (private) numbers. It's well understood that you can't just go to 8-digit numbers from 7, since there is no room in the plan. This is made very clear on Linc Madison's excellent area code page (http://www.lincmad.com). In order to eventually have 8-digit dialing, a transition period is needed wherein all calls, local and toll, need the area code. (This is where most industry plans stop!) That allows the old 7-digit numbers to be flushed out during a "permissive" period, before 8-digit locals become permissive. Existing 3-digit prefix codes are algorithmically converted to 4-digit ones; since multiple existing area codes are being merged, the old area code determines the second digit of the prefix. The Digest is a great forum but I don't think we should burden Pat with the volume of traffic that this topic sometimes gets, so I request that discussion of this topic be limited to the above forum. Thanks. (And welcome back, Pat!) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2000 21:38:54 -0500 From: Bill Horne Subject: Re: The DLC Epidemic Spreads to the Northeast Organization: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & News Services Ed Ellers wrote: > I see from The Washington Post that Bell Atlantic has now started shafting > some of its customers in the same way that BellSouth is shafting me -- > namely, by using digital loop carrier systems to provide a poor imitation of > a phone line, one which unnecessarily distorts the signal and therefore > blocks the use of V.90 modem connections. If your reader feels that a DLC system is a "poor imitation of a phone line", then I'm curious what he feels a good "imitation" would be. Perhaps a Picturephone system, with unlimited local calling and free installation? To say that a Digital Loop Carrier "unnecessarily distorts the signal" is a very arrogant way of inferring that Bell Atlantic would spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to design, equip, install, insure, and support a DLC system which requires more (and more expensive) maintenance than copper wires, can't offer the same services, and costs more to run. All this, so that his V.ridiculous modem wouldn't work? May I suggest your reader put some tinfoil around the walls, to keep the cosmic rays at bay? Sorry to be the messenger bringing bad new, but the cable conduits are full, and the manholes are full: there is no more copper to be had, and in some areas, BA has had to rip out copper cables installed less than five years ago to accommodate fiber. The FCC and your local lawmakers decided that the public interest, convenience, and necessity required Bell Atlantic to lease space under the streets at bargain basement rates, so that the legions of BUSINESS customers whom make campaign contributions may have a choice of DIAL TONE providers to serve their BUSINESS communication needs. BUSINESS customers don't give a damn about dialup internet service: they care only about FAX lines, which work fine over DLC. If they need to move data around, they pay for dedicated, diverse, custom designed DATA circuits to do it. I'm sorry, but civilians whom feel offended about the need for more DIAL TONE in businesses have no recourse other than to Internet mailing lists, while businessmen are able to pick up the phone, call their congressman, and have the call acted on. That's the system we live with. Claiming that BA, or any other RBOC, would spend immense sums of money just to disable his 56K modem is (let's be kind) naive. By his own admission, your reader is unable to obtain DSL service (it requires copper), so where's the motivation? This sounds like a complaint that BA didn't design it's VOICE network to accommodate net surfers - well, complain all you want, but 56K modems are a hack that requires a very specialized set of circumstances, and when dial tone demands require DLC equipment, that's what BA uses. After all, they get paid to provide dial tone. Bill Horne ------------------------------ Organization: http://www.remarq.com: The World's Usenet/Discussions Start Here Subject: Re: Wireless Extensions From: joe Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2000 17:57:14 -0800 You can get phones from a company in Canada that claim some really L O N G ranges, but they are not approved by the FCC ( or whoever sets the regulations here in the states ). If you are in the US; your best bet would probably be from a company named EnGenius. They have a cordless phone that they claim will work at a range of like 5 miles. ------------------------------ From: LAURA Subject: Latin American Telecom Summit Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2000 15:01:06 -0300 Dear Sir, I congratulate you for the web site. It is really interesting. I would very much appreciate it if you can inform me about the Latin American Telecommunications Summit to be held in Lima, Peru, on March 13/16. I have not found information on the web about it. Kind regards, Laura Garcia ------------------------------ From: John Hines Subject: Re: Telephone-Pole Battle: Steel Takes On Wood Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2000 12:38:16 -0600 Organization: US Citizen, disabled with MS, speaking solely for myself. msb@vex.net wrote: > Is there an important distinction for some reason between *telephone* > poles and those for other utilities? In the Chicago metro area, they are power line poles, owned and maintained by Commonwealth Edison, and the telephone, and cable companies lease space from them. ComEd then exchanges the electricity to run the city/village for the lease on the right of way for the poles. ------------------------------ From: Andrew Subject: Re: Communication Tower Being Built Date: 3 Mar 2000 18:46:54 GMT Organization: Kill-9 Industries Linda Harris wrote: > We have been approached by a communications company, who wish to put a > cellular communications tower on our property. > We meet all their requirements regarding site, elevation etc., They > had done all their homework before they approached us, and they know > its in a prime site. Its known throughout this district, that our area > is a black spot for cellular phones. We would like to know, before we > go any further, as to the payment for the lease offered by them. The > lease is to run for over 50 years. Is there anyone who has had > similar dealings with having towers put on their property, and could > give us an Idea as to what they were given as payment. Its obvious > that they offer you the very minimum as an opening offer. We are > curious as to the "going" rate. We live in western PA. Down in here in Atlanta, according to a recent newspaper article, the going rate is $1200/month. AT&T wireless put a tower on some property that my stepfather owns in suburban Minneapolis last year. I haven't quizzed him in detail about the deal, but apparently the amount they pay him is indexed to something because they originally payed him $1000/month and this went up to $1048/month after a few months. The agreement he signed has provisions to let competing wireless providers share the tower in which case each competitor would have to pay my stepfather the same amount that AT&T is paying. Andrew ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2000 08:13:23 -0800 From: Isaac Wingfield Subject: Netscape Cookies on a Mac > From: siegman@stanford.edu (A. E. Siegman) > Subject: Re: DoubleClick Looks to Regain Surfers' Trust > Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2000 21:31:58 -0800 > Organization: Stanford University > In article , Douglas Dunlop > wrote: >> Rather than bother with manually accepting and rejecting cookies, I >> set Netscape to accept all cookies. I also deleted everything below >> the "do not edit" line in the cookies.txt file and set the file >> properties to read only. All cookies are accepted, none are stored ... > I'm guessing this is a Unix system. Is there a way to do the > same thing with the MagicCookie file in Netscape on a Mac? Replace the *file* named "MagicCookie" with a *folder* named "MagicCookie" and Hey Presto! a black hole for cookies -- they just go in and vanish. Isaac ------------------------------ From: clintcrg@aol.com (Clint CRG) Date: 03 Mar 2000 00:19:03 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Subject: Re: Directory Number Fee In California there is a monthly fee of $45 per 100 numbers for DID (direct inward dialing directory numbers). Also there is a penalty for droping the numbers in less than three years. Clint Gilliland Menlo Park, CA John Schmerold john@katy.com wrote: > In Missouri, there is no fee for Directory numbers. If you have a > business with 6 lines, you get 6 numbers, despite the fact that you > only need one number. Indeed, the business is better off without 6 > numbers due to prevelance of caller-id. So, why not create a revenue > neutral tariff`q on directory numbers. If a customer wants multiple > numbers, that is fine, but there will be a monthly $3 per line > charge. > Anyone know if this has been tried? Why not? ------------------------------ From: Rory Matthews Subject: Surf Watch Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2000 14:21:30 PST Hello Pat, Thought you might enjoy this... Yesterday while at school using the computers I remembered the discussion on the various Internet blocking programs and decided to investigate. My school uses a program called Surf Watch and I was curious to see if they banned your site. As it turned out they didn't block your site at all. But in the process I discovered something else. It seems that when I go through your Anonymous Web Surfing service I'm able to access all those oh-so-naughty sites that are usually inaccessable. It appears your fighting censorship in a way you probably didn't even realize! Rory Matthews [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thank you for your kind words of support, Rory. I appreciate your message. Feel free to tell the other guys at your school about Operator Pat and how she supplies things for you guys to look at. PAT ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 23:42:26 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Court Blocks WA School from Suspending Student Over Humorous Web http://www.aclu.org/news/2000/n022300c.html Court Blocks WA School from Suspending Student Over Humorous Web Site FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Tuesday, February 23, 2000 SEATTLE, WA -- In the latest case involving student free speech in cyberspace, a federal judge in Seattle today blocked school administrators from suspending a student because of a web site he had created on his home computer. The American Civil Liberties Union of Washington represented the student in contesting the suspension. "The court recognized today that school officials do not have authority to punish students for exercising their freedom of speech outside of school," said Aaron Caplan, the ACLU of Washington Staff Attorney who represented the student. "Schools need to learn that they can't discipline students who create satires on the Internet." Nick Emmett, the high school senior whom officials in the Kent School District sought to discipline, welcomed the news. "I feel good that the judge understood my rights as a student," he said. "I went to court to fight for my rights because I don't think administrators should be able to make punishments that are unfair." Emmett is a college-bound senior and a co-captain of the Kentlake High School basketball team. On the weekend of February 12 and 13, Nick and a friend posted their own site on the Internet, using the Emmett family computer and AOL account. Nick's father helped set up the graphics. Titled the "Unofficial Kentlake High Home Page," the site was intended as a light-hearted vehicle to promote discussion among the King County school's students. Nick posted compliments to the school's administration, and the home page included the following disclaimer: "This website is meant for entertainment purposes only. In no way, shape, or form is it intended to offend anybody. And to the KL (Kentlake) Administration, ...We love you guys!" At a friend's suggestion, Nick added a fake obituary to the friend's memory; the idea came, in part, from a creative writing class Nick had taken in which students had been assigned to write mock obituaries. This and another obituary written in jest (with the student's permission) proved so popular that other students began posting requests for parody death notices about themselves to be written. As a humorous touch, a feature was added to the Web site enabling people to vote for the next fake obituary. At school, Nick received praise for the Web site from students and teachers alike. On February 16, a television reporter interviewed Nick about the Web site, and a television news report that night suggested that the site had a "hit list" threatening to injure people. Concerned by coverage he considered misleading, Nick and his co-creator closed the site. On February 17, Nick learned that the Kentlake principal was placing him on emergency expulsion, pending an investigation. The next day, Nick received a five-day suspension, causing him to miss a basketball playoff game. He and his parents contacted the ACLU of Washington and with the ACLU's help contested the suspension. "I was surprised they were punishing me and thought it was unfair," Nick said. "I had talked with administrators about the Web site, and they didn't say they had a problem with it. I care about school and want to go to class," he added. After a hearing this morning, Chief Judge John Coughenour of the United States District issued a temporary restraining order enjoining the school district from enforcing the suspension imposed on Nick Emmett. In his ruling Judge Coughenour said, "Although the intended audience was undoubtedly connected to Kentlake High School, the speech was entirely outside of the school's supervision or control." Judge Coughenour cited the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal's ruling in a 1988 ACLU of Washington case (Burch v. Barker), holding that student distribution of non-school-sponsored material cannot be prohibited "on the basis of undifferentiated fears of possible disturbances or embarrassment to school officials." The judge noted that the school district presented "no evidence that the mock obituaries and voting were intended to threaten anyone, did actually threaten anyone, or manifested any violent tendencies whatsoever." The court's ruling comes as increasing numbers of students are taking freedom of speech into cyberspace. Earlier this month, the Lake Washington School Board decided not to punish three Eastlake High School students represented by the ACLU over a Web site they had created. In 1995, in a much-publicized case, the ACLU of Washington won an out-of-court settlement for Bellevue student Paul Kim after his principal disciplined him for creating a parody of his high school from a home computer. Still pending in the state is an ACLU lawsuit on behalf of a Thurston County high school student who was expelled for a month in 1999 for creating a Web site on his home computer lampooning his school's vice-principal. The ACLU has represented students in similar cases across the country, including Ohio, Missouri and Texas. The pleading filed in the case, as well as the judge's temporary restraining order are available online from the ACLU of Washington at: http://www.aclu-wa.org/ISSUES/students/Kentlake%20TRO/Kentlake%20High%20 School%20Index.htm. Copyright 2000, The American Civil Liberties Union ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V20 #8 **************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat Mar 4 16:39:27 2000 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id QAA01225; Sat, 4 Mar 2000 16:39:27 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2000 16:39:27 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200003042139.QAA01225@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #9 TELECOM Digest Sat, 4 Mar 0 15:16:16 EST Volume 20 : Issue 9 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Kevin Mitnick Speaks to Congress (Dale Neiburg) Re: Long Lines Bells (Don Kimberlin) Re: Calling-Party Pays (Wireless) (Dave Levenson) Re: F.C.C. Debates Changes to Cell Phone Fees (Mark Brukhartz) Re: Intuit Acts to Curb Quicken Leaks (Scot E. Wilcoxon) Re: Telephone-Pole Battle: Steel Takes On Wood (Joel B Levin) Re: DoubleClick Looks to Regain Surfers' Trust (Paul Rubin) Number of Telephones in the U.S. (Greg Erickson) Re: The DLC Epidemic Spreads to the Northeast (Ed Ellers) Re: The DLC Epidemic Spreads to the Northeast (Daniel Seyb) Re: The DLC Epidemic Spreads to the Northeast (Steve Sobol) Re: Telephone-Pole Battle: Steel Takes On Wood (Hudson Leighton) Re: Telco 214 Licenced (Michael Sullivan) Re: Infamous Hacker Sought for Advice (Alan Boritz) 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-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest 611 Poplar Street Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 805-545-5115 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@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: hyperarchive.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 the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From:dneiburg@bpr.org Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2000 06:23:38 EST Subject: Kevin Mitnick Speaks to Congress FYI. (I haven't obtained reprint permission, but thought you'd like to see this piece.) To view the entire article, go to http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A62010-2000Mar2.html Hacker Gives Hill a How-To Just two months ago, America's most notorious computer hacker was wearing prison-issue khakis at California's Lompoc federal penitentiary. Yesterday, Kevin Mitnick sported a pinstriped navy suit and tie and charmed a panel of U.S. senators as a star witness and respected expert on the art of hacking. "If somebody has the time, money and motivation, they can get into any computer," Mitnick told members of the Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs, which is considering legislation to boost the security of the federal government's networks. Mitnick's testimony comes at a time of surging interest in computer security. The recent attacks by cyber-vandals against Yahoo, Amazon and other prominent New Economy companies have shaken consumer confidence in the burgeoning online medium. And while much of the attention has been paid to computer-cracking tools that can be downloaded from the Internet and used by anyone from a teen to a terrorist, Mitnick raised a more fundamental issue in his testimony. "The weakest link in the security chain," he said, is "the human element." Nobody knows that better than Mitnick, who often was able to get more information by tricking people into giving it up over the phone than by touching a keyboard. Security training and monitoring is as important as improving hardware and software, he suggested. The 36-year-old computer trespasser, who served nearly five years for cell-phone fraud and unauthorized entry into computer systems all over the globe, regaled the crowded room with tales of hoodwinking employees from the Internal Revenue Service and Social Security Administration into disclosing confidential taxpayer information over the telephone. He hastily noted that those exploits occurred in 1992, "which just so happens to be beyond the applicable statute of limitations" for federal computer crimes. Mitnick showed the smooth social skills that helped him to wheedle access to so many computer systems in government and industry, giving earnest advice and engaging in lively banter with star-struck senators. "My motivation was a quest for knowledge, the intellectual challenge, the thrill and the escape from reality," he said, not damaging computers or making money from his exploits. He compared the urge to break into computer systems to the kick of gambling and the allure of cocaine but demurred when Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) asked if he would consider it as "addictive." Back in the days when he began learning about computers, hacking was actually encouraged by some teachers as a way to get students to think about security. Mitnick recalled one teacher assigning him to write a program that would trick users into thinking that they needed to enter their names and passwords and then capture that information. "Of course, I got an 'A,'" he said. Mitnick also railed against the prosecutors who tried him, and against the New York Times, which tracked his case closely; he said he believes that the newspaper goaded the Justice Department into making an example of him. Los Angeles Assistant U.S. Attorney Chris Painter, who won the conviction that put Mitnick away, said the testimony accurately portrayed the threat of "human engineering." "The best security system in the world isn't worth much if you can bypass it by getting security people and other people to give you information and he was very good at that," said Painter, who called Mitnick a "cyber-con man." But he scoffed at Mitnick's complaints about the treatment. "He's the one who created the conduct that's all he was charged with, and all he was prosecuted with." Under the unusually stringent conditions of Mitnick's parole, he cannot use a computer or cellular phone for three years; he said he was not allowed to buy a pocket organizer and even had to get permission from his probation officer to get a pager. "I have to live as if I'm part of the Amish," he said. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It is purely up to Kevin where to go on this, and it appears he already went before Congress with his testimony, but I personally would have told them to leap off a very high bridge. The treatment he got from the government was very disgraceful and I personally would have given them no cooperation at all. If anything, I would have gone before Congress and publicly encouraged other hackers to continue their work. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 04 Mar 2000 05:18:46 -0500 From: Don Kimberlin Subject: Re: Long Lines Bells ....Editing a longish thread (Wed Mar 1, 09:56 -0600) > Margaret Hill wrote: >> Are you familiar with LONG LINES? Was this once a telephone company? >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: "Long Lines" was the informal name >> for AT&T's long distance operation. PAT] > Long Lines was shortened name for AT&T Long Lines. Long Lines was the > long distance arm of the Bell System. ...In actual fact, its proper, complete name was: Long Lines Department of the American Telephone and Telegraph Company ...Trust me. That's what my paychecks from them said. Fred Goodwin asked: > Question on a minor point: didn't the local BOCs own and operate the *intrastate* LD networks prior to Divestiture? I thought LL owned and > operated only the AT&T *interstate* LD network, and that the BOCs had to > spin off to LL their own intrastate, interLATA LD plant at Divestiture? ... In fact, there was a Gordian knot of who-owns-which and who-operates-what in the pre-divstiture Bell System. Where I worked in Florida, Southern Bell had Long Lines operate a great deal of its intrastate plant. Even terminal operations like the sixth floor Private Line Testboard in Miami (which was enormous in size, but that's another story) was perhaps 50% Southern Bell circuits, equipment and operations -- all run by "AT&T" people who answered the same phone number (377-9311) for anything ranging from a 10 mile long FX to Perrine or Hollywood to a transcontinental airline data circuit or press service telephoto circuit. Down on the third floor, intemingled with the rows and rows of interstate L-carrier terminals were bays and bays of ON short-haul carrier terminals to cities ranging from Key West to West Palm Beach, housed, maintained and operated by AT&T personnel for Southern Bell. Up on the seventh floor, there was a Collins microwave to Fort Lauderdale that carried about 2400 voice channels for Southern Bell. By and large, Southern Bell ran its own repeatered transmission lines and the terminals in the outlying cities, and the layout engineering was done by Southern Bell at Jacksonville, but the documents always named the "control office" as "Miami 1," which made the AT&T people the focus of operations and maintenance. Of course, accounting for all that meant a heap of paper and records, which was supposedly settled somewhere in the bowels of the books of the integrated Bell System. ... As recently as five years ago, I was in the Southern Bell building on Caldwell Street in downtown Charlotte. There, one could still find many areas of the plant floors that had wandering yellow stripes painted on them demarcating Southern Bell from AT&T space. All these years later, it's still not been feasible to physically separate the plant of the two entities. Donald E. Kimberlin, NCE ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 04 Mar 2000 08:22:45 -0500 From: Dave Levenson Organization: Westmark, Inc. Subject: Re: Calling-Party Pays (Wireless) Calling-party-pays is fine if the caller knows about it. I suggest that CPP wireless numbers be given a distinctive area code (e.g. 900) so that callers will be alerted to the fact that they will be charged an abnormal rate for such calls. This will enable companies who don't want to pay for these calls when made by their employees to block them. It will enable resellers like hotels, payphone providers, and schools to assess the charges correctly to their guests, customers, or students. If CPP numbers with un-documented charges are hidden among ordinary- looking NANPA numbers, then it gives the wireless providers a license to steal from unsuspecting consumers. -Dave Levenson, Westmark, Inc. PS: Pat: it's great to see you back on the net. Hope your recovery continues! ------------------------------ From: Mark.Brukhartz@wdr.com Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2000 01:54:44 -0600 Subject: Re: F.C.C. Debates Changes to Cell Phone Fees Unless ``calling party pays'' mobile phone charges can be trivially determined from the mobile number, we'd have to expect payphone and hotel telephones to block calls to all of the provider's numbers. Since third-party billing systems cannot listen to recorded fee notifications, they cannot determine how much to charge for a call. Without that information, third party phone operators will have no choice other than to block the calls. This is a major reason why 500 numbers were a dismal failure. They were blocked from payphones, hotel phones and even some office PBX systems because the charges were unpredictable, and possibly steep. Business travelers, the initial market for 500 one-number services, could not use them from their hotels and airport payphones. A solution might be to allocate new area codes for ``calling party pays'' mobile telephones, allocate exchanges to mobile carriers, and require mobile phone carriers to give three months' notice of calling party fee changes. The lead time would be necessary for third party operators to update their systems. Personally, I agree that ``calling party pays'' in the United States would raise the price of calling mobile phones to the point of pain. There is little restraint to imposing fees on non-customers. Witness the explosion of non-customer automatic teller machines fees. In the USA, it is now common to pay about $1.50 to use another bank's ATM. Even though most ATMs were deployed before these fees were permitted. -Mark ------------------------------ From: Scot E. Wilcoxon Organization: self Subject: Re: Intuit Acts to Curb Quicken Leaks Date: Sat, 04 Mar 2000 11:35:04 -0600 Of course, Intuit doesn't mind knowing every time you read email which they sent to you. Look at Intuit HTML email with ID codes in URLs. ------------------------------ From: Joel B Levin Subject: Re: Telephone-Pole Battle: Steel Takes On Wood Organization: On the desert Reply-To: levinjb@gte.net Date: Sat, 04 Mar 2000 18:19:20 GMT In , John Hines wrote: > In the Chicago metro area, they are power line poles, owned and > maintained by Commonwealth Edison, and the telephone, and cable > companies lease space from them. ComEd then exchanges the electricity > to run the city/village for the lease on the right of way for the > poles. In much of New England this was handled by agreements between the local electric companies (especially where an electric company covers much of a state) and New England Tel, when it existed: in alternate towns the utility owned the poles, and in the rest Telco owned them. These were presumably assigned on such a basis that the pole ownership was fairly equal and no one had to pay anyone (well, except the cable TV companies, when they arrived, and they had to pay everyone). On the main topic, out here in the wide open flat desert, shortly after we arrived here a year ago USWest (or APS, the power company, I don't know which) started using steel or aluminum poles instead of wood. People are moving in quite rapidly (for around here) and it's easy to see where new houses are moving in from the growth of metal among the wood. /JBL ------------------------------ From: phr@netcom.com (Paul Rubin) Subject: Re: DoubleClick Looks to Regain Surfers' Trust Date: 4 Mar 2000 11:24:47 GMT Organization: NETCOM / MindSpring Enterprises, Inc. Ryan Shook wrote: > There are several possibilities to get around doubleclick.net. > [good ideas snipped] My favorite tool these days is the junkbuster proxy, www.junkbusters.com. It's free, includes source code, is highly configurable, and removes the referer header from outgoing requests (the referer header is even more invasive than a cookie, in some situations). ------------------------------ From: GERICLAW@aol.com Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2000 13:43:10 EST Subject: Number of Telephones in the U.S. Could you tell me how many telephones are currently in the U.S.A. broken down into Business and Residential or where I can go to research such information? I went to the Census but they are always having difficulties. Anything you could provide I would appreciate. Greg Ericksen Bountiful, Utah ------------------------------ From: Ed Ellers Subject: Re: The DLC Epidemic Spreads to the Northeast Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2000 22:36:51 -0500 Bill Horne wrote: > If your reader feels that a DLC system is a "poor imitation of a phone > line", then I'm curious what he feels a good "imitation" would be." Easy -- one that doesn't cause the distortion that a poorly implemented DLC system causes. Specifically, the DLC system should be implemented in such a way that the digital audio signal coming into the switch is passed, *unaltered,* to the end of the DLC system where the subscriber loop begins, and vice versa. If the telcos did that then a DLC system would in fact be superior to a copper loop going back to the switch. But that isn't what they are doing -- they're using the DLC between the loop and a normal line card, so the signal gets converted *three times* instead of once. > "To say that a Digital Loop Carrier "unnecessarily distorts the > signal" is a very arrogant way of inferring that Bell Atlantic would > spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to design, equip, install, > insure, and support a DLC system which requires more (and more > expensive) maintenance than copper wires, can't offer the same > services, and costs more to run." No, I am saying that BellSouth -- and now apparently Bell Atlantic -- is doing so in an incompetent fashion. > "All this, so that his V.ridiculous modem wouldn't work? May I suggest your > reader put some tinfoil around the walls, to keep the cosmic rays at bay?" Might I suggest that you are making the wrong inferences -- that I'm not accusing the telcos of some nefarious plot, but of simple negligence backed by arrogance? > "Claiming that BA, or any other RBOC, would spend immense sums of money just > to disable his 56K modem is (let's be kind) naive." And, once again, that is not the claim I am making. > "This sounds like a complaint that BA didn't design it's VOICE network to > accommodate net surfers - well, complain all you want, but 56K modems are a > hack that requires a very specialized set of circumstances..." No, V.90 modems simply require one D/A conversion rather than several, something that is not a problem for customers served by conventional copper pairs, and would not be a problem with a proper DLC implementation. > "...and when dial tone demands require DLC equipment, that's what BA uses. > After all, they get paid to provide dial tone. No, telcos get paid to provide *communications services,* and if those services are inferior to what they are known to be capable of, they should get called on it. ------------------------------ From: daniel seyb Organization: someday, maybe Subject: Re: The DLC Epidemic Spreads to the Northeast Date: Sat, 04 Mar 2000 03:52:35 +0000 Hey, Bill, easy up a little. I'll respond to only a couple of your points: First, you must have spent your life working for much larger companies than I have, to assume that EVERY business has deep pockets and a pipeline to their congressman. Second, Mr Ellers was complaining that Bell Atlantic was cutting corners on the installation. You attacked him for complaining, but didn't dispute his claim. Third, if Bell Atlantic is indeed tearing out cable they installed "less than five years ago", what you have is bad planning. Five years ago was 1995. The cable Mr Horne is talking about was installed in 1996, or even later. And one tip for Mr Ellers: When i was living in New Jersey, i used BAnet as an ISP, just as Mr Horne is now. I almost never used the service, but i was paying protection money. When i had a problem, (which was often) i would get the same "we don't support the Internet" response Mr Horne is spewing. It was useful to point out that i was using a Bell Titanic product. dan Bill Horne wrote: > Ed Ellers wrote: >> I see from The Washington Post that Bell Atlantic has now started shafting >> some of its customers in the same way that BellSouth is shafting me -- >> namely, by using digital loop carrier systems to provide a poor >> imitation of blocks the use of V.90 modem connections. > If your reader feels that a DLC system is a "poor imitation of a phone > line", then I'm curious what he feels a good "imitation" would be. > Perhaps a Picturephone system, with unlimited local calling and free > installation? > To say that a Digital Loop Carrier "unnecessarily distorts the signal" > is a very arrogant way of inferring that Bell Atlantic would spend > hundreds of thousands of dollars to design, equip, install, insure, > and support a DLC system which requires more (and more expensive) > maintenance than copper wires, can't offer the same services, and > costs more to run. > All this, so that his V.ridiculous modem wouldn't work? May I suggest > your reader put some tinfoil around the walls, to keep the cosmic rays > at bay? > Sorry to be the messenger bringing bad new, but the cable conduits are > full, and the manholes are full: there is no more copper to be had, > and in some areas, BA has had to rip out copper cables installed less > than five years ago to accommodate fiber. The FCC and your local > lawmakers decided that the public interest, convenience, and necessity > required Bell Atlantic to lease space under the streets at bargain > basement rates, so that the legions of BUSINESS customers whom make > campaign contributions may have a choice of DIAL TONE providers to > serve their BUSINESS communication needs. > BUSINESS customers don't give a damn about dialup internet service: > they care only about FAX lines, which work fine over DLC. If they > need to move data around, they pay for dedicated, diverse, custom > designed DATA circuits to do it. > I'm sorry, but civilians whom feel offended about the need for more > DIAL TONE in businesses have no recourse other than to Internet > mailing lists, while businessmen are able to pick up the phone, call > their congressman, and have the call acted on. That's the system we > live with. > Claiming that BA, or any other RBOC, would spend immense sums of money > just to disable his 56K modem is (let's be kind) naive. By his own > admission, your reader is unable to obtain DSL service (it requires > copper), so where's the motivation? This sounds like a complaint that > BA didn't design it's VOICE network to accommodate net surfers - well, > complain all you want, but 56K modems are a hack that requires a very > specialized set of circumstances, and when dial tone demands require > DLC equipment, that's what BA uses. After all, they get paid to > provide dial tone. News Flash: Microsoft acquires Electrolux, makes extensive design revisions. Finally releases a product that doesn't suck. ------------------------------ From: sjsobol@NorthShoreTechnologies.Net (Steve Sobol) Subject: Re: The DLC Epidemic Spreads to the Northeast Date: 4 Mar 2000 03:28:07 GMT Organization: New Age Consulting Service Inc., Cleveland, OH, USA 'Bill Horne' wrote: > BUSINESS customers don't give a damn about dialup internet service I beg to differ, Bill. As someone who owns a company that provides such services -- or at least contracts with others to do so :) -- and who has worked for several other companies that also have, I can confirm that while medium-sized and larger businesses tend to prefer leased lines, frame relay, ISDN and other broadband offerings, there are still plenty of smaller companies that are fine with just a computer and a modem. > Claiming that BA, or any other RBOC, would spend immense sums of money > just to disable his 56K modem is (let's be kind) naive. By his own > admission, your reader is unable to obtain DSL service (it requires > copper), so where's the motivation? This sounds like a complaint that > BA didn't design it's VOICE network to accommodate net surfers - well, > complain all you want, but 56K modems are a hack that requires a very > specialized set of circumstances, and when dial tone demands require > DLC equipment, that's what BA uses. After all, they get paid to > provide dial tone. Good points. North Shore Technologies, Cleveland, OH http://NorthShoreTechnologies.net Steve Sobol, President, Chief Website Architect and Janitor sjsobol@NorthShoreTechnologies.net - 888.480.4NET - 216.619.2NET ------------------------------ From: hudsonl@skypoint.com (Hudson Leighton) Subject: Re: Telephone-Pole Battle: Steel Takes On Wood Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2000 21:33:34 -0600 Organization: MRRP In article , Jeremy Greene wrote: > How can anyone in their right mind be debating what type of pole to > use in a new residential development? Just bury the damn wires! As > long as you're digging up the street to lay pavement, sewers, gas, > water, etc., why not just bury the electricity, coax, fiber, telephone > cable, etc. along with it? You won't have to worry about drunk > drivers mowing down poles and knocking out phone and electrical > service. Your modems won't choke when squirrels start chewing on the > phone lines. And if the phone/cable companies would just spend the > extra money for decent infrastructure like fiber optics and good > watertight conduit, they won't have to come dig up the sidewalk in 10 > years to replace obsolete cables. Why do they sometimes bury > residential feeder cables bare, with no conduit? Isn't that just > asking for trouble when a woodchuck decides to burrow through your > front yard? > Jeremy An then you can wait weeks while they dig it all up to find a problem, broken wire lines are real easy to spot, repair, replace. Check out some of the various New York City area blackout stories. I seem to remember that buried utilties cost three times more to install and have less that 1/2 the life of pole lines. Also the locals have a harder time killing themselves when digging fence post holes. Hudson http://www.skypoint.com/~hudsonl ------------------------------ From: Michael Sullivan Subject: Re: Telco 214 Licenced Date: Sat, 04 Mar 2000 04:01:04 GMT Clay Nanton wrote: > My name is Noel Nanton. I have found your site to be very > informative through my many searches. This specific search is one that > has stumped me or possible just been starring me in my face due to poor > research techniques on my part. I am in search of Telco 214 licensed > companies. I am starting my own small business and I am in need of > information on these specific licensed companies because I am looking > for the same licensing. If possible would you know of any possible > areas where I might find some information. If this is a shot in the air > It's ok to tell me. I thank you so much for your help and keep this > site moving strong. Looking forward to hearing from you. Noel, the FCC issues Section 214 authorizations to companies wishing to provide international common carrier service outbound from the United States. A list of authorizations and pending applications (and with a click you can view information about the companies and their authorizations) is online at: http://dettifoss.fcc.gov:8080/cgi-bin/ws.exe/beta/ib_beta/reports/itc.htm Be forewarned that the file of Section 214 holders is a very large (multimegabyte) HTML table. Not good news on a dialup connection. Information on applying for a Section 214 authorization for nondominant international carriers is available from the .pdf guide to Electronic Section 214 filings on the same page (this is about a 10 megabyte .pdf file, be forewarned). Section 214 authorizations are also issued to dominant common carriers providing domestic service -- specifically, local exchange carriers. I don't believe these are available online, but the local exchange carriers' access tariffs are available online at: http://svartifoss.fcc.gov:8080/prod/ccb/etfs Good luck. Michael D. Sullivan, Bethesda, Md., USA avogadro@bellatlantic.net (also avogadro@well.com) ------------------------------ From: Alan Boritz Subject: Re: Infamous Hacker Sought for Advice Date: Sat, 04 Mar 2000 11:59:25 -0500 Organization: Dyslexics Untie David Chessler wrote: > Content-Location: "http://www.latimes.com/wires/20000302/ tCB00V0757.html" > Thursday, March 2, 2000 > By TED BRIDIS, AP Technology Writer > WASHINGTON--The government is seeking advice from the world's > most infamous computer hacker, just weeks after his release from > federal prison, about keeping its own electronic networks safe > from intruders. > In a bizarre twist to the federal prosecution of Kevin Mitnick, > a Senate panel today asked him to explain ways hackers infiltrate > sensitive computer systems, and to suggest solutions to > lawmakers... [Details of pointless legislation, political posturing, and general CYA behavior deleted] > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: If I were in Kevin's position I am > not sure at all that I would have cooperated. I would have sent > back a note to the investigative committee and told them "you are > about five years too late asking for my advice, and furthermore > the terms of my probation forbid me to use any sort of computer > necessary to assist you." No, perhaps you might not. If you were treated like a mushroom for long enough, you might do something to prevent your freedom (what there was of it) from being taken away from you again, if you were in Mitnick's shoes. > His case left me feeling > very bitter about the US Government's role in his case. If he does > decide to 'work along' with Congress I hope he gets up there and > rips them into shreds for their dishonesty in calculating the > amount of 'damages' he supposedly caused. PAT] I think you're missing the point. Many of those "victims" who helped put Mitnick in jail more than likely should have been put on the unemployment line. There's a growing complacency with incompetence that's victimizing the wrong parties in these kind of situations. An organization that experiences a computer security intrusion shouldn't be crying to their lawmakers for legislation, they should be showing their system administrators the door. Alan p.s. Good to have you back! ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V20 #9 **************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun Mar 5 18:37:56 2000 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id SAA20667; Sun, 5 Mar 2000 18:37:56 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 5 Mar 2000 18:37:56 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200003052337.SAA20667@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #10 ] TELECOM Digest Sun, 5 Mar 2000 16:43:22 EST Volume 20 : Issue 10 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Kevin Mitnick Speaks to Congress (David Chessler) Re: Kevin Mitnick Speaks to Congress (John Willkie) Re: Communication Tower (Linda Harris) Re: Intuit Acts to Curb Quicken Leaks (John David Galt) Re: NXX by NPA (Leonard Erickson) Re: The DLC Epidemic Spreads to the Northeast (Will Roberts) Give me Some of That New Wireless, Maybe (Joe Machado) Re: DoubleClick Looks to Regain Surfers' Trust (No Spam) Re: An Electronic Spy Scare Is Alarming Europe (Steve Hayes) Re: F.C.C. Debates Changes to Cell Phone Fees (Justa Lurker) Re: Telephone-Pole Battle: Steel Takes On Wood (The Old Bear) 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-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest 611 Poplar Street Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 805-545-5115 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@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: hyperarchive.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 the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 05 Mar 2000 13:13:06 -0500 From: David Chessler Subject: Re: Kevin Mitnick Speaks to Congress TELECOM Digest Editor responded to dneiburg@bpr.org who quoted a news source: <<>> > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It is purely up to Kevin where to go > on this, and it appears he already went before Congress with his > testimony, but I personally would have told them to leap off a very > high bridge. The treatment he got from the government was very > disgraceful and I personally would have given them no cooperation at > all. If anything, I would have gone before Congress and publicly > encouraged other hackers to continue their work. PAT] You assume that the Government is monolithic. It's not, and Congress is often at odds with the executive agencies that seek to enforce the laws that Congress botches up ^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H writes. Mitnick may not need publicity among the cognizenti (I guess that's us), but his career as a black-hat hacker is probably over. He's now repositioning himself as a "security consultant," quite possibly to the CIS departments of the same government agencies and private companies (such as the New York Times) that tried so hard to put him in jail. Moreover, he can do this without ever actually *touching* a computer. (He may be high-paid enough to do what little actual computer work he must do by dictating to a typist, as Dick Stallman did when he had carpel tunnel syndrome.) Indeed, as reported in this story, Mitnick got the endorsement of his persecutor: [sic] > Los Angeles Assistant U.S. Attorney Chris Painter, who won the > conviction that put Mitnick away, said the testimony accurately > portrayed the threat of "human engineering." "The best security > system in the world isn't worth much if you can bypass it by getting > security people and other people to give you information and he > was very good at that," said Painter, who called Mitnick a "cyber-con > man." That is surely good for Mitnick's future security business, giving lectures on "human engineering." Kevin Mitnick knows *exactly* what he's doing, and he's playing those Senators (and prosecutors) like a violin. ------------------------------ From: John Willkie Subject: Re: Kevin Mitnick Speaks to Congress Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2000 15:45:14 -0800 Pat; Just how could the "congress critters" (or even one of them) just snapped their fingers to get Mitnick out of jail a year ago? Last time I checked, Congress had no power to overturn a court order, and judgments are court orders, or to pass bills ex-post facto (after the fact) or to pass bills of attainder (affecting one person.) John Willkie [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: They certainly can pass bills which affect one person, although it is not done a lot. I think at the very least, they might have held a hearing a year or two ago, placed Janet Reno and a couple of her head honchos on a hot seat and asked her, 'Just why is Kevin Mitnick, a national hero in the estimation of many in this country being held in prison unconstitutionally without any trial for four years?' When they finally got around to letting him out of prison, he should have been allowed to walk freely, without any restrictions whatsoever on his speech or actions. They could have done a lot for him, but chose not to. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Linda Harris Subject: Re: Communication Tower Date: Sun, 05 Mar 2000 01:53:34 GMT First of all, thank you to everyone that has responded to our query. I will e-mail all concerned ASAP. We are a farm, southwest of Pittsburgh PA, with an elevation Bench Marker on our property of 1320ft above sea level. The site for the Tower is even higher than the Marker. From the intended site, you can see for a radius of over 30 miles. Saying this, it does not affect any property apart from our own. We have road access already in place, telephone cable and electricity. The site is a perfect spot for the erection of a tower. The tower company is offering us $5,000 per annum, with a 15% increase every 5 years. The lease will run for 55 years. We feel that because we are farmers, and the way farming has declined over the last few years, the tower company is taking advantage, thinking that we will snap up their offer. Obviously they want to get the site for the best possible price, we on the other hand feel that we should try and negotiate to get a fair and more reasonable offer. After all this will affect the next generation on the farm and possibly the one after that. We have read and re read all the e-mails that we have received, and will reply to them all, within the next day or so. Please e-mail me if you have anything more to say since receiving more details. Yours Faithfully, Linda Harris ------------------------------ From: John David Galt@acm.org Organization: Association for Computing Machinery Subject: Re: Intuit Acts to Curb Quicken Leaks Date: Sun, 05 Mar 2000 02:36:44 GMT Scot E. Wilcoxon wrote: > Of course, Intuit doesn't mind knowing every time you read email which > they sent to you. Look at Intuit HTML email with ID codes in URLs. I've seen such code used in both e-mail spam and newsgroup postings, and Netscape Communicator automatically executes it upon viewing the message. (Communicator has settings to turn off Java and JavaScript in messages, but not HTML. The only reliable way to avoid connecting to the web site in such cases is to download your messages, unplug your PC from the network, then read the messages.) I have complained to Netscape, was brushed off, and even wrote the problem up in comp.risks. I don't know if MSIE or other Internet software has the same vulnerability. Combine this with a malicious web page, and it will give the lie to the old saw that you can't get a computer virus merely by reading a message. Maybe after this happens and hurts enough people, Netscape will do something. John David Galt ------------------------------ From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) Subject: Re: NXX by NPA Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2000 18:00:00 PST Organization: Shadownet dold@email.rahul.net writes: > Robert M. Bryant wrote: >> Do you know where I can get a list of NXX's by NPA or by City or State?? >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It would be a humongous list to say >> the least, on several CD Roms, and printing out to hundreds of pages. >> And the list never ends, and is never entirely up to date. PAT] > Not several CDs, only one. > http://www.trainfo.com/tra/catalog.htm > The LERG is about $700, and contains _all_ the data. > The V&H Terminating Point listing has NPA-NXX, city, V&H, about $250. > "City" might not be what you think it is, though. Better yet, you can visit www.nanpa.com and down load the available and utilized NPA-NXX combos for regions. I'm in oregon so I grab WNAVAIL.ZIP and WNUTLZD.ZIP. (W for Western, N for northern). Here's a sample of WNAVAIL.TXT: State NPA-NXX File Updated 02/29/2000 CO 719-200 CO 719-201 CO 719-202 Here's a sample of WNUTLZD.TXT: State NPA-NXX OCN Company RateCenter Switch EffectiveDate File Updated 02/29/2000 CO 303-200 7378 TELEPORT COMMUNICATIONS GROUP - CO DENVER AURRCOBUDS0 CO 303-201 6584 THE WESTLINK COMPANY DENVER WMNSCODFCM1 CO 303-202 9636 US WEST COMMUNICATIONS - MOUNTAIN BELL DENVER LKWDCOMADS0 There are 6 or 7 regions. Alas, Canada isn't included in any of them. I think the Caribbean is included in one of them. If anyone knows of a free source for similar tables for Canada, I'd be interested. I'd also be interested in finding out why NANPA *doesn't* include Canadian info beyond areacodes! Last time I looked Canada *was* part of the "North American Numbering Plan Area". Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow) shadow@krypton.rain.com <--preferred leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com <--last resort ------------------------------ From: wroberts@arctos.com (Will Roberts) Subject: Re: The DLC Epidemic Spreads to the Northeast Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2000 17:20:16 -0500 Organization: The Arctos Group - http://www.arctos.com/arctos Bill Horne writes: > Ed Ellersa wrote: >> I see from The Washington Post that Bell Atlantic has now started shafting >> some of its customers in the same way that BellSouth is shafting me -- >> namely, by using digital loop carrier systems to provide a poor imitation of >> a phone line, one which unnecessarily distorts the signal and therefore >> blocks the use of V.90 modem connections. > If your reader feels that a DLC system is a "poor imitation of a phone > line", then I'm curious what he feels a good "imitation" would be. > To say that a Digital Loop Carrier "unnecessarily distorts the signal" > is a very arrogant way of inferring that Bell Atlantic would spend > hundreds of thousands of dollars to design, equip, install, insure, > and support a DLC system which requires more (and more expensive) > maintenance than copper wires, can't offer the same services, and > costs more to run. It seems that there are two issues concerning the use of subscriber loop carrier arrangements: v.90 modems and xDSL capabilities. I more or less agree with Bill Horne concerning xDSL -- you just can't make copper pairs appear out of nowhere. The incumbent telco is not in the business building copper plant anymore (unless, of course, the incumbent telco sees xDSL as a line of business it wants to be in.) But the v.90 modem problems are just plain lazy engineering even if not a conspiracy. (or maybe a little bit of both) There have been discussions about DLC in this forum on several occassions. If properly implemented, it shouldn't matter where the analog-to-digital conversion happens: at the CO or in a vault near the subcribers' homes. As I understand the issue from past discussions here, the problems arise when these digital carrier arrangements are improperly configured -- or when somebody uses them at *both* ends, converting back to analog before presenting the loop to the CO switch. If the ILEC wanted to accommodate v.90 modem traffic (and those nasty long duration calls which internet junkies and VPN-using telecommmuters make), the very well could. The thing that amazes me most, however, is the difficulty that the ILECs seem to have in understanding that CLECs are not going to go away and that if they stopped digging in their heels they could make their wholesale business very profitable indeed. If the 'carrier hotels' that are spring up can make money renting space to various service providers, why aren't the ILEC's building or leasing vault space in subdivisions or city blocks where they can terminate short subscriber copper loops and lease rack space and fiber backhaul to wherever. Nobody's going to build competing last mile facilities if the ILECs maintain their advanatage as efficient producers and progressive stewards of that portion of their plant. Somehow, however, I think that the ILECs are so focused on long distance services -- ironically an increasingly competitive market with decreasing margins and under the sword of Damocles caleld internet telephony -- that they cannot figure out the long-term profit opportunities imbedded in their local plant, engineering expertise, relationships with local government, and remaining craft workers. ------------------------------ From: Joe Machado Subject: Give me Some of That New Wireless, Maybe Date: Sun, 5 Mar 2000 00:15:43 -0600 It may have started with Eniac, the big beast that would perform calculations quicker than a human could, supposedly. Soon, the need arose for more computing power and a smaller footprint. IBM and folks provided the solutions but still more power and a smaller footprint was needed, especially one where people could easily use the beast. Gates and Jobs provided the footprint and solution, later Compaq and IBM, and soon we were computing on the desktop as well as the data center. My old Kaypro 10, with its CPM operating system could perhaps be considered an early form of mobile computing; just latch the keyboard on and take the whole thing to another location. Wonderful stuff! Laptops later came and got better screens, video, and power. Now we could really compute anywhere! The trend continued and motherboards got smaller as did 'mainframes', while also gaining in computing power. These communication resources were not sufficient, we also needed to speak to one another no matter where we were. Portable phones provided the answer ( no pun intended ) and it looks as if just about everyone in modern civilization today has a cell phone. However, if you could speak using a cellular telephone, and surf using the laptop, why not have the information one gets while surfing on the telephone? Sure, there was the matter of different screen sizes and amount of content, but WAP fixed all that. Now, you can speak on the cell phone, surf the net, receive and send emails and messages, and more, all on the same unit, the cellular telephone. You can also speak through your computer with someone else far away, and for free ... oh no! That is just free stuff, not WAP ). Wonderful opportunities, very interesting, and great fun!!! Excuse me, but is miniaturization going on? Yes, the world is shrinking due to the convergence of technologies and the accessibility we realize by using them, but, is not the technology also shrinking? It seems that what we are trying to do is exert ourselves into the many possibilities available not just as we knew them with a telephone and a computer, but also our realizations due to maturation of the Web with our participation in it, and all by using one single device. ( BTW, where is my cellular Cisco Pix on a chip? Also, can other people hear and see what I am doing? And, am I frying my brain or ear drum with this new gizmo? ). All the things we can do with multiple devices we can now do ( just about ) with one small handheld unit that can fit in a pocket on our clothes. This technology is cool, interesting, useful, and at many times necessary. It is also affordable for many. The technology really works and virtually anywhere, thanks to the big boys, including the Satellite folks! Hopefully everyone will be able to partake of these many options. My question is when are we going to stop using screens? Instead of screens an image could be projected using Red, Green, and Blue from a transmitter in glasses, or from a pendant, or from a wristwatch, or some other such device that does not use a screen to deliver the content. We could also use holographic projections and project the image into 3d space, again, in color. Why can't we look at a web page projected in front of us in space in a size that is relevant, complete with sound and all the content? Why can't we enter a web site and move around in it? Going to the grocery store ahem...) might really be fun, especially if other people were also in the site at the same time. Why can't we see the scene or image and engage in 3d communication with others from a chip planted in our brain? Why can't we think and realize the intent? Will we have to discuss the collective unconscious and how to not just materialize it but also use it? Do we need a chip in our brain? Would I not prefer being in my own home with my family instead of with the world in 3d virtual space? So how do we do a holographic projection that can fill a room? What kind of power source would be required for a set of glasses to deliver a 2 foot by 2 foot image in front of our faces? What technology would be required? Interesting issues and they are pressing. I think some grandchildren today will provide the answers, hopefully sooner than we are ready for them to. The way they would relate with each other would still be as we know it today, an age thing, but their communication would be more meaningful, complete, sharing, and indeed diverse, as well as dimensional. Why? Because they have bridged time and space and now share the world through common experiences ( can the new Cisco PIX prevent my daughter from being with that guy? ). Hopefully they would not forget us, but we are history moving forward. In the meantime, why can't we work at projecting a web page or a NetMeeting type interaction inside a car windshield instead of the speedometer? ------------------------------ From: No Spam Subject: Re: DoubleClick Looks to Regain Surfers' Trust Date: Sun, 05 Mar 2000 18:44:25 +1000 Organization: Customer of Telstra Big Pond Direct I prefer a piece of shareware called cookie pal. Best $15 dollars I have spent. It remembers who I want to give cookies to, who I don't want to give cookies to. It can even get down to a host in a particular domain. For the intrusive sites, it just accepts all cookies, doesn't put them anywhere though ... On Thu, 2 Mar 2000 10:54:54 -0500, Ryan Shook wrote: > On Wed, 1 Mar 2000, it was written: > >> I've set my Netscape cookies.txt file to read-only as was suggested >> here some time ago and this works ok. But the IE 4.72... that I >> sometimes use has a folder that contains these cookies. (NT's >> windows\profiles\username\cookies folder with files named >> username@domain.txt ) I've tried to set >> this folder to read-only but that permission gets changed back. Is >> there any way to make it stick? > >There are several possibilities to get around doubleclick.net. > 1) most computers have some sort of hosts file where the TCP/IP drivers try > to lookup domain names there before consulting with a DNS. Insert the > major doubleclick servers and set their IP address to 127.0.0.1. This > makes your browser think that you are doubleclick.net and try to retrieve > the banner from your computer which it obviously won't provide. The gotcha > is that with IE5 you get sent to "this page can't be loaded" far too > often, there is something fancy going on where doubleclick seems to be > executing a script or something. > 2) because 1) is flawed I found another solution. in IE5 there are security > zones set. Tools | Internet Options | Security. You can add domains to a > security zone. By default most everything is considered in the internet > domain. Instead ad *.doubleclick.net to the restricted sites list. I have > *.doubleclick.net and *.ads.*. Then go through the list of rights given to > restricted sites and make sure they can't play with cookies. I believe it > is set that way by default. > The trouble with solutions that completely turn off cookies (you can do > that in the above mentinoed "internet domain" is that they are truly > useful and sometimes necessary. By the nature of the web it is not really > connection based. You make and break hundreds of connections as you surf > instead of making a connection when you start at a website and break the > connection when you go elsewhere. For this reason it is difficult for web > servers to have a sense of state. Cookies allow a sense of state. They > allow a server to recognize you and serve content appropriately based on > information they saved in their databases. This is used by banks, > airlines, car companies that let you "build" a car online, and yahoo > finance so it can remember your customizations and many other groups who > use the technology properly. Unfortunately it is hard to control abuses. > The "security domain" settings in IE4 & 5 are tricky, I'm still trying to > find a combination that lets me get what I want productively from websites > while not letting me become too much of a statistic. ------------------------------ From: Steve Hayes Subject: Re: An Electronic Spy Scare Is Alarming Europe Date: Sun, 5 Mar 2000 12:15:57 +0000 Hi Pat and everyone, In TELECOM Digest V20 issue 4, Monty Solomon forwarded an article by Suzanne Daley about concerns with potential commercial espionage via the Echelon network. This network is run by the U.S. with various English speaking allies including Britain and intercepts all sorts of telephone, fax and e-mail traffic. Supposedly the network is used to gather intelligence about terrorists and drug traffickers (and, when it was dreamt up, about our Cold War adversaries of course). However, it is obvious to anyone that it can also intercept commercially sensitive information and this is what most concerned the French government when it kicked off the furor. In V20 issue 5, W.D.A. Geary pointed out that it is a bit rich of the French to complain about this in view of their long record of commercial espionage. This is quite true but the U.S. has an equally sordid record and I'm sure that Britain wouldn't fare any better if the facts were all known. If someone warns you not to leave your front door unlocked, you should listen even more carefully if you know that they are a burglar -- after all who would know more about the dangers. There is a story about the well known novelist and politician Jeffrey Archer which non-British readers may not have heard. Some years ago, a friend of Archer made a nice profit on some Anglia TV shares which he bought (or did Archer buy them in his name?) just before a takeover bid was announced. Archer's wife was a director of Anglia TV and the authorities suspected insider trading. Even if Mrs. Archer had kept quiet about the bid, she had been sent faxes about it which must have been hanging out of the Archers' fax machine until she collected them. Even in a case like that, the authorities could not prove anything and the case was dropped. Archer has since come unstuck over a completely unrelated scandal from his past. The point is that if even a case like this is inconclusive, what are the chances of detection - let alone prosecution - if similar information was leaked after it was intercepted by a network like Echelon. The spying agencies (especially the CIA) have long records of partnership with criminals (e.g. drug traffickers) where they could further the agencies' other goals. On top of that, information is passed to politicians who are rarely adverse to a bit of "you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours" (see the current French Elf Oil scandals). Then of course, low level personnel in the agencies may seize their own opportunities. As an old cynic, I suspect that it's private gain rather than the desire to catch terrorists which explains the willingness of governments to fund systems like Echelon. The French have now warned their European partners and companies as well as everyone else that no e-mail, phone call or fax is safe from prying eyes (unless strong encryption is used). I don't think we need be paranoid about the insignificant details of our everyday lives but no-one should send unprotected information which would be worthy of exploitation by someone else. I think that the French have done us all a great service and only wish that my country was not being used so blatantly as part of this network. Steve Hayes South Wales, U.K. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 5 Mar 2000 05:26:50 -0700 From: jlurker@bigfoot.com (Justa Lurker) Subject: Re: F.C.C. Debates Changes to Cell Phone Fees Reply-To: jlurker@bigfoot.com (Please post to CDT) Date: Sun, 05 Mar 2000 12:25:53 GMT Organization: WinStar GoodNet, Inc. It was Sat, 4 Mar 2000 01:54:44 -0600, and Mark.Brukhartz@wdr.com wrote in comp.dcom.telecom: > Personally, I agree that ``calling party pays'' in the United States > would raise the price of calling mobile phones to the point of pain. The point of pain would at least be on the person who decided to make that call. Cellular Caller ID would help, but I carry a cell phone so that certain people can always reach me. I don't want to pay for calls from just anyone, so my number remains private. And the cell company loses business because those calls are never made. I believe that caller pays would lead to an increase of cell phone usage, sharing the infrastructure costs out over more minutes of actual use, and lowering the overall rate paid per minute to the point where calling a cell would cost the calling party a reasonable rate. I would be willing to give out that number more (since I don't have to pay for it) and, just as it is in caller party pays countries, usage goes up. > There is little restraint to imposing fees on non-customers. Witness > the explosion of non-customer automatic teller machines fees. In the > USA, it is now common to pay about $1.50 to use another bank's ATM. > Even though most ATMs were deployed before these fees were permitted. If I use a 'foreign ATM' I am in a sense a customer of that institution. They pay to maintain the location, stock the machine, and network to the national system. I realize that they would spend that money for their own customers only, to a certain extent, but there is cost involved, and some banks have chosen to charge fees instead of eating them. (I also get to pay to talk to a teller at my bank, where I AM a customer. Fees are getting out of hand.) Foreign ATM fees have been around for years, and I dispute your claim that 'most ATMs' were deployed before fees. Too many "ATM Inside" gas station and mall locations popping up over the past few years. I'd like to see some real numbers from the US on the Caller Pays issue. Cincinatti would be a good place to start as they have had a mix of caller pays and cellphone pays prefixes for many years. The foreign trends look good, but it would be nice to see NANP numbers. JL ------------------------------ From: oldbear@arctos.com (The Old Bear) Subject: Re: Telephone-Pole Battle: Steel Takes On Wood Date: Sun, 5 Mar 2000 15:46:44 -0500 Organization: The Arctos Group - http://www.arctos.com/arctos hudsonl@skypoint.com (Hudson Leighton) writes: > Jeremy Greene wrote: >> How can anyone in their right mind be debating what type of pole to >> use in a new residential development? Just bury the damn wires! > And then you can wait weeks while they dig it all up to find a problem, > broken wire lines are real easy to spot, repair, replace. > Check out some of the various New York City area blackout stories. > I seem to remember that buried utilties cost three times more to > install and have less that 1/2 the life of pole lines. > Also the locals have a harder time killing themselves when digging > fence post holes. San Francisco, and many California communities, have been working to place overhead wiring underground for several decades. One serious drawback to overhead wires is that they tend to suffer damage in large earthquakes when the spacing between the tops of the poles oscillates wildly. Obviously, maintaining emergency communications is a issue. But even more is the risk imposed by fallen power lines and poles which can and do become debris blocking streets and preventing access by emergency vehicles. Poles don't go away after an undergrounding project, however. They are still needed in some form to support street lights and traffic signals. However, by not being yoked together at the top, these posts can be designed to vibrate like a diving board stood on end. As for the locals "killing themselves when digging fence post holes," I'd be surprised if the number of such incidents is even significant compared with the number of people who drive into utility poles or are injured when someone else shears off a power pole and it falls onto someone or something. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V20 #10 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun Mar 5 19:50:44 2000 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id TAA23337; Sun, 5 Mar 2000 19:50:44 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 5 Mar 2000 19:50:44 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200003060050.TAA23337@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #11 TELECOM Digest Sun, 5 Mar 2000 19:50:00 EST Volume 20 : Issue 11 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson ICFC Call for Papers (David Loomis) Re: Communication Tower Being Built (Travis Dixon) Re: F.C.C. Debates Changes to Cell Phone Fees (Marcus Aakesson) Re: Telephone-Pole Battle: Steel Takes On Wood (Marcus Aakesson) Re: Telephone-Pole Battle: Steel Takes On Wood (J.F. Mezei) DoubleClick Cries "Uncle" (Monty Solomon) On the Internet, Your Bank is Not Your Friend (Monty Solomon) Policy Post 6.06: Privacy Matters -- DoubleClick Doubles-Back (M Solomon) Re: NXX by NPA (Stephen Kaps) Re: 7D Dialing Across NPA Boundaries (Stanley Cline) Re: 7D Dialing Across NPA Boundaries (Steve Riner) Re: Long Lines Bells (Grover C. McCoury III) Re: Long Lines Bells (Tony Pelliccio) Internet Call Centers (Smarty) Did Consumer E-Commerce Happen Too Fast? (Monty Solomon) 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-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest 611 Poplar Street Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 805-545-5115 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@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: hyperarchive.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 the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2000 17:05:58 -0600 From: David Loomis Subject: ICFC Call for Papers CALL FOR PAPERS The 18th Annual 2000 ICFC Conference "Convergence of New Technologies and Market Dynamics: Forecasting, Economics and Marketing for the Communications Revolution" Seattle Sheraton Hotel and Towers, Seattle, WA, U.S.A. September 26-29, 2000 Hosted by Illinois State University and the International Telecommunications Society The ICFC Conference is an international communications conference for marketing, forecasting and demand analysis. The ICFC attracts forecasters, demand analysts, market researchers, product managers, statisticians, academics, and consultants within, or interested in, the communications industry. The ICFC provides state-of-the-art information and analysis of existing and emerging issues as they pertain to communications forecasting, planning, demand analysis, market research and cost analysis. Please submit abstracts of 300 words or less by mail, fax or e-mail on or BEFORE MAY 1, 2000 to: (preferred mode is e-mail; please include name, address, phone, fax and e-mail on all correspondence) David G. Loomis Illinois State University Department of Economics Campus Box 4200 Normal, IL 61790-4200 Tel: 309-438-7979 Fax: 309-438-5228 E-mail: dloomis@ilstu.edu Abstracts will be reviewed by the conference Planning Committee and notification of acceptance will be given by MAY 31, 1999. Presentations will be generally about 20 minutes followed by a brief discussion period. If you require more time for your proposed presentation or you have any special audiovisual or computer requirements, please indicate so in your abstract. All presenters are expected to register for the conference and pay the regular registration fee. A limited number of registration scholarships may be available to academic and government presenters. Papers presented at the conference are also eligible to be included in a conference book. For more Information: PLEASE VISIT ICFC HOME PAGE AT http://www.icfc.ilstu.edu/ ************************************************************************** David G. Loomis Email: dloomis@ilstu.edu Illinois State University Voice: (309) 438-7979 Department of Economics FAX: (309) 438-5228 Campus Box 4200 Normal, IL 61790-4200 Web Site: http://www.ilstu.edu/~dloomis/ ************************************************************************** ------------------------------ From: Travis Dixon Subject: Re: Communication Tower Being Built Organization: None of Your Business Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2000 23:22:33 GMT This was a big discussion in misc.rural several months back. You might want to check deja.com for articles on this - there was some excellent info from folks there on easements and such. Basically you should see a lawyer on *your* terms to make sure that you're not giving up something that you don't want to be giving up -- like rights to fence your land, etc... travis Linda Harris wrote: > We have been approached by a communications company, who wish to put a > cellular communications tower on our property. > We meet all their requirements regarding site, elevation etc., They > had done all their homework before they approached us, and they know > its in a prime site. Its known throughout this district, that our area > is a black spot for cellular phones. We would like to know, before we > go any further, as to the payment for the lease offered by them. The > lease is to run for over 50 years. Is there anyone who has had > similar dealings with having towers put on their property, and could > give us an Idea as to what they were given as payment. Its obvious > that they offer you the very minimum as an opening offer. We are > curious as to the "going" rate. We live in western PA. > Yours Faithfully, > Linda Harris > e-mail address....Tamworth@voicenet.com ------------------------------ From: Marcus Aakesson Subject: Re: F.C.C. Debates Changes to Cell Phone Fees Date: Sat, 04 Mar 2000 00:58:46 +0100 Organization: Chalmers University of Technology On Thu, 2 Mar 2000 18:29:01 -0600, Jeremy S. Nichols wrote: > I would like a pair of phone numbers for my phone: one for which I pay > the charges, and the other for which the calling party pays. > My (U.S.) mobile account gives me first incoming minute free, so I can > leave my phone powered on full time risk-free. I am careful to whom I > give the number, however, as I don't want to be bombarded with junk > calls like I am on my land-line phone. Calling-party-pays would seem > to be a disincentive to junk callers and I could be much more free > distributing that number. But there are many people who would never > call me if it were going to cost them $0.50 US per minute. I would > want to give them a free number to call. That's easy, we just forward our home or office number. That way I pick up the charges _when I want to_. > One potential problem with calling-party-pays is that there is no > price pressure. As a mobile subscriber I choose a calling plan to > minimize my costs and the carriers compete for my business. As a > caller to a mobile I have to accept the price I will be charged and > have no way to shop for a better rate. I likely won't call. Why ? Here we are all CPP and there is fierce competition between different operators for the lowest landline-to-mobile calls. > The calling-party-pays plans I have seen here have a per-minute rate > 2-5 times the subscriber's rate. Since many parts of the CPP world do not use the "included minutes" plans, this is hard to compare. It is however certain that prices are coming down al the time in CPP systems. Since we also only pay for around half of the calls (outgoing) this also must be considered in the comparison. > It boils down to who's convenience is being served by the mobile > phone. Ideally the extra charge for a mobile call would be paid by > the party benefitting the most. I find it convenient to be able to choose. During working hours, I forward my work phone to my mobile. That way customers will reach me without any extra charges. After hours, I'm only (maybe) available on my mobile number. If they need to disturb me, they pay. Works good for me. > Of course, this perspective is from someone in an area where all local > non-mobile calls have no per-minute charge. Yes, that is a big difference, and the numbering plan is another important issue. Marcus AAkesson marcus.akesson@NO_SPAM_PLEASE_home.se Gothenburg Callsigns: SM6XFN & SB4779 Sweden >>>>>> Keep the world clean - no HTML in news or mail ! <<<<<< ------------------------------ From: Marcus AAkesson Subject: Re: Telephone-Pole Battle: Steel Takes On Wood Date: Sat, 04 Mar 2000 01:05:20 +0100 Organization: Chalmers University of Technology On Thu, 2 Mar 2000 10:24:36 -0500, Mike Pollock wrote: > By ROBERT GUY MATTHEWS > Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL > March 2, 2000 > How many wood poles do woodpeckers peck, since woodpeckers do peck poles? > In a typical midsize city, roughly 1,000 telephone poles have to be replaced every year because birds -- and then rain -- cause them to rot. That annoys utilities and sets them back about $200 a pole. Poles ? In the Year 2000 they are debating poles ? I havn't seen any new poles come up in my lifetime here. This house is in a residential area built in 1939, and there is not a pole in sight. Out in the countryside there are plenty, but hardle ever in any residential areas planned after around 1930 ... Marcus AAkesson marcus.akesson@NO_SPAM_PLEASE_home.se Gothenburg Callsigns: SM6XFN & SB4779 Sweden >>>>>> Keep the world clean - no HTML in news or mail ! <<<<<< ------------------------------ From: JF Mezei Subject: Re: Telephone-Pole Battle: Steel Takes On Wood Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2000 19:22:07 -0500 Jeremy Greene wrote: > How can anyone in their right mind be debating what type of pole to > use in a new residential development? Just bury the damn wires! After the ice storm of 1998 in Montreal, there was much debate about Hydro Quebec having the least amount of its distribution network underground (and thus most exposed to weather). Part of Hydro's response is that while the number of disruptions are lessened, each disruption is more complex since locating the break is difficult and requires digging up backyards (bringing digging equipment to backyards etc is not easy sometimes). Also, considering that stringing fiber to homes is something which will begin soon, I am not sure it would be wise to do much digging up now. Once the shakeout in telecom wiring has occured and we know whether twisted pair , fiber or coax will go to homes, then perhaps it becomes a worthy effort to bury cables. As far as wooden poles being "natural" and "healthy", aren't they treated with creosote or other nasty stuff ? ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2000 20:51:45 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: DoubleClick Cries "Uncle" http://www.thestandard.com/article/display/0,1151,12568,00.html Every so often, bad PR actually affects company policy. DoubleClick announced Thursday that it's holding off on linking peoples' Web-surfing habits and online purchases with personal information like their names and addresses. "I made a mistake," DoubleClick chief executive Kevin O'Connor said, in a statement that was quoted across the board. O'Connor didn't say he'd never merge the two databases. He just said his company would take it easy "until there is agreement between government and industry on privacy standards." In other words, you won't see DoubleClick execs laughing over a beer with folks from the Electronic Privacy Information Center anytime soon. Government investigations and privacy advocates put the squeeze on DoubleClick over the last month, but they certainly weren't the only ones. In a page-one story, John Schwartz of the Washington Post described the 100,000-plus consumer complaints DoubleClick has received, the private lawsuits against the company, and the decisions by AltaVista and Kozmo.com to keep their visitors' data from DoubleClick unless individuals give their permission. As New York Times columnist Bob Tedeschi and the WSJ's Andrea Petersen noted, DoubleClick's beleaguered stock rose on the announcement. The L.A. Times suggested that strained relationships with clients inspired the change in plans - and besides, DoubleClick was at least a year away from being able to implement the program in question. Privacy advocates seemed pleased but wary. The editor of Privacy Times even told Tedeschi that DoubleClick's about-face might hurt the effort to establish privacy standards. "By backing down now and doing the right thing, they take a little air out of the balloon, and unfortunately that could slow things down," he said. Sounds like the privacy movement needs a new enemy. - Jen Muehlbauer DoubleClick Beats a Retreat on Data Privacy http://publish.thestandard.com/article/display/0,1151,12563,00.html?nl=mg Web Firm Halts Profiling Plan http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/business/A61991-2000Mar2.html DoubleClick Reverses Course After Outcry on Privacy Issue http://interactive.wsj.com/articles/SB952019045241548818.htm (Paid subscription required.) DoubleClick Backs off Web-Tracking Plan http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/tech/cth486.htm DoubleClick Puts off Its Plan for Wider Use of Personal Data http://www.nytimes.com/library/financial/columns/030300doubleclick-adcol.html (Registration required.) DoubleClick Backs Away From Linking Consumers to Data http://www.sjmercury.com/svtech/columns/gillmor/docs/dg030300.htm DoubleClick Cancels Plan to Link Net Users' Names, Habits http://www.latimes.com/business/20000303/t000020658.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2000 20:32:20 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: On the Internet, Your Bank is Not Your Friend Deposit This On the Internet, your bank is not your friend Hal Plotkin, Special to SF Gate Wednesday, February 23, 2000 When the notorious bank robber Willie Sutton was finally apprehended, a reporter asked him: "Mr. Sutton, can you tell us why you rob banks?" Sutton's famous reply: "Because that's where they keep the money." The same undeniably simple logic is behind a huge fight now brewing between the already anachronistic banking industry and Internet entrepreneurs who are trying to put more power in the hands of consumers. http://www.sfgate.com/technology/beat/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2000 21:19:26 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Policy Post 6.06: Privacy Matters -- DoubleClick Doubles-Back, http://www.cdt.org/publications/pp_6.06.shtml CDT POLICY POST Volume 6, Number 6 March 3, 2000 `A BRIEFING ON PUBLIC POLICY ISSUES AFFECTING CIVIL LIBERTIES ONLINE from THE CENTER FOR DEMOCRACY AND TECHNOLOGY CONTENTS: (1) DoubleClick Puts Profiling on Hold; AltaVista Adopts Opt-In (2) Next Steps: Raising Industry Standard through Consumer Action (3) CDT Testifies on Privacy (1) DoubleClick Puts Profiling on Hold; AltaVista Adopts Opt-In In an important step for privacy, Internet advertiser DoubleClick announced on March 2 that it will hold up plans to tie personally identifiable information such as names and addresses to users' online surfing habits until government and industry have reached an agreement on privacy rules for the Internet. CDT played a major role in alerting the public and policymakers to the privacy pitfalls of DoubleClick's profiling plans. On February 1, CDT started an online campaign, creating a Web site where Internet users could: 1) opt-out of DoubleClick; 2) write to DoubleClick's CEO to complain; and 3) write to Web sites that allowed DoubleClick to set cookies on their viewers, seeking clarification of what personal data those sites were sharing with DoubleClick. Over 100,000 people visited our DoubleClick action site. On February 29, CDT along with the Privacy Rights Clearinghouse, Consumer Action, the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD), and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed a Statement of Additional Facts and Grounds for Relief with the Federal Trade Commission, seeking immediate action to prevent harm to consumer privacy as a result of DoubleClick's data matching. In the wake of CDT's online campaign and FTC filing, several prominent businesses publicly distanced themselves from DoubleClick and reevaluated their own privacy practices. * Most notably, Internet search engine and portal AltaVista, DoubleClick's largest partner, announced that it was adopting an "opt-in" policy for personal information collected about the surfing habits of users registered at its site. * Intuit removed DoubleClick advertisements from the loan and mortgage sections of its Quicken Web site after being notified that information about users' salaries and debts were being transmitted to DoubleClick. DoubleClick's announcement: http://www.cdt.org/privacy/000302doubleclick.shtml AltaVista's reply to CDT: http://www.cdt.org/action/doubleclick/altavista.shtml Our FTC filing: http://www.cdt.org/testimony/000225ftcdcstatement.shtml (2) Next Steps: Raising Industry Standard through Consumer Action These recent developments signal an important shift in the privacy debate. DoubleClick's decision to halt its plan to create fully identifiable profiles of online users is testament to the growing and vocal consumer privacy constituency online. These newly empowered Netizens can use the technology to express their privacy concerns in the marketplace, and companies are paying attention. AltaVista's move to an "opt-in" privacy policy is a significant departure from the industry norm and proves that Internet companies can respect privacy and still provide free, innovative services to consumers. Intuit's move to limit the flow of personal information about users to DoubleClick, sets the stage for Web sites taking a more proactive approach to analyzing the privacy implications of their business relationships. This week's DoubleClick and AltaVista developments set an important benchmark for other companies online. CDT will now turn its attention to urging other companies to meet this standard. * First, CDT is calling on all network advertisers to join DoubleClick and not merge individuals' names and addresses with their surfing habits. * Second, CDT is calling on the other search engines and portals to join AltaVista in seeking prior customer approval (opt-in) before disclosing personally identifiable information on subscribers. * Third, we will continue to use the Internet to provide individuals with timely alerts and online resources so that users can make their voices heard with impact. To subscribe to CDT's Activist Network, go to: http://www.cdt.org/join/ * Finally, CDT will continue to provide its "Operation Opt-Out" tools helping consumers learn how to get off direct marketing, telemarketing, online profiling and other lists http://optout.cdt.org, including information about how to "opt-out" of DoubleClick. (3) CDT Testifies on Privacy In two separate Hill appearances this week, CDT spelled out its privacy vision. Testifying before a joint House-Senate hearing on February 29, CDT senior staff counsel Jim Dempsey addressed the need for strong privacy protections limiting government access to information. Responding to calls for legislation in response to the denial of service attacks last month, Dempsey stressed that good network security is the responsibility of the private sector, not the government, and can be achieved without sacrificing privacy or anonymity online. He pointed out how legal standards for government surveillance are too weak, and urged Congress, if it adopts any new legislation on computer crime or surveillance authorities, to keep it narrow and to balance it with privacy enhancements. In Senate testimony on the AOL-Time Warner merger on March 2, CDT Executive Director Jerry Berman noted that the proposed merger highlights both the increased risks for privacy problems as the Internet evolves, and the great potential for self-regulatory efforts to enhance privacy protection. Both AOL and Time Warner have access to significant amounts of personal data about their subscribers. For AOL, this includes, for example, information about online service subscribers, AOL.COM portal users, and ICQ and instant messaging users. Time Warner has access to information about ranging from cable subscriber usage to magazine subscriptions. The specter of the merged companies pooling all of their information resources, and then mining those resources for marketing and other purposes, should be cause for concern. Fundamentally, however, the AOL Time Warner merger does not alter the equation for a privacy solution. Protecting privacy on the Internet requires a multi-pronged approach, Berman testified, that involves self-regulation, technology, and legislation, whether or not the merger occurs. Dempsey's testimony: http://www.cdt.org/security/000229judiciary.shtml Berman's testimony: http://www.cdt.org/testimony/000302berman.shtml Detailed information about online civil liberties issues may be found at http://www.cdt.org/. This document may be redistributed freely in full or linked to http://www.cdt.org/publications/pp_6.06.shtml. Excerpts may be re-posted with prior permission of ari@cdt.org Policy Post 6.06 Copyright 2000 Center for Democracy and Technology ------------------------------ From: Stephen Kaps Reply-To: skaps@flash.net Subject: Re: NXX by NPA Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2000 23:40:18 GMT Organization: FlashNet Communications, http://www.flash.net The list you desire is the LERG (Local Exchange Routing Guide?) I found this as the first hit when I searched for LERG. Nathan Stratton nathan@robotics.net wrote: > A few months ago I was trying to put together a list of LERG switch codes. > Many people on this list helped fill in the blanks, but there was still a > large number of codes that I did not know. Even more people asked me where > they could get such a list. Well I just got my copy (actually it looks like > a copy of a copy of a copy of a copy) from Telcordia (Am I the only one > who liked Bellcore better?). It is Telcordia (Bellcore) Practice BR > 751-100-460 issue 3, April 1995 and only cost $10 from Telcordia. Anyway, because so many people asked about it I wanted to post the info to this list. ><> Nathan Stratton Telecom & ISP Consulting http://www.robotics.net nathan@robotics.net Robert M. Bryant wrote: > Do you know where I can get a list of NXX's by NPA or by City or State?? > Robert M. Bryant > DNAE IBM Team > 440 Hamilton, 12th. fl. > White Plains, NY 10601 > (914) 397-8451 > Pager: 888-858-7243, pin 116852 > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It would be a humongous list to say > the least, on several CD Roms, and printing out to hundreds of pages. > And the list never ends, and is never entirely up to date. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Stanley Cline Subject: Re: 7D Dialing Across NPA Boundaries Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2000 19:14:52 -0500 Organization: by area code and prefix (NPA-NXX) Reply-To: sc1@roamer1.org On Wed, 01 Mar 2000 03:47:43 GMT, Blake Droke wrote: [Memphis] > Unlike Louisville, however, no 10D calling is allowed. Of course there SWB allows 10d from West Memphis to Memphis ... or at least they did last May. :) > I noticed a potential problem in the Neustar database recently. 901-739 > has been assigned to a CLEC in 901, while 870-739 is assigned to > Southwestern Bell and is a local call from Memphis 901. Might not be a > problem since Tennessee is a toll alerting state. It depends on which > rate center will get 901-739. If its in the Metro Memphis area, there > will be a dialling conflict. BellSouth Mobility in Chattanooga somehow got 423-937 (I don't recall if it showed up in the NNAG/NIPC/etc. or if it was a translations error for 423-987 or some other prefix assigned to BSM; calls from Atlanta were correctly completed to 423-937, however, which would tend to indicate that IXCs knew about it); Ringgold, GA, which is local to Chattanooga, has 706-937. Needless to say, that got fixed quickly. Stanley Cline -- sc1 at roamer1 dot org -- http://www.roamer1.org/ ------------------------------ From: Steve Riner Subject: Re: 7D Dialing Across NPA Boundaries Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2000 18:12:09 -0600 Organization: Frontier GlobalCenter Inc. Arthur L. Rubin <216-5888@mcimail.com> wrote in message news:telecom20.4.1@telecom-digest.org... > As an aside, has anyone suggested requiring the local phone companies > to have permissive 11D dialing for calls within the same area code? > I've been unable (as yet) to program my dialers (under Windows 3.1) > to handle the 602/623/480 NPA split. (For those not familiar with the > split, calls are 7D within each NPA, 10D between them, > and 11D (with, I believe, some 10D exeptions near the border with 520) > to other NPAs. All calls within those NPAs are local. Cities local calling area (area codes 612/651/763/952 and even a couple of exchanges within 507). While their dialing instructions state "DO NOT" dial 1+ for FNPA local calls, 1+10D calls are not charged long distance. Steve Riner Columbia Heights MN Explore Minnesota Highways of the Past and Present at: http://www.frontiernet.net/~riner/main_hwy.htm ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 05 Mar 2000 16:17:18 -0600 From: Grover C. McCoury III Organization: Corvia Networks, Inc. Subject: Re: Long Lines Bells I dusted off my copy of the "Bell Labs Bible", Engineering and Operations in the Bell System, and found the following definition: The Long Lines Department of AT&T owns and operates long distance transmission facilities and certain switching systems to provide connections between operating companies and with foreign countries. Long Lines, being an operating organization, is the largest part of AT&T, with about 90% of all AT&T personnel. AT&T was organized as follows: ______________________________________ AT&T General Depts. Long Lines Dept ______________________________________ | | | Western Electric | Bell Operating Companies(24 BOCs) | | | | ------ | | | Bell Telephone** Laboratories ** - BTL is 50% owned by Western Electric and 50% owned by AT&T Dean Forrest Wright wrote: > Incidentally, the name Long Lines really meant exactly that. AT&T Long > Lines was, with a few exceptions, responsible for carrying telephone > calls which crossed state lines, with the local Bell Operating Company > (i.e. Mountain States Telephone & Telegraph) being responsible for > carrying calls within a given state or related geographical area. > Dean Forrest Wright, P.E. Telecommunications (Central Office > Equipment) Engineer dean at imt dot net /********************************** Grover C. McCoury III @ Corvia Networks, Inc. physical: 212 Gibraltar Drive Sunnyvale, CA 94089 audio: (408)752-0550 x128 electronic: grover@corvia.com WWW: http://www.corvia.com **********************************/ ------------------------------ From: nospam.tonypo1@nospam.home.com (Tony Pelliccio) Subject: Re: Long Lines Bells Organization: Providence Network Partners Date: Sun, 05 Mar 2000 00:33:04 GMT In article , Goodwin, Fred says ... > Question on a minor point: didn't the local BOCs own and operate the > *intrastate* LD networks prior to Divestiture? I thought LL owned and > operated only the AT&T *interstate* LD network, and that the BOCs had to > spin off to LL their own intrastate, interLATA LD plant at Divestiture? > If you're equating "long distance" to "interstate", then my point is > moot. Many moons ago I asked someone from New Englad Telephone why in state toll rates were so ridiculously high. They explained that AT&T Long Lines handled all in-state toll traffic. It looks like NET at the time didn't have their own toll switches so they let AT&T rape the crap out of us. On the master balance sheet they were all the same company though. Tony Pelliccio, KD1S formerly KD1NR Trustee WE1RD ------------------------------ From: Smarty Subject: Internet Call Centers Date: Sun, 05 Mar 2000 02:43:42 GMT Is anyone using or know anything about Internet Call Centers? What do you recommend. Do you like what you are using? Etc. Etc. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2000 20:29:40 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Did Consumer E-Commerce Happen Too Fast? February 28, 2000 DIGITAL COMMERCE By DENISE CARUSO The latest entrant in the Internet economy's continuing game of buzzword bingo is "business to business," predictably shortened to "B2B." B2B is just what the name implies: businesses selling to other businesses, using the Internet to cut transaction costs and increase efficiencies. It is a $1.76 billion market that, according to Forrester Research, will reach more than $1 trillion in 2002. http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/00/02/biztech/articles/28digi.html ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V20 #11 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Mar 6 19:25:16 2000 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id TAA10629; Mon, 6 Mar 2000 19:25:16 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2000 19:25:16 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200003070025.TAA10629@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #12 TELECOM Digest Mon, 6 Mar 2000 19:24:00 EST Volume 20 : Issue 12 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Communication Tower (Dean Forrest Wright) Re: Communication Tower (Robert D. Weller, Hammett & Edison, Inc.) Re: F.C.C. Debates Changes to Cell Phone Fees (John Stahl) Internet Merchants Fight Back (Monty Solomon) Re: The DLC Epidemic Spreads to the Northeast (Julian Thomas) Re: F.C.C. Debates Changes to Cell Phone Fees (Michael Hartley) Re: Traffic Exchange (Pavel Gavronsky) Seeking Information on New Company (harad@erols.com) Internet Content vs Internet Delivery (J.F. Mezei) Re: The DLC Epidemic Spreads to the Northeast (Ed Ellers) Re: The DLC Epidemic Spreads to the Northeast (73115.1041@compuserve.com) Re: Kevin Mitnick Speaks to Congress (Ed Ellers) Re: Telephone-Pole Battle: Steel Takes On Wood (Don Kimberlin) Dial 1D Carrier Options in AC 248 (Heywood Jaiblomi) Re: Intuit Acts to Curb Quicken Leaks (Joel B. Levin) Information Wanted on Telephone Switching Systems (Vaios Savviou) The Demise of An IP Long Distance Service? (Ted Koppel) 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-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest 611 Poplar Street Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 805-545-5115 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@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: hyperarchive.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 the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Dean Forrest Wright dot@RUTGERS.EDU> Subject: Re: Communication Tower Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2000 16:02:54 GMT Organization: Wright Engineers P.C. In our world of rapidly changing technology, you should consider the consequences of the tower owner discontinuing its use. In utility line easements, I have seldom seen any clause which requires the owner of the facility to remove it, should it be abandoned. You may wish to consider, however unlikely it may seem at this time, the ramifications of having an abandoned tower and building on your property and consult counsel accordingly. Dean Forrest Wright, P.E. Telecommunications (Central Office Equipment) Engineer dean imt net "When one lacks a sense of awe, there will be a disaster. Linda Harris wrote in article ... > The tower company is offering us $5,000 per annum, with a 15% increase > every 5 years. The lease will run for 55 years. ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Communication Tower From: rweller@h-e.com (Robert D. Weller, Hammett & Edison, Inc.) Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2000 09:56:19 -0800 Organization: Hammett & Edison, Inc. I believe that I missed an earlier message on this subject. Tower site valuation is strongly dependent upon what the tower is going to be used for. If the tower is for a single user, such as a cellular telephone company to fill a gap in its coverage, the value would be much less than if the site will be developed as a multi-user site. The $5k/year proposal sounds reasonable for a single-user pole. Around here (S.F. Bay Area), single-user site leases run $6k-18k/year. Keep in mind those figures are for urban/suburban areas. Rural area land costs are much lower, so tower site lease values would also be lower. In my experience, multi-tenant site owners often negotiate a lease that is based upon a percentage of gross tenant revenue. Percentages for prime sites can run from 15-40% of gross revenue. Another common approach is to negotiate a fixed dollar amount for the first X tenants, plus an escalator (like 2-3%/ year), with a percentage of revenue applying for all tenants beyond X. Bottom line, if $5k/year was their first offer, you need to counter with something higher. Bob Weller ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2000 09:08:23 -0500 From: John Stahl Subject: Re: F.C.C. Debates Changes to Cell Phone Fees I too, am concerned about this subject, particularly about the 'calling party' pays portion of the deliberation. Please look at my email note to Mr. Kennard, FCC Chairman, regarding this issue and his answer, below. John Stahl Aljon Enterprises Telecom/Data Systems Consultant >>> John Stahl 02/29/00 09:55AM >>> Mr. Kennard, I have been reading lately about some FCC deliberation regarding "cellular caller pays". However, I tried to do a search on the FCC internet site to no avail with regards to this subject. I am quite concerned that if this is confirmed by the FCC that many unsuspecting callers will be 'automatically' charged with very high charges when calling a cellular user who is 'roaming' far from their home base (say based in New York and traveling - roaming - in Hawaii). I'm sure you will agree that if this 'calling party pays' is approved, it should have some restrictions on the cellular company to advise the caller of as to what the charges will be in advance of call completion. I would really appreciate finding any internet available information regarding the FCC meetings on this subject. Thank you. John Stahl Response from FCC Chairman Kennard: X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 5.2 Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 17:29:17 -0500 From: BKENNARD To: aljon@worldnet.att.net Subject: Re: Request to the Chairman When considering potential adoption of these rules, we already considered including a notification announcement to callers if they we going to be charged. Thank you for your concerns. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2000 10:29:33 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Internet Merchants Fight Back Frustrated by fraud artists, business owners take matters into their own hands By Mike Brunker MSNBC March 3 - When their pleas for help in fighting credit card thieves in foreign lands fell on deaf ears, Internet merchants Marc Gilbert, Pat LaMastro and Cheryl Faye Schwartz took matters into their own hands. Their tales of international intrigue, online detective work and, in one case, a deadly confrontation in a Eastern European capital would make good fodder for espionage author John LeCarr's next novel. http://www.msnbc.com/news/377221.asp?cp1=1 ------------------------------ From: jata@aepiax.net (Julian Thomas) Subject: Re: The DLC Epidemic Spreads to the Northeast Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2000 17:48:36 GMT In , on 03/04/00 at 05:20 PM, wroberts@arctos.com (Will Roberts) said: > As I understand the issue from past discussions here, the > problems arise when these digital carrier arrangements are > improperly configured -- or when somebody uses them at *both* ends, > converting back to analog before presenting the loop to the CO > switch. I suspect that the DLC concept is old enough that originally it had to work with analog switches (good grief! SxS!!) as well as digital switches -- hence the conversion back to analog. Julian Thomas jata@aepiax.net remove letter a for email (or switch . and @) In the beautiful Finger Lakes Wine Country of New York State! Boardmember of POSSI.org - Phoenix OS/2 Society, Inc http://www.possi.org WarpTech 2000: May 26-28 in Phoenix - plan NOW to attend! www.warptech.org "Unix _IS_ user friendly... It's just selective about who its friends are." ------------------------------ From: Michael Hartley Subject: Re: F.C.C. Debates Changes to Cell Phone Fees Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2000 10:11:47 -0000 > I would like a pair of phone numbers for my phone: one for which I pay > the charges, and the other for which the calling party pays. > One potential problem with calling-party-pays is that there is no > price pressure. Not for call charges, in any case. Experience in the uk shows that inbound call revenue is very inelastic to the per minute charge to the calling party. If people want to call you, they will. > As a caller to a mobile I have to accept the price I will be charged and > have no way to shop for a better rate. You can always use a calling card, or choose a tariff which offers mobile-mobile calls at less than land-mobile rates. > I likely won't call. Your loss. Many others will;+) > Of course, this perspective is from someone in an area where all local > non-mobile calls have no per-minute charge. There's a very interesting [and contentious ;+)] uk/us comparison in this. Here in the uk, e-business is seen to be hampered by per-minute call charges regardless of access- leading to a less developed e-economy. In the US, e business booms and the mobile market lags Europe by a couple of years..... M commerce is here in Europe already, draw your own conclusions about how long called party pays will last in the US. Mike (No, I don't want to get in a standards/politics flame war here -- just look at the market penetration figures.) ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Traffic Exchange Organization: Telrad Networks Ltd. Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2000 12:46:33 GMT Hello Sergey, It's not clear, what do you find exactly, so send me e-mail (KOI-8, WIN, ISO are acceptable). Best regards, Pavel Gavronsky IN System Architect Public Networks Solution Telrad Networks Ltd. Phone (972)-8-9134583 Fax (972)-8-9131255 mailto:pavel.gavronsky@telrad.co.il Sergey A. Mosienko wrote in message news:telecom20.6.2@telecom-digest.org... > Hi, > Pls, > Where I can find the references for an IPT traffic exchange ( WWW) ? > Soon we shall have Moscow - Nakhodka ( Russia ) min E1 ( max 36 E1 ), > Router - Tigris AXC-711 ( Ericsson ) and Gateway AXI-511 ( Ericsson ). > Best Regards, > INCOM > Telecom and Datacom Networks > Sergey A. Mosienko > Deputy Director on Business Development > Tel / Fax. +7 - 095 - 795-3323 > E-mail: mosienko@incom-svyaz.ru > Web: http://www.incom-js.ru > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Would a couple of our readers please > correspond with Sergey in Russia and see if his questions can be > answered. Thanks very much. PAT] ------------------------------ From: harad@erols.com Subject: Information Wanted on New Company Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2000 05:16:58 -0800 Mr. Townson, Are you aware of a new ip telephony co. called @IPbell? Web site www.ipbell.com. There is info about this new start up on the new releases of a US company, science dynamics, (OTC: SIDY). I am interested in learning about @IPbell, believing it to be an investment opportunity to be considered. Unfortunately, the web site is not helpfull, and the only other source of info came from cisco and hp news saying that they are partners. If you could help me learn about this company, I would be greatfull. Thanks Harad@erols.com ------------------------------ From: JF Mezei Subject: Internet Content vs Internet Delivery Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2000 02:49:39 -0500 I am quite puzzled as to how Wall street considers mergers between AOL and Time-Warner to be so significant. They mention on how Time-Warner gains a new distribution medium for their content. While I inderstand that AOL gains access to Time's cable infrastructure to upgrade from modem to cable based ISP service, I really don't understand how "content" companies benefit when they buy "ISP" companies. Since the internet is worldwide, and since WWW.CNN.COM is already available worldwide through any ISP, how does it benefit CNN to since CNN is already distributed to AOL subscribers whether Time-Warner owns AOL or not ? In Canada, on the heels of the Time-AOL merger, Bell Canada (BCE) decided it had to move and bid for CTV which owns the CTV television network as well as a few specialty TV channels in canada. BCE said that they wanted to add content to their internet services (sympatico). Can someone explain to me what that means ? How does owning a TV station add to your ISP business ? In the past, carriers (telcos, satellite, cable companies) have not been controlled by TV networks, yet the two worked fine and TV was delivered. While I can see advantage of Time-Warner of controlling cable companies since they can ensure that their own channels are carried by that cable company, I fail to see the use of controlling an ISP, since customers can choose from any internet site. Can someone please explain what sort of synergy/benefits *really* happen when a content company merges/buys an ISP ? ------------------------------ From: Ed Ellers Subject: Re: The DLC Epidemic Spreads to the Northeast Date: Sun, 5 Mar 2000 20:21:03 -0500 Will Roberts wrote: > I more or less agree with Bill Horne concerning xDSL -- you just can't make > copper pairs appear out of nowhere. The incumbent telco is not in the > business building copper plant anymore (unless, of course, the incumbent > telco sees xDSL as a line of business it wants to be in.) Right, though with the right equipment out in the neighborhoods -- which allegedly is on its way from various vendors, though not yet generally available -- telcos could provide xDSL on DLC-served lines. > There have been discussions about DLC in this forum on several > occassions. If properly implemented, it shouldn't matter where the > analog-to-digital conversion happens: at the CO or in a vault near the > subscribers' homes. > As I understand the issue from past discussions here, the problems arise > when these digital carrier arrangements are improperly configured -- or when > somebody uses them at *both* ends, converting back to analog before > presenting the loop to the CO switch. If the ILEC wanted to accommodate > v.90 modem traffic (and those nasty long duration calls which internet > junkies and VPN-using telecommmuters make), they very well could. That's what I've been trying to get across. In my area we were served by a Western Electric 1A ESS, and since this was an analog switch a DLC installation would have had to present the loop to the switch in the analog domain. We were cut over to a Lucent 5ESS-2000 in December 1996, and as best I can tell -- though no one at BellSouth has been honest enough to give a straight yes *or* no answer -- the DLC-extended loops were simply cut over from the 1A ESS to the 5ESS-2000 in the same way that all-copper loops were, rather than being converted to use digital line cards on the switch. > The thing that amazes me most, however, is the difficulty that the ILECs > seem to have in understanding that CLECs are not going to go away and that > if they stopped digging in their heels they could make their wholesale > business very profitable indeed. > If the 'carrier hotels' that are spring up can make money renting space to > various service providers, why aren't the ILEC's building or leasing vault > space in subdivisions or city blocks where they can terminate short > subscriber copper loops and lease rack space and fiber backhaul to wherever. > Nobody's going to build competing last mile facilities if the ILECs maintain > their advanatage as efficient producers and progressive stewards of that > portion of their plant. > Somehow, however, I think that the ILECs are so focused on long distance > services -- ironically an increasingly competitive market with decreasing > margins and under the sword of Damocles caleld internet telephony -- that > they cannot figure out the long-term profit opportunities imbedded in their > local plant, engineering expertise, relationships with local government, and > remaining craft workers. Excellent point. One thing to remember is that, in most places, there is or soon will be *one* potential CLEC that does not need to build new outside plant for voice services -- that's the local cable TV company, most of whom are either rebuilding their systems to 750 or 860 MHz capacity and full two-way capability. If ILECs seriously go into the business of selling the last mile to CLECs, that admittedly would bring in a lot more CLECs -- but it might fragment the market enough to prevent the cable companies from swinging a wrecking ball against the ILECs. ------------------------------ From: 73115.1041@compuserve.com Subject: Re: The DLC Epidemic Spreads to the Northeast Date: Sun, 05 Mar 2000 20:43:04 -0700 Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com wroberts@arctos.com (Will Roberts) wrote: > There have been discussions about DLC in this forum on several > occassions. If properly implemented, it shouldn't matter where > the analog-to-digital conversion happens: at the CO or in a > vault near the subcribers' homes. I agree. SLCs have a bad rap because their initial installations were not integrated with the CO. There would be a SLC in the neighborhood that would concentrate 20+ lines on a single copper pair back to the CO, then another SLC that would demux the lines, where the would be wired individually to the switch. There's a limited amount of bandwidth you can put on a copper pair and the extra mux/demux cycle didn't help either. Modern SLCs do the conversion once and send all the lines digitally right into the switch, usually on a fibre pair direct from the SLC. This can actually be a preferred solution, as the fibre is immune to induced noise. The problem here is that space for a DSL DSLAM in the SLC cabinet is at a premium, if it exists at all. This makes it hard for the telco or CLEC to provide highspeed internet access. SLCs are also confused with "pair gain" type devices that are used when there isn't enough copper from the vault to the demarc on the house. These are nasty as they usually do a frequency split/shift for one of the two lines that destroys any modem performance. Ken ------------------------------ From: Ed Ellers Subject: Re: Kevin Mitnick Speaks to Congress Date: Sun, 5 Mar 2000 20:25:22 -0500 David Chessler wrote: > Mitnick may not need publicity among the cognizenti (I guess that's us), > but his career as a black-hat hacker is probably over. He's now > repositioning himself as a "security consultant," quite possibly to the CIS > departments of the same government agencies and private companies (such as > the New York Times) that tried so hard to put him in jail. Moreover, he can > do this without ever actually *touching* a computer." Except that the same probation order that prevents him from using a computer also prevents him from giving such advice to clients, though public statements like this are not covered. Personally, though I happen to believe that Mitnick should have been locked up for what he did, I don't think this probation order makes any sense. IMHO, either the court should have let him loose entirely, or -- if he is still a danger to society -- should have kept him in prison. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 05 Mar 2000 21:24:45 -0500 From: Don Kimberlin Subject: Re: Telephone-Pole Battle: Steel Takes On Wood ... In typical short-accounting-cycle American style, the utility companies have prolonged use of wooden poles. Resource-limited Europeans have used steel (actually cast iron) poles since the Year Dot of Telecommunications. Metal poles made for Siemens' overland adventure of extending a telegraph line to India in the 1860's are still standing and in use across the Middle East today. Who could argue those have not been economical, since wooden poles, even under the best circumstances, would have required 3 to 5 replacements since then. ... A typically poorly researched bit of American reportage, since anyone who understands a bit of telecommunications history knows that the telegraph was using poles a good 50 years before the AT&T line reported here ... ... The article later goes on to say that metal poles have been shown to survive better in heavy weather locations like Puerto Rico, but ask any traveler parts of the world that the British built their empire in, like East Africa, if they haven't seen metal poles over a good portion of the globe. ... Metal poles? "New technology?" Humbug! Don Kimberlin, NCE ------------------------------ From: heywood@gloucester.com (Heywood Jaiblomi) Subject: Dial 1 LD Carrier Options in AC 248 Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2000 04:02:34 GMT Organization: Uncle Heywood's Trousers of Fun Hi! 1. Welcome back Pat. Take care of yourself, eh? 2. I'm sure this is an elementary question, but I'm not in Michigan so maybe someone can help me. My mother in 248-651-xxxx spends half the year in FL, and still has to pay AT&T $3/month for the privilege of them being her dial 1 carrier. She's a low volume LD user, and I'm sure someone has already done the research on this. Do most reliable dial 1 carriers now charge a monthly fee? If not, who should I suggest she go to? Thanks! Woody If I had my life to live over, I think I'd like to live over a liquor store. ------------------------------ From: Joel B Levin Subject: Re: Intuit Acts to Curb Quicken Leaks Organization: On the desert Reply-To: levinjb@gte.net Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2000 00:22:41 GMT In , John David Galt@acm.org wrote: > I've seen such code used in both e-mail spam and newsgroup postings, > and Netscape Communicator automatically executes it upon viewing the > message. (Communicator has settings to turn off Java and JavaScript > in messages, but not HTML. The only reliable way to avoid > connecting to the web site in such cases is to download your > messages, unplug your PC from the network, then read the messages.) My solution is to read mail with a mail reader[1], not a web browser. I also read Usenet with a news reader[1], not a web browser. I surf the web with a web browser[2] (that gets me in enough trouble). Nothing I receive gets saved to disk, much less executed, till I explicitly request it; and all-HTML messages and articles I usually flush without trying to decipher, on principle (though I make certain exceptions, for instance if I get one as junk mail I'll try real hard to make sure the right admins find out about it). /JBL [1] I use Agent, $29 from www.forteinc.com, for both mail and news. There are also other good choices, both free and for money, available, except from what I gather most Microsoft products are os closely integrated with Internet Explorer that reading mail or news with them is almost as risky as using a browser. [2] I use Netscape (fwiw). ------------------------------ Reply-To: Vaios Savviou From: Vaios Savviou Subject: Information About Telephone Switching Systems Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2000 02:24:40 -0000 Organization: None Dear Sir/Madam, I am a student in the University of Abertay Dundee in Scotland. I am doing as a project a telephone switching system. Could you please send me any information on how telephone switching systems work. Thank you, Vaios Savviou BSc Mechatronics University Of Abertay Dundee vaios@cableinet.co.uk [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Anyone care to write direct to the author above with information on telephone switching systems? PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2000 10:39:10 -0500 From: Ted Koppel Subject: The demise of an IP LOng Distance Service? Until this past week, I was a customer of the ICG/Netcom IP Long Distance service -- wherein one dialed a local access number, then the number of the person to contact, and the call would be completed over the Netcom IP network. Although the local access number still answers (here in Atlanta), the calls do not complete -- they are intercepted by a message for Thinklink -- whatever that is. Netcom was purchased by Mindspring some months ago. ICG hasn't heard of their IPLD service. Netcom phone calls are now answered by Mindspring, who also don't have a clue. So, without any notice to customers (how typical!) a company that ostensibly exists to serve the public drops off the scope. Anyone know what really happened to ICG Netcom IPLD? And what this ThinkLink is? Thanks. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V20 #12 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Mar 7 12:20:27 2000 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id MAA11238; Tue, 7 Mar 2000 12:20:27 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2000 12:20:27 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200003071720.MAA11238@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #13 TELECOM Digest Tue, 7 Mar 2000 11:50:41 EST Volume 20 : Issue 13 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Internet Content vs Internet Delivery (Matt Simpson) Re: Internet Content vs Internet Delivery (hoxley@nouce.shore.net) Australia; Wireless Phone Number Portability 3/2001 (David Lind) Re: On the Internet, Your Bank is Not Your Friend (Hal Murray) Re: Long Lines Bells (Hal Murray) Cost of Wiretapping (Hal Murray) 1.)Thread Creep Alert! 2.)Urban Legend Alert! (Don Kimberlin) Re: Dial 1 LD Carrier Options in AC 248 (Joseph Singer) Re: The DLC Epidemic Spreads to the Northeast (John S. Maddaus) Re: Give me Some of That New Wireless, Maybe (Ryan Tucker) Re: Dial 1 LD Carrier Options in AC 248 (Eli Mantel) WTB: Altigen Quantum card (TSL) Re: The DLC Epidemic Spreads to the Northeast (Marvin A Sirbu) DoubleClick Beats a Retreat on Privacy (Monty Solomon) Virginia Law Standardizes Internet Contracts (Monty Solomon) Feds: Your Secrets Are Safe With Us (Monty Solomon) 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-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest 611 Poplar Street Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 805-545-5115 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@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: hyperarchive.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 the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Matt Simpson Subject: Re: Internet Content vs Internet Delivery Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2000 09:58:15 -0500 Organization: University of Kentucky Computing Services In article , JF Mezei wrote: > Can someone please explain what sort of synergy/benefits *really* > happen when a content company merges/buys an ISP ? A lot of new Internet users are not very Internet literate. Their ISP gives them a browser customized to show them the startup page that the ISP wants them to see every time they turn their computer on. Obviously, that can be changed. But many users never do. So if the content company owns the ISP, they can direct a lot more eyeballs to their content. Matt Simpson -- Obsolete MVS Guy University Of Kentucky, Lexington, KY ------------------------------ From: hoxley@nouce.shore.net Subject: Re: Internet Content vs Internet Delivery Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2000 15:13:13 GMT Organization: Shore.Net/Eco Software, Inc; (info@shore.net) Something that I see COULD happen is "content" which used to be available to all Internet users will eventually move behind AOL/TimeWarner's firewall, to only be accessable by AOL/TW subscribers. JF Mezei wrote: > Can someone please explain what sort of synergy/benefits *really* > happen when a content company merges/buys an ISP ? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- = Herb Oxley (hoxleyATshore.net) = = Please note I *never* buy any product or = = service advertised by unsolicited E-mail = = from anyone I'm not doing business with! = -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- ------------------------------ From: David Lind Subject: Australia; Wireless Phone Number Portability 3/2001 Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2000 08:28:07 GMT Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy. Sooo glad to have this forum and the moderater back!! The Aussies have mandated wireless phone number portability to be implemented in 12 months. So what is holding us up? http://cnniw.newsreal.com/cgi-bin/NewsService?osform_template=pages/cnniwStory&ID=cnniw&storypath=News/Story_2000_03_06.NRdb@2@5@3@5&path=News/Category.NRdb@2@14@2@1 David ------------------------------ From: murray@pa.dec.com (Hal Murray) Subject: Re: On the Internet, Your Bank is Not Your Friend Date: 7 Mar 2000 09:52:03 GMT Organization: Compaq Systems Research Center > The same undeniably simple logic is behind a huge fight now brewing > between the already anachronistic banking industry and Internet > entrepreneurs who are trying to put more power in the hands of > consumers. > http://www.sfgate.com/technology/beat/ Nice article. Thanks. Although technically possible, it will be difficult and costly for the banks to deploy systems that determine when online records are being requested by an actual customer or by a third-party website that has access to the customer's password. I have visions of smug bankers who have just hacked their router to black hole the evil third-party sites. How long do you think it will take for somebody to write an app that runs on your PC and gets the info from your bank and sends it to the third-party? Is that more or less secure? ------------------------------ From: murray@pa.dec.com (Hal Murray) Subject: Re: Long Lines Bells Date: 7 Mar 2000 09:59:19 GMT Organization: Compaq Systems Research Center > Many moons ago I asked someone from New Englad Telephone why in state > toll rates were so ridiculously high. They explained that AT&T Long Lines > handled all in-state toll traffic. It looks like NET at the time didn't > have their own toll switches so they let AT&T rape the crap out of us. Many moons ago in California, the PCU set intra-state long distance charges high in order to cross-subsidize residential rates. For a while, it was cheaper to call the east coast than across the state. ------------------------------ From: murray@pa.dec.com (Hal Murray) Subject: Cost of Wiretapping Date: 7 Mar 2000 10:40:20 GMT Organization: Compaq Systems Research Center I think the US has regulations requiring telephone systems to have some automated mechanism for wiretaps. Is there a good description of that system available on the web? What fraction of the current COs support it? I assume there are supposed to be checks in the system to make sure that it's only used for legal taps. Is there any reason that I should believe those checks are good enough to keep hackers from tapping whatever they want? How much does that system cost? If I took the total cost of that system and put a pile of cash on the table in front of the FBI, would they spend it on a wiretapping system or something else? Is this just a sneaky way of taxing phone subscribers to support law enforcement? ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2000 08:18:38 -0500 From: Don Kimberlin Subject: 1.)Thread Creep Alert! 2.)Urban Legend Alert! (Re: Telephone-Pole In article Fri, 03 Mar 2000 12:38:16 -0600 (John Hines (jhines@enteract.com) wrote: > ... power line poles, owned and maintained by Commonwealth Edison, > and the telephone, and cable companies lease space from > them. ComEd then exchanges the electricity to run the city/village for the lease on the right of way for the poles. ... This may be one of those numerous twists and turns in the complex byways of life for common carrier utilities in the United States, but in the southeastern part of the country, and a few other spotty areas I've worked in, the streets and sidewalks are public right-of-way, available free to any state-certificated common carrier -- i.e., no leasing by municipalities or otherwise. ... In fact, in southern states, highway rights-of-way are free for anyone to use (with demonstration of proper engineering drawings and construction plans). ... Do we have here an urban legend of telecommunications, with someone's assumption bubbling into what seems plausible fact? ... In the interest of accuracy, I must challenge the poster to prove his claim with some factual references - and more than a reported phone call to an unnamed town or utility employee, please! ------------------------------ Reply-To: dov@oz.net Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2000 05:24:59 -0800 From: Joseph Singer Subject: Re: Dial 1 LD Carrier Options in AC 248 heywood@gloucester.com (Heywood Jaiblomi) recently wrote: > 2. I'm sure this is an elementary question, but I'm not in Michigan so > maybe someone can help me. My mother in 248-651-xxxx spends half the > year in FL, and still has to pay AT&T $3/month for the privilege of > them being her dial 1 carrier. > She's a low volume LD user, and I'm sure someone has already done the > research on this. Do most reliable dial 1 carriers now charge a > monthly fee? If not, who should I suggest she go to? I'm not aware at this point of who the other LD carriers besides AT&T might be that charge a "minimum useage" charge like this, but you might consider looking at using a "dialround" long distance the so called "10-10" services and just have your ILEC remove dial 1 long distance. You will not be let off the hook entirely as your local phone company will still bill you a $1 "fee" for not having long distance! As for where to look for information on what plan to consider I would recommend looking at abelltolls.com where you'll find comparisons of many different carriers some for pre-subscribed (dial 1) and others for the dialrounds (so called 10-10) carriers. Also keep in mind that with carriers you may or may not see the cost of the PICC or USF charges. Some carrier incorporate these charges into their rates while other carriers charge a percentage of value of the call or a flat rate for the charge. Depending on the kind of calling you do it may be worth your while to determine whether a carrier charges on a percentage basis or on a flat rate basis. Joseph Singer "thefoneguy" PO Box 23135, Seattle WA 98102 USA +1 206 405 2052 [voice mail] +1 206 493 0706 [FAX] ------------------------------ From: jmaddaus@NO_SPAM.usa.net (John S. Maddaus) Subject: Re: The DLC Epidemic Spreads to the Northeast Reply-To: jmaddaus@NO_SPAM.usa.net Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2000 16:10:41 GMT Organization: AT&T Worldnet Bill Horne wrote: > Sorry to be the messenger bringing bad new, but the cable conduits are > full, and the manholes are full: there is no more copper to be had, > and in some areas, BA has had to rip out copper cables installed less > than five years ago to accommodate fiber. Not exactly true. As a product planner for AT&T SLC line, we tried to kill the Slc96 for several years. Guess who objected? BA, GTE, SWB, BS just to name a few. Why, because analog copper was still a necessary part of the LEC business plan, partiularly outside large urban areas. In fact there were some states (Texas for one) where the state and local tarriffs made copper the ONLY cost effective alternative in certain areas around DFW. > BUSINESS customers don't give a damn about dialup internet service: > they care only about FAX lines, which work fine over DLC. If they > need to move data around, they pay for dedicated, diverse, custom > designed DATA circuits to do it. Again not true. I am a small business and I darn well care about dialup internet service. I have no need for dedicated data services yet but I'll take the fastest modem I can get and that my ISP supports. > Claiming that BA, or any other RBOC, would spend immense sums of money > just to disable his 56K modem is (let's be kind) naive. Not at all if another portion of the business has a competitive data service to offer and wants to make money on it. Bell Atlantic Mobile deliberately de-tuned their analog mobile system in the D.C area to "force" subscribers to consider digital. There were strong reservations about this from some BA quarters given the original roll-out was going to be TDMA in the DC area to compete against SBMS' TDMA roll-out. The trial performance was so bad that the only way BA management felt they could get enough digital subscribers was to make analog life more difficult. Cell site placement was designed specifically to enhance digital offerings and frustrate analog users. Drive up the 93 corridor with a CDMA and an analog phone in MA and NH and see the difference! By the way, it irritates me to have a 56k capable modem and not be able to use it due to telco mismanagement. We are also served by BA in NH and our local CO and peripherals are too old to support 56k, or so BA says. BA said it was possible to re-home me to another CO but they wouldn't do that for anyone. Turns out that BA had just launched an internet service and was at the time guaranteeing 56k capability for everyone who signed up. The internet service folks had clearly not coordinated with the LEC side. They just stuck a bunch of 56k modems at various locations and started advertising. I asked the telco people how they could do that if our CO could not physically support 56k rates and they hedged big time. I put in a false advertising complaint to the PUC and BA. One week later, all three of my lines were 56k capable. No change in phone numbers, no re-wiring and only one AD/DA conversion where I had three the week before. Magic huh? John Maddaus jmaddaus@usa.net Bedford, NH ------------------------------ From: rtucker+from+200001@katan.ttgcitn.com (Ryan Tucker) Subject: Re: Give me Some of That New Wireless, Maybe Reply-To: rtucker+replyto+200001@katan.ttgcitn.com Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2000 04:08:40 GMT Organization: Time Warner Road Runner - Rochester NY In , Joe Machado spewed: > In the meantime, why can't we work at projecting a web page or a > NetMeeting type interaction inside a car windshield instead of the > speedometer? Because it's already possible. : -) -rt Ryan Tucker http://www.ttgcitn.com/~rtucker/ President, TTGCITN Communications Box 92425, Rochester NY 14692-0425 Please keep public threads public -- e-mail responses will be ignored. ------------------------------ From: Eli Mantel Subject: Re: Dial 1 LD Carrier Options in AC 248 Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2000 23:18:28 PST Heywood Jaiblomi (heywood@gloucester.com) wrote: > My mother [pays] AT&T $3/month [as a minimum monthly fee]... > Do most reliable dial 1 carriers now charge a monthly fee? AT&T, MCI, and Sprint all do one or more of the following: have monthly minimums or monthly fees, overcharge the single-line user for the PICC fee, charge a flat universal service fee instead of a percentage fee. If you're on their basic service plan, AT&T does all of these things: They charge a $3.00 monthly minimum, $1.51 for the monthly PICC fee, and a flat $1.38 universal service fee, penalizing the low-volume user even further. If that weren't enough, they charge very high per-minute rates for long distance. But can you really blame them for gouging people who can't be bothered to shop around? There's not that much to be concerned about when switching to a different long distance carrier. The local phone company will charge a few dollars for the switch, and you may start getting a separate bill from your new long distance company. Just make sure you understand the monthly fees and per-minute rates. Customer service will vary from company to company, but MCI and Sprint don't necessarily earn high marks on this anyway. The quality of the phone calls is the same unless they're offering IP-based service. There are a number of long distance carriers that don't have a monthly fee or minimum, charge only the actual cost of the PICC fee, and charge a percentage for the universal service fee. Your mother's $5.89 monthly charge from AT&T could be reduced to under $2. For details, look at http://cageyconsumer.com/rateplan/pscalc.html ------------------------------ From: TSL Subject: WTB: Altigen Quantum card Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2000 07:45:31 GMT Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy. Looking for an additional Altigen Quantum card to expand our small system. Can be the 4 trunk / 8 extension version, or the reverse. Needs to be a recent rev., with the onboard power supply. Will take new, used, demo etc. as long as the price is right, which means well below street. If you have one of these and want to turn it into quick cash please get in touch. Thanks, Nick computhings@my-deja.com 212 269-7044, then press 1 ------------------------------ From: Marvin A Sirbu Subject: Re: The DLC Epidemic Spreads to the Northeast Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2000 20:03:44 -0500 Organization: Epp, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA There are a couple of nice papers on the problems of mixing ADSL and DLC, and CLECs and DLC available at http://www.bullcreek.austin.tx.us/mci_worldcom.html Marvin Sirbu ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2000 21:33:05 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: DoubleClick Beats a Retreat on Privacy http://www.thestandard.com/article/display/1,1151,12596,00.html After a stock slump and bad press, the online ad giant opts out of tying Web user profiles to offline data. By Ben Hammer Responding once again to the controversy over online privacy, Internet advertising firm DoubleClick said Thursday it will not tie Web users' anonymous online activities to their offline personal data until there's agreement on privacy standards. DoubleClick CEO Kevin O'Connor revealed the company had second thoughts after meeting with hundreds of consumers, privacy advocates and others. The Electronic Privacy Information Center filed a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission at the beginning of last month, charging that DoubleClick was merging data about Web surfers' online activities with offline data such as names, postal addresses and catalog purchase histories. DoubleClick's own privacy policy forbids merging the data and, in his statement last week, O'Connor stated that his company has never done it. Last year, DoubleClick acquired Abacus Direct and its large consumer purchasing database, giving DoubleClick the ability to link its anonymous tracking of viewers' responses to ads it serves online with those viewers' offline consumer information. The company affirmed it would tie the information, even as it unveiled a five-point plan to assuage the privacy brouhaha. O'Connor's statement Thursday struck a different chord: "I made a mistake by planning to merge names with user activity across Web sites in the absence of government and industry privacy standards. We are going to await clear standards before we decide the future direction of a number of new products." Still, DoubleClick has cross-referenced 100,000 opt-in e-mail addresses from NetDeals - a sweepstakes site that collects personal data - with Abacus' database for targeted e-mail marketing, but O'Connor said DoubleClick didn't create offline profiles. DoubleClick's stock rebounded after the announcement, gaining nearly 10 percent in midday trading Friday. "[This] removes a pretty major overhang on the stock," said David Doft, equity research director for ING Barings, which initiated coverage of DoubleClick Friday with a positive outlook. Some privacy advocates voiced cautious support for O'Connor's remarks. "It is a step in the right direction, definitely, because before [DoubleClick] insisted that opt-out was sufficient for identifying people," said Jason Catlett of privacy consulting firm JunkBusters. "What needs to be done now is for there to be a legal framework to protect the privacy of online profiles." Copyright 2000 The Industry Standard ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2000 22:43:06 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Virginia Law Standardizes Internet Contracts http://www.techweb.com/wire/story/TWB20000301S0013 By George Leopold, EE Times Mar 1, 2000 (11:37 AM) WASHINGTON - A law enacted by the Virginia General Assembly -- expanding Internet contracts -- could open the flood gates to similar laws around the nation that supporters say would bring uniformity to Internet transactions. On Feb. 15, the Virginia General Assembly in Richmond became the first in the nation to approve a standard commercial code for Internet contracts, the "Uniform Computer Information Transactions Act." The measure is expected to be signed into law by Gov. James Gilmore, a Republican, after the completion of a series of studies on its impact. Similar measures are being considered by state lawmakers in Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, and Oklahoma. The Virginia law, which seeks to create uniform provisions for contracts over the Internet such as software licenses, drew support from the software industry and opposition from engineering and consumer groups as well as several state attorneys general. The law contains a lengthy series of definitions designed to clarify the reach of Internet contracts. For instance, it would allow companies to send binding legal notices by e-mail about restrictions on the use of their software. This and other provisions prompted consumer groups to warn that the law could bind customers to unseen licensing agreements, while allowing companies to disable their product if a purchaser missed a payment. Contract law varies from state to state, said Jane Johansen, a software-law specialist with the Washington law firm Drinkard Biddle. "Maybe the time has come for some uniformity" in Internet contracts, she said. While some groups said the bill is anti-consumer, Johansen said the Virginia legislation could provide consumers with a better chance of getting a refund on returned software since it contains new warranty definitions usually not found in software contracts. She said the expressed warranties would force software companies to add disclaimers to licenses, thereby highlighting new protections. Detractors predicted software firms would simply bury the disclaimers in already confusing licensing agreements. Still unclear is how the new code would affect so-called "upstream transactions" by large software companies licensing their products in the state. Another sticky issue is whether the Virginia law changes current laws on reverse engineering. The issue prompted engineering groups, such as the IEEE-USA, to oppose the bill. The legislation "would bind you to an agreement where you can't do any reverse engineering," said Mark Pullen, IEEE-USA's vice president for technology policy. Pullen said the capability is important for software engineers so they can, for example, design software to read different file formats. Plus, said Pullen, the Virginia bill turns a "purchase decision into a license agreement." But Johansen said, "So far, I don't see this law changing the law on reverse engineering" of software. Virginia legislators will study the impact of the law on libraries and other state institutions. Opponents have not ruled out a court challenge. Copyright 1998 CMP Media Inc. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2000 21:16:37 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Feds: Your Secrets Are Safe With Us http://www.thestandard.com/article/display/0,1151,12622,00.html Wired News reported two bits of Clinton-Internet news Friday, without highlighting the irony that floated between them. Declan McCullagh summarized a report recommending ways to make it easier for cops to trace users in "real time." A group chaired by Attorney General Janet Reno, and including FBI Director Louis Freeh, wrote the report. According to McCullagh, "The group focused on what it views as the problem of anonymity." Members complained about anonymous remailers, and about e-mail accounts that let folks sign up without confirming their identities. Meanwhile in Silicon Valley, President Clinton was wagging his finger at tech industry bigwigs, including Novell Chairman Eric Schmidt, and warning them that if they didn't do a better job of protecting the privacy of Net users, the government would have to do it for them. Huh? The executive branch could undoubtedly explain the distinction between privacy and anonymity. But in light of the investigative pressure now being brought to bear on DoubleClick, and given the justification provided by the denial-of-service hack attacks, the government just may feel that it's the only organization qualified to follow our movements online. And that begs the question: Whom do you trust with your secrets - DoubleClick or the FBI? - David Sims U.S. Wants to Trace Net Users http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,34720,00.html Clinton Visits Valley of the DoS (Reuters) http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,34733,00.html Clinton Warns Net Industry to Set Standards for Privacy http://interactive.wsj.com/articles/SB952127598514787472.htm (Paid subscription required.) ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V20 #13 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Mar 7 17:35:23 2000 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id RAA23771; Tue, 7 Mar 2000 17:35:23 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2000 17:35:23 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200003072235.RAA23771@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #14 TELECOM Digest Tue, 7 Mar 2000 17:33:00 EST Volume 20 : Issue 14 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: NXX by NPA (Clarence Dold) Re: 1.)Thread Creep Alert! 2.)Urban Legend Alert! (Ross McMicken) Re: Long Lines Bells (and intrastate dial rates) (Don Kimberlin) Re: 1.)Thread Creep Alert! 2.)Urban Legend Alert! (John Hines) Re: Australia; Wireless Phone Number Portability 3/2001 (C. Wilkinson) Re: On the Internet, Your Bank is Not Your Friend (John Nagle) Query on LNP (Krishnan PP) Re: F.C.C. Debates Changes to Cell Phone Fees (John R. Levine) Workplace E-Mail Privacy Bill Reintroduced In Calif. (Monty Solomon) Re: The DLC Epidemic Spreads to the Northeast (Curtis R. Anderson) Re: The DLC Epidemic Spreads to the Northeast (Ed Ellers) Last Laugh! The Infinite Monkey Protocol Suite (IMPS) (Monty Solomon) Last Laugh! Hell Hath no Fury Like a Telco Scorned (Monty Solomon) 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-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest 611 Poplar Street Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 805-545-5115 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@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: hyperarchive.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 the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Clarence Dold Subject: Re: NXX by NPA Date: 7 Mar 2000 17:55:21 GMT Organization: a2i network Reply-To: dold@email.rahul.net Ben Schilling wrote: > You can get the lists from http://www.nanpa.com/ . They are under Central > Office Codes (Prefixes). There are sixteen zip files in the entire set. How strange. Those are incredibly out of date and incomplete. Looking at WSUTLZD.TXT, I find 707-965 (my home) with no description. Looking for NAPA, I find it listed as 415-217. I don't remember how long ago Napa became the 707 NPA. Wait a minute ... I see a pattern. The older NPA-NXX are incomplete, but the "newer" ones are properly described. But there is a _LOT_ of data missing. My dad's house is in in San Leandro, but listed as Oakland. There are 21338 entries in WSUTLZD.TXT 1556 different "Names" 4501 NPA-NXX have no description. 21% The most reliable thing seems to be a one-time download of the NNACL, at $150, and free quarterly downloads of NNAG, from http://www.trainfo.com/tra/catalog.htm There's something about 'non-commercial use' that might bear investigating. The TPM-VH CD that I buy is a commercial product. Clarence A Dold - dold@email.rahul.net - Pope Valley & Napa CA. ------------------------------ From: Ross McMicken Subject: Re: 1.)Thread Creep Alert! 2.)Urban Legend Alert! (Re: Telephone-Pole Organization: Giganews.Com - Premium News Outsourcing Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2000 12:55:15 -0600 On Tue, 07 Mar 2000 08:18:38 -0500, Don Kimberlin wrote: > In article Fri, 03 Mar 2000 12:38:16 -0600 (John Hines > (jhines@enteract.com) wrote: >> ... power line poles, owned and maintained by Commonwealth Edison, >> and the telephone, and cable companies lease space from >> them. ComEd then exchanges the electricity to run the city/village > for the lease on the right of way for the poles. > ... This may be one of those numerous twists and turns in the complex > byways of life for common carrier utilities in the United States, but > in the southeastern part of the country, and a few other spotty areas > I've worked in, the streets and sidewalks are public right-of-way, > available free to any state-certificated common carrier -- i.e., no > leasing by municipalities or otherwise. > ... In fact, in southern states, highway rights-of-way are free for > anyone to use (with demonstration of proper engineering drawings and > construction plans). > ... Do we have here an urban legend of telecommunications, with someone's > assumption bubbling into what seems plausible fact? > ... In the interest of accuracy, I must challenge the poster to prove his > claim with some factual references - and more than a reported phone call > to an unnamed town or utility employee, please! In Houston, Tx, the utilities pay a franchise fee to the city for use of the city rights of way. I believe it amounts to about 4 percent of gross revenues. We periodically get big squabbles over how much of the fee can be charged to the consumer. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2000 14:33:58 -0500 From: Don Kimberlin Subject: Re: Long Lines Bells (and Intrastate Dial Rates) In article: 7 Mar 2000 09:59:19 GMT , Hal Murray (murray@pa.dec.com) wrote: >> Many moons ago I asked someone from New England Telephone why in state >> toll rates were so ridiculously high. They explained that AT&T Long >> Lines >> handled all in-state toll traffic. It looks like NET at the time didn't >> have their own toll switches so they let AT&T rape the crap out of us. > Many moons ago in California, the PCU set intra-state long distance > charges high in order to cross-subsidize residential rates. > For a while, it was cheaper to call the east coast than across the > state. ... Your California story was accurate; the New England Tel story was an urban fable. While Long Lines did, indeed, operate most all the toll switches for New England Telephone, the rate-setting within each state with short-haul toll rates set high to subsidize local dial tone was the real story everywhere. ... While pundits of the business tried to rationalize telecommunications "costs" for short distances being like those faced by taxi drivers or even airlines as having higher "start-up" or "loading/unloading" costs, any significant reason for higher short-haul dial rates melted away when customers dialed their own calls. ------------------------------ From: John Hines Subject: Re: 1.)Thread Creep Alert! 2.)Urban Legend Alert! (Re: Telephone-Pole Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2000 15:41:08 -0600 Organization: US Citizen, disabled with MS, speaking solely for myself. Don Kimberlin wrote: > In article Fri, 03 Mar 2000 12:38:16 -0600 (John Hines > (jhines@enteract.com) wrote: >> ... power line poles, owned and maintained by Commonwealth Edison, >> and the telephone, and cable companies lease space from >> them. ComEd then exchanges the electricity to run the city/village >> for the lease on the right of way for the poles. > ... This may be one of those numerous twists and turns in the complex > byways of life for common carrier utilities in the United States, but > in the southeastern part of the country, and a few other spotty areas > I've worked in, the streets and sidewalks are public right-of-way, > available free to any state-certificated common carrier -- i.e., no > leasing by municipalities or otherwise. The deed to my house says I own the land, but that the village has a utility easement on it. The power lines are in the back, not on the street ROW, here in development. I know that for a fact, its surveyed, and that I have a power pole on the property as well. And it is the power company that shows up when the poles need replacing from storm damage, and that the phone guys have to wait for them. > ... In fact, in southern states, highway rights-of-way are free for > anyone to use (with demonstration of proper engineering drawings and > construction plans). It don't work that way around here. The village offers an exclusive monopoly on electric service, and those are the terms the contract are in. > assumption bubbling into what seems plausible fact? No, you have my recollection of the news reports on the re-negotiating of the contracts, many of which expired in 2000. It was a big issue, since in order to make any changes to the system, every street lamp and stop light would have to be metered, which would add costs. > ... In the interest of accuracy, I must challenge the poster to prove his > claim with some factual references - and more than a reported phone call > to an unnamed town or utility employee, please! http://www.ci.chi.il.us/Environment/EnergyManagement/ See the section on utility oversight. Or http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:www.westmont.il.us/government/village/manager/CompPlan/WebDocs/chapter_six.htm for another local village. ------------------------------ From: news@askadrian.com (Christopher Wilkinson) Subject: Re: Australia; Wireless Phone Number Portability 3/2001 Reply-To: news@askadian.com Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2000 17:28:20 GMT Organization: Cable Internet (post doesn't reflect views of Cable Internet) On Tue, 07 Mar 2000 08:28:07 GMT, David Lind wrote: > Sooo glad to have this forum and the moderater back!! > The Aussies have mandated wireless phone number portability to be implemented > in 12 months. So what is holding us up? Us being the US? ------------------------------ From: John Nagle Organization: Animats Subject: Re: On the Internet, Your Bank is Not Your Friend Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2000 12:15:16 -0800 Monty Solomon quoted: > Deposit This > On the Internet, your bank is not your friend > Hal Plotkin, Special to SF Gate > Wednesday, February 23, 2000 This is a puff piece for Yodlee.com, which is a sort of "financial portal" that wants to act as your agent in managing your finanical affairs. Unfortunately, they also want to disclaim all liabilitiy when doing so: http://www.yodlee.com/help/terms.html Read those terms and conditions, and stay away. Anybody offering financial services should take financial responsibility for their errors. Yodlee definitely does not. You could even get stuck paying for third-party claims against Yodlee, and even their legal bills. John Nagle ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2000 02:20:39 +0530 From: Krishnan PP Subject: Query on LNP Question: How does LNP (Local Number Portability) work for the following cases : Intra LATA call Inter LATA call I want to know the details of the location of the portability database, the LRN etc. Regards, krishnan ------------------------------ Date: 6 Mar 2000 20:33:49 -0500 From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: F.C.C. Debates Changes to Cell Phone Fees Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA >> As a caller to a mobile I have to accept the price I will be charged and >> have no way to shop for a better rate. > You can always use a calling card, or choose a tariff which offers > mobile-mobile calls at less than land-mobile rates. Oh, but you can't. The price will be set by the recipient's telco, not the caller's. These numbers will work just like 500 or 900 numbers, which is why I've always said they belong in the otherwise nearly abandoned 500 SAC. Yes, every PBX and payphone in the country blocks calls to 500 numbers. There's a reason for that. 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: Mon, 6 Mar 2000 22:45:46 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Workplace E-Mail Privacy Bill Reintroduced In Calif. http://www.newsbytes.com/pubNews/00/144965.html By Sherman Fridman, Newsbytes SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA, U.S.A., 03 Mar 2000, 10:09 AM CST California State Senator Debra Bowen (D-Redondo Beach) has developed something of a reputation as the state's legislative guru on high-tech matters. Now, she's shown that she can be tenacious as well when it comes to the issue of protecting the privacy of employee-generated e-mail. Senator Bowen introduced a bill in last year's session of the California State Legislature that would have prevented employers from monitoring the e-mail of employees unless employees first acknowledged in writing that they had been informed their employer had a specific e-mail monitoring policy. The bill passed both houses of the California legislature by a substantial bipartisan margin but was vetoed by Governor Gray Davis last October on the grounds that the bill's notification requirement would place too great a burden on employers. This year, Bowen has reintroduced, (as SB 1822), a workplace privacy bill that would make it illegal for companies to review the e-mail of employees, the Internet sites visited by employees, and the computer files created by the employee, without providing the employee with notification of the company's computer monitoring policy. Asked by Newsbytes why she reintroduced a previously vetoed bill, Senator Bowen said, "Look, I'm generally not a one-shot-and-out kind of legislator. This may be one of those ideas that takes two, three, or four charges up the hill before it gets signed into law because in some ways it requires people to look through the prism in a different way." Bowen acknowledged that she needed to do a better job of showing people, including the governor, that her bill wasn't about giving computer users special protections; rather, "it's about extending the same privacy protections provided to letter writers and phone users." According to Bowen, "Some employers argue that because they own the computers and pay for Internet access, they have the right to spy on their workers without telling them it's company policy. But these same companies don't have that right in any other part of the workplace. They can't find out what medication you're on even though they're paying for your health care, and they can't eavesdrop on your personal telephone conversations even though they own the phone." The issue of electronic monitoring in the workplace is one that's growing. In 1999, the American Management Association found that out of 1,000 corporations surveyed, 45 percent electronically monitor and record employee communications in the workplace, and 27 percent read their employees' e-mail messages. California has laws addressing employee telephone use at work, but computers are not covered. The California Public Utilities Commission requires employers to inform employees when telephone conversations are recorded or monitored by either putting a beep tone on the line or by playing a recorded message. Bowen says that SB 1822 creates similar "right to know" laws to cover the new technologies that are used in today's workplace. Bowen's bill contains three main requirements; the first of which is a mandate that employers create and distribute to all employees the company's workplace privacy and electronic monitoring policies and practices. The bill would also require employees to sign, either in writing or digitally by electronic signature, that they have read, understood, and received the company's monitoring policies and practices. The third major provision of the bill would give employees the right to access electronic data that the employer collects through monitoring, and the right to dispute or delete inaccurate data. Bowen is quick to point out that her bill doesn't outlaw monitoring, and says that employers have the right to fire employees who violate company policies and misuse company equipment. "But," says Bowen, "people have a right to know what those policies are before they get a pink slip." Reported by Newsbytes.com, http://www.newsbytes.com 10:09 CST Reposted 10:34 CST (20000303/Press contact: Jennie Bretschneider, 916-445-5953 /WIRES TOP, ONLINE, LEGAL, BUSINESS/BOWEN/PHOTO) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2000 22:34:55 -0500 From: Curtis R. Anderson Organization: Misguided Followers Of the Late Nicholas Devereux Subject: Re: The DLC Epidemic Spreads to the Northeast 73115.1041@compuserve.com wrote: > Modern SLCs do the conversion once and send all the lines digitally > right into the switch, usually on a fibre pair direct from the > SLC. This can actually be a preferred solution, as the fibre is immune > to induced noise. The problem here is that space for a DSL DSLAM in > the SLC cabinet is at a premium, if it exists at all. This makes it > hard for the telco or CLEC to provide highspeed internet access. Alltel comes right out on their web site and says they will NOT be putting DSLAMs in their DLC cabinets at this time. At least, Alltel managed to get the contractor to install the DLCs correctly; they have many of them servicing this rural part outside of the Jamestown, NY area. Dialup speeds for me average 49333 bps for inbound V.90. That isn't bad considering the local loop should be < 11000 feet from the DLC to the house. Speeds can peak up to a shocking 52000 under the very best conditions. I watched the contractors installing the DLC one day and got to talking about how my modem speeds improved. They were surprised V.90 even worked at all. They were nervous when I asked about how many T1 trunks were serving it, until I told them I read the Telecom Digest. That seemed to calm them down a lot. I was able to get from the contractor that Alltel did not plan to run fiber to the DLC at this time; copper seemed to be sufficient. Curtis R. Anderson, Co-creator of "Gleepy the Hen", SP 2.5?, KoX We eat korv, not surströmming or lutefisk in western NY. Sorry. http://www.madbbs.com/users/gleepy/ ICQ: 50137888 mailto:gleepy@intelligencia.com UTM: PS 7036 7315, zone 17 ------------------------------ From: Ed Ellers Subject: Re: The DLC Epidemic Spreads to the Northeast Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2000 22:44:32 -0500 Julian Thomas wrote: > I suspect that the DLC concept is old enough that originally it had to work > with analog switches (good grief! SxS!!) as well as digital switches -- > hence the conversion back to analog." Not just SxS by any means -- Western Electric's No. 1, 1A, 2 and 3 ESSes switched in the analog domain under CPU control, as did GTE Automatic Electric's EAX. (Nortel used to make clones of the WECo switches before the Bell Canada divestiture, so I suspect they didn't have their "own" analog switch and concentrated instead on the DMS line.) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2000 20:55:30 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Last Laugh! The Infinite Monkey Protocol Suite (IMPS) To: IETF-Announce: ; From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Reply-to: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Subject: I-D ACTION:draft-christey-imps-00.txt Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2000 10:32:15 -0500 Sender: nsyracus@cnri.reston.va.us A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. Title : The Infinite Monkey Protocol Suite (IMPS) Author(s) : S. Christey Filename : draft-christey-imps-00.txt Pages : 18 Date : 01-Mar-00 This draft describes a protocol suite which supports an infinite number of monkeys that sit at an infinite number of typewriters in order to determine when they have either produced the entire works of William Shakespeare or a good television show. The suite includes communications and control protocols for monkeys and the organizations that interact with them. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-christey-imps-00.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then "get draft-christey-imps-00.txt". A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. Send a message to: mailserv@ietf.org. In the body type: "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-christey-imps-00.txt". NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail readers exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on how to manipulate these messages. Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. [The following attachment must be fetched by mail. Command-click the URL below and send the resulting message to get the attachment.] [The following attachment must be fetched by ftp. Command-click the URL below to ask your ftp client to fetch it.] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2000 21:15:18 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Last Laugh! Hell Hath no Fury Like a Telco Scorned When we first met our players last June, dashing young Qwest had swooped down from the Rockies to steal local belle US West from the clutches of Bermuda-based Global Crossing. Because she had already marched halfway down the aisle with her Caribbean beau, US West didn't come willingly. But a backroom deal was struck, the bride surrendered several hundred million dollars in dowry, and the betrothed couple rode back to Denver to plan the wedding. http://www.thestandard.com/article/display/0,1151,12621,00.html ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V20 #14 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Mar 8 15:45:06 2000 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id PAA07510; Wed, 8 Mar 2000 15:45:06 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2000 15:45:06 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200003082045.PAA07510@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #15 TELECOM Digest Wed, 8 Mar 2000 15:45:00 EST Volume 20 : Issue 15 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Nokia Chief Details Web Future (Monty Solomon) Re: Internet Content vs Internet Delivery (Ryan Shook) Re: Internet Content vs Internet Delivery (Felix Deutsch) Re: F.C.C. Debates Changes to Cell Phone Fees (Mike Hartley) Tracking Net's Prying Eyes (Monty Solomon) Re: Cost of Wiretapping (Michael Sullivan) Re: Cost of Wiretapping (Someone) Re: NXX by NPA (Michael G. Koerner) Re: Give me Some of That New Wireless, Maybe (Andrew Green) Re: F.C.C. Debates Changes to Cell Phone Fees (David Jensen) Re: Internet Content vs Internet Delivery (Ryan Tucker) DoubleClick Privacy Questions (Monty Solomon) Does Anyone Use Call Manager? (Keith Knipschild) 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-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest 611 Poplar Street Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 805-545-5115 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@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: hyperarchive.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 the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2000 00:19:21 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Nokia Chief Details Web Future Nokia Chief Details Web Future Reuters 8:00 a.m. 3.Mar.2000 PST TOKYO -- The chief of Finnish cellular phone maker Nokia Corp said on Friday he expects Web-connected mobile phones to outnumber personal computers linked to the Net within three years. "The future is not PC-centric. It's mobile phone-centric," Nokia chief Jorma Ollila told a seminar on mobile networks and digital home appliances in Tokyo. http://www.wired.com/news/business/0,1367,34718,00.html ------------------------------ From: Ryan Shook Subject: Re: Internet Content vs Internet Delivery Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2000 01:54:41 -0500 Organization: University of Waterloo On Mon, 6 Mar 2000, JF Mezei wrote: > I am quite puzzled as to how Wall street considers mergers between AOL and > Time-Warner to be so significant. > While I inderstand that AOL gains access to Time's cable > infrastructure to upgrade from modem to cable based ISP service, I > really don't understand how "content" companies benefit when they buy > "ISP" companies. [...] > Can someone please explain what sort of synergy/benefits *really* > happen when a content company merges/buys an ISP ? I went to C|Net news, one search, one hit: http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1005-200-1518888.html?tag=st.ne.1002. AOL buys Time Warner in historic merger If you check out zdnet, c|net mercurynews or any other news source you can find more articles guessing about how and why. The sale was announced around January 11th. Here's my two cents. The ISPs, well at least AOL have enormous stock prices and so they can spend money. Internet Access is quickly becoming/has become a commodity. If you are in that business, you probably want to find ways to become a leader or find a new business. AOL must figure that Time will do it some good. There is certainly enough content there to keep one's pipe pretty full. Ryan Shook Mechanical Engineering | Amateur (HAM) Radio Lic.:VE3 TKD RJShook@uwaterloo.ca | http://www.eng.uwaterloo.ca/students/rjshook/ Your mouse has moved, reboot required for the changes to take effect. ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Internet Content vs Internet Delivery From: Felix Deutsch Date: 08 Mar 2000 10:31:41 +0100 JF Mezei writes: > I am quite puzzled as to how Wall street considers mergers between AOL and > Time-Warner to be so significant. > They mention on how Time-Warner gains a new distribution medium for > their content. > While I inderstand that AOL gains access to Time's cable > infrastructure to upgrade from modem to cable based ISP service, I > really don't understand how "content" companies benefit when they buy > "ISP" companies. You are mislead by thinking that AOL is a mere ISP, thus just offering full-IP connectivity. I would think that many AOL subscribers spend a significant amount of their online time using services provided by AOL and not the WWW in general. > Since the internet is worldwide, and since WWW.CNN.COM is already > available worldwide through any ISP, how does it benefit CNN to since > CNN is already distributed to AOL subscribers whether Time-Warner owns > AOL or not ? They may offer some 'added-value' content for AOL subscribers, like discount on the merchandise crap for the latest 'family' *spit* movie. Felix "A further hint at my impending doom was that the specification was based on the OSI model - a group of standards renouned worldwide for their pointless complexity, difficulty of implementation, and unworkability." Donald Becker - "Why IrDA Should Be Laughed Out Of Town" ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2000 04:28:17 PST From: Mike Hartley Subject: Re: F.C.C. Debates Changes to Cell Phone Fees "John R. Levine" wrote: >>> As a caller to a mobile I have to accept the price I will be >>> charged and >>> have no way to shop for a better rate. >> You can always use a calling card, or choose a tariff which offers >> mobile-mobile calls at less than land-mobile rates. > Oh, but you can't. The price will be set by the recipient's telco, > not the caller's. There's probably some UK/US difference here. The point I wanted to bring out was that although the recepient's telco will set the minimum price, individual originating telcos will add varying markups, usually depending on tariff/volume/marketing strategy. So, as an example: If I call a mobile from my PSTN line I'm charged at the rate which my (fairly small) PSTN provider has negotiated with the terminating operator. If I call the same mobile from my PSTN line using a calling card I get a different rate, approx 50% lower, since the calling card telco negotiates with other large resellers/carriers who have managed to secure much more advantagous termination rates based on higher call volumes. If I call from my mobile I get a rate between the PSTN and calling card because I'm on a high volume tariff. > From an anglocentric point of view I don't see how the US can implement calling party pays without giving mobiles their own number groups. Regards, Mike ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2000 09:17:10 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Tracking Net's prying eyes Cybersleuth aims to expose surveillance of consumers By Frank James Special to the Tribune March 6, 2000 BROOKLINE, Mass. -- Richard M. Smith is a software expert who doesn't fully trust his own kind. So he has launched a personal crusade to expose technology practices that threaten the privacy of millions of Internet users. The retired co-founder of a maker of specialized software for industry, he has a growing reputation as one of the Internet's premier privacy defenders. He has essentially become the Techie Avenger for millions of less savvy Internet users who surf unaware of how much of their personal information is silently being gathered. http://www.chicagotribune.com/tech/biztech/article/0,2669,2-42915,FF.html ------------------------------ From: Michael Sullivan Subject: Re: Cost of Wiretapping Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2000 04:47:15 GMT Hal Murray wrote: > I think the US has regulations requiring telephone systems > to have some automated mechanism for wiretaps. You are thinking about CALEA, the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act, which requires carriers to provide assistance to authorized law enforcement agencies in performing wiretaps -- more specifically, interceptions of communications and accesses to call identifying information. It's not exactly automated, though. Just complicated, costly, and near-impossible to implement properly. As well as being constitutionally suspect, as implemented. > Is there a good description of that system available on the web? The FBI's CALEA home page is http://www.fbi.gov/programs/calea/calea.htm and the FCC's is http://www.fcc.gov/wtb/csinfo/calea.html > What fraction of the current COs support it? Well, that depends on what you mean. Virtually all COs support, to one degree or another, the provision of wiretapping assistance to law enforcement. None that I know of support all of what the statute requires, yet. The telephone and cellular industries have developed a standard, J-STD-025, or the "J Standard," that will provide a lot of scary stuff, but the FBI and FCC decided that it wasn't enough and imposed further requirements. Compliance with the J Standard is due June 30, 2000, and with the additional FBI "punch list" requirements by September 30, 2001. Right now it doesn't look like more than a handful of COs (if that) will meet those deadlines. > I assume there are supposed to be checks in the system to make > sure that it's only used for legal taps. Is there any reason > that I should believe those checks are good enough to keep > hackers from tapping whatever they want? Yes. Under CALEA and the FCC regs, an interception or access can be set up only if a designated official of the carrier is provided with "legal authorization" by law enforcement, determines that it is valid, fills out some forms, and then gives the carrier's employees authorization to proceed. This is not an automated process; there is human review of all wiretap requests at a fairly high level in the corporation. Neither law enforcement nor hackers will have the ability to simply send codes over the internet to set up a wiretap, if the system works as it should. Under the J Standard, taps will be set up to provide content and/or call identifying information over prearranged facilities (e.g., leased lines), so the law enforcement authorities will be able to get what's authorized back at their offices, not at the CO. > How much does that system cost? Nationwide, it will probably cost several billion dollars. Nobody knows for sure. > If I took the total cost of that > system and put a pile of cash on the table in front of the FBI, would > they spend it on a wiretapping system or something else? The system is to be paid for in part by the Feds and in part by the carriers (and ultimately their customers). Specifically, getting pre-1995 switches up to the J Standard is supposed to be paid for by the Feds, and getting post-1995 switches up to the standard will generally by paid by the carriers and/or customers. There are a variety of provisions for the Feds to pick up additional costs under certain circumstances. > Is this just > a sneaky way of taxing phone subscribers to support law enforcement? Yes. Michael D. Sullivan, Bethesda, Md., USA avogadro@bellatlantic.net (also avogadro@well.com) ------------------------------ From: Someone Subject: Re: Cost of Wiretapping Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2000 21:14:10 -0800 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Hal Murray wrote in message news:telecom20.13.6@telecom-digest.org... > I think the US has regulations requiring telephone systems > to have some automated mechanism for wiretaps. Yes, this is correct. > Is there a good description of that system available on the web? There are several, most of which are summarized here: http://www.tiaonline.org/government/CALEA/ ------------------------------ From: Michael G. Koerner Subject: Re: NXX by NPA Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2000 21:34:53 -0600 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Reply-To: mgk920@dataex.com Clarence Dold wrote: > Ben Schilling wrote: >> You can get the lists from http://www.nanpa.com/ . They are under Central >> Office Codes (Prefixes). There are sixteen zip files in the entire set. > How strange. Those are incredibly out of date and incomplete. > Looking at WSUTLZD.TXT, I find 707-965 (my home) with no description. > Looking for NAPA, I find it listed as 415-217. I don't remember how > long ago Napa became the 707 NPA. > Wait a minute ... I see a pattern. > The older NPA-NXX are incomplete, but the "newer" ones are properly > described. But there is a _LOT_ of data missing. > My dad's house is in in San Leandro, but listed as Oakland. > There are 21338 entries in WSUTLZD.TXT > 1556 different "Names" > 4501 NPA-NXX have no description. 21% That is interesting, as I am finding the NANPA 'Utilized' list printout that I am poring over as I write this (I printed out part of the total 'Upper Midwest' file so that it only covers Wisconsin, Illinois, the 906 NPA in Michigan and the 219 NPA in Indiana) to be EXTREMELY accurate and up to date (the file is dated 29-Feb-2000). The 'blank' entries are either 'reserved', 'unassignable' or, in the case of an NPA that is splitting (414-262, mandatory this past Saturday), 'duplicative'. 'Blank' entries that have an 'effective date' at the end have just been assigned, with more info coming later (the TelCordia NNAG seems to be 'faster' in this area, and their entries agree with NANPA's ones). Regards, Michael G. Koerner Appleton, WI ------------------------------ From: Andrew Green Subject: Re: Give me Some of That New Wireless, Maybe Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2000 16:27:44 -0600 Joe Machado writes: > In the meantime, why can't we work at projecting a web page > or a NetMeeting type interaction inside a car windshield > instead of the speedometer? Um, because you're supposed to be driving? Seriously, we're developing a lot of stuff that obviously could operate just fine inside a car, but not all of it is necessarily a Good Thing there. Laws notwithstanding, I like to think that the reason conversion van and limousine manufacturers, for example, usually shy away from installing their on-board TVs within view of the driver is because common sense dictates that (1) the TV will be a major distraction to the driver, and thus (2) some idiot will drive into one of them newfangled steel telephone poles while watching, um, "Wall Street Week," and promptly sue the manufacturers for putting the TV distraction in view. As it happens, I love the heads-up speedometer display on my Pontiac, because it significantly reduces the distraction and time that would be taken by looking down at the dashboard and then refocusing on the road. But that's a gadget that enhances the driving experience rather than interferes with it. I have a cellphone in there, too, but it's rigged for speed dialing, hands-free operation and generally to be as undistracting as possible. Please, we have enough problems with morons reading the newspaper as they drive (check out any Chicago expressway traffic jam for examples); let's not give them a multimedia show as well. Andrew C. Green (312) 853-8331 Datalogics, Inc. 101 N. Wacker, Ste. 1800 http://www.datalogics.com Chicago, IL 60606-7301 Fax: (312) 853-8282 ------------------------------ From: David Jensen Subject: Re: F.C.C. Debates Changes to Cell Phone Fees Organization: Jensen Family Reply-To: david@dajensen-family.com Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2000 22:38:12 GMT On 6 Mar 2000 20:33:49 -0500, in comp.dcom.telecom johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) wrote in : > Oh, but you can't. The price will be set by the recipient's telco, > not the caller's. These numbers will work just like 500 or 900 > numbers, which is why I've always said they belong in the otherwise > nearly abandoned 500 SAC. Anyone here expect AOSlime and other dishonest resellers as the first in line to be selling calling party pays? > Yes, every PBX and payphone in the country blocks calls to 500 > numbers. There's a reason for that. We have to have a way to block this unless the prices are regulated and acceptable. ------------------------------ From: rtucker+from+200001@katan.ttgcitn.com (Ryan Tucker) Subject: Re: Internet Content vs Internet Delivery Reply-To: rtucker+replyto+200001@katan.ttgcitn.com Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2000 23:39:07 GMT Organization: Time Warner Road Runner - Rochester NY In , hoxley@nouce.shore.net spewed: > Something that I see COULD happen is "content" which used to be available > to all Internet users will eventually move behind AOL/TimeWarner's > firewall, to only be accessable by AOL/TW subscribers. But AOL invented that game ... the protocol is different, they're a lot bigger, but most people will still not go out of their way to reach www.cnn.com when www.abcnews.com is right over there. They still have some internal content, but they're mainly marketing the ease-of-use and the community aspects (forums and chat), all of which are already commonly kept internal/proprietary. There's two essential things AOL will gain from this: - Time Warner's infrastructure, from telecom to cable modem to satellite to what-have-you, and - a hell of a lot of respect from people who think the Internet is a fad. And those are very valuable things to an Internet company :-) Ryan Tucker http://www.ttgcitn.com/~rtucker/ President, TTGCITN Communications Box 92425, Rochester NY 14692-0425 Please keep public threads public -- e-mail responses will be ignored. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2000 21:56:30 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: DoubleClick Privacy Questions Forwarded to the Digest, FYI: Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 14:18:53 -0800 (PST) From: Phil Agre Subject: [RRE]DoubleClick privacy questions [Faced with possible action by the FTC in response to complaints by privacy activists (in addition to the ones I've already mentioned on RRE, see ), DoubleClick has announced that it is abandoning the online profiling plans that were so widely denounced a while back. Yet several questions remain. USA Today had reported that DoubleClick "has begun tracking Web users by name and address as they move from one Web site to the next", yet the company's press release specifically denies this. DoubleClick has not ruled out connecting anonymous cookie information with personal identities and profiling information from other sources. To the contrary, it reserves the right to go ahead once "there is agreement between government and industry on privacy standards". Meanwhile, CNET is reporting today that Richard Smith has discovered that sensitive personal financial data entered into the Intuit Web site was being sent to DoubleClick; Intuit claims that this was happening without their knowledge and would constitute a violation of DoubleClick's contract. Smith believes that this is happening at numerous sites, and that it results in these sites violating their own privacy policies. Internet electronic commerce is giving rise to a new privacy disaster about once a week. Usually these sorts of panics are overblown, but the weird thing here is that most people are too complacent. "It's a one-time thing. It just happens a lot." The vast majority of people, including many in the computer industry, woke up to the Internet very recently; they take it as a given, and they have no way of imagining how it could be any different. Maybe you need to have been doing this stuff for decades to realize what a pile of junk it all is. It is not a superficial problem, and the necessary structural solutions won't happen unless a significant amount of force is applied. To this end, the FTC should be made responsible for enforcing the Fair Information Practices and promoting the adoption of privacy-enhancing technologies based on public-key cryptography. The great danger is that the applications architecture we have right now will freeze in place due to well-known standards dynamics. We can't blame the people who designed the stuff; they assumed that they were sketching a first rough draft, not setting something in stone for all time. If we *can't* change those first rough drafts once they become widely used, then the ideological image of the Internet as a roiling cauldron of endless structural change is (like so much of the received wisdom in this area) the opposite of the truth. And in that case, we need to adopt a more deliberative method for adopting the standards that increasingly govern our lives. One structural problem is that the client-server architecture of the Web is misconceived. The client-server concept arose in contexts such as proprietary airline reservations systems in which the institutional relationship between client and server is fixed and well-understood. In such an environment, it makes sense for the technological boundary between client and server to be invisible to the user: the moral and legal boundary is provided by the well-understood contract. As the client-server model moved onto public networks such as the Internet, however, the underlying assumption of a fixed and well-understood institutional relationship between client and server was undermined. A Web client transacts business with an unbounded variety of servers, and the institutional relationship between them -- the rules that govern privacy and a hundred other things -- are no longer fixed or well-understood. Yet the boundary between client and server is still invisible. It will simply not be possible to solve privacy problems in Web-based electronic commerce until this profound architectural and user-interface problem is repaired, and that will require substantial revisions to the most basic conception of the Web. We can begin to imagine what this would look like: take the tools that sophisticated security experts like Richard Smith use to watch packets moving into and out of your personal computer, make those tools an integral part of the operating system, and incorporate user- friendly interfaces for those tools into the architecture of the Web browser. Those stupid pop-up windows that say "you've gotten a cookie XQW27RTOX990876GHRX91 from tormentor666.redzone.doubleclick.com; do you want to accept it?" are a band-aid version of this. They are not built into the operating system, they are annoying, and they are not intelligible to the user. They're designed to make you turn them off. We can do an awful lot better, but first we have to think in moral and legal terms about what personal boundaries are, and the respective roles of technology, policy, markets, consumer education, and community norms in supporting them. Last point. If you're not grossed out enough by Internet privacy and security already, see .] This message was forwarded through the Red Rock Eater News Service (RRE). You are welcome to send the message along to others but please do not use the "redirect" option. For information about RRE, including instructions for (un)subscribing, see http://dlis.gseis.ucla.edu/people/pagre/rre.html Press Releases STATEMENT FROM KEVIN O'CONNOR, CEO OF DOUBLECLICK NEW YORK, March 2, 2000 - "Over the past few weeks, DoubleClick (Nasdaq: DCLK) has been at the center of the Internet privacy controversy. During this time, we have met and listened to hundreds of consumers, privacy advocates, customers, government officials and industry leaders about these issues. The overwhelming point of contention has been under what circumstances names can be associated with anonymous user activity across Web sites." "It is clear from these discussions that I made a mistake by planning to merge names with anonymous user activity across Web sites in the absence of government and industry privacy standards." "Let me be clear: DoubleClick has not implemented this plan, and has never associated names, or any other personally identifiable information, with anonymous user activity across Web sites." "We commit today, that until there is agreement between government and industry on privacy standards, we will not link personally identifiable information to anonymous user activity across Web sites." "This action does not affect our core business activity. It means we are going to await clear industry standards before we decide the future direction of a number of new products. We will continue to expand our successful media, technology, e-mail and offline data businesses. We will also continue to abide by common industry practices in building anonymous profiles for ad targeting." "Since founding DoubleClick only 4 years ago, our company has grown to 1,800 employees with more than 7,000 customers worldwide. We are helping thousands of companies become successful in our new economy. I'm proud of DoubleClick's leadership as an innovator in improving the value of Internet advertising and keeping the Internet free for consumers. Taking risks, inventing new products and services, and correcting mistakes is a sign of responsible leadership." "Creating industry policies involving something so incredibly important to our global economy and individuals is not something to be taken lightly. We all agree on the goals: keep the Internet free while protecting consumer privacy. It is now time for industry, consumers and government to develop a clear set of guidelines that help create a healthy, free Internet while protecting the privacy of all consumers." About DoubleClick Inc. DoubleClick Inc. (www.doubleclick.net) is a leading provider of comprehensive global Internet advertising solutions for marketers and Web publishers. Combining technology, media and data expertise, DoubleClick centralizes planning, execution, control, tracking and reporting for online media campaigns. DoubleClick Inc. has Global headquarters in New York City and maintains over 30 offices around the world. ------------------------------ From: Keith Knipschild Subject: Does Anyone Use Call Manager ? Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2000 19:42:04 -0500 Im curious does anyone use Call Manager ( Bell Atlantic calls it ) If so what equipment are you using ? Is it a Standalone unit or built into your phone ? The reason I'm asking is because I have Call Manager and have never used it, since I could not find reasonable priced equipment. Thanks, Keith =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= WEB: http://www.knip.com MAIL: keith@knip.com =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V20 #15 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Mar 9 20:28:50 2000 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id UAA04349; Thu, 9 Mar 2000 20:28:50 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2000 20:28:50 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200003100128.UAA04349@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #16 TELECOM Digest Thu, 9 Mar 2000 20:28:00 EST Volume 20 : Issue 16 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Psychic Hotline Charges (Paul Cook) Symantec Threatens Legal Action Over I-Gear Report (Bennett) Persistent Mysterious Calls from Hell ... (Bill Phillips) Re: Long Lines Bells (Don Kimberlin) Keystroke Cops (Monty Solomon) Re: Australia; Wireless Phone Number Portability 3/2001 (David Clayton) What Can be Done When the LECs T1 Card Goes? (Dan Star) Siemens EWSP Switch (Joshua Walmsley) Re: Internet Content vs Internet Delivery (J.F. Mezei) DoubleClick Names Privacy Chiefs (Monty Solomon) Interesting Anomalies in Bell Canada Call Screen Service (GT Snoracer) 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-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest 611 Poplar Street Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 805-545-5115 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@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: hyperarchive.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 the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Reply-To: Paul Cook From: Paul Cook Subject: Psychic Hotline Charges Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2000 15:56:18 -0800 Organization: Proctor & Associates, Inc. Psychic hot line bill: $70,000 Thursday, March 9, 2000 By PAULO LIMA Staff Writer The Bergen Record Had the telephone psychics been more clairvoyant, they might have told Jeffrey Ochs they saw a big bill in his future. As far as Bell Atlantic is concerned, Ochs himself should have seen it coming: After all, he was calling an international number when he repeatedly dialed up a psychic hot line over a seven-week period. Ochs, of Hackensack, said the hot line operator told him, "We'll fix your life," and encouraged him to keep calling back. Ochs' troubles came to a head Feb. 15, when Hackensack police arrested him on a complaint filed by Bell Atlantic, charging him with theft of services for refusing to pay the bill. According to the complaint, Ochs opened up accounts in five different names in order to make hundreds of calls to the hot line, which operates from the South Pacific island nation of Vanuatu, west of Fiji. The calls weren't cheap, averaging about $6 per minute. "A half-hour call costs approximately $180," said Tom Cassidy, an investigator with Bell Atlantic. "And they were one after another!" Ochs, 49, who works for a job placement agency, has refused to pay for the hot line calls, made between Nov. 15 and Jan. 7. Last week, he filed a report with police seeking to charge Bell Atlantic with deceptive business practices. "I'm not sure if he's upset over the $70,000 or if it's because they didn't fix his life," said Hackensack Deputy Police Chief Ed Koeser. On Monday, Ochs and his attorney pursued the complaint in Hackensack Municipal Court. But a hearing on whether they legally could file a countercomplaint was postponed because Bell Atlantic wasn't represented by an attorney. A new hearing date had not yet been scheduled. "We think he should pay only for the long-distance charge and not for the psychic hot line's fee for its services," said Ochs' lawyer, Richard Galler. "In other words, he should pay whatever it costs to make a regular call to Vanuatu." Galler contends the psychic hot line is not entitled to collect a fee because it never provided a service. Instead, he said, the psychics exploited his client. "He tells them he has emotional problems, and they repeatedly encourage him to call back," Galler said. He refused to elaborate. Ochs, who is single, said he saw an advertisement for the service in TV Guide. Sandwiched between larger displays for the Psychic Source and the Professional Psychic Loveline on the magazine's last page, the two-line "Psychic Hotline" ad promises "live 1-to-1 readings." "They don't even have the rate" in the ad, Ochs said. "It said, 'international rates apply' -- whatever that means." Soraya Rodriguez, a Bell Atlantic spokeswoman, said the company is not Ochs' long-distance carrier and does not decide the charge. "Whatever the long-distance carrier tells us to charge, that's what we bill them," Rodriguez said. Galler said Ochs' long-distance carrier is Sprint, whose charge for a call to Vanuatu -- regardless of whether it's to a psychic hot line, a private residence, or another business -- ranges from about $7 per minute to $3.71 per minute with the company's international plan, under which the caller pays a $5.95 monthly fee. Such disputes over bills ordinarily result when parents discover that their teenage children have been calling phone sex lines. Yet large psychic hot line tabs are not unheard of. Cassidy, the investigator, said he worked a case years ago in which a Central Jersey woman ran up more than $50,000 in psychic hot line charges. And last year, a Los Angeles man reportedly made a staggering $120,000 worth of calls to a psychic hot line. Telephone industry experts emphasized, however, that the high bills do not necessarily reflect the psychic hot line's fee. International long-distance rates depend largely on pre-negotiated contracts between U.S. long-distance carriers -- such as AT&T, MCI, and Sprint -- and the local telephone company in the destination country, said Teresa Evert of Concert, a joint venture between AT&T and British Telecom. Long-distance carriers pay Vanuatu International Telephone Co. a $2-per-minute settlement rate, which is what the Vanuatu company charges to complete the call. The rate is one of the highest in the world, said Evert, adding that most Western European countries charge settlement rates under 10 cents per minute. The high settlement rates have attracted psychic and phone sex lines to the island country in recent years, Evert said. By offering to bring in more calls, the services negotiate deals with the Vanuatu telephone company for their cut of the American dollars. American carriers say they do not add on any extra fees for sex lines or psychic hot lines. "We charge the same price for any standard, direct-dial call to Vanuatu," Evert said. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2000 08:48:23 -0600 From: bennett@peacefire.org Subject: Symantec Threatens Legal Action Over I-Gear Report Reply-To: peacefire-press@iain.com Our report on I-Gear at: http://peacefire.org/censorware/I-Gear/igdecode/ has attracted the attention of Symantec's lawyers, who sent a fax to our ISP demanding that they remove our link to the I-Gear blocked site list on Symantec's server: http://peacefire.org/censorware/I-Gear/igdecode/symantec-to-media3.3-1-2000. txt Our report provided a means to download the list of 470,000 sites blocked by I-Gear and decrypt the list with the "igdecode" codebreaker program. We looked at the first 50 .edu URL's blocked under "pornography" that were still working, and found that 38 of them were mistakes: http://peacefire.org/censorware/I-Gear/igear-blocked-edu.html The blocked pages included a 75 K page written entirely in Latin, a description of a milking machine system written in Spanish, and volumes 4 and 6 of "The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire" -- but NOT volumes 1, 2, 3, and 5 (even though these were linked from the same index page), since apparently all the "good parts" are in volumes 4 and 6. (Before our report was pubilshed, we also sent mail to a few contacts asking them to download I-Gear's list, and act as "witnesses" in case I-Gear removed the list and claimed our report was fabricated.) We also found that the I-Gear installer retrieves your "real name" and "company name" from Windows registration information on your computer, and secretly sends this data back to Symantec -- apparently in violation of the privacy policy on Symantec's Web site. Symantec is demanding that we remove the links to their server, which we have not done. However, Symantec did move the blocked-site list on their server, so the link from our page no longer works. (More precisely, the link contains a serial number that has to be verified before the list can be downloaded, and Symantec de-activated that serial number to stop the link from working.) We believe that the issue at stake is the right to criticize software by looking "under the hood", and to allow others to verify your findings. By decrypting the list, in addition to the 76% error rate for .edu pages, we found that portions of the Web sites of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU.org), the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF.org), the Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT.org), the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC.org), and the Censorware Project (Censorware.org) were blocked by I-Gear in its "pornography" category. On the other hand, none of the major pro-censorship groups (enough.org, frc.org, afa.net, fotf.org, etc.) had portions of their Web sites blocked. Regardless of whether those anti-censorship sites got on the list by accident, the results suggest a bias in the blocked-site database -- which never would have been discovered without decrypting the list. Peacefire has never altered any content on our Web site as a result of legal threats. Our report on I-Gear will stay up, and we will post updates to our Web site regarding the legal situation. For more information: email bennett@peacefire.org or call (425) 649 9024; I'll be in most of the day. We also have a list of lawyers, lobbyists, and activists on the pro- and anti-side of the blocking software debate, at: http://www.peacefire.org/info/press.html complete with email and phone numbers, if you're looking for statements from other people and organizations. -Bennett bennett@peacefire.org http://www.peacefire.org (425) 649 9024 ------------------------------ From: wfp@ziplink.net (Bill Phillips) Subject: Persistent Mysterious Calls from Hell ... Organization: ShoeString Projects, Cambridge, MA Reply-To: wfp@ziplink.net (Bill Phillips) Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2000 05:44:11 GMT [The following came from a friend of mine in Washington state. I've left her name off. I figure someone among all you phone gurus has the answer ... Right?] I'm trying to be patient and not paranoid. (which fortunately, I'm generally not very paranoid.) There's a number that keeps calling me, about 6:00 p.m. or so, which is usually when I am out feeding or working with horses. The operator and the phone company can't tell me anything about it (won't? they say they don't know the interchange...YOU'RE THE FREAKIN' PHONE COMPANY!!!! GRRRR....). I've tried reverse directories InfoSpace, AnyWho, and ThinkPC411. The number is 509-533-1504. 509 is eastern washington; I'm in a 509 as well. But the 533 interchange isn't listed anywhere. When I call the number back, I either get a busy signal or it just rings and rings forever (and boy, have I let it ring!). It could be a "switch" number -- like, when I get a call from our hospital to my house, it might be any number, and not match any of the "real" outgoing numbers, because all our calls get routed through a switch. So maybe it's a big telemarketer ... but I sure wish I could figure it out ... it's starting to freak me out. Of course they never leave a message. I guess what's weirding me out is that they keep calling; about 6 times or so in the last 3 weeks. Any ideas for figuring out more about this? I'd just like to know if I'm being stalked by a telemarketer or a real person (vicious point intended). ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2000 22:25:52 -0500 From: Don Kimberlin Subject: Re: Long Lines Bells In article Sun, 05 Mar 2000 16:17:18 -0600 Grover C. McCoury III (grover@corvia.com) wrote: > I dusted off my copy of the "Bell Labs Bible", Engineering and > Operations in the Bell System, and found the following definition: > The Long Lines Department of AT&T owns and operates long distance > transmission facilities and certain switching systems to provide > connections between operating companies and with foreign countries. > Long Lines, being an operating organization, is the largest part of AT&T, > with about 90% of all AT&T personnel. > AT&T was organized as follows: > ______________________________________ > AT&T > General Depts. Long Lines Dept > ______________________________________ > | | | > Western Electric | Bell Operating Companies(24 BOCs) > | | > | | > ------ | > | | > Bell Telephone** Laboratories > ** - BTL is 50% owned by Western Electric and 50% owned by AT&T That's a good book and a good list. I tell people that pre-divestiture, Long Lines was the "25th RBOC," seeing as its function was to run the intercompany lines between all the others. In the original Bell System setup, Long Lines in fact collected _all_ the money from the RBOCs who had to do the local connecting, provide many interstate operator services, bill and flow the money through -- and originally, got only a measly flat twenty-five cents for their work at each end, while AT&T kept _all_ the rest -- and that in a day when "long distance" was a large portion of a dollar per minute! The RBOCs, by comparison, were mere "tax farms" for 195 Broadway, and the attitude of their personnel toward Long Lines employees generally showed it. When DDD came along and the plant got automated, profitability skyrocketed even further. It should be no wonder that interlopers like MCI finally cracked the code and found out there was so much profit anybody could do it... Donald Kimberlin, NCE ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2000 01:11:26 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Keystroke Cops New software raises troubling questions on worker privacy By Michael J. McCarthy THE WALL STREET JOURNAL March 7 - The American workplace has been put on notice that office computers can be monitored. But who could have imagined the keystroke cops? IN A NEW THREAT to personal privacy on the job, some companies have begun using surveillance software that covertly monitors and records each keystroke an employee makes: every letter, every comma, every revision, every flick of the fingertip, regardless of whether the data is ever saved in a file or transmitted over a corporate computer network. As they harvest those bits and bytes, the new programs, priced at as little as $99, give employers access to workers' unvarnished thoughts - and the potential to use that information for their own ends. http://www.msnbc.com/news/378768.asp?cp1=1 ------------------------------ From: David Clayton Subject: Re: Australia; Wireless Phone Number Portability 3/2001 Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2000 19:39:36 +1100 Organization: Customer of Connect.com.au Pty. Ltd. Reply-To: dcstar@acslink.aone.net.au David Lind contributed the following: > Sooo glad to have this forum and the moderater back!! > The Aussies have mandated wireless phone number portability to be implemented > in 12 months. So what is holding us up? > http://cnniw.newsreal.com/cgi-bin/NewsService?osform_template=pages/cnniwStory&ID=cnniw&storypath=News/Story_2000_03_06.NRdb@2@5@3@5&path=News/Category.NRdb@2@14@2@1 It may be in legislation, but the established carriers have been "dragging their feet" in agreeing how it is to happen, but: ......... On 1 October 1999, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission determined that full number portability for mobile phone numbers (excluding analogue AMPS mobiles) should be available in Australia, and directed the ACA (Australian Communications Authority) to set the earliest practicable date for its implementation. Mobile number portability is the ability of a customer to change their mobile service provider, while keeping their existing mobile phone number. To assist in setting the implementation date for mobile number portability, the ACA released a discussion paper in December 1999 seeking public comment. Following consideration of the responses to this paper, the ACA will release a report in early March 2000, outlining the ACA's preliminary view of an appropriate implementation date for mobile number portability. After inviting further comment, the ACA will finalise its report by late April 2000 and announce the implementation date for mobile number portability. ............. Regards, David Clayton, e-mail: dcstar@acslink.aone.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: Thu, 09 Mar 2000 18:44:52 -0600 From: Dan Star Reply-To: danstar@execpc.com Organization: ETCO Subject: What Can be Done When the LECs T1 Card Goes? We had a site coneected via Frame relay go down in the morning due to a faulty T1 card provided by the Ameritech LEC. The Frame service itself is provided by MCIWorldCom. It took the LEC until 8 pm that night to fix it. Can either party be held responsible for this? How should a customer respond to this occurence? Dan ------------------------------ From: Joshua Walmsley Subject: Siemens EWSP Switch Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2000 22:35:51 +1100 Organization: Optus Internet Hi, I am looking for information relating to the EWSD switch family. I have searched and all I have been able to get is two pages from Siemens web site. Can somone point me in the direction of information. What I am looking for is setup information, case studies how some compaines have theirs setup..etc. ------------------------------ From: JF Mezei Subject: Re: Internet Content vs Internet Delivery Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2000 23:16:50 -0500 Felix Deutsch wrote: > You are mislead by thinking that AOL is a mere ISP, thus just offering > full-IP connectivity. I would think that many AOL subscribers spend a > significant amount of their online time using services provided by AOL > and not the WWW in general. But what advantage is there for CNN to restrict content to AOL-only subscribers ? If the goal is to have more eyeballs, shouldn't CNN push to be on the world-wide-web and get eyeballs from any ISP in the world instead of just AOL with a proprietary product available only on AOL ? ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2000 22:22:27 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: DoubleClick names privacy chiefs http://cbs.marketwatch.com/news/current/netdaily.htx By Frank Barnako, CBS MarketWatch Last Update: 2:10 PM ET Mar 8, 2000 Internet advertising services firm DoubleClick (DCLK) moved Wednesday to quell controversy about its data collection and tracking procedures by hiring two prominent consumer protection experts. Jules Polonetsky, New York City's Consumer Affairs Commissioner, has signed on as DoubleClick's Chief Privacy Officer. Former New York State attorney general Robert Abrams will chair a Privacy Advisory Board for the company. "DoubleClick is dedicated to both guaranteeing user privacy and delivering effective online advertising that will keep the Internet free," said the firm's president, Kevin Ryan. He said Polonetsky will act as an ombudsman for Internet users, working with clients to institute and police their privacy policies. ------------------------------ From: gt_snoracer@my-deja.com Subject: Interesting Anomalies in Bell Canada Call Screen Service Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2000 21:16:43 GMT Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy. My neighbor, who is a single mother with two year old twins and a six year old, has been facing non-stop harassment from collection agents thanks to debts ran up by her deadbeat ex husband, who has fled back to Iran. Since her job entails that she answer the phone at all times, she was at her wits end with them calling late or early and waking the children. when she found out i used to work in the field and talked to me, i explained some strategies, particularly with Bell's call screen service, that could cut down on these calls from these psychological terrorists. (And that's really what they are ... but I digress ...) The agents usually call with the the call display number blocked or unknown, but call screen seems to work with a surprising amount of them. Most have ceased. One interesting thing I have noticed, however, is that two numbers, CollectCorp [(416) 961-9622] and The Collection House [(416) 447-0060] do not work with the system. So the question I have ... is Bell in bed with those two companies? (Or one company perhaps ... these agencies are notorious for using shell companies to cloak operations.) and how effective is a service like this, which is advertised as allowing people to escape harassment (and it's a clear case of it here)? Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V20 #16 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Mar 9 22:27:32 2000 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id WAA08722; Thu, 9 Mar 2000 22:27:32 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2000 22:27:32 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200003100327.WAA08722@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #17 TELECOM Digest Thu, 9 Mar 2000 20:42:37 EST Volume 20 : Issue 17 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Telephone-Pole Battle: Steel Takes On Wood (Dick Aichinger) SPAM: ADV: Search Engine Registration (Claire Pieterek) Nortel Analog Switches (was Re: The DLC Epidemic...) (Steve Hayes) Re: NXX by NPA (Clarence Dold) Re: Give me Some of That New Wireless, Maybe (A. E. Siegman) IDT Adopts Cellular/Paging Calling Party Pays (Monty Solomon) 24/7 Europe Develops The World's First WAP Ad Server (Monty Solomon) IEEE Statement Against UCITA (Monty Solomon) Re: 1.)Thread Creep Alert! 2.)Urban Legend Alert! (Don Kimberlin) Re: 1.)Thread Creep Alert! 2.)Urban Legend Alert! (Tony Pelliccio) U.S. Wants to Trace Net Users (Monty Solomon) Re: Last Laugh! The Infinite Monkey Protocol Suite (Barry Margolin) Desperately Seeking the Next DoubleClick (Monty Solomon) 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-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest 611 Poplar Street Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 805-545-5115 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@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: hyperarchive.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 the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Dick Aichinger Subject: Re: Telephone-Pole Battle: Steel Takes On Wood Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2000 18:46:55 GMT Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy. In article , msb@vex.net wrote: > Mike Pollock quotes Robert Guy Matthews in The Wall Street Journal: >> The U.S. currently has about 90 million wood telephone poles. Steel poles >> have tripled since 1997, but they still represent less than 2% of the >> market. The key, the steel industry believes, is in the telephone- >> pole replacement market: Four million wood poles each year need to be >> replaced >> because of routine maintenance, accidents, construction, and steel's >> friend, the woodpecker. > About two years ago Toronto Hydro, the local electric company, rewired my > street and replaced the old wooden poles with concrete ones. Is concrete > not a common choice of for utility poles in the US? Is there an > important > distinction for some reason between *telephone* poles and those for > other utilities? > Mark Brader, Toronto | Any company large enough to have a research lab > msb@vex.net | is large enough not to listen to it. --Alan Kay > My text in this article is in the public domain. The use of concrete poles instead of steel or wood poles for utilities in the US is very regional. Where there is a concrete pole facility, concrete poles seem to be more readily used but for distribution line construction concrete is still not used that much. The much heavier concrete pole is a limiting factor for it acceptance for freight or construction considerations. I believe the authors use of the term "telephone pole" was a generic representation of wood poles commonly seen along roads and along neighborhood backyards. I believe his reference and statistics represent the wood pole use for utilities in general. Dick Aichinger, PE ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2000 13:50:52 PST From: Claire Pieterek Reply-To: pieterek@pipeline.com Subject: SPAM: ADV: Search Engine Registration Hi, Pat -- I'm glad you're back! Here is another worthy entry for the Telecom Digest Business Directory. mike@yy3becker92181.net wrote: > From pop_server."pilotgirl"@pop.pipeline.com Wed Mar 8 13:48:56 2000 > Return-Path: > Received: from marci1.marcireau.fr ([212.208.179.3]) > by work.mail.mindspring.net (Mindspring Mail Service) with ESMTP id > scdick.4lj.37kbi0t > for ; Wed, 8 Mar 2000 16:43:47 -0500 (EST) > Received: from computer [212.208.179.135] by marci1.marcireau.fr > (SMTPD32-6.00) id A9243E590084; Wed, 08 Mar 2000 22:41:56 +0100 > To: > From: > Subject: ADV: Search Engine Registration > MIME-Version: 1.0 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=unknown-8bit > content-length: 485 > Message-Id: <200003082241578.SM00311@computer> > Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2000 22:41:59 +0100 > Removal instructions below. > I saw your listing on the internet. > I work for a company that specializes > in getting clients web sites listed > as close to the top of the major > search engines as possible. > Our fee is only $29.95 per month to > submit your site at least twice a > month to over 350 search engines > and directories. > To get started and put your web site > in the fast lane, call our toll free > number below. > Mike Bender > 888-532-8842 > To be removed call: 888-800-6339 X1377 Claire Pieterek surfing on a wave of nostalgia for an age yet to come [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think instead of 'Mike Bender' his name should be 'Bend Over'. Sadly, a lot of newcomers on the net will probably bend over, at least to get their wallet out of their pocket to hand him his money every month. I agree this is a good entry for the Busines Directory, but decisions about that are left up to the Editor of the same. I suspect we will see a new issue of the directory before long. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Steve Hayes Subject: Nortel Analog Switches (was Re: The DLC Epidemic...) Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2000 11:08:16 -0000 Hi Pat and everyone, First, I should have already said Welcome back, Pat. We can see that the old war-horse is still responding to the bugle call. Many thanks for your efforts. In Telecom Digest V20 No. 14 while contributing to the DLC Epidemic thread, Ed Ellers speculated a bit about Nortel analog switches. I can fill in a few more details which I hope will be interesting to a few readers. In the early 70s, Northern Electric (which became Northern Telecom and now Nortel) made the Western Electric No. 1 ESS switch under license. Northern's engineering department had the not very demanding job of going through the Western documents with red and yellow pencils, crossing out the word "Western" and replacing it with "Northern". They also had to change the leading K on each part number to a Q but that was about it. As I heard it, Western refused to license the later ESS versions. I suppose they hoped to get the business themselves. Northern rose to the challenge and developed the SP1 switch (SP as in Stored Program). This had more advanced CPU control then the No. 1 ESS but used inexpensive and reliable mini-crossbar electromechanical switches for the actual (analog) switching. It was a very successful switch in its day - partly thanks to the captive Bell Canada market of course. I'm not sure but I think that the No. 1 ESS used ferreed switching elements - someone else is bound to know more about that. Digital switching started to come in around the mid 70s and Northern developed the DMS range which soon replaced the SP1. I wonder if any of the SP1s are still in service - like their electromechanical predecessors they had a 40 year design life. It's interesting to speculate whether Northern would ever have developed DMS if the licensing agreements with Western had continued. Steve Hayes South Wales, UK ------------------------------ From: Clarence Dold Subject: Re: NXX by NPA Date: 8 Mar 2000 22:06:30 GMT Organization: a2i network Reply-To: dold@email.rahul.net Michael G. Koerner wrote: > Clarence Dold wrote: >> How strange. Those are incredibly out of date and incomplete. >> Looking at WSUTLZD.TXT, I find 707-965 (my home) with no description. >> Looking for NAPA, I find it listed as 415-217. I don't remember how >> long ago Napa became the 707 NPA. > That is interesting, as I am finding the NANPA 'Utilized' list printout ... > NPA in Michigan and the 219 NPA in Indiana) to be EXTREMELY accurate and My supposition, based only on the SF Bay Area, is that the table is now being populated as NPA-NXX are assigned. The NPA-NXX that existed at the start of the 'project' were filled in manually, and only for important areas. The suburbs (most of NPA 707) is sparsely populated. 707-nnn is 644 entries, 365 of which are blank. CA 707-968 for instance. No date, no ... 415-nnn is 693 entries, 34 of which are blank, and some of those are nn/nn/2000 dates. Unassignable? 8 of them are N11. Most of 415, the mature NPA in the area, is populated. So, you might be able to use these tables casually, but you certainly can't depend on them in California. Clarence A Dold - dold@email.rahul.net - Pope Valley & Napa CA. ------------------------------ From: siegman@stanford.edu (A. E. Siegman) Subject: Re: Give me Some of That New Wireless, Maybe Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2000 18:20:06 -0800 Organization: Stanford University In article , Andrew Green wrote: > Seriously, we're developing a lot of stuff that obviously could operate just > fine inside a car, but not all of it is necessarily a Good Thing there. Based on a day's exposure to a colleague's car in Japan equipped with a GPS system and CD-ROM-driven LCD dynamic map display, this particular system is going to be the premier example of this unresolved dichotomy. * The capabilities of the system for indicating where you are, where you're heading, and what's around you are wonderful (especially in a place like Japan), as well as near unbelievable. * The driver obviously needs to see it. * Yet the amount of information displayed is large (basically two side-by-side maps, one showing immediate surroundings, the other a broader area) and the level of detail involved is very distracting, almost guaranteed to pull the driver's attention away from the road -- and the display unit, at least in the van I rode in, is down low in the general area where radio and heater controls are in most cars, so when you're looking at it, the road ahead is barely in your peripheral vision. In other words, the amount of visual and mental distraction from the task of driving the car is way beyond any simple task like listening to the radio, talking on a phone hands-off, or using an electric shaver. On the one hand, these things are wonderful; on the other hand it's hard to believe they aren't going to lead to an epidemic of rear-end collisions, running down of pedestrians, and similar accidents. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2000 00:51:15 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: IDT Adopts Cellular/Paging Calling Party Pays IDT Adopts Cellular/Paging Calling Party Pays 03/03/00 Newsbytes, 03/3/2000 08:11 NEWARK, NEW JERSEY, U.S.A., 2000 MAR 3 (NB) -- By Steve Gold, Newsbytes. IDT Corp. [NASDAQ:IDTC] has become the first major US carrier to offer calling party pays (CPP) services to its paging and cellular service subscribers. http://investing.lycos.com/lycos/story.asp?symbols=IDTC&startStory=13134897&mode=News ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2000 00:56:15 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: 24/7 Europe Develops The World's First WAP Ad Server 02/25/2000 24/7 Europe Develops The World's First WAP Ad Server The advertising network 24/7 Europe (www.247europe.com) has developed the world's first WAP ad server. It enables WAP ad campaigns to be served into mobile content which individual users can access using WAP or SMS enabled devices. The system incorporates ad serving, management and reporting capabilities allowing delivery, monitoring and control of campaigns. http://www.bizreport.com/news/2000/02/20000225-2.htm ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2000 22:00:15 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: IEEE Statement Against UCITA Forwarded to the Digest, FYI: Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2000 12:12:02 -0800 (PST) From: Phil Agre Subject: [RRE]IEEE statement against UCITA [UCITA, the bizarre set of proposed laws governing the sale of software in the United States, is still undead. It is about to be considered by the various state legislatures; if they approve it then it's a done deal. IEEE has taken a strong position against it (enclosed, heavily reformatted), and Slashdot has published a practical guide to lobbying against it: . You will recall that among UCITA's many alarming implications is the very real possibility that software companies can prevent anybody from ever publishing any critical reviews of their products.] =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= This message was forwarded through the Red Rock Eater News Service (RRE). Send any replies to the original author, listed in the From: field below. You are welcome to send the message along to others but please do not use the "redirect" option. For information about RRE, including instructions for (un)subscribing, see http://dlis.gseis.ucla.edu/people/pagre/rre.html or send a message to requests@lists.gseis.ucla.edu with Subject: info rre =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2000 16:26:47 -0500 From: "Raymond Paul" http://www.ieeeusa.org/forum/POSITIONS/ucita.html The IEEE-USA Board of Directors approved the following statement on UCITA at the meeting last Thursday. [...] Opposing Adoption of the Uniform Computer Information Transaction Act (UCITA) By the States Approved By the IEEE-USA Board of Directors (Feb. 2000) On behalf of The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers -- United States of America (IEEE-USA) and its nearly 230,000 U.S. members who are electrical, electronics, computer and software engineers, we wish to reiterate to the state legislatures the concerns regarding the Uniform Computer Information Transaction Act (UCITA) that we previously expressed to the National Council of Commissioners on State Laws (NCCUSL). We believe UCITA should be rejected by the states. UCITA would have a widespread, complex impact, including: (a) the provisions of the act itself; (b) its interaction with the existing statutes, principles, and interpretations of Federal intellectual property law; (c) the provisions currently found in "shrink wrap" and "click-through" software agreements -- many of them questionable or unenforceable under current law -- that UCITA seeks to make enforceable; and (d) UCITA's effect on existing business practices and reasonable purchaser expectations. Into the existing and evolving legal and business situation, UCITA would inject an ironclad statutory framework that is very easy to abuse to the serious detriment of consumers, large business users, and small business users of computer software, software developers, computer consultants and the general public. Many organizations, including 24 state Attorneys General, the staffs of the Bureau of Competition, Bureau of Consumer Protection, and Policy Planning Office of the Federal Trade Commission, professional and trade associations, consumer groups, the American Law Institute (originally NCCUSL's partner in drafting UCITA), and others have expressed opposition or concern regarding UCITA In some cases the concerns of these organizations parallel ours, and in other cases they raise additional issues. Our concerns are in the following areas: By changing what would otherwise be considered a sale into a licensing transaction, UCITA permits software publishers to enforce contract provisions that may be onerous, burdensome or unreasonable, and places on the purchaser the burden and cost of proving that these provisions are unconscionable or "against fundamental public policy". Examples of these provisions include prohibitions against public criticism of the software and limitations on purchasers' rights to sell or dispose of software. The first provision prohibits the reviews, comparisons, and benchmark testing that are critical for an informed, competitive marketplace. The second issue could legally complicate transactions including corporate mergers/acquisitions, sales of small businesses, the operation of businesses dealing in second-hand software, and even yard sales. UCITA would undermine the protections provided by Federal intellectual property law and upset the carefully achieved balance between owners and purchasers of intellectual property. One major protection is that "fair use" case law and statutory copyright law permit "reverse engineering" for certain important purposes, such as development of compatible (interoperable) software products and information security testing. Reverse engineering is the examination of software to identify and analyze its internal elements. Current shrink-wrap agreements often contain strict provisions forbidding reverse engineering. By making these provisions enforceable, UCITA would stifle innovation and competition in the software industry, and would straightjacket efforts of users to provide information security protection for their systems. UCITA allows software publishers to disclaim warranties and consequential damages even for software defects known to the publisher prior to sale, undisclosed to the buyer, and having damages that can be reasonably foreseen. For example, under UCITA a software publisher could not only prohibit publication of information on security vulnerabilities that users identify but could avoid responsibility for fixing these vulnerabilities. By legalizing the choices of law and forum often included in software agreements, UCITA would allow software publishers to make expensive and burdensome any efforts by purchasers to protect their rights. This includes issues that for a sale would be handled in local small-claims courts. The "self-help" provisions of UCITA would allow software publishers to embed security vulnerabilities and other functions in their software to facilitate "denial-of-service" attacks (remote disablement or destruction of the software) and to avoid liability for accidental triggering of the attacks or exploitation of these functions by malicious intruders. We urge the state legislatures to reject UCITA. This statement was developed by the Committee on Communications and Information Policy and the Intellectual Property Committee of The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers - United States of America (IEEE-USA), and represents the considered judgment of a group of U.S. IEEE members with expertise in the subject field. The IEEE-USA promotes the careers and public-policy interests of the nearly 230,000 electrical, electronics, computer and software engineers who are U.S. members of the IEEE. Some Sources of Additional Information General information: http://www.4cite.org Encompasses coalition of organizations opposing adoption of UCITA. http://www.badsoftware.com Includes or links to numerous opposition comments. http://www.2bguide.com Includes both pro and con comments. "Whatsnew" page has extensive links to relevant UCITA and UCC-2B documents. Specific: http://www.ieeeusa.org/forum/POLICY/1999/99july20.html July 1999 IEEE-USA letter to NCCUSL http://www.2bguide.com/docs/citopp.html Memo by Steven Chow, dissenting member of UCITA drafting committee http://www.ftc.gov/be/v990010.htm Letter by FTC staff to NCCUSL opposing UCITA http://www.4cite.org/prinlng.html Memo describing adverse impacts of UCITA on businesses (prepared by Principal Financial Group) http://www.2bguide.com/docs/50799dad.html Memo from former ALI members of drafting committee declining further participation http://www.acm.org/usacm/copyright/usacm-ucita.html Letter from the President of ACM to NCCUSL opposing UCITA [...] Last Updated: 15 Feb. 2000 Staff Contact: Deborah Rudolph, d.rudolph@ieee.org Copyright (c) 2000 The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. Permission to copy granted for non-commercial uses with appropriate attribution. Raymond Paul Legislative Representative Technology Policy IEEE-USA 1828 L Street, NW Suite 1202 Washington, DC 20036 Phone: 202-530-8331 Fax: 202-785-0835 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2000 22:23:38 -0500 From: Don Kimberlin Subject: Re: 1.)Thread Creep Alert! 2.)Urban Legend Alert! In article (Tue, 07 Mar 2000 12:55:15 -0600 ) Ross McMicken (mcmicken@ix.netcom.com) wrote: >In Houston, Tx, the utilities pay a franchise fee to the city for use > of the city rights of way. I believe it amounts to about 4 percent of > gross revenues. We periodically get big squabbles over how much of the > fee can be charged to the consumer. Oh my. Now we get into that realm of all the variables, in which Texas is its own kind of unique case where Southwestern Bell managed to keep the state from even having a Public Utilities Commission for decades. As I recall the history there, the State Railroad Commission tried after many decades, and even it suffered legal defeat at the hands of Southwestern Bell taking the state government itself to court. My recall of the Texas situation was that each municipality wound up having to negotiate its franchise deal with SW Bell. Sounds like Houston fared well compared to many. In article (Tue, 07 Mar 2000 15:41:08 -0600 ) John Hines (jhines@enteract.com) wrote: >> ... In the interest of accuracy, I must challenge the poster to >> prove his >> claim with some factual references - and more than a reported phone >> call >> to an unnamed town or utility employee, please! > http://www.ci.chi.il.us/Environment/EnergyManagement/ See the section > on utility oversight. > Or > http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:www.westmont.il.us/government/village/manager/CompPlan/WebDocs/chapter_six.htm > for another local village. ... Of which, the first mentioned only that Commonwealth Edison, the electric company, pays a franchise fee. The telephone company, originally Illinois Bell, but now part of Ameritech, has been (:in)famous since the earliest days of the phone business for being a wily political animal - especially one of the sort that will let members of the public chase their tail over something others got caught with, but which they avoided since Year Dot of "the business." ... The second reference got a failure to find whatever site was quoted. ... All of which is not to say there can be wide variance in the situation. For example, in Charlotte, North Carolina, it wasn't found out until way, way too late in the game to do anything about it that Southern Bell had managed to "overlook" ever getting a franchise from the City. What you gonna do? Throw the phone company out on its ear a century later? Not likely! ... Thus, there may even be the odd town here and there where one could find a firm reference to a fee being paid. However, I'll wager that phone companies paying a fee are the exception, and that even if they do, it's something that finally occurred since we broke up Ma Bell. She was monolithic in more ways than most might imagine. ------------------------------ From: nospam.tonypo1@nospam.home.com (Tony Pelliccio) Subject: Re: 1.)Thread Creep Alert! 2.)Urban Legend Alert! (Re: Telephone-Pole Organization: Providence Network Partners Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2000 23:18:10 GMT In article , mcmicken@ix.netcom.com says: > In Houston, Tx, the utilities pay a franchise fee to the city for use > of the city rights of way. I believe it amounts to about 4 percent of > gross revenues. We periodically get big squabbles over how much of the > fee can be charged to the consumer. Uh -- couldn't that be considered a business expense? If so it could be used to offset revenue thereby increasing the earnings of said utility. Tony Pelliccio, KD1S formerly KD1NR Trustee WE1RD ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2000 23:43:09 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: U.S. Wants to Trace Net Users by Declan McCullagh 3:00 a.m. 4.Mar.2000 PST WASHINGTON -- The ease of hiding one's identity on the Net is giving police migraines and justifies providing broad new powers to law enforcement, the White House says in a forthcoming report. The federal government should take steps to improve online traceability and promote international cooperation to identify Internet users, according to a draft of the report commissioned by President Clinton and obtained by Wired News. http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,34720,00.html [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Maybe you saw the headline story today in {USA Today} entitled 'How Goverment failed to see or stop largest denial of service attack in nation's history.' The story said they had arrested someone named 'Coolio', I presume since they no longer have Kevin Mitnick to kick around. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Barry Margolin Subject: Re: Last Laugh! The Infinite Monkey Protocol Suite Organization: GTE Internetworking, Cambridge, MA Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2000 22:50:18 GMT In article , Monty Solomon wrote: > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts > directories. > Title : The Infinite Monkey Protocol Suite (IMPS) > Author(s) : S. Christey > Filename : draft-christey-imps-00.txt > Pages : 18 > Date : 01-Mar-00 Wow, has IETF bureaucratic procedure become so entrenched that even an April Fool's Day RFC has to be published as an I-D first? BTW, Monty, you posted two "Last Laugh" messages -- which one is *really* last? Barry Margolin, barmar@bbnplanet.com GTE Internetworking, Powered by BBN, Burlington, 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: Actually, I receive a dozen articles at a time from Monty Solomon; I pick a couple to use every day. The 'Last Laugh' feature runs from time to time also; again it is my choice to do it. I chose to run both of those messages as 'Last Laugh' in the same issue. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2000 23:27:19 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Desperately Seeking the Next DoubleClick http://www.thestandard.com/article/display/0,1151,12675,00.html After the fun it's had recently with DoubleClick, the press may have become addicted to privacy stories. (In case you're just joining this storyline: The Net ad giant, under fire, shelved plans to breach the anonymity of visitors to the sites of its customers.) This morning, three outlets ran almost identical stories about Topica's plan to sell advertisers the qualified eyeballs Topica hits with the thousands of e-mail lists it manages. ZDNet's tag invoked DoubleClick angst, but Wired News won for Best Head: "Hot Topica Conversation." As it turns out, though, the Topica news had little in common with DoubleClick's consumer-hostile plan. Topica's mailing-list clients will remain anonymous to advertisers, and their participation in particular mailing lists carries at least the odor of consumer-friendly opt-in. The press may be flogging a dead privacy pony. The Wall Street Journal's Michael J. McCarthy found a much more compelling privacy angle this morning. He turned in a long piece about Silent Watch, a software package that businesses use to monitor employees' keystrokes - all of them. McCarthy accurately reflected the current legal consensus that an employee can have little expectation of privacy when using his employer's computer. But McCarthy generated goosebumps with his depiction of Silent Watch recording every keystroke, typos and all, as an unwitting employee drafted an application letter for an aviation scholarship. McCarthy quoted the rhetorical question of a privacy-aware lawyer: "When else can you peer into someone's raw thought process?" - Keith Dawson Hot Topica Conversation http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,34772,00.html E-mail List Maker Launches New Ad Service (Reuters) http://www.sjmercury.com/svtech/news/breaking/merc/docs/033713.htm An Alternative to DoubleClick Angst? http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2456612,00.html Keystroke Loggers Save E-Mail Rants, Raising Workplace Privacy Concerns http://interactive.wsj.com/articles/SB952387732195636577.htm (Paid subscription required.) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I had some corresponence with Topica about a year ago, when they offered to buy TELECOM Digest's mailing list from me. I told them thanks, but no thanks. At that time, I thought maybe Topica was going to be a lot like DoubleClick, and I still feel that way. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V20 #17 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Mar 9 23:51:12 2000 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id XAA12213; Thu, 9 Mar 2000 23:51:12 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2000 23:51:12 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200003100451.XAA12213@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #18 N TELECOM Digest Thu, 9 Mar 00 23:51:00 EST Volume 20 : Issue 18 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson In Never-Bell Land, Phone Service Is Way Above Average (David Chessler) Re: On the Internet, Your Bank is Not Your Friend (No Spam) Re: The DLC Epidemic Spreads to the Northeast (Fred Goldstein) Re: Persistent Mysterious Calls from Hell ... (Justa Lurker) Is Iridium in or out? (Monty Solomon) Re: Persistent Mysterious Calls from Hell ... (Clarence Dold) Re: Cost of Wiretapping (Anonymous User) Re: Telephone-Pole Battle: Steel Takes On Wood (John Hines) Re: Communication Tower Being Built (Rich Osman) 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-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest 611 Poplar Street Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 805-545-5115 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@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: hyperarchive.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 the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2000 21:12:59 -0500 From: David Chessler Subject: In Never-Bell Land, Phone Service Is Way Above Average http://www.nytimes.com/yr/mo/day/news/financial/richmond-phones.html In Never-Bell Land, Phone Service Is Way Above Average, and Competitive March 9, 2000 By JULIE FLAHERTY RICHMOND, Mass. -- The hand-cranked phone boxes are long gone. The party lines are, too. But the residents of tiny Richmond, a former mining town in the Berkshires, still dial the operator when they need the local news. "Someone called to ask who picks up the trash," said Melissa Perdue, a customer care specialist with the Richmond Telephone Company, the local exchange. "We pretty much know everything about the town." Richmond is in many ways not your typical phone company. Its headquarters is a green-shuttered, white clapboard house on Route 41, in far-western Massachusetts just shy of the New York border. It has 13 employees, including a one-man repair crew named Maurice. Its phone book listings are 12 pages long, representing 1,168 residents and businesses. And it has handled the calls here for 97 years. Ethel Hanson, 82, has known no other phone company. Richmond installed her first dial phone in the 1960's and, before that, ran her parents' party line. "When I heard someone ring two long and two short, I knew that was mine," she recalled. As archaic as it may seem, more than 1,000 small, independent phone companies like Richmond Telephone still do business, mostly in rural areas of the nation. Each incumbent, as they are known in the industry, handles as few as 60 access lines or as many as 50,000, and altogether they serve nearly five million customers. Many are family-run companies, dating to the early 1900's, that were never part of the Ma Bell system, were never bought out by competitors and were basically left to their own devices all these years. Not that they have stayed in the dark ages of telecommunication. Richmond Telephone's old magneto switchboard was retired to a museum in Springfield, Mass., long ago, the president, Lorinda Ackley-Mazur, is quick to point out. Like many other independents, her company, with roughly 1,200 access lines, provides services like call waiting and call answering, just like Bell Atlantic, the dominant company in the Northeast, with nearly 44 million access lines. Richmond installed fiber optic cable in 1996, and last year it began Richmond NetWorx, an Internet access service. High-speed connections are also available. "Plus we have excellent customer service," Ms. Ackley-Mazur said, a contention that is hard to refute when a first name and a street are usually all that any of the four customer-care specialists need to find an account. One customer, Patrick Hanavan, said he stopped by the Richmond Telephone offices to sign up for call answering and found the service activated by the time he made the five-minute trip home. Another praised the prompt repairs. "They don't tell you that you have to wait when the phone gives out," said Tynia Harrington, 44, a cook at a restaurant in nearby Lenox. "They'll get right on it." The basic rate is just $12.50 a month, but calls outside the five-square-mile Richmond service area and Pittsfield, the nearest urban area, count as long distance. That does not bother Ms. Harrington, who usually drops off her payment in person so she can chat with the employees. "I can be late on a bill," she said. "I'll say, 'Is two weeks O.K.?' And they'll say, 'That's fine.' " Maurice Garofoli, 41, the company's sole repairman for the last 21 years, is so well known that customers often call him at home when they have trouble. Having the only repair truck in town makes him popular for other reasons, too. "I change the light bulbs in the Town Hall, put the rope on the flag," he said good-naturedly. Richmond Telephone was formed in 1903, when a group of town residents paid $70 each to become shareholders. Back then, about 6,000 small phone companies were started out of necessity, in areas around the country that the Bell system had overlooked as unprofitable. "They weren't in there to make money," said Martha Silver, a spokeswoman for the Organization for the Promotion and Advancement of Small Telephone Companies, a Washington-based trade group. "Many of them, 100 years ago, they were farmers. They were in many ways pioneers." Eventually, through mergers and consolidations, largely since 1950, the numbers dwindled. Now, as phone service becomes an increasingly important economic factor to even the most rural places, little telephone companies that serve out-of-the-way communities are finding themselves in demand by new business. A village in Maine is now home to a credit card call center; a Midwest farm town can employ dozens of residents as telemarketers. The town of Richmond, with its pastoral setting, has attracted its share of business people, mostly telecommuters, and Richmond Telephone is setting up more and more home offices. Last September, Mr. Hanavan, 33, forsook San Francisco for the quiet of a five-acre farm here, but he still dials in to his employer in Seattle through dedicated fax, modem and computer lines. "Coming here I was a bit nervous," said Mr. Hanavan, the director of East Coast sales for SpotTaxi.com, the Web site of Central Media Inc., an audio distributor. "Then Maurice came over and hooked me up. I'm not missing a beat." Richmond Telephone bills itself on the cover of its slim blue phone book as "the small company with big connections," and Ms. Ackley-Mazur says that is not an illusion of grandeur. In January, the company burst out of its comfortable niche to offer local, long-distance and Internet service to all of Berkshire County, a market of about 42,000 access lines, essentially putting itself head to head with Bell Atlantic. For now, Richmond Telephone is leasing Bell Atlantic lines and providing long-distance services in partnership with GFC Communications of Albany. The direct competition, said John H. Johnson, a spokesman for Bell Atlantic, is "good for consumers and it represents growth in the industry." It also serves another important purpose, as Bell Atlantic needs to show that its market is open to competition as it awaits federal approval to move into the long-distance market in Massachusetts. Rex G. Mitchell, an analyst for Banc of America Securities, said many rural telephone companies, already set up to serve the more costly low-population areas, are finding that they can branch out into neighboring towns without much added expense. That is a result of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, which allowed federal regulators to push down the cost of leasing phone lines to jump-start competition. Independents that do not grow seem headed for consolidation, he said, as the swirl of acquisitions and mergers in the telecommunications industry has affected the rural areas. The former Bell companies have not shown much interest because arcane regulations make such acquisitions too costly. But consolidators, companies that specialize in acquiring telecommunications businesses in rural markets, have been snapping up local access lines at $2,400 to $5,000 each. Ms. Ackley-Mazur is aware of the big money involved. Two years ago, when she was acting president and general manager for the Taconic Telephone Corporation of nearby Chatham, N.Y., a concern her grandfather founded in 1908, the company was acquired by MJD Communications Inc. of Charlotte, N.C., a consolidator, for $67.5 million. Taconic had grown to have more than 24,000 access lines and interests in cellular, wireless and cable. Divesting, she said, was the most profitable move for Taconic's 240 shareholders. Still, Ms. Silver, the trade group spokeswoman, said she expected most small incumbents to retain their independence for some time; only about 20 or 30 are sold each year, she said, usually when no one wants to take the helm of the family business. As for Richmond Telephone, Ms. Ackley-Mazur said she had made it clear that she wanted to expand the company, not sell it. For one thing, she likes keeping the business in the family, the way it has been since her father, J. Benedict Ackley, bought it from the remaining 22 shareholders in 1961. He is still chairman and still regularly goes over the books. Despite her small-town surroundings, Ms. Ackley-Mazur is as closed-lipped as the president of any private company. She would not comment about the company's finances except to say that the established telephone part of the business was profitable. She would not even say what her father paid for the company 40 years ago. "I know he borrowed the money from his mother," she said. "His father wouldn't give it to him." And yet another generation seems set in place. Ms. Ackley-Mazur's daughter, Catherine Dullaghan, was also raised in the phone business. She dropped off phone books at age 14 and flagged traffic for the repair truck and installed cable during her college breaks. Now 26 and a business school graduate, she manages marketing and customer care. "It really wasn't a decision for me," she said. "I just knew I was going to be here." Copyright 2000 The New York Times Company ------------------------------ From: No Spam Subject: Re: On the Internet, Your Bank is Not Your Friend Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2000 12:37:45 +1000 Organization: Customer of Telstra Big Pond Direct On 7 Mar 2000 09:52:03 GMT, murray@pa.dec.com (Hal Murray) wrote: >> The same undeniably simple logic is behind a huge fight now brewing >> between the already anachronistic banking industry and Internet >> entrepreneurs who are trying to put more power in the hands of >> consumers. >> http://www.sfgate.com/technology/beat/ > Nice article. Thanks. > Although technically possible, it will be difficult and costly for the > banks to deploy systems that determine when online records are being > requested by an actual customer or by a third-party website that has > access to the customer's password. > I have visions of smug bankers who have just hacked their router to > black hole the evil third-party sites. How long do you think it will > take for somebody to write an app that runs on your PC and gets the > info from your bank and sends it to the third-party? > Is that more or less secure? True. The product looks ok. I tried it with a few accounts and it work well. The sync to a palm device looks good too. This type of product has the ability to remove the need for accounting programs like Quicken .... although I note it is one of their 'sponsors'. Security of my data is always a concern in the back of my mind though. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2000 22:11:50 -0500 From: Fred Goldstein Subject: Re: The DLC Epidemic Spreads to the Northeast Lest the dead horse be beaten too much, I can perhaps contribute some background to this thread. DLCs are not in and of themselves, bad things. For instance, my house is 21 kilofeet from the CO, so I couldn't get ISDN (18 kf loop limit) until I found somebody at New England Tel to admit to the existence of a DLC only a few kilofeet away. Said engineer looked at the crufty old wire plant on my block and ordered a new cable job to the DLC. (He was a contractor, which accounted for his higher-than-NYNEX standards.) Now I have ISDN. And if somebody could get into the manhole (CEV), they could probably put in a DSLAM. But as noted, there are two ways to do it. "Universal" mode means back-to-back analog ports at the CO, putting an analog line into a CO terminal. This breaks modems badly. (Not ISDN, though, or related "switched digital" services.) It's the only way to do it on an analog switch, of course, but those are all gone here. "Integrated" mode means that there is a direct digital connection from the DLC into the CO, usually T1 (E1 in Europe, of course). There are two common standardized ways to do Integrated DLC in North America. Telcordia spec TR-008 maps each channel of the T1 to an analog line. There's no concentration; each T1 carries 24 lines from CO to DLC. It's essentially the protocol that AT&T (WECo) used between the SLC-96 remote and CO terminals, using bit-robbed signaling similar to other 1980s channel banks. Telcordia's GR-303 is much newer, having really come into its own within the last few years. It provides for line concentration; a group of 2-20 T1s supports as many as 2000 lines, with channels assigned on demand. ISDN-like signaling and its own maintenance channel are required. It's very slick when it works and has become the standard way for CLECs to access the remote terminals they put in ILEC CO collocation rooms. (European equivalent specs, totally different of course, are called V5.1 and V5.2 respectively.) Universal needs a CO terminal (extra hardware) and analog line ports (extra hardware), so it's hardly efficient. It works worse than Integrated mode. So why is it the norm here in TheFormerNYNEXLand? Some have speculated that it's intentional sabotage of modems. Maybe to some extent, given how much Bell Titanic detests Internet dial-up, but I think that's more of a bonus, icing on their cake as it were. More realistically, GR-303 is quite expensive. Lucent and Nortel charge big bucks for the software license ("right to use", or "RTU", fee). They'd rather have you use proprietary remote terminals. Since there are lots of old channel banks left around from the analog-switch days, the universal-mode CO terminal is "free". But the main reason, which I learned from a retired NYNEX executive, is worse than that. Within the telco hierarchy, there are two very distinct departments, one in charge of "inside plant" (ISP), the other in charge of "outside plant" (OSP). The boundary is near the switch. If there's a CO terminal for universal DLC, that's part of the OSP. So if something breaks, they can pull off the jumper and see if the switch or the DLC is broken. If it were integrated, there would be no clear demarc between the departments, so they'd have to cooperate rather than point fingers at each other. In telco corporate culture, that's virtually unthinkable. So your modem is broken because the manglers in Bell need a physical break in their plant to mimic a hundred-year-old break in the org chart. ------------------------------ From: /dev/null@.com (Justa Lurker) Subject: Re: Persistent Mysterious Calls from Hell ... Organization: Anonymous People Reply-To: jlurker@bigfoot.com (Replies to DIGEST please) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2000 03:13:28 GMT It was Thu, 09 Mar 2000 05:44:11 GMT, and wfp@ziplink.net (Bill Phillips) wrote in comp.dcom.telecom: > The number is 509-533-xxxx. 509 is eastern washington; I'm in a 509 > as well. But the 533 interchange isn't listed anywhere. xxxx's added by me! > From NNAG for December 1999. 509-533 SPOKANE US WEST PNW BELL End Office Code - Portable Modified 03/17/00 5E SPKNWAKYDS0 v:06247 h:08180 Any chance of talking to your phone company's annoyance call bureau? JL ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2000 21:17:36 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Is Iridium In or Out? To avoid deportation to the Land of Dead Companies, Iridium is scrambling for a green card. The satellite-phone company had crossed its fingers that the necessary paperwork would come from "billionaire investor" Craig McCaw, as the media likes to call him. But on Friday, McCaw dumped Iridium. http://www.thestandard.com/article/display/0,1151,12623,00.html ------------------------------ From: Clarence Dold Subject: Re: Persistent Mysterious Calls from Hell ... Date: 10 Mar 2000 03:30:12 GMT Organization: a2i network Reply-To: dold@email.rahul.net Bill Phillips wrote: : The number is 509-533-1504. 509 is eastern washington; I'm in a 509 : as well. But the 533 interchange isn't listed anywhere. That one shows up as at E 3rd and South Napa Streets, in Spokane, according to http://www.mapquest.com online maps. You might take a shot at calling 509-533-1500, just on a whim, if this is an auto-dialer behind a PBX. Clarence A Dold - dold@email.rahul.net - Pope Valley & Napa CA. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2000 04:15:04 +0100 From: Anonymous User Subject: Re: Cost of Wiretapping Organization: mail2news@nym.alias.net > I think the US has regulations requiring telephone systems > to have some automated mechanism for wiretaps. CALEA, passed in 1996. > Is there a good description of that system available on the web? > What fraction of the current COs support it? Any search engine on the Web will turn up numerous discriptions of CALEA itself. I believe COs have flexibility on how they achieve compliance to CALEA. As to whether telcos 'support' it there are two answers: telcos are now required by law to implement CALEA so there's no question they will 'support' it in the legal sense. But as to whether telcos 'support' the idea behind it the answer is a universal No - not out of any sense of consumer privacy merely the bottom line: telcos will have to pay for the bulk of CALEA compliance out of their own pockets. Excuse me, out of their customers' pockets, that being us consumers of course. > I assume there are supposed to be checks in the system to make > sure that it's only used for legal taps. Is there any reason > that I should believe those checks are good enough to keep > hackers from tapping whatever they want? Sure there are checks in the system. Just like there are checks in place to make sure people with badges don't shove broomhandles up your backside or pump you full of lead when you reach for a wallet. > How much does that system cost? If I took the total cost of that > system and put a pile of cash on the table in front of the FBI, would > they spend it on a wiretapping system or something else? Is this just > a sneaky way of taxing phone subscribers to support law enforcement? It's not about revenue-generation, it's about power - our govt's insatiable need for more power to control us citizens. Somewhen ago a govt flunky was quoted as saying the feds want the ability to tap 10% of the phone calls being made in the US at any given time. An enquiring mind might ask, "Why?" Maybe Echelon isn't working as well as it used to - more likely CALEA just makes the task of eavesdropping much easier and cheaper. After all, why go to all the effort of eavesdropping on communications when you can pass a law that makes telcos squirt the data right to you no muss no fuss? Steve ------------------------------ From: John Hines Subject: Re: Telephone-Pole Battle: Steel Takes On Wood Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2000 22:06:19 -0600 Organization: US Citizen, disabled with MS, speaking solely for myself. Dick Aichinger wrote: > I believe the authors use of the term "telephone pole" was a generic > representation of wood poles commonly seen along roads and along > neighborhood backyards. I believe his reference and statistics > represent the wood pole use for utilities in general. I suspect it was the result of the old Bell system putting metal tags at visible levels on any pole that they had equipment on. They were, and in many cases, still are, all over the place, big highly visible warning signs. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2000 20:21:12 -0600 From: Rich Osman Organization: Paranoia was Overcome Subject: Re: Communication Tower Being Built It's heavily dependent on location. I've never seen a ground lease run less than $1000/mo for the most remote rural locations (less that this and the just buy the ground.) The most expensive urban *ground* lease that I'm aware of is $15,000/mo and it's an anomaly. Most urban sites are on existing buildings. Look for other towers, contact the owners and see what they're getting. Check with the local water district and see what they're getting for their water tanks (almost all of them are cell sites these days.) Water tanks are usually more expensive, because the cell companies invest less to use them. One way to look at the price is to figure the cost of purchasing the land, and figure the perpetual annuity value that you could buy for that amount. This helps decide a starting point. Consider the impact on your adjacent property value. Don't forget that the improvements they make can confer a tax liability to you in some jurisdictions. Make sure that the agreement makes them accept all risk and liability, particularly if it's tall enough to require paint or lights. I'd also get them to set up some escrow method to cover the removal of the tower, and establish a mechanism to terminate the lease at your convenience. Linda Harris wrote: > We have been approached by a communications company, who wish to put a > cellular communications tower on our property. > We meet all their requirements regarding site, elevation etc., They > had done all their homework before they approached us, and they know > its in a prime site. Its known throughout this district, that our area > is a black spot for cellular phones. We would like to know, before we > go any further, as to the payment for the lease offered by them. The > lease is to run for over 50 years. Is there anyone who has had > similar dealings with having towers put on their property, and could > give us an Idea as to what they were given as payment. Its obvious > that they offer you the very minimum as an opening offer. We are > curious as to the "going" rate. We live in western PA. > Yours Faithfully, > Linda Harris > e-mail address....Tamworth@voicenet.com -- mailto:Rich@Osman.com http://www.rich.osman.com Rich Osman; POB 93167; Southlake, TX 76092 (Near DFW Airport) ARS: WB0HUQ If you receive something that says "Send this to everyone you know," PLEASE pretend you don't know me. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V20 #18 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Mar 10 16:55:52 2000 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id QAA18020; Fri, 10 Mar 2000 16:55:52 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2000 16:55:52 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200003102155.QAA18020@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #19 TELECOM Digest Fri, 10 Mar 2000 16:55:00 EST Volume 20 : Issue 19 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Cost of Wiretapping (Bilgates Remailer) Re: 1.)Thread Creep Alert! 2.)Urban Legend Alert! (John Hines) Re: In Never-Bell Land, Phone Service Is Way Above Average (Mike Sullivan) Did AT&T Raise Calling Card Charges on Feb. 2nd? (Bill Phillips) Re: Internet Content vs Internet Delivery (Felix Deutsch) DoubleClick Waits on Business Plan as Groups File in FTC Action (M Solomon) Net Camera Scam Alive and Well (Monty Solomon) "Opt-in Rules!" (Monty Solomon) Re: Persistent Mysterious Calls From Hell ... (Andrew Green) Reminder: IDMS 2000 Deadline is March 15 (Clever Ricardo Guareis de Farias) Rescue 211 (Jeremy Pickett) Re: Psychic Hotline Charges (Richard D G Cox) Intrusive Background Checks (reddog3140@my-deja.com) New Local Service and Problem With 1172 (Carl Moore) Re: Cost of Wiretapping (John S. Maddaus) Persistent Mysterious Calls from Hell (Fred Goldstein) Yahoo! News Story - Motorola Warns Iridium Customers (Yahoo! News) Last Laugh! Re: Number of Telephones in the U.S. (Dale Neiburg) 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-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest 611 Poplar Street Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 805-545-5115 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@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: hyperarchive.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 the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2000 22:20:01 CST From: Bilgates Remailer Subject: Re: Cost of Wiretapping Organization: mail2news@nym.alias.net > I think the US has regulations requiring telephone systems > to have some automated mechanism for wiretaps. CALEA, passed in 1996. > Is there a good description of that system available on the web? > What fraction of the current COs support it? Any search engine on the Web will turn up numerous discriptions of CALEA itself. I believe COs have flexibility on how they achieve compliance to CALEA. As to whether telcos 'support' it there are two answers: telcos are now required by law to implement CALEA so there's no question they will 'support' it in the legal sense. But as to whether telcos 'support' the idea behind it the answer is a universal No - not out of any sense of consumer privacy merely the bottom line: telcos will have to pay for the bulk of CALEA compliance out of their own pockets. Excuse me, out of their customers' pockets, that being us consumers of course. > I assume there are supposed to be checks in the system to make > sure that it's only used for legal taps. Is there any reason > that I should believe those checks are good enough to keep > hackers from tapping whatever they want? Sure there are checks in the system. Just like there are checks in place to make sure people with badges don't shove broomhandles up your backside or pump you full of lead when you reach for a wallet. > How much does that system cost? If I took the total cost of that > system and put a pile of cash on the table in front of the FBI, would > they spend it on a wiretapping system or something else? Is this just > a sneaky way of taxing phone subscribers to support law enforcement? It's not about revenue-generation, it's about power - our govt's insatiable need for more power to control us citizens. Somewhen ago a govt flunky was quoted as saying the feds want the ability to tap 10% of the phone calls being made in the US at any given time. An enquiring mind might ask, "Why?" Maybe Echelon isn't working as well as it used to - more likely CALEA just makes the task of eavesdropping much easier and cheaper. After all, why go to all the effort of eavesdropping on communications when you can pass a law that makes telcos squirt the data right to you no muss no fuss? Steve ------------------------------ From: John Hines Subject: Re: 1.)Thread Creep Alert! 2.)Urban Legend Alert! Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2000 22:45:58 -0600 Organization: US Citizen, disabled with MS, speaking solely for myself. Don Kimberlin wrote: > ... Thus, there may even be the odd town here and there where one could > find a firm reference to a fee being paid. However, I'll wager that > phone companies paying a fee are the exception, and that even if they > do, it's something that finally occurred since we broke up Ma Bell. She > was monolithic in more ways than most might imagine. You're right, there is no need to charge the phone company a franchise fee, since the village, state, and feds already directly tax the service to the consumer. (You may not be taxed at all three levels, but I am.) This is unlike the electric, and cable industries, where the taxes have been hidden from the end consumer. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What many people do not understand is that telco cannot cut off your service for failure to pay the tax due on service. Although they are required to collect the tax and remit it to government agencies (generally one agency collects all the municipal taxes on behalf of all other agencies), if you refuse to pay the taxes (or some portion of them) all telco can do is notify tax collector that you did not pay. As a matter of fact, the amounts of money are so small, chances are likely no one will make an issue of it, but they might, so take care. Back during Viet Nam days, almost no one was paying the federal phone tax, claiming it was being used to support the 'war machine'. The feds did not go out and chase people down; and no one got their phone cut off for failure to pay the taxes. You do need to notify telco of your intent to not pay taxes, so you are not put down as a partial payment on their books. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Michael Sullivan Subject: Re: In Never-Bell Land, Phone Service Is Way Above Average Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2000 06:36:22 GMT The NYT article about the Richmond, Mass. independent telco with "Phone Service Way Above Average, and Competitive" leaves out some very important points and suggests the conclusion that a little family company can do a better job than a Bell behemoth. That this conclusion is false is only apparent to an astute reader who looks at the chart at the head of the article, which was not included in the posted text (not sure if it was in the online version, which is no longer available). The specific facts of interest are: Richmond Telephone has 13 employees, serves 1,200 access lines in a 5 square mile area, and charges $12.50/month for local service. Let's do the math. The company's annual access revenue is 1200*12.50*12, or $180,000. Thirteen employees at, say, $35,000 salary + $15,000 benefits is $650,000. Fixed and variable non-employee costs (depreciation, electricity, gasoline, etc.) add a few hundred thousand more, at the very least; estimate $200,000 to be conservative. Add in return on an investment of $2,000,000 or so -- another $200,000, say. The company's total revenue requirement for a year comes to at least $1,050,000. In other words, the low monthly line charges cover only 17% of the cost of providing the company's "way above average" service. Who pays the remaining 83%? WE DO. Companies like this are massively subsidized by those of us paying more per month for poorer service, through the universal service/high cost program, and through long-distance access charges. This company probably loads the vast majority of its costs onto long-distance users by gouging long-distance carriers for excessive carrier common line charges that are "justified" by the company's high costs -- costs resulting from providing gold-plated, overstaffed service. Michael D. Sullivan, Bethesda, Md., USA avogadro@bellatlantic.net (also avogadro@well.com) ------------------------------ From: wfp@ziplink.net (Bill Phillips) Subject: Did AT&T Raise Calling Card Charges on Feb. 2nd? Organization: ShoeString Projects, Cambridge, MA Reply-To: wfp@ziplink.net (Bill Phillips) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2000 08:23:12 GMT Since last summer we have used 1-800-CALL-ATT and our Bell Atlantic calling card to make calls from work at MIT in Cambridge, MA, mostly to New York City, where her mother is in an assisted-living facility (not cheap, but there seems to be no other way to make an l/d connection from her department). We've had AT&T Reach Out service for many years, and even though it's not very economical for us any more, my wife seems to want to hang onto it. I have trained her, however, to use dialarounds from home.] We looked at our Bell Atlantic bill last night and were shocked. It appears as though AT&T almost doubled our calling card charges without letting us know ... But since I haven't seen any mention of this in the Digest archive, I'm somewhat suspicious. (I admit I'm just a wee bit out-of-it in many ways, so please bear with me if everybody else in the world already knows about this ...) Calls placed before 2/2/2000 were at a much lower rate than calls placed since. I calculated the new rate as $0.69/minute plus a $4.95 per-call charge. Ack! I didn't bother to figure out what it was before, but looks like about half that. So ... what happened, why didn't I know about it, do we have any recourse, and is there a better (cheaper) way to get to an l/d carrier from inside a place like MIT? Thanks. ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Internet Content vs Internet Delivery From: Felix Deutsch Date: 10 Mar 2000 11:50:45 +0100 JF Mezei writes: > Felix Deutsch wrote: >> You are mislead by thinking that AOL is a mere ISP, thus just offering >> full-IP connectivity. I would think that many AOL subscribers spend a >> significant amount of their online time using services provided by AOL >> and not the WWW in general. > But what advantage is there for CNN to restrict content to AOL-only > subscribers ? Quite obviously to get more people to subscribe to AOL. This way they're trying to push some smaller ISPs out of business. > If the goal is to have more eyeballs, shouldn't CNN push to be > on the world-wide-web and get eyeballs from any ISP in the world instead of > just AOL with a proprietary product available only on AOL ? Yes. But if there was a single goal, then it would be to make more profit. And this can be reached by widening the paying customer base for one _and_ get 'eyeballs' for ads. Felix ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2000 00:47:31 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: DoubleClick Waits on Business Plan as Groups File in FTC Action By Mike Godwin E-Commerce Law Weekly March 8, 2000 Web advertising agency DoubleClick Inc. announced March 2 that it would hold off on its plans to tie personally identifiable information to Internet users' online surfing habits until government and industry have reached a consensus on privacy rules for the Internet. The decision came two days after five public-interest groups announced that they were filing an "Additional Statement of Facts and Grounds for Relief" with the Federal Trade Commission (see: http://www.cdt.org/testimony/000225ftcdcstatement.shtml), seeking FTC action against DoubleClick. The filing was a followup to the FTC's Feb. 16 announcement that it is investigating DoubleClick for its privacy practices. http://www.lawnewsnetwork.com/stories/A18091-2000Mar7.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2000 00:17:23 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Net Camera Scam Alive and Well Inside the 'perfect crime' - a blow-by-blow account of e-commerce gone bad, as MSNBC 'falls' for scheme By Bob Sullivan MSNBCMarch 6 - Five months and counting. That's how long one Internet scam artist has been able to trick Net users into stealing high-end digital cameras on his behalf. MSNBC first reported on the scam in January, and with no sign of prosecution in sight, we decided to "fall" for it ourselves. The end result? MSNBC "stole" a $982 Sony digital camera from IBuyline Inc.; the e-commerce site and its credit verification service pointed fingers at each other for not catching an obviously fraudulent charge; and a scamster calling himself "Peter Wightman" is still waiting for the $750 we were instructed to wire to his Latvian bank account. http://www.msnbc.com/news/378497.asp?cp1=1 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2000 00:29:41 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Opt-in Rules! How does 24/7 Media CEO David Moore target ads without raising the ire of privacy activists? He asks permission. By Lydia Lee When online advertising giant DoubleClick suggested last month that it would merge its database of anonymous Web surfing habits with a database of names and other personal information it had recently acquired, it unleashed a firestorm. Privacy activists protested, the Electronic Privacy Information Group filed a lawsuit and the Federal Trade Commission opened an investigation. On Thursday, DoubleClick began back-pedalling furiously, and CEO Kevin O'Connor admitted the plan was a mistake. http://www.salon.com/tech/view/2000/03/06/moore ------------------------------ From: Andrew Green Subject: Re: Persistent Mysterious Calls from Hell ... Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2000 08:48:08 -0600 /dev/null@.com (Justa Lurker) writes: >> From NNAG for December 1999. > 509-533 SPOKANE > US WEST PNW BELL > End Office Code - Portable > Modified 03/17/00 > 5E SPKNWAKYDS0 v:06247 h:08180 *boggle* What the heck was that? :-) Seriously, I read the Digest in order to learn things; can you add a little detail as to what sort of info you're sharing with us here about the 509-533 mystery number? And to the original poster: Have you ever _answered_ one of these mystery calls, or are you just looking at Caller ID logs? Does an answering machine record anything from these calls? From the timing and pattern you describe, if I answered the phone I would expect to be hearing the "boop... boop... boop..." of a misprogrammed fax machine trying to send a regularly-scheduled outbound message of some sort. Andrew C. Green (312) 853-8331 Datalogics, Inc. 101 N. Wacker, Ste. 1800 http://www.datalogics.com Chicago, IL 60606-7301 Fax: (312) 853-8282 ------------------------------ From: Clever Ricardo Guareis de Farias Subject: Reminder: IDMS 2000 Deadline is March 15 Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2000 15:37:54 +0100 Organization: CTIT - Centre for Telematics and Information Technology Call for Papers IDMS'2000 The 7th International Workshop on Interactive Distributed Multimedia Systems and Telecommunication Services October 17-20, 2000 CTIT / Univ. of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands This is just a reminder that the deadline for IDMS '2000 is approaching quickly: the deadline for full and position papers is March 15, 2000. In case of questions, please, feel free to contact the program co-chairs: Marten van Sinderen - mailto:sinderen@cs.utwente.nl Hans Scholten - mailto:scholten@cs.utwente.nl For general details please check the website at: http://www.ctit.utwente.nl/Docs/news/idms_2000.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2000 09:39:37 -0500 From: Jeremy Pickett Subject: Rescue 211 In many towns in the north Georgia area 311 is used as a shortcut to the telco's voicemail system. Out of curiousity, I began to try the different combinations one evening, being careful not to dial 411 or 911. I was surprised when I reached our county's 911 center by dialing 211. Embarassed, I apologized and quickly hung up. Does anyone know if this is something other telco's are doing as well, or just a strange ALLTEL quirk? I've heard that in some areas 311 will be assigned to non-emergency police, but nothing's been mentioned about 211. Incidentally voicemail in our exchange cannot be reached at 311. When dialed it returns a fast busy. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2000 16:16 +0000 From: Richard@office.mandarin.com (Richard D G Cox) Subject: Re: Psychic Hotline Charges In TELECOM Digest V20 #16, Paul Cook reports from the Bergen Record: > Ochs opened up accounts in five different names in order to make > hundreds of calls to the hot line, which operates from the South > Pacific island nation of Vanuatu, west of Fiji. The calls weren't > cheap, averaging about $6 per minute. ... > Ochs, 49, who works for a job placement agency, has refused to pay > for the hot line calls, made between Nov. 15 and Jan. 7. Last week, > he filed a report with police seeking to charge Bell Atlantic with > deceptive business practices. ... > "We think he should pay only for the long-distance charge and not > for the psychic hot line's fee for its services," said Ochs' lawyer, > Richard Galler. "In other words, he should pay whatever it costs > to make a regular call to Vanuatu." He may have a point - however I wonder if it is the *right* point! The chances of such a service actually operating in Vanuatu - given the cultural and other differences - are at the best extremely slim. It is far more likely (as close to 100% certain as you can be without actually being 100% certain) that the service operates out of somewhere closer to mainland USA. Possibly even ON mainland USA - or in the UK. (calls US->UK or vice versa cost Telcos about a (US) cent per minute!) Many phone companies operate services where an international number is intercepted and diverted to a less expensive destination, with the savings in call charges achieved by routing to the less expensive destination being shared between the long-distance phone company and the called party. It used to be necessary for such calls to be routed over a specific LD company, but the phone companies have now developed a method using C7 for one Telco to "grab" calls dialled over another LD/International company, route that call into their network and terminate it locally. This method isn't widely understood outside those personnel who actually operate it, but came to light during one of my firm's recent fraud investigations. Telcos have traditionally claimed that their actions are acceptable "because the caller is getting the service they expected at the price they expected to pay" but consumers (and, I gather, the FCC) would regard the practice as being 100% fraudulent: because the main purpose of such an arrangement is to bypass any regulatory/consumer protection processes that are in place, and also to get around any barring that may be in place (as it often is on 900 or locally-equivalent numbers!) Richard Galler should consider obtaining in dependant verification of where these calls actually terminated, and which long distance company actually handled them. Which is not necessarily the same as asking which long distance Telco would have handled normal calls to Vanuatu. To get reliable information, it would be necessary to obtain notarised copies of the Call Detail Records from the LD/international switches. There again, a good check would be whether the dialled number actually exists in the Vanuatu dialling plan ... I'm sure Linc Madison would be able to help with that! Richard D G Cox Mandarin Technology, Penarth, United Kingdom: Telephone +44 29 2031 1131 Senders of genuine e-mail should remove "office" from the e-mail address. ------------------------------ From: reddog3140@my-deja.com Subject: Intrusive Background Checks Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2000 17:40:31 GMT Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy. I am doing a story on internet privacy and have heard that your employer, head hunting firms, even your insurance company are using newsgroups archives to search for incriminating information you may have posted in a newsgroup. Has this happened to anyone? Do you know of anyone who has been fired (or not hired) because of something they posted in a newsgroup? Also, does has anyone had their identity stolen DIRECTLY as a result of the internet? Any ideas would be so helpful! Thanks. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2000 12:33:20 EST From: Carl Moore Subject: New Local Service and Problem With 1172 Conectiv Power Delivery, formerly Delmarva Power, has been offering (in Maryland, at least in North East and Elkton exchanges?) local service to New Castle County, Delaware in addition to the areas offered via Bell Atlantic. I have been switched recently to Conectiv, but notice as to when that was occurring may have left something to be desired. I just opened up what turns out to be a very small bill from Bell Atlantic (apparently pro-rated due to the just-mentioned switch). I think I remember hearing that special features would not be affected (I have had call forwarding), but after I saw that Bell Atlantic bill, I checked (calling from my other line to the one which has had the call forwarding), and sure enough, I got ringing with no forwarding! As some of you may know from elsewhere, you have to watch out for special features being lost (until you program them back in) when a switch is made, and I had that happen back in late 1996 when I had my phone number moved from one residence to another. Dialing 0 from the phone line which had the call forwarding now gets "Conectiv operator". I had a pulse-only phone plugged into that line, but when I punched 1172 while trying to put that call forwarding back on, I got a ringing signal, then a message that the call could not be completed as dialed. I plugged in in a touch-tone phone and was able to proceed correctly via *72. When is 1172 supposed to work for this? Delmarva Power had, between 1993 and 1996 inclusive, taken over the local power supplying for where I live in Maryland. A letter at the time said Delmarva Power has been serving parts of Maryland, but was new in that particular part of Maryland. ------------------------------ From: jmaddaus@NO_SPAM.usa.net (John S. Maddaus) Subject: Re: Cost of Wiretapping Reply-To: jmaddaus@NO_SPAM.usa.net Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2000 18:08:46 GMT Organization: AT&T Worldnet Anonymous User wrote: > As to whether telcos 'support' it there are two answers: telcos > are now required by law to implement CALEA so there's no question > they will 'support' it in the legal sense. But as to whether telcos > 'support' the idea behind it the answer is a universal No - not out > of any sense of consumer privacy merely the bottom line: telcos will > have to pay for the bulk of CALEA compliance out of their own pockets. > Excuse me, out of their customers' pockets, that being us consumers > of course. There's an even more compelling reason why telcos do not want feds in their COs. Telco's can monitor their traffic at will (needs of the business) without any court order. Once court ordered taps are put in place at a CO, they essentially need to stop their own monitoring. They do not like to do that, -- most have many cases going simultaneously where they build the evidence and when they are ready, contact law enforcment with archived and sealed forensic material. Telcos are loathe to let any law enforcement individual phyiscally into the CO. The rift between the government and the telco's is huge for precisely the reason posted above. CALEA has just about shut the discussion door between "the gov't" and the telcos. John S. Maddaus jmaddaus@usa.net ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2000 11:07:53 -0500 From: Fred Goldstein Subject: Persistent Mysterious Calls from Hell While it may not be easy to find out who owns the specific number, the prefix code 509-533 is listed as Spokane: WA 509-533 9638 US WEST COMMUNICATIONS - PACIFIC NWEST BELL SPOKANE The best source is now www.nanpa.com, which has area code information including the "utilized" lists. These now show the above information. So while it's not quite as thorough as the (costly) LERG, you can tell the rate center and the carrier. (9638 is PNB-WA's Operating Carrier Number.) Thanks to NeuStar, which now administers the NANP. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2000 08:19:13 -0800 (PST) From: Yahoo! News Subject: Motorola Warns Iridium Customers CHICAGO (Reuters) - Motorola Inc. (NYSE:MOT - news) has notified customers of Iridium LLC, the financially troubled satellite telephone system it bankrolled, that service would end on March 17 unless a buyer for Iridium comes forward. Motorola Warns Iridium Customers http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20000310/bs/telecoms_iridium_5.html Yahoo! News http://dailynews.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ From: Dale Neiburg Subject: Last Laugh! Re: Number of Telephones in the U.S. Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2000 15:30:47 -0500 In Telecom Digest 20:009, Greg Ericksen asked: > Could you tell me how many telephones are currently in the > U.S.A. broken down into Business and Residential or where I can go to > research such information? In my experience, at any given time about 30% of the telephones in America are broken down. (Then there's the old schtick about the bishop who sent every pastor in his diocese a letter asking for a list of parishioners, broken down by sex....) Dale Neiburg ** NPR Satellite Operations ** 202-414-2640 "The thoughts that you refuse to think, you will act out in some violent, seemingly illogical way." --Sigmund Freud ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V20 #19 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat Mar 11 20:05:16 2000 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id UAA06880; Sat, 11 Mar 2000 20:05:16 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2000 20:05:16 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200003120105.UAA06880@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #20 TELECOM Digest Sat, 11 Mar 2000 19:13:15 EST Volume 20 : Issue 20 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Cable TV Franchise Fees (Neal McLain) Re: Did AT&T Raise Calling Card Charges on Feb. 2nd? (Brian Vita) Re: Did AT&T Raise Calling Card Charges on Feb. 2nd? (Joseph Singer) Re: Rescue 211 (Stanley Cline) Re: Rescue 211 (Ed Ellers) Re: Symantec Threatens Legal Action Over I-Gear Report (Ed Ellers) Re: Persistent Mysterious Calls from Hell ... (Justa Lurker) Re: Psychic Hotline Charges (Justa Lurker) Re: In Never-Bell Land, Phone Service Is Way Above Average (Roy Smith) Re: Give me Some of That New Wireless, Maybe (Hahn, Ki Suk) Help: Seeking RJ11 Walljack Manufacture (Brae R.) Is Doubleclick the Only Commercial Firm Who Spies on Web Users? (YOELK) Re: Motorola Warns Iridium Customers (JF Mezei) Iridium (W. Hatfield) Goodbye, Phone Company; Hello PhoneFree 6.1 (PTownson@compuserve.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-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 259 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 805-545-5115 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@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: hyperarchive.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 the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2000 07:56:41 -0500 From: Neal McLain Subject: Cable TV Franchise Fees In Telecom Digest 20:19, John Hines wrote (in reference to the ongoing thread about utility franchise fees): > You're right, there is no need to charge the phone company a > franchise fee, since the village, state, and feds already > directly tax the service to the consumer. (You may not be taxed > at all three levels, but I am.) > This is unlike the electric, and cable industries, where the > taxes have been hidden from the end consumer. I have to disagree. Cable TV taxes and franchise fees may be "hidden" on your cable bill, but that's definitely not a universal policy. Cable TV companies are generally subject to three forms of tax-like fees, and many cable companies itemize them individually on subscriber bills. For the record, here's a summary of those fees: - Franchise fee. This fee is imposed by, and paid to, the "local franchising authority" (LFA), typically the local municipal or county government. It's supposed to cover the LFA's costs for administering the franchise, and to reimburse it for the franchisee's use of its "right of way," i.e., the public streets. It's capped by FCC rule at 5% of gross revenue, a figure that has nothing at all to do with the amount of the right-of-way that's actually used. Most LFA's charge the full 5%. (But it's actually more than 5% for reasons I'll explain presently). - Sales tax. In most states, sales tax is a "tax of general applicability": it applies to all sales, including cable TV service. It's imposed by, and paid to, either the state government, or some layer of local government, or both. Here in Wisconsin, the state sales tax is 5%, and the county tax is 0.5%, for a combined total of 5.5%. - FCC Regulatory Fee. This fee is imposed by, and paid to, the FCC. It reimburses the FCC for the cost of regulating the industry. For year 1999, the fee was $0.48 per subscriber per year. Most cable companies pass this fee through to subscribers by spreading it across twelve monthly bills. All of these fees are ultimately paid by the subscriber whether or not they're itemized on the bill. In my experience (which includes many years as a cable TV engineer), most cable companies itemize them. LFA's would probably prefer to have the franchise fees hidden, but cable companies obviously want to make sure that their subscribers know where their money's going. Federal law specifically authorizes itemizing franchise fees: in the words of Senator Trent Lott, "I would like to offer my amendment ... dealing with subscriber bill itemization, to give the cable companies an opportunity to itemize these so-called hidden costs to explain to people what is involved in the charges so they will know it is not just the cable company jacking up the prices..." The franchise fee is supposedly capped at 5%. But here's what's really weird: that 5% applies not only to the cable bill itself, but ALSO TO THE FUNDS THE CABLE COMPANY COLLECTS TO PAY IT! This case began as a dispute between the City of Baltimore and a local cable provider, United Artists Cable of Baltimore (UACB). UACB had originally agreed to pay the city a 5 percent franchise fee. In calculating its gross revenue, UACB treated the fee like sales tax: it calculated the fee based on its charges for cable television service. If a customer's monthly bill was $30.00, UACB divided the bill into two portions: $28.56 allocated to cable services, and $1.44 (5% of $28.56) allocated to pay the franchise fee. The city contended that this method of calculation was incorrect. Instead, the city argued that under the franchise agreement, UACB was required to pay 5 percent of the full sum collected from subscribers. Therefore, if a customer's bill was $30.00, the franchise fee would be $1.50. UACB appealed the matter to the FCC's Cable Services Bureau, which ruled in favor of UACB. The full Commission upheld the Bureau. At that point, the cities of Dallas and Laredo, Texas, among others, appealed to the federal courts, where the case eventually made its way to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. The central issue in the case turned on the question of Congress' use of the term "gross revenues." The cities claimed that the term should be interpreted broadly, to include all revenues received by the cable operator. Cable interests relied on the FCC's statement that "nothing in the statutory provisions of the Cable Act states that franchise fees are to be included in calculating an operator's gross revenues." The Court issued its opinion in July 1997, reversing the FCC's interpretation and holding that cable operators may be required by local franchise to pay a franchise fee on the revenue collected to pay that fee. So most cable operators (meaning their subscribers) are now required to pay the full "fee on fee" amount. Using standard compound-interest formulas, that works out to about 5.26 percent. The full text of this decision may be found at http://caselaw.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=search&case=/uscircs/5t h/9660427cv0.html Neal McLain nmclain@compuserve.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2000 09:11:16 -0500 From: Brian Vita Subject: Re: Did AT&T Raise Calling Card Charges on Feb. 2nd? wfp@ziplink.net (Bill Phillips) wrote: > Since last summer we have used 1-800-CALL-ATT ... > It appears as though AT&T almost doubled our calling card charges > without letting us know ... We had a similar thing happen to us twice with AT&T. The first time was two years ago when our term contract expired unnoticed. Without any warning, or attempt to renew us, they went from our $0.094/minute rate to a $0.27/minute rate for direct dial from the office. We left them. We came briefly back to AT&T as a backup carrier earlier last year. They were offerring a 10.4/minute rate. We signed. They billed at $.27. We cancelled. To this day they are trying to bill us for calls that we did not make and for rates that we never agreed to. I have over eight hours logged in to trying to reach someone at AT&T who can adjust the billings and stop the mystery billings for accounts that we can't identify. At this point I've given up and I'm waiting for it to go to legal. AT&T will never again be in this office. Brian ------------------------------ Reply-To: dov@oz.net Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2000 23:35:41 -0800 From: Joseph Singer Subject: Re: Did AT&T Raise Calling Card Charges on Feb. 2nd? wfp@ziplink.net (Bill Phillips) wrote: > Since last summer we have used 1-800-CALL-ATT and our Bell Atlantic > calling card to make calls from work at MIT in Cambridge, MA, mostly > to New York City, where her mother is in an assisted-living facility > (not cheap, but there seems to be no other way to make an l/d > connection from her department). We've had AT&T Reach Out service for > many years, and even though it's not very economical for us any more, > my wife seems to want to hang onto it. I have trained her, however, to > use dialarounds from home.] Habits are hard to break if it's "what you've been used to." Unfortunately just hanging on to what you've always done nowadays in the long distance bidness could cost you more coins than you really have to spend. Companies like AT&T or whoever you signed up for a year or two or 10 years ago may very well not be a good deal for you even though maybe at one time it was a sort of good deal. > It appears as though AT&T almost doubled our calling card charges > without letting us know ... This type of behavior from AT&T or Sprint or MCI or any other carrier is nothing new. I don't think they are required to notify except perhaps putting the required legal announcement once in the paper and I don't even know if they are required to do that. They don't necessarily or usually notify their customers. > So ... what happened, why didn't I know about it, do we have any > recourse, and is there a better (cheaper) way to get to an l/d carrier > from inside a place like MIT? You can always shop for a better rate for a calling card and I don't mean a pre-paid calling card either. There are a number of places on the net where you can look up calling cards and what they charge. One place you could look is which not only compares 1+ plans, "dialaround" so called "10-10" plans, but also compares calling cards and what the rates are. Some calling cards do not charge any monthly or per call surcharge. Others do. Some don't even charge the USF charges and incorporate the charge into their rates. I have the Voicenet calling card which charges 17.5¢/minute for domestic calls. This is not the cheapest rate around, but it's not a pre-paid card and is much better than I can do with one of the majors and not get slapped a hefty surcharge or a monthly fee for the "priviledge" of using their card. The bottom line is that you need to get out from under AT&T and find a calling card that is more economical and is a better deal. It's a competitive landscape and you need to get out and find something that will serve you better and give you a better overall rate than what you're getting now with your calling card program. As for ease of use most of the calling cards will let you use your home phone number with a four digit PIN that often you can choose yourself or change later once you have the card. Joseph Singer "thefoneguy" PO Box 23135, Seattle WA 98102 USA +1 206 405 2052 [voice mail] +1 206 493 0706 [FAX] ------------------------------ From: Stanley Cline Subject: Re: Rescue 211 Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2000 01:59:02 -0500 Organization: by area code and prefix (NPA-NXX) Reply-To: sc1@roamer1.org On Fri, 10 Mar 2000 09:39:37 -0500, Jeremy Pickett wrote: > In many towns in the north Georgia area 311 is used as a shortcut to the > telco's voicemail system. Out of curiousity, I began to try the Are you in a former Standard Telephone area? I seem to recall they did this for some reason. > different combinations one evening, being careful not to dial 411 or > 911. I was surprised when I reached our county's 911 center by dialing > 211. Embarassed, I apologized and quickly hung up. Does anyone know if > this is something other telco's are doing as well, or just a strange > ALLTEL quirk? I've heard that in some areas 311 will be assigned to In BellSouth exchanges in the Atlanta local calling area (I have no clue about ALLTEL exchanges local to Atlanta e.g. Canton, nor TDS's or Frontier's Atlanta-metro exchanges) 211 goes to the United Way. (211 is a free call, and BellSouth's tariffs specifically exclude 211 from inclusion in toll-restriction arrangements.) That said, I recall there was a brief period of time when in one Chattanooga, TN exchange (actually, this switch is physically in Georgia, but both Telcordia and BellSouth treat the CO as being in Tennessee, and Georgia customers served by that switch pay Tennessee rates for POTS services per both Georgia and Tennessee tariffs. ISDN etc. is priced at the [much higher] Georgia rates :( ), dialing 611 resulted in the call going to the Hamilton County, TN 911 PSAP -- not to BellSouth repair service (in AL, KY, LA, MS, and TN, BellSouth does *not* use 611 for repair service, they use 557-6111 instead), nor to the correct PSAP for the originating line where this quirk was noted (Catoosa County, GA.) That's since been fixed; 611 from that CO now goes to a "call cannot be completed as dialed" recording. The same sort of thing -- a translations error -- may be the case in your area. Stanley Cline -- sc1 at roamer1 dot org -- http://www.roamer1.org/ ------------------------------ From: Ed Ellers Subject: Re: Rescue 211 Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2000 19:10:40 -0500 Jeremy Pickett wrote: "Out of curiousity, I began to try the different combinations one evening, being careful not to dial 411 or 911. I was surprised when I reached our county's 911 center by dialing 211. Embarassed, I apologized and quickly hung up. Does anyone know if this is something other telco's are doing as well, or just a strange ALLTEL quirk?" I haven't heard of that, but I do remember that when the 1A ESS was cut over in my area in 1982 -- before we had 911 of any sort -- it was configured to divert 911 calls to the operator. ------------------------------ From: Ed Ellers Subject: Re: Symantec Threatens Legal Action Over I-Gear Report Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2000 19:12:59 -0500 Bennett wrote: "We believe that the issue at stake is the right to criticize software by looking "under the hood", and to allow others to verify your findings." But what if that collides with the right of the software manufacturer to not have its intellectual property stolen by its potential competitors? ------------------------------ From: /dev/null@.com (Justa Lurker) Subject: Re: Persistent Mysterious Calls from Hell ... Organization: Anonymous People Reply-To: jlurker@bigfoot.com (Reply to the DIGEST) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2000 22:06:16 GMT It was Fri, 10 Mar 2000 08:48:08 -0600, and Andrew Green wrote in comp.dcom.telecom: > /dev/null@.com (Justa Lurker) writes: >> From NNAG for December 1999. > 509-533 SPOKANE > US WEST PNW BELL > End Office Code - Portable > Modified 03/17/00 > 5E SPKNWAKYDS0 v:06247 h:08180 > *boggle* > What the heck was that? :-) Seriously, I read the Digest in order to > learn things; can you add a little detail as to what sort of info > you're sharing with us here about the 509-533 mystery number? Sorry ... just a little technical detail. I also did a search via ANYWHO as the original person claimed (searching for the first 8 digits) and came up with Spokane addresses. Not too hard to find. But the tech data comes from NNAG, published monthly at trainfo.com and followed by numbering junkies like me. :-) > 509-533 SPOKANE Exchange # and name > US WEST PNW BELL Who it is primarily served by > End Office Code - Portable Type of code, not to be confused with wireless. > Modified 03/17/00 The last time that the code was changed (effective date) > 5E SPKNWAKYDS0 v:06247 h:08180 Switch type, Silly code (CLLI), and coordinates of switch. > And to the original poster: Have you ever _answered_ one of these > mystery calls, or are you just looking at Caller ID logs? Does an > answering machine record anything from these calls? From the timing > and pattern you describe, if I answered the phone I would expect to be > hearing the "boop... boop... boop..." of a misprogrammed fax machine > trying to send a regularly-scheduled outbound message of some sort. I believe that the victim was out with the horses during the call, so I would assume Caller ID (with no name or 'unavalable' name) or *69 (callback) type service. JL ------------------------------ From: /dev/null@.com (Justa Lurker) Subject: Re: Psychic Hotline Charges Organization: Anonymous People Reply-To: jlurker@bigfoot.com (Reply to the DIGEST) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2000 22:19:45 GMT It was Fri, 10 Mar 2000 16:16 +0000, and Richard@office.mandarin.com (Richard D G Cox) wrote in comp.dcom.telecom: >> "We think he should pay only for the long-distance charge and not >> for the psychic hot line's fee for its services," said Ochs' lawyer, >> Richard Galler. "In other words, he should pay whatever it costs >> to make a regular call to Vanuatu." > He may have a point - however I wonder if it is the *right* point! > The chances of such a service actually operating in Vanuatu - given > the cultural and other differences - are at the best extremely slim. > It is far more likely (as close to 100% certain as you can be without > actually being 100% certain) that the service operates out of somewhere > closer to mainland USA. Possibly even ON mainland USA - or in the UK. > (calls US->UK or vice versa cost Telcos about a (US) cent per minute!) "The caller dialed Vanuatu, which implies that he was willing to pay the international fee to Vanyatu for his call, regardless where the psychic was located." A sad rationalization for what is going on. I agree with you and believe that when you dial a number your call should be connected to someone IN the country you dialed. But due to the fact that this 'victim' set up phone accounts under several names to make his calls, I'd say he really wasn't 'willing to pay'. The suggestion to check out websites like lincmad.com is good. JL ------------------------------ From: Roy Smith Subject: Re: In Never-Bell Land, Phone Service Is Way Above Average Organization: New York University School of Medicine Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2000 17:42:55 -0500 Michael Sullivan wrote: > costs resulting from providing gold-plated, overstaffed service. Bell Atlantic wouldn't know gold-plated service if it jumped up and bit them on the nose. ------------------------------ From: Hahn, Ki Suk Subject: Re: Give me Some of That New Wireless, Maybe Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2000 13:00:53 -0600 siegman@stanford.edu (A. E. Siegman) wrote: > On the one hand, these things are wonderful; on the other hand it's > hard to believe they aren't going to lead to an epidemic of rear-end > collisions, running down of pedestrians, and similar accidents. The top-of-the-line Hyundai in Korea has two LCD screens, one for the rear-passengers (behind center armrest), one for the driver (mounted high on the dash). It has the GPS+CDROM navigation with voice commands, and once you enter your destination, there's not much of a need to look at the display, since a female voice will guide you. The map display will still be on for the driver. The display is also hooked up to a TV and CD/VideoCD player, but the driver's display is blacked out (with sound on) when the car is in drive, un-blacked-out when in neutral or park. [But accidents with pedestrians are still very common in Korea, unfortunately.] Ki Suk Hahn kshahn@datalogics.com ------------------------------ From: Brae R Subject: Help: Seeking RJ11 Walljack Manufacture Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2000 12:18:56 -0800 Organization: MindSpring Enterprises Hello, I am trying to find some companies that have the ability to take from rough specifications and drawings and design an engineering print for submission to manufacture for a special RJ11x3 walljack for use in residential applications. Does anyone know of such a company(ies) in the US? Preferably in the SE part of the country, but not required. A project would be for 2,000-10,000 on the manufacturing end, with 5-10 beta units for testing. Brae ------------------------------ From: YOELK Subject: Is Doubleclick the Only Commercial Firm Who Spies on Web Users? Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2000 09:11:39 +0200 Organization: My organization I found the following two firms who do exactly the same thing: 1) www.avenuea.com They have the opt out option, so they say. I have checked this option and found an 'optout' cookie. Still this cookie has a unique ID, so I am not sure if this is worth anything. 2) www.preferences.com (www.matchlogic.com). In www.preferences.com in a page 'control your information' was a form to send them personal information! A misleading practice I suppose. The important thing to note here was that they found a mechanism to bypass Netscape option 'Only accept cookies from same server as the page being viewed'. (Java script in cnn.com) Do you know about more firms doing this ? Even when I find ways to filter cookies from web promos, there would pop up new web promo servers, so the problem is to keep track on them. YOELK ------------------------------ From: JF Mezei Subject: Re: Motorola Warns Iridium Customers Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2000 01:21:20 -0500 > Motorola Warns Iridium Customers > http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20000310/bs/telecoms_iridium_5.html > If Iridium does not find a buyer in time, it will dismantle the satellite > system, leaving Iridium subscribers with useless phones. Motorola > said the phones would not work with other satellite telephone > systems. What does "dismantling the satellite system" entail ? Will they send a shuttle equipped with laser guns to blast those satellites out of the sky ???? :-) :-) Seriously though, reading about NASA's satellite system which does not provide for continous communications for neither the space station or shuttle, wouldn't NASA benefit from acquiring those satellites to build its own network that truly does span the globe so that orbiting vehicles could communicate with earth? Or are the antennas such that the satellites are truly useless from higher orbits? Or perhaps AOL could buy them and provide worldwide ISP services ? It would provide easy access to any remote areas, as well as very interesting global wireless opportunities. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2000 23:31:04 -0400 From: W. Hatfield Subject: Iridium Without comment, for the record In "Business This Week March 4th - March 10th 2000" The Economist puts it bluntly > IRIDIUM, a satellite-phone company that has been operating under > American bankruptcy protection for six months, saw Craig McCaw, a > potential saviour, walk away after he had considered a refinancing of > the beleaguered firm. Iridium's creditors can now look forward to a > night sky illuminated by the company's 66 satellites burning up as they > fall back to earth. ------------------------------ From: PTownson@compuserve.com Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2000 22:01:10 -0500 Subject: Goodbye, Phone Company; Hello PhoneFree 6.1 Forwarded message: Date: 3/10/00 7:10 PM RE: Goodbye, phone company; hello PhoneFree 6.1 Dear PhoneFree user, My name is Jan Horsfall, CEO of PhoneFree, and I'm sick of the phone company. I mean, why should any of us continue to shell out money for out-of-date technology? Why stick with the old system when new solutions are available? I think it's time for a revolution. PhoneFree is the start of the revolution in communications. It's free, it's easy, and it makes great use of the technology you and I use every day. It allows you to make long-distance calls around the world to other PhoneFree users - absolutely free. And by marrying voice technology to the Web, it's more than just a dial tone - it's a new way to communicate by voice and video. Come to PhoneFree.com today and install new version 6.1. Help us wave goodbye to the old legacy phone companies. Look for occasional updates from our resident revolutionary, a charming guy by the name of Patrick H., in our new PhoneFree.com Flash newsletter. If, for some bizarre reason, you're satisfied with the old system and don't want to be part of this revolution, simply follow the unsubscribe instructions at the bottom of this message. Thanks for being PhoneFree. Jan Robert Horsfall ************************************************************* PhoneFree.com (sm) Flash In this issue: - PhoneFree 6.1 -- FREE - FREE beauties for a year - More than just a phone - it's a community - PhoneFree Company Store grand opening - PhoneFree testimonials ************************************************************** PhoneFree 6.1 -- FREE ************************************************************ You know PhoneFree works. You know it's better than a legacy phone system. Now you can install an even more powerful incarnation of PhoneFree - new version 6.1. It includes our brand new Personal Communications Center, where you can see and talk to other PhoneFree users. It also includes integrated voicemail, video mail, voice and video conferencing, file and data transferring capabilities, bubble chat groups and security features to protect your privacy. And, it's all absolutely free. Install today at http://www.phonefree.com/install/index.html - and tell your friends and family to do the same. FREE beauties for a year You're a loyal PhoneFree user - what can we do to thank you? While sending you a check for a large sum of money is tempting, we're told that such an action might send our accounting department into a collective fit of convulsions. So we decided to give you the next best thing - supermodels. That's right, just for being a PhoneFree user, you can have a free virtual calendar for the year, featuring your favorite Elite supermodels. It's more than just eye candy, too - you get daily news, a personal organizer, and a new female or male model from a database of 35,000 photos to grace your calendar daily. Get your calendar now at http://www.elitecalendar.com/phonefree/home.asp. And remember, free is always an excellent price. Telephones aren't good for much more than gabbing with friends, relatives and annoying telemarketers. Though PhoneFree is good for all those things (except maybe the telemarketer part), its Web technologies allow it to be so much more. Imagine chat rooms that allow for real verbal interaction. Or e-mail that talks. Or video mail. Or making new friends from lists of people with interests that are similar to yours. Stay tuned for these and other cool features. The potential is almost limitless. You can reunite with old friends and family from all over the world, or make new friends among the thousands of PhoneFree users. Just think of it - the more that you, your friends and family use PhoneFree, the more money you can save on long distance bills. Forward this newsletter to all your friends and help us spread the word. Or go to mailto://mailinglist@phonefree.com to add a friend to our mailing list. Either way, you save big and reserve your hard-earned cash for something more glamorous than a phone bill. PhoneFree Company Store Grand Opening Looking for accessories to turn your PC into the ultimate communication device? Check out the grand opening of our PhoneFree Company Store, where you can buy the latest in headsets to make your calling experience even better (sorry, ma Bell, but we don't sell phones). Come to http://www.netsales.net/pk.wcgi/vxi-phfree today and discover a new way to communicate. It's time to leave legacy phone companies behind. PhoneFree Testimonials Telephones aren't good for much more than gabbing with friends, relatives and annoying telemarketers. Though PhoneFree is good for all those things (except maybe the telemarketer part), its Web technologies allow it to be so much more. Imagine chat rooms that allow for real verbal interaction. Or e-mail that talks. Or video mail. Or making new friends from lists of people with interests that are similar to yours. Stay tuned for these and other cool features. The potential is almost limitless. You can reunite with old friends and family from all over the world, or make new friends among the thousands of PhoneFree users. Just think of it - the more that you, your friends and family use PhoneFree, the more money you can save on long distance bills. Forward this newsletter to all your friends and help us spread the word. Or go to mailto://mailinglist@phonefree.com to add a friend to our mailing list. Either way, you save big and reserve your hard-earned cash for something more glamorous than a phone bill. PhoneFree Company Store Grand Opening Looking for accessories to turn your PC into the ultimate communication device? Check out the grand opening of our PhoneFree Company Store, where you can buy the latest in headsets to make your calling experience even better (sorry, ma Bell, but we don't sell phones). Come to http://www.netsales.net/pk.wcgi/vxi-phfree today and discover a new way to communicate. It's time to leave legacy phone companies behind. PhoneFree Testimonials Stories about how PhoneFree has made communications better. We will pick some of the best stories to appear on our Web site. Stay tuned for more updates. Let me know what you think. -Patrick H. (GMLOGMD) ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V20 #20 ****************************** TELECOM Digest Sun, 12 Mar 2000 17:36:00 EST Volume 20 : Issue 21 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson CPP, ATM Surcharges (was F.C.C. Debates Changes to Cell Phones) S. Cline) Re: Help: Seeking RJ11 Walljack Manufacture (Don Kimberlin) Globalstar Satellite Phones (David Lind) Re: Australia; Wireless Phone Number Portability 3/2001 (Terry Knab) Re: Rescue 211 (Terry Knab) Re: What Can be Done When the LECs T1 Card Goes? (Terry Knab) Re: In Never-Bell Land, Phone Service Is Way Above Average (Terry Knab) Software For Faxes Needed (TELECOM Digest Editor) Re: Iridium (David Glynn) A Turning Point for E-privacy (Monty Solomon) 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-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 259 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 805-545-5115 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@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: hyperarchive.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 the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Stanley Cline Subject: CPP, ATM Surcharges (was F.C.C. Debates Changes to Cell Phone Fees) Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2000 21:54:37 -0500 Organization: by area code and prefix (NPA-NXX) Reply-To: sc1@roamer1.org On Sun, 05 Mar 2000 12:25:53 GMT, jlurker@bigfoot.com (Justa Lurker) wrote: > I believe that caller pays would lead to an increase of cell phone > usage, sharing the infrastructure costs out over more minutes of > actual use, and lowering the overall rate paid per minute to the point > where calling a cell would cost the calling party a reasonable rate. Every single trial or commercial offering of CPP in the US has had the calling party paying 40-60c/min, compared to 7-30c/min paid by the wireless customer for outgoing or callee-pays calls. That's simply too high! Besides, that doesn't address the very simple fact that the calling party is forced to pay whatever the wireless carrier charges; they can't "dial-around" for a lower rate. (They can choose to reach the wireless user via other methods such as paging/text messaging, etc., of course.) Carriers are under little pressure to compete on rates charged callers, since the caller has no choice but to pay whatever the carrier charges; the only pressure may come from customers who switch carriers if they feel callers are charged too much. Most customers won't switch for that reason. Basically, CPP leads to a "captive audience" situation -- and IMO, captive audience situations call for tight regulation! (I've said more or less the same things about payphones in prisons and schools, cable and phone service in apartments, etc.) Also, CPP numbers would likely be blocked from PBXs, payphones, hotels, other wireless carriers, customers of CLECs, long distance callers, etc. because of the uncertainty about what rates would be charged (and in the case of most CLECs and wireless carriers, lack of third-party billing arrangements), which would make them about as worthless as 976 numbers, which are all but dead in many cities. In cities with no or limited flat-rate local calling, such as Chicago, NYC, and most of California, CPP may be accepted more widely *provided that the rate to call a mobile is approximately the rate charged for a local or local-toll call*, but I simply don't see anyone going for CPP in places with large flat-rate local calling areas such as Atlanta, Phoenix, etc. As long as wireless users have a choice of CPP and traditional callee-pays, fine, but if carriers force customers to CPP, usage will decrease -- substantially. > If I use a 'foreign ATM' I am in a sense a customer of that > institution. They pay to maintain the location, stock the machine, > and network to the national system. I realize that they would spend > that money for their own customers only, to a certain extent, but > there is cost involved, and some banks have chosen to charge fees > instead of eating them. (I also get to pay to talk to a teller at my Sorry to go off-topic here, but it's important to note that financial institutions that own ATMs ALREADY RECEIVE PAYMENT when a customer of another institution uses their ATMs, through the "foreign ATM" fee charged by the *issuer of the ATM card* -- the ATM owner receives a cut of that fee. ATM surcharges are nothing more than PURE PROFIT. > Foreign ATM fees have been around for years, and I dispute your claim Foreign ATM fees (what YOUR bank charges you when use another bank's ATM), yes. ATM surcharges (what the ATM OWNER charges), no. ATM surcharges didn't become widespread until 2Q 1996, when the two major national ATM networks dropped rules that prohibited ATM surcharges. (Surcharges were already gaining ground in states that had laws or judicial decisions that overrode the provisions of the ATM network agreements that banned surcharges -- most of these states were in the South, FWIW.) Stanley Cline -- sc1 at roamer1 dot org -- http://www.roamer1.org/ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2000 21:39:58 -0500 From: Don Kimberlin Subject: Re: Help: Seeking RJ11 Walljack Manufacture In article: Brae R (braeatwork@mindspring.com) on Sat, 11 Mar 2000 12:18:56 -0800 wrote: > I am trying to find some companies that have the ability to take from > rough specifications and drawings and design an engineering print for > submission to manufacture for a special RJ11x3 walljack for use in > residential applications. > Does anyone know of such a company(ies) in the US? Preferably in the > SE part of the country, but not required. A project would be for > 2,000-10,000 on the manufacturing end, with 5-10 beta units for > testing. ... If you really insist on having some special plastic molded up, that's certainly do-able, but are you aware that there are industry standards for premises wiring that include covering requirements for not only twisted pair, but coaxial and fiber optic cable for data? The most widely known one is EIA/TIA 568, which has been around for some time. ... Several manufacturers provide wiring devices to meet this and similar standards, which can be used for architectural purposes. One of the several manufacturers of such devices is Siemon Corporation, whose MAX line can mount as many as six jacks in the space of one common US electrical outlet box. Here's the Siemon web page pertaining to their MAX jacks for residential use: http://www.siemon.com/cgi-bin/SiemonCatalog.exe?RT=GENINFO&FAM=MAX_Modules ... And, if you really want to see the news from the leading source for telecommunications premises wiring methods and technology, you'll want to get in tune with BICSI, the professional association of people who do it for a living. They are, at the moment, developing a new standard, TIA-570, specifically for residential application (:where at present, TIA 568 is being used for both business and residential telecommunications wiring): http://www.bicsi.org Donald E. Kimberlin, NCE ------------------------------ From: David Lind Subject: Globalstar Satellite Phones Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2000 12:13:52 GMT Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy. As Iridium fades... Globalstar satellite phones emerge. Which will come first; a canoe accident on the Amazon river because a boater was talking on his satellite phone, or shooting, because a police officer thought the phone was a gun (see photos, gmpcs). For a sat. phone tutorial see... QUALCOMM Globalstar Home Page Address:http://www.qualcomm.com/ProdTech/globalstar/index.html A couple of retailers, with pricing, of the next satellite phone offering... Home Page globalstar-usa.com Address:http://www.com-sat.com/Globalstar/index.html Globalstar Satellite System Address:http://www.gmpcs-us.com/satellite_telephones/globalstar-tele.html David ------------------------------ From: tknab@nyx.net (Terry Knab) Subject: Re: Australia; Wireless Phone Number Portability 3/2001 Organization: The Home Office Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2000 13:57:04 GMT David Clayton wrote: > On 1 October 1999, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission > determined that full number portability for mobile phone numbers > (excluding analogue AMPS mobiles) should be available in Australia, > and directed the ACA (Australian Communications Authority) to set the > earliest practicable date for its implementation. Mobile number > portability is the ability of a customer to change their mobile > service provider, while keeping their existing mobile phone number. And we wonder why its not going to happen in the US anytime soon? Since 90% or so of the mobile numbers are *still* AMPS services (remember, TDMA/CDMA digital are just *addons* to AMPS), there's not really a reason to do so now. The only carriers really affected by portability in the US would be the PCS carriers (whos phones are NOT inter-operable with each other) such as Nextel, Sprint PCS, and Omnipoint/Aerial/VoiceStream (soon to be one and the same). Basically, portability isn't viable in the US since PCS hasn't really taken off as much as everyone would hope. Plus, since in the North American Numbering Plan, most cell carriers have entire prefixes blocked off to themselves (in some situations, though, the prefix is 'shared' with land lines. Southwestern Bell has this problem. They at one time didn't grab all of the numbers in a prefix and then had to go back and open new ones because the remaining numbers were eaten by landlines) and with the way prepaid is configured, tehre are some major logistic problems. Terry E. Knab News/Acting System Administrator Nyx Public Access Unix ------------------------------ From: tknab@nyx.net (Terry Knab) Subject: Re: Rescue 211 Organization: The Home Office Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2000 14:03:48 GMT Jeremy Pickett wrote: > In many towns in the north Georgia area 311 is used as a shortcut to the > telco's voicemail system. Out of curiousity, I began to try the > different combinations one evening, being careful not to dial 411 or > 911. I was surprised when I reached our county's 911 center by dialing > 211. Embarassed, I apologized and quickly hung up. Does anyone know if > this is something other telco's are doing as well, or just a strange > ALLTEL quirk? I've heard that in some areas 311 will be assigned to > non-emergency police, but nothing's been mentioned about 211. > Incidentally voicemail in our exchange cannot be reached at 311. When > dialed it returns a fast busy. Its a strange ALLTEL quirk. I've seen the various x11 numbers used for all sorts of bizarre things. 311 is supposed to be for non-emergency calls to the police/fire, etc. However, its not implemented universally yet. 211 used to be long-lines (LD) operators, IIRC. I've seen 511 used as the 'test number' which spits back the ANI on a given line (although at one time, SWB used 222 222 2222 as a valid combo for that, as well as currently 973# where I live) Also, let's not forget the infamous 611, which was repair service in a good chunk of the Bell System. And in Calif, Pac Bell used to use 811-xxxx as business office line numbers. (Those are the only x11-xxxx numbers I've *ever* seen until they started running out of toll-free numbers!) Terry Knab News/Acting System Administrator Nyx Public Access Unix [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Years ago in Chicago, prior to 911, we used POLice 5-1313 and FIRe-7-1313. '211' was long distance, when it was still undialable by customers. '411' was directory assistance, when it was still called 'information' and '611' was repair service. OFFicial 3-9100 was a downtown business office, but OFFicial 3-9411 was the Illinois Bell corporate offices. Various business offices around the city were (various exchanges)-9100. '811' was originally military priority long distance during the second world war and it was changed over to hotel guest long distance service when Bell paid a commission on such calls to hotel switchboards, but they had to quote 'time and charges' to the switchboard as part of the process. PAT] ------------------------------ From: tknab@nyx.net (Terry Knab) Subject: Re: What Can be Done When the LECs T1 Card Goes? Organization: The Home Office Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2000 14:11:50 GMT Dan Star wrote: > We had a site coneected via Frame relay go down in the morning due to > a faulty T1 card provided by the Ameritech LEC. The Frame service > itself is provided by MCIWorldCom. It took the LEC until 8 pm that > night to fix it. Can either party be held responsible for this? How > should a customer respond to this occurence? Once a problem with a frame relay has a problem its the responsibility of the carrier to get it fixed, at least that's my take on it. If its tracked back to a local loop, then its the local carrier's problem to fix. And I'd hold *both* parties responsible for this, but Ameritech would be my vote for the most likely target of complaint. And I'd at least ask for one day's worth of out-of-service credit since the services were unusable for one business day. Terry E. Knab News/Acting System Administrator Nyx Public Access Unix ------------------------------ From: tknab@nyx.net (Terry Knab) Subject: Re: In Never-Bell Land, Phone Service Is Way Above Average Organization: The Home Office Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2000 14:31:59 GMT Michael Sullivan wrote: > Richmond Telephone has 13 employees, serves 1,200 access lines in a 5 > square mile area, and charges $12.50/month for local service. > Let's do the math. The company's annual access revenue is > 1200*12.50*12, or $180,000. Thirteen employees at, say, $35,000 salary > + $15,000 benefits is $650,000. Fixed and variable non-employee costs > (depreciation, electricity, gasoline, etc.) add a few hundred thousand > more, at the very least; estimate $200,000 to be conservative. Add in > return on an investment of $2,000,000 or so -- another $200,000, say. > The company's total revenue requirement for a year comes to at least > $1,050,000. In other words, the low monthly line charges cover only 17% > of the cost of providing the company's "way above average" service. > Who pays the remaining 83%? WE DO. Companies like this are massively > subsidized by those of us paying more per month for poorer service, > through the universal service/high cost program, and through > long-distance access charges. This company probably loads the vast > majority of its costs onto long-distance users by gouging long-distance > carriers for excessive carrier common line charges that are "justified" > by the company's high costs -- costs resulting from providing > gold-plated, overstaffed service. Gold-plated? Overstaffed? That service sounds *far* better than most of the RBOCs out there. We hear horror stories of how bad the Bells are (and SBC is just about the worst of the bunch! They make US West look good!) Most of the RBOCs out there have done every trick in the book to make themselves unaccessable to customers, and the service level post-divesture has gone down the crapper. Granted, we're subsidizing this company, but its my opinion that they're doing it better than Bell is, service wise. As to the charge they're trying to gouge people, the issue is how much is BA charging *them* to access the services? Almost every rural company has higher charges to access the network of a RBOC than if they were near a big city. Its the RBOCs who are the reason that we have to subsidize rural services. They *force* the local carriers to pay to access their networks (particularly in the intra-lata market) And try living in a fairly large city 50 miles outside of a major city serviced by a RBOC and try getting DSL or ISDN. Its not gonna happen! It sounds like these guys can at least offer that. Another thing that's not being figured into the revenue stream are the non-reg services such as Call Waiting, Voice Mail, etc ... ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2000 15:30:39 EST From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Software For Faxes Needed If anyone has software to send/receive faxes from PC, I would like to use it. My computer has a modem capable of sending and receiving faxes, but I have no software/drivers to operate it. It can either be for Windows98 or DOS, with the former preferred. Please get in touch with me. Thanks. Patrick Townson ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2000 04:10:20 -0600 From: David Glynn Subject: Re: Iridium At 08:05 PM 03/11/2000 -0500, editor@telecom-digest.org wrote: > What does "dismantling the satellite system" entail ? Will they send a > shuttle equipped with laser guns to blast those satellites out of the > sky ???? :-) :-) Heads up. Oooooh, look at the pretty lights! ;) They burn them into the atmosphere. Really, those satellites are not that great a loss. Word around the water coolers was that they skimped on shielding due to weight, and the actual lifespan of those satellites was only expected to be five years. The idea was that the launch costs would go down, so replacements satellites that were actually capable of long term survival in space would be sent up(cheaper) as replacements once the original satellites proved the business model viable. Of course, the business model apparently was hosed, so, expensive light show. P.S. Nice to have you back Pat. Didn't realize how much I missed the digest until you came back. Keep diggin'! David Glynn "Can the stock market value of all these dglynn@mathware.com companies continue? I don't think it can, I think it's a bubble" -Tom Perkins 2/22/2000 Founder, Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2000 23:41:13 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: A Turning Point for E-Privacy by Chris Oakes 3:00 a.m. 4.Mar.2000 PST February 2000 should prove to be a month to remember for Internet privacy advocates -- and DoubleClick investors. It ended with the online ad firm announcing it would suspend plans to tie names to now-anonymous user Web "cookies" until online privacy standards were established. With that, privacy advocates -- who insist it's still premature to declare any sort of victory -- at least scored a momentous success. http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,34734,00.html ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V20 #21 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Mar 13 22:59:25 2000 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id WAA19572; Mon, 13 Mar 2000 22:59:25 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2000 22:59:25 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200003140359.WAA19572@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #22 TELECOM Digest Mon, 13 Mar 2000 22:59:00 EST Volume 20 : Issue 22 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: CPP, ATM Surcharges (was F.C.C. Debates Changes to Cell (F. McClintic) Re: In Never-Bell Land, Phone Service Is Way Above Average (Fred Goodwin), Two Flight Attendants Appeal Search of Home Computers (M Solomon) Executive Order on Unlawful Conduct Using the Internet (Monty Solomon) Re: Query on LNP (Al Varney) Cyber Patrol Cracked; How to Get I-Gear's Secret List (Bennett) Looking for ITSP to Terminate Calls (Aldevinas) Re: Persistent Mysterious Calls (John Ledahl) Could AOL Become The Ma Bell of New Millennium? (The Old Bear) Caller SOMETIMES Pays on Phoenix Cell Phones (Chris N. Acuma) Dot-coms Wary of Privacy Bills (Monty Solomon) 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-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 259 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 805-545-5115 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@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: hyperarchive.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 the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2000 20:28:10 -0600 From: Fred McClintic Subject: re: CPP, ATM Surcharges (was F.C.C. Debates Changes to Cell Phones) On Sat, 11 Mar 2000 21:54:37 -0500, Stanley Cline wrote: > Also, CPP numbers would likely be blocked from PBXs, payphones, > hotels, other wireless carriers, customers of CLECs, long distance > callers, etc. because of the uncertainty about what rates would be > charged (and in the case of most CLECs and wireless carriers, lack of > third-party billing arrangements), which would make them about as > worthless as 976 numbers, which are all but dead in many cities. The primary problem, and the reason that the existing proposals should be totally scrapped is that PBX owners and others CAN'T block CPP numbers! The FCC to-date has said no to any proposal that would give cellular providers numbers which could be, by automated means, determined to be such. Universities charge their students for phone calls that they make through their PBXs. Companies bill back departments for calls that they make via account codes or other methods. All of these bill-back methods rely on Call Detail Records produced by the PBX which are then ran though an accounting package that costs the call. All of these packages rate the call based on the local or LD rates charged by the carrier that the call was passed to, and the rates that the owner of the PBX negotiated with the carrier. With CPP, all of that pre-determination goes out the window and we're back to going through the phone bill manually and hoping that we can collect the money out of the caller (who, in the case of universities, may well be a perpetually broke student who ran up a three or four-figure phone bill talking to their girl/boyfriend who has a CPP number). Various parties have supposedly brought up means of *verbally* telling the caller that he is about to be charged extra, but PBXs can't do voice recognition (yet?). As long as there is no *automated* means of determining if we are going to be charged extra for the call (and blocking accordingly), the CPP proposals should be shot dead in the water. Fred McClintic ------------------------------ From: Fred Goodwin Subject: Re: In Never-Bell Land, Phone Service Is Way Above Average Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2000 11:21:51 -0600 Michael Sullivan wrote: > Who pays the remaining 83%? WE DO. Companies like this are massively > subsidized by those of us paying more per month for poorer service, > through the universal service/high cost program, and through long- > distance access charges. This company probably loads the vast majority > of its costs onto long-distance users by gouging long-distance carriers > for excessive carrier common line charges that are "justified" by the > company's high costs -- costs resulting from providing gold-plated, > overstaffed service. Mike, as you've seen from the replies so far, it is not politically-correct to criticize small, rural, or mom and pop telcos. There's much truth to what you say -- as an auditor for an intrastate toll pool, I saw the accounting and engineering records of many small telcos. It is no secret that much of their funding comes from toll pool disbursements (both intrastate and interstate -- in the form of NECA). But it is also true that their operating costs are higher than the big ILECs. I think the readers of this list might be surprised to know that many rural telcos converted 100% to digital switching long before the RBOCs did (its easy when you have to replace a single switch; many RBOCs continue to operate analog 1AESSs). Toll pool "settlements" had no small part to do with those upgrades. And of course, small telcos are net recipients from the toll pools, whereas the RBOCs were net payers into the toll pools, meaning those conversions were subsidized by RBOC ratepayers, as well as IXC access fees (paid for by LD users). List readers might also be surprised to know that the total ROR for many of these small telcos far exceeds anything Mr. Kushnick constantly harps about. When a proposal was floated a decade ago to reduce subsidized REA loan funding to small telcos, the howls could be heard to the halls of Congress, and of course, the subsidized funding was essentially preserved (60 Minutes even gave an example of how Vail, CO benefited from such funding). Under the REA's curious rules, "once funded, always funded" so that even tho the Vail telco was later bought out by GTE, the Vail exchange still qualifies for (and presumably receives) subsidized REA loans. One wonders how much the taxpayers in the more rural parts of RBOC territory are subsidizing the "poor" folk of Vail, CO? Fred Goodwin, CMA Associate Director -- Technology Program Management SBC Technology Resources, Inc. 9505 Arboretum, 9th Floor, Austin, TX 78759 fgoodwin@tri.sbc.com (512) 372-5921 (512) 372-5991 fax ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2000 12:20:36 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Two Flight Attendants Appeal Search of Their Home Computers Published Friday, March 10, 2000 2 flight attendants appeal search of their home computers Tony Kennedy / Star Tribune A court-sanctioned search of computers owned by two Northwest Airlines flight attendants was a company fishing expedition that violated the workers' personal privacy, claims an appeal that seeks destruction of the copied computer data. Lawyers for flight attendants Kevin Griffin and Ted Reeve said in an appeal filed Thursday in U.S. District Court in St. Paul that the two flight attendants should have been trusted to search their own electronic records for material relevant to Northwest's lawsuit against them. The suit alleges that Griffin, Reeve, 19 other http://www2.startribune.com/stOnLine/cgi-bin/article?thisStory=81456213 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: So many of these large companies seem to feel all they have to do to get their way regards search and seizure of the computers of individuals is to get a loud-mouthed lawyer to go make a demand of a judge somewhere. I wonder if they bothered to get search warrants and how they dealt with email which belonged to others that happened to be stored on the computers in question. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2000 12:33:44 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Executive Order on Unlawful Conduct Using the Internet Excerpt from Prosecuting Crimes Facilitated by Computers and by the Internet http://www.usdoj.gov/criminal/cybercrime/crimes.html D. Executive Order on Unlawful Conduct Using the Internet On March 9, 2000, Attorney General Janet Reno announced the release of "The Electronic Frontier: the Challenge of Unlawful Conduct Involving the Use of the Internet." In August 1999, President Clinton established an interagency Working Group on Unlawful Conduct on the Internet. Executive Order 13,133 directed the Working Group, under the leadership of the Attorney General, to prepare a report with recommendations on: --The extent to which existing federal laws provide a sufficient basis for effective investigation and prosecution of unlawful conduct that involves the use of the Internet; --The extent to which new technology tools, capabilities, or legal authorities may be required for effective investigation and prosecution of unlawful conduct that involves the use of the Internet; and --The potential for new or existing tools and capabilities to educate and empower parents, teachers, and others to prevent or to minimize the risks from unlawful conduct that involves the use of the Internet. The report and its appendices can be found via the links below: * The Electronic Frontier: the Challenge of Unlawful Conduct Involving the Use of the Internet (March 9, 2000) http://www.usdoj.gov/criminal/cybercrime/unlawful.htm * Appendices to "The Electronic Frontier: the Challenge of Unlawful Conduct Involving the Use of the Internet " (March 9, 2000) http://www.usdoj.gov/criminal/cybercrime/append.htm [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Did anyone hear on the BBC today where a couple of British politicians referred to Bill Clinton and Janet Reno as 'a couple of liars'. What has never ceased to amaze me since his election (the first time) were the large number of Silicon Valley people who were tricked into voting for him. The internet was getting along just fine before Clinton and Gore (the father of the internet to hear Gore talk about it) got into office. PAT] ------------------------------ From: varney@ihgp2.ih.lucent.com (Al Varney) Subject: Re: Query on LNP Date: 13 Mar 2000 16:05:11 GMT Organization: Lucent Technologies, Naperville, IL Reply-To: varney@lucent.com In article , Krishnan PP wrote: > Question: > How does LNP (Local Number Portability) work for the following cases : > Intra LATA call > Inter LATA call > I want to know the details of the location of the portability database, > the LRN etc. First, it would be useful to understand what YOU mean by "the portability database". Within a REGION, the following hierarchy typically exists: REGIONAL portability database (the NPAC) | | V Feeds multiple SMS databases (owned by large provider or 3rd party) | | V Each feeds multiple SCP databases (real-time query by CO/Tandem switches, owned or leased or per-query charging) There are six Regions in the USA, plus a Canadian "region". There is NOTHING preventing SMS or SCP databases from supporting or spanning multiple regions -- a service provider could have 1 SMS and 1 huge SCP connected to all the NPAC databases. Or the service provider could lease/pay-per-query all SCP queries, and not own any SMSs or SCPs. In general, queries for intra-LATA calls are performed by the "originating" switch in the LATA. Queries for inter-LATA calls are made by the switch sending the call into the LATA (an IXC/INC switch). Exceptions: Intra-LATA calls routed via IXC switch do not query at the originating LEC switch -- the IXC switch does it. Recent changes in NP requirements allow LEC switches to query for some IXCs (based on agreements) when the call is intra-LATA. Also, there is an option for LEC switches to query for selected inter-LATA calls (say, those within the REGIONAL area) as a service to some IXCs. Also, LECs will typically support doing queries for un-queried calls from some IXCs. Typically, the LEC charges more for doing the query than they do for allowing the IXC to query the LEC's SCPs. In general, switches have no idea which SCPs will a specific query; that's determined by SS7 Global Title routing information in STPs. It's possible for queries of different destination numbers to route to different SCPs. An IXC with a switch connected to LATAs in multiple REGIONS might wish to have individual SCPs only have data for one REGION or LATA, and thus need to support routing based on destination NPA-NXX. Information links: Committee T1 requirements (TRQs) for NP: NeuStar (previously Lockheed Martin CIS), the NPAC operator (and also the LNP Administrator, NANP Administrator, Number Pooling Administrator and CO Code Administrator): General North American portability/pooling site: Al Varney ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2000 09:37:17 -0600 From: bennett@peacefire.org Subject: Cyber Patrol Cracked; How to Get I-Gear's Secret List Reply-To: peacefire-press@iain.com [sent to journalists on Peacefire's press list] Good morning and welcome back to work :-) This actually happened over the weekend, but the authors released their news on a Saturday morning, not the best time of the week to get publicity: Two programmers, Eddy L O Jansson and Matthew Skala, have decrypted the list of sites blocked by Cyber Patrol and made their findings public: http://hem.passagen.se/eddy1/reveng/cp4/cp4break.html This means that the entire list of 80,000 blocked sites is now public information for the first time. And, unlike I-Gear, it is not possible for Cyber Patrol to stop people from downloading their encrypted blocked-site database. (The technical reason is that the Cyber Patrol client does not send back any serial numbers when it requests the list to download, so anyone can download the list without having to use a serial number which Cyber Patrol could revoke.) Cyber Patrol claims over ten million users, and their list of blocked sites is their most closely guarded secret. Because the authors of the report are located outside the U.S., the legal implications of their work remain to be seen, but we are mirroring the Cyber Patrol codebreaker on our site (within the U.S.) in defiance of whatever legal threats may be made by Cyber Patrol's lawyers. The instructions on the Web page above, describing how to get Cyber Patrol's list and decrypt it, are somewhat convoluted. If you're interested in getting a copy of the list before Cyber Patrol has a chance to cover anything up, email us (bennett@peacefire.org and we'll pass on the instructions that have worked for us so far. ************** HOW TO GET I-GEAR'S SECRET LIST FROM SYMANTEC We have a link to Symantec's server that can be used to download the encrypted list of sites blocked by I-Gear. However, we are not publishing this on our Web site, since if we revealed the download location for the list, Symantec could de-activate the serial number and make the link unusable. (We are NOT refraining from publishing the link as a result of any legal threats -- Symantec's legal team has demanded, for example, that we also remove the codebreaking program from our site as well, which we have not done.) If you would like to get the link to download the list, please email me and I can send you the link subject to a non-disclosure/off-the-record/cross-your-heart/hope-to-die agreement not to give it out to anyone. Several publications are covering our exposure of I-Gear, and this secret file could give you the journalistic "edge" :-) Thanks, Bennett bennett@peacefire.org http://www.peacefire.org (425) 649 9024 ------------------------------ From: Aldevinas Subject: Looking for ITSP to Terminate Calls Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2000 14:22:31 +0200 I'm looking for ITSP to terminate calls in Russia and Europe. Hardware: Computer Protocol Malaysia. If you are interested drop me an email. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2000 09:11:56 -0800 From: John Ledahl Subject: Re: Persistent Mysterious Calls In response to the mysterious calls, I have experienced a similar pattern in Northern California. Our calls came frequently around 6-7 p.m. with other calls coming in the morning between 6-8 a.m. as well. By calling your local police you can get a case number to give to the local exchange company. The LEC then places a "trap" on you phone for about two weeks. Once you report two calls from the same phone number, the police follow through. Our calls were from a residence in Dallas. Apparently, according to Pac Bell, a satellite company or local cable company had crossed paths with the resident's line causing automatic calls to my number. Ours wasn't the only number being called. Once we identified the calling number via this process, the calls stopped. You have a right not to be harassed. I suggest you make a police complaint and follow through as above. Good luck! John Ledahl ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2000 20:49:40 -0500 From: The Old Bear Subject: Could AOL Become The Ma Bell of New Millennium? Excerpted from The Wall Street Journal of March 13, 2000: NEW YORK -- While no one was watching, America Online Inc. has quietly become a force in the telephone business, piecing together a formidable collection of technologies and products that could one day make it the Ma Bell of the new millennium. The company is hoping to place itself at the forefront of two important communications trends: cheap phone calls routed through the Internet and Web access via wireless phones. Many people believe the company's text-chatting services will eventually add voice capability. And through its pending purchase of Time Warner Inc., AOL stands to acquire coveted cable lines that will let it offer a full range of phone services, plus video on demand, in many areas. A company spokeswoman says AOL isn't ready to talk about its Internet telephony strategy. But in a recent speech, Steve Case, AOL's chief executive, said, "People will have the equivalent of AOL phones." Acquisitions are one key. Recently, AOL has been in talks to gain control of Net2Phone Inc., a fast-growing Internet telephony start-up in Hackensack, N.J., in which it already has a sizable stake. Though that deal could still fall through, the two companies are already working to let users of AOL's two text-chatting services, ICQ and AOL Instant Messenger, make Internet phone calls to their online buddies using Net2Phone. AOL's vast directory of Instant Messenger and ICQ users could one day become something like an online phone book for setting up calls, analysts believe. AOL also owns just under a 10% stake in Talk.com Inc., a company in Reston, Va., that sells AOL-branded traditional long-distance calling to AOL's online-service subscribers. So far, Talk.com has signed up 1.5 million customers, most of them for the AOL service. To capitalize on the explosive growth of wireless access to the Internet, the company has teamed up with Nokia Corp., Motorola Inc. and other big wireless players to develop services that will let cell-phone users communicate with friends through mobile versions of AOL Instant Messenger and e-mail. In December, AOL acquired Tegic Communications, a small company whose software makes it easier for users to punch out messages from cell-phone keypads. AOL has also established a wireless division headed by Dennis Patrick, a former chairman of the Federal Communications Commission and a former wireless-industry executive. AOL executives say they may even consider offering an AOL-branded wireless service if they determine there's consumer interest. "I wouldn't rule anything out," says Bob Pittman, AOL's president. To be sure, nobody is expecting Internet calls placed through computers to replace traditional phone calls overnight. But many believe AOL and others will increasingly skim telephone calls from traditional phone companies as cut-rate online calls become more accessible. And few doubt AOL's ability to crash the hugely profitable world of telephone service. After all, AOL boasts 21 million customers and has proven its ability to make complicated technologies simple for consumers to use. It used to be that companies needed thousands of miles of underground networks to be a player in communications. But industry watchers expect AOL to gain a foothold in the voice market by leveraging current strengths, including consumer brand building, customer support and billing expertise. More important is AOL's enormous power in Internet communications, including more than 100 million registered users who do online text chatting, with its potential to add a voice-based service. "The industry has realized in the last couple of months that the Internet is a natural means for voice -- and AOL is part of that," says Tom Evslin, chief executive officer of ITXC Corp., which sells Net telephony services to companies at about three cents a minute. "This is a very natural extension for AOL. They have the right customers and they are the leader," says Mr. Evslin, who formerly headed AT&T's Internet services. All this puts AOL on a collision course with companies whose core business is providing phone service, including AT&T Corp and regional Baby Bells. MCI WorldCom is citing AOL's growth as a long-distance company as a reason regulators should approve the company's merger with Sprint Corp. Yahoo! Inc., Microsoft Corp. and other Internet players are concluding they need to move into the phone business as well. Many say AT&T, with its 65 million customers, is the only company that can seriously challenge AOL's increasing clout. AT&T had hoped to cut a deal with Time Warner to use its cable systems for phone service, to no avail. Now that AOL is buying Time Warner, it's unclear what will happen with that plan. Time Warner CEO Gerald Levin said in a recent session with analysts that "a lot has changed in the past year." Executives at AT&T say no deal between the companies will be struck before AT&T completes its acquisition of MediaOne Group Inc. Before the Time Warner acquisition was announced, there was bad blood between AOL and AT&T. Last year, AOL's top executives escalated the debate over opening access to cable lines owned by AT&T and other cable companies. Despite speculation that the two companies would reach a compromise, AT&T Chairman C. Michael Armstrong and AOL's Mr. Case at times were barely on speaking terms. Last week, Mr. Case said AOL was holding talks with AT&T about gaining access to its cable networks, but he didn't disclose a timetable and warned that it wasn't clear an agreement would be reached. AT&T, for its part, insists that the interests of AOL and AT&T are more closely aligned than they have been in some time. John Petrillo, AT&T's top negotiator as its executive vice president of strategy and business development, says AOL's communications ambitions could be what finally forces a reckoning between the two giants. Instant Messages Aren't Just for Chat Yellow Freight System recently installed a slew of new toll-free lines to talk to its customers. But the big Kansas trucking company isn't using AT&T or Qwest, or any other telephone company. It's using America Online. Yellow Freight's customer-service agents now field inquiries from customers asking for rate quotes and delivery times via AOL's Buddy List. That's the same system that flirtatious teens use to send each other fast-written messages via the Internet. Yellow Freight says those instant messages, as they're known, are a natural complement to its 800 number. "Millions and millions of people use this," Paul Marshall, senior director of customer support, says of the AOL service. "There's a whole other world out there." Phone companies, watch out. Instant messages, or IMs, are making inroads into corporate call centers and customer-support operations. AOL, with more than 90 million instant-message users, dominates the market. It has blocked some rivals -- including AT&T -- from plugging into its IM system, sparking heated battles over the technology. THE NEXT CHAPTER: buddy lists will morph into virtual phones, thanks to evolving technology that beams voice conversations over the Net. Voice calls will eventually become a standard feature of instant-messaging software. When that happens, the companies that dominate instant messages could become the Ma Bells of the new millennium. This revolution has been a quiet one so far. AOL isn't pushing its Buddy Lists to businesses directly. Instead, it teamed up with tiny FaceTime Communications of Foster City, Calif. Lots of startups provide small chat-room systems for customer service, but FaceTime co-founder David Hsieh is betting that tapping into AOL's huge user base will give him a crucial edge. "This is the telephone of the Internet," Mr. Hsieh says. "And a person's buddy name is their phone number." Mr. Hsieh, 36 years old, started FaceTime in October 1997 after shopping for a computer online. Unable to find the answer to a question about laptop screens on Dell Computer's Web site, he wound up logging off and calling Dell's toll-free number for the answer he needed. Figuring e-commerce sites would eventually need a better way to communicate online with customers, Mr. Hsieh started to develop an instant-chat system. But he concluded he was trying to re-invent the wheel. So he struck a deal with AOL to tap into its IM network. In January, FaceTime rolled out its system, dubbed BizBuddy. To consumers, a BizBuddy conversation looks like AOL's Instant Messenger system. In that system, an AOL member stores the online nicknames for friends and family in a personalized list. The list indicates when friends are online and lets a user begin a chat by clicking the appropriate nickname. Users type messages and read replies in a split-screen window. With BizBuddy, businesses get an online nickname that AOL members can add to their lists. This allows the company to route inquiries to customers and set up pre-programmed responses. Wingspan Investment Services, the online brokerage unit of Bank One, urges customers to add its online nickname "WingspanInvest" to their Buddy Lists. For now, Wingspan waits for customers to start the dialogue. But Wingspan Investment President Terry Ransford thinks the brokerage will eventually use BizBuddy to initiate conversations. For instance, a chat window could be used to notify a customer that a transaction was completed. "It's a very powerful tool," he says. And it's likely to get more powerful. AOL's ICQ software, an upscale instant-message system that operates separately from the AOL Buddy List network, already supports some third-party Internet phone-call software. An Internet-telephone company called Net2Phone has a deal to integrate its software into the mainstream Buddy List service. "If you can provide great voice, all of a sudden you have the next-generation telephone network," says Mr. Hsieh of FaceTime. "I would be scared if I were a phone company." On the traditional phone system, any telephone can dial up another. Not so in the world of instant messages. Last year, AOL clashed with Microsoft over the software giant's MSN Messenger Service, an instant-message system designed to let its users talk to AOL buddies. AOL deployed one tactic after another to block the MSN software. In November Microsoft said it would give up trying to tie into AOL. Tribal Voice, a majority-owned unit of CMGI, makes an instant-message service called PowWow designed to communicate with everyone. It even works with AOL -- sort of. Tribal Voice says some PowWow users can chat with AOL buddies, but those on AT&T's WorldNet service find themselves blocked. AOL, citing privacy and security concerns, says its policy is to block all unauthorized use, regardless of Internet service. Tribal Voice, AT&T, Microsoft and others recently complained about the practice to a Senate hearing on the AOL-Time Warner merger. AOL says it's working with partners like Novell and Lotus to spread instant messaging. It is also discussing standards that would let anyone tap the AOL network, but little progress has been made. Says David Gang, an AOL senior vice president: "This is a complicated space." ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2000 16:35:00 MST From: acuma@aztec.asu.edu (Chris N. Acuma) Subject: Caller SOMETIMES Pays on Phoenix Cell Phones When I first got this it was great. I only use it for when I first got my 602 cell phone where the caller pay business and my customers don't mind paying. US West would eat the charges for calls it could not bill, such as people calling me from out of the Phoenix area, and it let people call me for free from US West pay phones in the Phoenix area (but it made the COCOT pay phone pay my air time). But US West got greedy. Now if US West can't bill the caller for the air time they bill me. Now if someone calls me from a Phoenix area us west pay phone makes me pay the charges. (while COCOT pay phones get no such deal and the caller does pay). Now if someone calls from a long distance number US West can't force to pay for the air time US West will make me pay for the air time. As a result I'm cancelling my caller pays cell phone service due to huge bills US West is sticking me when the caller can't pay. The service should be renamed to US West will rip off the caller and if US West can't rip off the caller they will rip off the cell phone owner. chris "Good intentions will always be pleaded for every assumption of authority. It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard the people against the dangers of good intentions. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters." -- Noah Webster ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2000 21:05:11 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Dot-coms Wary of Privacy Bills DoubleClick furor may push regulation drive By Patrick Thibodeau 03/10/2000 Drugstore.com Inc. uses e-mail to inform customers of prescription refills and new products. It's an important means of customer contact. But Congress and the states are considering privacy laws that could make that harder to do. Five major Internet privacy bills are in Congress, and Internet privacy bills will likely be considered in 44 states -- every state with a legislative session this year. The bills may affect everything from Web site design to the bottom line. http://www.computerworld.com/home/print.nsf/CWFlash/000310F5B6 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V20 #22 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Mar 15 13:26:40 2000 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id NAA03617; Wed, 15 Mar 2000 13:26:40 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2000 13:26:40 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200003151826.NAA03617@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #23 TELECOM Digest Wed, 15 Mar 2000 12:53:29 EST Volume 20 : Issue 23 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson ITU Grant Ends (TELECOM Digest Editor) Call Routing References (Dimitris Terzis) Re: Infamous Hacker Sought for Advice (James Carlson) Re: Infamous Hacker Sought for Advice (David Scheidt) From DSL v ISDN - Basic Info (James Carlson) CTIA Daily News From WOW-COM - March 14, 2000 (Michael Hartley) Re: Anti-Spam E-mail Suit Tossed Out (Tom Betz) Re: Two Flight Attendants Appeal Search of Their Home Computers (Anonymous) Tell Congress to Speed Up the Internet (cyberorganizer@aol.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-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 259 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 805-545-5115 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@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: hyperarchive.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 the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2000 12:40:27 EST From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: ITU Grant Ends I want to let everyone know that the grant TELECOM Digest recieved from International Telecommunication Union for seven years (it started in 1993; $500 per month) was discontinued as of March 1, 2000. They said the reason was a budget cutback; there may have been other reasons as well. I know they will be missed terribly. It was pretty much my sole source of income. I hope all of you will join me in thanking them for the several years of loyal help they provided. I mean that sincerely. Now of course, I need to find a new sponsor, or two, ASAP. If any businesses want to become a sponsor of this Digest, please write and let me know. After all these years, I do not intend to stop the Digest, if there is anyway to keep it going. I don't want to do that, and I don't think most of you want me to quit. In the meantime, if you have not made a contribution of your own for this year, or last year, please consider doing so now. My address is PO Box 259, Independence KS 67301. Thanks to all of you in advance for your assistance. Patrick Townson From: "DeGuzman, Corazon" To: "'TELECOM Digest Editor'" Cc: "Wohlleber, Wolfgang" , "Rodrigues, Luis" , "Shaw, Robert" , "Mialhe, Christiane" Subject: RE: ITU Grant for the period 01 December 1999 to 29 Feb 2000 Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2000 17:41:43 +0100 Importance: high X-Priority: 1 Return-Receipt-To: "DeGuzman, Corazon" Dear Mr. Townson, This is to reiterate in my previous email below dated 21 December 1999 that the ITU cancelled the grant that they are giving you effective 1st March 2000. Please cancel any invoice being issued. We are very sorry for this decision but we need to cut off some expenses due to cut off of our budget. We hope that you could understand our present situation. Thank you for your understanding and collaboration. Yours sincerely, Corazon De Guzman-Me¤ez ITU / IS Secretariat / V.41 Place des Nations CH-1211 GENEVE 20 Tel.: (022) 730.53.42 Fax: (022) 730.53.37 email: deguzman@itu.int > -----Original Message----- > From: DeGuzman, Corazon > Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 1999 8:03 PM > To: 'TELECOM Digest Editor' > Cc: Wohlleber, Wolfgang; Rodrigues, Luis; Shaw, Robert > Subject: RE: ITU Grant for the period 01 December 1999 to 29 Feb 2000 > > Dear Mr. Townson, > > I would like to inform you that the Finance Department paid your invoice > for the period 01 December 1999 to 29 Feb. 2000. > > In behalf of Mr. Wohlleber as Chief of the IS Department, I would also > like to inform you that the ITU grant for the TELECOM Digest will be > cancelled effective 1st of March 2000. > > It has been a pleasure doing business with you and we wish you a Merry > Christmas and a prosperous New Year. > > Thanks and best regards, > > Corazon DE GUZMAN-MENEZ > ITU / IS Secretariat / V.41 ------------------------------ From: Dimitris Terzis Subject: Call Routing References Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2000 15:55:30 GMT Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy. Hi guys, I am looking for good references (books, papers, URL's, etc.) on Call Routing and how it's done in today's (or recent) networks (PSTN/IP/ATM), from both a technology (e.g., algorithms) and customer (e.g., services) point of view. The search I've been doing over the net and online bookshops has not resulted in any impressive results ... Any ideas? Thanks, Dimitris ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Infamous Hacker Sought for Advice From: James Carlson Date: 15 Mar 2000 06:42:50 -0500 Bill Horne writes: > I had a conversation with a system administrator at a medium sized > business in the midwest: I called to tell him his site had been placed > on the Real-time Black hole List because spammers were using it as an > open relay: he agreed that the version of Sun's Unix he was using is > outdated and can't be made secure, and then asked ME to speak to the > company President, so as to get the point across that they had to > spend some money for a change. I agree that clueless management often does this (I've certainly been on the receiving end of it), but this particular one is probably not the best example. It's not true that it "can't" be made secure. That clueless administrator should have gotten a copy of the most recent sendmail and tcp_wrappers, configured, compiled, and installed. It's free stuff. I don't think anybody who knows what he's doing runs the workstation code from {pick-a-vendor} right out of the box. James Carlson, System Architect IronBridge Networks / 55 Hayden Avenue 71.246W Vox: +1 781 372 8132 Lexington MA 02421-7996 / USA 42.423N Fax: +1 781 372 8090 "PPP Design and Debugging" --- http://people.ne.mediaone.net/carlson/ppp ------------------------------ From: David Scheidt Subject: Re: Infamous Hacker Sought for Advice Date: 15 Mar 2000 05:03:07 GMT Organization: EnterAct Corp. Bill Horne wrote: > I had a conversation with a system administrator at a medium sized > business in the midwest: I called to tell him his site had been placed > on the Real-time Black hole List because spammers were using it as an > open relay: he agreed that the version of Sun's Unix he was using is > outdated and can't be made secure, and then asked ME to speak to the > company President, so as to get the point across that they had to > spend some money for a change. Making SunOS secure, and configuring sendmail (or your favorite other MTA) to not relay spam are very different things. Anybody who doesn't understand that does need to be shown the door. I'm a system administrator, and know all about having to deal with outdated systems because getting someone to pay for an upgrade isn't possible. There's a huge difference between the impossible, and the merely difficult. Stopping spam falls into the difficult category, but blocking relaying is possible on every UNIX I have ever dealt with. David Scheidt The presumption of the flamers is, I assume, that folks barging in to AFU with tired old stories and off-topic drivel have already ignored the polite and subtle clues, and require a thwack with the clue-by-four. -- Andrew Reid ------------------------------ Subject: Re: From DSL v ISDN - basic info pse. From: James Carlson Date: 15 Mar 2000 06:48:43 -0500 ghelbig writes: > How are the signals aggregated at the local exchange? Are they > kept as 'ethernet' (say) packets? and would this mean 'Billy and > Johnny down the road' would be able to 'see' each others > computers? If you're connecting to the Internet (and not using one of those toy computers), it probably doesn't much matter. > Reasons I am asking is I work for a small Computer Co. and we > are connecting more and more sites to 'the Internet'. As yet > security doesn't seem to be to much of an issue to SME's in the > UK, but I am wondering if 'always on' is such a good idea after > all? Um. That's the whole point of the Internet -- everyone can "see" everyone else's computers. It wouldn't be too useful otherwise. If you connect and you care about security, then that's up to you as the customer. If you're relying on your ISP to do this for you, I think you're likely going to get what you asked for, but not what you wanted. James Carlson, System Architect IronBridge Networks / 55 Hayden Avenue 71.246W Vox: +1 781 372 8132 Lexington MA 02421-7996 / USA 42.423N Fax: +1 781 372 8090 "PPP Design and Debugging" --- http://people.ne.mediaone.net/carlson/ppp ------------------------------ From: Michael Hartley Subject: CTIA Daily News from WOW-COM - March 14, 2000 Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2000 08:48:51 -0000 Pat, Not sure if you've come accross this before (website extract below) Donate a Phone to Fight Domestic Violence Donate your no longer used wireless phone to help fight domestic violence. For more information, please visit http://www.donateaphone.com or call 888-901-SAFE. The goal of the program is to collect one million no-longer-used wireless phones to expand the wireless industry's program to combat domestic violence. Once collected, the phones become a part of our national CALL to PROTECT program which, in collaboration with the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence, provides wireless phones to victims of domestic violence. Wireless phones with donated emergency service can be a lifeline in the hands of domestic violence victims, enabling them to call for assistance when faced with a life-threatening situation. The phones also offer a sense of security, especially as the victims make the transition from living in an abusive situation to one of safety and independence. This program is made possible thanks to the generous contributions of CTIA member companies. Since 1996, Motorola has donated over 16,000 phones and 74 wireless service providers have donated free emergency airtime to domestic violence victims. For more information: 1-888-901-SAFE or contact the Wireless Foundation at Foundation@cita.org. Regards Mike ------------------------------ From: tbetz@panix.com (Tom Betz) Subject: Re: Anti-Spam E-mail Suit Tossed Out Date: 15 Mar 2000 06:15:46 GMT Organization: Society for the Elimination of Junk Unsolicited Bulk Email Reply-To: tbetz@pobox.com Quoth Monty Solomon in : > by Peter Lewis > Seattle Times technology reporter > In the war of words over unsolicited commercial e-mail, better known > as spam, an Oregon man has won a victory over the state of Washington. > But the battle may not be over, as the attorney general ponders an > appeal. > The victory came when King County Superior Court Judge Palmer Robinson Would that be palmer.robinson@metrokc.gov ? > dismissed a case in which the state charged Jason Heckel with > violating Washington's anti-spam law. Robinson said the law, generally > regarded as the nation's toughest, violates the interstate-commerce > clause of the U.S. Constitution. > http://www.seattletimes.com/news/local/html98/spam_20000314.html |I always wanted to be someone,| Tom Betz, Generalist | |but now I think I should have | Want to send me email? FIRST, READ THIS PAGE: | |been a wee bit more specific. | | | | YO! MY EMAIL ADDRESS IS HEAVILY SPAM-ARMORED! | ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2000 07:46:02 +0100 From: Anonymous User Subject: Re: Two Flight Attendants Appeal Search of Their Home Computers Organization: mail2news@nym.alias.net > 2 flight attendants appeal search of their home computers > Tony Kennedy / Star Tribune > A court-sanctioned search of computers owned by two Northwest Airlines > flight attendants was a company fishing expedition that violated the > workers' personal privacy, claims an appeal that seeks destruction of > the copied computer data. > Lawyers for flight attendants Kevin Griffin and Ted Reeve said in an > appeal filed Thursday in U.S. District Court in St. Paul that the two > flight attendants should have been trusted to search their own > electronic records for material relevant to Northwest's lawsuit > against them. The suit alleges that Griffin, Reeve, 19 other > http://www2.startribune.com/stOnLine/cgi-bin/article?thisStory=81456213 > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: So many of these large companies seem > to feel all they have to do to get their way regards search and > seizure of the computers of individuals is to get a loud-mouthed > lawyer to go make a demand of a judge somewhere. I wonder if they > bothered to get search warrants and how they dealt with email which > belonged to others that happened to be stored on the computers in > question. PAT] One word: e-n-c-r-y-p-t-i-o-n Encryption won't prevent the phuzz from seizing your box but it will put a serious crimp in their getting anything incriminating out of it. IMHO, anyone with a computer that is engaging in anything that might attract the attention of the legal system and is not running PGP is a fool. Anonymous remailers are another excellent privacy-enhancing tool available to the masses. Steve (living in the USSA) ------------------------------ From: cyberorganizer@aol.com Subject: Tell Congress to Speed Up the Internet Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2000 16:48:03 GMT thought the group might be interested in this: YOU CAN ACT TODAY TO HELP SPEED UP THE INTERNET! It's all too common of a story. Computers with 56K modems are never able to connect at 56K. Sometimes you're lucky if your connection is better than 28.8K. You're saying to yourself, "What's going on? I can't be part of the Internet economy with this super-slow connection." The problem isn't with your computer, modem or Internet service provider. The problem is outdated regulations that have slowed the growth of high-speed Internet connections. And you can do something about it right now. Congress is considering a bill (H.R. 2420) that will, if passed, open up the Internet backbone to new competition, resulting in more bandwidth capacity from city to city, and within cities. The sad truth is that the regulations in place today are fostering the creation of a cable information dictatorship. While these cable companies make millions, consumers are stuck with Internet connections that are so slow it's like moving a bowling ball through a drinking straw What can you do? >> SEND A FREE FAX TO CONGRESS TO HELP CREATE A FASTER INTERNET Tell Congress how your feel, send your FREE FAX today! It will only take a minute to send your message fax to the Capitol, but you will save hours in downloading time if this bill passes. Go to http://www.fasternet.org to send your FAX. Tell Congress that it's time to let consumers, not the government, make real choices between high-speed Internet access providers. Visit http://www.fasternet.org today!! >> PLEASE FORWARD TO FRIENDS, WE NEED THEIR HELP!! << ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V20 #23 ****************************** Note: Issue 23 was issued twice in error. This one is called 23-B. From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Mar 14 23:45:43 2000 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id XAA08970; Tue, 14 Mar 2000 23:45:43 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2000 23:45:43 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200003150445.XAA08970@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #23 TELECOM Digest Tue, 14 Mar 2000 23:45:00 EST Volume 20 : Issue 23 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Broadband Briefings (The Old Bear) Re: Could AOL Become The Ma Bell of New Millennium? (J.F. Mezei) Re: Caller SOMETIMES Pays on Phoenix Cell Phones (Adam H. Kerman) Re: Two Flight Attendants Appeal Search of Their Home Computers (C. Dold) Re: Infamous Hacker Sought for Advice (Bill Horne) Re: Cost of Wiretapping (LCS Mixmaster Remailer) Re: Two Flight Attendants Appeal Search of Their Home Computers (McHarry) Anti-Spam E-mail Suit Tossed Out (Monty Solomon) Re: Persistent Mysterious Calls from Hell ... (Bill Phillips) Selling of SL1 Parts & Phones (Nolan) 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-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 259 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 805-545-5115 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@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: hyperarchive.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 the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2000 08:43:46 -0500 From: The Old Bear Subject: Broadband Briefings Broadband Briefings ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Published by NetAction Issue No. 8 March 13, 2000 Repost where appropriate. Copyright and subscription info at end of message. In This Issue: Broadband and the Bells Pipe Dreams II Rural Routes About Broadband Briefings ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Broadband and the Bells Last week, three members of the Federal Communications Commission joined four of their state commission colleagues for a Federal-State Joint Conference on Advanced Services. The conference marked the first of six field hearings scheduled by the Joint Conference to assess the status of deployment of advanced telecommunications services. This week's hearing, in Washington, D.C., focused on the status of broadband deployment in the inner cities, and on identifying examples of "best practices" of successful deployment. Not surprisingly, there was plenty of talk about the benefits of bringing broadband to all Americans, about the need for public-private partnerships, and about the role that regulators should play in promoting rapid and widespread deployment to advanced services. But there is one aspect of advanced telecommunications deployment that wasn't on the agenda for the field hearings. In addition to looking at what was accomplished, regulators should be looking at what has not been accomplished, and why. NetAction believes the field hearings should be expanded to include an examination of the role the regional Bell Operating Companies have played in the deployment of these new services. We are convinced that advanced telecommunications services would have been fully deployed by now had the Bells lived up to the promises they made in the past to state and federal regulators, and to consumers, in exchange for reduced regulatory oversight. If the goal of policy makers is to promote rapid and widespread deployment of advances services at affordable prices, it is crucial that they recognize, understand, and address the Bells' history of broken promises. The Bells are lobbying Congress to amend the Telecommunications Act of 1996 to allow them into the long distance data market without first opening their own markets to competition in accordance with the conditions imposed in the 1996 Act - most notably the fourteen-point competition checklist required under Section 271 of the Act. Letting the local monopolies into any new markets now would only lead to more broken promises. In recent months, NetAction has been studying several years' worth of Bell financial data that was compiled by the New Networks Institute (NNI), a New York-based research organization . NNI's Bruce Kushnick has spent the past several years independently analyzing the impact of the break-up of AT&T and the creation of the RBOCs on the deployment of new and advanced telecommunications networks, as well as on telephone subscribers in general. Late last year, NNI filed a petition with the Federal Communications Commission requesting an investigation into the Bells' failures to deploy advanced networks . The petition, which was subtitled, "How the Bells Stole America's Digital Future," documents in detail how the Bells used the promises of advanced network deployment to convince regulators to replace "rate-of-return" regulation, which protected consumers from excess profits, with alternative regulatory frameworks that allowed the Bells much higher profits. In exchange, the Bells agreed to deploy advanced services and promised that by the year 2000 almost half of America would be wired with fiber-optic networks capable of delivering up to 800 channels of digital services, at lightning-fast speeds. Well, it is now the year 2000, and not a single Bell company has deployed an advanced network as promised. Moreover, NNI estimates that telephone customers have paid over $50 billion dollars in excess charges for advanced services that were never deployed. Here are just a few examples from "Info-Scandal: The Bells' Greatest Broadband Failures," one of NNI's recent reports : --> Bell Atlantic, in its 1993 Annual Report, announced it would be spending $11 billion over the next five years to build an advanced network capable of serving 8.75 million homes by the end of the year 2000. --> Pacific Bell, in its 1993 Annual Report, announced it would be spending $16 billion over the next seven years for an advanced network that would provide broadband service to 5 million homes by the end of the decade. --> Ameritech, in its 1994 Investor Fact Book, boasted that it was building a video network that would extend to 6 million customers within six years. These companies didn't even come close to fulfilling their promises: By the end of 1999, the number of digital subscriber lines (DSL) in the US and Canada combined was only about 600,000, according to a recent report from the consulting firm TeleChoice. NetAction agrees with the goal of the Joint Conference to encourage the deployment of advanced telecommunications services to all Americans in accordance with the provisions of Section 706 of the 1996 Act. But gathering data on the status of deployment isn't as important to America's digital future as understanding why advanced services haven't already been deployed, and holding the Bells accountable for their past promises. Moreover, we believe that the most relevant example of "best practices" of successful deployment of advanced services is the competitive market. In stark contrast to the typical Bell practice of using ratepayer money to finance their investments, competitive telecommunications companies have invested billions of shareholders' dollars in cable networks in order to offer broadband Internet service and competitive local phone service. The result is that there are now about 2 million cable modem customers in the US and Canada, according to a report by the research firm Kinetic Strategies. And private sector investments in cable networks have not only expanded the availability of advanced services in many communities, they've put competitive pressure on the Bells to speed up the introduction of digital subscriber line services. Regulators should keep this in mind as the Joint Conference field hearings continue. For when all is said and done, the most important thing that policy makers can do right now to ensure rapid and widespread deployment of advanced services is to refrain from imposing any rules, regulations, or conditions that might discourage private sector investment in broadband deployment, or give the Bells a further competitive advantage. NetAction is working with NNI to increase consumer awareness of the Bells' role in delaying the deployment of advanced telecommunications services and mobilizing Internet users to put pressure on state and federal regulators to order the Bells to deliver on their promises, or return the $50 billion they were given to deploy advanced networks. Contact Bruce Kushnick at NNI or Audrie Krause at NetAction if you can help. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Pipe Dreams II Last summer, in our very first issue of Broadband Briefings, we noted that the debate over "open access" to high-speed cable Internet service was -- and still is -- premised largely on the assumption that consumers are going to favor cable broadband over competing technologies like digital subscriber line (DSL) and wireless. At the time, we weren't convinced that cable broadband would be the consumers' top choice for high-speed Internet access. We identified both practical and technical reasons why cable broadband might not wind up being the preferred technology, and concluded that if cable isn't the preferred technology, the "open access" debate would prove to be largely irrelevant. There is increasing evidence that our predictions were on target. For example, InternetNews.com reported earlier this month that a new survey found consumers were more likely to choose DSL than cable broadband. (See: . The Parks Associates study reported that of 6,000 consumers who planned to switch to broadband service, 34 percent wanted DSL, compared to 25 percent who wanted cable broadband. Moreoever, a higher percentage of cable modem customers said they would switch services if they could get the same speed for $10 less per month. News reports also indicate that price competition is emerging. In addition to reduced monthly charges, there are companies planning to offer free broadband access to consumers willing to accept advertising content. These developments just underscore our point that regulated access isn't necessary at this time. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Rural Routes In their continuing quest for entry into long distance markets, local phone monopolies are making increasingly outrageous claims. Given the Bells' history of broken promises that NNI has uncovered, regulators and lawmakers ought to be skeptical. This is particularly true of claims that local monopolies are uniquely capable of bringing broadband services to rural communities. An excellent report on broadband deployment in rural communities was prepared last fall by Economics and Technology, Inc. The authors, Lee L. Selwyn, Scott C. Lundquist and Scott A. Coleman, report that a variety of technologies are being deployed in rural areas by companies interested in serving those markets. The report is available at . ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ About Broadband Briefings Broadband Briefings is a free electronic newsletter, published by NetAction to promote policies that encourage rapid and widespread deployment of high-speed Internet access. NetAction is a national, non-profit organization dedicated to educating the public, policy makers, and the media about technology-based social and political issues,and to teaching activists how to use the Internet for organizing, outreach, and advocacy. To subscribe to Broadband Briefings, send email to: The body of the message should state: To unsubscribe at any time, send email to: The body of the message should state: NetAction is seeking sponsors to provide financial support for its work. Sponsors will be acknowledged on NetAction's Web site. NetAction is supported by individual contributions, membership dues and grants. ------------------------------ From: J.F. Mezei Subject: Re: Could AOL Become The Ma Bell of New Millennium? Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2000 01:03:58 -0500 The Old Bear wrote: > And through its pending purchase of Time Warner Inc., AOL stands to > acquire coveted cable lines that will let it offer a full range of > phone services, plus video on demand, in many areas. So, AOL gets various local cable plants. It will be AOL as a cable company that competes against the telcos not AOL as an internet ISP. While using a PC to transmit sounds is currently done, the "internet telephony" is shaping up as a black box connected at the end of the coax cable and provide an RJ11 analogue phone service. This is what Videotron (Montreal cable company) is going to do. Nothing to do with a microphone plugged into a Wintel PC. The way I see it, the cable company will provide 3 services: -television signals -INTERNET using TCPIP sold as different brands, including AOL. -local telephone service using TCPIP. Is there a standard protocol already for telephony between the box in customer premises and the cable company's central office ? Is that protocol capable of being routed long distance ? Or will the local cable companies convert their TCPIP-telephone-calls to "industry standard" telephone calls and hand them off to long distance carriers ? I have a feeling that the "internet telephony" is misinterpreted by the media and wall street in the same way that Wall Street thing that just because G3-GSM will use a CDMA technique instead of TDMA, it means that Qualcomm will control all of the world's mobile phones (Qualcomm doesn't control CDMA, it controls one stack which uses CDMA). Or how Wall Street tought for a long time that "the information superhighway" was going to be 500 TV channels. So, if AOL's cable companies provide local telephone service, will AOL also buy a long distance carrier to link all its local cable networks together ? Does AOL own its own fiber beteween cities already ? (or lease capacity from various carriers ?) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2000 10:20:35 -0600 From: Adam H. Kerman Subject: Re: Caller SOMETIMES Pays on Phoenix Cell Phones Organization: Chinet - Public Access since 1982 acuma@aztec.asu.edu (Chris M. Acuma) wrote: > When I first got this it was great. I only use it for when I first > got my 602 cell phone where the caller pay business and my customers > don't mind paying. What, exactly, made you think your customers didn't mind paying your airtime? How do you know you didn't lose calls or potential customers who thought you were nickel-and-diming them? They all knew before they engaged your services that they could only reach you via caller-pays wireless service? ------------------------------ From: Clarence Dold Subject: Re: Two Flight Attendants Appeal Search of Their Home Computers Date: 14 Mar 2000 16:58:03 GMT Organization: a2i network Reply-To: dold@rahul.net > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: So many of these large companies seem > to feel all they have to do to get their way regards search and > seizure of the computers of individuals is to get a loud-mouthed > lawyer to go make a demand of a judge somewhere. I wonder if they > bothered to get search warrants and how they dealt with email which > belonged to others that happened to be stored on the computers in > question. PAT] In the case of my wife's former employer, they did get a search warrant. They took my computer "and all diskettes and software media, such as CDROMs", on April 3, just a little before I had finished my taxes. The search warrant was supposedly looking for a list of clients, since he thought she was going to set up a competing business. The deputy apparently didn't know what Zip disks were, because he left those behind, with my copies of tax stuff, so I was able to finish that on a borrowed computer, but I wonder what basis the judge had for granting a search warrant. The request was sealed, even to us, because it contained trade secret information. A couple of weeks later, the computer was returned. It wouldn't boot. I discovered that my C drive had been restrapped to be an IDE slave, so that the deputy could install his drive and software to sarch mine for hidden and deleted files. I don't know whether to believe that the former employer really felt there was some business threat, or if this was purely vindictive. I would have thought that there would have to be some overt action before a judge would consider the business threat to be real ... like at least one contact with a customer. Clarence A Dold - dold@rahul.net - Pope Valley & Napa CA. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: To be quite honest, if I had not gotten my taxes done in time -- and I would not have worried too much about it -- I would have referred the tax collector to the judge who issued the warrant, with a note saying 'all my records were seized by the judge on the basis of a BOGUS, unwarranted search warrant.' Then I would have sicced the tax collector on the judge. In the absence of any other details, I would have treated it as vindictive. You should definitly filed a claim for the damages done to the computer. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2000 09:52:51 -0500 From: Bill Horne Subject: Re: Infamous Hacker Sought for Advice Organization: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & News Services Alan Boritz wrote: TELECOM Digest Editor had initially replied: >> His case left me feeling >> very bitter about the US Government's role in his case. If he does >> decide to 'work along' with Congress I hope he gets up there and >> rips them into shreds for their dishonesty in calculating the >> amount of 'damages' he supposedly caused. PAT] > I think you're missing the point. Many of those "victims" who helped > put Mitnick in jail more than likely should have been put on the > unemployment line. There's a growing complacency with incompetence > that's victimizing the wrong parties in these kind of situations. An > organization that experiences a computer security intrusion shouldn't > be crying to their lawmakers for legislation, they should be showing > their system administrators the door. > Alan I differ on only one point: who should get the ax. "An organization that experiences a computer security intrusion" should fire their IS manager, not the system administrator. It's usually the manager whom demands that the system administrator hack away at outdated hardware and software, on the theory that system administrators are just kids looking for a new toy whenever they want money. I had a conversation with a system administrator at a medium sized business in the midwest: I called to tell him his site had been placed on the Real-time Black hole List because spammers were using it as an open relay: he agreed that the version of Sun's Unix he was using is outdated and can't be made secure, and then asked ME to speak to the company President, so as to get the point across that they had to spend some money for a change. Bill Horne (Return address munged to prevent spam: sorry. Remove .nouce for direct replies.) ------------------------------ Date: 14 Mar 2000 07:00:24 -0000 From: LCS Mixmaster Remailer Subject: Re: Cost of Wiretapping Organization: mail2news@nym.alias.net >> As to whether telcos 'support' it there are two answers: telcos are >> now required by law to implement CALEA so there's no question they >> will 'support' it in the legal sense. But as to whether telcos 'support' >> the idea behind it the answer is a universal No - not out of any >> sense of consumer privacy merely the bottom line: telcos will have >> to pay for the bulk of CALEA compliance out of their own pockets. Excuse >> me, out of their customers' pockets, that being us consumers of >> course. > There's an even more compelling reason why telcos do not want feds > in their COs. Telco's can monitor their traffic at will (needs of > the business) without any court order. Once court ordered taps are > put in place at a CO, they essentially need to stop their own > monitoring. They do not like to do that, -- most have many cases > going simultaneously where they build the evidence and when they are > ready, contact law enforcment with archived and sealed forensic > material. Telcos are loathe to let any law enforcement individual > physically into the CO. As we all should be. LEOs are *not* your friend - they are looking to bust you any way they can, or use you to get to someone else. Letting a LEO onto your property is like inviting a fox inside a henhouse - no good can come from it. Once inside your house all a cop needs to say is "Say, I smell pot." and poof you're in jail and your property is seized and your kids are shipped off to a govt agency for "safekeeping". > The rift between the government and the > telco's is huge for precisely the reason posted above. CALEA has > just about shut the discussion door between "the gov't" and the > telcos. This is the silver lining of an otherwise dark and omnious cloud. Anything that prevents, inhibits or degrades CALEA implementation and operation is a Good Thing (tm). "A government cannot grant freedom to you; it can only take it away". Steve ------------------------------ From: John McHarry Subject: Re: Two Flight Attendants Appeal Search of Their Home Computers Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2000 20:44:01 -0500 > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: So many of these large companies seem > to feel all they have to do to get their way regards search and > seizure of the computers of individuals is to get a loud-mouthed > lawyer to go make a demand of a judge somewhere. I wonder if they > bothered to get search warrants and how they dealt with email which > belonged to others that happened to be stored on the computers in > question. PAT] Perhaps if some of those others in turn subpoenaed ALL the computers, backups, etc. of the law firms involved it would dampen such tactics. After all, how can the firm operate while all its schedules, billing systems, and so forth are being copied onto punched paper tape? [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I admit it sounds like a good idea, but it just won't work. Large companies and their attornies are entitled to make up all the lies they want about you, but the same is not true in reverse. Most of the law firms involved would get their counsel into court very fast to squelch any ideas you had like that. Just try it if you think it will work. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2000 22:03:58 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Anti-Spam E-mail Suit Tossed Out by Peter Lewis Seattle Times technology reporter In the war of words over unsolicited commercial e-mail, better known as spam, an Oregon man has won a victory over the state of Washington. But the battle may not be over, as the attorney general ponders an appeal. The victory came when King County Superior Court Judge Palmer Robinson dismissed a case in which the state charged Jason Heckel with violating Washington's anti-spam law. Robinson said the law, generally regarded as the nation's toughest, violates the interstate-commerce clause of the U.S. Constitution. http://www.seattletimes.com/news/local/html98/spam_20000314.html ------------------------------ From: wfp@ziplink.net (Bill Phillips) Subject: Re: Persistent Mysterious Calls from Hell ... Organization: ShoeString Projects, Cambridge, MA Reply-To: wfp@ziplink.net (Bill Phillips) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2000 21:57:50 GMT Andrew Green wrote: > /dev/null@.com (Justa Lurker) writes: >> From NNAG for December 1999. >> 509-533 SPOKANE >> US WEST PNW BELL > End Office Code - Portable >> Modified 03/17/00 >> 5E SPKNWAKYDS0 v:06247 h:08180 > *boggle* > What the heck was that? :-) Seriously, I read the Digest in order to > learn things; can you add a little detail as to what sort of info > you're sharing with us here about the 509-533 mystery number? > And to the original poster: Have you ever _answered_ one of these > mystery calls, or are you just looking at Caller ID logs? Does an > answering machine record anything from these calls? From the timing > and pattern you describe, if I answered the phone I would expect to > and be hearing the "boop... boop... boop..." of a misprogrammed > fax machine trying to send a regularly-scheduled outbound message > of some sort. [The original poster (not me) replies:] > Hi -- > I get the calls at about 6:00 p.m. It's always been > when I'm outside feeding the horses, always when I'm > home alone (persistently annoying). There is no > message left -- I have Sprint voicemail system. PS: Thanks for all the feedback! ------------------------------ From: Nolan Subject: Selling of SL1 Parts & Phones Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2000 10:49:39 -0500 Not to polute the news group, but there doesn't seem to be a better place. I have two sl1's one xt (3 tier) complete, and one xt (1 tier) missing processor and memory. I have the whole assortment of cards 2009, 2112, 2317, and sl1 sets. If you are interested email me directly. And no I am not giving it away, it was removed from service about five years ago, and has been in boxes the rest of the time. It is completly functional, with some exceptions on the cards which I have notes on. Nolan Nolan@netcorpinc.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V20 #23 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Mar 16 17:40:11 2000 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id RAA28724; Thu, 16 Mar 2000 17:40:11 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2000 17:40:11 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200003162240.RAA28724@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #24 TELECOM Digest Thu, 16 Mar 2000 17:39:00 EST Volume 20 : Issue 24 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Tell Congress to Speed Up the Internet (Fred Goldstein) IDMS'2000: Deadline Extension (Clever Ricardo Guareis de Farias) Mobile Commerce 2000 Conference (Andrew Josey) Re: Two Flight Attendants Appeal Search of Their Home Computers (Atkinson) Re: Two Flight Attendants Appeal Search of Their Home Computers (M.Simpson) Re: Caller SOMETIMES Pays on Phoenix Cell Phones (Adam H. Kerman) Re: Anti-Spam E-mail Suit Tossed Out (Ed Ellers) Search of Gov. Employee's Net Use, Computer Not Unconstitutional (Solomon) Policy Post 6.07: Domain Names Body Moves Towards More Democratic (Solomon) Re: CPP, ATM Surcharges (was F.C.C. Debates Changes to Cell Phones) (Dnes)) Book Review: "Handbook of Mobile Radio Networks", Sami Tabbane (Rob Slade) Cyber Patrol Sues Codebreakers (the AP Story is *Wrong*) (Bennett) Toll-Free 866 & 855, Delayed (Judith Oppenheimer) 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-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 259 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 805-545-5115 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@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: hyperarchive.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 the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2000 08:53:26 -0500 From: Fred Goldstein Subject: Re: Tell Congress to Speed Up the Internet Somebody anonymous wrote, and it slipped past Pat's usually better editing, > I thought the group might be interested in this: ... > YOU CAN ACT TODAY TO HELP SPEED UP THE INTERNET! > The problem isn't with your computer, modem or Internet service > provider. The problem is outdated regulations that have slowed the > growth of high-speed Internet connections. > Congress is considering a bill (H.R. 2420) that will, if passed, open > up the Internet backbone to new competition, resulting in more > bandwidth capacity from city to city, and within cities. > The sad truth is that the regulations in place today are fostering the > creation of a cable information dictatorship. While these cable > companies make millions, consumers are stuck with Internet connections > that are so slow it's like moving a bowling ball through a drinking > straw Okay, let's explain. This is a classic "astroturf" web site, created by a public relations firm on behalf of blue chip clients who don't want their own name out front. In this case, it's our old friends, the large ILECs -- Bell Titanic, Southwestern Hell, etc., begging and paying Congresscritters to give them relief from the Telecom Act, which requires them to open up their local markets to competition before they can enter the long-distance business. Note the phrase, "cable information dictatorship". The ILECs and the CATVs are the enemies. CATVs are doing a better job of opening up fast net access to the public, so the ILECs are resorting to name calling. In between trying to get all ISP-bound calls reclassified as toll, of course (ye old Modem Taxe, a dream that SBC and BellTitanic still harbor). The web site in question (fasternet.org) doesn't show a whole lot about the exact policies they're calling for. Trust them, they say, give them your name to stick on a fax to Congress, and they'll fill in the rest. Hell, for all you know it could be a call to give federal funding to the Ku Klux Klan. But their "policy info" site has testimonies from Bell and SBC executives. Faster Internet? Faster to drain your wallet, faster to put your local CLEC out of business, faster to keep your CATV from providing cable modems, and faster to try to kick you and your Internet traffic off their dial-up network. Gee, I guess if you extract the right two words, you can find "faster ... Internet" in there. ------------------------------ From: Clever Ricardo Guareis de Farias Subject: IDMS'2000: Deadline Extension Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2000 10:58:10 +0100 Organization: CTIT - Centre for Telematics and Information Technology Announcement and Call for Papers IDMS'2000 7th International Workshop on Interactive Distributed Multimedia Systems and Telecommunication Services 17-20 October 2000 CTIT / Univ. of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands in co-operation with ACM SIGCOMM and SIGMM http://www.ctit.utwente.nl/Docs/news/idms_2000.htm Based on numerous requests, we have decided to extend the deadline for IDMS'2000 paper submission. The new, hard deadline for submitting both full papers and position papers is: March 31, 2000. For details, please refer to the conference website. ------------------------------ From: Andrew Josey Subject: Mobile Commerce 2000 Conference Organization: The Open Group Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2000 08:56:49 GMT Mobile Commerce 2000 Hilton London Metropole, London, April 10-12, 2000 (extending to April 14 for Members) More information and Registration: http://www.opengroup.org/conference/ The Open Group, its sponsors - Compaq, Fujitsu, Hitachi, HP, IBM, Fujitsu Siemens, Sun, its 100+ members, and The Mobile Data Association (UK) invite you to a unique conference: no blue skies, no "wouldn't it be great if" vision after vision. Hear industry leaders converse and report on today's mobile commerce technologies: solutions, implementations, struggles, and successes. Gather actionable information that can have an immediate impact on the strength of your mobile commerce strategy. This two-day conference will address the Mobile Commerce marketplace by examining case studies, considering the economics, and discussing the future direction. Speakers from organizations driving and using mobile commerce include: Sun Microsystems, Orange, Nokia, DTI, Global Mobile Commerce Forum, Boeing, Reuters, AOL, Cisco, Sonera SmartTrust, Ericsson and more. To find out more about the conference, including the full agenda and how to register see, the conference web site at http://www.opengroup.org/conference/ Mobile Commerce 2000, April 10-11 2000, London, UK. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2000 00:55 EST From: Fred Atkinson Organization: Personal Copy Subject: Re: Two Flight Attendants Appeal Search of Their Home Computers > One word: e-n-c-r-y-p-t-i-o-n > Encryption won't prevent the phuzz from seizing your box but it will put > a serious crimp in their getting anything incriminating out of it. > IMHO, anyone with a computer that is engaging in anything that might > attract the attention of the legal system and is not running PGP is a > fool. Anonymous remailers are another excellent privacy-enhancing tool > available to the masses. > Steve (living in the USSA) Will it really? What's to prevent them from giving you the 'we won't prosecute you for contempt of court' if you don't give us your passphrase? Of course you can decline and risk a heavy fine and/or short jail term. But I agree with you that it does provide some method of protection. If you can't read the messages in the first place, it is not as likely that it will attract attention. When I think of all the information that is probably being scanned out of email messages every day, it just makes me sick. If people normally encrypted their messages, there would be a lot less of that. Fred http://www.mishmash.com/fredspgp ------------------------------ From: Matt Simpson Subject: Re: Two Flight Attendants Appeal Search of Their Home Computers Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2000 11:02:47 -0500 Organization: University of Kentucky Computing Services In article , Anonymous User wrote: > One word: e-n-c-r-y-p-t-i-o-n > Encryption won't prevent the phuzz from seizing your box but it will put > a serious crimp in their getting anything incriminating out of it. Yeah, but that's not the point. Being incriminated isn't the problem. The problem is being subjected to the inconvenience and hardship of having your computer seized, and possibly trashed, in an abuse of power by the gummint. And encryption doesn't prevent that. In fact, they're likely to use that as "evidence" that you're trying to hide something: "If he's innocent, why is he encrypting stuff?" I'm not agreeing with that mentality, and I think citizens should be free to encrypt to their heart's content without fear of repercussion. But the simple fact is that just encrypting your data won't protect you from this kind of abuse. Matt Simpson -- Obsolete MVS Guy University Of Kentucky, Lexington, KY ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2000 21:27:16 CST From: Adam H. Kerman Subject: Re: Caller SOMETIMES Pays on Phoenix Cell Phones Matt Ackeret wrote: > In article you write: >> acuma@aztec.asu.edu (Chris M. Acuma) wrote: >>> When I first got this it was great. I only use it for when I first got my >>> 602 cell phone where the caller pay business and my customers don't mind >>> paying. >> What, exactly, made you think your customers didn't mind paying your airtime? > With any other telephone call, the caller pays.. I really don't see > why you consider it a ripoff.. With calls to landlines, callers expect to pay time and distance (which may not be expensive depending on the nature of the local calling plan). Calls to wireless pay time and distance to an arbitrary rating point. Calling party pays wireless calls, they pay airtime on top of other charges. They may consider this un-business-like. > (I don't have a cell phone, and hope that cell phones eventually come down to > the same price as wired phones.. but I think caller pays only makes sense.) Why would anyone want to pay airtime to call you? You are the one who chose to use wireless versus a landline. ------------------------------ From: Ed Ellers Subject: Re: Anti-Spam E-mail Suit Tossed Out Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2000 22:36:26 -0500 Monty Solomon wrote: > The victory came when King County Superior Court Judge Palmer > Robinson dismissed a case in which the state charged Jason Heckel with > violating Washington's anti-spam law. Robinson said the law, generally > regarded as the nation's toughest, violates the interstate-commerce > clause of the U.S. Constitution. Good for him. How in the hell can a person not physically present in the state be charged with a violation of the laws of that state? ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2000 23:46:58 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Search of Gov. Employee's Net Use, Computer Not Unconstitutional Search of office permissible because it was reasonable and related to employee misconduct E-Commerce Law Weekly March 10, 2000 A government worker did not have a legitimate expectation of privacy with regard to the record or fruits of his Internet use in light of his government employer's policy, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit held Feb. 28 (United States v. Simons, 4th Cir., No. 99-4238, 2/28/00). The defendant, Mark L. Simons, was an employee of the Foreign Bureau of Information Services, a division of the Central Intelligence Agency. In June 1998, FBIS instituted a policy regarding Internet usage by employees. The policy stated that employees were to use the Internet for official government business only. Accessing unlawful material was particularly prohibited. http://www.lawnewsnetwork.com/stories/A18334-2000Mar9.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2000 23:51:15 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Domain Names Body Moves Towards More Democratic Elections http://www.cdt.org/publications/pp_6.07.shtml CDT POLICY POST Volume 6, Number 7 March 15, 2000 A BRIEFING ON PUBLIC POLICY ISSUES AFFECTING CIVIL LIBERTIES ONLINE from THE CENTER FOR DEMOCRACY AND TECHNOLOGY CONTENTS: (1) Domain Names Body Moves Towards More Democratic Elections (2) CDT & Common Cause Promote Fair And Representative Elections (3) Voter Registration Continues (4) Other Major Issues For ICANN (1) DOMAIN NAMES BODY MOVES TOWARDS MORE DEMOCRATIC ELECTIONS At a public meeting in Cairo last week, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) voted unanimously to adopt a new set of rules that will improve democratic representation in its upcoming global election for a new board directors. ICANN is a technical organization with policy oversight responsibilities, and has long struggled with the issue of individual representation in its decision-making process. The action last week followed strong criticism of ICANN's previous plan for indirect elections from a diverse group of nonprofit, business, and international stakeholders. CDT and Common Cause summarized these concerns in a detailed report submitted to the current ICANN board. In a major shift, the new election rules allow individuals to vote directly for 5 out of the total 9 "At Large" representatives on ICANN's board of directors. These direct elections should take place before November 2000, and will be followed by an international study of the election process. The study will determine whether the final 4 directors will be elected by similar rules. Public interest advocates viewed the change from indirect to direct elections as a major improvement, increasing the accountability and legitimacy of the election. Another major change included a nominations process to seek highly qualified candidates. The At Large election has been considered the only venue for individuals to have a real voice in ICANN's crucial technical management functions. CDT and Common Cause commend the ICANN board for responding to the concerns of the Internet community. The adoption of several of our recommendations was a major step towards legitimate elections. However, much work remains to ensure that the election rules are implemented in a fair manner. A brief summary of the new election rules is available on ICANN's homepage: http://www.icann.org/minutes/prelim-report-10mar00.htm (2) CDT & COMMON CAUSE PROMOTE FAIR AND REPRESENTATIVE ELECTIONS The concerns expressed by diverse stakeholders in the ICANN process were summarized in a detailed report presented by CDT and Common Cause at the ICANN meeting in Cairo. The report was the result of a three month independent study of the ICANN election process, including outreach to leaders in the nonprofit, business, and technical communities. Experts in online voting, democratic process and international elections were also consulted for the study. CDT and Common Cause uncovered uniform skepticism that the previous election plan would adequately address issues of representation, legitimacy, accountability and due process. The previous plan also inspired strong fears about diversity and capture, as well as magnifying confusion and concern about the scope of ICANN's mission. The report included several public interest recommendations for improving accounability and fairness in the election process. CDT and Common Cause recommended that ICANN hold direct elections, clarify the scope of its mission, create a fair nominating process to generate quality candidates, and establish an independent election authority to monitor the election. CDT and Common Cause believed that an election could not proceed in a fair and representative manner until these concerns were resolved. More information on the CDT/Common Cause ICANN Election Study: http://www.cdt.org/dns/studyoverview.shtml Full text of the CDT/Common Cause report: http://www.cdt.org/dns/icann/study/ (3) VOTER REGISTRATION CONTINUES Internet users interested in the ICANN process can register to vote today. Shortly before the Cairo meeting, ICANN unveiled a new web site (http://members.icann.org/) where any Internet user can register to become a member, provided he/she is over the age of 16 and has a valid mailing address. At the Cairo meeting, the ICANN staff reported that several thousand people have already registered from around the world. ICANN also held the first meeting of its Membership Implementation Task Force (MITF). The MITF is a group of volunteers from around the world who will assist the ICANN staff with implementing the election rules and conducting voter outreach. Currently, the MITF is dealing with such issues as translation of official ICANN documents from English to other languages and preparing educational materials about membership. (4) OTHER MAJOR ISSUES FOR ICANN In addition to its elections, the ICANN board considered several other important issues at the Cairo meeting: * New generic Top Level Domains: Several interest groups supported the introduction of new generic Top Level Domains (gTLDs), such as ".biz" and ".per". In particular, noncommercial groups advocated for the immediate introduction of 6 to 10 new gTLDs, with at least half reserved for noncommercial purposes. The board expressed a committment to take action on these proposals at the next ICANN public meeting in July. * Famous Marks in the Domain Name Space: In a separate resolution, the board noted that a list famous trademarks prepared by the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) would be helpful in assessing trademark issues in the expansion of gTLDs. This resolution raised concerns from noncommercial representatives, as well as some intellectual property interests, who believe that the WIPO famous marks list is too restrictive for use on the Internet. * The Administration of Country code Top Level Domains: ICANN board also considered proposals on the management of country code Top Level Domains (ccTLDs), the two letter abbreviations for countries (such as ".fr" for France). ccTLDs have been traditionally delegated to local managers, who operate according to local policies that are adapted to best meet the economic, cultural, and linguistic circumstances of the country or territory involved. ICANN is now trying to create a uniform policy for ccTLD delegation worldwide and to further define the relationship and role of the ccTLDs within ICANN. The board authorized the ICANN staff to prepare draft language for contracts with the ccTLDs to be considered in July. A more detailed description of the board's resolutions: http://www.icann.org/minutes/prelim-report-10mar00.htm Detailed information about online civil liberties issues may be found at http://www.cdt.org/. This document may be redistributed freely in full or linked to http://www.cdt.org/publications/pp_6.07.shtml. Excerpts may be re-posted with prior permission of ari@cdt.org Policy Post 6.07 Copyright 2000 Center for Democracy and Technology ------------------------------ From: Walter Dnes Subject: Re: CPP, ATM Surcharges (was F.C.C. Debates Changes to Cell Phones) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2000 01:02:53 -0500 On Sun, 12 Mar 2000 20:28:10 -0600, in comp.dcom.telecom Fred McClintic wrote: > The primary problem, and the reason that the existing proposals > should be totally scrapped is that PBX owners and others CAN'T > block CPP numbers! The FCC to-date has said no to any proposal > that would give cellular providers numbers which could be, by > automated means, determined to be such. [...deletia...] > Various parties have supposedly brought up means of *verbally* > telling the caller that he is about to be charged extra... Anyone care to place bets on how vague the recordings will be, or how often the warning-message playback will "experience technical difficulties". > but PBXs can't do voice recognition (yet?). As long as there > is no *automated* means of determining if we are going to be > charged extra for the call (and blocking accordingly), the CPP > proposals should be shot dead in the water. Has anybody noticed how sleazebags keep trying to sneak in high-cost chargable services in via the backdoor to get past people's defenses ? - It took a while, but most people now know about 1-900-XXX-XXXX and 976-XXXX phone numbers. There was a flap a few years ago when somebody (was it 1-800-CALL-MCI ?) set up a "service" that allowed bills to be charged for 1-800 calls. - "Audiotext services" on regular-looking *LOCAL* exchanges - 1-XXX-XXX-XXXX calls in NANP are assumed to be a reasonable toll, but then along came the 809 and 664 area codes. I seem to remember a news item some time ago about Bell-Atlantic (or was it SW Bell??) offering an option to block *ALL* 3rd-party charges on an account. This is starting to look like a very good idea. Walter Dnes http://www.waltdnes.org SpamDunk Project procmail spamfilters. A picture is worth a thousand words; unfortunately, it consumes the bandwidth of ten thousand words. ------------------------------ From: Rob Slade Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2000 11:16:49 -0800 Subject: Book Review: "Handbook of Mobile Radio Networks", Sami Tabbane Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca BKHBKMRN.RVW 20000215 "Handbook of Mobile Radio Networks", Sami Tabbane, 2000, 1-58053-009-5, U$93.00 %A Sami Tabbane %C 685 Canton St., Norwood, MA 02062 %D 2000 %G 1-58053-009-5 %I Artech House/Horizon %O U$93.00 800-225-9977 fax: +1-617-769-6334 artech@artech-house.com %P 619 p. %T "Handbook of Mobile Radio Networks" This work is a bit too big for the "handy pocket reference" definition of handbook, but as a quick guide to the enormous range of technologies involved in mobile radio it fills the bill nicely. Part one of the book, though not formally delineated, gives the basic concepts behind mobile radio networks. Chapter one is an overview of mobile radio needs, history, and standards. Propagation gets thorough coverage in chapter two, and while there is lots of math there are also good explanations. Medium and channel access is dealt with in chapter three, including a detailed look at frequency, time, and code division multiple access (FDMA, TDMA, and CDMA, respectively). Channel imperfections and recovery, with a good section on adaptive antennae, are in chapter four. Chapter five's review of security has a good general introduction, decent explanations of cryptography, and some standards. Resource management and cell design is in chapter six. Cellular planning and engineering gets covered in chapter seven. Chapter eight deals with mobility management, cell selection, and roaming. Part two looks more at applications and implementations. Professional (sometimes referred to as Private) Mobile Radio (PMR) is the topic of chapter nine. Chapter ten discusses cordless telephony, with the CT2, DECT (Digital European Cordless Telecommunications), PHS (Personal Handyphone System, and PACS (Personal Access Communications System) standards. Paging, and the Eurosignal, POCSAG (Post Office Standardization Advisory Group), and ERMES (Enhanced Radio MEssage System) standards are in chapter eleven. Chapters twelve and thirteen look at various cellular and wireless data networks respectively. (There is reference to a prognosticating chapter fourteen in the book, but my copy had neither it nor any extra space.) All chapters have references and bibliographies, and most have appendices for further study on specialized topics. It's very nice to see a book that covers international standards and systems, although Americans may thereby feel that they don't fare too well on that front (which is as it should be). The material is presented in sufficient depth for a general understanding, but cannot, of course, detail every point of all the topics addressed. For those needing a broad grasp of current mobile radio technology, this is a very useful resource indeed. copyright Robert M. Slade, 2000 BKHBKMRN.RVW 20000215 ====================== (quote inserted randomly by Pegasus Mailer) Work out what you want to say before you decide how you want to say it. - Christopher Strachey's First Law of Logical Design http://victoria.tc.ca/techrev or http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2000 13:14:26 -0600 From: bennett@peacefire.org Subject: Cyber Patrol Sues Codebreakers (the AP Story is *Wrong*) Reply-To: peacefire-press@iain.com Cyber Patrol has asked a judge for a restraining order to force the "Cyber Patrol codebreakers" -- Eddy L O Jansson in Sweden and Matthew Skala in Canada -- to stop distributing their program that can decrypt the list of sites blocked by Cyber Patrol. (Unfortunately, the Associated Press completely botched the story about this incident, so if you've read about it on the AP wire, please see below to clear up any confusion.) WHAT HAPPENED: Jansson and Skala released a program that can decrypt the list of sites blocked by Cyber Patrol. (This is basically the same thing that Peacefire did for X-Stop and I-Gear in the last few weeks, when we were also releasing reports about what percentage of sites blocked by these programs were obvious mistakes.) Jansson and Skala's program can be downloaded from: http://hem.passagen.se/eddy1/reveng/cp4/cp4break.html The authors stated that they wrote this program in order to give customers the ability to see what sites Cyber Patrol blocks, so they can make an informed decision about whether to use Cyber Patrol or whether to recommend it. WHAT THE ASSOCIATED PRESS STORY SAID: The AP wire story, which is at: http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1005-200-1574168.html claimed that Jansson and Skala's program was just a tool for decoding the parental control password and hacking around Cyber Patrol. This is *not* what the program does, and it's not why Cyber Patrol is suing them. The primary purpose of the program is to decode the list, not turn Cyber Patrol off. (Peacefire has already had information on our site about how to turn Cyber Patrol off for over a year and a half, and Cyber Patrol never sued us.) The confusion has arisen because Cyber Patrol knows it would look bad for them, if people read that they were suing to stop parents and other customers of their product from finding out what Cyber Patrol really blocks. For that reason, they have been trying to spin this as a case of their company trying to stop two hackers from showing kids how to disable Cyber Patrol. Please note that that is *not* what the case is about. (If you think this sounds cynical, you can go to the original URL of the report at http://hem.passagen.se/eddy1/reveng/cp4/cp4break.html and see for yourself :-) ) In response to threats of legal censorship from Cyber Patrol against the authors of the original codebreaker, we have mirrored their essay and their codebreaking program on our Web site. -Bennett bennett@peacefire.org http://www.peacefire.org (425) 649 9024 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: A good rule of thumb regards any newspaper or television report on Internet activities is to assume the story is either written out of malice by a reporter or editor frightened that their holy territory is being taken away (what do you mean, we no longer have control over what people read and think about; what a nightmare!) or written out of ignorance, or some of both perhaps. The other day, someone was speaking on Rush Limbaugh (a case of his own) who claimed that filters were neded because Cyber Patrol had uncovered 'millions of pornographic web sites and more were being discovered daily.' What a bunch of rot; I am on the internet for hours most days and see very little porn. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Judith Oppenheimer Subject: Toll-Free 866 & 855, Delayed Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2000 11:02:17 -0500 The SMS/800 Number Administration Committee (SNAC) decided last week to delay 866 and 855, currently scheduled April 1 and April 8 rollout, having discovered that some number reservations were completely out of order. In an usual twist, the "disadvantaged" RespOrgs are high-volume "MGI" users that can submit multiple requests with no wait time, and program requests ahead of time. "On-Line" and "GUI" Users are limited with fewer request options; wait time; and manual data entry. At issue is FCC-mandated "first come first serve". Measured in nanoseconds, the ramifications can be significant, particularly regarding prized vanity numbers. Judith Oppenheimer, 1 800 The Expert, 212 684-7210 mailto:joppenheimer@icbtollfree.com Publisher of ICB Toll Free News: http://icbtollfree.com Publisher of WhoSells800.com: http://whosells800.com Moderator TOLLFREE-L: http://www.egroups.com/group/tollfree-l/info.html President of ICB Consultancy: http://1800TheExpert.com: 800 # Acquisition Management, Lost 800 # Retrieval, Litigation Support, ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V20 #24 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Mar 17 20:23:23 2000 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id UAA17937; Fri, 17 Mar 2000 20:23:23 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 20:23:23 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200003180123.UAA17937@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #25 TELECOM Digest Fri, 17 Mar 2000 20:23:00 EST Volume 20 : Issue 25 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Judge Orders CP Codebreaker Site Shut Down (bennett@peacefire.org) Crimefighters vs. Privacy (Monty Solomon) Copyright Loophole May Let Corporations Duck Scrutiny (Monty Solomon) Re: CPP, ATM Surcharges (was F.C.C. Debates Changes) (Stanley Cline) CORRECTION Subject: Toll-Free 866 & 855, Delayed (Judith Oppenheimer) Book Announcement -- Hurley (Jud Wolfskill) US-VA: Telecom Positions Open (Indego/CTC, Inc.) 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-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 259 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 805-545-5115 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@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: hyperarchive.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 the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 13:48:58 -0600 From: bennett@peacefire.org Subject: Judge Orders CP Codebreaker Site Shut Down Reply-To: peacefire-press@iain.com [sent to journalists on Peacefire's press list] U.S. District Judge Edward F. Harrington has ordered the authors of the "Cyber Patrol codebreaker" program to remove their site from the Internet and stop distributing information about how to decode the list of blocked sites and find out what Cyber Patrol is blocking. The AP story is at: http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/ap/20000317/tc/internet_decency_hackers_4.html Effective immediately, Peacefire is setting up a "mirror site network" at: http://www.peacefire.org/cpmirrors/ where we will maintain links to all known mirror sites of the original essay. Even if Cyber Patrol is successful in shutting down the original site in Sweden, they will not be able to shut down all mirror sites around the world. We will not remove our links list without a court order -- and no U.S. court has ever ordered a defendant to take down a *link* to an overseas site. (Even the judge who ruled in the DeCSS DVD-playing program -- who granted almost all of the requests made by the film and music industry lawyers -- did not force defendants to stop linking to mirror sites.) We have the text of the complaint that Cyber Patrol filed in court, ordering the Swedish ISP to remove the essay describing how to decrypt Cyber Patrol's list of blocked sites: http://peacefire.org/censorware/Cyber_Patrol/cp-complaint.3-15-2000.txt The text of the judge's temporary injunction, ordering the defendants to remove the essay from their Web site, is not online yet. -Bennett bennett@peacefire.org http://www.peacefire.org (425) 649 9024 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2000 21:22:52 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Crimefighters vs. privacy We all know what a terrible thing cybercrime is, right? After all, those nasty hackers keep breaking into corporate sites, vandalizing government homepages, and swiping the occasional credit card number. The obvious culprits in all of this are ... privacy and anonymity? http://civilliberty.about.com/newsissues/civilliberty/library/weekly/aa031300a.htm Life, liberty, and Net anonymity Janet Reno is on a tear against Internet anonymity. Somehow the recent denial-of-service attacks are supposed to buttress the assertion that anonymity online is a "thorny problem" and that law enforcement needs new laws, new budget, and new tools to solve it. Let's get two things straight. First, anonymity is not a thorny problem, it's a basic American Constitutional right. Second, the methods used by the unknown DoS perpetrators to cover their tracks had very little to do with anonymity. http://www.digitalmass.com/columns/internet/0315.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2000 22:25:21 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Copyright Loophole May Let Corporations Duck Scrutiny http://www.oreilly.com/~andyo/ar/filter_copyright.html March 15, 2000 by Andy Oram [1]American Reporter Correspondent CAMBRIDGE, MASS.--Imagine that a company loses a lawsuit for a faulty product that caused deaths or severe damage, but manages to have the court records sealed as part of the settlement. (This routinely happens.) Imagine further that they have to report some details about the case in an annual report. When the report is distributed through standard channels, an enraged shareholder can legally pass it to a reporter and the reporter can quote it. But in the future, a company may choose to email the report, lightly encrypted, and claim a violation of its "technical self-help protection measures" when the truth hits the newsstands. This danger is why we should pay attention to a story of apparently minimal significance that turned up around March 8 in some of the computer trade news sites and online discussion groups. On its surface, the story looked like just another lark by young hackers. But to the discerning eye it opened up a chasm onto corporate irresponsibility. The blustering company in this case was [2]Symantec, a long-time vendor of filtering software called I-Gear that promises to keep kids from viewing sleazy Web pages or engaging in saucy online chats. As always happens when someone seriously evaluates one of these software packages, the results showed that the choices of what to block were arbitrary, unfair, spotty, and sometimes even bizarre. "The blocked pages included a 75 K page written entirely in Latin, a description of a milking machine system written in Spanish, and volumes 4 and 6 of `The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'," wrote Bennett Haselton, who delved into I-Gear's code and posted the http://cryptome.org/igear-fire.htmhttp://cryptome.org/igear-fire.htm"> results on his [3]PeaceFire anti-filter site. Most filter companies are secretive about what sites they block; they claim that the information represents a competitive advantage over other filtering software. Its more likely that revealing the list would cause customers to question the reliability, if not the sanity, of those doing the rating. The question is whether customers have a right to know what the products they use are doing under the hood -- and whether free speech protects those who try to warn them. There are several ways to figure out what Internet sites are being blocked; the simplest is just to try various common Web sites or keywords and see what fails to get through. But for maximum visibility, some programmers like to crack the files of blacklisted Web sites distributed with filtering programs. For this purpose, experts use reverse engineering, a technique for figuring out what code is doing that has exploited by professional computer users ever since programming languages were invented. But reverse engineering and code-cracking have been under attack over the past few years. The campaign began in scattered law clauses and initially appeared to affect only a few small constituencies, such as companies developing products that competed with popular software packages. But experts in computer science predicted from the beginning that such bans would lead to abuses by a wide range of companies trying to avoid having their practices brought to light--and they were right. The first shots fired were in an audio recording act of the early 1990s, and then the massive [4]Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998. The companies pushing these laws planned to use encryption (or scrambling) to keep people from copying their products, and anticipated that someone would be able to break the encryption. Thus, the laws made it a crime to manufacture or distribute any device whose "primary purpose" was to overcome such technical protection measures. As narrowly as the legislators tried to word such prohibitions, they represented an astonishing restriction on the freedom to do research and engineering. It took a couple years for the dire predictions of computer scientists and free-speech advocates to hit. Then the DMCA was employed in a widely publicized lawsuit by the manufacturers of DVDs and the motion picture industry. When someone decrypted their weak controls so that people could play DVDs on Linux systems, these companies undertook the daunting job of prosecuting everyone they could find who posted the offending software on a Web site. Even this show of corporate muscle, however, stayed within the realm of copyright debates. The movie studios and DVD makers simply wanted to control the use of their wares (a goal opposed to the customers' traditional right to make use of a product any way they want). Symantec is threatening to use copyright law for an entirely different end: to keep the public from examining and discussing its actions. Haselton had a sense this was coming; back on February 22 he published an [5]appeal to defend the DVD decryption sites and to fight [6]UCITA, a proposed law that would enshrine the restrictions software companies like to put on reverse engineering. (Almost any commercial software you buy, if you check the license, will prove to include a ban on reverse engineering, but unless UCITA is passed the ban is unsupported by court precedent.) The current threat by Symantec is by no means the first that Haselton has suffered for his efforts to educate filter users. Isn't it bizarre that Symantec claims to hold a copyright on information coded deep in hidden files? Copyright is for things that the creator wants people to see, like this article. In software, copyright has traditionally been used to prevent an employee from jump-starting a new company by reusing code from a previous firm. Copyright is a powerful weapon, so any attempt to broaden its definition is dangerous. Symantec is on shaky ground in claiming that Haselton has misused their intellectual property, whether they invoke copyrights or trade secrets. But we still don't know how the courts will rule on the use of the DMCA, or UCITA (which was passed into law yesterday by the state of Virginia and is under consideration by most other states). Thus, the trend among companies with something to hide is to use intellectual property as their shield. While Symantec wants to keep its filters secret, an automobile manufacturer can't keep a consumer advocate from opening the hood of a car and checking how its engine filters air. But in the future, an automobile manufacturer might embed the complexities of its filtering in a computer chip and use the Symantec defense to keep consumer advocates from investigating its practices. So the story of the I-Gear fight should be bigger news. It's bigger than technical questions of computer security, even bigger than the debate over Internet censorship. We're talking about the right to share information about corporate practices, and that touches everyone. Cyber Rights moderator, Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility--[7]cyber-rights-owner@cpsr.org Editor, O'Reilly & Associates--[8]andyo@oreilly.com Author's [9]home page Other [10]articles in chronological order [11]Index to other articles References 1. http://www.american-reporter.com/ 2. http://www.symantec.com/ 3. http://www.peacefire.org/ 4. http://lcweb.loc.gov/copyright/legislation/hr2281.pdf 5. http://slashdot.org/features/00/02/21/1745232.shtml 6. http://www.badsoftware.com/uccindex.htm 7. mailto:cyber-rights-owner@cpsr.org 8. mailto:andyo@oreilly.com 9. http://www.oreilly.com/people/staff/andyo/index.html 10. http://www.oreilly.com/people/staff/andyo/professional/article.html 11. http://www.oreilly.com/people/staff/andyo/policy/index.html This article can be redistributed online, with author and newspaper attributions intact, for non-profit use. For printing or commercial use, please contact Joe Shea, publisher of the American Reporter, at JoeShea1@ix.netcom.com. ------------------------------ From: Stanley Cline Subject: Re: CPP, ATM Surcharges (was F.C.C. Debates Changes to Cell Phones) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2000 20:41:13 -0500 Organization: by area code and prefix (NPA-NXX) Reply-To: sc1@roamer1.org On Thu, 16 Mar 2000 01:02:53 -0500, Walter Dnes wrote: > I seem to remember a news item some time ago about Bell-Atlantic (or > was it SW Bell??) offering an option to block *ALL* 3rd-party charges > on an account. This is starting to look like a very good idea. BellSouth offered blocking of third-party billing for nonpublished numbers (only -- it was in conjunction with "not releasing nonpub information to other telecom companies". I got a blurb about it in one of my bills when I had a nonpub number [I again have a nonpub number]) a few years ago; I don't know if they will still do it. There are problems with blocking third-party billing, though... a) it blocks dial-arounds completely, unless you have a direct-billed account with the dial-around (something most of them don't offer for dial-around-only service) b) if you have a LEC calling card, it makes it usable ONLY with that LEC (but generally, LEC cards are poor deals anyway) c) (most importantly, and often misunderstood, IMO) it blocks calls from prisons/jails completely (many people who have switched to CLECs -- who usually do not handle any third-party billing -- have found this to be a problem. IMO, in the absence of billed party preference or prepaid calling arrangements, prison calls should be EXEMPT from third-party billing blocking arrangements, and CLECs should be REQUIRED to handle third-party billing for such calls.) Stanley Cline -- sc1 at roamer1 dot org -- http://www.roamer1.org/ ------------------------------ From: Judith Oppenheimer Subject: CORRECTION Subject: Toll-Free 866 & 855, Delayed Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 08:53:50 -0500 3rd line 1st para > having discovered that some number reservations were completed... (not > 'completely') out of order. Explanation: Every entry into the IMS queue is time stamped when it hits the system. Entries leave the IMS queue first in first out, based on that time stamp. Entries then route to one of three 'regions': MGI, Dialup or GUI. With parallel processing among the three, processing time in the higher-volume MGI region can take longer than in the Dialup region, so that infrequently, a request for the same number from two RespOrgs in these regions, can hit the reserve queue in reverse order of entry the IMS queue. Having survived a challenge at the FCC regarding the unfairness of MGI use because it places most RespOrgs at a significant disadvantage to AT&T, MCI, Sprint and one or two others (the FCC decided it is fair because all RespOrgs have the option to use the gazillion-dollar MGI system), MGI users now found the tables turned. And they didn't like it one bit. Judith -- the original message is reprinted here -- From: Judith Oppenheimer Subject: Toll-Free 866 & 855, Delayed Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2000 11:02:17 -0500 The SMS/800 Number Administration Committee (SNAC) decided last week to delay 866 and 855, currently scheduled April 1 and April 8 rollout, having discovered that some number reservations were completely out of order. In an usual twist, the "disadvantaged" RespOrgs are high-volume "MGI" users that can submit multiple requests with no wait time, and program requests ahead of time. "On-Line" and "GUI" Users are limited with fewer request options; wait time; and manual data entry. At issue is FCC-mandated "first come first serve". Measured in nanoseconds, the ramifications can be significant, particularly regarding prized vanity numbers. Judith Oppenheimer, 1 800 The Expert, 212 684-7210 mailto:joppenheimer@icbtollfree.com Publisher of ICB Toll Free News: http://icbtollfree.com Publisher of WhoSells800.com: http://whosells800.com Moderator TOLLFREE-L: http://www.egroups.com/group/tollfree-l/info.html President of ICB Consultancy: http://1800TheExpert.com: 800 # Acquisition Management, Lost 800 # Retrieval, Litigation Support, ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 15:31:03 -0400 From: Jud Wolfskill Subject: Book Announcement -- Hurley The following is a book which readers of this list might find of interest. For more information please visit http://mitpress.mit.edu/promotions/books/HURFPS98 The First 100 Feet Options for Internet and Broadband Access edited by Deborah Hurley and James H. Keller The growth of the Internet has been propelled in significant part by user investment in infrastructure: computers, internal wiring, and the connection to the Internet provider. This "bottom-up" investment minimizes the investment burden facing providers. New technologies such as wireless and data transmission over power lines, as well as deregulation of telecommunications and electric utilities, will provide new opportunities for user investment in intelligent infrastructure as leverage points for Internet and broadband access. Recasting the "problem of the last 100 feet" as "the opportunity of the first 100 feet," this book challenges individuals, businesses, and policymakers to rethink fundamental issues in telecommunications policy. The contributors look at options for Internet and broadband access from the perspective of homeowners, apartment complexes, and small businesses. They evaluate the opportunities and obstacles for bottom-up infrastructure development and the implications for traditional and alternative providers at the neighborhood, regional, and national levels. Already, some argue that Internet service will become the common denominator platform on which all other services can be carried. Deborah Hurley is Director of the Information Infrastructure Project at Harvard University's John F. Kennedy School of Government. James H. Keller is Associate Director of the Information Infrastructure Project. A Publication of the Harvard Information Infrastructure Project 6 x 9, 300 pp., ISBN 0-262-58160-4 paperback | Jud Wolfskill ||||||| Associate Publicist Phone: (617)253-2079 ||||||| MIT Press Fax: (617) 253-1709 ||||||| Five Cambridge Center E-mail: wolfskil@mit.edu | Cambridge, MA 02142-1493 http://mitpress.mit.edu ------------------------------ Reply-To: Indego/CTC, Inc. From: Indego/CTC, Inc. Subject: US-VA: Telecom Positions Open Organization: Indego/CTC, Inc. Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 20:36:39 GMT Indego/CTC, Inc. is aggressively seeking personnel with the following qualifications and skills requirements. If you are interested please send me your latest resume. Please make sure that you meet or exceed all the requirements. This is a very hot item and we will be interviewing next week for this position. Position is located in Arlington VA. Qualified individuals will monitor network events using various surveillance systems & tools. Candidate must have experience with data networks, digital transmission, troubleshooting and knowledge of network elements to dispatch personnel for on-site maintenance. Knowledge of ATM, TDM, & facilities surveillance network services is required. Candidate must be willing to work some overtime, weekends & holidays. Shift work may be required. Candidate must be willing to work some overtime, weekends and holidays. Shift work may be required. Candidate must possess 2 years experience using various surveillance system & tools such as Network EMS plus test systems. Experience in services related ATM, TDM, and Frame Relay. Knowledge of SONET a plus. Background Investigation and Drug testing may be requested. Please don't hesitate to call me or email me for more details ... Thank you in advance and I truly look forward to hearing from you ... Regards, Thomas A. Baer Executive Vice President - Indego/CTC, Inc. Phone: (703) 626-9797 Fax: (703) 830-0710 Please Visit our Web Site at US-VA: TELECOM POSITIONS OPEN ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V20 #25 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Mar 17 23:29:32 2000 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id XAA24829; Fri, 17 Mar 2000 23:29:32 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 23:29:32 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200003180429.XAA24829@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #26 TELECOM Digest Fri, 17 Mar 2000 23:29:00 EST Volume 20 : Issue 26 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: North American Numbering Plan Proposals - New Discussion (georgep) ACLU Calls White House Report on Internet Crime Law Enforcement (Solomon) Customer Conundrum (Monty Solomon) Faster Telecoms (Pedro M.) Re: CPP, ATM Surcharges (was F.C.C. Debates Changes (Pedro M.) Altigen (Johnny) Number ID Numbers (Martin Hannigan) Re: Two Flight Attendants Appeal Search of Their Home Computers (M Simpson) Re: Two Flight Attendants Appeal Search of Their Home Computers (J McHarry) Re: Anti-Spam E-mail Suit Tossed Out (John McHarry) Telecom Technology Map (Guy Gilliland) Seeking Techies With OC48/Sonet Equip Experience (JK) Moving - Systems Available (Illinois Press Association) Re: F.C.C. Debates Changes to Cell Phone Fees (Ken Weaverling) ADSL Help Needed (Eddie Yeung) 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-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 259 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 805-545-5115 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@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: hyperarchive.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 the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: georgep_on_ca@my-deja.com Subject: Re: North American Numbering Plan Proposals - New Discussion Forum Date: Sat, 04 Mar 2000 21:16:16 GMT Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy. Hi, I have some concerns/questions about your plan. Why have 8/7 digit ranges? Does USA geographical area include US territories ie. PR, US Virgin Islands etc. 10xxxxx - Carrier Access Codes 11xx - Special Features ie *69/1169 12xx - Range for 8 digit local numbers in USA 13xx - Range for 8 digit local numbers in USA 14xx - Range for 8 digit local numbers in USA/US Territories 15xx - Range for Canada 16xx - Range for other countries 17xx - Cellular/PCS/Pager Range 170 - Special Services/Cell Phones 171x - Range for cell phone at national rate ie caller pays (USA) 172x - Range for cell phone at national rate ie caller pays (USA) 173x - Range for cell at nat rate ie caller pays (USA/territories) 174x - Range for cell phones at national rate (Canada) 175x - Range for cell phones other countries 176x - future usage 177x - future usage 178x - future usage 199x - future usage 18xx - Range for Toll Free servicecs 190x - Range for premium services 192x - future usage 193x - future usage 194x - future usage 195x - future usage 196x - future usage 197x - future usage 198x - future usage 199x - future usage Note that we do not really need 192x-199x for "900" numbers such a range could be uaged by ie. toll free, cells, or area code hungry areas when the area codes run out. This plan would use the 4-4-4 plan ie 4 digit area code, exchange, and extension. This is to keep a uniform system in the NANPA. In article , Fred Goldstein wrote: {snip} Expanding the North American Numbering Plan Fred R. Goldstein Arthur D Little Inc. 11/99 Executive Summary A method is shown by which the North American Numbering Plan, currently based on a 3+3+4 digit scheme created in 1947, is replaced by one with a greater capacity, more mnemonic number assignment, capacity for new services, and eventually 8-digit local dialing. This plan is implemented in six phases, with all changes having a "permissive" period and no "flag days" in which dialing plans suddenly become incompatible. Various "wish list" items that have been requested by the public and others are supported. Definitions X - Any digit 0-9 N - Any digit 2-9 R - Any digit 2-8 Y - The digits 1, 0 NPA – Numbering Plan Area, or Area Code. Prefix – The 3-digit number identifying the rate center following an area code. SAC – Service Access Code (e.g., 800, 900) NXX – The current format for both NPA and prefix. Goals and design basis The North American Numbering Plan has been in place since 1947, and is based upon a well-known 3-3-4 digit numbering and dialing plan. The American public has grown accustomed to this plan and it is embedded in many places, mostly outside of the telephone network, where 10-digit fixed-length telephone numbers are stored in countless databases. But the rate of new area code assignment has been quite rapid, leading to the potential for exhaust in the 5-10 year time frame. The Alliance for Telecommunications Industry Solutions (ATIS) has been working on numbering plan issues, but its efforts to date have been aimed mainly at creating an extension of the current plan, rather than migrating to a different one. ATIS appears to begin from the assumption that the new plan should retain as much as possible of the old plan, removing 7-digit local dialing in the process. While such a change is inevitable in the short term, an alternative is presented that leads to allows most calls to eventually be dialed with far fewer than the 11-12 digits required by the existing ATIS candidate plans. This proposed plan is inspired more by the new United Kingdom plan than by the North American plan that is nearing exhaust. In the UK plan, the first digit after the leading "0" (an escape digit roughly corresponding to the "1" in North America) indicates the type of code that follows, allowing the user to immediately recognize for instance "freephone", geographic, caller-pays wireless and premium-charge numbers. Unlike the UK plan, number length remains deterministic; the originating switch can determine the total number of digits to be dialed by analyzing the first few digits. This proposed plan leaves almost everything at a fixed 11 digits following an escape digit (which remains 1), while allowing local dialing to be accommodated with 8 digits, which should suffice to prevent splits and overlays in reasonably large areas, and even allows 7-digit local dialing in places that have a small enough number of prefix codes. This plan is designed around its end state, from which a transition plan is created. This allows the focus to be on the long-term plan, rather than constraining the next NANP by compatibility with the existing plan. The transition plan phases in the new plan and phases out the old plan in a manner that avoids interruption. The worst case dialing scenario is a brief (e.g., one year) period in which 11 digits will need to be dialed for local calls; however, there will be so many overlays in place by then which require at least 10-digit dialing anyway that this will not be a major inconvenience. Existing 7-digit and 10-digit numbers are algorithmically converted to an 8-digit format, so no numbers are otherwise changed except by addition of a digit to the prefix. Like all other changes, this is initially implemented in a permissive mode. End-state numbering plan The plan allows digits 2-9 to be the first digits of an 8-digit (or, in some areas, 7-digit) local telephone number. The digit 0 retains its significance as an escape for special handling (international, operator, collect, etc.) and the digit 1 remains the escape digit for multiple other purposes. All calls using an area code (other than the old codes being replaced) must make use of the leading 1; the British custom of including it with the area code in written representations of the number is recommended. The end-state post-transition plan summarizes as per this table: 12xx + 8 digits Geographic USA area codes (8-digit local dialing) 13xx + 8 digits Geographic USA area codes (8-digit local dialing) except 137xx + 7 digits Geographic USA area codes with 7-digit local dialing 14xx + 8 digits and 14xxx + 7 digits Geographic non-USA area codes; country-determined length (Canada 14{0-3}) 15 + 5-10 digits Nongeographic numbers, multiple uses 16 + 10 digits If not sharing 15+ space, Calling-party-pays services (esp. wireless); else reserved for future use 17 + 10 digits Carrier-specific numbers except 178 178 + 9 digits Private numbering plans (corporate networks, etc. 18 + 10 digits Free-to-caller services (800, etc.) 19 + 10 digits Premium-rated services (900, etc.) Note that the second digit after the leading 1 may not be "9" during the transition interval (see below). Thus for example the 12xx space does not include, at least initially, 129x. Certain other restrictions and exceptions apply, as noted below. Geographic USA numbers The 12/13 space allows well over 100 new-plan area codes with 8-digit local dialing (most of 1200-1289; 1300-1369). These eventually replace, rather than supplement, the existing area codes. This allows many metropolitan areas to consolidate previous splits and overlays into a simplified dialing plan. Existing 10-digit geographic numbers (NPA-NXX-XXXX) will become 8-digit numbers by inserting a unique digit {0-4, 6-8} in the second position of the prefix (NRXX), with the R digit being mapped to which existing NPA the prefix code is in. Thus if current 617 and 978 are merged into 1267, then 617-234 may become 1267-2634 (the area code 1267 is not dialed for local calls) and 781-234 may merge into it as 1267-2734. The selection of the second digit for the conversion of existing NXX codes is not always algorithmic, because existing NPAs to be consolidated may overlap in any of the three positions (e.g., 508 consolidates with 978 so the third digit is not appropriate there, but 310 consolidates with 323 so the first digit is not appropriate there). Nonetheless it is uniform within a region. The second digit "5" is not recommended because of potential conflicts with 950 carrier access codes. It should be noted that prefix-pooling on the thousands-digit basis is retained, so that a given prefix code identifies a rate center, not a rate center and assigning local carrier. Thus 1267-2734-1xxx numbers may be assigned by one LEC and 1267-2734-2xxx numbers by another, if complete (unassigned) number pooling has not already been adopted. The 137 space allows up to 100 area codes to retain 7-digit dialing. Relatively few places are likely to have few enough rate centers to only need 7-digit dialing, especially in the United States, but the option is retained. 138 is reserved for expansion of either the 7-digit or 8-digit space, as required. Geographic non-USA numbers The 14 space is used for non-USA areas. Canada might, for instance, be assigned 140-143 and choose to use 140x-142x for 8-digit local areas and 143xx for 7-digit local areas. Non-USA Caribbean points, billed at international rates, would then be assigned area codes in the 144-148 range, and could choose 7 or 8 digit dialing; with 7-digit dialing, the NPA would be one digit longer (148xx vs. 145x). It is assumed that most of these countries will retain 7-digit dialing. Nongeographic numbers The 15 space is used for nongeographic numbers, some with a total length of 11 digits after the 1. These include personal numbers like those once assigned in the 500 block, but can also be used for data services and other applications in which the caller pays a predictable usage-based rate. This might be local, corresponding for instance to the UK's 0345 or existing American LATA-wide "oddball" numbers, or nonlocal; such services should probably be assigned different subsets of the 15 space. This numbering space may also be appropriate for data services that use E.164 numbers, such as B-ISDN/ATM/SMDS etc. The parsing of this space is not necessarily on a 3-4-4 or 4-3-4 basis, since it is never a home area. A subset of this space (such as 151-152) is reserved for short code dialing (see below). Calling Party Pays The 16 space is suggested for calling-party-pays services, with a total length of 11 digits following the 1. This is the norm for wireless in many countries; the number space is divided among wireless carriers and each carrier’s tariff to the caller is known ahead of time. Thus the caller knows the rate based on the prefix. For example, a carrier may be assigned the use of 16558 (plus 7 digits) for which it charges a rate of 15 cents per minute. This should overcome most objections to CPP services which, within the current NANP, could lead to "stealth billing" abuses. The 16 space is not necessarily reserved for wireless/CMRS, but that is the most obvious intended use. Note: The demand for nongeographic (15) and CPP (16) numbers is speculative. An optional variation is to consolidate these two somewhat similar service classes behind a single space , reserving the other combination for future use. Thus nongeographic wireline numbers could be assigned 150 up and CPP numbers 158 down, leaving 16 for future expansion. Carrier-specific numbering The 17 space is used for carrier-specific purposes, which currently makes use of SAC 700. The total length of these numbers is 11 digits following the 1, as with most other services, but there is no need for specific parsing of this space on a 3-4-4 basis. The 178 space is specifically reserved for subscriber private numbering plans (access to ETNs, VPNs, etc.) and should not be used by carriers. (Thus a PBX need not for instance dial "8" for ETN and "9" for PSTN numbers.) Toll-free The 18 space is used for free-to-caller services, again with a total length of 11 digits following the 1. This allows a dramatic in the number of 800-like numbers. With judicious assignment, this space is sufficient to allow all PSTN subscribers to have their own toll-free number, if they choose to accept such calls. Premium-rated services The 19 space is used for premium-rated services, with a total length of 11 digits following the 1. This is akin to current 900 numbers, for which the charge may be unpredictable and which many subscribers might wish to block. Existing 7-digit premium intraLATA numbers (540, 976, etc.) should be consolidated into this space. Restrictions In all cases for number 12-19, the third dialed digit (second following the leading 1) must not be "9"; this is reserved for transitional purposes. Initially it will be used to accommodate old-style area codes; its future use is reserved for later expansion. Thus for example 12xx for geographic area codes includes 1200-1289, not 129x. While special service codes of the form N11 do not require a leading 1, the pattern 1N11 is reserved to avoid confusion and to permit, for instance, 1411 to be used as an alias for 411, and to reduce false 911 calls. However the dialing pattern 1N00 is not reserved; current N00 service access codes are superceded. Transition plan Getting from the current 3-3-4 plan to this plan (basically 3-4-4 with optional 4-3-4 subsets) requires a number of steps. The following table illustrates them. The allowable formats for dialing (shown by X) are phased in and out in steps. Existing numbers are transitioned by using the reserved digit 9 in the second position of the NPA. Thus where n9xx is shown below, an example would be existing NPA 617 which becomes {1}6917. No new NPAs may have 9 in the second position. Pattern old plan step A step B step C step D step E step F 7d X X 10d X (locally) X X X 1+10d X X X X n9xx+7d X X 1n9xx+7d X X X X X 1nRn+8d X X X 8d X X Step A represents the first stage of transition, wherein the new-form transitional area codes become permissive with a leading 1 (for example, {1}617 becomes optionally 16917). This introduces no conflicts so it could be done at any time, but realistically will take a few years for supporting software changes to be made within the network. During this time 7-digit local dialing may still be permitted, but the widespread use of overlays will make it less common. Ten-digit or 11-digit local dialing and 11-digit (1-10) toll dialing is retained. Step B is when 7-digit local dialing is finally disabled, to remove potential conflicts with new-format numbers before they are introduced. By doing this as a separate step, there is no "flag day" or any period of time when a given dialing pattern is ambiguous. Step B is suggested to occur roughly two years after Step A, allowing ample time for embedded systems to transition from 7-digit to 1x9xx+7d local (and toll) dialing. This could however be sped up, and if mandatory 10-digit local dialing is already in effect nationwide, this step becomes moot. Step C introduces n9xx+7d transitional dialing for local numbers, without requiring a leading 1. This is strictly a short-term palliative to allow old-format local numbers to be manually dialed with 11 digits rather than 12, while 10-digit and 11-digit dialing of the old area codes is permitted but deprecated. Step C is suggested to occur a short time, up to say a year, after Step B. During the interval between steps C and D, 4-digit prefix codes are announced to supercede 3-digit codes, inserting a second digit as outlined above. Step D marks the cutover of the new numbering plan, allowing an expansion in the available pool of numbers. At this time, 12-digit dialing (1nxx+8 digits) is introduced using newly-assigned area codes in front of 8-digit local numbers. 10-digit and 1+10 digit dialing of old-format numbers is disabled. Old area codes and numbers are still reachable using transitional n9xx+7 digit dialing, both with and without the leading 1, but the n9xx+7 format is on notice for discontinuance. Step D is suggested to occur roughly a year after Step C. Step E marks the introduction of 8-digit local dialing, and the reintroduction of 7-digit dialing in smaller areas. The second digit of 8-digit local numbers may not be a 9, in order to remove a conflict with n9xx dialing of transitional 11-digit numbers. Areas retaining 7-digit local numbers (137xx+7) must disable n9xx dialing (in favor of 1n9xx) of local numbers before 7-digit dialing can be reinstituted. At this stage, autodialers and embedded applications are able to safely use the new 8-digit permanent numbers for local dialing, while manual dialing can use either transitional 1n9xx+7d or 8-digit local numbers. New numbers are assigned in 8-digit format. Step E is suggested to occur a year after Step D. Step F marks the end of transitional dialing. The old 1n9xx area codes are disabled and that part of the numbering plan space is reclaimed for future use. Only 8-digit local (seven digits in some areas) and new-NPA dialing is permitted. This step is suggested to occur five years after Step E. Additional features and special dialing sequences The 11+ dialing space is reserved for its current application, feature code entry. The 10+ dialing space is reserved for its current application, carrier access codes. The 555 prefix in each area code is transitioned to 5955 while 5555 is also reserved as an alias. The N11 dialing pattern for Special Service Codes (911, 411, etc.) is retained. Feature Group B carrier access codes The 950 pseudoprefix for Feature Group B carrier access codes is retained and expanded to 9n50, with the proviso that the n is not a 5. Thus 9250, 9350 et al are likewise reserved for access code use. These are not part of any area code, so a switch seeing an initial sequence of 950 or 9x50 will recognize a total access code length of 7 or 8 digits respectively. As a further restriction on the numbering plan, if 3-digit prefix codes are converted to 4-digit format by inserting a "5" in the second position, prefix codes 900-909 become ambiguous; old prefix conversions should thus avoid the use of 5 unless all 90x prefix codes can be removed from that area. After Step F, new prefix codes may be assigned 95xx provided that the xx is not 50. Short codes Short code dialing permits a nongeographic number to be less than the full length. Some subscribers use 950-series carrier access codes for this today; 555-series numbers in the old plan are likewise reserved. This is a natural function for the 15 space. Thus for instance short codes numbers can be assigned in the range 151 + 4 digits and 152 + 6 digits, while 150 is followed by 9 digits to make the usual 11-digit number (after the 1) length. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2000 23:40:18 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: ACLU Calls White House Report on Internet Crime Law Enforcement http://www.aclu.org/news/2000/n030900a.html ACLU Calls White House Report on Internet Crime Law Enforcement "Wish List" Thursday, March 9, 2000 WASHINGTON-- A White House report on blocking Internet crime contains dangerous recommendations that would strip away basic privacy, free speech and free press protections, the American Civil Liberties Union warned today. The report, scheduled to be made public this morning at Attorney General Janet Reno's weekly press briefing, "raises a number of civil liberties concerns," the ACLU said in a letter, including suggestions for stripping away anonymity online, lowering the privacy threshold for telephone as well as online communications, and threatening laws protecting free speech rights of anyone using a computer, including news reporters. "The Attorney General and Congress should view this report for what it is -- a law enforcement wish list," said Barry Steinhardt, Associate Director of the national ACLU and an author of the letter. "If our government truly wants to combat cybercrime, then it should look to build up our defenses through more secure networks and encryption rather than stripping away rights." Entitled "The Electronic Frontier: the Challenge of Unlawful Conduct Involving the Use of the Internet," the report was prepared by the President's Working Group on Unlawful Conduct On the Internet, a group that includes FBI Director Louis Freeh, Treasury Secretary Larry Summers, Commerce Secretary William Daley, and representatives from the military, DEA, and Secret Service. Yet despite the report's sweeping recommendations for dealing with cybercrime, the ACLU said, nowhere does it document the extent or threat of such crime or explain why the threat is so serious as to warrant dramatically expanded police powers. Gregory T. Nojeim, a Legislative Counsel with the ACLU's Washington National Office, said that some legal protections may indeed be outdated, but that the law needs to catch up with, not dismantle, our privacy protections. He particularly took issue with the report's reference to privacy and anonymity as a "thorny issue." "Anonymity on the Internet is not a 'thorny issue,' it is a constitutional right," Nojeim said. "Law enforcement and national security agencies want to outlaw the digital equivalent of pen names." The ACLU letter, sent yesterday to Reno, was signed by Steinhardt, Nojeim and Laura W. Murphy, director of the ACLU's Washington National Office. The letter is available online at: http://www.aclu.org/congress/l030800a.html. Copyright 2000, The American Civil Liberties Union ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 00:24:29 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Customer Conundrum March 13, 2000 by Upside staff The first conundrum of marketing in the Internet age: To serve customers better, a company needs to extract their preferences. But they usually won't divulge their preferences until they have a relationship with the company. Pick any facet of the relationship -- wooing, tracking, communicating -- and the Internet complicates it. With this special omnibus feature, UpsideToday simplifies the customer-relationship challenge on the Net. Just as airline passengers have willingly subjected themselves to metal detectors as a tradeoff against being hijacked, customers will trade off information for better service. http://www.upside.com/texis/mvm/ebiz/story?id=38c94cfd0 ------------------------------ From: Pedro M. Subject: Faster Telecoms Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 22:48:38 +0100 You can see the next links about telecoms using powerlines : http://www.mediafusionllc.net/northamerica/main/home.html (2.5Gb/s). http://www.ipcf.org/ ( Organization ) Double-way satellite to connect to the Internet ( without use telephone, only satellite ) : www.web-sat.com All the best. Agrupacin para la Devolucin del Bucle de Abonado ( A.D.B.A ) http://pagina.de/adbao tambin http://www.bucledeabonado.es.org/ Listas : onolista, bucle, electricas ------------------------------ From: Pedro M. Subject: RE: CPP, ATM Surcharges (was F.C.C. Debates Changes) Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 22:52:48 +0100 Like in some European countries, it's convenient the user can utilize carrier ( operator ) selection and preselection in mobile phones. All the best. ------------------------------ From: Johnny Subject: Altigen Organization: Giganews.Com - Premium News Outsourcing Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2000 23:54:11 -0800 Anyone seen these switches. I would love to hear experiences. Johnny johnhen@yahoo.com (C) Those who should know better Email me, it's good for you! ------------------------------ From: hannigan@clue-store.fugawi.net (Martin Hannigan) Subject: Number ID Numbers Date: 17 Mar 2000 02:44:57 GMT Reply-To: hannigan@fugawi.net Are RBOCS legally required to provide CLEC's with the telephone numbers of the switch that will read back the number you are calling from for ID purposes? Especially if you are a "switchless" CLEC. If I remember correctly, the switch did the read back. IN a VOIP network, how would I accomplish this? I know you'd have the SS7 links for the data. Is this a specific class in SS7? ------------------------------ From: Matt Simpson Subject: Re: Two Flight Attendants Appeal Search of Their Home Computers Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2000 11:02:47 -0500 Organization: University of Kentucky Computing Services In article , Anonymous User wrote: > One word: e-n-c-r-y-p-t-i-o-n > Encryption won't prevent the phuzz from seizing your box but it will put > a serious crimp in their getting anything incriminating out of it. Yeah, but that's not the point. Being incriminated isn't the problem. The problem is being subjected to the inconvenience and hardship of having your computer seized, and possibly trashed, in an abuse of power by the gummint. And encryption doesn't prevent that. In fact, they're likely to use that as "evidence" that you're trying to hide something: "If he's innocent, why is he encrypting stuff?" I'm not agreeing with that mentality, and I think citizens should be free to encrypt to their heart's content without fear of repercussion. But the simple fact is that just encrypting your data won't protect you from this kind of abuse. Matt Simpson -- Obsolete MVS Guy University Of Kentucky, Lexington, KY ------------------------------ From: John McHarry Subject: Re: Two Flight Attendants Appeal Search of Their Home Computers Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2000 19:48:37 -0500 On Tue, 14 Mar 2000 20:44:01 -0500, John McHarry wrote: > Perhaps if some of those others in turn subpoenaed ALL the computers, > backups, etc. of the law firms involved it would dampen such tactics. > After all, how can the firm operate while all its schedules, billing > systems, and so forth are being copied onto punched paper tape? > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I admit it sounds like a good idea, > but it just won't work. Large companies and their attornies are > entitled to make up all the lies they want about you, but the same > is not true in reverse. Most of the law firms involved would get > their counsel into court very fast to squelch any ideas you had > like that. Just try it if you think it will work. PAT] I don't hope to have the opportunity. On the other hand, what I was proposing was multiple attacks by affected third parties, presuming they have a claim to own email on those computers. Ideally they could each file in their home jurisdictions. The intent isn't really to win but to counter intimidate. ------------------------------ From: John McHarry Subject: Re: Anti-Spam E-mail Suit Tossed Out Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2000 19:56:55 -0500 On 15 Mar 2000 06:15:46 GMT, tbetz@panix.com (Tom Betz) wrote: > Quoth Monty Solomon in > : >> by Peter Lewis >> Seattle Times technology reporter >> In the war of words over unsolicited commercial e-mail, better known >> as spam, an Oregon man has won a victory over the state of Washington. >> But the battle may not be over, as the attorney general ponders an >> appeal. >> The victory came when King County Superior Court Judge Palmer Robinson > Would that be palmer.robinson@metrokc.gov ? >> dismissed a case in which the state charged Jason Heckel with >> violating Washington's anti-spam law. Robinson said the law, generally >> regarded as the nation's toughest, violates the interstate-commerce >> clause of the U.S. Constitution. Reminds me of the time PAT took up the cause of the little old lady whose phone number was mistakenly printed on the stationery of a probation department. They became a LOT more cooperative after PAT published their number and suggested that the Telecom Digest community call it asking for her. They soon had the stuff reprinted and set up an operator to Very Politely intercept her legitimate calls and forward them to her until things quieted down. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2000 17:41:36 -0600 From: Guy Gilliland Organization: The Boston Consulting Group Subject: Telecom Technology Map I'm involved in a project where I'm charged with developing a detailed map of all technologies relevant to the telecom industry. I'm using the OSI model as a framework. Does anyone have any information or can you point me to information like this. I've seen several posters of the communications protocols arranged on the OSI model. What I really need is this map of protocols in editable form so that I can augment it. Also I need a mapping of hardware technology as well. Thank you very much for any help. Guy Gilliland gilliland.guy@bcg.com p.s. Please email me your responses. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2000 16:23:16 -0800 From: JK Subject: Seeking Techies With OC48/Sonet Equip Experience Organization: SBC Internet Services If you are currently seeking contract opportunities in the Bay Area, please contact sylviah@procom.ca ------------------------------ From: Illinois Press Association Reply-To: ipaads@springnet1.com Subject: Moving - Systems Available Organization: bCandid - Powering the world's discussions - http://bCandid.com Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2000 23:19:34 GMT The Illinois Press Association, a statewide organization of newspapers, is moving to a new building and has 20 phones (mostly Panasonics) and a Panasonic voice mail system we're trying to get rid of. We have no idea who to contact. Both are currently on Ebay as items No. 285317562 and No. 285282029. Swim in and steal 'em; we just need to get rid of them when we leave our current rental facilities. Ron DeBrock IPA Communications Manager ------------------------------ From: weave@hopi.dtcc.edu (Ken Weaverling) Subject: Re: F.C.C. Debates Changes to Cell Phone Fees Date: 16 Mar 2000 19:21:07 -0500 Organization: Delaware Technical and Community College In article , David Jensen wrote: > Anyone here expect AOSlime and other dishonest resellers as the first > in line to be selling calling party pays? Try Bell Atlantic. I live in northern Delaware and this is a "test market" for CPP. The billboards advertising it are pretty misleading. They shout "never pay for incoming cell calls ever again." and in small print (on a billboard no less) it says that incoming parties pay 25 cents/min or 35/min when using a credit card. The rates are not totally out of line when compared to subscriber rates. My "single rate east" plan is 59.95 for 600 mins and .20 min over that. Ken Weaverling (ken @ weaverling.org) WHOIS: KJW http://www.weaverling.org/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2000 10:01:33 +1100 From: Eddie Yeung Subject: ADSL Help Needed Hey Patrick, I'm a engineering cadet for a telco in Australia and have been trying to get as much information as I can about ADSL. Although the site has a lot of info, you must be at least on a network engineer level to find certain information. If there are certain sites or a paper that you can direct me to I would be most appreciative. Cheers, Eddie [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, everyone, let's see what we can do for Eddiein helping him to learn about ADSL. Thanks. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V20 #26 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat Mar 18 22:18:22 2000 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id WAA04047; Sat, 18 Mar 2000 22:18:22 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2000 22:18:22 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200003190318.WAA04047@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #27 TELECOM Digest Sat, 18 Mar 2000 22:18:00 EST Volume 20 : Issue 27 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson PFIR Statement on Content Control and Ratings (Lauren Weinstein) Re: A Constitutional Right to Anonymous Speech? (Mel Beckman) Heavens-Above (Mike Pollock) Re: Anti-Spam E-mail Suit Tossed Out (Alan Boritz) Re: Anti-Spam E-mail Suit Tossed Out (Steve Sobol) Re: CPP, ATM Surcharges (was F.C.C. Debates Changes) (Walter Dnes) High Speed Bandwidth to the Workspace (Wiring65) Cell Phones May Upgrade Automatically (Mike Pollock) Re: Iridium (Bonfire of the Manatees) 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-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 259 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 805-545-5115 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@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: hyperarchive.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 the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2000 21:00:28 -0500 From: Lauren Weinstein Subject: PFIR Statement on Content Control and Ratings PFIR Statement on Content Control and Ratings (http://www.pfir.org/statements/2000-03-18) PFIR - People For Internet Responsibility - http://www.pfir.org [ To subscribe or unsubscribe to/from this list, please send the command "subscribe" or "unsubscribe" respectively (without the quotes) in the body of an e-mail to "pfir-request@pfir.org". ] 2000-03-18 Greetings. One of the most contentious issues on the Internet and its World Wide Web is the rising furor surrounding the filtering and rating of site content. It has all the elements of a classic "B" movie: politics, religion, sex, and even some dandy sci-fi aspects such as runaway technology. But filtering and content matters far transcend the importance of an afternoon's idle entertainment, and strike to the very heart of some crucial concerns of both individuals and society. The Internet has created the potential for information distribution and access without respect to organizational size, jurisdictions, or geographic boundaries. These abilities are unparalleled in the human experience. Even such fundamental developments as the printing press seem to pale in scope when compared with the vast quantity and reach of information the Internet can provide. The Internet and Web are just tools of course, and as such do not possess intrinsic ethical or moral sensibilities. The available materials cover the entire range from the vile to the sublime. But assigning any particular page of information, photos, or other Internet data to a specific point along that continuum is a highly individualistic experience, with reasonable and honorable people disagreeing over virtually every category. It is into this unprecedented environment that the world's populace has found itself suddenly thrust, and the urge to attempt the implementation of "simple" solutions to a very complex set of circumstances is proving to be overwhelming. As usual, however, we're finding that the simple approaches are often wrought with problems of their own. The core issue revolves around the desire and abilities of individuals, organizations, and governments to rate, filter, or otherwise control the Internet content that may be viewed by any given individual. In some cases, their specific concerns may be fundamentally laudable, in other cases, highly suspect. Countries with a history of censoring political speech, for example, have been quick to attempt the implementation of proxy servers and other controls to try stem the flow of such communications. But this trend is not limited only to governments with a history of draconian information controls, but also has appeared in such enlightened democracies as Australia, where government-mandated rating and blocking requirements, aimed primarily at "offensive" entertainment material, have been implemented. Similar government edicts are on the rise within the European Union and other areas of the world. In the United States, these movements are also present. The use of content filtering software programs is on the rise by private and public organizations, municipalities in their offices, schools, and libraries, and so on. Sometimes these filters are directed at children's use of computers, but often adults as well are required to abide by the programs' restrictions. The U.S. Congress has twice attempted to mandate the use of such filters by public institutions, linking such usage to federal funding. These mandates have so far been rejected by the federal court system, though the legal wrangling continues. Even if such filtering programs accurately performed their stated purposes, the information control, freedom of speech, and related issues would be formidable at best. But making matters even worse is the flawed nature of these filtering methodologies, and in many cases the secretiveness with which they implement their content filtering decisions. Filtering can be applied to nearly any type of Internet content, from e-mail to Web pages. It can be implemented via automated systems, typically using keyword searching to try find "offending" materials. This tends to be the most laughable filtering technique, since its false positive rate is immensely high. Web pages mentioning the term "Superbowl XXX" have been blocked as pornography by such systems. Even the recent "PFIR Statement on Spam" (http://www.pfir.org/statements/2000-03-11) was rejected by some sites running filters that declared the PFIR message to *be* spam--possibly because terms such as "multi-level marketing" were included within the discussion of spam problems. We don't really know what triggered the rejections -- you're usually not told specifically what content in a message or Web page was deemed unacceptable by the programs. While controlling spam is certainly a positive goal, it's obvious that you cannot accurately determine the context of words via such crude techniques. Systems that are keyword-based without human review are unsuitable for use in *any* Internet content filtering application. Unfortunately, content filtering systems based on ostensibly human-created lists or human review seem to be equally inaccurate and obnoxious. Most commercially available Web filtering programs contain "secret" lists of sites to be blocked -- the manufacturers often consider their block lists to be proprietary and copyrighted. Operational experiences have suggested that many of these lists are highly inaccurate, often blocking sites unrelated to the announced blocking criteria. Health information sites have been blocked as if they were pornography, for example. In many other cases, blocks are so far off-base that it's difficult to imagine how they could have occurred unless automated systems were actually responsible for the listings. At one point, the well-respected PRIVACY Forum was blocked by a popular filtering program, which had placed the Forum Web pages within a "criminal skills" category. It turned out that the mere mention of encryption issues within some PRIVACY Forum articles had triggered this categorization! When contacted, the firm who created the filter acknowledged the obvious inappropriateness of the block, and removed the PRIVACY Forum from their block lists. The company never had a reasonable explanation of how their human reviewers could have made such an error. This brings up another critical point. Sites who are blocked normally have no way to even *know* of their blocked status unless somebody attempting to access the site informs them about it. Companies selling blocking software don't normally even attempt to inform sites when they've been added to a block list, nor are systematic procedures for appealing such categorizations universally available. Sites have no reliable way to know which of the many available filtering programs are blocking them, possibly completely inaccurately, at any given time. Even after specific blocking errors are corrected, such mistakes could recur again without warning. These factors, along with the secretiveness with which the filtering companies tend to treat their blocking lists, create an untenable situation. Especially when such filters are being used by public entities such as libraries and schools, they create the Orwellian atmosphere of secret censorship committees, completely devoid of any genuine accountability. What do the block lists really contain? Porn sites? Religious sites? Political speech sites? We can't know if the lists are unavailable. This is a horror in any modern public policy context. At a bare minimum, public institutions should be prohibited from using any filtering software which does not make its complete block lists available for public inspection! Most manufacturers of filtering software are very serious about keeping their lists hidden. In a very recent case, individuals who decrypted the block list from one such package are being sued by the company involved, who is also reportedly trying to learn the identities of the persons who accessed those decrypted materials from related Web sites. While the detailed legal issues relating to the actual decryption in this case may be somewhat problematic, the intolerable fact that the block lists are kept hidden seems to have at least partly driven this situation. Outside of the rating procedures used by the commercial filtering software packages, there are also a variety of efforts aimed at inducing all Web sites to "self-rate" via various criteria, often with the suggestion of penalties or sanctions in cases of perceived inaccurate ratings. In some countries, as in the Australian case, these ratings are being mandated by the government. In other cases they are being presented as being ostensibly voluntary. But it's clear that there'd really be nothing voluntary about them, since unrated sites would presumably be treated as "objectionable" by many Web browser configurations that would implement the rating systems. And again, we find ourselves faced with the problem of how ratings would be evaluated for "accuracy" -- given the wide range of opinions and world views present in any society. To whom do we cede the power to make such determinations in the international environment of the Internet? It is particularly alarming to observe the extent to which the proponents of mandatory filtering seem anxious to control Internet content that is not similarly controlled in other situations. A common example frequently cited is information about explosives. There is certainly such information available on the Internet which could be used to harm both persons and property. But much of this same sort of information is available in bookstores, libraries, or by mail order. How do we draw the line on what would be forbidden? Radical literature? Industrial training materials? Chemistry textbooks? Are we really so anxious to dramatically alter our notions of free speech across the board, not just relating to the Internet? Free speech is by no means absolute, but blaming the Internet or Web for our perceived problems is merely finding a convenient scapegoat, not a genuine solution. Before we tamper dramatically with such fundamental concepts, we'd better be very careful about what we wish for, and consider how the granting of some wishes could potentially damage society and our most cherished precepts. In any case, personal responsibility, both in terms of our own behaviors and when it comes to supervising the activities of children, must not be replaced by automated systems. Taking responsibility is *our* job as human beings -- it is certainly not an appropriate role for our machines! It should be interesting to see how many automated content filters the vocabulary of this very document will trigger ... --Lauren-- Lauren Weinstein lauren@pfir.org or lauren@vortex.com Co-Founder, PFIR: People for Internet Responsibility - http://www.pfir.org Moderator, PRIVACY Forum - http://www.vortex.com Member, ACM Committee on Computers and Public Policy ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2000 15:45:47 -0800 From: Mel Beckman Subject: A Constitutional Right to Anonymous Speech? At 8:23 PM -0500 3/17/00, Monty Solomon wrote: > Let's get two things straight. First, anonymity is not a thorny > problem, it's a basic American Constitutional right. Second, the > methods used by the unknown DoS perpetrators to cover their tracks had > very little to do with anonymity. A constitutional right? I don't believe anything in the constitutions can be construed to guarantee _anonymous_ free speech. Moreover, saying that anonymous speech is a right seems tautological. If nobody knows who created a particular expression of free speech, how can that person's rights be protected? While I do believe that people have a right to privacy (the right to be let alone), that doesn't have anything to do with a right to private free speech.If I run a newspaper, for example, I'm entitled to demand that readers identify themselves before publishing their letters to the editor. Any purveyor of a publication medium is similarly entitled to require such identification. - Mel Beckman ------------------------------ From: Mike Pollock Subject: Heavens-Above Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2000 14:29:22 -0500 Organization: It's A Mike! With the death of Iridium, I remembered that time is also running out to visit ... http://www.heavens-above.com/ As their site says, "If you're interested in satellites or astronomy, you've come to the right place! Our aim is to provide you with all the information you need to observe satellites, Mir and the International Space Station, the Space Shuttle, ***the dazzlingly bright flares from Iridium satellites,*** [emphasis added] as well as a wealth of other spaceflight and astronomical information. Many people don't even realize that satellites can easily be seen with the naked eye. We not only provide the times of visibility, but also detailed star charts showing the satellite's track through the heavens. All our pages, including the graphics, are generated in real-time and customized for your location and time zone." Mike ------------------------------ From: Alan Boritz Subject: Re: Anti-Spam E-mail Suit Tossed Out Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2000 13:13:22 -0500 Organization: Dyslexics Untie On 15 Mar 2000 06:15:46 GMT, tbetz@panix.com (Tom Betz) wrote: > Quoth Monty Solomon in : >> by Peter Lewis >> Seattle Times technology reporter >> In the war of words over unsolicited commercial e-mail, better known >> as spam, an Oregon man has won a victory over the state of Washington. >> But the battle may not be over, as the attorney general ponders an >> appeal. >> The victory came when King County Superior Court Judge Palmer Robinson > Would that be palmer.robinson@metrokc.gov ? Would that be the same King County Superior Court, of which the Honorable robert.alsdorf@metrokc.gov might be Chief Judge? I wonder if Judge Robinson knows the Clerk of the Council, anne.noris@metrokc.gov or elva.francis@metrokc.gov ? Do you get the impression that the judges deciding these cases do not have a full grasp of just what issues are being violated? Do you also get the impression that none of these distinguished individuals ever had to pay a bill for connect time charges to pick up spam email? >> dismissed a case in which the state charged Jason Heckel with >> violating Washington's anti-spam law. Robinson said the law, generally >> regarded as the nation's toughest, violates the interstate-commerce >> clause of the U.S. Constitution. >> http://www.seattletimes.com/news/local/html98/spam_20000314.html ------------------------------ From: sjsobol@NorthShoreTechnologies.Net (Steve Sobol) Subject: Re: Anti-Spam E-mail Suit Tossed Out Date: 18 Mar 2000 08:22:29 GMT Organization: New Age Consulting Service Inc., Cleveland, OH, USA > From 'John McHarry': > Reminds me of the time PAT took up the cause of the little old lady > whose phone number was mistakenly printed on the stationery of a > probation department. They became a LOT more cooperative after PAT > published their number and suggested that the Telecom Digest community > call it asking for her. They soon had the stuff reprinted and set up > an operator to Very Politely intercept her legitimate calls and > forward them to her until things quieted down. If anyone is suggesting harrassing the judge, I would recommend against it. It would just make the spamfighters look bad. The judge, on this point, is utterly clueless. The Washington law doesn't ban spam outright, but merely makes it illegal to hide your identity while sending spam. This hardly creates a hardship on businesses sending mail to residents of that state. But please, let's take the high road, eh? Thanks. North Shore Technologies, Cleveland, OH http://NorthShoreTechnologies.net Steve Sobol, President, Chief Website Architect and Janitor sjsobol@NorthShoreTechnologies.net - 888.480.4NET - 216.619.2NET ------------------------------ From: Walter Dnes Subject: Re: CPP, ATM Surcharges (was F.C.C. Debates Changes) Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2000 21:08:02 -0500 On Thu, 16 Mar 2000 20:41:13 -0500, in comp.dcom.telecom Stanley Cline wrote: > BellSouth offered blocking of third-party billing for nonpublished > numbers (only -- it was in conjunction with "not releasing nonpub > information to other telecom companies". I got a blurb about it in > one of my bills when I had a nonpub number [I again have a nonpub > number]) a few years ago; I don't know if they will still do it. > There are problems with blocking third-party billing, though... It becomes a choice of the lesser of two evils. Using MAPS DUL/RBL/RSS spamfilters results in the occasional false-positive. However, for most people, it's very much preferable to getting bombarded with spam. This should be a consumer choice. If you feel that you prefer watching your phonebill like a hawk, fighting threats from collection agencies, and negative credit reports, I won't presume to force you to a bill-blocking account. All I ask is that ***I*** get to make the choice of how ***MY*** phone bill is handled. > IMO, in the absence of billed party preference or prepaid > calling arrangements, prison calls should be EXEMPT from > third-party billing blocking arrangements, and CLECs should > be REQUIRED to handle third-party billing for such calls.) Open up a loophole, and every con-man and his dog is going to come charging in. Once a few exemptions are made, everybody else will start lawsuits claiming unequal treatment. If a friend or relative of yours ends up in prison, I have no problem with ***YOU*** switching to a billable account and exposing ***YOUR*** phonebill to every cramming telesleaze on the planet, if that's what it takes to accept collect calls from that person. But why should ***I*** be forced to drop ***MY*** financial firewall? Walter Dnes http://www.waltdnes.org SpamDunk Project procmail spamfilters. A picture is worth a thousand words; unfortunately, it consumes the bandwidth of ten thousand words. ------------------------------ From: wiring65@aol.com (Wiring65) Date: 18 Mar 2000 23:39:05 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Subject: High Speed Bandwidth to the Workspace Presubscriptions are being offered to business users in the Metropolitan Chicago area for a $750 per month fee that includes the basis subscriber package consisting of a full T-1 circuit, router, security ID modem, POTS line and ISP connection. This introductory offer has a $2,000 per month value. For further details contact CCSC at 847-934-0580 or email kknapp@ccscnet.com. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2000 11:33:10 -0800 PST From: itsamike@yahoo.com (Mike Pollock) Subject: Cell Phones May Upgrade Automatically Forwarded to Digrest FYI: This could make obsolesence obsolete! Cell phones may upgrade automatically By The Associated Press March 17, 2000, 11:00 a.m. PT http://home.cnet.com/category/0-1004-200-1575643.html The Federal Communications Commission is reviewing technology that automatically updates phones and radios as new services are developed. ------------------------------ From: Bonfire of the Manatees Subject: Re: Iridium Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2000 17:48:25 GMT Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net David Glynn wrote in message news:telecom20.21.9@telecom-digest.org: > At 08:05 PM 03/11/2000 -0500, editor@telecom-digest.org wrote: >> What does "dismantling the satellite system" entail ? Will they send a >> shuttle equipped with laser guns to blast those satellites out of the >> sky ???? :-) :-) > Heads up. Oooooh, look at the pretty lights! ;) > They burn them into the atmosphere. I've been wondering if there isn't a buck to me made for the stiffed creditors by perhaps selling the privilege to "de-orbit" a satellite or two. Buy a meteor for your valentine, anyone? ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V20 #27 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat Mar 18 23:45:36 2000 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id XAA07170; Sat, 18 Mar 2000 23:45:36 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2000 23:45:36 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200003190445.XAA07170@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #28 TELECOM Digest Sat, 18 Mar 2000 23:45:00 EST Volume 20 : Issue 28 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Telcomine: Trends in Telecom Technology (Telcomine) Re: North American Numbering Plan Proposals - New Discussion (F. Goldstein) Re: A Constitutional Right to Anonymous Speech? (Ed Ellers) Re: Anti-Spam E-mail Suit Tossed Out (Tom Betz) Call Outside US Territories (Ramon A Caban) Worldsite.ws Harvesting Internic Contact Info (Mark Thomas) Re: Telecom Technology Map (Pete Weiss) 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-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 259 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 805-545-5115 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@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: hyperarchive.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 the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: telcomine Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2000 19:58:28 +0550 Subject: Telcomine: Trends in Telecom Technology Reply-To: telcomine@infozech.com =======================TELCOMINE=============================== TELCOMINE - The monthly newsletter that brings the latest trends and developments in frontline IT Technologies. To subscribe mail to: nl@infozech.com To advertise mail to: telcomine@infozech.com To unsubscribe mail to: telcomine@infozech.com ================================================================ **You may forward TELCOMINE to your friends and colleagues** (or read it monthly in Telecom Archives) ================================================================ Trends in Telecom Technology Volume 3, No 3, March 2000 Visit: http://www.infozech.com/telcomine.html ================================================================ ======= IN THIS ISSUE=========================================== 1. IN INDIA "DOT COM" CHAUFFEURS ARE MILLIONAIRES: TOPIC FOR CLINTON'S VISIT MURDOCH IN BANGALORE UK, IRELAND IN THE RACE The inflated "dot com" stock market epidemic has spread to India too. Many car drivers and electricians in Infosys have become millionaires. Azim Hashmi Premji, owner of another software company, Wipro, is now rated as one of the world's five richest men with personal assets of $38 billion. America is interested. Indo-US memorandum of understanding in Information Technology is expected to be signed during President Clinton's India visit in the third week of March. http://www.infozech.com/articles/mar100.shtml 2. THREE -YEAR OLD COMPUTER KID TO PRESENT ROSE TO CLINTON IN INDIA When President Clinton visits Hyderabad, India, on March 23, he is to be presented a rose by the world's youngest Microsoft whiz-kid, Hyderabad-born, three-year old Ajay Puri. http://www.infozech.com/articles/mar200.shtml 3. MOBILE PHONES MAY DAMAGE MEMORY CELLS: STUDY Latest study on rats has shown that exposure to mobile phone radiation severely affects memory cells. Henry Lai of the University of Washington in a study found that cell phone type microwaves affect learning and memory in rats. http://www.infozech.com/articles/mar300.shtml 4. IBM's FEELING COMPUTER RESPONDS TO LOOKS IBM has released a "feeling" robot -- PONG, equipped with the BlueEyes Technology that enables it to perceive human feelings. It smiles when the person calls his name and expresses loneliness when it loses sight of the person. It is expected that in future ordinary household devices- such as refrigerators, TVs and ovens- will do their jobs when we speak to them or merely look at them. http://www.infozech.com/articles/mar400.shtml 5. BEZOS SAYS ALL COMPUTERS WILL BE WIRELESS IN 10 YEARS Internet based services dominated the annual conference of the Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association held in New Orleans this month. Among the speakers were luminaries Bill Gates, Steve case, Jeff Bezos and they all were optimistic over the marriage of the Internet and the wireless world. http://www.infozech.com/articles/mar500.shtml 6. IT IS MOBILE ALL THE WAY AT CEBIT FAIR IN HANOVER Taking the mobile- wireless revolution a step further the CeBIT fair at Hanover this month exhibited the latest high capacity GPRS (General Packet Radio Services) phones and Internet based GPS (Global Positioning system) products , Digital Angel. Billed as the largest Trade Fair CeBIT had 7,802 exhibitors and more than 700,000 visitors this year. Starting from 24th February to March 1st it used more than 4.5 million square feet of exhibition space. http://www.infozech.com/articles/mar600.shtml 7. I-MODE EXCELS WAP IN MOBILE INTERNET RACE IN JAPAN WAP RULES MOBILES IN THE WEST While WAP (Wireless Application Protocol) sustains the mobile Internet for some specific web based services in Europe and America, it is really the Japanese new comer 'I-mode' that gives unrestricted power to the mobile phone user to roam the worldwide web in any manner and for any service. http://www.infozech.com/articles/mar700.shtml 8. STAFF PUNISHED FOR MASS ABUSE OF OFFICE TIME ON INTERNET A recent study by NielsenNet Ratings has revealed mass abuse of office time over Internet by employees. As many as 36% of the companies had punished their workers for misusing the Internet and 11% had fired workers for Internet abuses. http://www.infozech.com/articles/mar800.shtml 9. PEN THAT PERFORMS PDA's FUNCTION C-Technologies introduced a C-Pen that can perform various PDA functions including reading printed text, writing and storing critical information. http://www.infozech.com/articles/mar900.shtml 10. INTERNET ALLOWS DISTANT MOURNERS A CHANCE TO VIEW FUNERALS Net has not only wired our life but will follow us unto death through a unique service, believed to be the first in the world, which will broadcast live video coverage of funeral rites over the Internet. http://www.infozech.com/articles/mar1000.shtml 11. HOTMAIL TOO LETS YOU BAR JUNK E-MAIL MENACE Hotmail has now joined Yahoo to provide its users the facility to shut out the unwanted junk e-mail nuisance from their mail-boxes. This could be a body blow to online propagandists and online e-commerce enthusiasts. But everyone seems to agree that if allowed unchecked it could choke off Internet and make it unusable. http://www.infozech.com/articles/mar1100.shtml 12. GLOBALNETXCHANGE TO HANDLE SEAR'S AND CARREFOUR'S $80 BILLION ONLINE TRADE Sears and Carrefour's combined $80 billion supply chain purchase from 50,000 suppliers, partners and distributors will now be put on the first global business-to-business online exchange which will ultimately serve the entire retail industry. http://www.infozech.com/articles/mar1200.shtml 13. BLUETOOTH - A GLOBAL SPECIFICATION FOR WIRELESS- TO - WIRELESS CONNECTIVITY Bluetooth is a global specification for wireless connectivity that would allow phones, palmtops, televisions, DVD players, burglar alarms etc to connect to each other and transmit voice and data by way of radio frequencies rather than cables. The gross data rate is 1 megabits per second. http://www.infozech.com/articles/mar1300.shtml 14. ANDERSON CONSULTING TO INVEST $1.2 BILLION IN INTERNET START-UP COMPANIES Anderson Consulting plans to open 17 "dot-com launch centers" worldwide as part of plans to invest $1.2 billion in Internet startups over the next three years. http://www.infozech.com/articles/mar1400.shtml 15. COMPLEX MOBILE SERVICES NEED NEW BILLING SYSTEMS SAYS VODAFONE AIRTOUCH CEO The introduction of the third generation mobile technology will change the face of telecommunications and also billing for its diverse services. As new technologies are evolving billing the users is becoming all the more complicated. http://www.infozech.com/articles/mar1500.shtml 16. INTEGRATED INFOZECH- ARRAY TEL PACKAGE TO SUPPORT ISPS' BILLING Infozech and Array Telecom have successfully achieved interoperability between -- eBill, Infozech's telecom billing solution, and Array's Series 3000 VoIP gateway. http://www.infozech.com/articles/mar1600.shtml 17. SPORTS EXCHANGE PRESIDENT CONVICTED FOR ONLINE GAMBLING $20 BILLIONS AT STAKE In a unique case 33 year old Jay Cohen, president of World Sports Exchange in Antigua, was convicted by a federal jury for betting over the net. http://www.infozech.com/articles/mar1700.shtml 18. MOUSE THAT CAN ESTABLISH USER'S IDENTITY In an effort to make online banking and e-commerce transaction more secure and reliable, a standard computer mouse has been developed which, with the help of an embedded fingerprint-scanning device can establish the true identity of the user. http://www.infozech.com/articles/mar1800.shtml 19. AMAZON OPENS WEB PORTAL FOR MOBILE USERS Amazon.com has opened up a web portal specially designed to resolve for the constraints of wireless devices, which have much smaller screens and slower Internet connections than a PC. http://www.infozech.com/articles/mar1900.shtml 20. GSM WORLD CONGRESS The GSM (Global System for Mobile Communications) World Congress in Cannes, France this year was a huge success with 72% increase in visitors. Attended by all the major players in the GSM industry the focus remained on Bluetooth technology. http://www.infozech.com/articles/mar2000.shtml 21. FCC CHAIRMAN PROPOSES WIRELESS BANDWIDTH EXCHANGE Bandwidth demand is creating bottlenecks for Internet and e-commerce. According to Mr. William Kennard, Chairman, FCC, USA, "the biggest challenge facing the industry today is the need for more spectrum. The demand for spectrum is simply outstripping supply". http://www.infozech.com/articles/mar2100.shtml 22. AUTO INDUSTRY CREATES ITS OWN INTERNET Recognizing the vast potential of Internet, giant auto makers, Ford, General Motors and DiamlerChrysler have teamed up to create the largest Internet marketplace that will be open to all auto manufacturers and suppliers. It is expected that up to $800 billion annual transactions might take place over the new auto exchange - the $250 billion that auto makers spend plus the $500 billion that their suppliers spend. http://www.infozech.com/articles/mar2200.shtml 23. MAILBOX NEW IDEA ON OPTICAL SWITCHING http://www.infozech.com/articles/mar2300.shtml ================================================================ IN INDIA "DOT COM" CHAUFFEURS ARE MILLIONAIRES: TOPIC FOR CLINTON'S VISIT The inflated "dot com" stock market epidemic has spread to India too. Many car drivers and electricians in Infosys have become millionaires. Azim Hashmi Premji, owner of another software company, Wipro, is now rated as one of the world's five richest men with personal assets of $38 billion. America is interested. Indo-US memorandum of understanding in Information Technology is expected to be signed during President Clinton's India visit in the third week of March. Infosys is unique among Indian companies where the lowest paid employees hold stocks. Attenders, cleaners, plumbers, electricians and chauffeurs become owners of company shares worth several million rupees, more than a whole life time's earning of a salaried employee. Thanks to the egalitarian philosophy of its scholar turned entrepreneur owner,N.R. Narayan Murthy. Infosys now has about 2000 millionaires and 100 billionaires (in rupees). Behind this boom is the sudden explosion in values of software shares in the stock markets. Wipro's two rupees share has shot up to almost Rs 10,000 and that of Infosys from its original base of Rs 10 to over Rs 22,000. Scores of other dot com shares have been shooting through the ceiling, in contrast to other non-software holdings. Murdoch in Bangalore Almost every big business house in the country is opening a software arm or planning to do so. Venture Capitalists, Indian and foreign, have sprung up overnight and are looking for start up firms they can support or buy. But there are not yet too many of them around. Rupert Murdoch, the International Media tycoon, arrived in Bangalore (India's Silicon Valley) on March 12 and announced his plans to acquire or invest in Indian Internet companies. UK, Ireland in the Race Among those eyeing the Indian talent mart are Bill Gates who visited India two years ago to launch Microsoft's active presence in the country. President Clinton will visit Hyderabad, India's new cyber city, during his visit to India this month. Ireland's Deputy Prime Minister Ms Mary Harney, is bringing a delegation of her country's top IT and telecom businessmen to India next month. Ireland exported $3.2 billion worth software product in 1998 against America's $2.9 billion. Britain has tried to take a short cut to the top class Indian professionals. The UK Ambassador in Washington this month hosted a high profile dinner to the cream of successful Indian software geniuses in America to attract them to his country. Germany too has entered the fray and is looking for collaborators in India. ================================================================ THREE -YEAR OLD COMPUTER KID TO PRESENT ROSE TO CLINTON IN INDIA When President Clinton visits Hyderabad, India, on March 23, he is to be presented a rose by the world's youngest Microsoft whiz-kid, Hyderabad-born, three-year old Ajay Puri. Indian kids in large numbers have gone computer crazy but none so startlingly crazy as Ajay, who has dazzled celebrities worldwide with his expert handling of the web and the PC. Microsoft which has already honored several Indian children has registered for him a site http://www.microsoftkid.com. Among those who have feted and greeted Ajay for his exceptional abilities are India's Prime Minister A B Vajpayee, top Industrialist KK Birla and Andhra Pradesh chief minister Chandrababu Naidu. Ajay lives with his parents in Bangkok and communicates through voice mail with his grandparents in New Delhi. He is very comfortable with software such as Word, Excel, PowerPoint and Internet Explorer. He can himself send out e-mail and recognizes all the alphabets on the keyboard. "A lot of people have already come forward to set up links to sell kid stuff through his new web page even before it is launched" said the whizkid's father Ravi Puri, an export manager at Birla Group's Century textiles in Bangkok. ================================================================ MOBILE PHONES MAY DAMAGE MEMORY CELLS: STUDY Latest study on rats has showed that exposure to mobile phone radiation severely affects memory cells. Henry Lai of the University of Washington in a study found that cell phone type microwaves affect learning and memory in rats. In the experiment two sets of rats were put in a water maze. First category had rats which Had been exposed to microwave radiation equal to that emitted by cell phones and the other category had normal rats. When both categories were put in the maze, it was discovered that rats exposed for an hour to the pulsed microwaves were slower to learn the location of a platform in a water maze than the unexposed ones. Moreover, they seemed to lose their memory of the location of the underwater platform on later tests. ================================================================ IBM's FEELING COMPUTER RESPONDS TO LOOKS IBM has released a "feeling" robot -- PONG, equipped with the BlueEyes Technology that enables it to perceive human feelings. It smiles when the person calls his name and expresses loneliness when it loses sight of the person. It is expected that in future ordinary household devices- such as refrigerators, TVs and ovens- will do their jobs when we speak to them or merely look at them. The researchers have been working on this futuristic technology -- Blue Eyes Technology - for quite some time at its Almaden Research Center. The primary objective is to give a computer the ability of the human mind to assess a situation by using the senses of sight. The applications of BlueEyes technology are claimed to be limitless -- from designing cars and developing presentations, to interactive entertainment and advertising. BlueEyes uses non-obtrusive sensing technology. With the help of video cameras and microphones, it identifies and observes a user's actions and then extracts key information, such as where the user is looking and what the user is saying verbally and by gestures. Analyzing these cues the users physical, emotional or informational state is determined, which in turn can be used to help make the user more productive by performing expected actions or by providing expected information. Visit: http://www.almaden.ibm.com ================================================================ BEZOS SAYS ALL COMPUTERS WILL BE WIRELESS IN 10 YEARS Internet based services dominated the annual conference of the Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association held in New Orleans this month. Among the speakers were luminaries Bill Gates, Steve case, Jeff Bezos and they all were optimistic over the marriage of the Internet and the wireless world. Amazon's CEO, Jeff Bezos, said: "I believe that all computers will be wireless 10 years from now." The craze of consumers could be assessed by the fact that by 2003 around 62 million people will use wireless devices to connect to the net. By effectively making Internet access a standard feature of phones, the manufacturers and carriers hope to spark consumer interest in mobile Web services. Companies are working in this direction and are competing hard. A Cupertino based company Pixo has developed a software that enables users to go to any Web site, not just ones specially formatted for wireless phones. Pixo has focussed on supporting e-commerce services based on the user's location, such as enabling users to buy tickets for nearby theatres in unfamiliar cities. Bill Gates, Chief Software Architect, Microsoft, said that the challenge is to bring together the Internet, corporate data, devices and users in an intelligent, manageable way. ================================================================ IT IS MOBILE ALL THE WAY AT CEBIT FAIR IN HANOVER Taking the mobile-wireless revolution a step further the CeBIT fair at Hanover this month exhibited the latest high capacity GPRS (General Packet Radio Services) phones and Internet based GPS (Global Positioning system) products , Digital Angel. Billed as the largest Trade Fair CeBIT had 7,802 exhibitors and more than 700,000 visitors this year. Starting from 24th February to March 1st it used more than 4.5 million square feet of exhibition space. GPRS is an emerging technology that adds high speed Internet access and e-mail services to GSM cellular phones. Mobile and Data Communications took the center stage this year's, 14th annual, CeBIT fair. Every company was competing to make an impact and umpteen products were displayed. The focal point was on WAP- Wireless Application Protocol -, General Packet Radio Services - GPRS, Third-Generation Wireless Services and Bluetooth. Samsung's mobile TV phone, Internet keyphone for office along with the first GPRS phone. Swedish Satsafe introduced Internet based GPS (Global Positioning System) Technology. German company Solarc showed Scotty -- a solar charger for mobile devices. C-Technologies introduced a C-Pen that can perform various PDA functions including reading printed text, writing and storing critical information. The fair had exhibitors from all walks of the telecom arena. Information technology (1,500); Office Automation (300); Software (2,700); Telecommunications (900) and Network Computing (400). Samsung introduced the first GPRS phone supports up to 56kbps although ultimately, the GPRS service will allow data connection at speeds of up to 115kbps. It offers voice dialing, voice memo, Predictive Text Input, Personal Information Management (scheduler, diary) and has a built-in IrDA (Infra red Data Access) port to allow wireless connection to PDAs and laptop computers. Samsung also introduced the first commercial watch phone, a small wrist watch which includes a mobile phone. The watch will be available by early summer in the US. It uses Code Division Multiple Access (CDMA) technology and weighs 1.3 ounces (1.7 ounces with battery) and measures 2.7 inches by 2.3 inches by 0.8 inches. German company Solarc showed Scotty -- a solar charger for mobile devices. Scotty can also recharge cells of any battery system. It measures only 100 x 60 x 20 mm and weighs 125 gms. The cost is Euro 61.30 ( USD 62 approx.). ================================================================ I-MODE EXCELS WAP IN MOBILE INTERNET RACE IN JAPAN While WAP (Wireless Application Protocol) sustains the mobile Internet for some specific web based services in Europe and America, it is really the Japanese new comer 'I-mode' that gives unrestricted power to the mobile phone user to roam the worldwide web in any manner and for any service. Within a short period i-mode has caught the imagination of millions of Japanese mobile fans, especially teenagers . The latest models have full-color displays, recognize spoken commands and have plug-in-keyboards for writing longer e-mails. The company expects to introduce a 'Third Generation' network based on the latest W-CDMA technology, which will increase the data transfer rate up to 40 times and will also allow high-quality streamed video and audio. i-mode is gaining customers at the rate of 25000 a day and is expected to pass the 5m mark subscriber base this month. i-mode's developer NTTDoCoMo is the world's largest telecom company billed at $370 billion. WAP RULES MOBILES IN THE WEST Meanwhile in Europe and America WAP is going ahead with its 3G plans which will allow wireless access to Internet contents, access to email, data, news, e-commerce transactions, banking services. WAP is the Universal standard for applications over wireless networks, is a key technology that enables users to easily access Web Based information services and applications from the screens of their mobile phones or other wireless devices. Carriers can also offer their personal and other customer related information located in the carrier customer configuration, billing and other databases in the intelligent network. Presently WAP is in a nascent stage. However its huge potential allows intelligent and sensitive data exchange between two devices. By 2005, the wireless connection speed will reach 1Mbps as against 14.4 Kilobits per second today. Its widespread use would lead to a convergent wallet less society. You would carry "cash" on your WAP based phone and also your business cards. You can beam your card to any other wireless phone instantly. At home the same device will open your house or work as TV remote. The difference between an ordinary mobile phone and its WAP enabled counterpart is that WAP provides a standard for designing Internet content for mobile phones with a special small-format WAP browser. WAP's basic function is to configure content from the net in a manner appropriate to the smaller screens and keypads of mobile phones. ================================================================ STAFF PUNISHED FOR MASS ABUSE OF OFFICE TIME ON INTERNET A recent study by NielsenNet Ratings has revealed mass abuse of office time over Internet by employees. As many as 36% of the companies had punished their workers for misusing the Internet and 11% had fired workers for Internet abuses. An average employee with Internet access spent 21 hours a week online, more than double the time spent by Internet users at home. News, financial news and general information sites are visited more often by work users. About 32.7 million US adults have internet access at work while 122.7 million have home internet access according to Nielsen/ Net ratings. The study discovered that at work, the number of Internet users was less than half as many as at home, but they spent twice the time there and logged on twice as many times. There are roughly 30.6 million wired employees as opposed to some 77 million at home, according to the study. ================================================================ PEN THAT PERFORMS PDAS FUNCTION C-Technologies introduced a C-Pen that can perform various PDA functions including reading printed text, writing and storing critical information. The pen has a storage for up to 2000 pages of printed text and 500 addresses,. It also has a sharper four line display in a signature pen-shaped device. C-Pen's exciting feature includes its dictionary that allows translating text to Spanish, French, Italian, German and Swedish from English and vice versa. ================================================================ INTERNET ALLOWS DISTANT MOURNERS A CHANCE TO VIEW FUNERALS Net has not only wired our life but will follow us unto death through a unique service, Believed to be the first in the world, which will broadcast live video coverage of funeral rites over the Internet. The site www.fergersonfuneralhome.com is offered by Fred Fergerson. It offers a video page where visitors can click on gallery and see the front entrance to the funeral home and traffic passing by in the distance. The idea struck him when his high school friend could not attend his father's funeral and thus he decided to set up a system. According to the website, the system is compatible with anyone's Internet connection. No software is needed to receive the program content. Fergerson can control the number of people who are allowed to view the program , the time each viewer is allowed to stay connected and can limit access by passwords. Families have to give written permission to have any portion of the funeral service transmitted on the Internet. The funeral home is offering this service free. ================================================================ HOTMAIL TOO LETS YOU BAR JUNK E-MAIL MENACE Hotmail has now joined Yahoo to provide its users the facility to shut out the unwanted junk e-mail nuisance from their mail-boxes. This could be a body blow to online propagandists and online e-commerce enthusiasts. But everyone seems to agree that if allowed unchecked it could choke off Internet and make it unusable. Hotmail's new 'bulk mail' option will allow users to sift unsolicited e-mail, or spam, to a folder that automatically deletes it in 30 days. "It's one of the biggest nuisances and sources of friction of e-mail users," said Barry Par, Director of Consumer e-commerce research at International Data Corp. in Mountain View, California. "The longer you have an e-mail address the more valuable it is but more likely you are to be on many spam lists." ================================================================ GLOBALNETXCHANGE TO HANDLE SEAR'S AND CARREFOUR'S $80 BILLION ONLINE TRADE Sears and Carrefour's combined $80 billion supply chain purchase from 50,000 suppliers, partners and distributors will now be put on the first global business-to-business online exchange which will ultimately serve the entire retail industry. The exchange will allow network members to buy, sell, trade or auction goods and services over the Internet using standard web browser. GlobalNetXchange as the exchange is known is expected to significantly reduce their purchasing expenses and greatly improve efficiencies of their trading partners. Revenues for the online purchasing sitewill be generated by fees charged to retailers and suppliers using the network. The exchange is based on Oracle's e-business marketplace platform. ================================================================ BLUETOOTH - A GLOBAL SPECIFICATION FOR WIRELESS- TO - WIRELESS CONNECTIVITY Bluetooth is a global specification for wireless connectivity that would allow phones, palmtops, televisions, DVD players, burglar alarms etc to connect to each other and transmit voice and data by way of radio frequencies rather than cables. The gross data rate is 1 megabits per second. This technology will do away with cables and connect one device to another with one universal short range radio link. It has a range of around ten meters and appliances only have to be in close proximity to work . It also facilitates real-time voice and data transmissions making it possible to connect any portable and stationary communication device as easily as switching on the lights. Once in place this technology could allow you to make adjustments to your stereo or check the oil in your car via mobile phones. The small Bluetooth radio transceiver component can be fit into any device -- existing or emerging ones. Blue-tooth ready devices and appliances are expected to hit the streets by the end of 2000 and become ubiquitous by 2005. More than 100 million mobile phones and in several million communication devices, ranging from headsets and portable PC's to desktop computers and notebooks. Bluetooth's fast frequency hopping technique promises a secure network. Due to this the frequency is varied 1600 times a second in a pseudo -random manner during transmission. ================================================================ ANDERSON CONSULTING TO INVEST $1.2 BILLION IN INTERNET START-UP COMPANIES Anderson Consulting plans to open 17 "dot-com launch centers" worldwide as part of plans to invest $1.2 billion in Internet startups over the next three years. According to the company, it is rounding up marketing, strategy and technology talent to help the young Internet firms avoid the pitfalls of fast-growing companies. In exchange, it will get minority stakes in the startups, as well as its standard fees. ================================================================ COMPLEX MOBILE SERVICES NEED NEW BILLING SYSTEMS SAYS VODAFONE AIRTOUCH CEO The introduction of the third generation mobile technology will change the face of telecommunications and also billing for its diverse services. As new technologies are evolving billing the users is becoming all the more complicated. Vodafone AirTouch, now the world's largest mobile network operator is uncertain of the impact the third generation mobile technology (3G) will have on billing. "Although we are concentrating on developing a global platform for mobile data services, we are still unsure how we will bill for them," comments Chris Gent, Chief Executive office of Vodafone AirTouch. There were number of possibilities, all of which needed to be explored", he said. Sholomo Baleli, President of R&D, Amdocs, believes that there will be large difference between billing consumers and businesses . There will be different billing charges based on value-added services. For example browsing, e-commerce and downloading videos will all be billed at different rates." He added that in the interconnect market, supporting invoicing between telecom carriers, expect the more traditional parameters ( billing by volume and type of data) to dominate. The move to billing for 3G mobile services has the potential to make it a lot easier use of current billing systems as a platform for future evolution. The billing criterion has to be service or application specific. It could be time-on-line (minutes/ peak/off, time of day, day of week etc). ================================================================ INTEGRATED INFOZECH- ARRAY TEL PACKAGE TO SUPPORT ISPS' BILLING Infozech and Array Telecom have successfully achieved interoperability between -- eBill, Infozech's telecom billing solution, and Array's Series 3000 VoIP gateway. This new partnership offers Internet service providers (ISP's) a fully-integrated operations support package incorporating order management, customer management, billing, accounts receivable and switch management on a common platform. eBill is Infozech's flagship product to meet the diverse requirements of telecommunication services such as Internet Telephony, Store and Forward Fax over Internet, Long Distance, Calling Cards and other CDR based service. Array Telecom Corp, a Comdial company, is a provider of carrier-class and enterprise IP telephony gateway products. Both eBill and Array's Series 3000 are scalable and suitable for small, medium, and large-sized users. "Billing and back-office management are an important part of a carriers' operation. Infozech's commitment to customer service is demonstrated not only by integrating eBill with our gateway products, but by working with us, and our customers, to add new and unique capabilities," said Row Zadeh, President of Array Telecom. Ankur Lal, Chief Executive Officer of Infozech, commented, "We are confident that by integrating with Array's Series 3000 we can provide ISP's, corporate customers and commercial carriers a complete solution for their IP telephony businesses. We believe that with eBill, we have attained a level of expertise which can satisfy billing requirements in any IP telephony environment." Infozech provides software solutions for telecom services like IP telephony, Fax over IP, callback, long distance, calling card, toll-free numbers or any other flat rate or CDR based service. For details visit: http://www.infozech.com/solution.html ================================================================ SPORTS EXCHANGE PRESIDENT CONVICTED FOR ONLINE GAMBLING In a unique case 33 year old Jay Cohen, president of World Sports Exchange in Antigua, was convicted by a federal jury for betting over the net. Jay Cohen was among 22 defendants charged in March 1998 with operating offshore companies that took bets from America via Internet or toll-free telephone numbers. Federal law prohibits the use of the Internet for sports betting. A Bill that passed the Senate last year would make it illegal to bet it on casino- style games online. The number of online casinos has increased from 15 in 1996 to more than 700 at present, according to industry research. Revenue to the roughly 200 companies that operate these sites is estimated to reach nearly $1.5 billion this year and $3 billion by 2002, said Sebastian Sinclair, an analyst who performs market research for the online gambling industry. $20 BILLIONS AT STAKE According to the American Gambling Association, the nation's 450 commercial casinos took in $20 billion in 1998, while 160 American Indian Casinos had $7.2 billion. The 4 million Americans who are expected to gamble online this year account for about 50 percent of the industry's revenue, analysts said. However , with the number of Asian and European bettors rising, some Internet casino operators said they aren't concerned about a US ban. Fines starting at $20,000 and prison sentences for operators are only on paper because many of the companies are located outside the United States. In a case of its own a jury in US District Court in Manhattan concluded that Jay Cohen broke a federal law by accepting bets and wagers on sports over the Internet and Telephone. ================================================================ MOUSE THAT CAN ESTABLISH USER'S IDENTITY In an effort to make online banking and e-commerce transaction more secure and reliable, a standard computer mouse has been developed which, with the help of an embedded fingerprint-scanning device can establish the true identity of the user. Compulink Research Inc. (CLR), a leader in biometrics products and services, has introduced this unique U.Match Biolink Mouse. The mouse ensures that only authorized users gain access to computers and websites. It is a standard two-button mouse that has a small built-in fingerprint scanner. Positioned on the side where your thumb naturally rests, the Biolink Mouse's manufacturer claims it provides a 100% positive verification of the user. As U-Match can distinguish fingerprints between a live person and a moulage, or a corpse, it can easily determine whether the received data is a current scanned fingerprint or it is forgery. Most importantly, the user's fingerprint is never captured and important privacy rights are not violated. Biolink Mouse creates a 500 byte, secure template that can not be replicated into a user fingerprint. It costs approximately $120. Visit: www.biolinkusa.com ================================================================ AMAZON OPENS WEB PORTAL FOR MOBILE USERS Amazon.com has opened up a web portal specially designed to resolve for the constraints of wireless devices, which have much smaller screens and slower Internet connections than a PC. The portal will allow customers to monitor the status of purchases, access more in-depth search information and check shipping availability worldwide. ================================================================ GSM WORLD CONGRESS The GSM (Global System for Mobile Communications) World Congress in Cannes, France this year was a huge success with 72% increase in visitors. Attended by all the major players in the GSM industry the focus remained on Bluetooth technology. It was held between 2nd - 4th February 2000. Its major attraction was a dedicated Bluetooth pavilion along with the 276 exhibitors who had displayed their latest products. Nortel Networks and France Telecom Mobiles demonstrated the Nortel Networks PicoNode - including features like SMS (Short Message Service), Intelligent Call Routing, Integrated PBX functionality, multi-site LAN connectivity and IP. ================================================================ FCC CHAIRMAN PROPOSES WIRELESS BANDWIDTH EXCHANGE Bandwidth demand is creating bottlenecks for Internet and e-commerce. According to Mr. William Kennard, Chairman, FCC, USA, "the biggest challenge facing the industry today is the need for more spectrum. The demand for spectrum is simply outstripping supply". He suggested that the wireless industry should follow the example of fiber optic industry and create a wireless exchange combining the resources of whatever spare capacity is available with different wireless networks into a composite "Wireless Exchange". The wireless spectrum is the 'airwaves' that carry TV, radio and wireless phone signals. A limited amount is available in any given area for carrying digital signals strong enough to use for wireless Internet access. According to Bank of America Securities, about 450 million subscribers had signed up for wireless phone accounts in 1999 -- with about 6.6 million wirelesses Net accounts. By 2003, billion people will be using wireless phones worldwide, with 400 million of these using the mobile web. He added that the bandwidth exchange model is just `kicking off in the fiber-optic world, where companies like Qwest and Level 3 have built huge networks over the past few years. ================================================================ AUTO INDUSTRY CREATES ITS OWN INTERNET Recognizing the vast potential of Internet, giant auto makers, Ford, General Motors and DiamlerChrysler have teamed up to create the largest Internet marketplace that will be open to all auto manufacturers and suppliers. It is expected that up to $800 billion annual transactions might take place over the new auto exchange -- the $250 billion that auto makers spend plus the $500 billion that their suppliers spend. This exchange will provide great opportunity to small suppliers who will get equal exposure to potential customers and the chance to bid on more contracts through the auctions. According to Brad Fox , an analyst with AutoPacific in Detroit, "the presumed savings from a more efficient supply chain could result in cheaper cars and trucks for buyers or more profits for car companies and their shareholders, or a combination of both". Ford, GM and DiamlerChrysler expect to reach a definitive agreement for the venture in the first quarter, subject to appropriate governmental and other approvals. Until then all services currently associated with the current exchanges will continue to be offered. These include catalogue purchasing, bidding and pricing quotes, on-line sourcing and auctions. In addition, supply chain management functions such as capacity planning, demand forecasting, production planning, supply chain transaction automation, financial services, payment and logistics will continue and will be expanded. The technology support is provided by Oracle and Commerce One and they are expected to have financial stakes in the venture.The new online auto exchange will be a separate company jointly owned by the five partners and will be open to all auto makers and suppliers. Analysts estimate that the auto makers and their suppliers will save 5 percent and 15 percent respectively from their cost by using the new exchange and some of the savings could trickle down to consumers in the form of lower car prices. ================================================================ MAILBOX NEW IDEA ON OPTICAL SWITCHING I have a very original idea about a solution (a theory) to this problem (optical switching). How to make this idea profitable? - Alain Pardo We suggest you develop your idea into a prototype and approach a venture capitalist. - Editor I am very glad to browse Telcomine as I feel that it is very informative and helpful in many ways. - Chandra Reka I subscribe to your highly informative 'Telcomine'. The contents are highly relevant to the current Telecom scenario and more importantly very precise. I have got a small suggestion, wouldn't it be better if you could add a link to the site from where the information was picked up or to the site where further info could be found. Sherin We try to mention sources wherever these can be clearly identified. - Editor Please send some more details on your 'Unimobile' article. (Free 'Unimobile' access to all mobiles in the world- February issue of Telcomine). Gopal Gupta Kindly visit: www.unimobile.com for more details. Please let me have more detailed information and contact for the Startupfactory .M. Najarali Kindly visit http:/www.startupfactory.com for more details. I've been through the site and it looks promising. I would like to subscribe to all information that disseminates from your site. - Anil Kumar. ============================================================ If you have any ideas and suggestions to improve TELCOMINE Contact Editor: telcomine@infozech.com or simply reply to this mail with your idea. If you have a new product or service that you would like us to mention. Send details to telcomine@infozech.com Executive Editor: Pragya Singh Consulting Editor: Seema Dhawan To Subscribe: nl@infozech.com To Advertise: Telcomine@infozech.com Internet: http://www.infozech.com/telcomine.html Fax: 48-490-2840; Voice Mail: 408-490-2842 ============================================================ TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You can always read each issue of TELCOMINE here in the Telecom Archives each month by tuning your browser to http://telecom-digest.org/archives/telecomine. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2000 21:37:56 -0500 From: Fred Goldstein Subject: Re: North American Numbering Plan Proposals - New Discussion At 11:29 PM 3/17/2000 -0500, GeorgeP wrote: > Hi, I have some concerns/questions about your plan. > Why have 8/7 digit ranges? I presume you're asking why have both? The 8-digit ranges are for the USA proper and presumably most/all of Canada. But the Caribbean countries who used to share NPA 809 mostly need very few numbers, so 8-digit numbering makes little sense for them. And 7-digit numbering is adequate for a few other outlying places like Guam, CNMI, and perhaps some other areas. Originally I thought it might be handy for some smaller areas of the USA proper, but in the draft map I put up on the web, I just merged some of those smaller NPAs together. > Does USA geographical area include US territories ie. PR, US Virgin > Islands etc. Yes, since they're domestic-rated, but I'd put them in a contiguous block (136x, 1377x, for instance, if both 7 and 8 digit formats needed; only PR really is a candidate for 8-digits, though). > 10xxxxx - Carrier Access Codes > 11xx - Special Features ie *69/1169 > 12xx - Range for 8 digit local numbers in USA > 13xx - Range for 8 digit local numbers in USA > 14xx - Range for 8 digit local numbers in USA/US Territories > 15xx - Range for Canada > 16xx - Range for other countries No, because the USA doesn't need 14xx, and we already use "500" for special nongeographic purposes; 15xx generalizes upon this. > 17xx - Cellular/PCS/Pager Range No, non-CPP cellular is required by FCC to get regular local numbers. CPP is under consideration and I *hope* it gets distinctive numbers. > 170 - Special Services/Cell Phones > 171x - Range for cell phone at national rate ie caller pays (USA) > 172x - Range for cell phone at national rate ie caller pays (USA) > 173x - Range for cell at nat rate ie caller pays (USA/territories) > 174x - Range for cell phones at national rate (Canada) > 175x - Range for cell phones other countries Very Euro-centric ... we don't *have* a "national rate"! Our many toll carriers have many rate plans. CPP would be a rate set by each of *dozens* of individual wireless carriers. Very complex and ugly, and requiring a 900-like number block. Anyway, we can discuss details on the forum, http://www.delphi.com/nanp/ . ------------------------------ From: Ed Ellers Subject: Re: A Constitutional Right to Anonymous Speech? Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2000 22:34:52 -0500 Mel Beckman wrote: > A constitutional right? I don't believe anything in the constitutions can > be construed to guarantee _anonymous_ free speech." One could argue that the right to speak freely implies the right *not* to speak, and that forcing the speaker to identify himself infringes upon that right. > "Moreover, saying that anonymous speech is a right seems tautological. If > nobody knows who created a particular expression of free speech, how can > that person's rights be protected?" Well, just look at what the First Amendment does. It says (among other things) that Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press. How could you enforce a law that did abridge the rights of a person if you do not know who the speaker is? > While I do believe that people have a right to privacy (the right to be let > alone), that doesn't have anything to do with a right to private free > speech.If I run a newspaper, for example, I'm entitled to demand that > readers identify themselves before publishing their letters to the editor. > Any purveyor of a publication medium is similarly entitled to require such > identification. The First Amendment has nothing to do with that -- it restricts *government* action only, so your decision not to publish based on asserted anonymity cannot possibly abridge the Constitutional rights of the writer. ------------------------------ From: tbetz@panix.com (Tom Betz) Subject: Re: Anti-Spam E-mail Suit Tossed Out Date: 18 Mar 2000 07:51:50 GMT Organization: Society for the Elimination of Junk Unsolicited Bulk Email Reply-To: tbetz@pobox.com Quoth John McHarry in : > On 15 Mar 2000 06:15:46 GMT, tbetz@panix.com (Tom Betz) wrote: >> Quoth Monty Solomon in >> : >>> by Peter Lewis >>> Seattle Times technology reporter >>> In the war of words over unsolicited commercial e-mail, better known >>> as spam, an Oregon man has won a victory over the state of Washington. >>> But the battle may not be over, as the attorney general ponders an >>> appeal. >>> The victory came when King County Superior Court Judge Palmer Robinson >> Would that be palmer.robinson@metrokc.gov ? >>> dismissed a case in which the state charged Jason Heckel with >>> violating Washington's anti-spam law. Robinson said the law, generally >>> regarded as the nation's toughest, violates the interstate-commerce >>> clause of the U.S. Constitution. > Reminds me of the time PAT took up the cause of the little old lady > whose phone number was mistakenly printed on the stationery of a > probation department. They became a LOT more cooperative after PAT > published their number and suggested that the Telecom Digest community > call it asking for her. They soon had the stuff reprinted and set up > an operator to Very Politely intercept her legitimate calls and > forward them to her until things quieted down. Are Washington State Superior Court judges appointed or elected? |I always wanted to be someone,| Tom Betz, Generalist |but now I think I should have | Want to send me email? FIRST, READ THIS PAGE: |been a wee bit more specific. | | | YO! MY EMAIL ADDRESS IS HEAVILY SPAM-ARMORED! ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2000 08:59:37 -0800 Subject: Call Outside US Territory From: Ramon A Caban I JUST WANT TO KNOW HOW DO I HAVE TO DO OF I WANT TO CALL WHITH DIAL PAD TO PUERTORICO OF USVIRGIN ISLAND. THANK TITE ------------------------------ From: Mark@Misty.com (Mark Thomas) Subject: Worldsite.ws Harvesting Internic Contact Info Date: 18 Mar 2000 18:52:51 GMT Organization: MGT Consulting Hi, I was bothered by automated recorded phone telemarketing messages I received telling me I should register worldsite.ws domain names. I was even more bothered when I noticed that on their Questions page one of their advertising features is that they are claiming that: "If you register with WorldSite.WS, however, your personal privacy is one of our highest concerns. Your personal contact information is given out only under the strictly specified circumstances. What we offer you instead , is a safe and secure way to be contacted." Is anyone else bothered by their marketing techniques and hypocracy? I thought fully automated phone telemarketing, without a human on the other end, was illegal these days. Who should I complain to? Mark Thomas (Mark@Misty.com) ------------------------------ From: pete-weiss@psu.edu (Pete Weiss) Subject: Re: Telecom Technology Map Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2000 10:20:25 -0500 Organization: Penn State University -- Office of Administrative Systems On Thu, 16 Mar 2000 17:41:36 -0600, Guy Gilliland wrote: > I'm involved in a project where I'm charged with developing a detailed > map of all technologies relevant to the telecom industry. Seems like a never-ending project. Would it be worthwhile to draw a line in the sand? /Pete ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V20 #28 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Mar 20 01:57:06 2000 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id BAA21292; Mon, 20 Mar 2000 01:57:06 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 01:57:06 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200003200657.BAA21292@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #29 TELECOM Digest Mon, 20 Mar 2000 01:57:00 EST Volume 20 : Issue 29 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: A Constitutional Right to Anonymous Speech? (Lisa Hancock) Re: A Constitutional Right to Anonymous Speech? (Garrett Wollman) LMDS/MMDS (Pedro M.) ATT (Pedro M.) Re: Call Outside US Territory (The bald one) Re: Worldsite.ws Harvesting Internic Contact Info (Steve Sobol) Re: Anti-Spam E-mail Suit Tossed Out (Steven Lichter) Re: Anti-Spam E-mail Suit Tossed Out (Ed Ellers) Re: Anti-Spam E-mail Suit Tossed Out (Michael D. Adams) Fiber in Drinking Water Systems (Guy de-Beer) Re: CPP, ATM Surcharges (was F.C.C. Debates Changes) (Ed Ellers) Re: CPP, ATM Surcharges (was F.C.C. Debates Changes) (Craig Macbride) Puppy Love (TELECOM Digest Editor) 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-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 259 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 805-545-5115 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@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: hyperarchive.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 the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) Subject: Re: A Constitutional Right to Anonymous Speech? Date: 19 Mar 2000 17:43:32 GMT Organization: Net Access BBS There are several distinct issues at work here. First, I think many people don't exactly understand what "free speech" allows or does not allow. As someone noted, a Constitutional right of free expression only applies to the *government's* actions. A non-governmental entity, such as an ISP, intermediate carrier, host site, or your employer, can regulate speech any way it chooses, fair or not. People get upset if a TV network won't air a program that violates the network's standards, but that is totally within the network's right as the owner of the distribution channel. People get upset if a school principal won't allow the student newspaper to publish a certain article, but the principal is the publisher and the school (not the student) is ultimately responsible for what goes into the newspaper. The owner of the medium gets to call the shots -- and take responsibility for what goes out. Also, there is no such thing as unlimited free speech. The obvious example of "yelling fire in a crowded theatre" comes to mind, but it goes beyond that. One can be prosecuted for releasing military secrets or publishing child pornography, to give two examples. One can be sued for libel/slander. Secondly: communication on the Internet consists of many different kinds of transmissions. Each type of transmission needs to be considered individual in terms of privacy rules and free speech rights. People should be able to post anonymously to Usenet news-groups. People should be able to read and download from Usenet anonymously. People should be able to read from the WWW anonymously. However, any individual web site may freely choose to require accurate real inden- tification of visitors if it makes it clear that is a term of admission. This likewise applies to ftp and telnet sites. As to email -- that's a little trickier. The flip side of the coin is controlling Internet abuses, especially such as forged signatures and site attacks. ------------------------------ From: wollman@lcs.mit.edu (Garrett Wollman) Subject: Re: A Constitutional Right to Anonymous Speech? Date: 20 Mar 2000 00:28:15 GMT Organization: MIT Laboratory for Computer Science In article , Mel Beckman wrote: > A constitutional right? I don't believe anything in the constitutions > can be construed to guarantee _anonymous_ free speech. You may not believe so, but the Supreme Court of the United States does, and said so in a campaign-finance case a few years ago. I don't remember the particulars, but the case turned on whether a state could require those making so-called ``independent expenditures'' to identify themselves in their advertising. The Supreme Court ruled that anonymous political speech, at least, is a fundamental constitutional right. You're certainly welcome to disagree, but that's the Law of the Land. -GAWollman Garrett A. Wollman | O Siem / We are all family / O Siem / We're all the same wollman@lcs.mit.edu | O Siem / The fires of freedom Opinions not those of| Dance in the burning flame MIT, LCS, CRS, or NSA| - Susan Aglukark and Chad Irschick ------------------------------ From: Pedro M. Subject: LMDS/MMDS Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 23:05:20 +0100 Is there any standards about LMDS or MMDS ( wireless loop ) ?. Is there any standard modem to connect using this services to the Internet ?. Can usual 56 K modems connect to the Internet using this services ?. All the best. Agrupacin para la Devolucin del Bucle de Abonado ( A.D.B.A ) http://pagina.de/adba o tambin http://www.bucledeabonado.es.org/ Listas : onolista, bucle, electricas ------------------------------ From: Pedro M. Subject: ATT Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 23:03:51 +0100 How can I phone ( toll-free ) to ATT customer services from Spain ?. All the best. Agrupacin para la Devolucin del Bucle de Abonado ( A.D.B.A ) http://pagina.de/adba o tambin http://www.bucledeabonado.es.org/ Listas : onolista, bucle, electricas ------------------------------ From: stanri@yahooREMOVETHISPART.com (The bald one) Subject: Re: Call Outside US Territory Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2000 21:12:37 GMT Organization: @Home Network On Sat, 18 Mar 2000 08:59:37 -0800, Ramon A Caban wrote: > I JUST WANT TO KNOW HOW DO I HAVE TO DO OF I WANT TO CALL WHITH DIAL PAD > TO PUERTORICO OF USVIRGIN ISLAND. > From what I understand, you can't ... at least not at the present time. Looking at their FAQ's I read that calls to Alaska and hawaii are OK. They are working on allowing international calls. Granted Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands may not be international, but they are not part of the 50 US States. I should add, they have been saying that for at least 6 months. Do you use the service at all?? What do you think of it. I find it handy for general chat conversations with friends. But for more serious talking, I use the regular phone. Dial pad for me at least, works well about 50-75% of the time. Other times the conditions are such that either one side can't hear the other, or it's to broken up to understand. I might add, I'm on a cable modem connection, but my other party is always dial up modem. Like everyone else, I hate spam. To reply, remove the "REMOVETHISPART" from the email address. ------------------------------ From: sjsobol@NorthShoreTechnologies.Net (Steve Sobol) Subject: Re: Worldsite.ws Harvesting Internic Contact Info Date: 19 Mar 2000 04:49:14 GMT Organization: New Age Consulting Service Inc., Cleveland, OH, USA > From 'Mark Thomas': > given out only under the strictly specified circumstances. What we > offer you instead , is a safe and secure way to be contacted." > Is anyone else bothered by their marketing techniques and hypocracy? > I thought fully automated phone telemarketing, without a human on the > other end, was illegal these days. Who should I complain to? You can file suit under the TCPA, the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991. http://www.tcpalaw.com (or is it .org) The TCPA is 47 USC 227. The USCode is on the web, and the TCPA is at: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/47/227.shtml And robodialing is most definitely illegal under the TCPA. North Shore Technologies, Cleveland, OH http://NorthShoreTechnologies.net Steve Sobol, President, Chief Website Architect and Janitor sjsobol@NorthShoreTechnologies.net - 888.480.4NET - 216.619.2NET ------------------------------ From: stevenl11@aol.comstuffit (Steven Lichter) Date: 19 Mar 2000 05:19:30 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Subject: Re: Anti-Spam E-mail Suit Tossed Out aboritz said: > Would that be the same King County Superior Court, of which the > Honorable robert.alsdorf@metrokc.gov might be Chief Judge? I wonder > if Judge Robinson knows the Clerk of the Council, > anne.noris@metrokc.gov or elva.francis@metrokc.gov ? Do you get the > impression that the judges deciding these cases do not have a full > grasp of just what issues are being violated? Do you also get the > impression that none of these distinguished individuals ever had to > pay a bill for connect time charges to pick up spam email? Maybe the judge would like to find out about all the wonderful items that're available on the net via forged headers from commerical mailers, also his staff might also be interested in those items also. Maybe if those people in the court really have E-mail address they should be subscribed to all of those. This account is totaly blocked for E-mail unless you are listed; Read the following on how I feel about spam!!!! Apple Elite II 909-359-5338. Home of GBBS/LLUCE, support for the Apple II and Macintosh 24 hours 2400/14.4. An OggNet Server. The only good spammer is a dead one, have you hunted one down today? (c) ------------------------------ From: Ed Ellers Subject: Re: Anti-Spam E-mail Suit Tossed Out Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2000 02:04:52 -0500 Steve Sobol wrote: > The judge, on this point, is utterly clueless. Not in the area in which he is ruling. > The Washington law doesn't ban spam outright, but merely makes it > illegal to hide your identity while sending spam. This hardly > creates a hardship on businesses sending mail to residents of that > state." Yes, it does because it puts a state in the position of criminalizing actions that take place solely outside that state's boundaries. ------------------------------ From: Michael D. Adams Subject: Re: Anti-Spam E-mail Suit Tossed Out Date: 20 Mar 2000 03:21:52 GMT Organization: Triskele -- http://www.triskele.com Reply-To: Michael D. Adams Alan Boritz wrote: > On 15 Mar 2000 06:15:46 GMT, tbetz@panix.com (Tom Betz) wrote: >> Quoth Monty Solomon in : >>> The victory came when King County Superior Court Judge Palmer Robinson >> Would that be palmer.robinson@metrokc.gov ? > Would that be the same King County Superior Court, of which the > Honorable robert.alsdorf@metrokc.gov might be Chief Judge? I wonder > if Judge Robinson knows the Clerk of the Council, > anne.noris@metrokc.gov or elva.francis@metrokc.gov ? Trivia OTD -- by experimenting around with multiple valences of my email address, I have learned that cancel messages provide a remarkable source of "food" for spammer-run address-harvesters, and that the control.cancel pseudo-newsgroup is the medium by which cancel messages are transmitted among newsservers. Why, a version of my address which I mis-typed when I posted a test cancel message six years ago has been the target for hundreds, if not thousands, of pieces of spam ever since. ___ Michael D. Adams mda at triskele dot com <*,*> W Hartford CT (41d46m N, 72d44m W) http://www.triskele.com [`-'] Dear Lord: Please make my words sweet and tender, for tomorrow -"-"- I may have to eat them. -- Linux fortune file ------------------------------ From: Guy de-Beer Subject: Fiber in Drinking Water Systems Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 03:46:50 GMT Organization: Road Runner I am looking for information about a certain project, specifically about the technology that was used in it. I don't know where this project was or exactly when. What I know is that someone wired a city by pulling fiber through the drinking water system. I can not find anything about this wiring method. All the fiber experts I asked could'nt help me either. Any information about this solution would be greatly appreciated. Thanx, Guy d. ------------------------------ From: Ed Ellers Subject: Re: CPP, ATM Surcharges (was F.C.C. Debates Changes to Cell Phones) Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2000 02:08:33 -0500 Stanley Cline wrote: > IMO, in the absence of billed party preference or prepaid calling > arrangements, prison calls should be EXEMPT from third-party billing > blocking arrangements, and CLECs should be REQUIRED to handle third-party > billing for such calls.) A better idea -- allow telephone customers who block third-party billing to selectively opt in to (A) collect calls from prisons, (B) collect calls other than from prisons and/or (C) IXC billing for 101-0xxx calls. ------------------------------ Subject: Re: CPP, ATM Surcharges (was F.C.C. Debates Changes to Cell Phone) From: craigm@earthling.net (Craig Macbride) Organization: Nyx Net, The spirit of the Night (www.nyx.net) Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2000 09:22:58 GMT Stanley Cline writes: > Every single trial or commercial offering of CPP in the US has had the > calling party paying 40-60c/min, compared to 7-30c/min paid by the > wireless customer for outgoing or callee-pays calls. That's simply > too high! Sounds unreasonably high and I would question the sources of these "trials". In Australia, one major carrier charges 17.4c/min (off-peak) and 33.3c/min (peak). That's 10.6-20.3c/min in US currency. Why would there be less competition and higher prices in the USA? > Besides, that doesn't address the very simple fact that the > calling party is forced to pay whatever the wireless carrier charges; > they can't "dial-around" for a lower rate. The Australian situation is that the same company that you have pre-selected as your long-distance carrier handles your mobile calls (unless you override them). They bill a particular rate and deal with the costs of whether it's their own mobile network or one of the other mobile networks that you are calling. They win on some calls and lose (or win less) on others. But, since they want you as a customer, it is in their interests to be competitive. > Carriers are under little pressure to compete on > rates charged callers, since the caller has no choice but to pay > whatever the carrier charges This is only if you assume that the user is charged directly by the mobile service they are calling, rather than by the company whose land line they are using. > ATM surcharges are nothing more than PURE PROFIT. And, to my knowledge, only exist in the USA. I have noticed that many US ATMs which charge a surcharge explicitly state that non-US cards are exempt. > Foreign ATM fees (what YOUR bank charges you when use another bank's > ATM), yes. ATM surcharges (what the ATM OWNER charges), no. ATM > surcharges didn't become widespread until 2Q 1996, when the two major > national ATM networks dropped rules that prohibited ATM surcharges. I am curious as to how that works. As I understand it, here in Australia at least, I have a contract with my credit provider and that contract spells out in minute detail what every single fee is that they have a right to charge. There is no scope in that contract for third parties to charge me anything to access my money. The bank themselves will, of course, have spelt out what fee they will charge for overseas transactions, but there is no clause allowing the ATM operator to charge anything extra. It surprises me that there aren't similar laws concerning credit contracts in the USA. Craig Macbride -----------------------http://www.nyx.net/~cmacbrid------------------------ "It's a sense of humour like mine, Carla, that makes me proud to be ashamed of myself." - Captain Kremmen ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 00:02:51 EST From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Puppy Love Here in Independence, KS we have an animal shelter. As in many towns, the shelter is always, invariably full and overflowing. We have a full-time animal control officer, aka 'Dog Catcher' who also traps cats as well as the occassional possum, and raccoon who wander into his traps in search of the tasty cat food dinners which were left there. All animals -- mostly dogs which he pick up and cats, plus the occassional possum and raccoon are brought to the shelter. Like most full and overflowing animal shelters, ours is licensed by the United States Humane Society, the state and federal government wildlife agencies, and like most, ours has a non-pub phone number or rather, a phone number in the directory but with 'address is withheld at the customer's request.' Still, that does not keep citizens in Montgomery County -- a mostly rural area with a total population of about 25,000 people from locating us. It was so bad about a year ago, that people would dump animals at our doorstep during the night. Finally the City of Independence, which operates the shelter for the entire county, put a couple of large, very noticeable signs around the shelter property saying, 'Abandonment of any animal is against the law and punishable by a fine of a thousand dollars and/or six months in jail.' That mostly cured that problem, but occassionally we still arrive in the morning to find cats rummaging in the trash dumpster or a dog running wild which someone decided to 'donate' to us overnight. This means still one or two more to take in. Normally we prefer to require that people bring their animal in to us in person and sign it over to us. We require that the person come in our office (not just send their children in as some have done) and sign a form saying they are relinquishing the custody of the animal and that as custodian in good faith of the animal, they are surrendering the animal to the Animals With Our Love Society, for whatever humane disposition the Society chooses. Then in plain English, in somewhat larger print below that is the statement, 'do you understand the animal may be euthanized if in our sole judgment no suitable home can be found?' Most people are decent about it; they'll leave a dog or cat with us, sign the form, make a donation for the animal's welfare and leave with tears in their eyes. They know what the solution is going to be. Some asked to be notified if the animal finds a new home. We tell them the exact specifics are confidential, but when a home is found, we will at least tell them that much, even if not the name/address of the new owner. People who throw dogs and cats away are cowards, like whoever tossed a blind elderly cocker spaniel in the river recently. For about 90 percent of the animals that means euthanasia. About 10 percent get adopted; the chances of adoption are much greater for young animals -- puppies and kittens -- while older cats and dogs have almost no chance of adoption. Still, we want people to look us in the face and sign on the line in very big print at the top of the form giving their consent for euthanasia. If they will do that -- look us in the face and sign the form -- we will take in the animal. The shelter manager refers to it as a 'shitty solution to a shitty problem'; the veternarian comes in every Tuesday to deal with it. While I am looking for work, I go out every morning to the shelter -- which is on the edge of town -- to feed the dogs and cats. There are typically five or six *dozen* animals there on any given day. The dog catcher will come in three or four times each day with new arrivals. On arrival, the animals get a bath if that is possible -- some of the cats are wild -- along with medical treatment as needed, and a meal. Some of the animals are *so* vicious you just know they won't be around a week later. If the animal control officer brings in a wild cat, he will use a very long pole with a rope on the end to hold the stuggling cat way out in front of him. A sign on the front of the cage door will indicate 'not a happy camper, DO NOT open door without wearing gloves'. On the other hand, some animals are frightened out of their wits, and will try to hide in the rear of their cage. When I go in each morning, it is easy to tell who the new arrivals are from the day before. Sometimes the new arrivals will cower in the rear of their cage and refuse any food. They are just like people with different personalities. Some are outgoing and want to make friends; eating all the food they can get (or steal from other animals). Entire litters are born there. A litter of kittens was born last week. Imagine beginning your life in a shelter. The mother cat was very protective nonetheless, nursing her babies. In the dog area, the animals start a huge ruckus everytime a new person walks in to look at them. Everyone of them seems to be convinced their human family has come to claim them and they want to make sure the humans know where to find them. About a month ago, a female Huskie had a litter, and I want to tell you about her, in this story I have entitled 'Puppy Love'. While I was working at the front desk one day about a week ago, a little boy came in and asked if we had any dogs available for adoption (what else is new?) and if so, how much did they cost. I told him our dogs were forty dollars, which paid the cost of spaying or neutering, which is required by state law before any animal can leave the shelter, 'plus whatever donation you would like to make, if any, to pay for their welfare while they were with us. The little guy got in his pocket and found $2.37 which was all of his money. He asked to look at the dogs so I brought the Huskie out. Within a few seconds, here she came with four little balls of fur -- her family -- running along with her. Three of the four were scampering along and running next to her. The fourth one was lagging behind, sort of limping. The kid noticed this right away and asked what was wrong with that one. Looking at the animal's shelter record, I told the kid that that particular dog had been born with a socket for his hip joint missing. The kid said he wanted that one. The file said that particular puppy was not adoptable because of its condition. He insisted; so I called the shelter manager in her office. She said if he wanted that one to let him have it. 'Just go ahead and give it to him; no charge.' The kid by now was very adamamant; he wanted to raise the money to give us the full forty dollars. 'I will give you the $2.37 I have now, and one dollar per week until I get it all paid off'. The shelter manager asked why he wanted to pay full price like that. The kid said 'here is why, I will show you.' With that, he rolled up his pants leg to reveal a badly withered leg with a brace. He said, 'I was born without a hip socket for one leg. I figured maybe the dog should go to a home where the owner understood the problem. You see, I don't get around very well either. The other kids I go to school with never select me for any teams because I am too slow. They don't like me very much at all. I wanted to make sure the dog knew that he was loved anyway, just as he is.' I told him I would bring the dog to his house that afternoon, and I did so, since our policy is that parents have to approve of pets adopted from us. He left us his $2.37 as he promised, and on Saturday he brought in another one dollar, and brought his dog for us to see. We had given him a leash and a box of dog biscuits. He had named the dog 'Michael' and he was obviously his pride and joy. And it seemed obvious that in the several days they had been together, the puppy had started to love his new master a lot also. And that's the report from Independence, KS for this week. PAT ------------------------------ E nd of TELECOM Digest V20 #29 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Mar 20 21:50:16 2000 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id VAA00508; Mon, 20 Mar 2000 21:50:16 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 21:50:16 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200003210250.VAA00508@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #30 TELECOM Digest Mon, 20 Mar 2000 21:50:00 EST Volume 20 : Issue 30 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Updated Telephony History Page (Mike Sandman) Re: Puppy Love (David B. Horvath, CCP) Re: Cell Phones May Upgrade Automatically (W.D.A. Geary) Who's Responsible For a Low-Hanging Cable?? (Andy Berry) Re: CPP, ATM Surcharges (was F.C.C. Debates Changes) (Ross McMicken) Re: CPP, ATM Surcharges (was F.C.C. Debates Changes) (Chris Wilkinson) Privacy is Back in Web Surfers Hands! (nirtechnion@my-deja.com) GSM Roles in Scandinavia (IT Jobs) Re: Anti-Spam E-mail Suit Tossed Out (Eli Mantel) Re: Call Outside US Territory (Mark Brukhartz) Re: A Constitutional Right to Anonymous Speech? (John David Galt) Re: A Constitutional Right to Anonymous Speech? (John McHarry) Re: A Constitutional Right to Anonymous Speech? (Mel Beckman) The Spy Who Bugged Me (Monty Solomon) Re: Calling AT&T Customer Service From Outside of North America (J. Singer) Re: Calling AT&T From Anywhere at Anytime (Scott Dance) 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-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 259 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 805-545-5115 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@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: hyperarchive.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 the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Mike Sandman Subject: Updated Telephony History Page Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 13:20:38 -0600 Organization: Mike Sandman Enterprises Reply-To: mike@sandman.com I've finally updated our Telephony History Page, after four or five years! http://www.sandman.com/telhist.html I'm still working on it, but it's already got lots of pictures, and some pretty strange stuff. I particularly like strange stuff. I have two complete BECO catalogs there from the 1960's and 70's, which are full of very neat old items. These catalogs are a history lesson in themselves, since BECO started by selling refurbished and war surplus stuff in the 1950's. They also sold perfectly good "antique" candlestick phones, made into lamps and flower planters. I guess maybe the phones we use today will end up as flower planters some day? BECO also had some wild pictures of scantily clad women in their later catalog, including one of "Ma Bell" looking like you have probably never thought of her. There's also an ad for the Dan Mac Magneto Worm Harvestor. Dan McNulty, who owned Telephone Repair Co. in Chicago (not "the" phone company), sold the magnetos out of old phones to fishermen, in ads in magazines like Popular Science. He also manufactured the Dan Mac Loud Ringing Bell for years, which was very popular at non-Bell companies. Have fun... Mike Sandman Mike Sandman 630-980-7710 E-mail: mike@sandman.com WWW: http://www.sandman.com Our 112 page catalog of Unique Telecom Products & Tools is on the World Wide Web. We have a fantastic assortment of Cable Installation Tools and Training Videos to help you use them. NEW "Basic ISDN", "Intro to T1" and Fiber Optic/CAT 5 Training Videos are now available. Also check out our Telephony History Page, which contains ads and articles from telephony related magazines from the first part of the century. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Mike Sandman's large catalog is free for the asking. I strongly urge every one of you to get a copy by asking Mike for it. You can write mike@sandman.com or visit his pages on the web. Mike has been a very big supporter of TELECOM Digest for a number of years. If you order someting from him through the mail, he is very trustworthy and reliable. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 18:34:53 -0500 From: dhorvath@cobs.com (David B. Horvath, CCP) Subject: Re: Puppy Love On Mon, 20 Mar 2000 00:02:51 EST, our esteemed moderator wrote: > Here in Independence, KS we have an animal shelter. As in many towns, > the shelter is always, invariably full and overflowing. We have a > full-time animal control officer, aka 'Dog Catcher' who also traps > cats as well as the occassional possum, and raccoon who wander into > his traps in search of the tasty cat food dinners which were left > there. All animals -- mostly dogs which he pick up and cats, plus > the occassional possum and raccoon are brought to the shelter. Delaware County Pennslyvania (suburban Philadelphia) also has an active animal shelter run by the local SPCA. They are always busy and seem to put more animals to sleep than they can adopt out. It is especially bad after significant events like Easter (chicks and bunnies) or "101 Dalmations". It is so bad out there that the staff has become very jaded and don't seem willing to help good families when they lose their pets. We've adopted 2 dogs and 2 cats from there. The first dog 13 years ago shortly after my wife and I got married. The second dog about 1.5 years ago. Neither were young puppies (about 9 months and 2 years respectively). The second needed medical treatment for separation anxiety and we almost went for care at the University of Pennsylvania for him. We were the second or third family to adopt him from the shelter -- we knew that he would not be adopted out another time if we took him back. The drugs were $60/month -- the same stuff given to humans with obsessive compulsive disorder. They worked. The two cats were younger -- the second one so young that our vet said it should not be away from its mother (who was *not* at the center). We fed him KMR through an eyedropper. Our third dog my grandmother adopted from the Philadelphia SPCA; we have taken care of that dog since my grandmother died. None of them are purebreeds. They are all snipped and will not reproduce. But they are the most loving creatures (well, maybe not the cats) and generally get along. As a side note about people dumping animals ... My wife and I were driving through upstate New York. It was a chilly and rainy day. We had been on the road for hours. We had the first dog with us. We hit the rest stop, walked the dog for a bit, and hooked him up to a picnic table to get a bit more air before we hit the road again. We went in the little tourist information/bathroom area. While we were inside the elderly clerk commented that someone had dumped a dog outside, *again*. We looked to see what poor animal had appeared since there were no other cars and we had just walked in. It was our dog and we explained why he was out there. Then they explained their comment. On a *regular* basis, people would pull in, drop the dog off, and drive away. They didn't even have the decency to go to an animal shelter. There is a special place in hell for *those* people or that guy in California who, in a fit of road rage, threw the dog of the woman who hit his car into on-coming traffic. There is at least $110,000 reward for his arrest/conviction. If I even thought I knew who did it, I would turn him in for free ... David B. Horvath, CCP Consultant, Author, International Lecturer, Adjunct Professor Board Member, ICCP Educational Foundation ------------------------------ From: wdag@my-deja.com (W.D.A. Geary) Subject: Re: Cell Phones May Upgrade Automatically Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 18:36:18 GMT Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy. "Big Brother" could also "update" cellphone to: *) Passively "alert/listen-in": calls a monitoring facility whenever a cellphone call initiated or in progress, allows full monitoring of dialed-number and both sides of conversation. *) Actively turn cellphone "on" (unless battery is disconnected) at command of monitoring facility, to serve as eavesdropping device or locator beacon. In article , itsamike@yahoo.com (Mike Pollock) wrote: > Cell phones may upgrade automatically > By The Associated Press > March 17, 2000, 11:00 a.m. PT > http://home.cnet.com/category/0-1004-200-1575643.html > The Federal Communications Commission is reviewing technology that > automatically updates phones and radios as new services are developed. W.D.A.Geary Wardenclyffe Microtechnology Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana. ------------------------------ From: Andy Berry Subject: Who's Responsible For a Low-Hanging Cable?? Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 12:28:24 -0600 Organization: Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas The company I work for is about to acquire a piece of property. The main frontage has a low (~10') hanging cable on it. I am concerned about trucks hitting it and pulling it down. Who is responsible for this, us or the LEC?? If it's the LEC, does anybody know how to obtain the phone no.for the local outside plant manager? The local "store" has no clue. TIA Andy B. ------------------------------ From: Ross McMicken Subject: Re: CPP, ATM Surcharges (was F.C.C. Debates Changes to Cell Phone) Organization: Giganews.Com - Premium News Outsourcing Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 07:57:58 -0600 On Sun, 19 Mar 2000 09:22:58 GMT, craigm@earthling.net (Craig Macbride) wrote: >> ATM surcharges are nothing more than PURE PROFIT. > And, to my knowledge, only exist in the USA. I have noticed that many > US ATMs which charge a surcharge explicitly state that non-US cards are > exempt. >> Foreign ATM fees (what YOUR bank charges you when use another bank's >> ATM), yes. ATM surcharges (what the ATM OWNER charges), no. ATM >> surcharges didn't become widespread until 2Q 1996, when the two major >> national ATM networks dropped rules that prohibited ATM surcharges. > I am curious as to how that works. As I understand it, here in > Australia at least, I have a contract with my credit provider and that > contract spells out in minute detail what every single fee is that > they have a right to charge. There is no scope in that contract for > third parties to charge me anything to access my money. The bank > themselves will, of course, have spelt out what fee they will charge > for overseas transactions, but there is no clause allowing the ATM > operator to charge anything extra. It surprises me that there aren't > similar laws concerning credit contracts in the USA. In the US, your bank generally doesn't charge you for using their ATM. A different bank will charge you because they have no business relationship with you, and won't give you money unless you pay them for the privilege at the time you make the withdrawal. I don't have a problem with banks doing that, as they all give you the option of terminating the transaction prior to incurring the fee. We have plenty of places to get money without a charge, ie every grocery store, so it's never been a problem. ------------------------------ From: news@askadrian.com (Christopher Wilkinson) Subject: Re: CPP, ATM Surcharges (was F.C.C. Debates Changes to Cell Phone) Reply-To: news@askadian.com Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 08:31:02 GMT Organization: Cable Internet (post doesn't reflect views of Cable Internet) On Sun, 19 Mar 2000 09:22:58 GMT, craigm@earthling.net (Craig Macbride) wrote: >> ATM surcharges are nothing more than PURE PROFIT. > And, to my knowledge, only exist in the USA. I have noticed that many > US ATMs which charge a surcharge explicitly state that non-US cards are > exempt. >> Foreign ATM fees (what YOUR bank charges you when use another bank's >> ATM), yes. ATM surcharges (what the ATM OWNER charges), no. ATM >> surcharges didn't become widespread until 2Q 1996, when the two major >> national ATM networks dropped rules that prohibited ATM surcharges. > Australia at least, I have a contract with my credit provider and that > contract spells out in minute detail what every single fee is that > they have a right to charge. There is no scope in that contract for > third parties to charge me anything to access my money. The bank > themselves will, of course, have spelt out what fee they will charge > for overseas transactions, but there is no clause allowing the ATM > operator to charge anything extra. It surprises me that there aren't > similar laws concerning credit contracts in the USA. This is a major hot issue in the UK at the moment -- but for credit/debit cards issued here terms and conditions can be amended from time to time (by written notice) and I have little doubt that as cards are replaced specific clauses allowing surcharges will be included. ------------------------------ From: nirtechnion@my-deja.com Subject: Privacy is Back in Web Surfers Hands ! Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 15:40:12 GMT Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy. This new product -- IDcide free privacy companion -- gives web surfers the ability to know who is tracking them and to block them. You would be amazed to see how many trackers are watching each step you do on the web. try it and be amazed !!! http://www.idcide.com/ Nir [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: As an alternate, you are free and encouraged to use http://telecom-digest/secret-surfer.html to do your surfing using a proxy server. You can also use the anonymous email writing facility there. Try it out and see what you think. Its free to Digest readers. PAT] ------------------------------ Reply-To: IT Jobs From: IT Jobs Subject: GSM Roles in Scandinavia Organization: IT Jobs Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 21:09:44 -0000 Our Client seeks a number of GSM professionals for long term contracts based in Scandinavia. The skills we are currently seeking include: - GSM installation - WAP - XML - JAVA - Javabeans No language experience necessary as English is used as the business language at these all of these organizations. No visa problems, we can arrange these on your behalf. For further information, please email you resume to Telecoms@Internet-solutions.com ------------------------------ From: Eli Mantel Subject: Re: Anti-Spam E-mail Suit Tossed Out Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 00:02:30 PST Ed Ellers (ed_ellers@msn.com) wrote: > ... [the anti-spam law "creates a hardship" because it] > puts a state in the position of criminalizing actions > that take place solely outside that state's boundaries. So if a person in one state fires a gun across a state line killing somebody in another state, I guess he gets away with murder. :-) California can't make gay marriage in Hawaii illegal, but you never know, they might be able to make it illegal for California residents to travel to Hawaii to participate in a gay marriage. I believe there are laws like this at the federal level. More seriously, Ed's line of reasoning is flawed. If it were true, then the United States couldn't claim jurisdiction when someone in a foreign country hacked a web site in the U.S., because that would criminalize an action which took place completely outside of the U.S. ------------------------------ From: Mark.Brukhartz@wdr.com Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 15:19:44 -0600 Subject: Re: Call Outside US Territory AT&T One Rate long distance plans charge domestic US rates for calls to Puerto Rico, the US Virgin Islands and Guam. They offer plans for $4.95 per month and 7 cents a minute, or $8.95 per month and 5 cents per minute. I'm assuming that you're calling from one of the 50 states. I do not know if AT&T One Rate is available from Puerto Rico or USVI. -Mark ------------------------------ From: John_David_Galt@acm.org Organization: Association for Computing Machinery Subject: Re: A Constitutional Right to Anonymous Speech? Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 20:10:54 GMT Garrett Wollman wrote: > In article , Mel Beckman > wrote: >> A constitutional right? I don't believe anything in the constitutions >> can be construed to guarantee _anonymous_ free speech. > You may not believe so, but the Supreme Court of the United States > does, and said so in a campaign-finance case a few years ago. I don't > remember the particulars, but the case turned on whether a state could > require those making so-called ``independent expenditures'' to > identify themselves in their advertising. The Supreme Court ruled > that anonymous political speech, at least, is a fundamental > constitutional right. You're certainly welcome to disagree, but > that's the Law of the Land. The "independent" group in that case was the NAACP, which quite sensibly feared various kinds of retaliation if its members' names were made public. The plaintiff was a Southern state government, I forget which. John David Galt ------------------------------ From: John McHarry Subject: Re: A Constitutional Right to Anonymous Speech? Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 19:37:35 -0500 On 19 Mar 2000 17:43:32 GMT, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) wrote: > There are several distinct issues at work here. Yes. > As someone noted, a Constitutional right of free expression only > applies to the *government's* actions. A non-governmental entity, > such as an ISP, intermediate carrier, host site, or your employer, can > regulate speech any way it chooses, fair or not. People get upset if > a TV network won't air a program that violates the network's > standards, but that is totally within the network's right as the owner > of the distribution channel. People get upset if a school principal > won't allow the student newspaper to publish a certain article, but > the principal is the publisher and the school (not the student) is > ultimately responsible for what goes into the newspaper. But most schools are governmental entities. I think most of their censorship comes under "in loco parentes", if that still survives. I used to write articles for my high school rag that the editor would take home, read to her husband, compliment me on the humor, and reject, because they "wouldn't be fitting for the freshmen." The one political piece I wrote, a phillipic against a state curfew law, that trashed out the governor, with quotes from one of his minions, she published. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 05:59:47 -0800 From: Mel Beckman Subject: Re: A Constitutional Right to Anonymous Speech? At 1:57 AM -0500 3/20/00, GAWollman wrote: > You may not believe so, but the Supreme Court of the United States > does, and said so in a campaign-finance case a few years ago. I don't > remember the particulars, but the case turned on whether a state could > require those making so-called ``independent expenditures'' to > identify themselves in their advertising. The Supreme Court ruled > that anonymous political speech, at least, is a fundamental > constitutional right. You're certainly welcome to disagree, but > that's the Law of the Land. If you can cite such a case, you may have a valid argument. However, I can't location any case like this in an extensive search. I did find several cases related to political action committees airing independent campaign commercials being asked to disclose their list of constituent members; the Supreme Court ruled that PACs do not have to make such disclosures, as long as they clearly identify the name of the PAC behind the ad. That's not the same thing as anonymous free speech, and I have to ask why the Supreme Court requires PACs identify themselves if anonymous speech is in fact recognized by them. Can you provide a citation? -mel ------------------------------ Reply-To: Monty Solomon From: Monty Solomon Subject: The Spy Who Bugged Me Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 15:03:13 -0500 Why make it easy to eavesdrop on satellite telephone calls? INTELLIGENCE agencies won't have any trouble working out how to snoop unnoticed on satellite phone calls. The information has just been published in patents filed by Motorola in the US and Europe. http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns222923 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 14:12:10 -0800 From: Joseph Singer Subject: Re: Calling AT&T Customer Service From Outside of North America Pedro M. Fri, 17 Mar 2000 23:03:51 +0100 wrote: > How can I phone ( toll-free ) to ATT customer services from Spain ?. Use AT&T direct's access number from Spain 900-990011. When the operator answers ask for a collect call to 412 553-7458 or if you wish to pay for the call just dial the international access code +1 412 553 7458. Their call center is in the Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania area. There may even be an option when you call AT&T direct to choose customer service by pressing one of the choices (using a DTMF telephone.) Joseph Singer Seattle, Washington USA [ICQ pgr] +1 206 405 2052 [voice mail] +1 206 493 0706 [FAX] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 10:49:48 -0800 From: Scott Dance Reply-To: sbdance@iname.com Subject: Re: Calling ATT From Anywhere in the World, Anytime I don't believe it's possible to reach AT&T Customer Service from anywhere in the world (especially the United States). [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: We knew that was the case with Sprint Long Distance. Whoever you are trying to reach has always 'just stepped away from her desk for a few minutes' or 'has been in a conference/training class all day'. Is AT&T now getting to be as bad as Sprint? PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V20 #30 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Mar 21 11:48:23 2000 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id LAA26666; Tue, 21 Mar 2000 11:48:23 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2000 11:48:23 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200003211648.LAA26666@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #31 TELECOM Digest Tue, 21 Mar 2000 11:48:00 EST Volume 20 : Issue 31 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Stalking Site: Slick or Sick? (Monty Solomon) Polar Explorers Isolated by Iridium Collapse (Monty Solomon) Re: Anti-Spam E-mail Suit Tossed Out (John David Galt) Re: A Constitutional Right to Anonymous Speech? (Herb Stein) Colorado Lawmakers OK Anti-Spam Bill (Monty Solomon) Re: Who's Responsible For a Low-Hanging Cable?? (Carl Knoblock) Re: Who's Responsible For a Low-Hanging Cable?? (Anthony Argyriou) Re: CPP, ATM Surcharges (was F.C.C. Debates Changes) (73115.1041) Re: CPP, ATM Surcharges (Jonathan Edelson) Re: The Spy Who Bugged Me (Arthur Ross) Data Transmission Speeds (USAOz) Re: What Can be Done When the LECs T1 Card Goes? (Kevin Bertsch) OptOut Software (Claire Pieterik) 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-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 259 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 805-545-5115 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@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: hyperarchive.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 the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has 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. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 20:44:01 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Stalking Site: Slick or Sick? http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,35022,00.html by Lynn Burke 12:50 p.m. Mar. 17, 2000 PST Somebody is stalking Julie. His identity isn't known, but he says he became infatuated with a young woman named Julie when she rented a movie in the Los Angeles video store where he works. He looked up her address on her video account, broke into her apartment, where she lives alone, and installed a voyeur cam in her bedroom that streams video directly to his website, ForTheLoveofJulie.com. It may be one of the Internet's creepiest sites -- and one of the most sconvincing hoaxes to hit the Net since the great virgin caper of 1998 at ourfirstime.com. In fact, ForTheLoveofJulie.com was so convincing that the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department strongly suggested the owners take the site down Wednesday. Sergeant Larry Balich, the lead investigator of the department's computer crimes unit, said he was disturbed when he looked at the site. "At first, we thought there was something to it," he said. Exactly the point, says Tim Street, president of Santa Monica, California's Spark Factory, which created the site. "It looks real," he said. "I think I've stumbled across something that is truly groundbreaking." The site was back up Friday with disclaimers saying its contents are fiction and that "Julie is not in any danger." A user is confronted by a firewall at the front door. But in a matter of seconds, a box pops up from Creepysites.com that claims to have hacked the password, and invites the user in. "We found this creepy site quite by accident and had to hack around its password, and we're almost sorry we did," Creepysites says. "Look at this one first because the guy who put it up is bound to get busted soon." The thing is, Creepysites.com is Fortheloveofjulie.com. Tim Street owns them both. A Web user named David Widmann, who got the link from a friend, says he fell for it. "Once I got in, I figured it was a joke, but after going through some of the material I became less and less sure. I kept waiting for the punchline, but what came was just more strangeness that seemed like something out of an FBI personality profile or something," he said. Critics like Feminist.com president Marianne Schnall say Street is behaving utterly irresponsibly. "Owners can say, 'Oh, we're not responsible for how people use the information,'" she said. "That's just not the right attitude to have. Violence against women is a really serious issue, and it makes you wonder whether sites like daterape.org [a site that was also recently shut down] and this trivialize these very important issues and it may actually encourage this type of behavior." Street says he's simply providing a form of entertainment. "There's no violence in the site," he said. "When you make a thriller movie you don't encourage people to go out and kill." Besides, Street said, the site is getting hundreds of thousands of page views a day. Whether this is true or not, the site's producers are making an effort to boost page views, and they've started pumping out press releases boasting that their site "adds an interactive element to serialized content and brings Internet stalking and voyeurism to a heightened reality." But even Hallie Bird, the 20-year-old actress from Canada who plays Julie, admits that the site is "really creepy." "There's one [movie] where you see my feet [while I'm] changing clothes, that was the creepiest one," she said. The folks behind the site are hoping to turn their idea into cash. Street says he's looking for funding to produce a feature film that will take off where the virtual journal leaves off. Sort of a Blair Witch for cyberstalkers. In the meantime, he's hoping to stay out of trouble with the law. "It's not like we're freedom fighters or anything," he said. "We don't want to rock the boat with law enforcement, but we're protected under freedom of speech." Schnall says that while that may be true, the site is nonetheless upsetting and reflective of a societal problem. "This kind of thing has to be considered unacceptable content," she said. "It is definitely not a healthy way to be surfing the Net." Copyright 1994-2000 Wired Digital Inc. All rights reserved. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 21:28:28 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Polar Explorers Isolated by Iridium Phone Collapse OSLO (Reuters) - Two Norwegians trekking across the Arctic via the North Pole face isolation with the collapse of the $5 billion Iridium satellite telephone network, a spokesman said Monday. http://news.lycos.com/headlines/Technology/article.asp?docid=RTTECH-IRIDIUM-NORWAY&date=20000320 Iridium Satellite Network to Flame Out Saturday, March 18, 2000 WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Iridium LLC, a bankrupt $5 billion satellite telephone service, entered the history books on Saturday as one of the costliest corporate fiascoes of all time. http://news.lycos.com/headlines/Technology/article.asp?docid=RTTECH-TECH-IRIDIUM&date=20000318 Iridium Phone Collapse Hits French Pacific Rower Friday, March 17, 2000 WELLINGTON, New Zealand (Reuters) - The impending collapse of the global $5 billion Iridium mobile telephone network will isolate a French rower attempting a solo crossing of the Pacific, organizers of his marathon said Saturday. http://news.lycos.com/headlines/Technology/article.asp?docid=RTTECH-IRIDIUM-ROWER&date=20000317 ------------------------------ From: John_David_Galt@acm.org (John David Galt) Organization: Association for Computing Machinery Subject: Re: Anti-Spam E-mail Suit Tossed Out Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2000 05:35:53 GMT Eli Mantel (mantel@hotmail.com) wrote: > Ed Ellers (ed_ellers@msn.com) wrote: >> ... [the anti-spam law "creates a hardship" because it] >> puts a state in the position of criminalizing actions >> that take place solely outside that state's boundaries. > So if a person in one state fires a gun across a state line killing > somebody in another state, I guess he gets away with murder. :-) It would certainly be interstate commerce, therefore a matter for Congress and not the state to legislate against. So is spam, if it enters WA from another US state. In addition, anything done on the telephone network is "interstate" for the purpose of some laws, simply because the network is itself interstate. This is one of those gray areas where lawyers get rich. But there is at least some doubt that the Washington law is valid even for intrastate spam. I'm pretty sure there is already a federal law against interstate "nuisance and harassing" phone calls. If that were simply extended it would be the perfect tool for the job here. Except that the spammers will just move to Antigua or Moldova or somewhere ... wait, they're already there! Seriously, if there's any way to stop spam through law, that law would have to be international in scope. And I really don't want to see that ball start rolling, because any possible international agreement to regulate communications will certainly (1) make us all less free, and (2) become obsolete as soon as it's ratified (unless they outlaw the development of new technology and somehow make it stick). The right way to stop spam, I think, is to continue developing voluntary protection mechanisms such as the ORBS and MAPS RBL lists. John David Galt [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Plus, what the original writer was ignoring is that murder is against the law in all fifty states. PAT] ------------------------------ From: herb@herbstein.com (Herb Stein) Subject: Re: A Constitutional Right to Anonymous Speech? Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2000 05:39:17 GMT Although written before the U. S. Constitution was ratified, the Federalist Papers were anonymous. Hamilton and Jay had a clear understanding of the need for anonymous speech. In article , John McHarry wrote: > On 19 Mar 2000 17:43:32 GMT, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) > wrote: >> There are several distinct issues at work here. > Yes. >> As someone noted, a Constitutional right of free expression only >> applies to the *government's* actions. A non-governmental entity, >> such as an ISP, intermediate carrier, host site, or your employer, can >> regulate speech any way it chooses, fair or not. People get upset if >> a TV network won't air a program that violates the network's >> standards, but that is totally within the network's right as the owner >> of the distribution channel. People get upset if a school principal >> won't allow the student newspaper to publish a certain article, but >> the principal is the publisher and the school (not the student) is >> ultimately responsible for what goes into the newspaper. > But most schools are governmental entities. I think most of their > censorship comes under "in loco parentes", if that still survives. > I used to write articles for my high school rag that the editor would > take home, read to her husband, compliment me on the humor, and > reject, because they "wouldn't be fitting for the freshmen." The one > political piece I wrote, a phillipic against a state curfew law, that > trashed out the governor, with quotes from one of his minions, she > published. Herb Stein The Herb Stein Group www.herbstein.com herb@herbstein.com 314 215-3584 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 21:57:55 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Colorado Lawmakers OK Anti-Spam Bill By Dick Kelsey, Newsbytes Special to the E-Commerce Times March 20, 2000 A bill to stem the avalanche of unsolicited e-mail won final approval by the Colorado Senate today and was sent to Governor Bill Owens for his signature. http://www.ecommercetimes.com/news/articles2000/000320-nb2.shtml ------------------------------ From: Carl Knoblock Organization: Apple II Forever Subject: Re: Who's Responsible For a Low-Hanging Cable?? Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2000 03:43:44 GMT Andy Berry wrote: > The company I work for is about to acquire a piece of property. The > main frontage has a low (~10') hanging cable on it. I am concerned > about trucks hitting it and pulling it down. Who is responsible for > this, us or the LEC?? If it's the LEC, does anybody know how to > obtain the phone no.for the local outside plant manager? The local > "store" has no clue. Try the repair number, and if they can't understand the problem, look for a number to call for locating buried utilities before you dig. I know, the cable in question isn't buried, but you are going to be digging, aren't you? When they come, point out the low cable. Carl G. Knoblock Telephone Tech cknoblo@home.com (402) 397-5533 cknoblo@delphi.com KansasFest 2000, July 26-30, 2000 3325 South 89th St. Y][Kfest - The Millenium KFest Omaha, NE 68124-3008 ------------------------------ From: Anthony Argyriou Subject: Re: Who's Responsible For a Low-Hanging Cable?? Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2000 00:27:44 -0800 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com On Mon, 20 Mar 2000 12:28:24 -0600, Andy Berry wrote: > The company I work for is about to acquire a piece of property. The > main frontage has a low (~10') hanging cable on it. I am concerned > about trucks hitting it and pulling it down. Who is responsible for > this, us or the LEC?? If it's the LEC, does anybody know how to > obtain the phone no.for the local outside plant manager? The local > "store" has no clue. In California, the LEC owns the line up to the junction box, the subscriber or property owner owns it after that. So, unless the junction box is up on the pole with the low cable, it's likely that the LEC owns it. Provided your state has the same rules as California. The phone book should have listings for that, if not, call your local "Underground Service Alert" and ask them for the name and number of the person at the phone company. Even if the underground and overhead lines are handled by different people, they'll know who their counterparts are. (USA is 1-800-642-2444 in Northern California) Anthony Argyriou http://www.alphageo.com/ ------------------------------ From: 73115.1041@compuserve.com Subject: Re: CPP, ATM Surcharges (was F.C.C. Debates Changes) Organization: Giganews.Com - Premium News Outsourcing Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 20:57:07 -0700 Ross McMicken wrote: > A different bank will charge you because they have no business > relationship with you, and won't give you money unless you pay them > for the privilege at the time you make the withdrawal. No, but they do ahave a business relationship with your bank, through the intertie network. And indeed, they do charge your bank a rather substantial amount when you use their ATM. The reason they started charging you directly (on top of the charge to your bank) was competitive. The banks with large ATM networks didn't want to let a smaller, more personal bank customer use their machines. I suspect they wanted to raise the rate charged directly to the customer bank and were told to go jump in the lake. Their response was to implement the direct charge. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2000 08:10:12 -0500 From: Jonathan Edelson Subject: Re: CPP, ATM Surcharges On Sun, 19 Mar 2000 09:22:58 GMT, craigm@earthling.net (Craig Macbride) wrote: > Australia at least, I have a contract with my credit provider and that > contract spells out in minute detail what every single fee is that > they have a right to charge. There is no scope in that contract for > third parties to charge me anything to access my money. Actually, the same is true in the US. There is no scope in the contract between you and your bank for the ATM surcharges. Instead the third party bank sets up their ATMs so that you have to agree to the surcharge in order to get your money, and then proceeds to take their surchage in the form of an increase in the amount that your account is debited. For example, I want $50, and go to a convenient ATM, owned by a third party. I set up my transaction, and then a prompt will appear 'This financial institution charges a fee of $1.50 for the use of this ATM for withdrawls. Press 'YES' to continue with your transaction.' I press yes, and $50 is dispensed. Both the transaction record and my statement at the end of the month will show a withdrawl of $51.50. -Jon ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2000 07:29:21 -0700 From: Arthur Ross Subject: Re: The Spy Who Bugged Me At 21:50 -0500 03/20/2000, editor@telecom-digest.org wrote: Monty Solomon wrote: > Why make it easy to eavesdrop on satellite telephone calls? > INTELLIGENCE agencies won't have any trouble working out how to snoop > unnoticed on satellite phone calls. The information has just been > published in patents filed by Motorola in the US and Europe. 1. I can't imagine why anybody would think that interception of freely propagating radio signals is news. 2. This particular patent seems to be relevant only to the (late) Iridium satellites, which use(d) crosslinks. Why they did that was a mystery to me too, until I found out that one of the consultants who they hired to help design it was a crosslink specialist. Ergo, lots of crosslinks for that real high percentage of international traffic that they expected (never been able to figure out where that notion came from either). 3. I can't imagine why Moto would take the trouble to patent this. It has zero commercial value, and has the downside of stirring up hostility. In short -- dumb, in a multi-faceted way. In the words of one of my local Moto buddies, they have permission from the bankruptcy judge to "de-orbit" the Iridium satellites, in what has to be the most expensive fireworks show ever. Could the business failure have been due to their failure to rename it from Iridium (element 77) to Dysprosium (element 66) when the number of satellites changed from 77 to 66? ;-) Dr. Arthur H. M. Ross 2325 East Orangewood Avenue Phoenix, AZ 85020-4730 Tel: 602-371-9708 Fax: 602-336-7074 Portable (CDMA, of course!): 602-677-1021 ------------------------------ From: USAOz Subject: Data Transmission Speeds Organization: http://www.remarq.com: The World's Usenet/Discussions Start Here Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2000 03:12:13 -0800 Our class is having a debate as to whether it would be faster tramsmission of digital data using a microwave link or a fibre-optic link. Could we have some thoughts on this please? ------------------------------ From: Kevin Bertsch Organization: @Home Network Subject: Re: What Can be Done When the LECs T1 Card Goes? Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2000 05:55:06 GMT Dan Star wrote: > We had a site coneected via Frame relay go down in the morning due to > a faulty T1 card provided by the Ameritech LEC. The Frame service > itself is provided by MCIWorldCom. It took the LEC until 8 pm that > night to fix it. Can either party be held responsible for this? How > should a customer respond to this occurence? > Dan Dan, Somewhere, you should have an "SLA" (service level agreement) from Ameritech. (If you don't, now would be a good time to negotiate one!) These normally spell out what constitutes a 'minor' and a 'major' fault, how quickly the LEC has to respond to faults of each type, penalties for missing their response windows, etc. I'd consult your document to determine where you stand, and what redress you're entitled to. Hope this helps, Kevin Bertsch Great Leap Forward Telecom ------------------------------ From: Claire Pieterek Reply-To: pieterek@pipeline.com Subject: OptOut Software Fellow Telecom Digest readers may be interested in this: Steve Gibson's MailBot wrote: > Internet Privacy: > OptOut? > Several weeks ago a scare swept through the Internet community > regarding alleged Internet "spying" being done by a very > popular advertising system known as "Aureate" (now renamed to > "Radiate".) Since the Aureate system is "carried" into the > user's PC by more than 400 popular freeware programs (like > Go!Zilla, GetRight, CuteFTP, and others), and is currently > installed and running in over TWENTY-TWO MILLION PC's!!, the > threat that this software was "spying" on its users was of > great and immediate concern. > My initial analysis of the Aureate system revealed that MUCH > of what had been claimed was completely unfounded. However, > that analysis DID raise enough concern and questions that I > decided to look further... > What I discovered was that this system WAS secretly running as > a "parasite" on your Netscape or Microsoft web browser, using > your browser's Internet connection to communicate with Aureate > servers in the background without the user's knowledge or > explicit permission! This meant that the Aureate software was > running and communicating over the Internet even when the > hosting "carrier" freeware, which brought it into the system, > was not running! This browser "parasite" had also been > implicated in frequent crashes of those browsers. And even > after the "freeware" which brought this parasitic software > into the user's machine had been completely removed, THE > AUREATE SYSTEM REMAINED INSTALLED AND OPERATING SECRETLY! > This was not okay. > A reading of Aureate's developer web site shows that the > freeware authors are receiving payment from the advertisers > in direct proportion to the number of advertisements actually > viewed and the length of time they are shown. In order to do > this, the actaul use of the various programs MUST be monitored > and reported back to Aureate. > This bothered me too. > So ... since I already knew of other similar sounding problems > with "Adbots" being secretly installed in user's machines (The > ZoneAlarm firewall discovered a different one running in my > own machine!), I decided to create an easy-to-use tool to > check for the presence of known "baddies" and -- optionally -- > remove them from the computer for the user. > The program is called "OptOut" because it allows users to "opt > out" of the use of unwanted advertising software on their > machines. > I wrote it in 100% assembly language over the past two weeks, > it's a nifty little 32K bytes in size ... and the "Preview > Release" is ready for you to use right now! > Please see the new "OptOut" page on the grc.com web site for > more information and news about Aureate and OptOut. You can > download it from there too... > http://grc.com/optout.htm Claire Pieterek surfing on a wave of nostalgia for an age yet to come ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V20 #31 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Mar 22 00:02:05 2000 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id AAA24215; Wed, 22 Mar 2000 00:02:05 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 00:02:05 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200003220502.AAA24215@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #32 TELECOM Digest Wed, 22 Mar 2000 00:02:00 EST Volume 20 : Issue 32 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: A Constitutional Right to Anonymous Speech? (Brett Frankenberger) Re: Two Flight Attendants Appeal Search of Their Home Computers (Anonymous) Wired News : Iridium Soaks Rower's Pipeline (Mike Pollock) Re: Data Transmission Speeds (Brett Frankenberger) Old Phone Number Needed: Sue and Herb's Restaurant (Frank) Re: CPP, ATM Surcharges (was F.C.C. Debates Changes) (Ross McMicken) Re: Anti-Spam E-mail Suit Tossed Out (Steve Sobol) Re: Calling ATT From Anywhere in the World, Anytime (Steve Sobol) Re: CPP, ATM Surcharges (was F.C.C. Debates Changes) (Steve Sobol) ATM Groups? (Ephraim Gadsby) Re: Data Transmission Speeds (John Hines) Line Length (Erwin Lubbers@my-deja.com) Re: Anti-Spam E-mail Suit Tossed Out (David Wolff) Re: Colorado Lawmakers OK Anti-Spam Bill (Tom Betz) 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-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 259 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 805-545-5115 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@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: hyperarchive.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 the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: rbf@rbfnet.com (Brett Frankenberger) Subject: Re: A Constitutional Right to Anonymous Speech? Date: 22 Mar 2000 01:30:52 GMT Organization: rbfnet In article , John McHarry wrote: >> People get upset if a school principal >> won't allow the student newspaper to publish a certain article, but >> the principal is the publisher and the school (not the student) is >> ultimately responsible for what goes into the newspaper. > But most schools are governmental entities. I think most of their > censorship comes under "in loco parentes", if that still survives. It's a complex issue. Yes, public schools are government entities, but they are also, in the case of school newspapers, the entities with the presses. I have a constitutional right to print leaflets that say "Bill Clintion is evil" and hand them out. I do not have a constitutional right to require the government to print the leaflets for me. The school newspaper censorship issue was Kuhlmeier et al. vs. Hazelwood School District. The censorship occurred in the school newspaper, "Spectrum", at Hazelwood East High School located in suburbs of St. Louis, MO. (I attended that school at the time of the Supreme Court ruling, which was several years after the actual act had occurred. The same principal (who made the decision to strike certain articles) was still there.) The case went back and forth -- the students sued and lost in federal district court, appealed and won, and the school district then appealed to the Supreme Court, which decided in favor of the school district (5-3). "In loco parentes" really wasn't an issue. What it came down to was that the newspaper was a school-funded classroom activity, not a public forum. The former entitles the school to do just about anything "reasonable" ... the latter subjects them to much more strict first amendment requirements. No one disputed the right of the students in question to publish an article about three pregnant high school students -- had the school tried to prevent that, they would almost certainly have lost. What was at issue was the right of the students in question to *require the school district to fund and implicitly endorse* the publication of an article about three pregnant high school students[1]. (An over simplifcation of the issue would be: "Freedom of the press belongs to the guy who owns the press".) Quoting from the decision: The standard for determining when a school may punish student expression that happens to occur on school premises is not the standard for determining when a school may refuse to lend its name and resources to the dissemination of student expression. Educators do not offend the First Amendment by exercising editorial control over the style and content of student speech in school-sponsored expressive activities so long as their actions are reasonably related to legitimate pedagogical concerns.[2] You can see the Supreme Court ruling at: http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/cas/comm/free_speech/hazelwood.html [1] The articles the principal ordered removed were one about teen pregnancy (ordered removed because the principal felt the girls in the article were identifiable even though their names had been changed, and because he felt some of the content was inappropriate for some of the younger students) and one about divorce (in which a student criticized her father, who was not given an opportunity to respond to the criticism). [2] This is much more leeway than is granted for non-school-sponsored activities -- for example, this would allow the district to ban printing of an article critical of the Vietnam War in a school newspaper (if the school, for example, wanted to avoid political debate in the school newspaper), even though the Supreme Court held that schools could not prevent students from wearing black armbands to protest the Vietnam War. (In other words, the school can't stop the students from protesting non-disruptively, but they don't have to fund or otherwise help the students protest.) -- Brett ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 02:35:03 +0100 From: Anonymous Subject: Re: Two Flight Attendants Appeal Search of Their Home Computers Organization: mail2news@nym.alias.net >> One word: e-n-c-r-y-p-t-i-o-n >> Encryption won't prevent the phuzz from seizing your box but it will put >> a serious crimp in their getting anything incriminating out of it. > Yeah, but that's not the point. Being incriminated isn't the problem. > The problem is being subjected to the inconvenience and hardship of > having your computer seized, and possibly trashed, in an abuse of power > by the gummint. And encryption doesn't prevent that. In fact, they're > likely to use that as "evidence" that you're trying to hide something: > "If he's innocent, why is he encrypting stuff?" Shades of J. Edgar Hoover's "Why should you care if you have nothing to hide?" Or was that Sen. Joe "Better Dead than Red" McCarthy? Sure they'll use use of encryption to smear you. But better to be smeared with stuff than can't be proven than to caught with something that can be proved. Take a lesson from our esteemed President: deniability is key. > I'm not agreeing with that mentality, and I think citizens should be > free to encrypt to their heart's content without fear of repercussion. > But the simple fact is that just encrypting your data won't protect you > from this kind of abuse. I agree wholeheartedly with your first statement. As for the second, things have gotten so bad that nothing can protect you from govmint abuse -- unless you decide to make a Final Stand. Short of that, if They want to get you They will get you somehow, someway. Doesn't matter whether you're guilty of anything or not. Encryption is just one weapon the citizenry have at their disposal in our fight for freedom. Come to think of it, you'd think people would be buying secure telephones like hotcakes. Why not? Steve (living in the USSA) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2000 19:11:15 PST From: itsamike@yahoo.com (Mike Pollock) Subject: Iridium Soaks Rower's Pipeline From Wired News, available online at: http://www.wired.com/news/print/0,1294,35077,00.html Iridium Soaks Rower's Pipeline by Kim Griggs 3:00 a.m. Mar. 21, 2000 PST WELLINGTON, New Zealand -- A lone rower crossing the Pacific Ocean will lose a communications lifeline when the plug is pulled on the Iridium satellite network. Solo French rower Jo Le Guen is six weeks into a journey estimated to take about four month -- weather dependent -- from New Zealand to Chile's southern tip, Cape Horn. The aim of his "Keep it Blue" endeavor is to raise awareness of the need to preserve the world's oceans. Also: Iridium Lost in Space Iridium, We Hardly Knew Ye Join The Wireless World But a shutdown of the Iridium network will cut off the rower from voice contact with the world. The service was slated to be cut at 11:59 p.m. EST on Friday after Iridium World Communications failed to find a rescuer from bankruptcy. However, according to a company statement from Iridium, Motorola will maintain the network "for a limited period of time" for users in remote parts to arrange other communications. Wellington-based supporter Clare Pinder says that as of Tuesday, Jo Le Guen's Iridium telephone is still working. Pinder is astonished at the threat of a shutdown: "You just don't go turning off a service that people depend on without going through a process to properly shut it down," Pinder said. For voice communications, Le Guen relies on the Iridium phone. "At the moment he gets weather updates from Pierre Lasnier of French weather forecasters Meteomer every day. He's getting his weather from France. It gives him three to four days of information," Pinder said. The rower has also had trouble with his feet, and the phone links him to his doctor. The Iridium phone is not Le Guen's only form of communication: He also has an Inmarsat link that transmits low-definition photos and emails. The problem with that is he needs to raise an aerial to make it work well, not an easy proposition in a low-lying boat. "It's not a good look standing up in 6-7-meter swells," says Pinder. A VHF radio gives Le Guen ship-to-ship communication, but its range is strictly limited -- again because the rowboat sits very low in the water. The boat also has a beacon to transmit its location daily, and a distress beacon. Paris-based supporter Philippe Tuffigo says the threatened shutdown has angered Le Guen. "Jo is naturally mad with this," Tuffigo said. It is an "illustration of what his crossing is for: The system doesn't care." Nobody from Iridium even warned him, according to Tuffigo. Le Guen is not the only adventurer affected by the company's bankruptcy. Reuters reports that two Norwegians trekking across the Arctic from Russia to Canada use the network for their communications. Pinder, in New Zealand, says the French rower will continue on his journey through the waters of the Pacific, even when the Iridium system is shut down. "It's not like trying to get to Chile without a compass, but it makes it much more dangerous." Related Wired Links: Iridium, We Hardly Knew Ye Saturday Curtain Falls on Iridium Thursday Iridium Lost in Space Mar. 10, 2000 $3 Million Keeps Iridium Aloft Mar. 6, 2000 A Buyer for Iridium? Dec. 3, 1999 Craig McCaw's Master Plan Nov. 2, 1999 Copyright 1994-2000 Wired Digital Inc. All rights reserved. ------------------------------ From: rbf@rbfnet.com (Brett Frankenberger) Subject: Re: Data Transmission Speeds Date: 22 Mar 2000 01:37:43 GMT Organization: rbfnet In article , USAOz wrote: > Our class is having a debate as to whether it would be faster > tramsmission of digital data using a microwave link or a fibre-optic > link. > Could we have some thoughts on this please? Faster how? Fiber-optic will have more bandwidth in general. But if you mean the actual latency of transferring one bit across the link, Microwave will be faster, because it goes a tthe speed of light in air, whereas fiber-optics are limited to the speed of light in glass. -- Brett ------------------------------ Reply-To: Frank From: Frank Subject: Old Phone Number Wanted: Sue and Herb's Restaurant Sierra Vista AZ Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2000 18:36:43 -0700 I was wondering if your organization could be of any help in locating the former phone number of a restaurant which was torn down somewhere around 1969-1970 or so. The information on the former business is: Sue and Herb's (Restaurant) 741 Fry Blvd Suerra Vista, AZ Thanks, Frank [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I am wondering if anyone has a 35-year old phone book for Suerra Vista, AZ *or* if there is a library in town with either old phone books on microfilm or 35 year old city directory ('criss cross') books who would be able to help Frank. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Ross McMicken Subject: Re: CPP, ATM Surcharges (was F.C.C. Debates Changes) Organization: Giganews.Com - Premium News Outsourcing Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2000 13:03:08 -0600 On Mon, 20 Mar 2000 20:57:07 -0700, 73115.1041@compuserve.com wrote: > Ross McMicken wrote: >> A different bank will charge you because they have no business >> relationship with you, and won't give you money unless you pay them >> for the privilege at the time you make the withdrawal. > No, but they do ahave a business relationship with your bank, through > the intertie network. And indeed, they do charge your bank a rather > substantial amount when you use their ATM. > The reason they started charging you directly (on top of the charge to > your bank) was competitive. The banks with large ATM networks didn't > want to let a smaller, more personal bank customer use their machines. > I suspect they wanted to raise the rate charged directly to the > customer bank and were told to go jump in the lake. Their response was > to implement the direct charge. Not to be an apologist for the banks, but they are in business to make money. As long as they inform me in advance of all charges, I'm not going to complain too much. I can always go to a grocery store, buy a pack of gum, and get cash back. Fortunately, my bank has ATM's all over town, so I seldom pay a fee unless I use the ATM at my office. I do hope that our wonderful lawmakers don't try to interfere with the process like they tried in certain parts of California. I beleive it was Santa Monica that banned surcharges for non-customer withdrawals. the end result was that banks only allowed withdrawals by customers. To make this telecom related, are ATMS on some kind of network, or do they dial up a central server for each transaction? ------------------------------ From: sjsobol@NorthShoreTechnologies.Net (Steve Sobol) Subject: Re: Anti-Spam E-mail Suit Tossed Out Date: 21 Mar 2000 23:43:12 GMT Organization: New Age Consulting Service Inc., Cleveland, OH, USA > From 'John David Galt': > "nuisance and harassing" phone calls. If that were simply extended it > would be the perfect tool for the job here. Except that the spammers > will just move to Antigua or Moldova or somewhere ... wait, they're > already there! Seriously, if there's any way to stop spam through > law, that law would have to be international in scope. Absurd. The vast majority of the spam I get may be RELAYED (probably illegally) through a foreign server but it ORIGINATES in the USA. We can pass a law to regulate US-based spammers. It might have to be a federal law, but to say that it would have to be international is silly. North Shore Technologies, Cleveland, OH http://NorthShoreTechnologies.net Steve Sobol, President, Chief Website Architect and Janitor sjsobol@NorthShoreTechnologies.net - 888.480.4NET - 216.619.2NET ------------------------------ From: sjsobol@NorthShoreTechnologies.Net (Steve Sobol) Subject: Re: Calling ATT From Anywhere in the World, Anytime Date: 21 Mar 2000 23:46:03 GMT Organization: New Age Consulting Service Inc., Cleveland, OH, USA > From 'Scott Dance': > I don't believe it's possible to reach AT&T Customer Service from > anywhere in the world (especially the United States). > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: We knew that was the case with Sprint > Long Distance. Whoever you are trying to reach has always 'just > stepped away from her desk for a few minutes' or 'has been in a > conference/training class all day'. Is AT&T now getting to be as > bad as Sprint? PAT] Residential or business? When I call the Customer Care line for business accounts, and they say there will be an extended delay, it's usually no more than five minutes. The exception is during the first quarter of each year because they have a ton of people calling in who are doing year-end books for their company and/or filing tax returns, and a lot of them are calling AT&T (probably with billing questions). That's what an AT&T rep told me, and I believe it, because the few problems I have had reaching them were always in Februrary or March. At all other times, as I said before, "an extended delay" usually means five minutes instead of three. North Shore Technologies, Cleveland, OH http://NorthShoreTechnologies.net Steve Sobol, President, Chief Website Architect and Janitor sjsobol@NorthShoreTechnologies.net - 888.480.4NET - 216.619.2NET ------------------------------ From: sjsobol@NorthShoreTechnologies.Net (Steve Sobol) Subject: Re: CPP, ATM Surcharges (was F.C.C. Debates Changes) Date: 21 Mar 2000 23:48:59 GMT Organization: New Age Consulting Service Inc., Cleveland, OH, USA > From '73115.1041@compuserve.com': > The reason they started charging you directly (on top of the charge to > your bank) was competitive. The banks with large ATM networks didn't > want to let a smaller, more personal bank customer use their machines. > I suspect they wanted to raise the rate charged directly to the > customer bank and were told to go jump in the lake. Their response was > to implement the direct charge. Does anyone know the status of the legal complaints that this constitutes double-dipping by the banks (charging transaction fees to both customers AND non-customers)? North Shore Technologies, Cleveland, OH http://NorthShoreTechnologies.net Steve Sobol, President, Chief Website Architect and Janitor sjsobol@NorthShoreTechnologies.net - 888.480.4NET - 216.619.2NET ------------------------------ From: Ephraim Gadsby Subject: ATM Groups? Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 00:56:16 +0000 What are the best newsgroups for discussing ATM technical issues? ------------------------------ From: John Hines Subject: Re: Data Transmission Speeds Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2000 11:41:42 -0600 Organization: US Citizen, disabled with MS, speaking solely for myself. USAOz wrote: > Our class is having a debate as to whether it would be faster > transmission of digital data using a microwave link or a fibre-optic > link. Take a look at the recent announcement from Bell Labs on their fiber optic breakthrough. http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,35079,00.html They used 82 different colors of light, each at 40 Gb/s. I don't know how RF technology would compare as far as the different wavelengths go, you might get 40Gb/s, but not on 82 channels or more at once. ------------------------------ From: erwinlubbers@my-deja.com Subject: Line Length Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2000 18:02:32 GMT Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy. Hi, We want to connect a phone to a PABX which will be connected by a copper leased line of around 5 kilometers long. It works at that distance, but volumes are very low, due to limits of the PABX. Is there a way to improve quality by some piece of hardware that can be placed between the PABX and the leased line? Or does someone has another suggestion? Regards, Erwin ------------------------------ From: world!dwolff@uunet.uu.net (David Wolff) Subject: Re: Anti-Spam E-mail Suit Tossed Out Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2000 17:55:18 GMT Organization: The World, Public Access Internet, Brookline, MA In article , John David Galt wrote: [snippage] > I'm pretty sure there is already a federal law against interstate > "nuisance and harassing" phone calls. If that were simply extended it > would be the perfect tool for the job here. Except that the spammers > will just move to Antigua or Moldova or somewhere ... wait, they're > already there! Seriously, if there's any way to stop spam through That's fine. As long as the large countries have anti-spam laws, I can just toss all e-mail from Antigua or Moldova. I don't know anyone or any businesses there that I want to deal with anyway (similarly for most small countries that you may wish to name). I recognize that this is not a perfect solution either, but it would be close enough for many people. David Wolff "Capability is its own motivation." ------------------------------ From: tbetz@panix.com (Tom Betz) Subject: Re: Colorado Lawmakers OK Anti-Spam Bill Date: 21 Mar 2000 18:40:29 GMT Organization: Society for the Elimination of Junk Unsolicited Bulk Email Reply-To: tbetz@pobox.com Quoth Monty Solomon in : > By Dick Kelsey, Newsbytes > Special to the E-Commerce Times > March 20, 2000 > A bill to stem the avalanche of unsolicited e-mail won final approval > by the Colorado Senate today and was sent to Governor Bill Owens for > his signature. > http://www.ecommercetimes.com/news/articles2000/000320-nb2.shtml Lame. Requires "ADV:" in the subject, a real From: address, and opt-out. Looks like it was written by the Direct Marketing Association. |I always wanted to be someone,| Tom Betz, Generalist |but now I think I should have | Want to send me email? FIRST, READ THIS PAGE: |been a wee bit more specific. | | | YO! MY EMAIL ADDRESS IS HEAVILY SPAM-ARMORED! ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V20 #32 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Mar 22 23:53:09 2000 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id XAA10754; Wed, 22 Mar 2000 23:53:09 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 23:53:09 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200003230453.XAA10754@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #33 TELECOM Digest Wed, 22 Mar 2000 23:53:00 EST Volume 20 : Issue 33 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Event: Internet Global Summit: Global Distributed (Jee Hyung Kim) Re: 7D Dialing Across NPA Boundaries (Leer Vide) Re: Rescue 211 (Leer Vide) Re: Line Length (Paul Cook) Re: Line Length (David Clayton) Re: Fiber in Drinking Water Systems (Samuel Lam) Re: ATM Groups? (James Carlson) Re: ATM Groups? (Jerry Harder) Jerry Orbach Sues eBay (Monty Solomon) Persistent Mysterious Calls from Hell ... (Mike Ward) Info Wanted on Telecorp Model 606 (Calling Terminal) (Etop Udoh) Re: Two Flight Attendants Appeal Search of Their Home Computers (J McHarry) Re: CPP, ATM Surcharges (was F.C.C. Debates Changes) (Steve Sobol) Phantom Problem (John Smith) "CyberGenie" PC Telephony? (Paul Robichaux) Re: Sue and Herb's Drive In (John Shaver) Iridium to Make Fireworks For Next Two Years (JF Mezei) 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-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 259 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 805-545-5115 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@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: hyperarchive.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 the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jee Hyung Kim Subject: Event: Internet Global Summit: Global Distributed Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 13:03:21 -0500 Organization: UBQT Reply-To: jee@ubqt.net Hello, I want to give every one a heads up about a great conference that's happening in Japan this July. The Internet Society, one of the oldest international Internet organizations, is hosting its annual Global Summit in Yokohama, Japan. This four day event will cover such pivotal topics as: -- Regulation, Policy and Governance -- E-Commerce and E-business -- Interactive and Multimedia -- Mobile Internet and IP Network Appliances -- Internet Science and Technology -- Internet Infrastructure and Technologies -- Third World Expansion -- Security -- Domain Names -- Linux -- Open Source Movement Please feel free to forward/post this announcement or pass it around to your colleagues. Here are the logistics of the event. INET 2000 The Internet Global Summit: Global Distributed Intelligence For Everyone The 10th Annual Internet Society Conference 18-21, July 2000 Pacifico Yokohama Conference Center, Yokohama, Japan email: web: REGISTER AT: http://mc-net.jtbcom.co.jp/inet2000registration/ INET is the premier event in the Internet industry, providing an international forum for advancing the development and implementation of Internet networks, technologies, applications, and policies. The world's Internet leaders meet at INET conferences to exchange experiences and shape the future of the Internet. INET attendees examine strategic issues emanating from the Internet's impact on commerce and finance, education, technologies and societies. INET 2000 presents a strong technical program with all papers peer reviewed by industry experts from around the world. *WHO ATTENDS INET CONFERENCES:* More than 2,000 decision-makers and networking professionals involved in extending the use and reach of Internet networks in their organizations or countries are expected to attend INET 2000. Their roles involve nearly every aspect of the Internet's development and operations. *KEYNOTE SPEAKERS:* - John T. Chambers, President and CEO of Cisco Systems, Inc. - Dr. Ken-ichi Ohmae, international management consultant and creator of the framework of the borderless economy. SUPER PANELS: Super Panel #1: Open Source Movement Launched in 1985 by Richard Stallman, (GNU), the free source code movement has blossomed into a broad front of projects best exemplified by the stunning success of Linux, the Unix-like kernel launched by Linus Torvalds in 1991. It is now challenging Microsoft's Windows NT in the server business and is poised to invade the desktop as well. Some call Linux the Internet Operating System and this is twice true: it could not have existed without the Internet and a lot of machines that are making up the Internet run on Linux. Apache, another free source code software, powers nearly half of all Internet servers in the world. This round table Super Panel will discuss how these two communities are rapidly merging into one that may be the real basis for the new net economy. Super Panel #2: Next-Generation Internet Research Projects: What's New, What's Next and What Works? Late-breaking news from Next-generation Internet projects will be presented. Panelists will address their current status, next step, and what has led them to success. Super Panel #3: The Future of the Internet Layer As the Internet continues to grow, there are increasing stresses and strains on some of its foundations, such as the original numeric addressing space and the underlying assumption of transparent communications. The expected arrival of millions of wireless devices, and expansion to new, very populous regions of the world, will maintain or increase these stresses for several decades to come. The Internet technical community has been aware of this issue for at least seven years and has carried out various studies and new developments including Classless Interdomain Routing, Network Address Translation and IPv6. The panel will discuss all this and more, and attempt to discern where we are headed next. PROGRAM THEMES: - Internet Infrastructure Technologies - Internet Science and Technology for the 21st Century - Mobile Internet and IP Network Appliances - Interactive, Multimedia, Innovative Contents with Full Demonstrations - Bio-Medical Issues - Education - E-Commerce and E-Business - Regulation, Policy and - Governance iGrid2000: LIVE DEMONSTRATIONS: The potential for using global, next-generation networks to significantly change the way science is conducted will be showcased at INET 2000, where researchers from around the world will collaborate in iGrid2000, sharing computing resources and data over high-speed networks to solve complex computational programs. REGISTER AT: http://mc-net.jtbcom.co.jp/inet2000registration/ For more information and the latest updates regarding the summit, visit http://www.isoc.org/inet2000/ ------------------------------ From: Spam@Proof.ID (Leer Vide) Subject: Re: 7D Dialing Across NPA Boundaries Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 18:41:06 GMT Organization: AT&T Worldnet I would also suggest that Cincinnati, Ohio is a major city (actually the 32nd largest metropolitan area in the United States.) Cincinnati Bell allows seven-digit dialing across the 513 (Cincinnati, Ohio) and 502 (northern Kentucky) NPAs. So not only is it cross-NPA, but cross-state. In article , Ed Ellers wrote: > Linc Madison (LincMad001@telecom-digest.zzn.com) wrote: > "That feature still exists in many places, but fewer and fewer with > each passing year. The last major city with such an arrangement was > Kansas City, which is currently phasing out 7D FNPA local calling due > to the shortage of prefixes." > Um, I would suggest that Louisville, Kentucky is also a major city! > We still have 7D dialing between parts of the 502 and 812 NPAs, an > since the state (wisely IMHO) changed the 270 addition from an overlay > to a split I expect we'll have it for some time to come. (The state > decision came during the permissive 10D dialing period, and -- guess > what? -- permissive 10D hasn't been turned off. Not that it does any > harm, of course. ------------------------------ From: Spam@Proof.ID (Leer Vide) Subject: Re: Rescue 211 Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 19:59:48 GMT Organization: AT&T Worldnet In Cincinnati, Ohio (513 NPA) and Northern Kentucky (606 NPA) dialing 211 gets traffic updates. They're recordings, where you punch in what road you're on (for example, 751 for I-75 north, 752 for I-75 south, or 521 for Ohio 521) and get information usually about three or four minutes old. The best part is it's a free call and works from both landline and mobile. Though, I'm not sure if dialing the free 211 from a cell phone counts against minutes included in your plan. In article , tknab@nyx.net (Terry Knab) wrote: > Jeremy Pickett wrote: >> In many towns in the north Georgia area 311 is used as a shortcut to the >> telco's voicemail system. Out of curiousity, I began to try the >> different combinations one evening, being careful not to dial 411 or >> 911. I was surprised when I reached our county's 911 center by dialing >> 211. Embarassed, I apologized and quickly hung up. Does anyone know if >> this is something other telco's are doing as well, or just a strange >> ALLTEL quirk? I've heard that in some areas 311 will be assigned to >> non-emergency police, but nothing's been mentioned about 211. >> Incidentally voicemail in our exchange cannot be reached at 311. When >> dialed it returns a fast busy. > Its a strange ALLTEL quirk. I've seen the various x11 numbers used > for all sorts of bizarre things. 311 is supposed to be for > non-emergency calls to the police/fire, etc. However, its not > implemented universally yet. ------------------------------ Reply-To: Paul Cook From: Paul Cook Subject: Re: Line Length Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 08:22:52 -0800 Organization: Proctor & Associates, Inc. erwinlubbers@my-deja.com wrote: > We want to connect a phone to a PABX which will be connected by a > copper leased line of around 5 kilometers long. It works at that > distance, but volumes are very low, due to limits of the PABX. Is > there a way to improve quality by some piece of hardware that can be > placed between the PABX and the leased line? Or does someone has > another suggestion? The Proctor 46222 Long Loop Adaptor may help. It is not a repeater amplifier, but it boosts current and ringing for off-premise extensions. It can be plugged into any key system or PBX with a standard two-wire analog extension. It will drive a 1900 ohm loop, and is typically hooked to a telco provided OL13C circuit. Since the OL13C must be engineered by the telco to meet certain specs, transmission or the loop resistance is not a problem, no matter how far they run it. You can also order an OL13B or OL13A for even better transmission specs. See www.proctorinc.com, and click on Key System Enhancements. There is also a 4-circuit version, the 46224. Paul Cook - Applications Engineer pcook@proctorinc.com 425-881-7000, ext 566 Proctor & Associates Redmond WA www.proctorinc.com ------------------------------ From: David Clayton Subject: Re: Line Length Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 19:19:16 +1100 Organization: Customer of Connect.com.au Pty. Ltd. Reply-To: dcstar@acslink.aone.net.au erwinlubbers@my-deja.com contributed the following: > We want to connect a phone to a PABX which will be connected by a > copper leased line of around 5 kilometers long. It works at that > distance, but volumes are very low, due to limits of the PABX. Is > there a way to improve quality by some piece of hardware that can be > placed between the PABX and the leased line? Or does someone has > another suggestion? What particular PABX?, some have programming settings for long analogue lines to give more gain etc. Regards, David. David Clayton, e-mail: dcstar@acslink.aone.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: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 02:55:34 PST Subject: Re: Fiber in Drinking Water Systems Organization: Scalable Network Systems Ltd. From: Samuel Lam Reply-To: Samuel Lam In article , Guy de-Beer wrote: > I am looking for information about a certain project, specifically > about the technology that was used in it. > I don't know where this project was or exactly when. What I know is that > someone wired a city by pulling fiber through the drinking water system. Nortel Networks (www.NortelNetworks.com) recently announced a product that does this. ...Sam -- Scalable Network Systems Ltd. Network Failure Analysis Lab, a division of Scalable Network Systems Ltd. "We solve difficult IP problems!" ------------------------------ Subject: Re: ATM Groups? From: James Carlson Date: 22 Mar 2000 06:56:58 -0500 Ephraim Gadsby writes: > What are the best newsgroups for discussing ATM technical issues? comp.dcom.cell-relay James Carlson, System Architect IronBridge Networks / 55 Hayden Avenue 71.246W Vox: +1 781 372 8132 Lexington MA 02421-7996 / USA 42.423N Fax: +1 781 372 8090 "PPP Design and Debugging" --- http://people.ne.mediaone.net/carlson/ppp ------------------------------ From: Jerry Harder Subject: Re: ATM Groups? Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 05:07:24 GMT Organization: @Home Network Ephraim Gadsby wrote in message news:telecom20.32.10@telecom-digest.org... > What are the best newsgroups for discussing ATM technical issues? Try comp.dcom.cell-relay. Good luck Jerry Harder remove spamnein from address to reply ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2000 23:44:32 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Jerry Orbach Sues eBay Excerpt from http://www.tvguide.com/newsgossip/inthenews/ JERRY ORBACH'S LEGAL DRAMA: Jerry Orbach is suing eBay for revealing his Social Security number on the Internet. According to Reuters, Orbach's suit alleges that eBay revealed the information last week when it promoted the sale of two of Orbach's acting contracts from 1958. The actor claims that eBay did not get his permission to use his name or Social Security number, and that he has been exposed to "identity theft" and credit-card fraud. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 08:16:56 -0800 From: mikeward Subject: Persistent Mysterious Calls from Hell ... It was Fri, 10 Mar 2000 08:48:08 -0600, and Andrew Green wrote in comp.dcom.telecom: >> /dev/null@.com (Justa Lurker) writes: > >> From NNAG for December 1999. > > 509-533 SPOKANE > > US WEST PNW BELL > > End Office Code - Portable > > Modified 03/17/00 > > 5E SPKNWAKYDS0 v:06247 h:08180 >> *boggle* >> What the heck was that? :-) Seriously, I read the Digest in order to >> learn things; can you add a little detail as to what sort of info >> you're sharing with us here about the 509-533 mystery number? > Sorry ... just a little technical detail. I also did a search via > ANYWHO as the original person claimed (searching for the first 8 > digits) and came up with Spokane addresses. Not too hard to find. > But the tech data comes from NNAG, published monthly at trainfo.com > and followed by numbering junkies like me. :-) > > 509-533 SPOKANE > > Exchange # and name > > > US WEST PNW BELL > Who it is primarily served by > > End Office Code - Portable > Type of code, not to be confused with wireless. > > Modified 03/17/00 > The last time that the code was changed (effective date) >> 5E SPKNWAKYDS0 v:06247 h:08180 > Switch type, Silly code (CLLI), and coordinates of switch. >> And to the original poster: Have you ever _answered_ one of these >> mystery calls, or are you just looking at Caller ID logs? Does an >> answering machine record anything from these calls? From the timing >> and pattern you describe, if I answered the phone I would expect to be >> hearing the "boop... boop... boop..." of a misprogrammed fax machine >> trying to send a regularly-scheduled outbound message of some sort. > I believe that the victim was out with the horses during the call, so > I would assume Caller ID (with no name or 'unavalable' name) or *69 > (callback) type service. > JL If your talking about those hang-up calls with nobody on the other end, it's probably a "predictive dialer" at work. Ain't technology wunderful? http://www.stopjunkcalls.com/bglobe.htm Here is the culprit - I didn't read their site to see how they stressed calibrating it so it wouldn't be able to put a call through that wasn't going to be used to make contact with. This machine can be a problem if it isn't calibrated -- maybe that's where the law could focus? (marketeers must use a calibrated predictive dialer -- with calibration seal?) Sheesh!! http://www.predictivedialers.com/home.htm MW ------------------------------ From: Sonic Druid (Etop Udoh) Subject: Info Wanted on Telecorp Model 606 (Calling Terminal) Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 21:42:11 -0800 Organization: CyberSpace Soldier of Fortune http://www.mindspring.com/~s_druid I'm looking for information on a Terminal made by Telecorp Industries. Model 606.... (Last known locations were: Norcross, Georgia) (Roswell, Georgia) or they might have been just branch offices... Thanks ... ======================================================================= | Etop Udoh | SOUTHERN POLYTECHNIC STATE UNIVERSITY [89-##] | | P.O. Box 4234 | Http://www.mindspring.com/~s_druid | | Marietta, Ga | Http://www.freeyellow.com/members7/sdruid | | 30061 | Http://www.homestead.com/~s_druid/files/index.htm| |-----------------| Http://sdruid.iwarp.com | | | Http://s_druid.home.mindspring.com | | | Http://www.geocities.com/siliconvalley/bit/9122 | | *** s_druid@mindspring.com *** s_druid1@hotmail.com *** | | .....TRUST NO ONE - DENY EVERYTHING..... | ======================================================================= ------------------------------ From: John McHarry Subject: Re: Two Flight Attendants Appeal Search of Their Home Computers Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 18:55:55 -0500 On Wed, 22 Mar 2000 02:35:03 +0100, Anonymous wrote: > ...Come to think of it, you'd think people would be buying secure > telephones like hotcakes. Why not? I have wondered about that for some years, particularly since sound cards and modems became widely available. A couple of cheap headsets and some software that is little more than freeware, and you have a secure link to make any drug lord drool. I guess they must be "old economy." Of course, reading the content of communications isn't the only threat. As I vaguely recall, the Russians nailed us in the 70s on a big wheat deal partly by watching traffic patterns. There is also the old denial of service attack. Boris: Natasha, my love, crank up the noise level on the line. Natasha: How's that? Boris: They're down to 9.6, a bit more. Natasha: Now? Boris: Great! They've decided to go in the clear. Shut it back down so we don't have to listen to it on the tapes. ------------------------------ From: sjsobol@NorthShoreTechnologies.Net (Steve Sobol) Subject: Re: CPP, ATM Surcharges (was F.C.C. Debates Changes) Date: 22 Mar 2000 13:24:05 GMT Organization: New Age Consulting Service Inc., Cleveland, OH, USA Ross McMicken wrote: > To make this telecom related, are ATMS on some kind of network, or do > they dial up a central server for each transaction? It seems to me that the ATM's in convenience stores, etc. use modems (with most of them you can hear them dial out). I imagine that the ones at banks are on some kind of dedicated connection. North Shore Technologies, Cleveland, OH http://NorthShoreTechnologies.net Steve Sobol, President, Chief Website Architect and Janitor sjsobol@NorthShoreTechnologies.net - 888.480.4NET - 216.619.2NET ------------------------------ From: John Smith Subject: Phantom Problem Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 12:13:54 GMT Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net I have a customer who has a phantom problem while using speakerphone the called party can not hear very well but improves when using handset. Using the different phone sets I made several local and long distance calls, the problem only occurred on toll calls. This does not happen on every toll call so I believe it may have to do with the long distance carrier. Any suggestion on how to rectify this problem (besides them using: handset/headset/conference-phone) would be appreciated. ------------------------------ From: Paul Robichaux Subject: CyberGenie PC Telephony? Organization: Robichaux & Associates Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 15:17:02 GMT Office Depot is showing a product from Cygnion (www.cygnion.com) called the "CyberGenie" phone. I'm shopping for a new SOHO phone and had pretty much settled on the GigaSet 2420 from Siemens. Does anyone have hands-on experience with the CyberGenie? I'm particularly interested in how well the "advanced" features work. Cheers, Paul Robichaux Robichaux & Associates NT & Exchange deployment, planning, and consulting ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 07:06:27 -0700 From: John Shaver Subject: Re: Sue and Herb's Drive In About Sue and Herb's Drivein, Sierra Vista, Arizona had a 5 number dial in those days. It was a GL-5 prefix, but it swallowed GL before dialing the 5-XXXX. I guess that I am curious as to why someone would want a phone number that no lonker worked. > I was wondering if your organization could be of any help in locating the > former phone number of a restaurant which was torn down somewhere around > 1969-1970 or so. > The information on the former business is: > Sue and Herb's (Restaurant) > 741 Fry Blvd > Suerra Vista, AZ > Thanks, > Frank ------------------------------ From: JF Mezei Subject: Iridium to Make Fireworks For Next Two Years Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2000 23:42:16 -0500 Iridium Satellite Network to Flame Out By Jim Wolf WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Iridium LLC, a bankrupt $5 billion satellite telephone service, entered the history books on Saturday as one of the costliest corporate fiascoes of all time. The Washington-based company said it was cutting off telephone service to its 55,000 customers as of 11:59 p.m. on Friday, a prelude to court-ordered liquidation. Iridium's last act will be to ``de-orbit'' -- and ultimately burn up -- its constellation of 66 satellites now 485 miles high, which was the first to make staying connected possible from any spot on Earth. The network has been reported to have cost $5 billion to $7 billion. By beaming instructions to on-board devices, engineers eventually will tip the craft, one by one, on a path that will send them down in flames. The target will be the ocean -- a spectacle that may be visible from Earth. Iridium on Friday gave up its hunt for a buyer to rescue it from bankruptcy proceedings. ``No bid was received which was a qualified bid,'' William Perlstein, an attorney representing the debt-plagued firm, told the U.S. bankruptcy court in Manhattan. Judge Arthur Gonzalez cleared Iridium to spend $8.3 million to start winding up its business while selling remaining Earth-bound assets, including ground stations. Iridium had been operating under court protection from its creditors since last August, less than a year after its network became operational on Nov. 1, 1998. The flop reflected a string of badly botched business calculations. For one thing, the company's clunky telephones initially were priced at $3,000 apiece, with calls costing as much as $7 a minute. Not only were the phones as big as bricks, but they did not work indoors. Wireless Networks Doomed Iridium Iridium was doomed by the rapid spread of ground-based wireless networks. Such networks now let business travelers, a prime market for the satellite phones, stay connected from most major destinations. An attorney for telecommunications equipment maker Motorola Corp. (NYSE:MOT - news), which built and operated the satellites, told the court it would begin the de-orbiting process in about a week. Clearing out the satellites is necessary because keeping them aloft costs large sums of money. Without proper attention, they could interfere with other spacecraft and explode if hit, adding to the human-made debris already cluttering the heavens. Bringing the satellites back must be coordinated with several U.S. government agencies. Motorola said it would take up to two years to burn up the last of the satellites in the atmosphere. Motorola, which held 18 percent of Iridium, the largest stake, said it would ``maintain'' the network while the de-orbiting plan was finalized, an apparent reference to steering the satellites away from danger. ``Motorola is extremely disappointed that Iridium LLC has not succeeded in its effort to emerge from voluntary bankruptcy,'' the Schaumburg, Illinois-based company said in a statement. ``Motorola and other Iridium investors have worked very hard to support Iridium LLC's efforts to reorganize and continue operating the business. Unfortunately, that has not happened.'' ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V20 #33 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Mar 24 10:16:41 2000 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id KAA13626; Fri, 24 Mar 2000 10:16:41 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 10:16:41 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200003241516.KAA13626@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #34 TELECOM Digest Fri, 24 Mar 2000 10:16:00 EST Volume 20 : Issue 34 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Working on the Web Site (TELECOM Digest Editor) Anticybersquatting Injunction Entered by Federal Court in Philly (Levant) Re: Iridium to Make Fireworks For Next Two Years (Tom Bennett) Strange Beeps at Lunch Time (John Eichler) Re: Phantom Problem (WDA Geary) Misdirected Census calls (Esan David) Re: CPP, ATM Surcharges (was F.C.C. Debates Changes) (Stanley Cline) Re: CPP, ATM Surcharges (was F.C.C. Debates Changes) (Walter Dnes) Re: 7D Dialing Across NPA Boundaries (Carl Moore) Congressmen Propose Privacy Commission (Monty Solomon) Thesis Administration of Phone Services (Nolberto Antonio Devia Espinosa) Regulating Internet Access (Ken Brown) 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-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 259 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 805-545-5115 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@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: hyperarchive.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 the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 16:04:10 EST From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Working on the Web Site If you have not visited the TELECOM Digest web site (http://telecom-digest.org) recently, there are a few changes you may wish to look at. The http://telecom-digest.org/news area now includes a section on gay news and lifestyles, as per a couple of readers who requested it. There is also a collection of missing children posters you may view there as well. The various parts of the web site are these: All begin with http://telecom-digest.org as follows: /archives is the 20 year back-issues collection along with various special reports which have appeared over the years. /chat is a chatroom feature. There are two parts. One is a traditional IRC-based chat; the other part is a web-based chat. It is used more as a place where messages can be posted which are answered at a later time by someone who read it and knows the answer. /postoffice is our web-based mail service. Anyone can obtain and use a box here, except *spammers are not allowed*. /secret-surfer.html is a proxy server for anonymous surfing. As part of this area you can also send single email letters as desired, untraceable, and *single piece mailings of news items non-commercial in nature*. /news is our electronic e-newspaper. We have about a hundred stories daily, and several special features, including news photos. Our two newest features as noted above is a section for gay news and lifestyle reports, and a series of posters updated daily on missing children. Also look here for audio news from several sources, including the BBC, NPR and AP. /television has several 'internet only' shows available including one on hackerphreaks, three on outer space, and more. /radio is our talk/news radio service. You can turn it on and let it play at your desk all day. /tribute is our virtual telephone museum operaterd by David Massey. There are many pages in this section full of pictures and stories about the old 'Bell System' and the various independent telephone companies. The above are just the main parts. The web site has gotten far to large to list everything here, so feel free to explore the entire site . The main, front page as links as well as a 'road map' of where you will be going at each stop. ============= other web sites I operate ========== http://internet-history.org (or) http://internet-pioneers.org Same site, with two different names. Call it either way you want. In any event, it deals with the history of the Internet for the past thirty years or so In addition to a huge repository of links and files, there is a section where Internet Pioneers post their thoughts. Everyone is welcome to read it. http://airwaves.com This site was founded by William Pfeiffer. After he passed on in September, 1999, his fiancee Cindy Freeman asked me to take it over full time. When work here is finished, this site will have a database of all radio stations, a chatroom and a few other features of interest to radio broadcasters and enthusiasts. We will also have a feature of employment ads for people in broadcasting.Watch for the 'grand reopening' real soon, hosted at iecc.com, which is John Levine's site. The site is partly open now if you want to go look at it. Associated with airwaves.com is AIRWAVES RADIO Journal and the Usenet rec.radio.broadcasting newsgroup which I also moderate. You are invited to participate in these groups. All are non- commercial, spam free, with NO invasion of privacy. All are supported by a very *limited* amount of advertising and with the very generous support of our friends. Patrick Townson Post Office Box 259 Independence, KS 67301 ------------------------------ From: William J. Levant Subject: Anticybersquatting Injunction Entered by Federal Court in Philly Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 12:05:25 -0500 My partner, Michael P. Coughlin, Esquire and I represented the Plaintiff in this case. Story from The Legal Intelligencer, Philadelphia : http://www.palawnet.com/news/story1.shtml Court's opinion is here: http://www.paed.uscourts.gov/opinions/00D0232P.ZIP Bill Levant usually wlevant@aol.com ------------------------------ From: Tom Bennett Subject: Re: Iridium to Make Fireworks For Next Two Years Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 12:49:39 -0500 Organization: ECDC Unisys Corp. Tredyffrin > The target will be the ocean -- a spectacle that may be > visible from Earth. Is the plan to drop one on the guy rowing from New Zealand to Cape Horn - who's complaining about the loss of his Iridium service - thereby killing two birds at once? ------------------------------ From: John Eichler Subject: Strange Beeps at Lunch Time Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 07:46:17 -0600 Pat, Normally I don't have many questions about phone problems since the Digest provides me with so many answers to queestions I haven't even thought of yet. However, I find that I do have a slight problem now that either you or one of your readers might provide me with an answer to. During the week about the noon hour (more or less), my phone will go ring and when I answer it I just get a single beep. I believe that if I wait for a little while I get another single beep, etc. This generally happens for two or three calls and then I'm not bothered again that day. The beeps are not those normally associated with either a modem (i.e., 2025 Hz variety) or a FAX machine. However, I wonder if either of these devices is trying to call my cell phone and wants to kick off something at my end of the line. I would appreciate if someone could shed a little light on what is happening here. Thanks, John ------------------------------ From: wdag@my-deja.com (WDA Geary) Subject: Re: Phantom Problem Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 17:20:58 GMT Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy. The speakerphone is half-duplex and cuts out the far-end-party speech when the near-end-party is talking. In a confetence room, the amplitude of a person's voice in normal conversation is not always above the "switching level", causing the speakerphone to constantly cut off the speech to the far end. Combine this with the LD echo-cancellers and you will get constant cut-outs. Get a better grade (full-duplex) speakerphone (or teleconferencing device). In article , John Smith wrote: > I have a customer who has a phantom problem while using speakerphone > the called arty can not hear very well but improves when using > handset. Using the different phone sets I made several local and > long distance calls, the problem only occurred on toll calls. This > does not happen on every toll call so I believe it may have to do > with the long distance carrier. W.D.A.Geary Wardenclyffe Microtechnology Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana. ------------------------------ From: Esan David Subject: Misdirected Census Calls Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 09:25:22 -0500 Census calls inundate student Hundreds of wrongly rerouted callers ask 21-year-old for help with their forms http://www.rochesternews.com/0323census.html David Esan Product Manager 3750 Monroe Avenue desan@veramark.com Pittsford, NY 14534 USA Voice: 1-716-381-6000 x6541 Fax: 1-716-383-6800 ------------------------------ From: Stanley Cline Subject: Re: CPP, ATM Surcharges (was F.C.C. Debates Changes) Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 19:19:13 -0500 Organization: by area code and prefix (NPA-NXX) Reply-To: sc1@roamer1.org On Tue, 21 Mar 2000 13:03:08 -0600, Ross McMicken wrote: > Not to be an apologist for the banks, but they are in business to make > money. As long as they inform me in advance of all charges, I'm not > going to complain too much. I can always go to a grocery store, buy a > pack of gum, and get cash back. Fortunately, my bank has ATM's all > over town, so I seldom pay a fee unless I use the ATM at my office. There are a lot of areas where there are no surcharge-free ATMs and no POS terminals (thus preventing the "buy gum, get cash back" scenario you described.) > I do hope that our wonderful lawmakers don't try to interfere with the > process like they tried in certain parts of California. I beleive it I hope they *do*. > To make this telecom related, are ATMS on some kind of network, or do > they dial up a central server for each transaction? Some, particularly those machines in stores and the like, dial up (often dialing a 950 number!), while others use 56k leased lines or frame relay. The server to which the ATM is connected varies from ATM owner to ATM owner; ATM networks are primarily regional (Star in the West and [with the Honor merger] in the Southeast too, MAC in the Mid-Atlantic states and Ohio, etc.) Most nonbank ATMs aren't affiliated with any regional network and connect directly to Cirrus (MasterCard) or Plus (Visa). Stanley Cline -- sc1 at roamer1 dot org -- http://www.roamer1.org/ ------------------------------ From: Walter Dnes Subject: Re: CPP, ATM Surcharges (was F.C.C. Debates Changes) Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 22:20:38 -0500 On 21 Mar 2000 23:48:59 GMT, in comp.dcom.telecom sjsobol@NorthShoreTechnologies.Net (Steve Sobol)wrote: > Does anyone know the status of the legal complaints that this > constitutes double-dipping by the banks (charging transaction > fees to both customers AND non-customers)? If you are using a bank's service (i.e. ATM), you *ARE* a customer, and they can charge you for the service. What's happening is that they charge "ATM customers" who don't have bank accounts with that bank, but offer ATM access free to "ATM customers" who do have accounts with them. Walter Dnes http://www.waltdnes.org SpamDunk Project procmail spamfilters. A picture is worth a thousand words; unfortunately, it consumes the bandwidth of ten thousand words. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 10:18:26 EST From: Carl Moore Subject: Re: 7D Dialing Across NPA Boundaries Spam@Proof.ID (Leer Vide) writes: > Cincinnati Bell allows seven-digit dialing across the 513 > (Cincinnati, Ohio) and 502 (northern Kentucky) NPAs. That's 606, not 502, in that part of Kentucky just across from Cincinnati, ignoring any split of 606. Also, isn't a very small part of 812 area in Indiana also in the Cincinnati calling area? (That does not include Law- renceburg, which is along U.S. near Ohio River just west of Ohio/Indiana border.) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2000 23:51:42 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Congressmen Propose Privacy Commission Congressmen Propose Privacy Commission By Margret Johnston WASHINGTON - Citing overwhelming concern about the protection of financial, health and other personal information, two U.S. lawmakers proposed a bill today that would establish a commission to study and make recommendations about how best to ensure data privacy. http://www.thestandard.com/article/display/0,1151,12953,00.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 08:29:07 CST From: Nolberto Antonio Devia Espinosa Subject: Thesis Administration of Phone Services Good Engineer I am student of electronic engineering of the university of the cauca (COLOMBIA), and I am developing a thesis project that consists in to administer or to configure the services that he/she lends the fixed telephony through of internet. He/she wanted to know if he/she has information in this respect or forms of obtaining it, or what should be kept in mind for interactuar with a phone power station or the SAT (System of Administration Telefnica) that controls it. Thank you for your attention Nolberto [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Readers who can give assistance to Nolberto are encouraged to do so. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Ken Brown Subject: Regulating Internet Access Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 14:04:19 -0800 REGULATING INTERNET ACCESS: An Idea Whose Time Never Came Kenneth Brown, Sr. VP., The Alexis de Tocqueville Institution The City of Portland, Oregon's 1998 decision to obligate its cable company ATT to agree to "open access" regulations, opened the door to one of 1999's hottest policy debates: whether government should regulate high-speed internet cable access. ATT lost its challenge to the Portland ruling in Federal Court in June 1999, and is awaiting a decision in the Ninth U.S. Court of Appeals. However, diminished consumer, local, and overall support for cable access legislation has made the outcome of the case near moot. Interest has dissipated for a number of reasons. Throughout 1999, phone carriers began hastily deploying high-speed Internet access services called Digital Subscriber Lines (DSL) to compete with cable. Within months, DSL prices dropped as much as 50% in markets around the country. Commenting on the price cutting, The San Jose Mercury-News editorialized, "Whenever [a] cable company announces its Internet service, the local phone monopoly expedites the roll-out of digital subscriber lines, or DSL, telephony's high-speed equivalent, and sharply cuts its price." The Federal Communications Commission (FCC), inevitably responsible for recommending a national standard for access regulations, repeatedly urged states and localities not to pass open access bills. FCC Chairman William Kennard commented in June 1999, "There are 30,000 local franchising authorities in the United States. If each and every one of them decided on their own technical standards for two-way communications on the cable infrastructure, there would be chaos." In October 1999, the FCC issued a report detailing burgeoning competition and new technologies offering high speed Internet access. The report highlighted the AOL/Hughes satellite internet access system slated for availability by Spring of 2000, and mentioned how wireless firms and electric utilities were spending billions to perfect their high speed internet access systems. On February 18, 2000, the FCC punctuated its position on cable access by rejecting Internet Ventures' petition to have regulators mandate the "leasing" of cable lines. When the focus of local legislators shifted to the specifics of access laws, enthusiasm for regulation dropped precipitously. Miami Mayor Alex Penelas commented last October, "though the proposed ordinance was originally presented as a very simple matter, the Board and my office quickly learned that this is a complex regulatory issue with implications far beyond the borders of Miami-Dade County." Penelas later described access regulations as, "a policy that would create a chilling effect on investment, competition and consumer choice..." Reactions were similar on the West coast. In a white paper, The Los Angeles Information Technology Agency commented, "the cost to the City to address these unbundling disputes is likely to exceed hundreds of thousands of dollars per year at a minimum, not including the initial costs associated with developing the pricing methodology and rules regarding dispute resolution. These costs would increase if additional open access obligations, such as interconnection, resale and network element unbundling were also required of cable operators." ISP relationships have also changed the landscape of the debate. In December 1999, AT&T announced an agreement with ISP MindSpring, and publicly committed to providing consumer choice to ISPs on its cable platform. In January 2000, America Online and Time Warner announced their merger. Subsequently, AOL one of the biggest proponets for access regulations, began ordering its lobbyists to stop advocating access regulations. The AOL reversal was not warmly received, by William Schrader, Chairman of ISP PSiNeT who commented, "I don't like hypocrites, and Mr. Case is a hypocrite. He is a self-serving businessman who's into hypocrisy and I'm not." AT&T and AOL/Time Warner jointly represent almost 50 percent of the market, with both firms making public commitments to consumer choice of competing ISPs. ISPs accounting for nearly 25 million subscribers have already negotiated access agreements. Despite organized efforts of access proponents, barely a dozen localities have agreed to enact access provisions. Major cities such as San Francisco, Miami, and Richmond have all rejected such regulations and similar bills introduced this year have also failed in New Hampshire, Idaho, Pennsylvania, Utah, Virginia and Kansas. One by one, editorial boards of major newspapers such as USA Today, The New York Times, and The Washington Post have sided against access regulations. Representative Mike Oxley, of Ohio echoed Washington's sentiments commenting, "legislation to mandate open access to cable systems and other broadband networks has no legs whatsoever in the House Commerce Committee." Many see the uniform opposition to cable regulation linked to the increased public enthusiasm and support for the Internet. Rejecting the access regulation idea, Kennard argued, "If we've learned anything about the Internet over the last 15 years, it's that it has thrived quite nicely with the intervention of government." As opposed to spending time creating cable regulations, lawmakers are shifting their focus to the importance of making Internet high speed access a nationwide priority. Leaders want hi-speed access for their communities, regardless of whether its DSL, satellite, wireless or cable. The regulation debate has become equated to hindering the Internet, a very unpopular idea. It would be safe to predict this time next year there will be zero interest in access regulation. What a difference a year makes. Kenneth P Brown Senior Vice President Alexis de Tocqueville Institution 1611 North Kent Street, Suite 901 Arlington, VA 22209 USA +1 (703) 351 4969 +1 (703) 351 0090 http://www.adti.net ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V20 #34 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat Mar 25 00:28:59 2000 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id AAA16412; Sat, 25 Mar 2000 00:28:59 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2000 00:28:59 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200003250528.AAA16412@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #35 TELECOM Digest Sat, 25 Mar 2000 00:28:00 EST Volume 20 : Issue 35 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Did AT&T Raise Calling Card Charges on Feb. 2nd? (Mark J Cuccia) ACLU Defends Peacefire Against Cyber Patrol Attacks (Bennett) Bellsouth Opposes Equality! (Jon Yarden) Iridium Cross-Links (Ross Oliver) Re: A Constitutional Right to Anonymous Speech? (Lee Hollaar) Attorney Needs Cellphone Expert (Judith Oppenheimer) DialPad (jinxegg@juno.com) Re: CPP, ATM Surcharges (was F.C.C. Debates Changes) (Ross McMicken) Re: Strange Beeps at Lunch Time (WDA Geary) 10-10 Dialing (Phil Smiley) International Ringing (Ringback) Tones (Paul Dorosh) 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-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 259 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 805-545-5115 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@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: hyperarchive.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 the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 15:53:17 CST From: Mark J Cuccia Subject: Re: Did AT&T Raise Calling Card Charges on Feb. 2nd? Bill Phillips (wfp@ziplink.net) wrote: > Since last summer we have used 1-800-CALL-ATT and our Bell Atlantic > calling card to make calls There's your mistake. You placed card calls over AT&T, but billed them to your Bell Atlantic issued card. Every several months, AT&T keeps raising the rates for card calls placed over their network that are billed to local telco issued cards or "commercial credit cards" (Visa, Mastercard, AMEX, etc). > from work at MIT in Cambridge, MA, mostly to New York City, where her > mother is in an assisted-living facility (not cheap, but there seems > to be no other way to make an l/d connection from her department). > We've had AT&T Reach Out service for many years, and even though it's > not very economical for us any more, my wife seems to want to hang > onto it. I have trained her, however, to use dialarounds from home.] > We looked at our Bell Atlantic bill last night and were shocked. > It appears as though AT&T almost doubled our calling card charges > without letting us know ... Yes, AT&T has jacked-up the rates on card-calls at least once this new year. You can get "cheaper" rates (and always at least try using the 800-CALL-ATT access) if you have a valid/active card _ISSUED_ by AT&T. Even if you are using a late-1980's piece of plastic that has your ten-digit home telephone number + PIN but also AT&T's logo, since 1991 that card has been considered by AT&T to be a card (number) issued by a local telco, and not an AT&T card (number/PIN). You could also get on AT&T's "One Rate Card Plan". For $1.00/month, domestic card calls placed with 1-800-CALL-ATT (and billed to an AT&T issued card number/PIN), and those calls will be billed at 25-cents/min. If you are on AT&T's "Personal Network" plan for your residential account (I won't go into all of the details here as to monthly fees, but your 1+ domestic calls, at least inTER-state, are 7-cents/min), your domestic card calls billed to the AT&T-issued card associated with your resi-account, and placed with 1-800-CALL-ATT access are billed at 10-cents/min, 24H/7D, with no per-call "card" surcharge. Of course, when placing card calls from public/coin/pay telephones, even with 1-800-CALL-ATT access, it is most likely certain that you will be billed a "payphone origination surcharge" of about 30-cents per call, extortion/kickback paid to the payphone owner. NOTE: the ONLY way to get the best rates on AT&T with your AT&T card and AT&T discount plans for AT&T card calls is to use the 800-CALL-ATT access number. If you use any other AT&T Card access 800- number, or if you use AT&T '00' access or 0+ access to AT&T Card services, you will NOT get the quoted "discount plan" rates that you may be 'subscribed' to. You must ALSO be "subscribed" to that plan as well. Also, many (private/COCOT) payphones and Hotel/Motel PBX systems will TAMPER with access to AT&T when you dial 1-800-CALL-ATT from those phones. They instead will take the 800-CALL-ATT number entered by you, entererd into the payphone's internal chips or PBX's registers, and CHANGE it to (101-0288)-00. If you hear the following menu when you THINK/KNOW you've entered 800-CALL-ATT, you're okay: "AT&T (sparkle jingle)... to place a calling card or credit card call, press-1; to place a collect call, press-2; ..." (etc.) BUT... if you KNOW you've entered 1-800-CALL-ATT, but hear the following menu: "AT&T (sparkle jingle)... to place a call please dial the number you are calling. For double-oh info, US-Directory, press-1; For other requests, please say 'information', 'credit', or 'operator'" you've been routed (by the payphone/PBX/etc) to the AT&T "double-oh" menu. If you have received the LATTER menu when you KNOW you've dialed 1-800-CALL-ATT, you will need to RE-KEY 800-225-5288 (800-CALL-ATT) to that menu. The AT&T OSPS '00' menu will return a "Thank you for using AT&T", and then "loop back" into itself, but now give you the REAL 'CALL-ATT' menu, the first menu I gave you. You are then able to enter your ultimate destination number and AT&T-issued card number, and will (supposedly) be billed the proper rate for the plan you might be on. However, if you went through the interim of the '00' menu, the called party will NOT see the calling number on their Caller-ID box, but rather "Out-of-Area". Hope this helps explain the situation! MARK_J._CUCCIA__PHONE/WRITE/WIRE/CABLE:__HOME:__(USA)__Tel:_CHestnut-1-2497 WORK:__mcuccia@mailhost.tcs.tulane.edu|4710-Wright-Road|__(+1-504-241-2497) Tel:UNiversity-5-5954(+1-504-865-5954)|New-Orleans-28__|fwds-on-no-answr-to Fax:UNiversity-5-5917(+1-504-865-5917)|Louisiana(70128)|cellular/voicemail- ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 16:40:40 -0600 From: bennett@peacefire.org Subject: ACLU Defends Peacefire Against Cyber Patrol Attacks Reply-To: peacefire-press@iain.com The American Civil Liberties Union has announced that it will defend Peacefire against legal threats from Cyber Patrol, whose lawyers are sending demand letters to any Web site that mirrors an essay describing how to decode Cyber Patrol's list of banned sites to see what it's blocking. The ACLU's press release is at: http://www.aclu.org/news/2000/n032400a.html Two other defendants in the case, Waldo Jaquith (professional Web design wiz kid and proprietor of http://www.waldo.net) and Lindsay Haisley, the owner of FMP Computer Services (http://www.fmp.com), are also being assisted by the ACLU after receiving demand letters from Cyber Patrol. (Waldo and Lindsay are also Peacefire members but are listed as separate parties in the case.) All three of us have received copies of a subpoena demanding copies of Web server log files, to find out who downloaded the Cyber Patrol essay from our Web sites. (See the end of this message for URL's for the relevant documents in HTML format.) The ACLU has filed a motion to quash the subpoenas. The ACLU and Cyber Patrol, who were once co-plaintiffs in a lawsuit to overturn a 1996 government Internet censorship law (see http://www.aclu.org/news/n062697a.html), will now be facing off in court on Monday. The essay itself -- "The Breaking of Cyber Patrol" -- is available from any one of the mirror sites listed at: http://www.openpgp.net/censorship/ (so, in spite of the efforts of Cyber Patrol's lawyers, the essay and the codebreaking program have been readily available for download ever since they were first released). The ACLU can be contacted through their media relations director, Emily Whitfield, at 212-549-2566. I'm still at 425-649-9024. ------------- Documents: The text of the temporary restraining order: http://peacefire.org/censorware/Cyber_Patrol/restraining-order.3-17-2000.html The text of the subpoena that Peacefire received by email: http://peacefire.org/censorware/Cyber_Patrol/subpoena.3-17-2000.html The Motion to Quash the subpoenas, and the Opposition to Motion for Preliminary Injunction which were filed by the ACLU on our behalf: http://www.peacefire.org/censorware/Cyber_Patrol/motion-to-quash-subpoenas.3 -24-2000.html http://www.peacefire.org/censorware/Cyber_Patrol/opposition-to-motion-for-in junction.3-24-2000.html -Bennett bennett@peacefire.org http://www.peacefire.org (425) 649 9024 ------------------------------ From: Jon Yarden Subject: Bellsouth Opposes Equality! Date: 24 Mar 2000 08:08:30 GMT Organization: Bluegrass Net Frankfort, Kentucky BellSouth Seeks Exemption from "Code of Conduct" Law in Kentucky With three days of legislative session left, members of the Kentucky Internet Service Provider's Association testified before a committee of the Kentucky State Senate that was considering approval of House Bill 897. Their testimony and candor won them a re-wording of ammendment at the eleventh hour that is sure to draw heavy fire from monopolistic telecom companies, most notably BellSouth. HB897, currently moving through the Kentucky Congress, is known as the "Code of Conduct" Act. This law outlines rules of conduct for privately-held monopolistic utilites in their actions with their "affiliate" companies ... such as Internet Service Providers, Appliance Repair Companies, etc. This bill was originally designed to address abuses by the local Power Utilities and their monopolistic practices pertaining to "service oriented" businesses such as appliance repair, etc. This code of conduct, however, can be interpreted as covering all "privately held" utilities, which also means ILECS (Incumbent Local Exchange Carriers) and RBOC (Regional Bell Operating Companies). In the case of HB 897 however, a certain a "Incumbent Telco Carrier" had an exemption written into the bill for telecommunications carriers and service providers, thereby precluding them from having to abide by the stipulations set forth in the bill. After heated discussion in which included testimony from the head of the Public Service Commission and the bill sponsor, as well as visible panic by lobbyists from the certain "Incumbent Telco Carrier", the Kentucky Senators on the committee realized the gravity of the exemption, and then motioned and voted in favor of dis-allowing the exemption. Reasons cited by the Senators for doing this were the importance of the Internet in the future of Kentucky's economy and the importance of insuring the viability of Kentucky owned Internet businesses in the future. Beginning March 24, 2000 the bill will be either debated in on the Senate Floor, or sent back to the House of Representatives to approve the ammendment change. It is recommended that everyone interested in this please contact their Kentucky State Senator via phone or e-mail immediately to voice their opinion on this matter. A listing of KY senators is at: http://www.lrc.state.ky.us Jon Nearly every complex solution to a programming problem that I have looked at carefully has turned out to be wrong. -- Brent Welch ------------------------------ From: reo@roscoe.airaffair.com (Ross Oliver) Subject: Iridium Cross-Links Date: Fri, 24 Mar 100 15:51:31 PST Arthur Ross wrote: > 2. This particular patent seems to be relevant only to the (late) > Iridium satellites, which use(d) crosslinks. Why they did that was a > mystery to me too, until I found out that one of the consultants who > they hired to help design it was a crosslink specialist. Ergo, lots > of crosslinks for that real high percentage of international traffic > that they expected (never been able to figure out where that notion > came from either). The purpose of Iridium's cross-links was to reduce the number of ground stations needed. Calls could be relayed from satellite to satellite until within range of a ground station. Contrast this with the Globalstar system, which requires calls to go from the receiving satellite directly to a ground station. Globalstar users must be within a certain distance of a ground station to get service. Seems to me the Iridium system would have been more robust. If your local Globalstar ground station is taken out by, say, a hurricane, you are now without service, in a situation where your satellite phone would be the most useful. Ross Oliver ------------------------------ From: hollaar@faith.cs.utah.edu (Lee Hollaar) Subject: Re: A Constitutional Right to Anonymous Speech? Date: 24 Mar 2000 23:00:18 GMT Organization: University of Utah Computer Science In article John_David_Galt@acm.org writes: > Garrett Wollman wrote: >> In article , Mel Beckman >> wrote: >>> A constitutional right? I don't believe anything in the constitutions >>> can be construed to guarantee _anonymous_ free speech. >> You may not believe so, but the Supreme Court of the United States >> does, and said so in a campaign-finance case a few years ago. I don't >> remember the particulars, but the case turned on whether a state could >> require those making so-called ``independent expenditures'' to >> identify themselves in their advertising. The Supreme Court ruled >> that anonymous political speech, at least, is a fundamental >> constitutional right. You're certainly welcome to disagree, but >> that's the Law of the Land. > The "independent" group in that case was the NAACP, which quite > sensibly feared various kinds of retaliation if its members' names > were made public. The plaintiff was a Southern state government, I > forget which. More likely he is thinking of the 1995 Supreme Court case _McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Comm'n", 514 U.S. 334, which can be found at: http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/93-986.ZO.html ------------------------------ From: Judith Oppenheimer Subject: Attorney Needs Cellphone Expert Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 12:40:14 -0500 Just got a call from a lawyer seeking a forensics expert in cellphones ... maybe one of you ... ? He's Benjamin Cooper, 610 434-6316. Judith http://ICBTollFree.com http://1800TheExpert.com (U.S.) 1 800 The Expert Judith Oppenheimer mailto:joppenheimer@icbtollfree.com +1 212 684-7210 ------------------------------ From: jinxegg@juno.com Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 13:04:22 -0500 Subject: DialPad What has happened to Dialpad.Com, I have not been able to make a connection with the server for the last 24 hours? I checked the news articles but found no information on any block? Jinxegg ------------------------------ From: Ross McMicken Subject: Re: CPP, ATM Surcharges (was F.C.C. Debates Changes) Organization: Giganews.Com - Premium News Outsourcing Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 12:35:18 -0600 On Wed, 22 Mar 2000 19:19:13 -0500, Stanley Cline wrote: > There are a lot of areas where there are no surcharge-free ATMs and no > POS terminals (thus preventing the "buy gum, get cash back" scenario > you described.) I've never been in area like you describe, even in tiny towns in South Texas. When we moved from California back to Texas, we were able to use the debit card at POS terminals everywhere we stopped. >> I do hope that our wonderful lawmakers don't try to interfere with the >> process like they tried in certain parts of California. I beleive it > I hope they *do*. I can't think of a way to make banks do business with non-account holders, and a law banning surcharges for non-customers will result in ATM's not dispensing cash to anyone except account holders. I use the debit card as an analog to a check. Try cashing a check in a bank where you don't have an account. >> To make this telecom related, are ATMS on some kind of network, or do >> they dial up a central server for each transaction? > Some, particularly those machines in stores and the like, dial up > (often dialing a 950 number!), while others use 56k leased lines or > frame relay. The server to which the ATM is connected varies from ATM > owner to ATM owner; ATM networks are primarily regional (Star in the > West and [with the Honor merger] in the Southeast too, MAC in the > Mid-Atlantic states and Ohio, etc.) Most nonbank ATMs aren't > affiliated with any regional network and connect directly to Cirrus > (MasterCard) or Plus (Visa). That explains why some ATM's give you a dialup sound, while others are silent. Stanley Cline -- sc1 at roamer1 dot org -- http://www.roamer1.org/ ------------------------------ From: wdag@my-deja.com (WDA Geary) Subject: Re: Strange Beeps at Lunch Time Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 19:37:17 GMT Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy. The standard for FAX devices (and for European modems) is that the calling device emits an "identification tone" (short "beep" every now and then) to indicate that it, indeed, is a machine - and not a little old lady who will be upset by a hearing-aid splitting burst of "noise". Euro modems (per V.25): 1300Hz: 0.5-0.7S ON, 1.5-2.0S OFF until answer, timeout or abandon. Fax is same timing, but 1100Hz (I think). In article , John Eichler wrote: > During the week about the noon hour (more or less), my phone will go > ring and when I answer it I just get a single beep. I believe that if > I wait for a little while I get another single beep, etc. This > generally happens for two or three calls and then I'm not bothered > again that day. The beeps are not those normally associated with > either a modem (i.e., 2025 Hz variety) or a FAX machine. W.D.A.Geary Wardenclyffe Microtechnology Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana. ------------------------------ From: Phil Smiley Subject: 10-10 Dialing Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 20:01:51 GMT Aside from billing issues, why would a long distance carrier choose to offer one of their 10-10XXX dialing offerings in one phone company but not another? ------------------------------ From: Paul Dorosh Subject: International Ringing (Ringback) Tones Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 10:55:57 -0500 Dear Sir, For a while now, I have been unsuccessfully surfing the Net to find any reference to a site containing information on ringing (ringback) tones, currently used in different countries in the world. I read your answer in "Telecom Digest Online" to someone inquiring about the tones used in the USA, and I would really appreciate if you could help me out as well. Thank you. Paul ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V20 #35 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun Mar 26 00:39:18 2000 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id AAA25491; Sun, 26 Mar 2000 00:39:18 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2000 00:39:18 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200003260539.AAA25491@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #36 TELECOM Digest Sun, 26 Mar 2000 00:39:00 EST Volume 20 : Issue 36 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: CPP, ATM Surcharges (was F.C.C. Debates Changes) (Spyros Bartsocas) Re: CPP, ATM Surcharges (was F.C.C. Debates Changes) (Tony Pelliccio) Re: Anticybersquatting Injunction Entered by Federal Court (James Cloos) Re: Anticybersquatting Injunction Entered by Federal Court (Bill Levant) Re: Did AT&T Raise Calling Card Charges on Feb. 2nd? (John R. Levine) Re: CPP, ATM Surcharges (was F.C.C. Debates Changes) (Joey Lindstrom) Re: Iridium to Make Fireworks For Next Two Years (David Clayton) Re: CyberGenie PC Telephony? (M. Palmer) Re: CyberGenie PC Telephony? (Brian C. Roy) PRI & DACSed Data? (Scott Ables) USPTO Issues Patent on "Hyperspace Bypass" (David Chessler) Telephone Directory Archives (Iola Bean) Re: 7D Dialing Across NPA Boundaries (Mike Jezierski) CPML (Torow) Waterproof Digital Telephones? (Sandra Richards) Re: Persistent Mysterious Calls from Hell ... (Thomas A. Horsley) Re: Persistent Mysterious Calls from Hell ... (Jonathan Seder) Special Assessment of Readers for Trademark (Patrick Townson) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, 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-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 259 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 805-545-5115 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@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: hyperarchive.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. Our attorney is William Levant, Blue Bell, PA In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Spyros Bartsocas Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 00:14:40 +0200 Subject: Re: CPP, ATM Surcharges (was F.C.C. Debates Changes) > Do ATM's dial up a central server for each transaction? ATMs are connected to a network. It could be the same network that connects the branches of the bank to the main computers, or a separate one. Besides providing better service to the customer, a permanent connection allows easier updating of the software and other administrative functions. Spyros Bartsocas ------------------------------ From: nospam.tonypo1@nospam.home.com (Tony Pelliccio) Subject: Re: CPP, ATM Surcharges (was F.C.C. Debates Changes) Organization: Providence Network Partners Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 22:18:41 GMT In article , sjsobol@NorthShoreTechnologies.Net says: > Ross McMicken wrote: >> To make this telecom related, are ATMS on some kind of network, or do >> they dial up a central server for each transaction? > It seems to me that the ATM's in convenience stores, etc. use modems > (with most of them you can hear them dial out). I imagine that the > ones at banks are on some kind of dedicated connection. In the new Providence Place mall there are Citizens Bank ATM's all over the place in freestanding kiosks. They all dial in. What's worse is that it sends your PIN over the line too -- I can imagine an enterprising hacker would have a ball with that. Tony Pelliccio, KD1S formerly KD1NR Trustee WE1RD ------------------------------ From: James H. Cloos Jr. Subject: Re: Anticybersquatting Injunction Entered by Federal Court in Philly Date: 24 Mar 2000 20:26:41 -0400 Organization: Interpacket Group Inc. William J. Levant writes: > Story from The Legal Intelligencer, Philadelphia : > http://www.palawnet.com/news/story1.shtml Is there a new URL for this story? The link now points to what I presume is a newer story. (About a decision covering the duties temp agencies have to their temps.) > Court's opinion is here: > http://www.paed.uscourts.gov/opinions/00D0232P.ZIP Unfortunately in a format unsuitable for web distribution. Ie, one what cannot in general be unobfuscated into actual text. One would think a court would want people to be able to *read* what they post.... :( Is it perhaps also available in a reasonable format? -JimC ------------------------------ From: Wlevant@aol.com Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 19:58:37 EST Subject: Re : Anticybersquatting Injunction Entered by Federal Court in > Story from The Legal Intelligencer, Philadelphia : > http://www.palawnet.com/news/story1.shtml Gone with the wind, I'm afraid. Try this one : http://www.phillynews.com/inquirer/2000/Mar/23/national/SWEB23.htm Bill ------------------------------ Date: 25 Mar 2000 00:51:20 -0500 From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: Did AT&T Raise Calling Card Charges on Feb. 2nd? Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA >> Since last summer we have used 1-800-CALL-ATT and our Bell Atlantic >> calling card to make calls > There's your mistake. You placed card calls over AT&T, but billed them > to your Bell Atlantic issued card. No kidding. AT&T just doesn't have competitive rates for residential and small business customers. It looks like the lowest they'll go is 25 cents per minute and $1/month. I have a Voicenet card that's about 17 cpm with no monthly charge, and I've seen other calling cards as low as 15 cents. If you make most of your calls from one local area, you can do even better with dialaround carriers. I have an account with a local VOIP CLEC, USA Datanet, who offer very attractive dialaround rates for long in-state calls. (10 cpm for the first 9.9 minutes, free after that, so I can call a friend in NYC and talk for an hour for 99 cents.) They have a reasonable rate of 7.9 cpm for interstate and Canada calls, which I can get not just from home but from any phone that's a local call from one of their POPs here in upstate New York. When I'm on a nearby college campus, I can pick up any local-only campus phone and make calls anywhere in North America almost as cheaply as calling from home. I'd be surprised if there weren't similar companies operating in Boston. 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: Joey Lindstrom Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2000 07:34:31 -0700 Reply-To: Joey Lindstrom Subject: Re: CPP, ATM Surcharges On Mon, 20 Mar 2000 01:57:06 -0500 (EST), Craig Macbride wrote: >> Besides, that doesn't address the very simple fact that the >> calling party is forced to pay whatever the wireless carrier charges; >> they can't "dial-around" for a lower rate. > The Australian situation is that the same company that you have > pre-selected as your long-distance carrier handles your mobile calls > (unless you override them). They bill a particular rate and deal with > the costs of whether it's their own mobile network or one of the other > mobile networks that you are calling. They win on some calls and lose > (or win less) on others. But, since they want you as a customer, it is > in their interests to be competitive. I'm a little unclear on this "they bill a particular rate". Are you saying that if I call you (from an Australian land line to your mobile), I pay the same rate as you would pay if you called me from that same mobile to the same landline? I can see this working... but if the rates are different, then all of the objections to CPP previously raised here still stand. >> ATM surcharges are nothing more than PURE PROFIT. > And, to my knowledge, only exist in the USA. I have noticed that many > US ATMs which charge a surcharge explicitly state that non-US cards are > exempt. Add Canada to the list. I bank with the Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce (CIBC). I lucked out there: they recently inked a deal with Southland Corp, owners of the 7-11 chain of convenience stores, and there's now a CIBC cash machine in *EVERY* 7-11 in the country, so I get quick access to my cash 24 hours a day. But if I use a Bank of Montreal machine, or ScotiaBank, or Toronto Dominion, then I get hit upside the head with a $1.25 surcharge. We've also got a rash of US-style "generic" machines popping up in gas stations, mom and pop convenience stores, and even bars, which are actually owned by the big banks but charge a whopping $2.00 surcharge - in some cases, these machines are actually owned by the same bank you have an account with, yet you still pay this surcharge. Tell me THAT ain't pure profit, and mean it, and I'll eat my hat. When I was down in the USA in May of 1998, I made a few cash-machine withdrawals. None of the machines I used (in Washington, Oregon, and California) said anything about non-US cards being exempt, and indeed I got dinged $2.00 (Canadian) for each withdrawal from a "Plus Network" machine. Also, when in Great Britain in 1996, I was also whacked with a $2.00 fee for each withdrawal I made from British cash machines (again, shown on my statement as "Plus Network") On the other hand, the banks in Canada have a monopoly network called "Interac", which, in addition to wiring up all those bank machines that hose you for $1.25 per transaction, are also increasingly wiring up retail businesses, so you can make direct-debit purchases at, say, Wal-Mart and have it come right out of your checking account. These transactions are handled in the same manner as a cash withdrawal from a machine owned by your own bank, even if another bank is providing the service at that retail establishment. Go figure. It's been said that the problems in Canada's banking system lies with the fact that there are five major, national banks and they've got all the power - not enough competition. But I look south and I see a country with no truly national banks (ie: with branches in all 50 states), enough banks to choke a horse in fact, and the situation is EVEN WORSE. Kinda makes a right-winger like me feel it's time to reconsider communism... :-) From the messy desktop of Joey Lindstrom Visit The NuServer! http://www.GaryNumanFan.NU Visit The Webb! http://webb.GaryNumanFan.NU "If you have a home computer, say good-bye to purchasing your own diskettes. Stolen diskettes look exactly like work-related diskettes that are being taken home so you can `do a little work at night.' The only practical limit on the number of diskettes you can steal is the net worth of the company you're stealing from. Your company will go broke if you steal too many diskettes. Nobody wins when that happens. That's why moderation is the key. After you have enough diskettes to back up your hard drive and maybe shingle your house, think about cutting back." --Scott Adams ------------------------------ From: David Clayton Subject: Re: Iridium to Make Fireworks For Next Two Years Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2000 11:06:21 +1100 Organization: Customer of Connect.com.au Pty. Ltd. Reply-To: dcstar@acslink.aone.net.au Tom Bennett contributed the following: >> The target will be the ocean -- a spectacle that may be >> visible from Earth. > Is the plan to drop one on the guy rowing from New Zealand to Cape > Horn - who's complaining about the loss of his Iridium service - > thereby killing two birds at once? Serves him right for doing something as silly as rowing that distance, he should have drove ... Regards, David Clayton, e-mail: dcstar@acslink.aone.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: mpalmer1@yahoo.com (M. Palmer) Subject: Re: CyberGenie PC Telephony? Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2000 00:41:27 GMT Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy. I've tried both and found the Gigaset more practical than Cybergenie. However I've had problems with both: Gigaset: Sometimes when a call comes in I attempted to answer it and got the message: "No channel available". I always lost the call. No one was using any other handsets at the time. Siemens suggested I "re-boot" the system. It didn't help, so I ended up returning the system. Transferring calls between handsets is a pain. Operating range is poor compared to other cordless phones, even 900MHz phones. Cybergenie: Handsets don't always ring or show Caller ID info. Voice mail must be played through the handset - why can't it play through the computer? Needs a computer that's on all the time for most functionality. Operating range is poor compared to other cordless phones, even 900MHz phones. It too is going back to Office Depot tomorrow. If you buy, make sure you can return if not satisfied. In article , Paul Robichaux wrote: > Office Depot is showing a product from Cygnion (www.cygnion.com) > called the "CyberGenie" phone. I'm shopping for a new SOHO phone and > had pretty much settled on the GigaSet 2420 from Siemens. Does anyone > have hands-on experience with the CyberGenie? I'm particularly > interested in how well the "advanced" features work. > Cheers, > Paul Robichaux > Robichaux & Associates > NT & Exchange deployment, planning, and consulting > ------------------------------ From: briroy@gcfn.org (Brian C Roy) Subject: Re: CyberGenie PC Telephony? Date: 23 Mar 2000 19:49:20 -0500 Organization: The Greater Columbus Free-Net I was a beta tester for the system- the announcement was posted here on the Telecom Digest ( Thanks Pat !). I was really impressed with all the system would do. Feel free to drop me a line with any questions you may have. Brian Roy briroy@gcfn.org Paul Robichaux (paul@robichaux.net) wrote: > Office Depot is showing a product from Cygnion (www.cygnion.com) > called the "CyberGenie" phone. I'm shopping for a new SOHO phone and > had pretty much settled on the GigaSet 2420 from Siemens. Does anyone > have hands-on experience with the CyberGenie? I'm particularly > interested in how well the "advanced" features work. > Cheers, > Paul Robichaux > Robichaux & Associates > NT & Exchange deployment, planning, and consulting > ------------------------------ From: Scott Ables Subject: PRI & DACSed Data? Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 17:10:34 -0800 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com If anyone has successfully aggregated data (say 8 channels of dedicated Internet access for example) onto a PRI, please, email me with the details: 1) CPE 2) Telco that delivers circuit 3) Any issues in turning it up? 4) Is a contact person available for me to discuss this with on an informal basis? I'm told that the central office switch has a problem with receiving PRI out of the DACS used to insert the data channels. The switch will not allow the PRI to be turned up, so I'm told we will have to either be satisfied with vanilla T1 (no caller id, which we need), or use PRI and get a separate T1 for our Internet connection. Neither option is cost effective. I can't get DSL either. Has anybody seen this work? Thank you, Scott Ables scott_ables@yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 21:01:47 -0500 From: David Chessler Subject: USPTO Issues Patent on "Hyperspace Bypass" There is a problem with the URL, but if you do a search on the www.patents.ibm.com site using the patent number, 6025810, which is in the URL, you will find this. * Original: FROM..... DAVID FARBER Subject: IP: USPTO issues patent on "Hyperspace Bypass" X-Sender: brett@localhost Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 06:57:56 -0700 To: Dave Farber From: Brett Glass Subject: IP: USPTO issues patent on "Hyperspace Bypass" Two US patent examiners have granted a Colorado inventor a 19-page patent on a "Hyper-space Antenna." The device is claimed to open a portal to a "new dimension," through which radio signals can supposedly travel faster than light. As a convenient side effect, the device is claimed to make plants grow better. According to the patent, "All known radio transmissions use known models of time and space dimensions for sending the RF signal. The present invention has discovered the apparent existence of a new dimension capable of acting as a medium for RE signals. Initial benefits of penetrating this new dimension include sending RF signals faster than the speed of light, extending the effective distance of RF transmitters at the same power radiated, penetrating known RF shielding devices, and accelerating plant growth exposed to the by-product energy of the RF transmissions." Sound like an April Fool's Day spoof? It isn't. See http://www.patents.ibm.com/details?&pn=US06025810__&s_bsum=1 --Brett Glass David Chessler ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 08:47:54 -0700 From: Iola Bean Subject: [telecom-digest.org] Telephone Directory Archives Do you know if old telephone books exist. I enjoy genealogy, but I am stuck. I need telephone books for Mitchell, South Dakota for 1935 and 1936. I have looked at the Cultural Heritage Center (South Dakota Historical Society) in Pierre, South Dakota and in the Public Library in Mitchell, south Dakota without success. Any suggestions will be appreciated. Iola Bean iolabean@frii.com ------------------------------ From: Mike Jezierski Subject: Re: 7D Dialing Across NPA Boundaries Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 16:43:37 -0600 Organization: news.outfitters.com Reply-To: Mike Jezierski The Quad Cities of Iowa and Illinois have 7D cross NPA within the I-80/I-280 "ring". Davenport and Bettendorf can call Rock Island, East Moline, Moline, and a couple of suburbs as a local call. Of course last year the cross-river lines got goofy and it was fast busy crossing the river for a while. USWorst and Ameritech finally figured it out though. "Leer Vide" wrote in message news:telecom20.33.2@telecom-digest.org... > I would also suggest that Cincinnati, Ohio is a major city (actually > the 32nd largest metropolitan area in the United States.) Cincinnati > Bell allows seven-digit dialing across the 513 (Cincinnati, Ohio) and > 502 (northern Kentucky) NPAs. So not only is it cross-NPA, but > cross-state. > In article , Ed Ellers > wrote: >> Linc Madison (LincMad001@telecom-digest.zzn.com) wrote: >> "That feature still exists in many places, but fewer and fewer with >> each passing year. The last major city with such an arrangement was >> Kansas City, which is currently phasing out 7D FNPA local calling due >> to the shortage of prefixes." >> Um, I would suggest that Louisville, Kentucky is also a major city! >> We still have 7D dialing between parts of the 502 and 812 NPAs, an >> since the state (wisely IMHO) changed the 270 addition from an overlay >> to a split I expect we'll have it for some time to come. (The state >> decision came during the permissive 10D dialing period, and -- guess >> what? -- permissive 10D hasn't been turned off. Not that it does any >> harm, of course. ------------------------------ From: Justin B. Torow Subject: CPML Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 14:53:35 -0500 Could anyone help me? I'm looking for people that have done development work on Class 5. Switches in CPML and ESP would be a plus, if anyone knows a good place to look, or has these skills please let me know. Justin B. Torow Stealth Technologies, Inc 770-612-3040 ------------------------------ From: Richards, Sandra Subject: Water Proof Digital Telephones? Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 17:12:51 -0500 I'm looking for waterproof telephones, preferably digital for a Meridian switch. Telephones must be able to handle two calling lines and have a speaker phone capabilities. Will be placed in an area where they will be indirectly exposed to the elements year round. Sandy Richards Loral Cyberstar Telephone/Support Specialist E-mail: srichards@cyberstar.com ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Persistent Mysterious Calls from Hell ... From: Tom.Horsley@worldnet.att.net (Thomas A. Horsley) Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 23:09:43 GMT Organization: AT&T Worldnet Actually, I like predictive dialers. Whenever I answer the phone and there is absolutely nothing on the other end for 2 or 3 seconds, I know I can just hang up because its a predictive dialer trying to find a free telemarketer to connect me to :-). >>==>> The *Best* political site >>==+ email: Tom.Horsley@worldnet.att.net icbm: Delray Beach, FL | Free Software and Politics <<==+ ------------------------------ From: Jonathan Seder Subject: Re: Persistent Mysterious Calls from Hell ... Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 18:19:33 -0800 Organization: Don't Spam Me! You could try Mike Sandman's "Telemarketer Stopper(tm)". It produces "the SIT tone... the short 'doo-doo-doo' sound you hear when you dial a disconnected number - before the recording says the line is disconnected." Predictive dialers attempt to detect this and then delete the number from their call lists. Visit his Web site and have a listen. $35. http://www.sandman.com/tmstop.html [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: And when you are talking to Mike or one of his assistants, ask for an *entire* catalog of all his goodies. The catalog is free and makes *very* interesting reading. Mention to Mike you heard about it here in TELECOM Digest. PAT] ------------------------------ From: TELECOM Digest Editor Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2000 00:10:00 Subject: Special Assessment From Readers If you recall the fiasco last fall with the 'competing' Telecom Digest, there were various suggestions made for dealing with it. One good, worthwhile suggestion was to trademark TELECOM Digest and sue anyone who infringed on it in the future. Our regular participant, attorney Bill Levant volunteered the paperwork, but he is asking for assistance in paying the patent registration fee. The fee requested by the trademark office is $325.00 and if you are able to pay some of this, please do so. Bill Levant has also agreed to serve as corporate attorney for TELECOM Digest. Make your check payble to TELECOM Digest and mail it to the law firm, "Kaplin Stewart Meloff Reiter & Stein, PC", attention Bill Levant, address: 350 Sentry Parkway Building 640, Blue Bell, PA 19422. Funds received in excess of $325 will be turned over to me. If you want to call Bill for further verification, call him at 610-941-2474 or fax 610-260-1240. Thank you for your cooperation. The above address is *only* for the special assessment to secure a trademark. Regular gifts you wish to make should be addressed to me at PO Box 259, Independence, KS 67301. Patrick Townson ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V20 #36 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun Mar 26 17:53:05 2000 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id RAA23248; Sun, 26 Mar 2000 17:53:05 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2000 17:53:05 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200003262253.RAA23248@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #37 TELECOM Digest Sun, 26 Mar 2000 17:53:00 EST Volume 20 : Issue 37 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Anticybersquatting Opinion (Bill Levant) Re: Anticybersquatting Injunction Entered by Federal Court (hoxley) Re: Anticybersquatting Injunction Entered by Federal Court (Monty Solomon) Re: Hackers Sued by Software-Filtering Company (From RISKS) (M. Solomon) Re: Earn $$$ for Referring Beta Testers (John Shaver) Hiring in New York (Alfredo De La F) Geeks to the Rescue! (Monty Solomon) Napster Hack Allows Free Distribution of Software, Movies (Monty Solomon) Re: CPP, ATM Surcharges (was F.C.C. Debates Changes) (Steve Sobol) Re: Did AT&T Raise Calling Card Charges on Feb. 2nd? (Steve Sobol) Re: USPTO Issues Patent on "Hyperspace Bypass" (Tony Pelliccio) Risks of Microsoft Passport (Monty Solomon) 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-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 259 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 805-545-5115 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@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: hyperarchive.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. Our corporate attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Wlevant@aol.com (Bill Levant) Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2000 09:48:38 EST Subject: Re : Anticybersquatting Opinion It's also available in HTML: http://www.paed.uscourts.gov/opinions/00D0232P.HTM Beware -- this link is in their "recent opinions" section, the contents of which are moved to the general opinion library every Monday. If this link doesn't work, backtrack to the home page, and follow the link for "opinions". Bill ------------------------------ From: hoxley@NO_UCE.shore.net Subject: Re: Anticybersquatting Injunction Entered by Federal Court Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2000 17:08:51 GMT Organization: Shore.Net/Eco Software, Inc; (info@shore.net) will give you an online-readable version of the court opinion. And programs to extract ZIP files into "actual text" are close to universal; there are unZIPpers available for almost computing platforms in modern use. James H. Cloos Jr. wrote: >> Court's opinion is here: >> http://www.paed.uscourts.gov/opinions/00D0232P.ZIP > Unfortunately in a format unsuitable for web distribution. Ie, one what > cannot in general be unobfuscated into actual text. One would think a > court would want people to be able to *read* what they post.... :( > Is it perhaps also available in a reasonable format? > -JimC -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- = Herb Oxley (hoxleyATshore.net) = = Please note I *never* buy any product or = = service advertised by unsolicited E-mail = = from anyone I'm not doing business with! = -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2000 14:08:40 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Re: Anticybersquatting Injunction Entered by Federal Court > From: James H. Cloos Jr. > Subject: Re: Anticybersquatting Injunction Entered by Federal Court > Date: 24 Mar 2000 20:26:41 -0400 > Unfortunately in a format unsuitable for web distribution. Ie, one what > cannot in general be unobfuscated into actual text. One would think a > court would want people to be able to *read* what they post.... :( Doesn't everyone know how to unpack a ZIP file? :-) > Is it perhaps also available in a reasonable format? http://www.paed.uscourts.gov/opinions/00D0232P.HTM ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2000 13:18:09 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Re: Hackers Sued by Software-Filtering Company Excerpt from RISKS-FORUM Digest http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/20.85.html Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 09:25:32 From: Bear Giles There is *far* more going on here than meets the eyes. Those programmers are involved in the Peacefire anti-censorship group (http://www.peacefire.org). The site has had detailed instructions for getting around censorware software for months, without any legal action from the companies. But for some odd reason Symantec (I-Gear) threatened legal action only after Peacefire cracked their encrypted blacklist and determined that 76% of the sites in a quick sample (the first 50 .edu sites) were erroneously blocked. Likewise Mattel (CyberPatrol) sued only after Peacefire cracked their encrypted blacklist and published the results. To a critical mind, several questions scream out: - why are the blacklists encrypted? Is this to block access by competitors, or is it really to prevent parents and libraries from performing their own quality checks? (If it's an anticompetitive measure, why are the companies treating it as a "hackers, kids and porn" case?) - how would knowing that a site is on the blacklist permit a kid to access the blocked site? How many kids have the technical knowledge to edit the blacklist... and how hard would it be to check an MD5 checksum every so often? (Since the blocking software only works when the computer is on the 'net, it is trivial to automatically download the checksum every Nth request. If they don't match, download a new copy of the blacklist.) - why would the legitimately blocked sites have a problem with this? AFAIK most legitimate porn sites are more than willing to cooperate with censorware companies because it reduces their legal exposure - they can demonstrate a good-faith effort to prevent access by minors. The only sites that have a beef with this issue are ones that are blocked due to judgment calls, e.g., the pro-censorware Christian group that was was shocked to discover itself on a blacklist because of its firm, principled stand against homosexuals and heathens. Further complicating the issue is the apparent attempts to invoke the DMCA (essentially criminalizing political debate if one party uses even trivial encryption of key evidence; it brings to mind the 80's fad of putting a lawyer into every meeting so the company could claim lawyer-client confidentiality) and the pending UCITA legislation (which would explicitly criminalize badmouthing software). And we must never forget the absurdity of a U.S. judge telling a Swedish ISP that it can't host material for two Canadian residents -- do all courts have worldwide jurisdiction in the prenatal millennium? I strongly recommend anyone interested in this topic review the Censorware Project's report on an analysis of the logs of all Utah schools and libraries. (http://censorware.org/reports/utah/) This report has been widely misquoted as proving that censorware works. The 0.0006% (or "1-in-6 million," as was allegedly misquoted at one point in the Bush-McCain slugfest) error rate is a total fiction; any sane analysis shows that about 1-in-20 blocked sites are blocked in error in practice. *** Late update: according to Slashdot (http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=00/03/20/0845236) Mattel (CyberPatrol) has not only sent mass mailings to all mirrors of the the critical webpages, they have allegedly added these mirror sites (and the author's homepages) to their blacklist *under all categories.* Slashdot also reports that Declan McCullagh, respected journalist for _Wired_ who has never hosted the essay in question has also received legal threats. This means there is an excellent chance that this issue of comp.risks will be unavailable to school children nationwide due to its shocking content of nudity, explicit sexual depictions, violence, drug use, satanic acts, gambling activities, etc. The RISKS created by an "informed public debate" on the merits of censorware, where the library patrons are quietly "protected" from legitimate criticisms of one side of the debate should be obvious to everyone. This is *not* an example pulled out of thin air -- another recent Slashdot discussion covered the Holland, Mich. debate on whether to mandate this type of censorware in their libraries. One can only shudder in anticipation of the glorious day when nobody is even aware of this problem as DMCA and UCITA ensure that no software, anywhere, ever has any publishable defects of any kind. On the bright side, this one petulant act may be enough to raise serious constitutional issues of whether it will *ever* be legal for a government to mandate the use of censorware on publicly access systems. If this nonsense is allowed to stand, we might as well appoint the CEO of Mattel Lord High Emperor because he(?) will have demonstrated the ability to stifle the free political debate that lies at the heart of our democracy. (The preceding political screed was brought to you by the Drug-Running Child Pornography Terrorists of America.) Bear Giles P.S., some people are already calling for a Barbie-Q to protest this. I am seriously torn between the attraction of torching a little Mattel CEO-in-drag effigy on the steps of the state capitol (and passing out flyers explaining the situation to passing legislators) and the horrid fact that that means Mattel would get even one thin dime from me. [Does Barbie have a Mattelephone? PGN] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2000 13:45:52 -0700 From: John Shaver Subject: Re: Earn $$$ for Referring Beta Testers NeoPost is looking for beta test users for their program which makes your computer and printer into a part-time postage meter. They give you $100 in free postage and I think that when the Beta Test is over that you can continue to use the service but have to pay for the postage. They make their profit by charging a fee for selling you postage. John Shaver > Earn $$$ for referring Beta Testers! > List a friend on the Beta User Referral List, have them visit > to register, and upon their completion and > approval you earn $$$. Remind them of the FREE $100 in postage they will > receive simply for participating. > <> ------------------------------ From: Alfredo De La F Subject: Hiring in New York Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2000 14:54:15 -0500 We are a Lucent Technologies Authorized Dealer in New York City. We are looking to hire technicians with knowledge of the Partner and Merlin Legend/Magix products. Training is available. The main determining factors for us will be ability to troubleshoot, think, and work as a team player. Training will be made avaliable to any technicians we feel have the potential to benefit from it. Please call or Enhanced Communications, Inc. Tel: 212-405-2222 Fax: 212-405-2223 -Alfred For All of your Telecom & Data Needs Enhanced Communications, Inc. 212-405-2222 http://www.nylucentdealer.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2000 16:06:53 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Geeks to the Rescue! Technology Log: Geeks to the rescue! Three programmers try to spark a grass-roots movement on the Net to save global satellite network Iridium from a fiery death in space. By Katharine Mieszkowski [03/23/00] http://www.salon.com/tech/log/2000/03/23/save_iridium/index.html ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2000 11:59:52 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Napster Hack Allows Free Distribution of Software, Movies http://news.cnet.com/category/0-1005-200-1581232.html By John Borland Staff Writer, CNET News.com March 22, 2000, 4:15 p.m. PT Update: A new program has been posted on the Internet that transforms a popular music-trading network into a full-blown online swap meet capable of trading videos and software. The program, dubbed Wrapster, has been available for downloading since yesterday. According to its developer, Wrapster allows any kind of file to be listed and traded over the Napster network, which was designed to recognize only MP3 music files. CNET News.com was able to use the program to locate and download several different types of files through Napster. A source at Napster said company executives are aware of Wrapster but have not done anything to block its use. Wrapster joins a growing list of programs allowing the quick, free and wide distribution of illegally copied files. The trend is bad news for record companies, movie studios and software companies that have fought hard to keep their wares from being pirated online. Programs such as Wrapster and Nullsoft's Gnutella, which mimic and expand on Napster, are quickly speeding the erosion of copyright protections online, leaving copyright holders scrambling to keep up. "(Copyright holders) are aggressively pursuing the issue in the courts," said Peter Schalestock, an attorney with Perkins Coie. "They'd like to keep up with the technology, but that is turning into an arms race." Napster, a program designed to let Internet users swap music files with one another, has quickly moved to the heart of the controversy over pirated music and online copyrights. The software allows people to share a library of MP3 music files with anyone else on the Napster system and to freely download songs directly from others' computers. Napster's ease of use and the huge selection of music available through the system have made it a favorite among college students and other communities with high-speed Internet connections. Thousands of people can frequently be found on the network in the evenings, often sharing nearly a million songs with their peers. This has infuriated the recording industry, which views Napster as a tool for piracy. The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) has sued the company, charging that its software is facilitating the illegal distribution of material. The industry is asking courts for a potentially huge sum of $100,000 per illegally distributed song. "The overwhelming majority of the MP3 files offered on Napster are infringing," the RIAA says on a Web page explaining its position. "We believe Napster knows this and even encourages it." To this point, the turmoil has been caused simply by the distribution of music files. Wrapster raises the stakes, however. The Wrapster program tricks the Napster software into thinking that any file or set of files, including items such as software, videos or games, are MP3 files. Its author, identified as "Octavian" in the program's "about" file, suggests using the software as a means for trading programs such as Windows 2000. Octavian could not be reached for comment. While aware of Wrapster, executives at Napster do not yet see it as a problem. "They really see it as something that's benign right now," said Dan Wool, a spokesman for Napster. "Until it poses some kind of problem, they'll just keep the status quo." Napster proponents note that Wrapster's search capabilities aren't unique online. A less well-known program dubbed iMesh allows people to swap music, video and other multimedia files. That provides a broader range of options than Napster itself, which only supports MP3 files, but falls short of the capabilities of the new Wrapster technique. The software also has spawned imitators offering expanded features. Programmers at Nullsoft, the digital music player company recently acquired by America Online, unveiled an open-source effort that, like Wrapster, would allow any kind of file to be shared. Although AOL quickly pulled the project from its site, the code is available elsewhere, and the project may move ahead independently. "Other programs have already tried to imitate Napster's system and even taken it a step further," said Wayne Chang, a Haverhill, Mass., student who manages Napster's online community bulletin boards. "Wrapster is just ripping off the same idea, except this time disguising the files as the only media that Napster currently recognizes." The movie and software industries are watching the RIAA's experience closely, aware that they'll ultimately be subjected to the same pressure. They don't face the same risk of widespread piracy today because high-speed Internet connections still aren't common enough to make numerous downloads of their products feasible. An audio MP3 file generally takes up to half an hour to download over a dial-up connection and just seconds over a cable or DSL modem. A file such as Windows 2000 or a Hollywood movie, however, could take all day over an ordinary modem and potentially hours even over a fast connection. Nevertheless, the studios and software manufacturers are doing their best to protect their works against copying and to threaten potential pirates with high-stakes lawsuits. "It's an arms race as long as someone is trying to get around (copyright protections)," said Rich Taylor, vice president of public affairs for the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA). "The only things that are preventing a full-blown explosion of video entertainment on the Net are the lack of high-speed connections and the need to secure that digital product." ------------------------------ From: sjsobol@NorthShoreTechnologies.Net (Steve Sobol) Subject: Re: CPP, ATM Surcharges (was F.C.C. Debates Changes) Date: 26 Mar 2000 05:39:26 GMT Organization: New Age Consulting Service Inc., Cleveland, OH, USA > From 'Tony Pelliccio': > In the new Providence Place mall there are Citizens Bank ATM's all over > the place in freestanding kiosks. They all dial in. What's worse is that > it sends your PIN over the line too -- I can imagine an enterprising > hacker would have a ball with that. Bank One FastCash ATMs do that too. They've placed the FastCash ATM's in BP gas stations all over Cleveland (and presumably in BP's other big markets too; I'll bet you can find a ton of 'em in Atlanta and up through the Carolinas). Bank One charges their normal $1.50 fee to non-customers, but in an interesting twist they charge a $1 "FastCash" fee to their customers too. I imagine that this might be to cover the (real or perceived) increased cost of having the ATM dial up ... I don't know whether they encrypt the PINS on those dialup terminals. North Shore Technologies, Cleveland, OH http://NorthShoreTechnologies.net Steve Sobol, President, Chief Website Architect and Janitor sjsobol@NorthShoreTechnologies.net - 888.480.4NET - 216.619.2NET ------------------------------ From: sjsobol@NorthShoreTechnologies.Net (Steve Sobol) Subject: Re: Did AT&T Raise Calling Card Charges on Feb. 2nd? Date: 26 Mar 2000 05:47:53 GMT Organization: New Age Consulting Service Inc., Cleveland, OH, USA > From 'John R. Levine': >>> Since last summer we have used 1-800-CALL-ATT and our Bell Atlantic >>> calling card to make calls >> There's your mistake. You placed card calls over AT&T, but billed them >> to your Bell Atlantic issued card. > No kidding. AT&T just doesn't have competitive rates for residential > and small business customers. It looks like the lowest they'll go is > 25 cents per minute and $1/month. I have two tollfree numbers and a corporate calling card. And I still manage to only bill $25 a month on my AT&T corporate account (not a lot of outgoing calls yet, and only one of the tollfree numbers in occasional use; the other one I am holding on to because I'm going to need it for a project I'm doing.) I'm charged between 10 and 12 cents per minute for outgoing and incoming long distance. The $7.50 monthly fee is waived, though I pay $5 per month for the 800 numbers. I started at 25 cents per minute, and was lowered to 15 cents upon my request that they review my account. The second time my rate went down, it wasn't at my request; I was talking to a Customer Care rep and they offered to take a look and see if they could get me a lower rate; which, apparently, they could. My experience with residential mirrors John's though. 7 cents per minute nights and weekends, but everything else is 30, and they have told me that they simply do not do discounts on residential calling cards. So I either call at night or on the weekends if I need to call from home, or I use my corporate card ... I've found that MCI Worldcom and Sprint offer better residential rates. However, while I haven't been a Sprint customer in years, I have recently been an MCI customer. And due to their complete lack of a clue about what constitutes good customer service, I will never be an MCI customer again. North Shore Technologies, Cleveland, OH http://NorthShoreTechnologies.net Steve Sobol, President, Chief Website Architect and Janitor sjsobol@NorthShoreTechnologies.net - 888.480.4NET - 216.619.2NET ------------------------------ From: nospam.tonypo1@nospam.home.com (Tony Pelliccio) Subject: Re: USPTO Issues Patent on "Hyperspace Bypass" Organization: Providence Network Partners Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2000 17:11:11 GMT In article , chessler@usa.NOSPAM.net says... > According to the patent, > "All known radio transmissions use known models of time and space > dimensions for sending the RF signal. The present invention has > discovered the apparent existence of a new dimension capable of > acting as a medium for RE signals. Initial benefits of penetrating > this new dimension include sending RF signals faster than the speed > of light, extending the effective distance of RF transmitters at the > same power radiated, penetrating known RF shielding devices, and > accelerating plant growth exposed to the by-product energy of the RF > transmissions." > Sound like an April Fool's Day spoof? It isn't. See > http://www.patents.ibm.com/details?&pn=US06025810__&s_bsum=1 Sounds like the SciFi network can actually back their FTL network. The applications of something like this are pretty interesting though. Deep space communications networks anyone? Tony Pelliccio, KD1S formerly KD1NR Trustee WE1RD ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2000 13:18:05 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Risks of Microsoft Passport Excerpt from RISKS-FORUM Digest http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/20.85.html Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2000 14:33:05 GMT From: rubin@research.att.com (Avi Rubin) Subject: Risks of Microsoft Passport Dave Kormann and I took a look at Microsoft's Passport protocol and examined the risks. Our full paper is available at: http://cs.nyu.edu/rubin/passport.html Here is the abstract: Passport is a protocol that enables users to sign onto many different merchants' web pages by authenticating themselves only once to a common server. This is important because users tend to pick poor (guessable) user names and passwords and to repeat them at different sites. Passport is notable as it is being very widely deployed by Microsoft. At the time of this writing, Passport boasts 40 million consumers and more than 400 authentications per second on average. We examine the Passport single signon protocol, and identify several risks and attacks. We discuss a flaw that we discovered in the interaction of Passport and Netscape browsers that leaves a user logged in while informing him that he has successfully logged out. Finally, we suggest several areas of improvement. Avi ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V20 #37 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Mar 27 00:41:23 2000 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id AAA06774; Mon, 27 Mar 2000 00:41:23 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 00:41:23 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200003270541.AAA06774@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #38 n TELECOM Digest Mon, 27 Mar 2000 00:41:00 EST Volume 20 : Issue 38 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Net Speed Ain't Seen Nothin' Yet (Monty Solomon) Debit Card PIN Encryption (was Re: CPP, ATM Surcharges) (Andy Berry) Re: DialPad (The bald one) Re: Iridium to Make Fireworks For Next Two Years (The Old Bear) Re: Earn $$$ for Referring Beta Testers (Steve Sobol) Re: Earn $$$ for Referring Beta Testers (John R. Levine) Airline's Mistake Exposes Email Addresses (Monty Solomon) Insurance Site Exposes Personal Data (Monty Solomon) Privacy Pervasive in Policy (Monty Solomon) Re: Geeks to the Rescue! (JF Mezei) Re: Hackers Sued by Software-Filtering Company (William H. Bowen) Dial Labels ... Where to Find Them (Joseph Singer) Employment Opportunity: H.323 Contract Job (Joe Kalash) AOL Is Immune From Suit for Incorrect Company Information (Monty Solomon) Pre-paid Calling Cards (Tad Cook) Re: USPTO Issues Patent on "Hyperspace Bypass" (Scot E. Wilcoxon) Legality of PacBell Tax and Surcharge Calculations (Sidney Zafran) 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-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 259 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 805-545-5115 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@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: hyperarchive.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. Our corporate attorney is Bill Levant of Blue Bell, PA. In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2000 14:18:53 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Net Speed Ain't Seen Nothin' Yet by Leander Kahney 3:00 a.m. Mar. 21, 2000 PST Scientists at leading research labs are starting to push the data-transmission capabilities of fiber-optic cable into the realm of the mind-boggling. Setting a new record, researchers at Lucent's Bell Labs have for the first time managed to push an astonishing 3.28 terabits per second of data over a long stretch of fiber-optic cable. http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,35079,00.html ------------------------------ From: Andy Berry Subject: Debit Card PIN Encryption (was Re: CPP, ATM Surcharges) Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2000 18:57:34 -0600 Organization: Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas Steve Sobol wrote in message news:telecom20.37.9@telecom-digest.org: > I don't know whether they encrypt the PINS on those dialup terminals. Every debit card terminal I have seen in the petroleum business encrypts PINs at the point of entry, whether it is the terminal itself, a separate PIN pad, or out at the gas pump. Since most of the dialup terminals I see are Verifone machines, I would expect strong encryption of PINs. Andy B. ------------------------------ From: stanri@yahooREMOVETHISPART.com (The bald one) Subject: Re: DialPad Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2000 18:53:48 GMT Organization: @Home Network Just tried it. Same thing. It dials, rings, seems to connect and that's it. I dropped a note to Dialpad ... if they reply I'll post it. On Fri, 24 Mar 2000 13:04:22 -0500, jinxegg@juno.com wrote: > What has happened to Dialpad.Com, I have not been able to make a > connection with the server for the last 24 hours? I checked the news > articles but found no information on any block? > Jinxegg Like everyone else, I hate spam. To reply, remove the "REMOVETHISPART" from the email address. ------------------------------ From: oldbear@arctos.com (The Old Bear) Subject: Re: Iridium to Make Fireworks For Next Two Years Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2000 18:09:32 -0500 Organization: The Arctos Group - http://www.arctos.com/arctos Tom Bennett contributed the following: >>> The target will be the ocean -- a spectacle that may be >>> visible from Earth. The thought crossed my mind that some enterprising COCOT investor should have bought Iridium out of bankruptcy, packaged the phones into solar powered telephone booths, and placed them all over the planet -- in villages in less developed countries, by the side of the road in rural America, on street corners in underserved inner-city areas. Revenues would be by coin, credit card, or prepaid card depending upon the local culture and circumstance. With 90%+ of the debt burned off via the bankruptcy, revenues would need only to cover operating costs. And while the original concept was to make the system expensive and sell to a relatively limited number of users, this scheme would make the system less expensive and sold all over the place. Given the ability of COCOT companies to figure out how to make money on dimes and quarters, it doesn't seem like that big a leap. Anyone know the number of call minutes the Iridium system could handle and what the average revenue per minute would have to be at a high utilization level? (The above posted only half in jest.) ------------------------------ From: sjsobol@NorthShoreTechnologies.Net (Steve Sobol) Subject: Re: Earn $$$ for Referring Beta Testers Date: 27 Mar 2000 04:47:23 GMT Organization: New Age Consulting Service Inc., Cleveland, OH, USA From 'John Shaver': > NeoPost is looking for beta test users for their program which makes > your computer and printer into a part-time postage meter. And how is their service different from stamps.com (which I use; it's wonderful) or eStamps? (So, John, you're getting money for posting off-topic to c.d.t? Cool! :P) North Shore Technologies, Cleveland, OH http://NorthShoreTechnologies.net Steve Sobol, President, Chief Website Architect and Janitor sjsobol@NorthShoreTechnologies.net - 888.480.4NET - 216.619.2NET ------------------------------ Date: 26 Mar 2000 18:45:52 -0500 From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: Earn $$$ for Referring Beta Testers Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > NeoPost is looking for beta test users for their program which makes > your computer and printer into a part-time postage meter. I'm using it, the beta version is kind of a pain to set up and use but it does work once you figure it out. The envelopes you print look quite cool, a block where the stamp would usually go saying U.S. POSTAGE and the amount, meter number, and your city, below that is a block of OCR dots that encodes all that info and the date so they can scan it and look for fraud. This version of the sofware authentcates over the net each time you print a stamp, which is fine if you have a permanent connection but annoying if you have to dial up. They had another beta program, now closed, that used a dongle on the printer port to store the postage, so you only have to connect on-line when you want to buy more postage to load into the dongle. I'd have preferred that one. 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 Mar 2000 13:20:54 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Airline's Mistake Exposes Email Addresses Airline's mistake exposes email addresses By Rachel Konrad Staff Writer, CNET News.com March 21, 2000, 2:15 p.m. PT Trans World Airlines is bracing for turbulence after the company inadvertently included subscribers' email addresses in an electronic bulletin -- potentially leaking valuable information to marketers and spammers. http://news.cnet.com/category/0-1007-200-1580221.html ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2000 11:56:47 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Insurance Site Exposes Personal Data Glitch on Selectquote site reveals information to next user By Mike Brunker MSNBC March 22 - Consumers who requested online life insurance quotes from Selectquote.com on Tuesday and Wednesday got more than they bargained for: Thanks to a software glitch, their personal information was left on the company's Web site for the next user to see. http://www.msnbc.com/news/385464.asp?cp1=1 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2000 12:16:48 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Privacy Pervasive in Policy by Declan McCullagh 3:00 a.m. Mar. 24, 2000 PST WASHINGTON -- It took years for a debate over privacy to start on Capitol Hill, but only an hour for legislators to conclude that it'll be one of the most important topics from now on. At the end of a meeting on Thursday to launch the Congressional Privacy Caucus, Congressman Joe Barton (R-Texas) predicted that "every" major piece of legislation considered this year will have a privacy component. http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,35152,00.html ------------------------------ From: JF Mezei Subject: Re: Geeks to the Rescue! Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2000 21:12:34 -0500 Monty Solomon wrote: > Technology Log: Geeks to the rescue! > Three programmers try to spark a grass-roots movement on the Net to > save global satellite network Iridium from a fiery death in space. If they are truly willing to let the birds barbeque and write off their investments, why not try something radical instead ? Could they not adjust the service to allow data calls and thus provide internet services worldwide. For instance, Canada, Russia, Australia (and probably others) have significant number of communities in remote areas. Could they not offer nationwide coverage ? Perhaps such countries could get together and buy the constellation with a goal to serve their remote communities ? Can the satellites be re-programmed to provide adequate data bandwidth ? Or is Iridium data truly limited to 2400 baud ? ------------------------------ From: bowenb@best.com (William H. Bowen) Subject: Re: Hackers Sued by Software-Filtering Company Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 02:43:32 GMT Reply-To: bowenb@best.com Monty Solomon wrote: > Excerpt from RISKS-FORUM Digest > http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/20.85.html > Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 09:25:32 > From: Bear Giles > There is *far* more going on here than meets the eyes. Those > programmers are involved in the Peacefire anti-censorship group > (http://www.peacefire.org). The site has had detailed instructions > for getting around censorware software for months, without any legal > action from the companies. > But for some odd reason Symantec (I-Gear) threatened legal action only > after Peacefire cracked their encrypted blacklist and determined that > 76% of the sites in a quick sample (the first 50 .edu sites) were > erroneously blocked. > Likewise Mattel (CyberPatrol) sued only after Peacefire cracked their > encrypted blacklist and published the results. > To a critical mind, several questions scream out: > - why are the blacklists encrypted? Is this to block access by > competitors, or is it really to prevent parents and libraries from > performing their own quality checks? (If it's an anticompetitive > measure, why are the companies treating it as a "hackers, kids and > porn" case?) Both companies, from what I've read, encrypt the lists because they consider the lists a "trade secret" - their rational is that it has cost them much time and money to amass the lists, and don't want other vendors profiting from their work. They are playing it as a "hacker incident" due to the provisions of the Digital Millenium Copyright Act. > - how would knowing that a site is on the blacklist permit a kid > to access the blocked site? How many kids have the technical > knowledge to edit the blacklist... and how hard would it be to > check an MD5 checksum every so often? (Since the blocking software > only works when the computer is on the 'net, it is trivial to > automatically download the checksum every Nth request. If they > don't match, download a new copy of the blacklist.) You've heard of that old phrase "they can't see the nose on their own face"? > - why would the legitimately blocked sites have a problem with this? > AFAIK most legitimate porn sites are more than willing to cooperate > with censorware companies because it reduces their legal exposure - > they can demonstrate a good-faith effort to prevent access by minors. > The only sites that have a beef with this issue are ones that are > blocked due to judgment calls, e.g., the pro-censorware Christian > group that was was shocked to discover itself on a blacklist because > of its firm, principled stand against homosexuals and heathens. "He who lives by the sword . . ." > Further complicating the issue is the apparent attempts to invoke the > DMCA (essentially criminalizing political debate if one party uses > even trivial encryption of key evidence; it brings to mind the 80's > fad of putting a lawyer into every meeting so the company could claim > lawyer-client confidentiality) and the pending UCITA legislation > (which would explicitly criminalize badmouthing software). And we > must never forget the absurdity of a U.S. judge telling a Swedish ISP > that it can't host material for two Canadian residents -- do all courts > have worldwide jurisdiction in the prenatal millennium? Yep, the whole thing is degenerating into a morass of insanity!! Watch out if the treaty for the International Criminal Court is ratified . . > I strongly recommend anyone interested in this topic review the > Censorware Project's report on an analysis of the logs of all Utah > schools and libraries. (http://censorware.org/reports/utah/) This > report has been widely misquoted as proving that censorware works. > The 0.0006% (or "1-in-6 million," as was allegedly misquoted at one > point in the Bush-McCain slugfest) error rate is a total fiction; any > sane analysis shows that about 1-in-20 blocked sites are blocked in > error in practice. > *** Late update: according to Slashdot > (http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=00/03/20/0845236) Mattel > (CyberPatrol) has not only sent mass mailings to all mirrors of the > the critical webpages, they have allegedly added these mirror sites > (and the author's homepages) to their blacklist *under all > categories.* Slashdot also reports that Declan McCullagh, respected > journalist for _Wired_ who has never hosted the essay in question has > also received legal threats. > This means there is an excellent chance that this issue of comp.risks > will be unavailable to school children nationwide due to its shocking > content of nudity, explicit sexual depictions, violence, drug use, > satanic acts, gambling activities, etc. > The RISKS created by an "informed public debate" on the merits of > censorware, where the library patrons are quietly "protected" from > legitimate criticisms of one side of the debate should be obvious to > everyone. This is *not* an example pulled out of thin air -- another > recent Slashdot discussion covered the Holland, Mich. debate on > whether to mandate this type of censorware in their libraries. One > can only shudder in anticipation of the glorious day when nobody is > even aware of this problem as DMCA and UCITA ensure that no software, > anywhere, ever has any publishable defects of any kind. > On the bright side, this one petulant act may be enough to raise > serious constitutional issues of whether it will *ever* be legal for a > government to mandate the use of censorware on publicly access > systems. If this nonsense is allowed to stand, we might as well > appoint the CEO of Mattel Lord High Emperor because he(?) will have > demonstrated the ability to stifle the free political debate that lies > at the heart of our democracy. > (The preceding political screed was brought to you by the Drug-Running > Child Pornography Terrorists of America.) The previous line sure should trigger the blocking software :)) Let's face it: there are many, many people that are afraid of the 1st Amendment (and most of the others, for that matter). It is a constant battle to keep the barbarians from breaking down the door, and it will get MUCH harder before it gets any easier. I don't want to turn this into a political "thing", but read "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich" if you want a lesson on what is happening in this country. Regards, Bill Bowen bowenb@best.com Daly City, CA ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 17:44:50 -0800 From: Joseph Singer Subject: Dial Labels ... Where to Find Them I remember at one time finding a place on the net that had the original labels that were used on rotary dial phones. Both Western Electric and Automatic Electric. If someone knows where I can look I'd appreciate their input. TIA, Joseph Singer "thefoneguy" PO Box 23135, Seattle WA 98102 USA +1 206 405 2052 [voice mail] +1 206 493 0706 [FAX] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 14:13:38 -0800 From: kalash@pacbell.net (Joe Kalash) Subject: Employment Opportunity: H.323 Contract Job Organization: Really Easy Internet, Inc We have a short term need for a contractor with experience in H.323 (especially the voxzilla source). Anybody interested, please contact me directly. Thanks, Joe Kalash Really Easy Internet, Inc. kalash@really-easy.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2000 22:41:34 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: AOL Is Immune From Suit for Incorrect Company Information AOL not a content provider because it did not work closely with companies that supplied allegedly inaccurate stock information E-Commerce Law Weekly March 27, 2000 America Online acted solely as an interactive computer service provider when it gave access to allegedly inaccurate information regarding a company and its stock and therefore is immune from suit under the Communications Decency Privacy Act of 1996, the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled March 14 (Ben Ezra, Weinstein & Co. Inc. v. America Online Inc., 10th Cir., No. 99-2068, 3/14/00). http://www.lawnewsnetwork.com/practice/techlaw/news/A19603-2000Mar24.html ------------------------------ From: Tad Cook Subject: Pre-paid Calling Cards Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2000 20:28:51 -0800 Does anyone know of a web site that compares pre-paid calling cards that are purchasable over the net? I was all set to buy one from ecallingcards.com, but their site seems to be broken. Tad Cook Seattle, WA tad@aa.net ------------------------------ From: Scot E. Wilcoxon Organization: self Subject: Re: USPTO Issues Patent on "Hyperspace Bypass" Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2000 21:24:55 -0600 > Deep space communications networks anyone? As the patent requires magnets parallel to the transmission, before you can try it between here and Jupiter you have to install magnets between here and Jupiter. But fortunately that should also make plants grow better in the Solar System ... ------------------------------ From: Sidney Zafran Reply-To: szafran@alum.mit.edu Subject: Legality of PacBell Tax and Surcharge Calculations Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 04:57:23 GMT Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net I am questioning the method used by PacBell to calculate the taxes and surcharges they collect. PacBell does not pro-rate charges. What they do is to calculate charges based on the tax rate in effect during the current billing period. If a rate changes occurs, it consequently can apply to charges incurred prior to the effective date of the change. A specific illustration may clarify the situation. The rate surcharge, which appears as a credit on PacBell customers' bills, changed on January 1, 2000. My January bill, dated Janurary 16, which covers my billing period from December 16, 1999 through January 15, 2000, calculated the rate surcharge at the new January rate. I did, however, make some direct dialed calls in December. Accordingly, I was charged at the lower January credit rate for those calls, resulting in a smaller credit, and a larger bill. Is it legal for PacBell to apply rates ex post facto? ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V20 #38 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Mar 27 14:42:25 2000 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id OAA04469; Mon, 27 Mar 2000 14:42:25 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 14:42:25 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200003271942.OAA04469@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #39 TELECOM Digest Mon, 27 Mar 2000 14:42:00 EST Volume 20 : Issue 39 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Experience With Home Service (Bill Ranck) Re: Iridium to Make Fireworks For Next Two Years (Bill Ranck) Re: USPTO Issues Patent on "Hyperspace Bypass" (Arthur Ross) Re: Persistent Mysterious Calls from Hell ... (Mark Brader) Direction Needed: Where to Look For Help (Victor Frazier) Trying to Identify Long Distance Number (Judy Ramirez) ISP Access Number Problem (Kim Heusel) Re: International Ringing (Ringback) Tones (David) New Trial Offer From MCI (TELECOM Digest Editor) OptOut Software (Claire Pieterick) Fujitsu vrs. Cerent (D. Harms) Re: DialPad (Kim Brennan) Re: Geeks to the Rescue (W. Hatfield) 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-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 259 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 805-545-5115 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@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: hyperarchive.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. Our Corporate attorney is William Levant, Blue Bell, PA ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Bill Ranck Subject: Experience With Home Service Date: 27 Mar 2000 14:43:23 GMT Organization: Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia, USA Hello folks, Back about the end of October I posted here about a fairly low cost long distance service I had found on a Web page. I had promised to report back in a month or so, but as we all know the Digest sort of went moribund (get well Pat) for a while. The discussion about AT&T rates has prompted me to report back now. I signed up through a re-seller call Electrotex. They are apparently a company in Texas. The real service provider was Eclipse, though they have merged and changed names in the interim. After some trouble activating the free 800 number, things have gone well. The service is as promised, I get 7.9 cents/min. 24 hours a day, every day on outgoing long distance. Incoming on the 800 number costs me 8.9 cents per minute. This is handy with two daughters in college, and whenever my wife or I are travelling. Calling home is no problem and not too costly. The only "complaint" I have is that the long distance bill I get is about 20 pages. They report the call details, the cost per area code called, average time per call, etc, etc. Basically, it reports my long distance charges and calls in all sorts of different ways. I feel like they kill a whole tree every time they send me a bill, and the actual call detail is only one page or less. So far I have not needed to call customre service except early on. For some reason the web page request for a toll-free number did not work right, and I had to call Electrotex to get that fixed. Since then I have had no problems and no reason to call customer service. In the four months since I got the toll-free number there was only one wrong number received on that service, and it only cost me five cents. All-in-all it's been satisfactory for me. I know it's not the absolute lowest rate, but then it's the same rate all the time and there is no surcharge, or "plan fee," or whatever, and my total bill is lower than AT&T even with increased use. Oh, they also provided calling cards, but I have not had any real use for those with the 800 number to call home. The url for Electrotex is: http://newetex.electrotex.com/telecom/longdistance.html ***************************************************************************** * Bill Ranck +1-540-231-3951 ranck@vt.edu * * Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State University, Computing Center * ***************************************************************************** ------------------------------ From: Bill Ranck Subject: Re: Iridium to Make Fireworks For Next Two Years Date: 27 Mar 2000 13:28:19 GMT Organization: Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia, USA The Old Bear wrote: > The thought crossed my mind that some enterprising COCOT investor > should have bought Iridium out of bankruptcy, packaged the phones into > solar powered telephone booths, and placed them all over the planet -- > in villages in less developed countries, by the side of the road in > rural America, on street corners in underserved inner-city areas. > Given the ability of COCOT companies to figure out how to make money > on dimes and quarters, it doesn't seem like that big a leap. Just this weekend I heard a report on NPR about "phone ladies" in rural areas of India. There is a bank that specializes in financing small rural businesses, especially ones run by women, and they financed the purchase of digital cell phones to individual women in remote villages that have no wire lines. The woman then rents the phone out to her neighbors for use and makes enough to pay the bank and keep some profit. Seems like your idea is already working, but Iridium would have the same problem in that market. The land based providers are already there ahead of them. I think the only way Iridium *might* have survived would have been to flood the world with cheap phones for use of their system, and then make money on low margin/high volume. Without knowing exact numbers it's not clear if that would have been a viable strategy. It is how Standard oil made money 100 years ago. Give away the kerosene laterns and then sell kerosene. ***************************************************************************** * Bill Ranck +1-540-231-3951 ranck@vt.edu * * Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State University, Computing Center * ***************************************************************************** ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 00:17:07 -0700 From: Arthur Ross Subject: Re: USPTO Issues Patent on "Hyperspace Bypass" Tony Pelliccio wrote: > In article , chessler@usa.NOSPAM.net > says... >> According to the patent, >> "All known radio transmissions use known models of time and space >> dimensions for sending the RF signal. The present invention has >> discovered the apparent existence of a new dimension capable of >> acting as a medium for RE signals. Initial benefits of penetrating >> this new dimension include sending RF signals faster than the speed >> of light, extending the effective distance of RF transmitters at the >> same power radiated, penetrating known RF shielding devices, and >> accelerating plant growth exposed to the by-product energy of the RF >> transmissions." >> Sound like an April Fool's Day spoof? It isn't. See >> http://www.patents.ibm.com/details?&pn=US06025810__&s_bsum=1 > Sounds like the SciFi network can actually back their FTL network. The > applications of something like this are pretty interesting though. Deep > space communications networks anyone? It is appalling that the USPTO actually issued this. Examiners Wong & Clinger should be fired. I've been convinced for a long time that a great many of the patents that are issued are, shall we say, short on real merit, but this one takes the all time prize. Dr. Arthur H. M. Ross 2325 East Orangewood Avenue Phoenix, AZ 85020-4730 Tel: 602-371-9708 Fax: 602-336-7074 Portable (CDMA, of course!): 602-677-1021 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 02:21:25 EST From: msb@vex.net (Mark Brader) Subject: Re: Persistent Mysterious Calls from Hell ... Organization: - Thomas Horsley writes: > there is absolutely nothing on the other end for 2 or 3 seconds, I > know I can just hang up because its a predictive dialer trying to find > a free telemarketer to connect me to :-). Trouble is, around here it could also be the public library's machine phoning to tell me that the book I've been on the waiting list for for the last 6 months is in. Mark Brader | "I don't have to stay here to be insulted." Toronto | "I realize that. You're insulted everywhere, I imagine." msb@vex.net | -- Theodore Sturgeon My text in this article is in the public domain. ------------------------------ From: VM Subject: Direction Needed; Where to Go or Look Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2000 23:08:26 -0800 Patrick, While surfing on the net I came across your site. Do you know of a book or site that will teach me the basics of switching in the telephone industry. I am currently taking a fiber optic/ copper cable splicing class. I would prefer inside plant work. My instructor has made it clear he does not teach this area. So now, I'm looking for somewhere to go to find help. I would like to become a switch tech, Central office tech, etc. Any assistance will be greatly appreciated. Thank you, Victor ------------------------------ From: yogimami Subject: Trying to Identify Long Distance Number Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 10:45:47 -0500 Dear Sir/Madam, I am trying to find the source of a phone number that shows up on my long distance bill. I already tried calling the number which is 352-372-2840 in Gainesville. There is no answer any of the times I have called. AT&T could not determine the source either when they tried to call. I haven't had any luck using the many different reverse search sites. This is not an access number that I use through Netzero (or used through AOL). I am continuously charged for calls to this number and I don't know who's it is! This is very frustrating. I was hoping that you might be able to give me any suggestions. Thank you. Sincerely, Ms. Judy Ramirez [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: If you are being billed by AT&T, then AT&T has to provide you the details. I will ask our readers to try and help, especially those in the area. I assume you are referring to Florida and not Georgia. In any event, maybe you need to turn up the heat a little on AT&T; if they cannot identify the call, then you are not going to pay for it. Believe me, they *will* find it that way. Even if it is some other telephone company or carrier, they will find it if you refuse to pay. In the meantime, can anyone offer any advice to Ms. Ramirez? PAT] ------------------------------ From: Kim Heusel Subject: ISP Access Number Problem Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 11:14:11 -0500 Pat: Perhaps you could post this question to the Telecom Digest discussion board. I have a friend here in Indianapolis who subscribes to Juno Gold. When she got her telephone bill recently, it listed more than 30 long-distance calls to a little town outside Indianapolis. The calls totaled more than $130 in charges. Come to find out, the number was one of the access number for Juno Gold. The problem is, that she has her modem set to dial only the local-access numbers provided by Juno for Indianapolis. After receiving the bill, she double-checked to make sure the settings hadn't been changed. They hadn't been. She has been a Juno subscriber for quite a while and never had a problem until recently. Could the locally called number be defaulting to the long-distance number? Could her modem be malfunctioning? Have you ever heard of anything like this happening before? Juno gave her the standard "not-our-fault" reply to her e-mail but didn't really answer her question, either. Thanks, Kim Heusel, project editor Howard W. Sams & Co. (317) 298-5530 * (800) 255-6989, x530 Celebrating 2000, the last year of the 20th century [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: When a number is 'defaulted' to ring some other number, it is handled like 'call forwarding' and the person or company forwarding the call is the one to pay for it. Regards the modem 'malfunctioning', the modem does not know the difference between ISPs, it just dials what is in the dialing string. A modem is not going to malfunction by always dialing a long distance number. Your friend needs to *MAKE CERTAIN* the number being dialed is in fact listed as a local number. Quoting from the Juno dialing instructions, see what Indiana Bell has to say about the number. If Juno is claiming it is a local number while in fact Indiana Bell has it listed as a long distance number, then Juno owes you an adjustment. It is not uncommon for a national ISP to get a little confused when making up their lists of 'local' numbers for people to call. They make up a list of numbers, and one gets listed as local when it should be long distance. In summary, the number is either/or; you can forget the modem malfunctioing part and the part about a local number being forwarded to a long distance number (and you expected to pay for it). PAT] ------------------------------ From: David Subject: Re: International Ringing (Ringback) Tones Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 16:32:04 GMT Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy. In article , Paul Dorosh wrote: > Dear Sir, > For a while now, I have been unsuccessfully surfing the Net to find any > reference to a site containing information on ringing (ringback) > tones, currently used in different countries in the world. I read your answer > in "Telecom Digest Online" to someone inquiring about the tones used > in the USA, and I would really appreciate if you could help me out as > well. > Thank you. There is a comprehensive listing of PSTN tones used throughout the world in a Technical Report published by the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI). This document is called "TR 101 141-2 Human Factors (HF); European harmonization of network generated tones; Part 2: Listing and analysis of European, World and Standardized tones". This information in this document for Europe should be quite accurate, it may be less so for the rest of the world. It should be possible to download this from the ETSI web site, the URL of the publication download area is http://webapp.etsi.org/pda/ and the home page is www.etsi.org. It is necessary to register before downloading the document. David ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 12:24:38 EST From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: New Trial Offer From MCI Gary Oppenheimer <0002180241@mcimail.com> is the brother of our Judith Oppenheimer and he has a new trial offer of interest for you. He works for MCI/Worldcom, which is starting a 'Find Me/Follow Me' service a lot like the MyLine program which I have told you about in the past. It is highly competitive with MyLine, which is now maintained by GST Telecom. The service from MCI/Worldcom has the same features as Myline, including voicemail, an 800 number, and the ability to call out via the 800 number. In addition, you can receive faxes, and there is a provision for broadcast faxes as well. If you wish, your 800 number can be transferred to/from MCI/Worldcom. You do not need to change numbers. There is also a voice broadcast feature which allows you to record a message one time and have it given out to a large number of people, for example a special announcement to be played. The best part is a TOTALLY FREE/NO OBLIGATION 30-day free trial. There is also a commission program based on sales volume you can use with your clients. Gary has suggested I may wish to offer it to readers of this Digest. To get a free 30 day trial of MCI/Worldcom's new Follow Me service, call Gary Oppenheimer at 888-691-0783 or fax him at the same number. To see how it works, look at http://www.findmefollowme.com or write to contact.sales@mcimail.com ... after you try it, please write to the Digest with your experiences. PAT ------------------------------ From: Claire Pieterek Reply-To: pieterek@pipeline.com Subject: OptOut Software Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 13:00:00 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I ran this once before, but it is worth repeating. Please read it closely. PAT] Fellow Telecom Digest readers may be interested in this: Steve Gibson's MailBot wrote: > Internet Privacy: > OptOut? > Several weeks ago a scare swept through the Internet community > regarding alleged Internet "spying" being done by a very > popular advertising system known as "Aureate" (now renamed to > "Radiate".) Since the Aureate system is "carried" into the > user's PC by more than 400 popular freeware programs (like > Go!Zilla, GetRight, CuteFTP, and others), and is currently > installed and running in over TWENTY-TWO MILLION PC's!!, the > threat that this software was "spying" on its users was of > great and immediate concern. > My initial analysis of the Aureate system revealed that MUCH > of what had been claimed was completely unfounded. However, > that analysis DID raise enough concern and questions that I > decided to look further... > What I discovered was that this system WAS secretly running as > a "parasite" on your Netscape or Microsoft web browser, using > your browser's Internet connection to communicate with Aureate > servers in the background without the user's knowledge or > explicit permission! This meant that the Aureate software was > running and communicating over the Internet even when the > hosting "carrier" freeware, which brought it into the system, > was not running! This browser "parasite" had also been > implicated in frequent crashes of those browsers. And even > after the "freeware" which brought this parasitic software > into the user's machine had been completely removed, THE > AUREATE SYSTEM REMAINED INSTALLED AND OPERATING SECRETLY! > This was not okay. > A reading of Aureate's developer web site shows that the > freeware authors are receiving payment from the advertisers > in direct proportion to the number of advertisements actually > viewed and the length of time they are shown. In order to do > this, the actaul use of the various programs MUST be monitored > and reported back to Aureate. > This bothered me too. > So ... since I already knew of other similar sounding problems > with "Adbots" being secretly installed in user's machines (The > ZoneAlarm firewall discovered a different one running in my > own machine!), I decided to create an easy-to-use tool to > check for the presence of known "baddies" and -- optionally -- > remove them from the computer for the user. > The program is called "OptOut" because it allows users to "opt > out" of the use of unwanted advertising software on their > machines. > I wrote it in 100% assembly language over the past two weeks, > it's a nifty little 32K bytes in size ... and the "Preview > Release" is ready for you to use right now! > Please see the new "OptOut" page on the grc.com web site for > more information and news about Aureate and OptOut. You can > download it from there too... > http://grc.com/optout.htm Claire Pieterek surfing on a wave of nostalgia for an age yet to come ------------------------------ From: dharms98@my-deja.com Subject: Fujitsu vs Cerent Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 18:00:08 GMT Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy. Anyone has experience with Cerent equipment and would like to share how it compares with Fujitsu? Thanks! D. ------------------------------ From: kim@aol.com (Kim Brennan) Date: 27 Mar 2000 18:27:04 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Subject: Re: DialPad > What has happened to Dialpad.Com, I have not been able to make a > connection with the server for the last 24 hours? I checked the news > articles but found no information on any block? Hmm, dialpad was one of those folks spamming me. I wonder if my emails had any effect. Kim Brennan Duo 2300c, PB G3(bronze),VW Fox Wagon GL, Corrado SLC, Vanagon GL Syncro http://members.aol.com/kim Duo Info Page: http://members.aol.com/kim/computer/duo/duoindex.html ?'s should include "Duo" in subject, else they'll be deleted unread. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 12:14:35 -0500 From: W. Hatfield Subject: Re: Geeks to the Rescue JF Mezei wrote: > Monty Solomon wrote: >> Technology Log: Geeks to the rescue! >> Three programmers try to spark a grass-roots movement on the Net to [...] > Can the satellites be re-programmed to provide adequate data bandwidth? Or is > Iridium data truly limited to 2400 baud? Twenty-four hundred baud. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V20 #39 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Mar 28 16:21:40 2000 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id QAA13330; Tue, 28 Mar 2000 16:21:40 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 16:21:40 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200003282121.QAA13330@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #41 TELECOM Digest Tue, 28 Mar 2000 16:21:00 EST Volume 20 : Issue 41 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Telecom Update (Canada) #226, March 27, 2000 (John Riddell) Re: Iridium to Make Fireworks For Next Two Years (Clarence Dold) Re: Iridium to Make Fireworks For Next Two Years (Al Dykes) Re: CPP, ATM Surcharges (was F.C.C. Debates Changes) (Mark Brukhartz) Re: Did AT&T Raise Calling Card Charges on Feb. 2nd? (Mark Brukhartz) Re: PRI & DACSed Data? (Paul Doran) Re: Debit Card PIN Encryption (was Re: CPP, ATM Surcharges)(T. Pelliccio) 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-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 259 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 805-545-5115 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@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: hyperarchive.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. Our corporate attorney is William Levant of Blue Bell, PA. In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 11:53:04 -0500 From: John Riddell Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #226, March 27, 2000 ************************************************************ TELECOM UPDATE Angus TeleManagement's Weekly Telecom Newsbulletin http://www.angustel.ca Number 226: March 27, 2000 Publication of Telecom Update is made possible by generous financial support from: AT&T Canada ...................... http://www.attcanada.com/ Bell Canada ............................ http://www.bell.ca/ Lucent Technologies .................. http://www.lucent.ca/ Sprint Canada .................. http://www.sprintcanada.ca/ Teleglobe Business Solutions ...... http://www.teleglobe.ca/ Telus Communications.................. http://www.telus.com/ TigerTel Services ................. http://www.tigertel.com/ ************************************************************ IN THIS ISSUE: ** Quebecor Bids for Videotron ** Rogers and Shaw Align Operations ** Inukshuk and SaskTel Win MCS Licenses ** Bell to Expand High-Speed Internet Access ** GT Buys National Fiber Net ** GT Acquires Moffat FiberLink Business ** Telus Mobility Moves East ** CN Invests in 360networks ** CRTC Okays CTV-Netstar Deal ** Bell Mobility Links to SAP Data ** Optel Readies Launch in Winnipeg, Halifax ** Telus Adopts Poison Pill ** AT&T Offers Network-Based Call Center ** New Execs at AT&T ** Mitel Launches IP-Based PBX ** 56% of Canadians Use Internet ** LNP Extends in Ontario, Quebec ** Nortel Buys Fiber Optics Start-Ups ** BlackBerry to Access Livelink Networks ** SaskTel Offers Fleet Tracking ** Exclusive in Telemanagement This Month ============================================================ QUEBECOR BIDS FOR VIDEOTRON: Quebecor and the Caisse de depot et placement du Quebec say they will bid $5.88 Billion in cash and shares for Groupe Videotron. Videotron's directors have already declared their support for a takeover proposal from Rogers Communications, but the Caisse has obtained a temporary injunction blocking the directors from voting in favor of the Rogers bid. Quebecor owns the Sun newspaper chain and the Canoe web portal. (See Telecom Update #219) ROGERS AND SHAW ALIGN OPERATIONS: Rogers Communications and Shaw Communications are proposing to reorganize their cable properties and merge parts of their Internet businesses. The plan, which requires CRTC approval, includes the following: ** Rogers will get Shaw's cable operations in southern Ontario and New Brunswick in exchange for Rogers' operations in British Columbia. ** Shaw and Rogers will jointly develop a national Internet backbone network using fiber purchased from 360networks. Both cablecos will make equity investments in 360networks. ** Rogers and Shaw will unite their Internet portals into Excite@Canada, owned by Rogers (51%), Shaw (22.5%), and Excite@Home (22.5%). Two other cablecos, Cogeco and Moffat, have been invited to participate the new company. ** Shaw will sell Rogers its six million shares of Cogeco, which operates in Ontario and Quebec, for about $270 Million. Shaw will acquire Rogers' stake in Canadian Satellite Communications (Cancom) for $94 Million. INUKSHUK AND SASKTEL WIN MCS LICENSES: Inukshuk Internet, owned by Look Communications and Microcell, has been awarded 12 of 13 licenses for MCS wireless service. The 13th went to SaskTel. Inukshuk says they will offer broadband wireless Internet access to 50% of Canadians in 2001. (See Telecom Update #204) http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/SSG/sf01708e.html BELL TO EXPAND HIGH-SPEED INTERNET ACCESS: Bell Canada says it will invest $1.5 Billion over three years to expand residential and business high-speed Internet service. Bell promises that the service will be available to more than 70% of its residential and business customers by year-end. GT BUYS NATIONAL FIBER NET: GT Group Telecom will pay 360networks $352 Million, plus a $50 Million equity investment, for 12 fiber optic strands from Victoria to Halifax and indefeasible rights of use to an additional 7,900 route kilometers of 12-strand fiber in the U.S. GT ACQUIRES MOFFAT FIBERLINK BUSINESS: Group Telecom has agreed in principle to buy the competitive access provider business of Moffat Communications for $118 Million in cash and stock. This will give GT 600 route kilometers of local fiber and 240 on-net buildings in Edmonton and Winnipeg. TELUS MOBILITY MOVES EAST: BCT.Telus has begun offering wireless telephone service in Ontario, Manitoba, and Saskatchewan. CN INVESTS IN 360NETWORKS: Canadian National Railway has exchanged its interest in two joint ventures with 360networks for an equity stake in the carrier. CRTC OKAYS CTV-NETSTAR DEAL: CRTC Decision 2000-86 approves CTV's purchase of 80% in NetStar Communications, subject to conditions that include the sale of the Sportsnet specialty channel within one year. BCE, whose offer to buy CTV is conditional on approval of the NetStar deal, has reserved comment. http://www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/Decisions/2000/DB2000-86e.htm ** The Commission also approved a proposal to create a trust to hold BCE's CTV shares, pending a ruling on the deal as a whole. BELL MOBILITY LINKS TO SAP DATA: Employees of companies using SAP resource management software can now access corporate data from Bell Mobility data-equipped handsets via SAP's MySAP.com Internet portal. OPTEL READIES LAUNCH IN WINNIPEG, HALIFAX: Optel Communications has asked the CRTC to approve tariffs which would allow it to launch service in Winnipeg and Halifax on April 28. (See Telecom Update #210) TELUS ADOPTS POISON PILL: Telus's Board of Directors have adopted a shareholder rights plan to deter possible hostile takeover bids. AT&T OFFERS NETWORK-BASED CALL CENTER: AT&T Canada now offers IBM's NetCallCentre, a network-based call center which provides service on a pay-per-use basis. NEW EXECS AT AT&T: AT&T Canada has appointed Mark Ethier, previously of Telus and Bell Canada, as Senior VP, Business Sales. Emilio Taddio, previously with Fonorola and Destia Communications, becomes Senior VP, Wholesale. MITEL LAUNCHES IP-BASED PBX: Mitel Communications Systems has released the Ipera 2000, which is to deliver the functionality of Mitel's SX-2000 PBXs over an IP platform. 56% OF CANADIANS USE INTERNET: An Angus Reid survey found that 56% of Canadians used the Internet between November and January. Canadian usage ranked second in the international survey after the U.S. (59%). LNP EXTENDS IN ONTARIO, QUEBEC: Local Number Portability will be extended next month to exchanges in Keswick, Ont. (April 15), Woodbridge, Ont. (April 14) and Chateauguay, PQ (April 21). NORTEL BUYS FIBER OPTICS START-UPS: Nortel Networks has agreed to buy two optical equipment manufacturers, CoreTek and Xros, for US$1.43 Billion and US$3.25 Billion, respectively. (See Telecom Update #213) BLACKBERRY TO ACCESS LIVELINK NETWORKS: Research In Motion is working with Waterloo-based Open Text to enable RIM's BlackBerry e-mail pager to access Open Text's Livelink collaborative networks. SASKTEL OFFERS FLEET TRACKING: SaskTel Mobility has introduced LoadTrak, which lets Saskatchewan-based trucking companies to track vehicles anywhere in North America and send messages to their drivers. EXCLUSIVE IN TELEMANAGEMENT THIS MONTH: Four LD companies have asked Cabinet to overturn a CRTC decision on contribution fees. Read their appeal in April's Telemanagement, along with these other exclusives: ** Full text of a position statement by the Canadian Institute of Public and Private Real Estate Companies on telecom carrier access to their buildings; ** An interview with Mike Kedar, founder of Call-Net and Microcell, on his plans to bring 3G wireless to Canada. ** Plus: The call center elephant; fiber vs. copper for office cabling; Outsourcing VPNs; and much more. Until March 30, new subscribers to Telemanagement will receive Tips, Tricks and Traps 2000: Managing Business Telecom Today," containing 24 Telemanagement articles on how to solve practical problems of telecom management. Call 1-800-263-4415, ext 225 or visit the Telemanagement home page at http://www.angustel.ca. ============================================================ 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: listmanager@postmastergeneral.com Insert as the subject of your message the two words: subscribe TelecomUpdate To stop receiving the e-mail edition, send an e-mail message to: listmanager@postmastergeneral.com Insert as the subject of your message the two words: unsubscribe TelecomUpdate =========================================================== COPYRIGHT AND DISCLAIMER: All contents copyright 2000 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 225. The information and data included has been obtained from sources which we believe to be reliable, but Angus TeleManagement makes no warranties or representations whatsoever regarding accuracy, completeness, or adequacy. Opinions expressed are based on interpretation of available information, and are subject to change. If expert advice on the subject matter is required, the services of a competent professional should be obtained. ============================================================ ------------------------------ From: Clarence Dold Subject: Re: Iridium to Make Fireworks For Next Two Years Date: 27 Mar 2000 20:58:22 GMT Organization: a2i network Reply-To: dold@rahul.net Bill Ranck wrote > Seems like your idea is already working, but Iridium would have the > same problem in that market. The land based providers are already > there ahead of them. That's exactly the analysis given for the failure of Iridium (after the stupidly high price of the bricks^H^H^H^phones initially). The reference was to the international roaming agreements, and the pervasiveness of cellular technology, squeezing the Iridium marketplace to only the most remote areas on earth, far smaller than the general international travel model required for the Iridium model to work. Clarence A Dold - dold@rahul.net - Pope Valley & Napa CA. ------------------------------ From: adykes@panix.com (Al Dykes) Subject: Re: Iridium to Make Fireworks For Next Two Years Date: 27 Mar 2000 18:30:54 -0500 Organization: PANIX -- Public Access Networks Corp. In article , The Old Bear wrote: > Revenues would be by coin, credit card, or prepaid card depending upon > the local culture and circumstance. > With 90%+ of the debt burned off via the bankruptcy, revenues would > need only to cover operating costs. And while the original concept > was to make the system expensive and sell to a relatively limited > number of users, this scheme would make the system less expensive and > sold all over the place. > Given the ability of COCOT companies to figure out how to make money > on dimes and quarters, it doesn't seem like that big a leap. Anyone know the number of call minutes the Iridium system could handle and what the average revenue per minute would have to be at a high utilization level? (The above posted only half in jest.) Al Dykes dykes@panix.com ------------------------------ From: Mark.Brukhartz@wdr.com Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 18:10:34 -0600 Subject: Re: CPP, ATM Surcharges (was F.C.C. Debates Changes) Banks will certainly continue to accept non-customer ATM cards when surcharges are prohibited. ATM network agreements are bilateral; if Wells Fargo wants their customers to be able to use other bank ATMs, they must accept ATM cards issued by other banks. A large bank could not prosper today issuing ATM cards good only at their own ATM machines. Too many of their customers would walk away. Some less-used ATMs may be removed when surcharges are prohibited. It costs something to purchase, install and maintain an ATM for a period of time, in addition to the usage-sensitive refilling costs. But ATMs were easy to find before the national networks permitted surcharges a few years ago. More machines will remain than existed a few years ago. -Mark ------------------------------ From: Mark.Brukhartz@wdr.com Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 18:10:33 -0600 Subject: Re: Did AT&T Raise Calling Card Charges on Feb. 2nd? AT&T has (had) one plan with good calling card rates. AT&T's Personal Network plan includes a 10 cents per minute calling card. It has no regular per-call surcharge; just a 30 cent per call payphone charge (not much more than the 26 cents per call that they must pay to payphone operators). Residential domestic calls are 7 cents per minute, 24 hours per day. International calls, from home or by calling card, are at reasonable rates; comparable to their residential international plan, but at no additional charge. The plan was available for something like $9.95 per month to anyone, $5.95 per month to AT&T Wireless subscribers accepting combined home and mobile billing, and for *free* to Wireless One Rate subscribers. AT&T has suspended offering of Personal Network to new subscribers pending their spinoff of AT&T Wireless. The Securities and Exchange Commission requires spin-off companies to be independent of the parent firm at the time of the initial public stock offering. The pricing tie with home long distance service violates that rule. Existing customers (such as myself) remain on the plan. An AT&T Personal Network customer service representative said that they intend to offer Personal Network again to new subscribers after the stock offering. -Mark ------------------------------ From: Paul Doran Subject: Re: PRI & DACSed Data? Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 01:21:43 GMT Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net I installed a PRI that we dropped out at least 8 channels for Adtran in Huntsville, Al at least five or six years ago. On one end we had a Nortel Option 61 on the other end in Calif. was a Nortel Option 11. We used an Adtran TSU-100 for the drop and add. If I remember correctly we also did the same thing on a direct circuit to MCI about the same time. You may want to give the presales engineering group at Adtran a call. On Thu, 23 Mar 2000 17:10:34 -0800, Scott Ables wrote: > If anyone has successfully aggregated data (say 8 channels of dedicated > Internet access for example) onto a PRI, please, email me with the > details: > 1) CPE > 2) Telco that delivers circuit > 3) Any issues in turning it up? > 4) Is a contact person available for me to discuss this with on an > informal basis? > I'm told that the central office switch has a problem with receiving PRI > out of the DACS used to insert the data channels. The switch will not > allow the PRI to be turned up, so I'm told we will have to either be > satisfied with vanilla T1 (no caller id, which we need), or use PRI and > get a separate T1 for our Internet connection. Neither option is cost > effective. I can't get DSL either. Has anybody seen this work? ------------------------------ From: nospam.tonypo1@nospam.home.com (Tony Pelliccio) Subject: Re: Debit Card PIN Encryption (was Re: CPP, ATM Surcharges) Organization: Providence Network Partners Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 22:45:58 GMT In article , ab98@yifan.net says: > news:telecom20.37.9@telecom-digest.org: > I don't know whether they encrypt the PINS on those dialup terminals. > encrypts PINs at the point of entry, whether it is the terminal > itself, a separate PIN pad, or out at the gas pump. Since most of the > dialup terminals I see are Verifone machines, I would expect strong > encryption of PINs. It wouldn't be difficult to figure out. Just run your own card for an account inquiry while monitoring the phone line. Then you just work it backwards. Try it a couple of times to make sure the encryption algorithm doesn't shift around. == Tony Pelliccio, KD1S formerly KD1NR == Trustee WE1RD ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V20 #41 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Mar 28 18:22:57 2000 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id SAA03182; Tue, 28 Mar 2000 18:22:57 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 18:22:57 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200003282322.SAA03182@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #40 TELECOM Digest Tue, 28 Mar 2000 18:22:00 EST Volume 20 : Issue 40 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson White House Phone Phraud (Tad Cook) Bell Atlantic 500 Numbers (Tad Cook) Direct Marketeting vs. Privacy (Marcus Schmied) Re: ISP Access Number Problem (Bill Levant) Re: ISP Access Number Problem (The Old Bear) Re: USPTO Issues Patent on "Hyperspace Bypass" (A. E. Siegman) Re: USPTO Issues Patent on "Hyperspace Bypass" (David Clayton) Twist in ACLU/Peacefire vs. Cyber Patrol Court Case (Bennett) 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-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 259 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 805-545-5115 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@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: hyperarchive.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 the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Tad Cook@aa.net> Subject: White House Phone Phraud Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 21:28:49 -0800 Army sergeant arrested; allegedly shared White House calling code From Time to Time: Nando's in-depth look at the 20th century NEW YORK (March 27, 2000 6:42 p.m. EST http://www.nandotimes.com) - President Clinton's phone bills rose more than $50,000 after an Army sergeant gave out the White House long-distance calling code, federal prosecutors said Monday. The scheme allegedly culminated in the arrest of David Gilmer, 30, of Woodbridge, Va., an Army sergeant assigned to the White House Communications Agency. In papers filed in federal court in Manhattan, U.S. Attorney Mary Jo White alleged that Gilmer gave the White House phone access number to people in New York and New Jersey, allowing them to make 9,400 unauthorized calls between Dec. 5 and Feb. 8. The callers were tapping into the same telephone service provided to the president, vice president, White House senior staff, the National Security Council, and U.S. Secret Service, according to court papers. The computerized telephone system is owned by private companies but operated by the White House Communications Agency. Gilmer was arrested Friday and charged with conspiracy to defraud the government. If convicted, he could face up to five years in prison and a $250,000 fine. A message left at Gilmer's home Monday after he had been released on bail was not immediately returned. Marvin Smilon, a spokesman for the U.S. attorney, said there was no indication that those who obtained the access codes could have done anything more than make free phone calls. Federal investigators searched seven locations in New York and one in New Jersey this month to gather evidence. According to the complaint, a person in New Jersey told investigators the code had come from Gilmer. The individual agreed to let federal agents tape telephone calls with Gilmer, including one in which Gilmer admitted he had provided access codes to others, the complaint said. ------------------------------ From: Tad Cook Subject: Bell Atlantic 500 Numbers Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 21:23:59 -0800 Bell Atlantic to offer go-anywhere 500 number to get local Net access By Peter J. Howe, Globe Staff, 3/27/2000 (Boston Globe) On-the-go customers of dial-up Internet access providers who constantly need to find a local number to get on the Net could soon have to remember just one number. Bell Atlantic is now offering for ISPs so-called "500" numbers that subscribers could call anywhere in Bell Atlantic's Maine-to-Virginia service territory and be hooked up to the closest dial-up line to get on the Net. This could be one of the first big uses of 500 area code numbers, which were created more than five years ago to support "follow-me" services -- like a single number that rings to whatever phone a subscriber has chosen to use -- but have been slow to take off. ISPs would get a number in one of two groups, either 500-699-XXXX or 500-555-XXXX. When subscribers called, their network would use caller ID to determine where they were calling from, and instantaneously route the call to the closest dial-up access number. Because Bell Atlantic is a local carrier, however, this could not be an out-of-state number. The Net access dial-up number would have to be in the same local calling area as the subscriber, which in Eastern Massachusetts would include any number in the 508, 617, 781 or 978 area codes. Ann Daniel, a Bell marketing manager for the service, said the company expects to sign contracts soon with two ISPs in Maine and Massachusetts. But she said she could not yet disclose their identities. By this autumn, Bell Atlantic plans to upgrade the service so that it could automatically find a second or third alternative local Net access number if the first one reached through the 500 number was busy, Daniel said. Rich D'Amato, a spokesman for America Online, the nation's largest dial-up ISP with more than 20 million subscribers, said of the Bell service: "This is certainly an interesting idea and one we will be taking a look at, but it's probably useful to AOL only in certain specific instances or geographical pockets." D'Amato said AOL already has more than 1.5 million modems in service. And by using the keyword "access," users visiting a different city can easily get a list of local access numbers in the area code. AOL's 4.0 and 5.0 versions also have this list built into the software. In suburban Pittsburgh, VoiceNet last month began offering a single 500 number for subscribers in the 412 and 724 area codes, replacing several different local numbers. The 500 service would also support a system under which, for example, a Domino's Pizza could offer a single 500 number for ordering a pizza that would ring to the Domino's franchise closest to the caller's home, Bell officials said. AT&T has also experimented with 500 numbers for wireless telephone subscribers that make the person calling pay for completing the call, as well as 500 numbers introduced in January 1995 that could be a "lifetime phone number" for people who move frequently. But company spokesman Gary Morgenstern said: "We withdrew all that from the marketplace last year. Five hundred numbers are sort of the Rodney Dangerfield of telecommunications: They don't get no respect." Morgenstern said many corporate telecommunications technicians refused to program their company switchboards to complete calls to 500 numbers, and US consumers "were wary of dialing what sounded like foreign numbers. Customers just didn't embrace them as much as we would have liked." Morgenstern added that AT&T's WorldNet ISP would be unlikely to use 500 numbers because it already has enough local access lines in service to guarantee 99 percent reliability for dial-up access, backed up by an 800 number if local lines are busy. ------------------------------ From: Marcus Schmied Subject: Direct Marketing vs. Privacy Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 10:12:35 GMT Organization: @Home Network This isn't exactly something pertaining to telecom, but it is in a vague way; the reason I chose this group is because it's moderated and has a high S/N ratio. Anyway, I am very concerned about the increasing use of data-mining to market to us stuff that we don't need or want. For example, just because I have an Hispanic surname, I received a solicitation from Club Music! (the Latin version of Columbia House, the CD club). The solicitation was written in Spanish (of which I speak or read not one iota) and featured music I have no interest in (Latin artists, whereas my music tastes run towards Classic Rock and Alternative). Why do these companies employ such crude marketing tactics? Just because I have a Spanish surname does not mean I am *culturally* Hispanic. Such an assumption is a subtle form of racism. It's a stereotype. And it gets worse. Apparently, a friend of mine was skiing in Aspen, Co. and sprained his ankle. He used plastic to pay for the doctor bill. Well, lo! and behold! Three weeks later, he received a solicitation in the mail from a realtor in Aspen asking if he wanted to purchase a home or ski condo. Apparently, either the c.c. company or the dr's office sold his address and info to the realtor. Why are there no laws to regulate such a rampant violation of privacy? When I go to the doctor, I do *not* want my information prostituted to every greasy marketer trying to make a fast buck. ------------------------------ From: Wlevant@aol.com (Bill Levant) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 21:27:25 EST Subject: Re: ISP Access Number Problem TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response: > Your friend needs to *MAKE CERTAIN* the number being dialed is > in fact listed as a local number....If Juno is claiming it is a local number > while in fact Indiana Bell has it listed as a long distance number, > then Juno owes you an adjustment. > It is not uncommon for a national ISP to get a little confused when > making up their lists of 'local' numbers for people to call ... PAT] Ah. Don't forget the OTHER possible explanation. Juno could be CORRECTLY claiming it to be a local call, and Indiana Bell could have a translations problem. Call goes off to the IXC, it gets billed as LD; in that case, the problem is Bell's, as the call should not have been handed off at all. This is not unheard-of, particularly with modem-pool numbers, which are often supplied by CLEC's (who L-O-V-E modem pools because they generate lots and lots of INCOMING minutes -- for which the ILEC pays the CLEC -- and *no* OUTGOING minutes -- for which they'd have to pay the ILEC). It happened to me about a year ago; Bell Atlantic had bad translations for several new CLEC codes; a three-hour local call got billed for $18.00. In fairness to Bell, once I got to the right person (from "how do YOU know what a translation is" to "our technicians said you're right") Bell was great -- and they ate about $150.00 in toll charges without a peep (no, they didn't charge them back; my LD carrier doesn't bill through telco). I don't think Bell made a mass adjustment, so I suppose that a whole bunch of other people who had the same problem got stuck paying for calls that should have been free. To make a long story short, if the call shows up on the phone bill as long-distance, but the town listed SHOULD be local, my vote is an Indiana Bell translations problem. Bill ------------------------------ From: oldbear@arctos.com (The Old Bear) Subject: Re: ISP Access Number Problem Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 22:40:32 -0500 Organization: The Arctos Group - http://www.arctos.com/arctos Kim Heusel writes: > Perhaps you could post this question to the Telecom Digest discussion > board. I have a friend here in Indianapolis who subscribes to Juno > Gold. When she got her telephone bill recently, it listed more than 30 > long-distance calls to a little town outside Indianapolis. The calls > totaled more than $130 in charges. Come to find out, the number was > one of the access number for Juno Gold. The problem is, that she has > her modem set to dial only the local-access numbers provided by Juno > for Indianapolis. After receiving the bill, she double-checked to make > sure the settings hadn't been changed. They hadn't been. > . . . > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: When a number is 'defaulted' to ring > some other number, it is handled like 'call forwarding' and the > person or company forwarding the call is the one to pay for it . > Regards the modem 'malfunctioning', the modem does not know the > difference between ISPs, it just dials what is in the dialing > string. A modem is not going to malfunction by always dialing a > long distance number. > Your friend needs to *MAKE CERTAIN* the number being dialed is > in fact listed as a local number. Quoting from the Juno dialing > instructions, see what Indiana Bell has to say about the number. Pat: This sounds like the JUNO software may try a secondary number if it does not connect to the primary number and, for some reason, the secondary number is in the vicinity but not within the local calling area. In which case, the user needs to make the appropriate changes. However, because telephone company database problems do happen with new exchanges not operated by the ILEC, the JUNO customer may want to check that the number she is being billed for is really in the town listed on her phone bill. Let me describe an insidious problem I encountered about a year ago when BellAtlantic had Xprogrammed its billing software to recognize incorrectly the rate center for several new CLEC exchanges. One of the common BellAtlantic residential calling plan tariffs in Massachusetts provides for unlimited calling to one's own town and "message units" being charged for calls outside of this immediate area. The message unit calls are not itemized on the customers' bills -- just a line item of x number of message units and a dollar amount. At the time, I was working for an ISP and we had obtained over a dozen numbers for our POP site dial-ins in various towns throughout the Boston metro area from MFS (now part of MCI/WorldCom.) Well, we started getting irate calls from customers who were getting hit with telephone bills with hundreds of dollars of "message units" for dialing our POP sites. I investigated several of these complaints and found the customers were invariably calling a number listed as being in their own town but, apparently, the BellAtlantic billing software did not know this and was assessing message units. We'd tell customers to work it out with their phone company, but many of them said they were getting nowhere. I was curious about BellAtlantic's explanation (and really did not want to lose customers because of someone else's errors), so I offered to join one of our more frustrated customers in a conference call to to the local BellAtlantic business office. The conversation went something like this: Customer: I have this huge bill for calls out of my area but I am only calling this one number here in Brighton. BellAtlantic: Well, you must be calling outside of your area. Customer: The number I am calling all the time is programmed into my computer. It is XXX-YYYY. Only my computer uses this line. I don't even have a telephone plugged in to the line and there are no other numbers programmed in my computer. BellAtlantic: Telephone lines are designed for regular calls and not computers. The telephone company can't help you fix your computer. Customer: There is nothing wrong with my computer. It is just like a phone with a memory dialer and the only number it knows is XXX-YYYY. Can you tell me where the XXX- exchange is located according to your records? BellAtlantic: Let me check. (Goes away for a minute and comes back on line.) XXX- is Brighton. Customer: Well, aren't call calls to Brigton included in my calling plan. BellAtlantic: Yes but not these calls to Brighton. Customer: I thought Brighton was Brighton. How can there be two different rates for the same town? BellAltantic: Um, well the calls are probably being forwarded to somewhere other than of Brighton. Customer: How can I be billed for calls being forwarded by someone else? I've never heard of such a service where the caller pays for the forwarding. BellAtlantic: Well it's not exactly forwarding. It's re-routing. They're probably re-routing your calls outside of the area. You have to pay for that, you know. Customer: I've never heard of re-routing. Can you explain to me how this works? BellAtlantic: It's just something they do to your calls that you have to pay for. You'd have to talk to your computer company about that. Customer: Can I speak with your supervisor, please.... So help me, this was getting more and more fantastic. The BellAtlantic rep was making things up as she went along. Anything to convince the customer to pay the bill -- even if it was wrong. (If you check back in the Telecom Digest archives, you will find some discussion of this issue, which I posted about at the time.) Ultimately, I prepared a sample letter for our customers to use when protesting these billings and instructed them to use it as a model and to be sure to send copies to the state's Department of Public Utilities. As far as I know, the written complaints worked. Now, the scary part of this is that I only heard from the customers who noticed the charges and who called us (the ISP) to complain. I am sure many people just paid their phone bills or accepted BellAtlantic telling them it was something the ISP was doing. On the latter score, I know that some customers changed ISPs over this issue, convinced that we were not providing them a local number to call. This was about 18 months ago and I think BellAtlantic may have the CLEC rate center thing more or less straightened out by now. But, aside from one small story on this in the Boston Globe, I don't think anyone came down on BellAtlantic or demanded that they give an accounting of the many dollars of revenues which they collected from unwary customers. ------------------------------ From: siegman@stanford.edu (A. E. Siegman) Subject: Re: USPTO Issues Patent on "Hyperspace Bypass" Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 20:43:49 -0800 Organization: Stanford University Dr. Arthur H. M. Ross wrote: [ re the issuance of an FTL patent ] > It is appalling that the USPTO actually issued this. Examiners Wong & > Clinger should be fired. > I've been convinced for a long time that a great many of the patents > that are issued are, shall we say, short on real merit, but this one > takes the all time prize. The whole topic of patents, their validity, the failure of many patents to give adequate reference to prior art, the special problems associated with software patents, the poor quality of many issued patents, and many related issues are discussed at length (and with considerable heat) in misc.int-property. At least one posting in that group convinced me that within the totally inadequate rules and procedures under which our seriously dysfunction Patent Office currently operates, the examiners involved actually could not have done other than issue this garbage patent. The fault is in the patent system itself, which as presently structured unavoidably produces an immense number of patents which are not just "short on real merit" but totally lacking in any merit (except perhaps in providing good incomes for the whole legal industry built around the patent system). There's an aphorism, source unknown to me, which says that in all too many cases the value of a patent is determined primarily by the amount that the patent holder is willing to spend on legal fees attempting to enforce it, or that someone else is willing to spend on legal fees in attacking it, and has almost nothing to do with the actual technical merits of the patent itself. Patent attorneys tend to "go ballistic" when they hear this quoted. From my experience, this is because of how true this adage is, not how false it is. ------------------------------ From: David Clayton Subject: Re: USPTO Issues Patent on "Hyperspace Bypass" Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 19:01:32 +1000 Organization: Customer of Connect.com.au Pty. Ltd. Reply-To: dcstar@acslink.aone.net.au Daniel Seagraves contributed the following: > On Thu, 23 Mar 2000, David Chessler wrote: > [Snip] > Nice! Now just don't tell the Vogons about it. ^_^ Yeah, that "poetry" can be murder........ :-) Regards, David. David Clayton, e-mail: dcstar@acslink.aone.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 Mar 2000 18:05:57 -0600 From: bennett@peacefire.org Subject: Twist in ACLU/Peacefire vs. Cyber Patrol Court Case Reply-To: peacefire-press@iain.com Lawyers for the American Civil Liberties Union and Cyber Patrol faced off in Boston court today for one hour. 25 minutes before the hearing began, Cyber Patrol attempted to halt the proceeding with an announcement that they had reached a settlement agreement with the authors of the original CPHack program. As a result, Cyber Patrol requested that the Judge Edward Harrington not hold a trial and simply grant Cyber Patrol their request of a permanent injunction against all mirror sites that had ever hosted copies of CPHack.exe, including Peacefire.org. This the judge did not do, and so the hearing proceeded, during which ACLU lawyer Chris Hansen argued that mirror sites should not be affected by the order. The judge said he would issue a decision by Wednesday. The interesting twist in the settlement -- agreed between Eddy L O Jansson and Matthew Skala, the original authors of the "CPHack" program and the accompanying essay, and Cyber Patrol's lawyers -- is that Jansson and Skala gave Cyber Patrol the rights to the copyright on their essay and the CPHack program. So Cyber Patrol may now attempt to shut down mirror sites by claiming that they are "violating Cyber Patrol's copyright" for a different reason -- because Cyber Patrol supposedly now owns the copyright on the essay! The essay can still be downloaded from one of the many mirror sites at: http://www.openpgp.net/censorship/ and Peacefire will post copies of the relevant court documents (including the agreement signed by Jansson and Skala) as soon as they become available. -Bennett bennett@peacefire.org http://www.peacefire.org (425) 649 9024 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V20 #40 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Mar 30 13:27:06 2000 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id VAA02321; Wed, 29 Mar 2000 21:07:09 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 21:07:09 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200003300207.VAA02321@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #42 TELECOM Digest Wed, 29 Mar 2000 21:06:00 EST Volume 20 : Issue 42 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Book Review: "IP Telephony", Olivier Hersent/David Gurle (Rob Slade) Fractional T1,E1/T1,E1 over IP Product Market Research (Mark Doyle) Bandwidth For Real-Time Video (Sian) Re: Iridium to Make Fireworks For Next Two Years (TelcoRock) Re: ISP Access Number Problem (Clarence Dold) Re: Debit Card PIN Encryption (was Re: CPP, ATM Surcharges) (David) Unchannelized T3/E3 Product Research (Mark Doyle) French To Outlaw Anonymous Web Posting (Monty Solomon) Re: Iridium to Make Fireworks For Next Two Years (J.F. Mezei) Numbering Plan in Bangladesh (Scaccia Silvia) Re: Data Transmission Speeds (Robert Berntsen) Re: Hackers Sued by Software-Filtering Company (Herb Stein) Re: Trying to Identify Long Distance Number (Herb Stein) Re: ISP Access Number Problem (Steve Sobol) Genius of Electricity (Dan Moran) 631 Telephone Exchange Codes (Bill Adler) Caller ID at UNC-Chapel Hill (Thomas B. Clark) Re: Twist in ACLU/Peacefire vs. Cyber Patrol Court Case (ilativ) Re: Geeks to the Rescue (langlo6@ibm.net) 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-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 259 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 805-545-5115 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@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: hyperarchive.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. Our attorney is Bill Levant of Blue Bell, PA. In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Rob Slade Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 08:19:07 -0800 Subject: RBook Review: "IP Telephony", Olivier Hersent/David Gurle/Jean-Pierre Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca BKIPTLPH.RVW 20000216 "IP Telephony", Olivier Hersent/David Gurle/Jean-Pierre Petit, 2000, 0-201-61910-5 %A Olivier Hersent book@netcentrex.net %A David Gurle %A Jean-Pierre Petit %C P.O. Box 520, 26 Prince Andrew Place, Don Mills, Ontario M3C 2T8 %D 2000 %G 0-201-61910-5 %I Addison-Wesley Publishing Co. %O 800-822-6339 617-944-3700 Fax: (617) 944-7273 bkexpress@aw.com %P 456 p. %T "IP Telephony: Packet-Based Multimedia Communications Systems" The preface does a rather heavy-handed sell on IP telephony, without really backing up any claims. It doesn't really define a specific audience, although the set of people who are listed as possibly being interested is a fairly limited one. The preface also expects a strong familiarity with ISDN (Integrated Services Digital Network) and TCP/IP networking. I'm not sure that I understand the requirement for ISDN, but a strong technical background is a must, if you are going to tackle this book. The authors don't appear to have made much attempt to ensure that it is readable, or even lucid. The text resembles nothing so much as a mass of technical trivia, only nominally organized. Ironically, despite the heavy technical content, there does not seem to be enough detail in the work to ensure that even dedicated readers will be able to produce some kind of implementation. Section one supposedly talks about application layer IP telephony protocols, although much of the material appears to be more appropriate to the session layer. Chapter one is huge, touching on the H.323 standard, RTP (Real-time Transfer Protocol), security, codecs, and an extensive H.323 session walk-through. The alphabet soup is thick, and not always defined. RAS (Registration, Application, Status, in this case) is not expanded at any point prior to page six, where it is used for the first time and noted as being defined "above," although it is based on H.225.0 which gets mentioned "above." H.323 is a complex standard which is somewhat non-standard, but the lack of any logical progression in the writing is not going to help the reader follow the material. The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP), in chapter two, appears to be something of an Internet-based contender to the ITU's (International Telecommunications Union) H.323. The Media Gateway Control Protocol (MGCP) seems to be a broader technology in some competition and cooperation with both, in chapter three. Section two looks at voice technology. Chapter four touches on a number of topics related to voice quality, but mostly concentrates on delay. Lots of math, tables, and flowcharts fail to explain much about voice coding in chapter five, which primarily seems to be a historical progression of standards. Section three discusses the network. Chapter six talks about quality of service (again emphasizing delay). Network dimensioning, in chapter seven, provides lots of math for figuring out the minimum bandwidth you need. IP multicast routing is the topic of chapter eight. Ultimately, this book might be most useful as a pointer to other sources of information, such as the standards themselves. copyright Robert M. Slade, 2000 BKIPTLPH.RVW 20000216 ====================== (quote inserted randomly by Pegasus Mailer) rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@sprint.ca slade@victoria.tc.ca p1@canada.com Nunc Tutus Exitus Computarus http://victoria.tc.ca/techrev or http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 10:38:19 -0800 From: Mark Doyle Subject: Fractional T1,E1/T1,E1 over IP Product Market Research Organization: SBC Internet Services I am trying to determine if there is much demand for a product that IP packetizes raw T1/E1 data onto a LAN/WAN for full duplex extension of a T1/E1. To summarize the T1/E1 over IP product is configured to take n DS0s from its T1/E1 interface and packetize it for sequenced transport within UDP packets to a remote unit via its Ethernet interface. The remote unit receives the T1/E1 over IP Packets from its Ethernet and then synchronously streams the DS0 data onto its T1/E1 interface. The T1/E1 over IP units support full duplex operation. Is anyone using such a product, looking for this solution or a variant? Mark Doyle Engage Communication www.engagecom.com ------------------------------ From: Sian Subject: Bandwidth For Real-Time Video Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 13:49:10 +0100 Can anyone tell me typically how much bandwidth is needed to transmit a single channel analogue real-time video signal? Thanks in advance. ------------------------------ From: TelcoRock Subject: Re: Iridium to Make Fireworks For Next Two Years Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 09:43:05 -0600 Seems like at least one guy is thinking the same thing. http://finance.individual.com/display_news.asp?doc_id=BW20000320BW0183&page= news John Dirgo TelcoRock http://www.telcorock.com Al Dykes wrote in message news:telecom20.41.3@telecom-digest.org... > In article , The Old Bear > wrote: >> Revenues would be by coin, credit card, or prepaid card depending upon >> the local culture and circumstance. >> With 90%+ of the debt burned off via the bankruptcy, revenues would >> need only to cover operating costs. And while the original concept >> was to make the system expensive and sell to a relatively limited >> number of users, this scheme would make the system less expensive and >> sold all over the place. >> Given the ability of COCOT companies to figure out how to make money >> on dimes and quarters, it doesn't seem like that big a leap. > Anyone know the number of call minutes the Iridium system could handle > and what the average revenue per minute would have to be at a high > utilization level? > (The above posted only half in jest.) > Al Dykes > dykes@panix.com ------------------------------ From: Clarence Dold Subject: Re: ISP Access Number Problem Date: 29 Mar 2000 17:51:07 GMT Organization: a2i network Reply-To: dold@rahul.net The Old Bear wrote: > Let me describe an insidious problem I encountered about a > year ago when BellAtlantic had Xprogrammed its billing software > to recognize incorrectly the rate center for several new CLEC > exchanges. I wonder how good big company data processing centers are ;-) In my little itty-bitty company, back when we charged by the mile, if there was a new NPA-NXX, and we hadn't updated the V&H tables, we would default to NPA-000, which we made up by counting the total number of exchanges in each VH location, and giving that VH to NPA-000. Since we were only dealing with long distance calls, a few miles wouldn't make that much difference, but if the same scheme happens in a local situation, it could be the difference between "free" and not. We know that the routing switch completed the call, perhaps correctly, perhaps incorreectly. We don't care about the switch. We only care about the billing system. Clarence A Dold - dold@rahul.net - Pope Valley & Napa CA. ------------------------------ From: d_c_h@my-deja.com (David Charles) Subject: Re: Debit Card PIN Encryption (was Re: CPP, ATM Surcharges) Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 19:22:21 GMT Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy. In article , Andy Berry wrote: > Steve Sobol wrote in message > news:telecom20.37.9@telecom-digest.org: >> I don't know whether they encrypt the PINS on those dialup terminals. > Every debit card terminal I have seen in the petroleum business > encrypts PINs at the point of entry, whether it is the terminal > itself, a separate PIN pad, or out at the gas pump. Since most of the > dialup terminals I see are Verifone machines, I would expect strong > encryption of PINs. > Andy B. A few years ago I read an ISO standard (probably ISO 9564-1) for security for equipment handling PINs for banking systems. This standard required that unencrypted PINs are never transmitted and are only stored or processed in physically secured or tamper evident units. I would assume that banks would require compliance to this standard or impose similar requirements from other sources in their procurement specifications. As an alternative to transmitting an encrypted PIN it would also be possible for PINs to be verified by some form of challenge/response system. In France all bank cards are smart cards and I understand that these validate their own PINs without any connection to the issuer being necessary. Restaurants in France frequently use portable card validation units, which can be taken to the customer at their table to process a transation, which is then uploaded later. These units require PINs to be entered (for French cards only) any validate them while off line. David Charles ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 11:37:18 -0800 From: Mark Doyle Subject: Unchannelized T3/E3 Product Research Organization: SBC Internet Services For those of you implementing T3/E3 circuits please take a moment to review. I am doing product development research to determine if there is a decent market for an unchannelized T3 DSU. It is possible to manufacture a low cost HSSI/V.35 to T3/E3 DSU if the channelization is not a requirement. We are looking at a list price that is much less than that of the major vendors such as Adtran. Are you using T3/E3 circuits that could be provisioned with an unchannelized full T3/E3 circuit. Is $1,500 a compelling price point? Also are you using T3/E3 PCI cards that are on an unchannelized full T3/E3 circuit? If so what platform do you need drivers for? Is there a standard freeware driver that the card could be designed to operate with? Thank you in advance for taking a moment to respond. Mark Doyle Engage Communication www.engagecom.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 00:11:13 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: French To Outlaw Anonymous Web Posting By uk.internet.com staff The French government plans to crack down on illegal Web sites and cybercriminals by requiring anyone posting content on the Internet to identify themselves. During a second reading at the French Parliament of a new law concerned with the freedom of communication, a proposal was added which requires that an author of content on the internet must provide identification details to their ISP. http://www.internetnews.com/intl-news/article/0,2171,6_328561,00.html ------------------------------ From: JF Mezei Subject: Re: Iridium to Make Fireworks For Next Two Years Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 14:00:00 EST > That's exactly the analysis given for the failure of Iridium (after > the stupidly high price of the bricks^H^H^H^phones initially). The > reference was to the international roaming agreements, and the > pervasiveness of cellular technology, squeezing the Iridium > marketplace to only the most remote areas on earth, far smaller than > the general international travel model required for the Iridium model > to work. Having cycled through outback areas of Australia where mining companies send surveyors for weeks to survey large areas, they are all very aware of Iridium, but it is too expensive compared to other satellite services available in Australia. So Iridium was originally priced out of the market where it woudl have benefitted most. So instead of focusing on executives who work in buildings (where sat coverage is poor), Iridium should have focused on the mining and travel industries. They could have provided air-phones wordwide on planes. Could have replaced Inmarsat service to ships. If you're going to focus on a market that doesn't go to cities much and provide competitive rates to begin with, then they woud not have had to bother with dual-tri mode phones that switched to local GSM service when in a city. Would have meant cheaper and smaller phones. Last year, Iridium realised this and started to lower its rates, but it was too late, I think that they were already stuck with the "bankrupt" image. ------------------------------ From: Scaccia Silvia Subject:Seeking Information About Bagladesh Area Code Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 12:46:46 +0200 Dear Mr. Townson, I am looking for information about Bangladesh area and country code. Some international carriers are informing me that I have to put digit '3' after country code 880. The problem is that I have a customer complaining me for problems in reaching number 008806213147. The strange thing is that there is no way to reach this number using Telecom Italia and only two international carriers allow us to reach this number. I remain waiting any additional information. Thanks in advance. Silvia Scaccia ------------------------------ From: Robert Berntsen Subject: Re: Data Transmission Speeds Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 13:35:34 +0200 USAOz wrote in message ... > Our class is having a debate as to whether it would be faster > transmission of digital data using a microwave link or a fibre-optic > link. > Could we have some thoughts on this please? Transport velocity will be higher for the microwave link: approx. 3,000,000 km/sec and approx. 2,000,000 km/sec for optical fiber. Bandwidth for the fiber is far more, just by the fact that the optical bandwidth is more than the total radio band. However, practical digital bandwidth for fiber is limited by optical transmitters and recievers, still much higher than achievable for a microwave link. ------------------------------ From: herb@herbstein.com (Herb Stein) Subject: Re: Hackers Sued by Software-Filtering Company Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 04:41:41 GMT Amen, to the last sentence. In article , bowenb@best.com wrote: > Monty Solomon wrote: >> Excerpt from RISKS-FORUM Digest >> http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/20.85.html >> Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 09:25:32 >> From: Bear Giles >> There is *far* more going on here than meets the eyes. Those >> programmers are involved in the Peacefire anti-censorship group >> (http://www.peacefire.org). The site has had detailed instructions >> for getting around censorware software for months, without any legal >> action from the companies. >> But for some odd reason Symantec (I-Gear) threatened legal action only >> after Peacefire cracked their encrypted blacklist and determined that >> 76% of the sites in a quick sample (the first 50 .edu sites) were >> erroneously blocked. >> Likewise Mattel (CyberPatrol) sued only after Peacefire cracked their >> encrypted blacklist and published the results. >> To a critical mind, several questions scream out: >> - why are the blacklists encrypted? Is this to block access by >> competitors, or is it really to prevent parents and libraries from >> performing their own quality checks? (If it's an anticompetitive >> measure, why are the companies treating it as a "hackers, kids and >> porn" case?) > Both companies, from what I've read, encrypt the lists because they > consider the lists a "trade secret" - their rational is that it has > cost them much time and money to amass the lists, and don't want other > vendors profiting from their work. > They are playing it as a "hacker incident" due to the provisions of > the Digital Millenium Copyright Act >> - how would knowing that a site is on the blacklist permit a kid >> to access the blocked site? How many kids have the technical >> knowledge to edit the blacklist... and how hard would it be to >> check an MD5 checksum every so often? (Since the blocking software >> only works when the computer is on the 'net, it is trivial to >> automatically download the checksum every Nth request. If they >> don't match, download a new copy of the blacklist.) > You've heard of that old phrase "they can't see the nose on their own > face"? >> - why would the legitimately blocked sites have a problem with this? >> AFAIK most legitimate porn sites are more than willing to cooperate >> with censorware companies because it reduces their legal exposure - >> they can demonstrate a good-faith effort to prevent access by minors. >> The only sites that have a beef with this issue are ones that are >> blocked due to judgment calls, e.g., the pro-censorware Christian >> group that was was shocked to discover itself on a blacklist because >> of its firm, principled stand against homosexuals and heathens. > "He who lives by the sword . . ." >> Further complicating the issue is the apparent attempts to invoke the >> DMCA (essentially criminalizing political debate if one party uses >> even trivial encryption of key evidence; it brings to mind the 80's >> fad of putting a lawyer into every meeting so the company could claim >> lawyer-client confidentiality) and the pending UCITA legislation >> (which would explicitly criminalize badmouthing software). And we >> must never forget the absurdity of a U.S. judge telling a Swedish ISP >> that it can't host material for two Canadian residents -- do all courts >> have worldwide jurisdiction in the prenatal millennium? > Yep, the whole thing is degenerating into a morass of insanity!! Watch > out if the treaty for the International Criminal Court is ratified . . >> I strongly recommend anyone interested in this topic review the >> Censorware Project's report on an analysis of the logs of all Utah >> schools and libraries. (http://censorware.org/reports/utah/) This >> report has been widely misquoted as proving that censorware works. >> The 0.0006% (or "1-in-6 million," as was allegedly misquoted at one >> point in the Bush-McCain slugfest) error rate is a total fiction; any >> sane analysis shows that about 1-in-20 blocked sites are blocked in >> error in practice. >> *** Late update: according to Slashdot >> (http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=00/03/20/0845236) Mattel >> (CyberPatrol) has not only sent mass mailings to all mirrors of the >> the critical webpages, they have allegedly added these mirror sites >> (and the author's homepages) to their blacklist *under all >> categories.* Slashdot also reports that Declan McCullagh, respected >> journalist for _Wired_ who has never hosted the essay in question has >> also received legal threats. >> This means there is an excellent chance that this issue of comp.risks >> will be unavailable to school children nationwide due to its shocking >> content of nudity, explicit sexual depictions, violence, drug use, >> satanic acts, gambling activities, etc. >> The RISKS created by an "informed public debate" on the merits of >> censorware, where the library patrons are quietly "protected" from >> legitimate criticisms of one side of the debate should be obvious to >> everyone. This is *not* an example pulled out of thin air -- another >> recent Slashdot discussion covered the Holland, Mich. debate on >> whether to mandate this type of censorware in their libraries. One >> can only shudder in anticipation of the glorious day when nobody is >> even aware of this problem as DMCA and UCITA ensure that no software, >> anywhere, ever has any publishable defects of any kind. >> On the bright side, this one petulant act may be enough to raise >> serious constitutional issues of whether it will *ever* be legal for a >> government to mandate the use of censorware on publicly access >> systems. If this nonsense is allowed to stand, we might as well >> appoint the CEO of Mattel Lord High Emperor because he(?) will have >> demonstrated the ability to stifle the free political debate that lies >> at the heart of our democracy. >> (The preceding political screed was brought to you by the Drug-Running >> Child Pornography Terrorists of America.) > The previous line sure should trigger the blocking software :)) > Let's face it: there are many, many people that are afraid of the 1st > Amendment (and most of the others, for that matter). It is a constant > battle to keep the barbarians from breaking down the door, and it will > get MUCH harder before it gets any easier. I don't want to turn this > into a political "thing", but read "The Rise and Fall of the Third > Reich" if you want a lesson on what is happening in this country. The Herb Stein Group www.herbstein.com herb@herbstein.com 314 215-3584 ------------------------------ From: herb@herbstein.com (Herb Stein) Subject: Re: Trying to Identify Long Distance Number Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 04:57:18 GMT I just dialed from St. Louis, MO. and got a modem. Since I don't have one on my end I can't try to negotiate. In article , yogimami wrote: > Dear Sir/Madam, > I am trying to find the source of a phone number that shows up on my > long distance bill. I already tried calling the number which is > 352-372-2840 in Gainesville. There is no answer any of the times I have > called. AT&T could not determine the source either when they tried to > call. I haven't had any luck using the many different reverse search > sites. This is not an access number that I use through Netzero (or used > through AOL). I am continuously charged for calls to this number and I > don't know who's it is! This is very frustrating. I was hoping that > you might be able to give me any suggestions. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: If you are being billed by AT&T, then > AT&T has to provide you the details. I will ask our readers to try > and help, especially those in the area. I assume you are referring > to Florida and not Georgia. In any event, maybe you need to turn > up the heat a little on AT&T; if they cannot identify the call, then > you are not going to pay for it. Believe me, they *will* find it that > way. Even if it is some other telephone company or carrier, they will > find it if you refuse to pay. In the meantime, can anyone offer any > advice to Ms. Ramirez? PAT] Herb Stein The Herb Stein Group www.herbstein.com herb@herbstein.com 314 215-3584 ------------------------------ From: sjsobol@NorthShoreTechnologies.Net (Steve Sobol) Subject: Re: ISP Access Number Problem Date: 29 Mar 2000 00:01:38 GMT Organization: New Age Consulting Service Inc., Cleveland, OH, USA TELECOM Digest Editor noted and 'Bill Levant' then responded: >> Your friend needs to *MAKE CERTAIN* the number being dialed is in >> fact listed as a local number....If Juno is claiming it is a local >> number while in fact Indiana Bell has it listed as a long distance >> number, then Juno owes you an adjustment. >> It is not uncommon for a national ISP to get a little confused when >> making up their lists of 'local' numbers for people to call ... PAT] > Ah. Don't forget the OTHER possible explanation. Juno could be > CORRECTLY claiming it to be a local call, and Indiana Bell could > have a translations problem. This happened with an ISP where I used to work. Two area-code 440 numbers, one serving Lake County, Ohio the other serving Geauga County, both east of Cuyahoga County (Cleveland) but local to all points in Cuyahoga. We ended up having Ameritech and Alltel reverse a lot of long-distance charges that should not have been charged. (Our telco was ICG.) North Shore Technologies, Cleveland, OH http://NorthShoreTechnologies.net Steve Sobol, President, Chief Website Architect and Janitor sjsobol@NorthShoreTechnologies.net - 888.480.4NET - 216.619.2NET ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 20:47:00 -0500 From: moran Reply-To: blueknife@ameritech.net Subject: Genius of Electricity I'm looking for a picture of "the genius of electricity". AT&T had a sculpture of him in thier main headquarters in New York (really cool). Any help would be greatly appreciated. Dan ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 20:53:36 -0500 From: Bill Adler Subject: 631 Telephone Exchange Code Hi, Do you know where I can find a list of the telephone exchange codes (i.e. the first three digits of a seven digit number) with their associated towns for the 631 area code (formerly 516 of Suffolk County, New York). Thanks for any assistance you can give me. Bill Adler ------------------------------ From: Thomas B. Clark Subject: Caller ID at UNC-Chapel Hill Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 21:30:59 -0500 Organization: Duke University, Durham, NC, USA The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill contracts with Bell South to provide its telephone service, and controls four exchanges. UNC Utilities has at least some remote capability for configuring numbers, but the switching is all done by BellSouth. Durham, a neighboring town, has GTE. It has always been a toll call between BellSouth and GTE territory, even though there are people living within the Chapel Hill city limits who have GTE numbers and vice versa. (It therefore is a toll call for many people, including myself, to call their city or county government offices!) In order to circumvent these toll charges, the University contracted with a carrier (I have not been able to find out which one) to provide local calling from University numbers to a very large area, including Durham, Raleigh, Wake Forest, Sanford, and many other surrounding towns, some of which are more than an hour away. The calling works by dialing 9 + 7 digits, exactly as if it were a local Chapel Hill number. My understanding is that the BellSouth switch automatically passes such calls to the contracted carrier. Unfortunately, the carrier is not providing caller ID information for calls originating in the University and going to the extended calling region. (BellSouth does provide caller ID information for calls betweenthe University and the Chapel Hill local calling area.) I have complained to UNC Utilities, and they made multiple unsuccessful attempts to get an answer from the carrier as to why CID information was not being transmitted. I would appreciate opinions from readers of this list as to whether UNC and/or the carrier are in violation of FCC regulations. I have read as many of the FCC regulations as I can find, but I am not sure how to interpret whether them in this context -- specifically, for example, whether the University might be considered to be operating a PBX. ------------------------------ From: ilativ@my-deja.com Subject: Re: Twist in ACLU/Peacefire vs. Cyber Patrol Court Case Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 02:43:38 GMT Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy. load cp4break.exe and source code here: http://www.hideip.com/proxy/68C2AC6356743DACD0DE7E2605083EEAC890EF823F5B 3E73842230A5FDEAC5B6D7804BDA1F3426E3A796FC553BD700790F0B ------------------------------ From: langlo6@ibm.net Subject: Re:Geeks to the Rescue Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 23:17:34 GMT Organization: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & News Services Is that really "baud", or do you mean "bits per second"? The difference is fundamental. From the depths of my ancient memory, I recall in the early 1970's a Bell Canada telephone engineer taking me to task over equating the two terms. He was quite clear that baud means a "change in state" and is measured as changes in state per second. Since each change in state may contain several bits, the total throughput rate (in bits per second) is calculated by multiplying the baud rate by the number of bits per baud. So if the baud rate is 2400, and each baud contains 8 bits, then the throughput rate is 19.2 kbps (kilo bits per second). Am I wrong in this? David Langlois Ottawa, Canada On Mon, 27 Mar 2000 12:14:35 -0500, W. Hatfield wrote: > JF Mezei wrote: >> Monty Solomon wrote: >>> Technology Log: Geeks to the rescue! >>> Three programmers try to spark a grass-roots movement on the Net to > [...] >> Can the satellites be re-programmed to provide adequate data >> bandwidth? Or is Iridium data truly limited to 2400 baud? > Twenty-four hundred baud. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V20 #42 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Mar 30 16:58:43 2000 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id QAA02481; Thu, 30 Mar 2000 16:58:43 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2000 16:58:43 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200003302158.QAA02481@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #43 TELECOM Digest Thu, 30 Mar 2000 16:58:00 EST Volume 20 : Issue 43 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Bell Atlantic 500 Numbers (Mike Jezierski) Re: CyberGenie PC Telephony? (Geoff Shepherd) Re: ISP Access Number Problem (Mike Jezierski) Deep Linking Legal, Says Judge (Robert Pierce) Talking While Driving; Employer Liability (David Lind) Re: 631 Telephone Exchange Code (Michael G. Koerner) Re: Data Transmission Speeds (David Clayton) Re: Data Transmission Speeds (Robert Berntsen) Demon Settles Internet Libel Case for $300,000 (Patrick Townson) Pa. Governor Wants Cell-Phone Notation (Carl Moore) 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-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 259 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 805-545-5115 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@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: hyperarchive.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 the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Mike Jezierski Subject: Re: Bell Atlantic 500 Numbers Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 15:59:32 -0600 Organization: news.outfitters.com Reply-To: Mike Jezierski Is this BA 500 service expected to also go into the newly acquired GTE territories? Tad Cook wrote in message news:telecom20.40.2@ telecom-digest.org: > Bell Atlantic to offer go-anywhere 500 number to get local Net access > By Peter J. Howe, Globe Staff, 3/27/2000 (Boston Globe) > On-the-go customers of dial-up Internet access providers who > constantly need to find a local number to get on the Net could soon > have to remember just one number. > Bell Atlantic is now offering for ISPs so-called "500" numbers that > subscribers could call anywhere in Bell Atlantic's Maine-to-Virginia > service territory and be hooked up to the closest dial-up line to get > on the Net. > This could be one of the first big uses of 500 area code numbers, > which were created more than five years ago to support "follow-me" > services -- like a single number that rings to whatever phone a > subscriber has chosen to use -- but have been slow to take off. > ISPs would get a number in one of two groups, either 500-699-XXXX or > 500-555-XXXX. When subscribers called, their network would use caller > ID to determine where they were calling from, and instantaneously > route the call to the closest dial-up access number. > Because Bell Atlantic is a local carrier, however, this could not be > an out-of-state number. The Net access dial-up number would have to be > in the same local calling area as the subscriber, which in Eastern > Massachusetts would include any number in the 508, 617, 781 or 978 > area codes. > Ann Daniel, a Bell marketing manager for the service, said the company > expects to sign contracts soon with two ISPs in Maine and > Massachusetts. But she said she could not yet disclose their > identities. > By this autumn, Bell Atlantic plans to upgrade the service so that it > could automatically find a second or third alternative local Net > access number if the first one reached through the 500 number was > busy, Daniel said. > Rich D'Amato, a spokesman for America Online, the nation's largest > dial-up ISP with more than 20 million subscribers, said of the Bell > service: "This is certainly an interesting idea and one we will be > taking a look at, but it's probably useful to AOL only in certain > specific instances or geographical pockets." > D'Amato said AOL already has more than 1.5 million modems in > service. And by using the keyword "access," users visiting a different > city can easily get a list of local access numbers in the area > code. AOL's 4.0 and 5.0 versions also have this list built into the > software. > In suburban Pittsburgh, VoiceNet last month began offering a single > 500 number for subscribers in the 412 and 724 area codes, replacing > several different local numbers. > The 500 service would also support a system under which, for example, > a Domino's Pizza could offer a single 500 number for ordering a pizza > that would ring to the Domino's franchise closest to the caller's > home, Bell officials said. > AT&T has also experimented with 500 numbers for wireless telephone > subscribers that make the person calling pay for completing the call, > as well as 500 numbers introduced in January 1995 that could be a > "lifetime phone number" for people who move frequently. > But company spokesman Gary Morgenstern said: "We withdrew all that > from the marketplace last year. Five hundred numbers are sort of the > Rodney Dangerfield of telecommunications: They don't get no respect." > Morgenstern said many corporate telecommunications technicians refused > to program their company switchboards to complete calls to 500 > numbers, and US consumers "were wary of dialing what sounded like > foreign numbers. Customers just didn't embrace them as much as we > would have liked." > Morgenstern added that AT&T's WorldNet ISP would be unlikely to use > 500 numbers because it already has enough local access lines in > service to guarantee 99 percent reliability for dial-up access, backed > up by an 800 number if local lines are busy. ------------------------------ From: Geoff Shepherd Subject: Re: CyberGenie PC Telephony? Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2000 00:09:42 GMT Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy. We've had the CyberGenie setup in our small office for about three weeks now and it has been bittersweet. We expected some rough spots given it's basically version 1.0 right now. We have the base station and five handsets. All five handsets have been replaced by Cygnion with second revision hardware. The first revision handsets had problems with the headset jack getting stuck. Only three of the five new handsets are working well. One will not charge and seems to have faulty contacts. The other will not display its assigned name and extension on the LCD display. I've alerted Cygnion to these new problems, and I'm awaiting a response. Voice recognition works surprisingly well most of the time. It's that "some-of-the-time" that it frustratingly misinterprets commands or people's names. Voice synthesis is somewhat muffled and hard to understand at times. You can listen to voice mail on the computer by opening up the Windows Messaging program in the start menu. You can also listen in to voice mail as people leave them by using the CyberGenie console. It is easy to transfer calls between handsets, but not easy to have additional extensions pick up the line for a shared conference. If you PC controlling CG goes down, the system switches to "stand- alone" mode so you can still make and answer calls, but advanced features become unavailable. We have quite a "wish list" going that we will send to Cygnion at some point. Most of our wishes could be accomodated, I'm sure, with software upgrades. Despite the problems, it's been a huge improvement over our old 2-line desk phones, and we'll hang on and hope it only gets better. We've received much positive feedback from our customers calling in. I recommend giving it a try, but make sure you can return the system after a reasonable amount of time to live with it. Geoff In article , mpalmer1@yahoo.com (M. Palmer) wrote: > I've tried both and found the Gigaset more practical than Cybergenie. > However I've had problems with both: > Gigaset: > Sometimes when a call comes in I attempted to answer it and got the > message: "No channel available". I always lost the call. No one was > using any other handsets at the time. Siemens suggested I "re-boot" > the system. It didn't help, so I ended up returning the system. > Transferring calls between handsets is a pain. > Operating range is poor compared to other cordless phones, even 900MHz > phones. > Cybergenie: > Handsets don't always ring or show Caller ID info. > Voice mail must be played through the handset - why can't it play > through the computer? > Needs a computer that's on all the time for most functionality. > Operating range is poor compared to other cordless phones, even 900MHz > phones. > It too is going back to Office Depot tomorrow. > If you buy, make sure you can return if not satisfied. > In article , Paul Robichaux > wrote: >> Office Depot is showing a product from Cygnion (www.cygnion.com) >> called the "CyberGenie" phone. I'm shopping for a new SOHO phone and >> had pretty much settled on the GigaSet 2420 from Siemens. Does anyone >> have hands-on experience with the CyberGenie? I'm particularly >> interested in how well the "advanced" features work. >> Cheers, Geoff Shepherd ------------------------------ From: Mike Jezierski Subject: Re: ISP Access Number Problem Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 15:56:56 -0600 Organization: news.outfitters.com Reply-To: Mike Jezierski Is it still true that for all practical purposes if you're within the I-465 loop you can call anywhere within Marion County and the edges of the surrounding counties for the local rate? Since the 317/765 split that basically anyone in 317 can call anywhere in 317 for the local rate (with the exception of extreme edges, like Mooresville to Carmel or Danville to Greenfield, except Shelbyville which is long distance to anywhere) Back to the issue here -- since there are so many new NXXs in Marion County as a result of the 765 NPA split -- before I moved I know there were about four new NXXs in Warren Twp that I was aware, or a IBT/Ameritech programming error? Here in 309 land we're not even up to using N0X and N1X prefixes! ha! Remove "smurfaspammer" and replace with "galesburg" to get my email Kim Heusel wrote in message news:telecom20.39.7@ telecom-digest.org: > Pat: > Perhaps you could post this question to the Telecom Digest discussion > board. I have a friend here in Indianapolis who subscribes to Juno > Gold. When she got her telephone bill recently, it listed more than 30 > long-distance calls to a little town outside Indianapolis. The calls > totaled more than $130 in charges. Come to find out, the number was > one of the access number for Juno Gold. The problem is, that she has > her modem set to dial only the local-access numbers provided by Juno > for Indianapolis. After receiving the bill, she double-checked to make > sure the settings hadn't been changed. They hadn't been. > > She has been a Juno subscriber for quite a while and never had a > problem until recently. Could the locally called number be defaulting > to the long-distance number? Could her modem be malfunctioning? Have > you ever heard of anything like this happening before? Juno gave her > the standard "not-our-fault" reply to her e-mail but didn't really > answer her question, either. > Thanks, > Kim Heusel, project editor > Howard W. Sams & Co. > (317) 298-5530 * (800) 255-6989, x530 > Celebrating 2000, the last year of the 20th century > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: When a number is 'defaulted' to ring > some other number, it is handled like 'call forwarding' and the > person or company forwarding the call is the one to pay for it. > Regards the modem 'malfunctioning', the modem does not know the > difference between ISPs, it just dials what is in the dialing > string. A modem is not going to malfunction by always dialing a > long distance number. > Your friend needs to *MAKE CERTAIN* the number being dialed is > in fact listed as a local number. Quoting from the Juno dialing > instructions, see what Indiana Bell has to say about the number. > If Juno is claiming it is a local number while in fact Indiana > Bell has it listed as a long distance number, then Juno owes you > an adjustment. It is not uncommon for a national ISP to get a > little confused when making up their lists of 'local' numbers for > people to call. They make up a list of numbers, and one gets listed > as local when it should be long distance. In summary, the number is > either/or; you can forget the modem malfunctioing part and the > part about a local number being forwarded to a long distance > number (and you expected to pay for it). PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2000 12:33:36 PST From: Robert Pierce Subject: Deep Linking Legal, Says Judge Pat, Here's an interesting article on deep linking I thought you would enjoy. Attention Editors: Deep Link Away http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,35306,00.html Extracts from the article: Deep linking has an official seal of approval now that U.S. District Judge Harry Hupp has ruled that websites can legally provide links to any pages on all other sites. . . . . "Why bring the lawyers in when there are simple technological fixes that could have solved the problem?" Pataki said. "For instance, Ticketmaster could have blocked all referrals from Tickets.com. That's an easy thing to do, so I suspect that by taking the legal route TicketMaster wanted to either get publicity or squish Tickets.com." . . . . "Bottom line is if you stop people from linking then the Web is no longer a Web," he said. "It would become a collection of isolated chunks of information. The Web is based on the concept of hyperlinking out to other sites. And it worked fine for all concerned until the big corporations started setting up their cyber tents online." . . . . "The deep linking issue attempts to answer the question that's been asked since the Internet first became part of the general public's consciousness: Is this medium a free source of information for the benefit of the people, or a controlled presentation of branded content that benefits commercial interests?" [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: In other words, the judge decided that the web should be used the way the web was intended; people linking to one another and using the web as a free source of information for the benefit of the people. Good! PAT] ------------------------------ From: David Lind Subject: Talking While Driving; Employer Liability Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2000 07:29:58 GMT Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy. It appears that employers may be liable when a worker is involved in an auto accident as a result of company cell phone usage. Houston Chronicle Working Column Source: Knight Ridder/Tribune Business News Publication date: 2000-03-24 Mar. 24--DRIVING AND TALKING MAY MEAN CRASHING: It's the hottest, newest, most-talked-about employer liability issue of the moment: employees who conduct business on their company cellular phones while driving. Most everyone does it -- that's why companies issue cellular phones -- but the liability question inevitably comes up when folks get so carried away with the phone conversation that they run into other drivers. Employers are having to pay damages, Rodney Glover, a lawyer with Gardner, Carton & Douglas in Washington, D.C., told those gathered this week for a seminar sponsored by the Houston Human Resource Management Associaton at the George R. Brown Convention Center. Glover scared the group with a story about how financial services firm Smith Barney ended up settling a cellular phone case for $150,000 in addition to the firm's liability insurance coverage after one of its brokers hit a motorcyclist while trying to dial a client. The motorcyclist died after the broker ran a red light. The news caught many of the human resource managers by surprise. An informal survey of about a dozen managers revealed that most had never even considered that potential liability of DWT. Only one manager said the subject had come up at the branch manager level but hadn't gone anywhere beyond that.   But don't mention the company, the manager said with a nervous laugh. He didn't exactly want it getting around.   For most companies, though, it's not on the radar screen. And that could be a mistake.   It's a sensitive issue for companies, especially in light of recent news on the dangers of driving while talking on a cellular phone. One study compared the practice to driving drunk.   And there is growing resentment against drivers who talk on their cellular phones. Parents who have lost their children because of cellular phone accidents are campaigning for laws to prohibit their use in moving vehicles. And cars are sporting bumper stickers that read: "Hang Up and Drive!"   But companies, eager to boost productivity, often encourage employees to use the cellular phones to make sales calls.   It's often an implicit requirement, said Dennis Herlong, a civil trial lawyer who handles a variety of employment cases in Houston.   But like the human resource managers, lawyers like Herlong haven't exactly been sitting around thinking about cellular phone liability.   But since the question came up, Herlong said he recommends that companies set firm policies that prohibit employees from using a cellular phone while driving. Employees should be required to pull over when they need to use the phone. Otherwise, employers should be held responsible for accidents.   "I wouldn't feel comfortable turning people loose with a cell phone," he said.   Neither would Margie Harris, an employment lawyer in Houston.   It makes sense to install a speaker into employees' cars so drivers don't have to hold a car phone. When you dial a phone, your concentration is diverted, said Harris, who has been known to talk on her phone while driving but saves her dialing for stoplights.   While surveying some of Houston's largest companies -- and getting several responses such as "huh?" -- finally it turned out that driving-while-talking issues are getting talked about at Apache Corp., the energy company.   The company recently included a warning in one of its periodic safety bulletins to its field staff about studies linking the increase in accidents with cellular phone use. The bulletin urged employees to use common sense when using their cellular phones in a vehicle, said Tony Lentini, vice president of public and international affairs. The company is also looking into whether it should establish a cellular phone driving policy but there are a few issues to resolve first such as how to enforce it and how should the company treat phones that have hands-free speakers, Lentini said. Of course, lawyers often find a problem behind every rule and Glover pointed out that telling employees to pull over before they make a call from the car could create another liability. After all, what happens if an employee is attacked at a rest area? To voice comments, telephone 713-220-2000 and dial in code 1002. Send e-mail to lm.sixel@hron.com. ------------------------------ From: Michael G. Koerner Subject: Re: 631 Telephone Exchange Code Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 21:38:43 -0600 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Reply-To: mgk920@dataex.com Bill Adler wrote: > Do you know where I can find a list of the telephone exchange codes > (i.e. the first three digits of a seven digit number) with their associated > towns for the 631 area code (formerly 516 of Suffolk County, New York). > Thanks for any assistance you can give me. > Bill Adler Go to http://www.nanpa.com/number_resource_info/co_code_assignments.html Then download the 'utilized' list that covers New York (it contains the codes for several states) and seperate out the part for 631. Regards, Michael G. Koerner Appleton, WI ***NOTICE*** SPAMfilter in use, please remove ALL 'i's from the return address to reply. ***NOTICE*** ------------------------------ From: David Clayton Subject: Re: Data Transmission Speeds Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2000 19:18:47 +1000 Organization: Customer of Connect.com.au Pty. Ltd. Reply-To: dcstar@acslink.aone.net.au Robert Berntsen contributed the following: >> Our class is having a debate as to whether it would be faster >> transmission of digital data using a microwave link or a fibre-optic >> link. >> Could we have some thoughts on this please? > Transport velocity will be higher for the microwave link: > approx. 3,000,000 km/sec and approx. 2,000,000 km/sec for optical > fiber. ..... Won't that depend on the transmission mode used in the fibre? Regards, David Clayton, e-mail: dcstar@acslink.aone.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: Robert Berntsen Subject: Re: Data Transmission Speeds Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2000 10:02:40 +0200 Robert Berntsen wrote in message ... > USAOz wrote in message ... >> Our class is having a debate as to whether it would be faster >> transmission of digital data using a microwave link or a fibre-optic >> link. >> Could we have some thoughts on this please? > Transport velocity will be higher for the microwave link: > approx. 3,000,000 km/sec and approx. 2,000,000 km/sec for optical > fiber. Sorry, here is a misprint, should be: 300,000 km/sec and approx. 200,000 km/sec for optical fiber. > Bandwidth for the fiber is far more, just by the fact that the optical > bandwidth is more than the total radio band. However, practical > digital bandwidth for fiber is limited by optical transmitters and > recievers, still much higher than achievable for a microwave link. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2000 09:42:39 PST From: Patrick Townson Subject: Demon Settles Internet Libel Case for $300,000 (Reuters) - British Internet provider Demon said Thursday it had settled a libel case that could cost it more than $300,000 and have far reaching implications for the online industry. Demon's parent company, Thus, said it had agreed to pay physicist Laurence Godfrey $300,000 in damages over defamatory material posted on newsgroups it hosted. It must also pay legal costs that have yet to be decided but could end up being more than $300,000. Lawyers said the case broke new ground for the online industry, making clear that Internet service providers (ISPs) could be held liable for material posted by readers on newsgroup sites over which they have no direct control. But Thus, a Scottish telecoms group, said it would lobby for English law to be changed, saying: ``Thus will press the government for recognition that ISPs should not be liable for the millions of items carried on the Internet every day.''

Godfrey's lawyer, Gordon Bishop, told the High Court in London that ``squalid, obscene and defamatory'' material purporting to have come from Godfrey had been posted in 1997 on a Demon hosted newsgroup about Thailand. Godfrey tried to get the forged material removed on several occasions, but Bishop said in a statement to the court that Demon had done nothing. In 1998 another posting from a Demon customer made further defamatory allegations about Godfrey that appeared in a legal newsgroup with a wider readership. Again efforts to get the posting removed failed. Demon Changes Procedures ``Demon has never sought to suggest that there was any truth in either of these libels but contended that it was not responsible or liable for their publication and was not under any duty to remove them from its news servers,'' Bishop said. But as a result of the case, he said the legal position had been clarified and Demon had changed its procedures. Godfrey, interviewed on BBC television, said he had taken the action partly so that ISPs would behave responsibly in future. Thus said in a statement: ``Concluding this matter in a reasonable way is in the best interests of the company and its customers.''Lawyer Kit Burden told the BBC the case could have major implications for ISPs in terms of assessing whether material they are carrying could be potentially defamatory. ``The larger ISPs like Demon or Freeserve might say it would be an insufferable burden for them to have to carry out that analysis at their own risk.'' ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2000 12:00:29 EST From: Carl Moore Subject: Pa. Governor Wants Cell-Phone Notation Tom Ridge, governor of Pennsylvania, has asked that police agencies in that state make official note if cell phone contributed to traffic accident. For now, it is to be noted in "remarks" area of police report. Later, new form is to have a box to be checked if cell phone use was involved. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V20 #43 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Mar 30 20:09:25 2000 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id UAA21487; Thu, 30 Mar 2000 20:09:25 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2000 20:09:25 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200003310109.UAA21487@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #44 TELECOM Digest Thu, 30 Mar 2000 20:09:00 EST Volume 20 : Issue 44 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: ISP Access Number Problem (Stanley Cline) Re: Did AT&T Raise Calling Card Charges on Feb. 2nd? (Stanley Cline) Re: Trying to Identify Long Distance Number (Stanley Cline) Re: Trying to Identify Long Distance Number (Phil Smiley) Re: Unchannelized T3/E3 Product Research (Terry Kennedy) Re: Fractional T1,E1/T1,E1 Over IP Product Market Research (Fred Daniel) Judge Allows Start-Ups to Link to Big Rivals (Monty Solomon) Looking For Advanced Answering Machine (Robert Eden) Use of WWW in Domain Names (JF Mezei) Re: Privacy Pervasive in Policy (Anonymous User) Looking For RAS Provider in Vancouver BC (Curtis Clothier) Re: Bandwidth For Real-Time Video (Tom Trottier) Ten Digit Dialing (David Fuchs) Genius of Electricity (Golden Boy); It's Closer Than You Think! (P Wills) Re: "Art" Imitates Life in the MCI/Worldcom Outage? (Carl Moore) Re: ISP Access Number Problem (Jim Orr) Re: Data Transmission Speeds (The Old Bear) Re: Geeks to the Rescue (The Old Bear) Re: Bell Atlantic 500 Numbers (Martin Hannigan) 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-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 259 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 805-545-5115 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@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: hyperarchive.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 the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Stanley Cline Subject: Re: ISP Access Number Problem Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 21:20:07 -0500 Organization: by area code and prefix (NPA-NXX) Reply-To: sc1@roamer1.org On Mon, 27 Mar 2000 21:27:25 EST, Wlevant@aol.com (Bill Levant) wrote: > CORRECTLY claiming it to be a local call, and Indiana Bell could have > a translations problem. > Call goes off to the IXC, it gets billed as LD; in that case, the > problem is Bell's, as the call should not have been handed off at all. The same thing is *still* happening in certain exchanges of BellSouth in Chattanooga with wireless numbers. First it was Powertel and Sprint PCS numbers that were showing up on IXC bills; now I'm hearing complaints of calls to GTE Wireless customers getting routed to an IXC and thus being billed as LD. For some reason this doesn't ever happen with calls to BellSouth Mobility customers... AirTouch Cellular in Atlanta for awhile put calls to Sprint PCS customers in NPA 404 -- but not 678! (they have *no* 770 numbers) -- in the "special charges" (read: local toll) area of their bills, but didn't charge toll on them. Then again, I may not have been charged toll since 'm on one of their national calling plans, which includes all roaming and LD/toll in the monthly and per-minute rates. > This is not unheard-of, particularly with modem-pool numbers, which > are often supplied by CLEC's (who L-O-V-E modem pools because they It's more often than not CLEC numbers in general. More often than not, of course, problems dialing CLEC numbers usually revolve around broken or inadequate interoffice trunking, not misbilling. Stanley Cline -- sc1 at roamer1 dot org -- http://www.roamer1.org/ "Never put off until tomorrow what you can do today. There might be a law against it by that time." -/usr/games/fortune ------------------------------ From: Stanley Cline Subject: Re: Did AT&T Raise Calling Card Charges on Feb. 2nd? Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 20:58:24 -0500 Organization: by area code and prefix (NPA-NXX) Reply-To: sc1@roamer1.org On 25 Mar 2000 00:51:20 -0500, johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) wrote: > No kidding. AT&T just doesn't have competitive rates for residential > and small business customers. It looks like the lowest they'll go is > 25 cents per minute and $1/month. I have a Voicenet card that's about > 17 cpm with no monthly charge, and I've seen other calling cards as > low as 15 cents. 17c/min? That's high to me! (Then again, I have a Sprint card and am grandfathered on a plan that charges a flat 50c/min. I use it only as a true backup card...) http://www.callatn.com/ offers a standalone card at 13.9c/min now (IIRC) and Cognigen (I am not a Cognigen agent!) has some very good deals as well, particularly the standalone AccuLinq card and the calling card that is part of their US Wats 1+ program (the same program with slight differences in rates can be found elsewhere.) > If you make most of your calls from one local area, you can do even > better with dialaround carriers. I have an account with a local VOIP In Atlanta: http://www.rapidlink.com/ Stanley Cline -- sc1 at roamer1 dot org -- http://www.roamer1.org/ "Never put off until tomorrow what you can do today. There might be a law against it by that time." -/usr/games/fortune ------------------------------ From: Stanley Cline Subject: Re: Trying to Identify Long Distance Number Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 21:13:40 -0500 Organization: by area code and prefix (NPA-NXX) Reply-To: sc1@roamer1.org On Mon, 27 Mar 2000 10:45:47 -0500, yogimami wrote: > long distance bill. I already tried calling the number which is > 352-372-2840 in Gainesville. There is no answer any of the times I have > called. AT&T could not determine the source either when they tried to It's a UUNET dialup POP. [begin] atdt*67,13523722840 BUSY a/ BUSY a/ CONNECT 48000 V42bis UQKT2 tnt1.gainesville.fl.da.uu.net Login: [end] > call. I haven't had any luck using the many different reverse search > sites. This is not an access number that I use through Netzero (or used > through AOL). I am continuously charged for calls to this number and I > don't know who's it is! This is very frustrating. I was hoping that > you might be able to give me any suggestions. It looks like you are dialing a UUNET number for one of your ISPs and they are forwarding it to Gainesville when all circuits are busy, and the forwarding on their end is set up improperly so you get billed. I've seen this happen with other large third-party network providers rather often. and PAT wrote: > and help, especially those in the area. I assume you are referring > to Florida and not Georgia. In any event, maybe you need to turn Of course -- Gainesville, GA is in NPAs 770 and 678. :) Stanley Cline -- sc1 at roamer1 dot org -- http://www.roamer1.org/ "Never put off until tomorrow what you can do today. There might be a law against it by that time." -/usr/games/fortune ------------------------------ From: Phil Smiley Subject: Re: Trying to Identify Long Distance Number Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2000 12:55:13 GMT Herb, Deny All Knowledge (DAK) and watch how fast AT&T's CTI folks find out who the party is. Smiley Herb Stein wrote: > I just dialed from St. Louis, MO. and got a modem. Since I don't have > one on my end I can't try to negotiate. > In article , yogimami > wrote: >> I am trying to find the source of a phone number that shows up on my >> long distance bill. I already tried calling the number which is >> 352-372-2840 in Gainesville. There is no answer any of the times I have >> called. AT&T could not determine the source either when they tried to >> call. I haven't had any luck using the many different reverse search >> sites. This is not an access number that I use through Netzero (or used >> through AOL). I am continuously charged for calls to this number and I >> don't know who's it is! This is very frustrating. I was hoping that >> you might be able to give me any suggestions. >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: If you are being billed by AT&T, then >> AT&T has to provide you the details. I will ask our readers to try >> and help, especially those in the area. I assume you are referring >> to Florida and not Georgia. In any event, maybe you need to turn >> up the heat a little on AT&T; if they cannot identify the call, then >> you are not going to pay for it. Believe me, they *will* find it that >> way. Even if it is some other telephone company or carrier, they will >> find it if you refuse to pay. In the meantime, can anyone offer any >> advice to Ms. Ramirez? PAT] > Herb Stein > The Herb Stein Group > www.herbstein.com > herb@herbstein.com > 314 215-3584 ------------------------------ From: Terry Kennedy Subject: Re: Unchannelized T3/E3 Product Research Organization: St. Peter's College, US Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2000 12:32:45 GMT Mark Doyle writes: > I am doing product development research to determine if there is a > decent market for an unchannelized T3 DSU. It is possible to > manufacture a low cost HSSI/V.35 to T3/E3 DSU if the channelization is > not a requirement. > We are looking at a list price that is much less than that of the major > vendors such as Adtran. Unchannelized, unframed, or something else? Unlike T1 equipment, T3 stuff doesn't necessarily interoperate with gear from dissimilar vendors - the 3 standards I know of are Larscom, ADC/Kentrox, and Digital Link. If I recall correctly, ADC and DL interoperate if they are both set to full-rate w/ scrambling disabled. The Larscom is its own kettle of fish. > Are you using T3/E3 circuits that could be provisioned with an > unchannelized full T3/E3 circuit. > Is $1,500 a compelling price point? Not when one considers the price of the hardware. TranSwitch makes a nice DS3 framer (TXC-03401B) http://www.transwitch.com/products/ds3f5_db.pdf If you're going to do this, you should add firmware to support interoperability with currently-marketed CSU's. The only one that may be too complex to support is ADC when both subrate and scrambling are enabled. I don't know what you feel your target market is, but you could save a good chunk of change by skipping the ECL HSSI port and providing your product on an industry standard card, like PCI. Of course, there's another part of the market that's looking for low-cost versions of existing external CSU's, and they'll need the HSSI port. In my particular case, I'm using on-board CSUs in my routers for density reasons (4 configured channelized T3's per 1" slot) and I wouldn't be interested in external units. Hopefully my other feedback is useful to you. Terry Kennedy http://www.tmk.com terry@tmk.com Jersey City, NJ USA ------------------------------ From: Fred Daniel Organization: @Home Network Subject: Re: Fractional T1,E1/T1,E1 over IP Product Market Research Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2000 04:09:16 GMT RAD has recently announced two new IP products with Ethernet interfaces. The first is one T1 and the second is four T1's. These look good to connect PBX trunks together on a IP LAN/WAN. I have seen several other brands come to the market in the last year. These should be VERY HOT items as WAN's convert from point-point circuits to IP clouds. Fred Daniel ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2000 10:50:48 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Judge Allows Start-Ups to Link to Big Rivals By The Associated Press Special to CNET News.com March 29, 2000, 12:20 p.m. PT LOS ANGELES--A federal judge has ruled that online companies can legally offer links to rival Web sites, a service many new Internet firms use to attract visitors. The ruling was in favor of start-up Tickets.com, which was the defendant in a lawsuit filed by Ticketmaster Online-CitySearch that alleged that so-called hyperlinking should be banned. http://news.cnet.com/category/0-1005-200-1597146.html ------------------------------ From: Robert Eden Subject: Looking For Advanced Answering Machine Organization: Giganews.Com - Premium News Outsourcing Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 23:09:40 -0600 I'm looking for an answering machine that can actually USE caller ID info. Here are some nice features: 1. Caller-ID should be stored with message 2. Out-of-Area, Private, and CLID matching a list go straight to answer (answer after XX otherwise) for Telemarketers and other undesirables 3. Passes through the phone line to another jack, but blocks 1st ring. (for no interruptions if #2) 4. Voice announce of calls through speaker. 5. Pager Notification (with caller-id even better) 4. Remote access to messages There are many computer voicemodem programs that do all this (and more), but I feel dedicated hardware would be more reliable (no disks, windows, etc) IIRC there was a Nortel phone that could do some of this stuff, but it had been discontinued. I'm really surprised at all the brain-dead digital answering machines out there ... any idea why no one has added intelligence? Robert ------------------------------ From: JF Mezei Subject: Use of WWW in Domain Names Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2000 17:53:22 -0500 A while ago, there was some discussion on the redundant use of "www" in domain names for web sites. More and more sites seem to be ditching the WWW, but wait, the story isn't over... With the advent of WAP enabled telephones, you'll find more and more web sites that have the WAP variation "WAP.company.com" as well as the traditional "WWW.company.com" So it seems that the use of "www" will continue since it will be needed to differentiate itself from the "wap". Since WAP uses the HTTP protocol, I think it becomes simpler for servers to be multi-homed and serve the different contents depending on whether the requested URL as the WWW or WAP in the domain name, compared to having developped a new protocol, port number etc etc. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2000 08:15:07 +0200 From: Anonymous User Subject: Re: Privacy Pervasive in Policy Organization: mail2news@nym.alias.net > http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,35152,00.html I thought Know Your Customer had been killed before becoming law, maybe a year or two ago. The link to the article detailing KYC dates back to 12/98. So is KYC really enacted? Steve ------------------------------ From: Curtis Clothier Subject: Looking For RAS Provider in Vancouver BC Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2000 14:49:50 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Does anyone know a provider of RAS services in the Vancouver BC area? Will be used for ISP service. Thanks ------------------------------ From: Tom Trottier Organization: +1 613 594-5412 Abacurial IT Consulting Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2000 15:19:12 -0500 Subject: Re: Bandwidth For Real-Time Video NTSC (TV) signals take 6 megahertz. Tom > From: Sian > Subject: Bandwidth For Real-Time Video > Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 13:49:10 +0100 > Can anyone tell me typically how much bandwidth is needed to transmit a > single channel analogue real-time video signal? Tom Trottier, Abacurial IT Consulting ICQ:57647974 400 Slater St.Suite 415, Ottawa ON Canada K1R 7S7 __o _ \< Voice:+1 613 291-1168 fax:594-5412 No ads/spam, please (+)/'(+) Vote for your favourite Olympus camera at http://www.freevote.com/booth/fav_camera ------------------------------ From: David Fuchs Subject: Ten Digit Dialing Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2000 15:57:52 -0500 I was searching the website, but couldn't find an updated list of all ten digit dialing areas currently if effect. Any recommended places? David M Fuchs MaxxConnect Customer Care 1-800-270-3788 ext. 2 ------------------------------ From: Paul Wills Subject: Genius of Electricity (Golden Boy); It's Closer Than You Think! Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2000 16:18:59 -0500 Check out these links on Dave Massey's site (affiliated with TELECOM Digest): http://www.bellsystem.com/tribute/western_electric_a_brief_history.html http://www.bellsystem.com/tribute/images/gbtall.jpg http://www.bellsystem.com/tribute/images/gbwide.jpg I took the pictures a couple of years ago while driving by the AT&T Headquarters in Basking Ridge, NJ. It's just a short way off I-287 at the Basking Ridge exit. I found the cartoon at the bottom of the Western Electric history page years ago and still consider it one of my favorites. Paul Wills - Web Site Guy Telephone Collectors International www.singingwires.org > Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 20:47:00 -0500 > From: moran > Reply-To: blueknife@ameritech.net > Subject: Genius of Electricity > I'm looking for a picture of "the genius of electricity". AT&T had > a sculpture of him in thier main headquarters in New York (really > cool). Any help would be greatly appreciated. > Dan [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Illinois Bell back in the 1950's-60's also had such a sculpture on display in their (main) public business office in downtown Chicago, which they inherited from their predecessor, Chicago Telephone Company, which in turn used it as the cover photograph for their telephone books during the 1900-1921 era. I always thought it was an attractive work. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2000 13:19:39 EST From: Carl Moore Subject: Re: "Art" Imitates Life in the MCI/Worldcom Outage? Several months ago, you noted Wile E. (Coyote, obviously from the Coyote & Roadrunner cartoons, from Warner Brothers) and "Acme". Another real-life occurrence of Acme is in Acme Markets, a supermarket chain based near Philadelphia! I'm well aware of it, having grown up in northern Delaware and seeing Acme Markets as far away as northeastern Maryland. ------------------------------ From: Jim Orr Organization: GST Telecom Subject: Re: ISP Access Number Problem Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2000 09:32:11 -0800 I work for a West Coast ICP that sells ISPs T1s of dialtone. The incorrect billing happens quite often. The LEC occasionally fails to update their rate tables for new or adjusted NXXs. The rating can also be affected by any changes in routing performed to convert offices or split tandems, etc. Jim Orr Director - Network Planning GST Telecom Steve Sobol wrote: > TELECOM Digest Editor noted and 'Bill Levant' then responded: >>> Your friend needs to *MAKE CERTAIN* the number being dialed is in >>> fact listed as a local number....If Juno is claiming it is a local >>> number while in fact Indiana Bell has it listed as a long distance >>> number, then Juno owes you an adjustment. >>> It is not uncommon for a national ISP to get a little confused when >>> making up their lists of 'local' numbers for people to call ... PAT] >> Ah. Don't forget the OTHER possible explanation. Juno could be >> CORRECTLY claiming it to be a local call, and Indiana Bell could >> have a translations problem. > This happened with an ISP where I used to work. Two area-code 440 > numbers, one serving Lake County, Ohio the other serving Geauga > County, both east of Cuyahoga County (Cleveland) but local to all > points in Cuyahoga. We ended up having Ameritech and Alltel reverse a > lot of long-distance charges that should not have been charged. (Our > telco was ICG.) ------------------------------ From: oldbear@arctos.com (The Old Bear) Subject: Re: Data Transmission Speeds Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2000 12:17:15 -0500 Organization: The Arctos Group - http://www.arctos.com/arctos Robert Berntsen writes: > Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 13:35:34 +0200 > From: Robert Berntsen > Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom > Subject: Re: Data Transmission Speeds > X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 20, Issue 42, Message 11 of 19 > Lines: 18 > USAOz wrote in message ... >> Our class is having a debate as to whether it would be faster >> transmission of digital data using a microwave link or a fibre-optic >> link. >> Could we have some thoughts on this please? > Transport velocity will be higher for the microwave link: > approx. 3,000,000 km/sec and approx. 2,000,000 km/sec for optical > fiber. > Bandwidth for the fiber is far more, just by the fact that the optical > bandwidth is more than the total radio band. However, practical > digital bandwidth for fiber is limited by optical transmitters and > recievers, still much higher than achievable for a microwave link. I found the original question intriguing because the answer depends very much upon how one defines "faster". Are we talking about throughput or latency; and are we talking about just the portion of the signal path which is light waves in fiber or radio waves in air, or are talking about making this measurement from terminal equipment plugged into some demarcation point at each end? Let me draw an analogy: what is the fastest way to go from Boston to New York City? Well, if I just want to consider maximum speed, taking an airplane is obviously the fastest. People on the airplane travel at 500km/hr while in flight. However, if I am measuring total travel time from an office on Route 128 just outside Boston to an office in downtown Manhattan, I have to figure the time it takes to drive to the airport, find a place to park, walk into the terminal, board the plane, etc. and a similar set of intermodal tasks on the New York end. Now AMTRAK has just commenced new rail service advertised as taking less than 3 hours from South Station in downtown Boston to Grand Central Station in New York. Let's assume that our traveller can get on this the train where it crosses Route 128 rather than driving into downtown, he shortens that part of the trip. And when he arrives in Manhattan, he may be able to from the train to his ultimate destination. Under this scenario, his maximum speed during the trip may be on 150km/hr but his total travel time is the same or less. Finally, let's re-phrase the question to ask "What is the fastest way to get 20,000 sports fans from game six of the world series being played at Fenway Park in Boston to game seven being played at Yankee Stadium in New York?" Well, if you have to select only one method, the answer would probably be automobiles or busses because of the finite number of passenger seats available on the airlines and rail service during the time window between the two games. And the top speed in this case would be only 90km/hr. ------------------------------ From: oldbear@arctos.com (The Old Bear) Subject: Re:Geeks to the Rescue Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2000 11:44:45 -0500 Organization: The Arctos Group - http://www.arctos.com/arctos David Langlois writes: > The difference is fundamental. > From the depths of my ancient memory, I recall in the early 1970's a > Bell Canada telephone engineer taking me to task over equating the two > terms. He was quite clear that baud means a "change in state" and is > measured as changes in state per second. Since each change in state > may contain several bits, the total throughput rate (in bits per > second) is calculated by multiplying the baud rate by the number of > bits per baud. > So if the baud rate is 2400, and each baud contains 8 bits, then the > throughput rate is 19.2 kbps (kilo bits per second). > Am I wrong in this? No, you are correct. Think of baud as the equivalent of symbols per second. If you are using a number system which only two symbols, like binary with its 1 and 0, then symbols per second is the same as bits (binary digits) per second. But if you have a number system that is base 8, a symbol can be 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, or 7. These symbols have the binary equivalent of 000, 001, 010, 011, 100, 101, 110, and 111. Therefore, each symbol is equivalent to three bits (binary digits). Early modems using the Bell 103 standard made use of two audible tones to represent 0 and 1. (There was a second pair of tones for data coming in the other direction.) By having only two states representing 0 and 1, the Bell 103 standard was used at data rates of 50, 110 and 300 bits per second. Later Bell 212 standards raised these limits to 1200 bits per second and, ultimately, 2400 bits per second. Subsequently, modem standards evolved which used multiple frequencies, phase shifts, and relative amplitudes to create "symbol tables" which were much more robust -- culminating in v.34+ with a data rate of 33,600 bits per second under optimal conditions. These modems actually negotiate a symbol table at the start of the connection by sending various combinations of frequency, amplitude and phase to one another and determining what the specific connection can support. They also are smart enough to retrain themselves if line conditions change during the duration of the connection. v.90 takes things a step farther by exploiting the fact that almost all telephone connections are now totally digital except for the "last mile" to the customer's end. By having the host end totally digital (v.90 systems require ISDN or T-carrier providing a digital connection to the host end terminal equipment), v.90 is able to exploit the 56kbps digital path of modern telephone networks. But the customer, who has a v.90 modem on an analog phone line, is still limited to 33.6kbps from his end to the host end -- because of the baud rate limitations of his "last mile" analog local loop and central office hardware. Although the inherent 1200 baud limitations are a serious impediment to high speed datacom over conventional voice-grade analog phone lines, one must pause in amazement that a telephone that great-grandmother used in 1935 still can be plugged into a local loop from a modern digital central office and that there will be dial tone, acceptance of the dialing pulses from the rotary dial, and a fully functional talk path established. What other electronic system, with the exception of AM broadcast radio, can claim a backward compatibility with hardware manufactured over a half-century ago? ------------------------------ From: hannigan@clue-store.fugawi.net (Martin Hannigan) Subject: Re: Bell Atlantic 500 Numbers Date: 30 Mar 2000 22:59:43 GMT Reply-To: hannigan@fugawi.net WHASUUUUUP! On Wed, 29 Mar 2000 15:59:32 -0600, Mike Jezierski wrote: > Is this BA 500 service expected to also go into the newly acquired GTE > territories? Are you talking about NPA 500? -M ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V20 #44 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat Apr 1 00:28:43 2000 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id AAA13763; Sat, 1 Apr 2000 00:28:43 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2000 00:28:43 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200004010528.AAA13763@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #45 TELECOM Digest Sat, 1 Apr 2000 00:28:00 EST Volume 20 : Issue 45 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Rapidly Deteriorating Phone Service in the US (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Need T-1 Card Information (D & S) Re: Data Transmission Speeds (B.L. Bodnar) Re: Data Transmission Speeds (Robert Berntsen) Re: CPP, ATM Surcharges (Craig Macbride) 631 Is Here, But Now a Firm Warns 516 May Split Again (Keith Knipschild) Panasonic KX-TA624 (rclark_bicton@my-deja.com) Re: Bandwidth For Real-Time Video (Seymour Dupa) Re: "Art" Imitates Life in the MCI/Worldcom Outage? (Steve Sobol) Re: Geeks to the Rescue (W. Hatfield) Re: Use of WWW in Domain Names (Nabeel) CTO Needed (Frank Weber) Regulating Internet Access (Linc Madison) Re: Data Transmission Speeds (David Lapin) To Whom Does This Number Belong? (J.F. Mezei) Re: Did AT&T Raise Calling Card Charges on Feb. 2nd? (Daryl Gibson) Re: Use of WWW in Domain Names (Hahn, Ki Suk) 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-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 259 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 805-545-5115 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@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: hyperarchive.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. Our corporate attorney is Bill Levant, Blue Bell, PA. In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Rapidly Deteriorating Phone Service in the US From: joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2000 13:41:15 GMT Organization: Road Runner As I write this, I'm on hold for 1-800 directory information. I've been on hold for several minutes, listening to inane messages like "someone will be right with you" or "thank you for your patience." Just ten years ago, it would have been unheard of to have to wait on hold for 1-800 directory assistance. (If you want ordinary out-of-state directory assistance, it will cost a dollar or so. It used to be free.) Elsewhere, I've been waiting six weeks for Bell Atlantic (NY) to install a DSL-compatible copper-pair in my house. They can't get it right. (They promise service within six-days!!) Waiting six weeks for the phone company would have been unheard of 15 years ago. There are two major highways from eastern CT into NY, I-95 and the Merrit. Neither has continuous cell-phone coverage. Once you get to New York City, if you want full cell-phone coverage, you need two phones, one for Bell Atlantic, and one for AT&T, because neither carrier completely covers New York City. To the best of my knowledge, New York City is the only world-class city that doesn't have excellent cell-phone coverage. The pattern is clear. Whereas the US used to have the best phone service in the world, service has been declining raapidly and steadily for over a decade. I think it's because we've decided that telco's should be money-making businesses, instead of services provided to citizens. And so we've seen a minor reduction in costs (but look how expensive out-of-state directory info is!) but an unacceptible drop in service. Comments? -Joel Hoffman (joel@exc.com) ------------------------------ From: D & S Subject: Need T-1 Card Information Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2000 02:46:18 GMT Organization: @Home Network Hi, My company is looking into getting a T-1 line connected into our existing Meridian phone system. We got a quote for a Norstar T-1 card programmed for auto route selection and digit insertion. The cost was $3549. Can someone tell me if this is a reasonable charge? Does anyone know where I can find this card at a cheaper price and perhaps get our communications provider to program it? We were also looking into getting our internet access through the T-1 and got quotes of $1692 for an Adtran TSU-120 CSU/DSU with pass through T-1 and Nx64Kbps V.35 data interface and $3042 for a Cisco 1601 router with IP software load. Ideally, we would like to find as much of this equipment elsewhere as possible and get someone local to program it. Thanks for any help! - Doug - ------------------------------ From: bohdan@ihgp4.ih.lucent.com (B.L. Bodnar) Subject: Re: Data Transmission Speeds Date: 31 Mar 2000 02:21:33 GMT Organization: Lucent Technologies In article , David Clayton wrote: > Robert Berntsen contributed the following: >>> Our class is having a debate as to whether it would be faster >>> transmission of digital data using a microwave link or a fibre-optic >>> link. >>> Could we have some thoughts on this please? >> Transport velocity will be higher for the microwave link: >> approx. 3,000,000 km/sec and approx. 2,000,000 km/sec for optical >> fiber. > ..... > Won't that depend on the transmission mode used in the fibre? > Regards, > David Clayton, e-mail: dcstar@acslink.aone.net.au > Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. I think this question is one where MANY answers apply -- and some of them contradict others. First, this question begets another one: is one interested in peak rate or effective rate? If one is interested in peak velocity, then free space propagation speed is, of course, faster than in fiber. On the other hand, if one is interested in effective transmission speed, then propagation errors, error control and network response to error control comes into play. Let me give you an example: I was once asked to look at a problem in microwave links in a certain tropical country bordering an ocean (no names mentioned). Every time the fog rolled in, the microwave-based data links would, basically, shut down. The shutdown was gradual (bit errors, followed by retransmission, etc.). The problem was the same one seen during radar research in the 1940s: microwave energy absorbtion by water molecules attenuating the signal. Hence, in this scenario, the effective data rate went to zero. A fiber optic system would not have this problem. So, I just presented you a second aspect of the original question: under what conditions is the signal being propagated? Fiber has a similar problem -- bit "smearing" caused by internal reflection in the fiber. That's why signal regenerators are used, etc. Best wishes, Bohdan Bodnar bbodnar@lucent.com ------------------------------ From: Robert Berntsen Subject: Re: Data Transmission Speeds Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2000 10:21:58 +0200 David Clayton wrote in message ... >> Transport velocity will be higher for the microwave link: >> approx. 300,000 km/sec and approx. 200,000 km/sec for optical >> fiber. > Won't that depend on the transmission mode used in the fibre? >Regards, >David Clayton Velocity for light is speed of light in vacuum divided by refraction index of medium. So in glass with index = 1.5 the velocity would be approx. 200,000 km/sec. (Sorry for the misprint in my first post). Refr. index for air is close to 1. The refraction index can vary from fiber to fiber and also with colour. The actual path within the (step-index) fiber can decrease the velocity slightly. ------------------------------ Subject: Re: CPP, ATM Surcharges From: craigm@earthling.net (Craig Macbride) Organization: Nyx Net, The spirit of the Night (www.nyx.net) Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2000 09:13:43 GMT Joey Lindstrom writes: > I'm a little unclear on this "they bill a particular rate". Are you > saying that if I call you (from an Australian land line to your > mobile), I pay the same rate as you would pay if you called me from > that same mobile to the same landline? Oh, no. The mobile to landline rate is set by the company whose mobile is being used. That could vary enormously, depending on the plan the mobile customer chooses. It could even be more than the landline customer would be charged to call the mobile. What I mean is that the landline call to a mobile is charged at a rate set by the company you are using for long-distance calls, irrespective of which mobile network you are calling. In other words, it's symmetrical: Caller pays and is charged by their carrier in all cases. The people saying that caller pays won't work seem to be proposing some sort of bastardised system in which the caller pays, but has to pay the mobile network directly even if they are the calling party, which seems rather silly to me. Craig Macbride -----------------------http://www.nyx.net/~cmacbrid------------------------ "It's a sense of humour like mine, Carla, that makes me proud to be ashamed of myself." - Captain Kremmen ------------------------------ From: Keith Knipschild Subject: 631 Is Here, But Now a Firm Warns 516 May Split Again Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2000 06:54:52 -0500 http://www.newsday.com/news/nthifri.htm NEWSDAY Staff Writer Pradnya Joshi TOMORROW, 631 will officially become the area code for Suffolk County. The question now is whether Nassau will need to add a second area code for the county in early 2001, officials said yesterday. The company that assigns area codes told the New York Public Service Commission last month that Nassau would need a new area code next year if no measures are taken to more efficiently handle the 7.9 million possible phone numbers in the existing 516 area code. But state officials now say they believe they can hold off such a change by altering how they assign 516 phones in the future. "This is not cause for alarm at this point," said Edward Collins, spokesman for the Public Service Commission. "That's just the forecast; that doesn't mean that [a new area code] is necessarily needed." He said that in mid-March state regulators decided telephone numbers would soon be issued to telecommunications companies in blocks of 1,000, instead of 10,000 as they have been. Even if a telecommunications company has only 100 customers, it receives 10,000 numbers for every region it serves. That leaves 9,900 numbers "trapped" because another phone company cannot be reassigned those numbers. By using smaller blocks, a process called "number pooling," regulators can add years to the life of an area code. Collins said yesterday that number pooling would begin for Nassau County on July 1. But Rebecca Barnhart, a spokeswoman for Neustar Inc., the Washington D.C.-based firm that handles area code assignment under a federal contract, said yesterday it remains unclear how much additional time number pooling will buy Nassau County. She said Neustar will survey telecommunications carriers later this year to determine how much demand there may be for new phone numbers. Telephone pooling was not an option in the case of the Suffolk area code, officials have said, because the process was still being tested when the decision was originally made that Long Island would need a second area code. Enjoy, Keith =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= WEB: http://www.knip.com MAIL: keith@knip.com =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= ------------------------------ From: rclark_bicton@my-deja.com Subject: Panasonic KX-TA624 Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2000 06:55:07 GMT Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy. I am thinking of buying one of these for home use. Anybody have an opinion? Rob ------------------------------ From: Seymour Dupa Subject: Re: Bandwidth For Real-Time Video Organization: Exchange Network Services, Inc. Date: 31 Mar 2000 12:55:48 GMT AS I recall, 6 Mhz is the bandwidth allowed by the FCC for a commercial TV broadcast station. There are several signals contained in this 6 Mhz. The video itself is broadcast as vestigial (sp) sideband. I believe the bandwidth of the video signal itself is 4.5 Mhz. We both assume the original poster meant the bandwidth of American/NTSC. Bandwidth of video cameras of different resolutions will vary. John Tom Trottier wrote: > NTSC (TV) signals take 6 megahertz. >> From: Sian >> Subject: Bandwidth For Real-Time Video >> Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 13:49:10 +0100 >> Can anyone tell me typically how much bandwidth is needed to transmit a >> single channel analogue real-time video signal? > Tom Trottier, Abacurial IT Consulting ICQ:57647974 > 400 Slater St.Suite 415, Ottawa ON Canada K1R 7S7 > __o > _ \< Voice:+1 613 291-1168 fax:594-5412 No ads/spam, please > (+)/'(+) Vote for your favourite Olympus camera at > http://www.freevote.com/booth/fav_camera You'll Always Have the Things You Got. ------------------------------ From: sjsobol@NorthShoreTechnologies.Net (Steve Sobol) Subject: Re: "Art" Imitates Life in the MCI/Worldcom Outage? Date: 31 Mar 2000 04:33:37 GMT Organization: New Age Consulting Service Inc., Cleveland, OH, USA > From 'Carl Moore': > Several months ago, you noted Wile E. (Coyote, obviously from the > Coyote & Roadrunner cartoons, from Warner Brothers) and "Acme". > Another real-life occurrence of Acme is in Acme Markets, a supermarket > chain based near Philadelphia! I'm well aware of it, having grown up > in northern Delaware and seeing Acme Markets as far away as > northeastern Maryland. The Albrecht Company, headquartered down in Akron, also runs a local chain of grocery stores named Acme. North Shore Technologies, Cleveland, OH http://NorthShoreTechnologies.net sjsobol@NorthShoreTechnologies.net - 888.480.4NET - 216.619.2NET "Never attribute to malice events more properly attributed to corporate greed." --Me, March 28th, 2000 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2000 02:42:12 -0500 From: W. Hatfield Subject: Re: Geeks to the Rescue At 9:07 PM -0500 3/29/00, was written: > From: langlo6@ibm.net > Subject: Re:Geeks to the Rescue > Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 23:17:34 GMT > Organization: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & News Services > Is that really "baud", or do you mean "bits per second"? > [.../] bits per second. ------------------------------ From: Nabeel Subject: Re: Use of WWW in Domain Names Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2000 14:16:56 -0500 www.mypage.org, a URL redirection service, has support for this. You can get anything.mypage.org and, when a request comes in from a WAP device, it apparently can distinguish the request and send it to a different URL. I haven't tried this but read it on their webpage. Nabeel "JF Mezei" wrote in message news:telecom20.44.9@telecom-digest.org: > A while ago, there was some discussion on the redundant use of "www" > in domain names for web sites. More and more sites seem to be ditching > the WWW, but wait, the story isn't over. > With the advent of WAP enabled telephones, you'll find more and more > web sites that have the WAP variation "WAP.company.com" as well as the > traditional "WWW.company.com" > So it seems that the use of "www" will continue since it will be > needed to differentiate itself from the "wap". > Since WAP uses the HTTP protocol, I think it becomes simpler for > servers to be multi-homed and serve the different contents depending > on whether the requested URL as the WWW or WAP in the domain name, > compared to having developped a new protocol, port number etc etc. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2000 11:52:26 -0800 From: Frank Weber Subject: CTO Needed Organization: SBC Internet Services Join our team as engineering visionary and team leader for profitable, Pre-VC company specializing in IP Billing and Network usage analysis products. Take over current, award winning product line and set a course for the future. Participate in funding efforts. Desired Requirements: B.S. engineering and advanced degree, MBA preferred, or track record/publications. Knowledge of IP networking, Linux, Unix, MRTG, Telecom, theory and practice a plus. Minimum Requirements: Strong Motivation, High Intelligence, Credible Presentation. Location: Sunnyvale California. reply to jobs@bluebox.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2000 13:35:30 -0800 From: Linc Madison Subject: Regulating Internet Access In TELECOM Digest V20 #34, Ken Brown wrote: > Despite organized efforts of access proponents, barely a dozen > localities have agreed to enact access provisions. Major cities such > as San Francisco, Miami, and Richmond have all rejected such > regulations and similar bills introduced this year have also failed > in New Hampshire, Idaho, Pennsylvania, Utah, Virginia and Kansas. To say that San Francisco rejected regulations requiring open access to cable modems is twisting the truth beyond its breaking point. It is true that San Francisco did not pass the regulations outright, but that was merely a deferral of the issue pending the outcome of the appeal of the Portland, Oregon, case. The City and County of San Francisco are firmly on record in support of requiring cable modem systems to provide open access to ISPs. Indeed, a regulation passed that states quite clearly that AT&T/TCI must provide the same open access that it provides in any other jurisdiction -- in other words, if AT&T loses in Portland, then the Portland regulations will also apply in San Francisco. It was referred to as a "most favored nation" clause. It is important to note that AT&T's attorneys agreed to the provision granting San Francisco any benefits that come from the Portland decision. Furthermore, the issue could reasonably be deferred in San Francisco, since the actual deployment of the first cable modem here is at least three years away. The installation of cable modems will require a groun-up overhaul of the entire cable infrastructure. So, in short, San Francisco has clearly agreed to enact access provisions. Linc Madison * San Francisco, California * Telecom-at-LincMad.com North American Telephone Area Codes & Splits ------------------------------ From: David Lapin Reply-To: dlapin@yahoo.com Subject: Re: Data Transmission Speeds Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2000 22:28:12 GMT Organization: AT&T Worldnet The Old Bear wrote: > Finally, let's re-phrase the question to ask "What is the fastest > way to get 20,000 sports fans from game six of the world series > being played at Fenway Park in Boston to game seven being played > at Yankee Stadium in New York?" Well, if you have to select only > one method, the answer would probably be automobiles or busses > because of the finite number of passenger seats available on the > airlines and rail service during the time window between the two > games. And the top speed in this case would be only 90km/hr. Two major fallacies here: First, in the nearly 50 years I've been a Red Sox fan, they have a serious tendency to fold in September and are very unlikely to make the World Series. Second, given the current alignment of major league baseball, it is extremely unlikely that two teams from the AL East would play each other in the World Series. Now if you move from Yankee Stadium to Shea Statium ... ------------------------------ From: J.F. Mezei Subject: To Whom Does This Number Belong? Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2000 18:10:03 -0500 GSM phones have a built-in text messaging capability. A message is sent to an SMSC (message centre) which is usually the one operated by your mobile provider. The SMSC then arranges for the delivery of the SMS to the destination's phone. OK, so when the destination is a phone also served by the same GSM network, it is simple. But when the phone is owned by another GSM network, the SMSC must somehow figure out to which remote SMSC the transaction should be sent and if it can be sent. So, knowing the country code is not enough since there can be multiple GSM providers in one country. And since this messaging spans the globe and not restricted to the NANP, I am wondering how a mobile phone company knows to whom it should route a transaction. Considering that mobile phone companies grow fairly fast, how often do they acquire a new block of number? For instance, in Canada, FIDO/Microcell spans the country, so it has quite a few numbers in quite a few area codes. How does FIDO know that the number I am sending an SMS to belongs to a Telecom Italia phone or a Omnitel phone? Is there a "country" administrator to whom all transactions are sent and that country administrator then routes the transaction to the appropriate mobile company based on the phone number? Or do all GSM companies publish a list of all the exchanges they have and each GSM operator maintains routing tables for all of the world? ------------------------------ From: Daryl Gibson Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2000 17:36:45 -0700 Subject: Re: Did AT&T Raise Calling Card Charges on Feb. 2nd? I use a prepaid AT&T calling card, on sale at Sam's Club (Wal-Mart Warehouse stores). It was purchased, and subsequently recharged at 10 cents/minute. Today, I recharged it, and got 5.9 cents/minute. That makes it currently lower than my AT&T residential service (presently at 7 cents a minute). Sure, you dial a few more numbers, but the cost sure is nice. I purchased 1000 minutes for $59. And...they sell them in resale packs, so you can always buy them at the lower rate, and make some money selling them at *normal* phone card rates, if you're so inclined ... > From: Stanley Cline > Subject: Re: Did AT&T Raise Calling Card Charges on Feb. 2nd? > Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 20:58:24 -0500 > Organization: by area code and prefix (NPA-NXX) > Reply-To: sc1@roamer1.org > On 25 Mar 2000 00:51:20 -0500, johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) wrote: >> No kidding. AT&T just doesn't have competitive rates for residential >> and small business customers. It looks like the lowest they'll go is >> 25 cents per minute and $1/month. I have a Voicenet card that's about >> 17 cpm with no monthly charge, and I've seen other calling cards as >> low as 15 cents. >> 17c/min? That's high to me! (Then again, I have a Sprint card and am > grandfathered on a plan that charges a flat 50c/min. I use it only as > a true backup card...) > > http://www.callatn.com/ offers a standalone card at 13.9c/min now > (IIRC) and Cognigen (I am not a Cognigen agent!) has some very good > deals as well, particularly the standalone AccuLinq card and the > calling card that is part of their US Wats 1+ program (the same > program with slight differences in rates can be found elsewhere.) >> If you make most of your calls from one local area, you can do even >> better with dialaround carriers. I have an account with a local VOIP 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 ------------------------------ From: Hahn, Ki Suk Subject: Re: Use of WWW in Domain Names Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2000 16:48:33 -0600 > From: JF Mezei > Subject: Use of WWW in Domain Names > Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2000 17:53:22 -0500 > A while ago, there was some discussion on the redundant use of > "www"in domain names for web sites. More and more sites seem to be > ditching the WWW, but wait, the story isn't over... I remember that some browsers will "help" you and add the initial 'www.' and the trailing '.com' when you enter just a word in the address box. Now, I've seen buses with dot-com ads on them and in the lower right corner there is this: "Internet keyword: blah", where blah is the company in www.company.com . I guess this is similar to the "AOL keyword" also seen in lots of places. But going back to the redundancy of the initial Ws, I've been to places that will only take company.com but not www.company.com , and, I don't know, to me that's kinda irritating. Ki Suk Hahn kshahn@datalogics.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V20 #45 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat Apr 1 17:46:33 2000 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id RAA12764; Sat, 1 Apr 2000 17:46:33 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2000 17:46:33 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200004012246.RAA12764@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #46 TELECOM Digest Sat, 1 Apr 2000 17:46:00 EST Volume 20 : Issue 46 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Twist in ACLU/Peacefire vs. Cyber Patrol Court Case (Daniel Seyb) Re: CPP, ATM Surcharges (John R. Levine) Re: Use of WWW in Domain Names (The Old Bear) Finally, Rationality in Each Assignment (L. Winson) Australian Phone Service (Darryl Smith) Re: Rapidly Deteriorating Phone Service in the US (Paul Coen) Re: Rapidly Deteriorating Phone Service in the US (Tony Pelliccio) Re: Data Transmission Speeds (The Old Bear) George Oslin's Book is Available Again (Jim Haynes) Re: Panasonic KX-TA624 (Carl Navarro) Judge Says Old Rule on Libel Suits Applies Online (Monty Solomon) Telecommunications Convergence Risks (Robert J. Perillo) Re: CPP, ATM Surcharges (Fred Goldstein) 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-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 259 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 805-545-5115 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@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: hyperarchive.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. Our corporat attorney is Bill Levant, Blue Bell, PA. In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Daniel Seyb Organization: someday, maybe Subject: Re: Twist in ACLU/Peacefire vs. Cyber Patrol Court Case Date: Sat, 01 Apr 2000 05:32:06 +0000 According to Wired News (http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,35226,00.html), yes they did assign the copyright to Mattel. But they copyrighted cphack under the GPL, which basically means anyone with a copy automatically has a license to use, modify and distribute the code. And there already are copies everywhere. In short, Mattel may have the copyright, but they are not allowed to suppress the progam. (Which doesn't mean they won't try). Indeed, they may be required to keep a copy available somewhere for distribution. NOTE: I am not a lawyer, don't use this as legal advice. Dan bennett@peacefire.org wrote: [....] > The interesting twist in the settlement -- agreed between Eddy L O > Jansson and Matthew Skala, the original authors of the "CPHack" > program and the accompanying essay, and Cyber Patrol's lawyers -- is > that Jansson and Skala gave Cyber Patrol the rights to the copyright > on their essay and the CPHack program. So Cyber Patrol may now > attempt to shut down mirror sites by claiming that they are "violating > Cyber Patrol's copyright" for a different reason -- because Cyber > Patrol supposedly now owns the copyright on the essay! > The essay can still be downloaded from one of the many mirror sites at: > http://www.openpgp.net/censorship/ and Peacefire will post > copies of the relevant court documents (including the agreement signed > by Jansson and Skala) as soon as they become available. News Flash: Microsoft acquires Electrolux, makes extensive design revisions. Finally releases a product that doesn't suck. ------------------------------ Date: 1 Apr 2000 00:40:23 -0500 From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: CPP, ATM Surcharges Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > The people saying that caller pays won't work seem to be proposing > some sort of bastardised system in which the caller pays, but has to > pay the mobile network directly even if they are the calling party, > which seems rather silly to me. You got it. Silly doesn't begin to describe what's wrong with it. 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: oldbear@arctos.com (The Old Bear) Subject: Re: Use of WWW in Domain Names Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2000 11:59:31 -0500 Organization: The Arctos Group - http://www.arctos.com/arctos Hahn, Ki Suk writes: >> A while ago, there was some discussion on the redundant use of >> "www"in domain names for web sites. More and more sites seem to be >> ditching the WWW, but wait, the story isn't over... > I remember that some browsers will "help" you and add the initial > 'www.' and the trailing '.com' when you enter just a word in the > address box. Now, I've seen buses with dot-com ads on them and in the > lower right corner there is this: "Internet keyword: blah", where blah > is the company in www.company.com . I guess > this is similar to the "AOL keyword" also seen in lots of places. But > going back to the redundancy of the initial Ws, I've been to places > that will only take company.com but not www.company.com > , and, I don't know, to me that's kinda > irritating. Tim Berners-Lee, who orginally conceived the use of hypertext protocol (http) and uniform resource locators (URLs) in the World Wide Web, has stated that the domain name conventions were never intended to have the visibility and importance placed on them the "dot-com" mania. The following is a quote from a interview with Tim Berners-Lee which appeared in the July 1996 issue of MIT's Technology Review: "The original idea was that anybody would very easily be able to write documents that could be connected through hypertext links. What has surprised me is the way people have been prepared to put up with manually encoding text. HTML was never supposed to be something that you would see -- it was intended to be something produced by an editor program. . . . I had not expected people to have to work out the hypertext links by looking up and typing in those long, complex codes for addressing. URL syntax was never intended for human consumption. It was intended for a machine ... In a couple of years, all the documents on the Web will probably be created without the direct use of HTML and URL syntax that is now so much a part of the Web." ------------------------------ From: lwinson@bbs.cpcn.com (L. Winson) Subject: Finally, Rationality in Each Assignment Date: 1 Apr 2000 17:32:18 GMT Organization: The PACSIBM SIG BBS For years, the news media has said the new unpopular area codes were required because of the explosion in cell phone, fax, and computer lines. Many consumers hated the new area codes, whether applied as a split or an overlay because of the many inconveniences involved. However, the news media has finally realized it isn't new phone lines, but rather the new independent companies who get a block of 10,000 numbers even if they only need 100. Local state public utility commissions and the FCC are finally waking up to this problem, and searching for solutions. It won't help the new area code assignments already made or those coming up soon, but should reduce future need. An unanswered question is who will pay for the cost of reprogramming the existing switching network to be able to accomodate smaller exchange assignment. Should the expense be assigned to the new companies? ------------------------------ From: Darryl Smith Subject: Australian Phone Service Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2000 22:03:00 +1000 G'Day all... I thought I would let you know why I just got about A$750 dollars from the phone company here in Australia, for them installing a line ... In January I tried to get a new phone connected at home. Mum has an existing line. I wanted a line for the modem. So I went to the local business office and waited in line for 20 minutes. Then they said their computers were down and to ring up to get a connection. When I rang up the person I spoke to had not done many new installs ... and this caused some problems. When she did the credit check she asked permission for the credit details. I did not say yes ... I just said 'If I say NO I will not be able to get the phone service' and she accepted this as a yes. Anyway she gave me a phone number, and arranged an appointment for a week's time -- an agreed connection date. A couple of days before this I rang to confirm the date. No problems. Then on the install date no one turns up. Ring up. They tell me the order has been held. I get a letter in the MAIL the NEXT DAY telling me the service has been held, and that construction is underway. I don't know why they didn't ring the phone number of the other service at the house. When I speak to held orders that tell me that there is no copper left, and that it will be two or three months until copper is available. I also find out that design is underway and not construction. I attempt to claim the missed appointment and delay under the 'Customer Service Guarantee', which is A$11.65 for a missed appointment, and A$11.65 for the first 5 days, then A$40.00 a day. They try to tell me that posting notification is OK as notification, and they do not need to pay me for the first four weeks after the Connection Date, since this is the guaranteed time frame. I know the rules better than him (I had done research ... The guy was indignant that I even knew about the damages, because that is what these are). Attempt to speak to supervisor. Supervisor is not available. Get phone number of Telstra Complaints. They are not helpful. Get their fax number. Write up my notes and send them to all parties, and the Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman. My complaints were: a) Missed Appointment b) Getting Damages from Aggreed Connection Date c) Letter said construction was underway, where as only design was. d) The telecommunications act requires them to meet timeframes - without option. After a little while one of their customer service people rang back. They told me that: a) I would be paid for the appointment b) I would get paid from the agreed connection date, not four weeks later. c) The form letter was being sent to their lawyers for rewrording at big $$$ d) So what ... they will pay ... even if they need to pay the $1800 projected. Anyway a couple days later they are adding a new main cable from the exchange to the top of the street... Amazing how these things work... Basically they took 4 weeks to install the phone service, giving me about A$750 credit, for a $173 install. And I actually got the remainder after two bills paid out by a cheque ... But they did send an overdue notice after the $750 had been credited, and changed my billing name to "MR DR MR D R SMITH" But the thing to note that I never did tell them that this was a modem line. If It was a modem line I would not have got a cent.... The Customer Service Guarantee (www.telstra.com under About Telstra) only applied to standard phone service used for voice ... Call Direct could fix that :-) If this is what happens in a stable suburban area, I can imagine how the service is in the 3rd of NSW the size of Texas with under 50,000 people living in it. Also the same company has a problem with it's cable modems. It has run out of them ... AT the moment there is a reasonable wait for service connection since they offered a residential unlimited service. Mobile Number 0412 929 634 [+61 4 12 929 634 International] Darryl@radio-active.net.au | www.radio-active.net.au for domain names ------------------------------ From: Paul Coen Subject: Re: Rapidly Deteriorating Phone Service in the US Date: Sat, 01 Apr 2000 13:33:10 -0500 Organization: Drew University "Dr. Joel M. Hoffman" wrote: > Elsewhere, I've been waiting six weeks for Bell Atlantic (NY) to > install a DSL-compatible copper-pair in my house. They can't get it > right. (They promise service within six-days!!) Waiting six weeks > for the phone company would have been unheard of 15 years ago. We recently had Bell Atlantic blow off a T1 installation appointment. They just didn't show up. Are you sure, BTW, that the folks that took the order could spell DSL? > There are two major highways from eastern CT into NY, I-95 and the > Merrit. Neither has continuous cell-phone coverage. Once you get to > New York City, if you want full cell-phone coverage, you need two Isn't part of the problem that BA is the B-carrier in a good chunk of CT? > for over a decade. I think it's because we've decided that telco's > should be money-making businesses, instead of services provided to Well, part of the problem is that a big chunk of the revenue is going into non-traditional areas of business. And infrastructure rot is happening everywhere -- bridges, tunnels, roads, rail lines, water and sewer systems, etc. We're just not paying the $$ needed to maintain the underpinnings that lead to the huge rise in standards of living across the United States in this century. Part of the shame of it is the need for equipment, materials and parts to keep a lot of this stuff up, plus the labor needed to actually maintain it well would create a decent number of jobs that pay better than a store clerk's. ------------------------------ From: nospam.tonypo1@nospam.home.com (Tony Pelliccio) Subject: Re: Rapidly Deteriorating Phone Service in the US Organization: Providence Network Partners Date: Sat, 01 Apr 2000 20:25:13 GMT In article , joel@exc.com says: > As I write this, I'm on hold for 1-800 directory information. I've > been on hold for several minutes, listening to inane messages like > "someone will be right with you" or "thank you for your patience." > Just ten years ago, it would have been unheard of to have to wait on > hold for 1-800 directory assistance. > (If you want ordinary out-of-state directory assistance, it will cost > a dollar or so. It used to be free.) The web has been so pervasive that it really isn't worth the time or money to keep DA ops for toll free numbers there. > Elsewhere, I've been waiting six weeks for Bell Atlantic (NY) to > install a DSL-compatible copper-pair in my house. They can't get it > right. (They promise service within six-days!!) Waiting six weeks > for the phone company would have been unheard of 15 years ago. Then again, a DSL pair can't be bridged in any way, shape or form. It's a bit more expensive to run it in over copper. In my office I've got BA fiber for my local service through MCI/Worldcom - go figure. I wonder if any of the bright bulbs at BA will realize this would be an ideal way to get anything I want into the building but they won't. Instead they'll put me through delay after delay until I finally get fed up, order it through BA and then they'll finally get it right. Does anyone else see this as mildly anti-competitive? > There are two major highways from eastern CT into NY, I-95 and the > Merrit. Neither has continuous cell-phone coverage. Once you get to > New York City, if you want full cell-phone coverage, you need two > phones, one for Bell Atlantic, and one for AT&T, because neither > carrier completely covers New York City. To the best of my knowledge, > New York City is the only world-class city that doesn't have excellent > cell-phone coverage. Funny - my Omnipoint phone had service the whole way. Then again they took to the tactic of building along the highways first. > The pattern is clear. Whereas the US used to have the best phone > service in the world, service has been declining raapidly and steadily > for over a decade. I think it's because we've decided that telco's > should be money-making businesses, instead of services provided to > citizens. And so we've seen a minor reduction in costs (but look how > expensive out-of-state directory info is!) but an unacceptible drop in > service. I don't think it's declining, but it's quickly becoming impossible to know where to go for what services. In the days of Ma Bell you went to your RBOC and asked for services and got them in no time flat. You also paid outrageous long distance rates so you could subsidize local service. Another effect of the Bell monopoly is that you really couldn't get what you wanted. They'd give you a line something like "We're the phone company. We don't have to care.". Just look how long it took WE to make a monophone or even introduce a color other than black. Then look at how they bungled things like ISDN. Luckily DSL looks to be going a bit better now that we have nimbler players in the field. Left to an ILEC DSL would go down the same dark alley ISDN did. == Tony Pelliccio, KD1S formerly KD1NR == Trustee WE1RD ------------------------------ From: oldbear@arctos.com (The Old Bear) Subject: Re: Data Transmission Speeds Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2000 11:03:09 -0500 Organization: The Arctos Group - http://www.arctos.com/arctos David Lapin writes: >The Old Bear wrote: >> Finally, let's re-phrase the question to ask "What is the fastest >> way to get 20,000 sports fans from game six of the world series >> being played at Fenway Park in Boston to game seven being played >> at Yankee Stadium in New York?" Well, if you have to select only >> one method, the answer would probably be automobiles or busses >> because of the finite number of passenger seats available on the >> airlines and rail service during the time window between the two >> games. And the top speed in this case would be only 90km/hr. > Two major fallacies here: > First, in the nearly 50 years I've been a Red Sox fan, they have a > serious tendency to fold in September and are very unlikely to make > the World Series. Ah, but hope springs eternal. (I am also waiting for BellAtlantic to find a pair of copper wires capable of xDSL to my house.) > Second, given the current alignment of major league baseball, it is > extremely unlikely that two teams from the AL East would play each other > in the World Series. Now if you move from Yankee Stadium to Shea > Statium ... How embarrassing ... my mind is still clouded by last year's American League Championship Series. ------------------------------ Subject: George Oslin's Book is Available Again Reply-To: jhaynes@alumni.uark.edu Organization: University of Arkansas Alumni From: haynes@alumni.uark.edu (Jim Haynes) Date: Sat, 01 Apr 2000 20:12:42 GMT This is not an advertisement, just an announcement about a book that I enjoyed a lot and is very relevant to the readers of this newsgroup. "The Story of Telecommunications" by George Oslin has been out of print, but is now available again from the publisher in paperback. For those who haven't heard, Oslin was the P.R. man for Western Union, and wrote the book when he was 92 years old. The publisher is his alma mater, Mercer University Press, http://www.mupress.org ------------------------------ From: cnavarro@wcnet.org (Carl Navarro) Subject: Re: Panasonic KX-TA624 Date: Sat, 01 Apr 2000 15:00:51 GMT Organization: Airnews.net! at Internet America On Fri, 31 Mar 2000 06:55:07 GMT, rclark_bicton@my-deja.com wrote: > I am thinking of buying one of these for home use. > Anybody have an opinion? It is not as much fun as a TD-308. If you need the extra extensions/lines, it is less expensive than the Digital-816. The TD-308 will let you assign names to numbers for CID number delivery only, it lets you have a single line CID box as a station(mine's the lady inside a Nortel 9516), and it has the door stuff already installed. Outside of that, I have no opinion :-). Carl Navarro ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2000 09:44:01 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Judge Says Old Rule on Libel Suits Applies Online By CARL S. KAPLAN Judge Says Old Rule on Libel Suits Applies Online In libel cases, there is a hard rule in many states that a lawsuit must be brought within one year of the date of the offending article's publication. Miss the one-year statute of limitations period by even one day, and your libel suit is barred forever. http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/00/03/cyber/cyberlaw/31law.html ------------------------------ id QAA21853; Sat, 1 Apr 2000 16:52:22 -0500 Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2000 16:52:22 EST From: Robert J. Perillo Subject: Telecommunications Convergence Risks, ComNet 2000. Saturday February 12, 2000 One of the major themes of the Communications Networking Conference (ComNet 2000), during the snowstorm of Jan. 25-27 in Washington D.C., was Convergence and Integrated Access. This was championed by major manufacturers and service providers such as Lucent, AT&T, Bell Atlantic, Cisco, Siemens, etc. But from a Security and Reliability standpoint, this industry trend is very disturbing. The object is to lower the cost of network operations, by consolidating services onto one network, and therefore increasing revenue. Unfortunately security and reliability risks are not calculated into this equation. Converging services onto one network or one vendor's switch or facilities reduces redundancy and therefore reliability. A single systemic failure could and has shutdown a service, therefore having multiple networks and using different vendor's equipment would allow some services to be provided to some user's. The capability of a service provider to transparently port user's from one network to another in an emergency should be essential. I do not understand why every network must be interconnected with every other network? This provides a connection for unauthorized access (hacking) and makes it easier to perform, harder to defend against and track, denial-of-service attacks. The major security feature of the old Air Traffic Control system and the old Electric Power Supervisory Control and Data Aquisition (SACDA) system, was their stand-aloneness and isolation. In a recent FBI/Computer Security Institute survey, 60% of the respondents identified computer attacks initiated from the Internet compared to under 10% a couple of years ago. These networks are now at risk because they are being connected to the TCP/IP Internet. Isolating or restricting-preventing access to a network is a valid security and reliability feature. Robert J. Perillo Principal Telecommunications Engineer Richmond, VA USA ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 01 Apr 2000 17:16:18 -0500 From: Fred Goldstein Subject: Re: CPP, ATM Surcharges In V20 I45, Craig MacBride wrote: > What I mean is that the landline call to a mobile is charged at a rate > set by the company you are using for long-distance calls, irrespective > of which mobile network you are calling. > In other words, it's symmetrical: Caller pays and is charged by their > carrier in all cases. > The people saying that caller pays won't work seem to be proposing > some sort of bastardised system in which the caller pays, but has to > pay the mobile network directly even if they are the calling party, > which seems rather silly to me. CPP operates rather like a collect call. The rate is NOT set by the caller's carrier, but by the called carrier. It is indeed "bastardized" but that is exactly how collect calls have worked since time immemorial, or at least since there has been competition. Thus the caller's carrier has no say at all. Yes, it is silly. In the USA, any old carrier, AOS or "information provider" is allowed to pay LECs for billing services. That's how the 900-call business works; again the originator's carrier has no say over the price. CPP is very much like 900 service. The fact that the rest of the planet uses it doesn't make it right, at least for the USA; I think for once the USA got the right model (cellular subscriber pays for their own convenience). ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V20 #46 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun Apr 2 17:22:10 2000 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id RAA20349; Sun, 2 Apr 2000 17:22:10 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2000 17:22:10 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200004022122.RAA20349@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #46 TELECOM Digest Sun, 2 Apr 2000 17:22:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 47 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Rapidly Deteriorating Phone Service in the US (Daniel Seyb) Re: Rapidly Deteriorating Phone Service in the US (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Re: Rapidly Deteriorating Phone Service in the US (Mark Brader) Re: Rapidly Deteriorating Phone Service in the US (Brad Ackerman) Intuit: Just Say NO (Adam Frix) Re: Australian Phone Service (David Clayton) Re: George Oslin's Book is Available Again (L Winson) Siemens Gigaset 2400 Series (Don House) Re: Pre-Paid Calling Cards (Mike Pollock) Spring Head Time (TELECOM Digest Editor) California PUC Considers Abolishing POPCORN (Anthony Argyriou) 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-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 259 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 805-545-5115 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@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: hyperarchive.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. Our corporate attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Daniel Seyb Organization: someday, maybe Subject: Re: Rapidly Deteriorating Phone Service in the US Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2000 05:43:14 +0000 I don't know about that. Ten years ago, I doubt you could have gotten a DSL-compatible copper pair at any price. I'm quite sure it would have cost several (like ten or twenty) times what you are now paying if it was available at all. And The Telephone Company has always been a money making operation. If they ever actually lost money on any product, they just raised the rates to make it up. What do they care if you're happy or not? dan "Dr. Joel M. Hoffman" wrote: > Elsewhere, I've been waiting six weeks for Bell Atlantic (NY) to > install a DSL-compatible copper-pair in my house. They can't get it > right. (They promise service within six-days!!) Waiting six weeks > for the phone company would have been unheard of 15 years ago. [....] > The pattern is clear. Whereas the US used to have the best phone > service in the world, service has been declining raapidly and steadily > for over a decade. I think it's because we've decided that telco's > should be money-making businesses, instead of services provided to > citizens. And so we've seen a minor reduction in costs (but look how > expensive out-of-state directory info is!) but an unacceptible drop in > service. News Flash: Microsoft acquires Electrolux, makes extensive design revisions. Finally releases a product that doesn't suck. ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Rapidly Deteriorating Phone Service in the US From: joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2000 03:20:14 GMT Organization: Road Runner >> There are two major highways from eastern CT into NY, I-95 and the >> Merrit. Neither has continuous cell-phone coverage. Once you get to >> New York City, if you want full cell-phone coverage, you need two > Isn't part of the problem that BA is the B-carrier in a good chunk > of CT? That's a side-effect of the real problem, which is that our government has decided that phone service should be subject to the whims of the open market. I've said it before but I think it's worth repeating: Telecom should be a service provided by the government. >> (If you want ordinary out-of-state directory assistance, it will cost >> a dollar or so. It used to be free.) > The web has been so pervasive that it really isn't worth the time or > money to keep DA ops for toll free numbers there. It's this attitude that's at the root of the problem. I'll grant that a phone company cannot make money by keeping enough DA people around to answer the phone on the first or second ring, but they should not have to make money. They are performing a service. We pour trillions of dollars into our military, because a prosperous US needs a military. Well, a prosperous US needs telecom, too, even if the telecom provider doesn't turn a profit. -Joel Hoffman ------------------------------ From: msb@vex.net (Mark S. Brader) Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2000 18:31:05 EST Subject: Re: Rapidly Deteriorating Phone Service in the US Organization: - Joel Hoffman writes: > As I write this, I'm on hold for 1-800 directory information. ... > Just ten years ago, it would have been unheard of to have to wait on > hold for 1-800 directory assistance. > (If you want ordinary out-of-state directory assistance, it will cost > a dollar or so. It used to be free.) It could be worse. If you call an ordinary long-distance phone number and the company puts you on hold, you pay according to how long you wait! Mark Brader, Toronto Carpe pecuniam! msb@vex.net --Roger L. Smith My text in this article is in the public domain. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This is true, but it is not the fault of telco. It is he fault of the company which left you on hold. PAT] ------------------------------ From: bsa3@cornell.edu (Brad Ackerman) Subject: Re: Rapidly Deteriorating Phone Service in the US Date: 01 Apr 2000 19:20:44 -0500 Organization: NERV GeoFront, Tokyo III joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) writes: > There are two major highways from eastern CT into NY, I-95 and the > Merrit. Neither has continuous cell-phone coverage. Once you get > to New York City, if you want full cell-phone coverage, you need two > phones, one for Bell Atlantic, and one for AT&T, because neither > carrier completely covers New York City. To the best of my > knowledge, New York City is the only world-class city that doesn't > have excellent cell-phone coverage. As has been noted, I-95 has continuous Omnipoint coverage. In NYC, Omnipoint has a minimum signal strength of S9 in Manhattan (possibly all of NYC) and complete coverage of all NYC above-ground locations, including the inside of every building I've been in. There's no coverage in the underground portions of the MTA system, which is indeed pathetic -- but apart from that, coverage is at least as good as in Berlin. > The pattern is clear. Whereas the US used to have the best phone > service in the world, service has been declining raapidly and > steadily for over a decade. I think it's because we've decided that > telco's should be money-making businesses, instead of services > provided to citizens. And so we've seen a minor reduction in costs > (but look how expensive out-of-state directory info is!) but an > unacceptible drop in service. Funny -- it doesn't seem to have worked that way for me. In 1998, I had to pay ridiculously high per-minute rate for my cell phone (Frontier), plus USD0.03 for each minute I actually used, plus USD0.99/min+USD3.00/d for roaming -- and most of the Frontier coverage area was roaming. The service was analogue, so I had to talk on the assumption that a full transcript would appear in the next issue of _The New York Times_, and voice quality was nonexistent. Even if international roaming was technically possible, Frontier wouldn't have implemented it. Enter Omnipoint. I'm now paying USD0.10 per minute for 600 minutes, long distance included -- and unlike Frontier, long distance means practically anything in country code 1. People who call me only know I'm on a cellular phone if I tell them. My handset works everywhere in western Europe and in most of eastern Europe, North America, Asia, and Africa. Voice mail, caller ID, call waiting, and call forwarding are standard. They haven't built out I-88 or the rural portions of Tompkins County yet, but in the area I travel in I've got great coverage except for about two hours during the trip from Ithaca to Boston, and the holes will be filled in. Before the Bell Atlantic acquisition, there was no way in heck that the Frontier network would ever provide seamless coverage, as you'd expect from a company that has had over a decade to fill in its network. Still, I expect that Omnipoint will get there first. Thanks to Omnipoint and Sprint PCS, Frontier has dramatically improved their prices. (Then again, that could be because they were purchased by Bell Atlantic. Funny how Satan Incarnate can become a white knight.) Therefore, even those whose home and/or office are far enough in the boonies so that the new networks don't directly help (e.g., John Levine, who is still about two missing towers away along (SR89) have still benefitted from their existence. (#include , of course.) Brad Ackerman N1MNB "Sorry -- I forgot what my point was." bsa3@cornell.edu Wandering Gweep -- Prof. Koschmann PGP: 0x62D6B223 http://skaro.pair.com/ HIST 298, 27 March 2000 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2000 18:51:15 -0500 From: Adam Frix Subject: Intuit: Just Say NO This is getting out of hand. I remember getting some Visioneer software that required me to register it. After 30 days installed, it wouldn't run unless I gave it a code--said code being available only by calling the software company and getting the third degree about who I am and what my lifestyle is. And of course, Microsoft won't let you run Office after a certain point unless you've registered it. Now Intuit is getting into a similar game, and it's time that we as a culture just tell these people NO, we will NOT do business this way: http://www.news.com/Perspectives/Column/0,176,411,00.html ------------------------------ From: David Clayton Subject: Re: Australian Phone Service Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2000 11:06:59 +1000 Organization: Customer of Connect.com.au Pty. Ltd. Reply-To: dcstar@acslink.aone.net.au Darryl Smith contributed the following: > G'Day all... > I thought I would let you know why I just got about A$750 dollars from > the phone company here in Australia, for them installing a line ... ..... > But the thing to note that I never did tell them that this was a modem line. > If It was a modem line I would not have got a cent.... The Customer Service > Guarantee (www.telstra.com under About Telstra) only applied to standard > phone service used for voice ... Call Direct could fix that :-) ..... The company I work for had 24 analogue services on order from the same Telco since May 1999, they were able to connect 8 but the rest haven't been done. Unfortunately these are services on their Centrex "Spectrum" service and are not covered by the CSG, (otherwise they would owe us about $80K by now) ... There is a 200 pair cable curled up in the basement outside the MDF awaiting termination now, it's been there a couple of months. I told my company to order PSTN lines instead of these Centrex lines, (for technical reasons), we still probably wouldn't have them connected but we would be financially much better off ... :-( Regards, David. David Clayton, e-mail: dcstar@acslink.aone.net.au Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. Dilbert's words of wisdom #18: Never argue with an idiot. They drag you Ndown to their level then beat you with experience. ------------------------------ From: lwinson@bbs.cpcn.com (L. Winson) Subject: Re: George Oslin's Book is Available Again Date: 2 Apr 2000 16:34:56 GMT Organization: The PACSIBM SIG BBS > "The Story of Telecommunications" by George Oslin has been out of > print, but is now available again from the publisher in paperback. > For those who haven't heard, Oslin was the P.R. man for Western Union, > and wrote the book when he was 92 years old. The publisher is his > alma mater, Mercer University Press, http://www.mupress.org I would definitely recommend this book to those interested in a history of Western Union and its relations with the Bell System. While this book is not a collegiate-style work (almost no footnotes and sources), it is the only source I know of for a history of Western Union and the transition from telegraph to telephone. Western Union's business history is not pretty, and very different than that of the Bell System. From the book's perspective, WU got a raw deal at the hands of regulators -- being forced to take over unprofitable ventures, such as the forced merger of Postal Telegraph into, and the denial of profitable services, such as certain overseas routes. The author feels WU got the raw end of regulatory orders compared to the Bell System on similar services, such as unfair pricing. Western Union apparently dropped the ball on data communications, letting the Bell System take all that business. WU did get into it for a bit -- it even launched its own satellite. I'm not sure if it was regulatory orders or bad management. As time went, WU used AT&T for its circuits; I'm not sure why they dropped their own network, which included microwave systems. When AT&T raised its rates, WU suffered. I remember WU briefly got into long distance service offering after deregulation, but apparently that didn't go far. ------------------------------ From: Don House Subject: Siemens Gigaset 2400 Series Date: Sat, 01 Apr 2000 10:51:51 -0800 We have been told that the Gigasets will not work with a line carrying ADSL. I hope to test this and will let you know what I find out. Don Robert House, MTS Excelsus Technolgies, Inc. Carlsbad, CA http://www.excelsus-tech.com ------------------------------ From: Mike Pollock Subject: Re: Pre-paid Calling Cards Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2000 16:26:48 -0400 Organization: It's A Mike! I've grown quite fond of my PrestoCard from Destia/EconoPhone/Viatel (take your pick.) Calls are 9.9 cents per minute with no per call surcharge, charged in 6 second increments after the first 30 seconds, or 5 cents per minute if you use a local number in the 212, 718, 516, 914, 714, 949, 323 or 818 area codes. Call detail is available online and you can refill the card on the fly with a PIN. http://www.prestocard.com --Mike > Tad Cook queried the group: > Subject: Pre-paid Calling Cards > Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2000 20:28:51 -0800 > Does anyone know of a web site that compares pre-paid calling cards > that are purchasable over the net? I was all set to buy one from > ecallingcards.com, but their site seems to be broken. ------------------------------ From: TELECOM Digest Editor (ptownson@telecom-digest.org) Subject: Spring Ahead Season Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2000 2:00 AM Its time once again to go through our twice-yearly ritual of adjusting our clocks. In the northern hemisphere spring, we set our clocks forward one hour which should have happened overnight / Sunday morning. If you did not set your various clocks, you may wish to do so now. For a good time, call 900-410-TIME for 75 cents and notice how the recording from the National Observatory never even misses a single second as the message tells us (if you can get through, it is *very* busy on time-change Sundays) that after one fifty-nine and fifty seconds 'National Observatory Master Clock time is three o'clock exactly. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Anthony Argyriou Subject: CPUC Considering Abolishing POPCORN Date: Sun, 02 Apr 12:27:43 PDT 2000 The San Francisco Chronicle reports that the CPUC is considering assigning numbers in the 767 prefix, which has traditionally been for finding out the time. The phone book lists 767-8900 as the number, but most kids learn it as pop-corn, 767-2676. Those of us who are lazy dialed it as 767-1111 on rotary phones, and as 767-7777 or 767-6767 on touch-tone. Now, to ease the phone number cruch, the CPUC is considering assigning numbers in the 767 prefix and other reserved prefixes, like 415-936 or 408-554, which are currently for weather information. Some concern is expressed in the article over receipients of the new numbers receiving mis-dials from people looking for a time check. Anthony Argyriou ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V20 #47 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Apr 3 00:34:16 2000 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id AAA04575; Mon, 3 Apr 2000 00:34:16 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2000 00:34:16 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200004030434.AAA04575@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #48 TELECOM Digest Mon, 3 Apr 2000 00:34:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 47 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Ten Digit Dialing (Mark J Cuccia) Re: Spring Ahead Season (Tony Pelliccio) Re: Spring Ahead Season (Mike Pollock) Re: Spring Ahead Season (L. Winson) Re: Spring Ahead Time (Bill Levant) Re: Rapidly Deteriorating Phone Service in the US (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Re: Rapidly Deteriorating Phone Service in the US (Derek J. Balling) Re: Pa. Governor Wants Cell-Phone Notation (Howard S. Wharton) Re: Pre-paid Calling Cards (Nabeel) Re: Two Flight Attendants Appeal Search of Their Home Computer (J. Hoffman) SEC's Plan to Snoop For Crime on Web Sparks Privacy Debate (Monty Solomon) 'Safe Harbor' Privacy Plan -- Not So Safe? (Monty Solomon) Virus Alert: FBI Finds 911 Virus Wiping Out Hard Drives Today (M. Solomon) Passive Web Site Fails to Provide Jurisdiction for Infringement (Solomon) 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-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 259 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 805-545-5115 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@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: hyperarchive.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. Our corporate attorney is Bill Levant, Blue Bell, PA In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2000 22:00:23 CDT From: Mark J Cuccia Subject: Re: Ten Digit Dialing David Fuchs (dfuchs@maxxis2000.com) wrote: > I was searching the website, but couldn't find an updated list of all > ten digit dialing areas currently if effect. Any recommended places? NANPA's website (http://www.nanpa.com) has a page/document on Dialing Plans within the NANP -- http://www.nanpa.com/dialing/index.html The document is a downloadable MS-Excel Spreadsheet: http://www.nanpa.com/dialing/dialing_plans.xls I can't vouch for perfect accuracy in this document, particularly when it comes to state-border situations where there might be local dialing between communities-of-interest along the state/province line ... Frequently there is "protected" 7-digit dialing ONLY wihtin that area, but that might not necessarily be documented in NANPA's Dialing Plans document. Similarly, some of the ACCESS codes in the (non-US) NANP-Caribbean might not necessarily (yet) be what the NANPA Dialing Plans document indicates. Some (non-US) NANP-Caribbean countries don't neccessarily (yet) use the NANP standards of: 1+ ten-digits for toll AND/OR ten-digits follow (regardless of local/toll w.r.t. calling party's NPA-NXX) 0+ ten-digits for "Operator/Special Billing" intra-NANP 01(1)+ for calling non-NANP countries Some of the (non-US) NANP-Caribbean locations use different prefixes than the above listed ones, but for same/similar functions. But as for MANDATORY (1)+10-digit "Home" (same) NPA dialing, the following areas have had overlays implemented: - Atlanta Metro (404/770/678) - Houston Metro (713/281/832) - Dallas Metro (214/972/469) - Maryland (301/240 ; 410/443) - Miami/Dade County (305/786) - the "keys" in Monroe County retain NPA 305 exclusively, and as such do NOT have "mandatory" 10-digit local dialing. - Denver Metro (303/720) - Philadelphia (215/267) - Philadelphia (PA) suburbs (610/484) - Orlando/central FL metro (407/321) - northern VA suburbs near DC (703/571) - New York City's five boroughs have been overlaid: Manhattan (212/646), Brooklyn/Queens/Bronx/StatenIsland (718/347), and the 917 NPA (which WAS for wireless since 1992, but now can have landbased customers on a voluntary basis) overlays ALL five boroughs, but I don't know if the "deadline" for making "home/same" NPA dialing (local or toll) mandatory as 1+ten-digits has officially taken effect. There were some waivers and court battles between NYState, the FCC, and the federal courts regarding delaying mandatory 1+ten-digits; it was SUPPOSED to take effect on sometime in April-2000, but I don't know if that is the "final/official/order" or if mandatory 1+ten-d is still "legally up-in-the-air". The 646 overlay to 212 in Manhattan took effect on 1-July-1999, while the 347 overlay to 718 for the other four boroughs was on 1-Oct-1999. Other overlays to take effect for the remainder of 2000 and in 2001 which will have mandatory (1)+ten-digits "home/same" NPA dialing, specifically for LOCAL calling will include the following ... DISCLAIMER: DATES AND OTHER DETAILS ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE!!! (i.e., "it ain't over 'till it's over -- it ain't over 'till the fat lady sings!) - Eastern Michigan: 810/586 (overlay and mandatory (1)+ten-digit local/home NPA dialing WAS to "officially" take effect 6-May-2000, but that has been temporarily postponed by FCC intervention); 734/278 (overlay and mandatory (1)+ten-digits for 4-Nov-2000); 313/679 (overlay and mandatory (1)+ten-digits for 3-Feb-2001); 248/947 (overlay and mandatory (1)+ten-digits for 5-May-2001); Due to the FCC's intervention temporarily delaying the 586 overlay on 810 along with delaying mandatory (1)+ten-digits there, the other MI overlays "might" ultimately be delayed as well... - western North Carolina: 980 to overlay 704 on 1-Dec-2000; mandatory ten-digit local "home" NPA dialing to become effective on 1-Nov-2000 - Fort Worth TX Metro (817) to be overlaid by sometime around Dec-2000; "reminder" recordings on local calls dialed with only seven-digits could begin in Oct-2000 - but that Oct-2000 date might also be the date of mandatory 10-digit local dialing within 817, as well as the date of new numbers in the new 682 overlay NPA... - northeastern OH: 330 to be overlaid with new 234 NPA, sometime in late Oct 2000. Mandatory (1)+10-digit home NPA dialing could start in early Oct 2000. - northwestern Oregon: 503 (except for the Pacific coastal area) to be overlaid with 971 in October 2000. That might be only the date of mandatory 10-digits local dialing within 503, with December 2000 being the date that new numbers/NXX codes take effect in the new 971 NPA. This overlay was ORIGINALLY to take effect in late Jan.2000, but OR state regulatory postponed it to October. Similar to the situation with the Florida "Keys" with respect to Miami and Dade County, the Pacific Coastal part of 503 will retain seven-digit local dialing (I assume that 10-digits local will be permitted), and this area as well will retain "exclusively" the 503 NPA - i.e., it won't be overlaid at this time. - western Washington State (except Seattle Metro): 360 is to be overlaid with 564, and mandatory local 10-digit dialing in the 360 NPA was to occur around late July / early Aug 2000. However, similar to what happened 'just next door' in Oregon, Wash.State regulatory has delayed this until no earlier than Feb.2001. - Connecticut: Both existing NPAs in CT are to be overlaid early in 2001... 203 to be overlaid with 475, and 860 to be overlaid with 959. Mandatory 10-digit local "home/same" NPA dialing could take effect as early as 6-Jan-2001. This may be the "official" date of overlay as well, but it is also possible that March-2001 will be the date that new NXX codes out of the two new NPA codes could take effect for new customer numbers. - Toronto ON (Canada): Mandatory ten-digit local dialing to take effect in early March 2001... "Reminder" recordings on local calls (within 416) dialed with only seven-digits to start in early Jan.2001 (but the call will still complete after the recording has played). The "official" date of overlay of 416 with new 647 NPA is 5-March-2001. However, "new" NXX c.o.codes (other than the NXX c.o.codes for testing) for new customer line-numbers probably won't take effect until late March 2001 or in April 2001. - Pittsburgh Metro (412) and other southwestern PA (814) The 878 NPA will "officially" overlay both 412 and 814 in Summer 2001, (17-Aug-2001). I don't know if "real" customer numbers on new NXX codes in the new 878 NPA will take effect on this date or later, but mandatory (1)+ten-digits local probably occurs in the Spring of 2001 or early in Summer 2001. - CHICAGO AND CALIFORNIA SITUATION: Presently, there is NO "mandatory" 1+ten-digit (local) Home/Same NPA dialing within Chicago Metro, nor in California. There had been overlays proposed in California, and in a few cases, preparations for the overlay including mandatory 1+ten-digit (local) home/same NPA dialing temporarily took effect, but the mandatory use was removed when regulatory changed their minds on overlay. In Chicago Metro, mandatory 1+ten-digit (local) Home/Same NPA dialing has not occurred yet. It WAS to take effect in 847 when the overlay with 224 was originally scheduled to occur in Fall 1998. But while state reg hasn't completely rescinded overlays in Chicago Metro, all overlays are presently "on hold" until deemed absolutely necessary. Ninety days prior to the first "real" customer lines / NXX c.o.codes within the new overlay NPA codes are scheduled to take effect - is when mandatory 1+ten-digit dialing will take effect within that "original" NPA. NOTE: There are numerous locations where there hasn't even been suggested an overlay, but permissive 10-digit local dialing within the (same) NPA is effective. Also, in some other places, like western KY where it was originally intended to overlay 502 with 270, but instead regulatory changed their minds and had a split implemented (Louisville Metro/etc. kept 502, but the remainder of the western part of KY split to the new 270 NPA), one can still PERMISSIVELY dial 10-digits local within their same NPA - at least within some central offices / locations. Also, there are NUMEROUS locations where there is local dialing to points within an adjacent area code (or state / NPA) might NOT allow "protected" seven-digit local dialing anymore. It may now REQUIRE (1)+ten-digit local dialing. Kansas City Metro is now like this ... It is MANDATORY ten-digit dialing to call between local points in 913/KS and 816/MO. And while not "mandatory" to dial ten-digits to place local calls to points "within" the same state/NPA, it is permitted to dial them as ten-digits (as well as seven-digits). MARK_J._CUCCIA__PHONE/WRITE/WIRE/CABLE:__HOME:__(USA)__Tel:_CHestnut-1-2497 WORK:__mcuccia@mailhost.tcs.tulane.edu|4710-Wright-Road|__(+1-504-241-2497) Tel:UNiversity-5-5954(+1-504-865-5954)|New-Orleans-28__|fwds-on-no-answr-to Fax:UNiversity-5-5917(+1-504-865-5917)|Louisiana(70128)|cellular/voicemail- ------------------------------ From: nospam.tonypo1@nospam.home.com (Tony Pelliccio) Subject: Re: Spring Ahead Season Organization: Providence Network Partners Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2000 02:12:55 GMT In article , TELECOM Digest Editor (ptownson@telecom-digest.org) says ... > Its time once again to go through our twice-yearly ritual of adjusting > our clocks. In the northern hemisphere spring, we set our clocks > forward one hour which should have happened overnight / Sunday morning. > If you did not set your various clocks, you may wish to do so now. > For a good time, call 900-410-TIME for 75 cents and notice how the > recording from the National Observatory never even misses a single > second as the message tells us (if you can get through, it is *very* > busy on time-change Sundays) that after one fifty-nine and fifty > seconds 'National Observatory Master Clock time is three o'clock > exactly. PAT] If you really want the correct time just point your browser to http://www.time.gov and click on your time zone. A Java app will then bring up NIST's clock on your system. == Tony Pelliccio, KD1S formerly KD1NR == Trustee WE1RD [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I almost forgot: You can also go to http://telecom-digest.org/linkspage.html and click on the link for 'at the tone the time will be' for an audio playout from the Naval Obervatory. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Mike Pollock Subject: Re: Spring Ahead Season Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2000 21:51:18 -0400 Organization: It's A Mike! > Its time once again to go through our twice-yearly ritual of > adjusting our clocks.... > For a good time, call 900-410-TIME for 75 cents For a better time, let your computer do it for you. The National Institute of Standards and Technology can help with its NIST Automated Computer Time Service (ACTS). See more info at http://www.bldrdoc.gov/timefreq/service/acts.htm and pay special attention to the Adobe Acrobat list of Publishers of Computer Time Synchronization Software at http://gpsmonitor.timefreq.bldrdoc.gov/pdf/timesoftware.pdf My current favorite piece time-setting software (and the one I recommended to the NIST list) is SocketWatch from http://www.locutuscodeware.com/swatch.htm Mike ------------------------------ From: lwinson@bbs.cpcn.com (L. Winson) Subject: Re: Spring Ahead Season Date: 2 Apr 2000 21:12:18 GMT Organization: The PACSIBM SIG BBS Philadelphia (Bell Atlantic) still offers time service (215-TIme 6-1212; also weather at 215-WEather 6-1212), charged as a regular call, not a special charge; long distance as usual elsewhere). I wonder how many other cities still offer time-of-day service at this price. I wonder how much longer it will continue in the competitive environment. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: For how many ever years, Chicago had CAThedral 8-8000 which was really the same as DEArborn 2-8000. Then one day that vanished in lieu of a 976 number with a additional charge for using it. Believe it or not, for many years in the 1920-30's era, CAThedral 8000 was manually answered by operators who would answer the call by announcing the time then hanging up. At some point or another, that got to be a pain and they began using a pre-recorded announcement. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Wlevant@aol.com Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2000 19:51:45 EDT Subject: Re: Spring Ahead Time > For a good time, call 900-410-TIME for 75 cents ... For just as good a time, and at a lower price, (303)499-7111 is (or used to be) a live pickup of WWV's signal (either 2.5mHz or 5 mHz; I forget) from Fort Collins, CO. At ten cents a minute or less from anywhere in the country, I recommend it to those looking for a good, cheap time. Bill [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: 303-499-7111 is still around. The majority of each minute is just a signal tone. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Rapidly Deteriorating Phone Service in the US From: joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2000 21:55:48 GMT Organization: Road Runner > As has been noted, I-95 has continuous Omnipoint coverage. In NYC, > Omnipoint has a minimum signal strength of S9 in Manhattan (possibly Nope. I lived there. Trust me. It has >almost< continuous coverage. But not enough to maintain a conversation while you're moving. There are well-known dead spots. And again, this is the point. If Omnipoint, BA and AT&T merged their coverage, THEN we'd have continuous coverage. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2000 18:43:38 -0700 From: Derek J. Balling Subject: Re: Rapidly Deteriorating Phone Service in the US >>> There are two major highways from eastern CT into NY, I-95 and the >>> Merrit. Neither has continuous cell-phone coverage. Once you get to >>> New York City, if you want full cell-phone coverage, you need two >> Isn't part of the problem that BA is the B-carrier in a good chunk >> of CT? > That's a side-effect of the real problem, which is that our government > has decided that phone service should be subject to the whims of the > open market. I've said it before but I think it's worth repeating: > Telecom should be a service provided by the government. Ah, another government program they can screw up. > It's this attitude that's at the root of the problem. I'll grant that > a phone company cannot make money by keeping enough DA people around > to answer the phone on the first or second ring, but they should not > have to make money. They are performing a service. We pour trillions > of dollars into our military, because a prosperous US needs a > military. Well, a prosperous US needs telecom, too, even if the > telecom provider doesn't turn a profit. A prosperous US needs food on everyone's table. Let's feed everyone with government funds. All food can be obtained at your nearest distribution point. Please dress warmly, expect lines. A prosperous US needs everyone to have a job. Please see your local Community Planner for your assigned job. It may, or may not, be to your liking, but its for the common good that you have a job. Your thinking sounds VERY suspiciously like an experiment that was tried in the Soviet Union a few short years ago. D ------------------------------ From: Howard S Wharton Subject: Re: Pa. Governor Wants Cell-Phone Notation Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2000 16:44:33 -0400 Organization: University at Buffalo I just wonder if the Police will also list if the person was drinking coffee, putting on make up or reading the paper while driving. It may sound funny, but I have observed drivers on the Youngmann (I290) doing all of that during rush hour while driving at 55. Howard S. Wharton Fire Safety Technician Occupational and Environmental Safety Services State University of New York at Buffalo ------------------------------ From: Nabeel Subject: Re: Pre-paid Calling Cards Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2000 18:39:03 -0400 I use it alot and recommend it to anybody. I especially like the web-based account info and recharging. They really should send you a plastic card, though, to keep in your wallet. Maybe after you've used a certain amount (I've probably used about $50 on them so far). Nabeel Mike Pollock wrote in message news:telecom20.47.7@telecom-digest.org ... > I've grown quite fond of my PrestoCard from Destia/EconoPhone/Viatel > (take your pick.) Calls are 9.9 cents per minute with no per call > surcharge, charged in 6 second increments after the first 30 seconds, > or 5 cents per minute if you use a local number in the 212, 718, 516, > 914, 714, 949, 323 or 818 area codes. Call detail is available online > and you can refill the card on the fly with a PIN. > http://www.prestocard.com > --Mike >> Tad Cook queried the group: >> Subject: Pre-paid Calling Cards >> Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2000 20:28:51 -0800 >> Does anyone know of a web site that compares pre-paid calling cards >> that are purchasable over the net? I was all set to buy one from >> ecallingcards.com, but their site seems to be broken. ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Two Flight Attendants Appeal Search of Their Home Computers From: joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2000 22:44:46 GMT Organization: Road Runner > Perhaps if some of those others in turn subpoenaed ALL the computers, > backups, etc. of the law firms involved it would dampen such tactics. > After all, how can the firm operate while all its schedules, billing > systems, and so forth are being copied onto punched paper tape? > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I admit it sounds like a good idea, > but it just won't work. Large companies and their attornies are On the contrary. Computer records, including backups, most certainly are subject to subpoenae. This is one reason most law firms DON'T keep things around unless they have to. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2000 23:11:41 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: SEC's Plan to Snoop For Crime on Web Sparks Privacy Debate on Web sparks privacy debate By Michael Moss THE WALL STREET JOURNAL March 28 - The Securities and Exchange Commission is moving to create an automated surveillance system that would scour the Internet for people who violate securities law. The agency has begun receiving proposals from vendors, who have conducted trial runs in recent weeks. http://www.msnbc.com/news/387655.asp?cp1=1 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2000 23:13:07 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: 'Safe Harbor' Privacy Plan -- Not so Safe? By Lisa M. Bowman, ZDNN March 30, 2000 5:45 PM PT A group representing consumers in the United States and Europe said the "Safe Harbor" privacy provision between the European Union and the U.S. government doesn't go far enough to protect the rights of the citizens in either region. http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2495461,00.html ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2000 23:19:12 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Virus Alert: FBI Finds 911 Virus Wiping Out Hard Drives Today From: The SANS Institute At 8:00 am on Saturday, April 1 (This is not an April Fool's joke!) the FBI announced it had discovered malicious code wiping out the data on hard drives and dialing 911. This is a vicious virus and needs to be stopped quickly. That can only be done through wide-scale individual action. Please forward this note to everyone who you know who might be affected. The FBI Advisory is posted at http://www.nipc.gov/nipc/advis00-038.htm The 911 virus is the first "Windows shares virus." Unlike recent viruses that propagate though eMail, the 911 virus silently jumps directly from machine to machine across the Internet by scanning for, and exploiting, open Windows shares. After successfully reproducing itself in other Internet-connected machines (to assure its continued survival) it uses the machine's modem to dial 911 and erases the local machine's hard drive. The virus is operational; victims are already reporting wiped-out hard drives. The virus was launched through AOL, AT&T, MCI, and NetZero in the Houston area. The investigation points to relatively limited distribution so far, but there are no walls in the Internet. Action 1: Defense Verify that your system and those of all your coworkers, friends, and associates are not vulnerable by verifying that file sharing is turned off. * On a Windows 95/98 system, system-wide file sharing is managed by selecting My Computer, Control Panel, Networks, and clicking on the File and Print Sharing button. For folder-by-folder controls, you can use Windows Explorer (Start, Programs, Windows Explorer) and highlight a primary folder such as My Documents and then right mouse click and select properties. There you will find a tab for sharing. * On a Windows NT, check Control Panel, Server, Shares. For an excellent way to instantly check system vulnerability, and for detailed assistance in managing Windows file sharing, see: Shields Up! A free service from Gibson Research (http://grc.com/) Action 2: Forensics If you find that you did have file sharing turned on, search your hard drive for hidden directories named "chode", "foreskin", or "dickhair" (we apologize for the indiscretion - but those are the real directory names). These are HIDDEN directories, so you must configure the Find command to show hidden directories. Under the Windows Explorer menu choose View/Options: "Show All Files". If you find those directories: remove them. And, if you find them, and want help from law enforcement, call the FBI National Infrastructure Protection Center (NIPC) Watch Office at 202-323-3204/3205/3206. The FBI/NIPC has done an extraordinary job of getting data out early on this virus and deserves both kudos and cooperation. You can help the whole community by letting both the FBI and SANS (intrusion@sans.org) know if you've been hit, so we can monitor the spread of this virus. Moving Forward The virus detection companies received a copy of the code for the 911 Virus early this morning, so keep your virus signature files up-to-date. We'll post new information at www.sans.org as it becomes available. Prepared by: Alan Paller, Research Director, The SANS Institute Steve Gibson, President, Gibson Research Corporation Stephen Northcutt, Director, Global Incident Analysis Center ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2000 23:18:02 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Passive Web Site Fails to Provide Jurisdiction for Infringement Court also declines to pierce corporate veil of parent company to reach acts of wholly owned subsidiary E-Commerce Law Weekly March 29, 2000 A non-interactive Web site, which provided information about a company's products and included an e-mail hyperlink, was insufficient in itself to establish jurisdiction over a non-resident defendant in a patent infringement suit, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas ruled March 9 (Nutrition Physiology Corp. v. Enviros Ltd., N.D. Texas, No. 5:99-CV-0107-C, 3/9/00). http://www.lawnewsnetwork.com/practice/techlaw/news/A19888-2000Mar28.html ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V20 #47 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Apr 3 02:13:13 2000 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id CAA08954; Mon, 3 Apr 2000 02:13:13 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2000 02:13:13 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200004030613.CAA08954@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #49 `> TELECOM Digest Mon, 3 Apr 2000 02:12:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 49 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson ICB Toll Free Consultancy and Telecom Digest Forge Alliance (Editor) ICB Headlines, March 31 (Judith Oppenheimer) Re: Spring Ahead Season (Joseph Singer) AU Privacy Commissioner Unveils Internet Guidelines (Monty Solomon) Aided by Internet, Identity Theft Soars (Monty Solomon) Iridium Flares (Monty Solomon) 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-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 259 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 805-545-5115 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@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: hyperarchive.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. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2000 01:04:44 EDT From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: ICB Toll Free Consultancy and TELECOM Digest Forge Alliance The Internet's premier 800 and Domain Name Consultancy/News Service, and the Internet's oldest continuing e-journal about telecommunications, team up in content and distribution pact. NEW YORK, April 4, 2000 -- ICB Toll Free, premier source of toll free 800 and dot com industry intelligence, analysis and news, today announced an alliance with TELECOM Digest, the oldest continuing e-journal about telecommunications on the Internet. ICB partially replaces International Telecommunications Union (ITU) as primary Digest underwriter, and will distribute its daily HeadsUp Headlines to the Digest's 2,500+ email subscribers and 8,000+ daily web site visitors, as well as Usenet comp.dcom.telecom. ICB Toll Free News covers 800 and dot com politics and news, delivering competitive intelligence to a business leadership of corporate and industry giants, as well as small business owners and entrepreneurs. "ICB keeps us up on the changing marketplace," says Emil G. Michael, Director of Business Development, Tellme Networks, Inc., "providing intelligence we consider a critical driver of our business. "ICB is our eyes and ears," agrees Richard Sapio, CEO of MUTUALS.COM. "With the convergence of communications occurring so rapidly, ICB helps me to run on 'Internet Time'," adds Custis F. Dunn, Executive Director, Telecom Institute. "We are honored to be a key sponsor of TELECOM Digest, the granddaddy of telecom journals on the Internet," says Judith Oppenheimer, President and Publisher of ICB. "Throughout its almost twenty year history on the net it has maintained the highest standards of editorial integrity, thanks to Editor Pat Townson, who moderates with wisdom, discretion, and good humor. TELECOM Digest remains to this day, a key news and analysis resource for industry leaders and watchers alike, worldwide." Patrick Townson, Digest Editor notes, "ICB's Judith Oppenheimer is a frequent and valued contributor to TELECOM Digest. The addition of ICB's daily HeadsUp Headlines, with its unique spotlight on toll free 800 and domain name issues, puts critical content on the front burner for Digest readers. Its a win-win relationship, and we're very pleased to have ICB on board." ABOUT ICB ICB Toll Free News (http://icbtollfree.com), premier source of 800 and dot com industry news, is owned by ICB Inc., a consulting practice (http://1800TheExpert.com) founded in 1993 and publisher of the WhoSells800.com Toll Free Service Provider Directory (http://whosells800.com). ICB is an industry leader in toll free and domain name intelligence, advising business owners, corporate marketers and the telecom industries since 1993. ABOUT TELECOM DIGEST 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'. The Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecommunications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then, and is possibly the second oldest e-zine on the internet in any category. Archives are available for review and research at http://telecom-digest.org. ------------------------------ From: Patrick Townson Subject: ICB TollFree.Com Headlines 3/31/00 Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2000 1:00:00 AM Note the ARTICLE ACCESS CODE LEGEND. ICBTollFree.Com HEADS UP HEADLINES from ICB Toll Free News - Daily News and Intelligence covering the Political, Legal and Marketing Arenas of 800 and Dot Com. ARTICLE ACCESS CODE LEGEND ICB Toll Free News offers two valuable service options: F = Free - News and Features articles P = Premium - Unlimited Site Access including all Articles and Documents. Access to Free (F) links requires one-time registration at ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. ... it ain't over till ... Stories on issues of particular significance that have not reached resolution, are now highlighted in 'ISSUE WATCH: it ain't over till ...', found on http://www.icbtollfree.com/icbheadlns.cfm. HEADLINES FOR MARCH 31, 2000 P - WINK .. promotes alternative to toll free number response to tv ads ... CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=1340 F - FOR SALE: NETWORKS.COM Stan Briggs, president of Network Computing Solutions, is selling the name networks.com to the highest bidder, provided that bidder offers between $6 million and $8 million. He said he has rejected a $4 million offer. CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=1340 F - ICANN & DNS: ANTITRUST ISSUE? While anyone can set up a computer to run a TLD registry, very few people will be able to find it, unless ICANN includes the TLD in the main root. The trademark lobby is seeking to 'own' a string across all TLD space on the Internet, not in a national legislature or through a treaty, but through ICANN's control of the Internet's root. CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=1344 ************* http://1800TheExpert.com ************** 800 & Domain Name Acquisition Management, Lost/Stolen 800 # Retrieval, Litigation Support, Regulatory Navigation, Correlating Domain Name & Trademark Matters. When success is the only option. ************* http://1800TheExpert.com ************** more HEADLINES FOR MARCH 31, 2000 F - CANADIAN TEEN IN DOMAIN SCRAP WITH APPLE Instead of buckling under the pressure to hand over his domain name, 16-year-old Calgary student Abdul Traya wants to make a deal. CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=1341 F - FCC APPROVES 2 NEW NATIONAL WIRELESS CARRIERS The companies have said they will initiate a 'national-one-rate' service to compete with other national service providers, such as AT&T. CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=1343 P - RECIPROCAL COMPENSATION AND ISP'S Court of Appeals for 5th Circuit upholds Texas PUC ruling on reciprocal compensation in interconnection agreement. CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=1345 P - ITU APPROVES IP SIGNALS TRANSPORT STANDARD The ITU indicated the latest standard 'will be followed quickly' by one that defines quality of service classes and performance objectives for IP network providers that offer end-to-end communications services. CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=1338 Do a friend a favor - suggest ICB ... Click Here to Recommend-It(r) http://www.recommend-it.com/l.z.e?s=118920 more HEADLINES FOR MARCH 31, 2000 F - E-COMMERCE RECOMMENDATIONS TO CONGRESS .. permanent the ban on Internet access taxes ... eliminate the 3 percent federal excise tax on telecommunications ... extend moratorium on Internet taxation for an additional five years ... CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=1337 P - ANTI-CYBERSQUATTING ACT USED FOR MULTIPLE DOMAINS A New York District Court has granted a company's request for the transfer of multiple domains CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=1339 P - NEW FCC APPOINTEES New Deputy Division Chief for Network Services Division of CCB has responsibility for all numbering administration issues. CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=1346 ---------------------advertisement----------- Haven't time to search? Get targeted telecom news every week from the source. Put 'subscribe Pipe' in the subject line and reply to: telecom_e_clips@hotmail.com. Read TOLLFREE-L online at http://www.egroups.com/group/tollfree-l/info.html One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. All rights reserved. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2000 22:08:04 -0700 From: Joseph Singer Subject: Re: Spring Ahead Season This is well after the fact, but: On Sun, 2 Apr 2000 2:00 AM TELECOM Digest Editor (ptownson@telecom-digest.org) wrote: > Its time once again to go through our twice-yearly ritual of adjusting > our clocks. In the northern hemisphere spring, we set our clocks > forward one hour which should have happened overnight / Sunday morning. > If you did not set your various clocks, you may wish to do so now. > For a good time, call 900-410-TIME for 75 cents and notice how the > recording from the National Observatory never even misses a single > second as the message tells us (if you can get through, it is *very* > busy on time-change Sundays) You can also call their non "dialit" number 303-499-7111 at considerably less money for the call. Regarding the "dialit" number I believe they have many many lines so your likelihood that you'd get a busy would be minimal. The "dialit" 900 number is 50 cents per minute. But why do that anyway. If you're connected to the net there are many sources that will give you the exact time. official US time "time clicker" for the exact time all over the world with the added capability to synch your local computer to the exact time (also interesting sounds when you choose a different time zone.) to show time in up to five time zones at once all over the world a map of time zones all over the world finally, an explanation of daylight saving time. Joseph Singer "thefoneguy" PO Box 23135, Seattle WA 98102 USA +1 206 405 2052 [voice mail] +1 206 493 0706 [FAX] [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: And don't forget that at http://telecom-digest.org/linkspage.html you can click on 'at the tone, the time will be' to hear an audio of the time at the National Observatory. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2000 23:22:42 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: AU Privacy Commissioner Unveils Internet guidelines Cosima Marriner, Newswire In a bid to protect employee privacy in the information age, the Australian Privacy Commissioner has a developed a set of guidelines for the monitoring of staff email and Web browsing. http://www.newswire.com.au/0003/privacy.htm ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2000 23:47:31 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Aided by Internet, Identity Theft Soars http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/00/04/biztech/articles/03theft.html April 3, 2000 By TIMOTHY L. O'BRIEN Law enforcement authorities are becoming increasingly worried about a sudden, sharp rise in the incidence of identity theft, the outright pilfering of people's personal information for use in obtaining credit cards, loans and other goods. ------------------------------ From: Monty Solomon Subject: Iridium Flares Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2000 1:30:00 AM These may possibly go off line soon, so be sure to check them while you still have a chance: http://www.heavens-above.com/ http://www.wingar.demon.co.uk/satevo/index.htm http://www.satellite.eu.org/sat/vsohp/iridium.html ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V20 #48 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Apr 3 15:46:28 2000 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id PAA05960; Mon, 3 Apr 2000 15:46:28 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2000 15:46:28 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200004031946.PAA05960@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V20 #50 TELECOM Digest Mon, 3 Apr 2000 15:46:00 EDT Volume 20 : Issue 50 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Telecom Update (Canada) #227, April 3, 2000 (John Riddell) Re: To Whom Does This Number Belong? (Michael Hartley) Re: CPP, ATM Surcharges (Michael Hartley) Bell Atlantic - Does Anybody Really Know What Time it is? (M. Muderick) Re: Spring Ahead Season (Jonathan Seder) Re: Spring Ahead Season (J.F. Mezei) Re: Siemens Gigaset 2400 Series (John Nagle) Boston Technologies Voice Mail (glqs@my-deja.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 259 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 805-545-5115 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@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: hyperarchive.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. Access to Premium (P) links requires upgrade to a paid subscription. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Only subscribers or registered users of ICB Toll Free News web site will be able to access all or some of the full text of URLs provided. Copyright 2000 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2000 11:36:33 -0400 From: John Riddell Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #227, April 3, 2000 ************************************************************ TELECOM UPDATE Angus TeleManagement's Weekly Telecom Newsbulletin http://www.angustel.ca Number 227: April 3, 2000 Publication of Telecom Update is made possible by generous financial support from: AT&T Canada ...................... http://www.attcanada.com/ Bell Canada ............................ http://www.bell.ca/ Lucent Technologies .................. http://www.lucent.ca/ Sprint Canada .................. http://www.sprintcanada.ca/ Teleglobe Business Solutions ...... http://www.teleglobe.ca/ Telus Communications.................. http://www.telus.com/ TigerTel Services ................. http://www.tigertel.com/ ************************************************************ IN THIS ISSUE: ** Telus to Acquire QuebecTel ** Bell Must Confirm Local Link Contracts ** Videotron Postpones Vote on Rogers Deal ** Overlay Recommended in 905 ** Cablecos Seek Policy Changes ** Optel Raises $180 Million ** NewTel Moves to Reduce LD Calling ** CRTC Accepts Telcos' Price Cap Filing Plan ** Bell Seeks Residential Rate Hikes ** Cisco Expands IP Phone System ** Mitel Doubles SX-2000 Capacity ** BCE and CTV Sign Exclusive Internet Deal ** Bell Nexxia Sells Financial Broadband Net ** Scotiabank to Offer Wireless Banking ** Bell Intros E-Commerce Products ** Glenayre to Build Two-Way Messaging Net ** Norigen Signs With Brookfield Properties ** Microcell Wholesales Service for Hotel Guests ** Primus Offers 10-Cent International Calls ** Bell Expands Call Screening ** 360networks to Use Marconi ATM ** Rogers Expands Cogeco Holdings ** The Call Center Elephant ============================================================ TELUS TO ACQUIRE QUEBECTEL: Telus has agreed to buy 70% ownership of Rimouski-based QuebecTel from independent shareholders and GTE. The deal, which will eliminate foreign ownership restrictions that have limited QuebecTel's ability to expand beyond its franchise area, has been endorsed by QuebecTel's Board and by GTE. The deal is subject to a vote by minority shareholders. BELL MUST CONFIRM that all of Bell Canada's Local Link customers are presumed to be on month-to-month service, unless Bell obtains formal confirmation that the customer agrees to a longer-term contract. Optel complained in November that Bell was locking customers into contracts without fully informing them about termination charges for early cancellation. (See Telecom Update #209) http://www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/Orders/2000/O2000-250.htm VIDEOTRON POSTPONES VOTE ON ROGERS DEAL: Videotron shareholders have delayed their vote on the Rogers takeover offer until late April. On April 17, a court will hear Videotron's challenge to the Caisse de Depot's claim of a right to veto any deal. ** Netgraphe Inc., a Videotron subsidiary, has purchased systems integrator APG Systems and Solutions for $120 Million in cash and shares. OVERLAY RECOMMENDED IN 905: The NPA 905 Relief Planning Committee has agreed, with one abstention (AT&T), to recommend a distributed overlay in Area Code 905, which is expected to run out of prefixes by August 2001, three years earlier than previously forecast. (See Telecom Update #224) ** On March 23, Bell Canada told the CRTC that it has "serious concerns about the accuracy" of the survey that predicts the early exhaust of 905. Bell wants the Commission to review and modify the survey. If the survey is correct, Bell asks the CRTC to initiate an expedited process for approval and implementation of a solution. CABLECOS SEEK POLICY CHANGES: In a report titled "E-TV: The Integration of Culture and Commerce," the Canadian Cable Television Association today called on the government to encourage the convergence of distribution, programming, new media, and e-commerce. The CCTA favors deregulation of small cablecos and telcos, reduced taxes, elimination of foreign ownership restrictions on carriers and distributors, and better coordination between government departments that deal with communication issues. http://www.ccta.com/rebuild/rebuild2/index.htm OPTEL RAISES $180 MILLION: OCI Communications, the parent company of CLEC Optel Communications, has sold 10 million Special Warrants, convertible to non-voting shares, for $180 Million. ** OCI has acquired EDI Communications Networking, a data network provisioning company. Optel has purchased two Ontario resellers, Simcoe County Long Distance and Quinte Long Distance, for $15 Million in cash. NEWTEL MOVES TO REDUCE LD CALLING: Customers in 91 exchanges in rural Newfoundland and Labrador will lose their unlimited LD calling plans effective April 10. NewTel says the change is necessary to reduce long distance traffic until it can upgrade network facilities to ensure access to emergency services, as ordered by the CRTC. (See Telecom Update #225) CRTC ACCEPTS TELCOS' PRICE CAP FILING PLAN: Two weeks ago, Canada's major telcos appealed the CRTC's refusal to change the price cap formula to allow the telcos to recover reduced direct connection rates (see Telecom Update #225). On Friday, with the CRTC's agreement, the telcos filed local rate change proposals which assume that the Commission will accept their appeal. By April 7 they must tell the Commission what rates they propose if their appeal is rejected. BELL SEEKS RESIDENTIAL RATE HIKES: In its price cap filing, Bell Canada has filed to raise local residential rates by $.35 in most areas, and by $1.55-$2.30 in Band D where rates are still far below cost. Bell's price cap proposals include reductions in business rates filed earlier this year. (See Telecom Update #222) CISCO EXPANDS IP PHONE SYSTEM: Cisco Systems says that 10 new products for its "Architecture for Voice, Video and Integrated Data" line will allow it to offer phone systems with up to 100,000 telephones. MITEL DOUBLES SX-2000 CAPACITY: Mitel Corporation has introduced Lightware 30 call control software for its flagship SX-2000 PBX, doubling the system's capacity to 4,224 ports, and adding Qsig networking features. BCE AND CTV SIGN EXCLUSIVE INTERNET DEAL: For the next 10 years, CTV programming will be available on the Internet only through portals operated by BCE. The agreement will take effect when BCE's offer to acquire CTV is completed. ** BCE says that the conditions set by the CRTC for CTV's purchase of Netstar are acceptable to it in relation to BCE's offer to buy CTV. (See Telecom Update #226) BELL NEXXIA SELLS FINANCIAL BROADBAND NET: Bell Nexxia has signed a three-year agreement to provide a broadband network linking 78 branches of ScotiaMcLeod and Scotia Capital. The network will support IP, data, video, and voice services. SCOTIABANK TO OFFER WIRELESS BANKING: Beginning in the second quarter, Bell Mobility's Mobile Browser will enable Scotiabank customers to access account information, pay bills, and conduct stock transactions. BELL INTROS E-COMMERCE PRODUCTS: Bell Canada has begun offering a range of e-commerce services to businesses, including e-marketing consulting, Web site creation, Web hosting, and electronic catalogues with online payment options. GLENAYRE TO BUILD TWO-WAY MESSAGING NET: Glenayre Technologies has signed a $5 Million agreement to build a national two-way text messaging network for Bell Mobility. NORIGEN SIGNS WITH BROOKFIELD PROPERTIES: Norigen Communications has signed a master agreement with Brookfield Properties, giving the CLEC access to all buildings owned or managed by Brookfield. ** Norigen has received $122.5 Million in equity financing from a syndicate led by Chase Capital and Horrowston Inc. ** Former Bell Canada exec Wendy Smith has joined Norigen as Vice-President of Client Service. MICROCELL WHOLESALES SERVICE FOR HOTEL GUESTS: Microcell Connexions has announced a wholesale agreement with Toronto-based Unique Wireless Applications Inc. Unique plans to offer wireless phones to hotels, for use by business travelers. PRIMUS OFFERS 10-CENT INTERNATIONAL CALLS: Primus Canada is now offering 10 cent/minute calling anytime, within Canada and to the U.S., UK, France, Germany, Ireland, Netherlands, Belgium, Hong Kong, Denmark, and Sweden. There is a $4.95/month fee for the residential calling plan. BELL EXPANDS CALL SCREENING: Bell Canada has introduced "Call Privacy," a new set of call screening and blocking features for residential customers. 360NETWORKS TO USE MARCONI ATM: Marconi Communications says that Vancouver-based 360networks, formerly Worldwide Fiber, is the first Canadian company to deploy Marconi's ASX-4000 system, which provides Asynchronous Transfer Mode switching at speeds up to 2.488 Gbps. ROGERS EXPANDS COGECO HOLDINGS: Rogers has purchased additional Cogeco shares, bringing its holdings to 12.7% of Cogeco Cable and 11.3% of Cogeco Inc. THE CALL CENTER ELEPHANT: In the April issue of Telemanagement, Henry Dortmans explains why call centers must by "seen, understood, and managed" as systems, not individual components. ** Also in Telemanagement #174: Outsourcing VPNs; Copper vs. Fiber for Office Cabling; Plans for a New Area Code in 905. To subscribe to Telemanagement call 1-800-263-4415, ext 225 or visit the Angus Telemanagement Group web site at http://www.angustel.ca ============================================================ 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: listmanager@postmastergeneral.com Insert as the subject of your message the two words: subscribe TelecomUpdate To stop receiving the e-mail edition, send an e-mail message to: listmanager@postmastergeneral.com Insert as the subject of your message the two words: unsubscribe TelecomUpdate =========================================================== COPYRIGHT AND DISCLAIMER: All contents copyright 2000 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 225. The information and data included has been obtained from sources which we believe to be reliable, but Angus TeleManagement makes no warranties or representations whatsoever regarding accuracy, completeness, or adequacy. Opinions expressed are based on interpretation of available information, and are subject to change. If expert advice on the subject matter is required, the services of a competent professional should be obtained. ============================================================ ------------------------------ From: Michael Hartley OK, so when the destination is a phone also served by the same GSM > network, it is simple. But when the phone is owned by another GSM > network, the SMSC must somehow figure out to which remote SMSC the > transaction should be sent and if it can be sent. From the GSM network's point of view it's all in the IMSI (International Mobile Subscriber Identity), which is stored in the SIM card and the HLR. The ISMI has three parts: the first is the Mobile Country Code (MCC)- always three digits, identifies the country of origin of the SIM. The next one or two digits (the Mobile Network Code MNC) identifies the network with the country and the remaining digits (max 10) are the Mobile Station Identification Number (MSIN) which are unique to the SIM. e.g. 234 15 xxxxxxxxxx MCC MNC MSIN UK Vodafone Use of the IMSI system allows individual SIMs to identify themselves independently of the numbering plan of the network they happen to be attached to at the time. Not to be confused with: MSISDN (Mobile Station Integrated Services Digital Network Number) this is the phone number you'd dial to call the subscriber. e.g. my number is +44 7956 xxx xxx +44 = UK country code 7956= one of many number blocks within the UK numbering scheme owned by my provider. xxx xxx = rest of the number. > Considering that mobile phone companies grow fairly fast, how often do > they acquire a new block of number? For instance, in Canada, Depends on the numbering system of the country in question, and the unit size in which numberspace is administered. In the UK the market is growing at approximatly ten million per year -- go figure ... > How does FIDO know that the number I am sending an SMS to belongs to a > Telecom Italia phone or a Omnitel phone? From the IMSI. > Is there a "country" administrator to whom all transactions are sent > and that country administrator then routes the transaction to the > appropriate mobile company based on the phone number? Nope, it's all C7. > Or do all GSM companies publish a list of all the exchanges they have > and each GSM operator maintains routing tables for all of the world? That's closer to it, for roaming at least. Regards, Mike ------------------------------ From: Michael Hartley Subject: Re: CPP, ATM Surcharges Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2000 10:05:23 +0100 > CPP operates rather like a collect call. The rate is NOT set by the > caller's carrier, but by the called carrier. Yes, at the basic level. But we're in a market here -- telcos neotiate for mega minute deals so although carrier x may pay a termination charge of x per minute for his say million minutes a month, carrier y may pay y (where x>>y) for their 100 million miunutes of terminating business. <..>Thus the caller's carrier has no say at all. Not true. The caller's carrier is free to negotiate with either the called network or third party transit networks. In reality since capacity comes from a variety of places you may find that the caller's network routes calls of a number of different carriers depending on the time of day/called network. > Yes, it is silly. Why ?? > The fact that the rest of the planet uses it doesn't make it right, at > least for the USA; Hmm. This would be the same sort of reasoning that landed the USA with cellular systems which don't even provide contiguous *national* roaming would it? ;+) > I think for once the USA got the right model (cellular subscriber pays for > their own convenience). I think you're wrong. What's more I don't think the market has moved on so far that the 'convenience' argument is a red herring. Here in the UK we're looking at mobile penetration approaching 80% by the end of this year. That's not convenience, that's a huge market. And it's all CPP. Go figure -- but in the end time will tell. Mike ------------------------------ From: Michael Muderick Subject: Bell Atlantic - Does Anybody Really Know What Time it is? Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2000 10:22:52 EDT As part of the spring ritual, I reset my clocks for DST yesterday morning. Right or wrong, I used Bell Atlantic as a reference. (I ONCE FOUND THEM TO BE ABOUT 7 MINUTES OFF- TOOK ME QUITE A WHILE TO FIND SOMEONE WHO KNEW SOMEONE TO CORRECT IT....) For a couple of hours, I called and got ALL CIRCUITS ARE BUSY. But I got the tones after it rang a few times, as if they were having problems resetting their clocks and forwarded the calls to an answering device. Normally the tones come right after you finish dialing, with no rings. Curious? [TELECOM Editor's Note: The fact that you got a few rings before they answered could have been an overload on their system. Something you rarely get on 303-499-7111 is a busy signal. I got one on Saturday night when calling them. When I called NAVOBS on Sunday morning I got a busy signal twice before getting through, and they had the recording set for only twenty seconds instead of the usual 55 seconds, apparently due to the large number of callers. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Jonathan Seder Subject: Re: Spring Ahead Season Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2000 23:07:36 -0700 Organization: Don't Spam Me! Pat - I hope you relished the clock-changing ritual, and enjoyed another day of recovery from your recent illness. This year my clock changing was simplified. Incoming caller ID updated my ATT 360 clock radio. My Sprint PCS phone got the new time from the network. My VCR gets a clock signal from a local TV station. RFC868 updated the clocks on my home computers. RFC868 yields accurate time for free, and WWV is likewise free if you have a shortwave radio or WWV-tuned clock. I am surprised that a "National Observatory" clock would change with daylight savings time. Most time standards report Universal Coordinated Time (GMT, Zulu Time) and leave it to the user to adjust for time zones or usage. Be aware of the difference between time standards. The telephone system is not synchronized with NIST/WWF, and the GPS system is also different. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: NAVOBS says their time like this: "At the signal tone, hours, minutes, seconds coordinated universal time. Following the tone, they say hours, minutes plus five seconds Eastern Daylight time, then another tone is heard. A complete reading is heard every fifteen seconds. On the other hand, NIST only gives the time once per minute. They are mainly concerned with their radio stations, WWV and WWVH in Boulder, CO and Hawaii. Because the two stations overlap a little in their coverage area (western USA and the Pacific), to avoid them both talking at once, Boulder gives their announcements on the minute, while Hawaii gives theirs at the fifty second mark, then remains silent while Boulder speaks. You inquired about my health. The psychiatrist from the university at Lawrence, KS does not think I am going to improve. It is still a chore for me to engage in a conversation other than a very simple one. I wobble around if walking without my cane, and my typing ability and knowledge of computers are very poor. I have a very hard time concentrating. When the doctor came here to my home as part of the examination for recieving what little I receive in social security disability benefits, he was very frank in telling me I probably would only see very little improvement for several months and that many of my skills were gone forever. He did say I was lucky to be alive. Most people who have aneurisms (or blood vessels which break in the head usually don't live, especially if they have to go a hundred miles to the hospital in an ambulance and stay in a coma for three weeks as a result. I think I will write my autobigraphy once I get to feeling a little better. PAT] ------------------------------ From: JF Mezei Subject: Re: Spring Ahead Season Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2000 11:16:15 -0400 ptownson@telecom-digest.org wrote: > Its time once again to go through our twice-yearly ritual of adjusting > our clocks. In the northern hemisphere spring, we set our clocks > forward one hour which should have happened overnight / Sunday morning. That should be "North America". Europe and the rest of the world change clocks on the last weekend of March while North America changes on first weekend of April. South Pacific changes last weekend of March (but they set their clocks back). [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The operational phrase in my writing you quoted was 'spring', not 'set our clocks'. Spring is coming once again in the northern hemisphere while the 'south-siders' are once again getting ready for the dreaded winter. This has been a horrible winter for me; brain damage and all that. This year in particular, I will be *so happy* to have warm weather, so I can go out and walk around for hours at a time, without having to rely on friends to take me around. PAT] ------------------------------ From: John Nagle Organization: Animats Subject: Re: Siemens Gigaset 2400 Series Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2000 23:15:19 -0700 Don House wrote: > We have been told that the Gigasets will not work with a line carrying ADSL. > I hope to test this and will let you know what I find out. > Don Robert House, MTS > Excelsus Technolgies, Inc. > Carlsbad, CA > http://www.excelsus-tech.com Yes, let us know. I'm about to do that. What goes wrong? Do the Gigasets emit noise that jams the DSL signal, or does the DSL signal make it into the Gigasets and cause noise in the audio channel? John Nagle Animats ------------------------------ From: glqs@my-deja.com Subject: Boston Technologies Voice Mail Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2000 14:43:01 GMT Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy. I have some very old Boston Technologies Voice Mail equipment. This stuff was made in 1991 and consists of several hundred modems, storage devices, cabinets, control equipment,large UPS system, etc. This system was fully functional until about 18 months ago when it was turned off. Specs available on request. I am trying to determine if there is a market for this or if it is just dumpster bait. Thanks for your input. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V20 #50 *****************************