For your convenience in reading: Subject lines are printed in RED and
Moderator replies when issued appear in BROWN.
Previous Issue (just one)
TD Extra News
TELECOM Digest Thu, 17 Mar 2005 13:02:00 EST Volume 24 : Issue 119 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Does AOL Treat Trillian Messages Differently? (sreelatha@hotmail.com) Re: Hosting Content on Zombie Computer Networks (Robert Bonomi) Re: Hosting Content on Zombie Computer Networks (John Levine) Re: Lifespan of a Desktop PC? (Justin Time) Re: Lifespan of a Desktop PC? (Al Dykes) Re: Los Angeles Times: Low-Tech Methods Used in Data Theft (D. Garland) Re: Los Angeles Times: Low-Tech Methods Used in Data Theft (C Griswold) Re: Former WorldCom CEO Guilty on All Counts (Dean) Re: The Lost Lessons of the 1920s and 1930s (Jim Haynes) Re: Iridium II: Is Satellite Radio Doomed? (John Levine) Re: Rep. Fred Upton Apparently Sold Out to Incumbent Telcos (R Collinge) Re: Attacked by a Dog Which was Playing (Fred Atkinson) Re: Attacked by a Dog Which was Playing (SELLCOM Tech support) Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the Internet. All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: nagu <sreelatha@hotmail.com> Subject: Does AOL Treat Trillian Messages Differently? Date: 17 Mar 2005 08:21:11 -0800 This is weird. AOL client pops up a new message window to the foreground when a new message arrives. But if it is a new message from a Trillian client, the new msg window is created but not brought to the foreground. My colleague had term-serv'ed into another machine and was using it in full screen mode. A msg from a trillian user wasn't pushed to the foreground. But a msg from a AIM client was pushed to the foreground. He uses AOL client. Has anyone seen this behavior? All the reference is to a new msg-new window. Not a new msg in an older window. Sreelatha ------------------------------ From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) Subject: Re: Hosting Content on Zombie Computer Networks Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 22:46:00 -0000 Organization: Widgets, Inc. In article <telecom24.117.8@telecom-digest.org>, Gareth Morrissey <garethmorrissey@yahoo.com> wrote: > Would it be possible to host content on zombie computer networks (like > those used to send out spam)? > Is anybody doing this currently? Yes, and yes. Sometimes actual 'hosting' is on the zombie, sometimes just a 'transparent proxy' that forwards to the "real" content holder. You can even find nameservers running on zombied machines. ------------------------------ Date: 16 Mar 2005 22:58:57 -0000 From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> Subject: Re: Hosting Content on Zombie Computer Networks Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > Would it be possible to host content on zombie computer networks (like > those used to send out spam)? Yes. > Is anybody doing this currently? Yes. > The next wave of p2p program? Solves the free rider problem?? I doubt it. The next wave of online fraud, perhaps. R's, John ------------------------------ From: Justin Time <a_user2000@yahoo.com> Subject: Re: Lifespan of a Desktop PC? Date: 17 Mar 2005 08:12:08 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com The lifespan of the average PC is almost impossible to measure. Our moderator states he has one that has been in use for the past 10 years. In our office here are some that are between 6 and 7 years old with some about 2 years old. But the question also asked about when you could expect the components to start failing. That is a more difficult question to answer. The two things that are most likely to fail first are the CRT monitor and the hard drive. The monitor because the phosphor will become etched or the electron gun will become less able to provide enough excitation to drive the screen to its desired brightness. The hard drive will fail because of mechanical motion, either the actuator that moves the heads across the surface of the disk or the motor that spins the disk. Those are two of the most common failures. The other common failure would be one of the electronic components such as an integrated circuit or driver transistor. These usually fail because of heat. If the case fan fails, then the operating temperature climbs and for every 10 degrees Celcius (about 18 degrees F) the junction temperature rises in a transistor, its life is cut in half. If an IC is spec'd to run say 40,000 hours at 30 degrees C (86 F), then if the temperature climbs to 40 C (104 F), the life span is now 20,000 hours. This also assumes the IC is powered on for the full time and the operating temperature can be maintained. What is not counted is thermal shock, the almost instantaneous heating when electricity begins to flow. The buildup of dust and dirt in a computer case also adds to thermal stress as the dust and dirt inhibit the flow of cooling air and act as insulation to keep the heat in the unit. Opening the case at least yearly and running a vacuum inside is one method of reducing this problem. You may also want to use compressed air, or even the exhaust of the vacuum cleaner to blow out any dust or dirt the suction misses. So, how long will a computer last before it fails mechanically? It depends on the environment. Used for only a couple of hours a day and properly maintained, almost indefinitely. I'd worry more about my software. But if a computer is turned on and left running behind the closed door of a cabinent and not checked and cleaned regularly, then maybe 8 or 9 years if you are fortunate. Rodgers Platt ------------------------------ From: adykes@panix.com (Al Dykes) Subject: Re: Lifespan of a Desktop PC? Date: 17 Mar 2005 11:12:16 -0500 Organization: PANIX -- Public Access Networks Corp. In article <telecom24.118.19@telecom-digest.org>, Peter R Cook <PCook@wisty.demon.co.uk> wrote: > In message <telecom24.117.5@telecom-digest.org>, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com > writes: >> Would anyone know what is the average/typical physical lifespan of a >> desktop PC? That is, how many years do they run before components >> start failing? >> When buying a new PC, how do people typically transfer the contents >> from the old PC hard drive to the new PC? At work, people move stuff >> out onto the LAN server or move the old drive into the new box; but >> others say old drives are not compatible with new technology. How do >> home users without a LAN handle it? >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have here a Toshiba Satellite 220-CDS >> since 1995. It started life as Win 95, has since been converted to Win-98 >> (which I am sorry I did, really, it seems to be running a little >> slower than it did as a 95). But it _never_ freezes up, _never_ locks >> out; just sits there all day long as part of my network doing its >> thing, the same as it did as a 95. Is ten years a rather good life >> span? PAT] > Define a desktop PC. Which bits count? My machines evolve rather than > get replaced. > I am typing this on a machine that I put together at the end of 1999 > The case, memory and display were new, the motherboard was second-hand > (so probably started life in 1997/8). The processors were upgraded (to > a set of second-hand 1Ghz units) at the end of 2001. The disks have > been regularly upgraded and added to . The latest upgrade (this month) > is a USB2 card (see off-line backup below) for speed. > When transferring "stuff" from one machine to another I have always used > as "crossover LAN cable" to connect one to the other -- its a long time > since I saw a machine without an ethernet port! > Easiest way to do the transfer is probably to "restore" your off-line > backup to the new machine - you do _have_ a backup of all the stuff > you might want to transfer (i.e. not loose) don't you? > Best bet today is probably to get a USB hard drive enclosure (US$35?), > pull the old drive and drop it into the box. Two benefits. > You can transfer the stuff easily. > You now have an off-line backup that you can keep up to date. > Peter R Cook > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have two older IBM Think Pad 770 > machines. One with a working CD Drive, the other without. I wanted to > put them both on Win 98. What I did was get the one machine up and > running with Win 98, then I swapped hard drives (put the one with no > associated CD drive into the machine that did have a CD drive.) Then > I used the Win 98 update CD to load Win 98 on the other hard drive. > Once Win 98 was working on that hard drive as well, then I swapped > the hard drive back to the other machine. Now I have Win 98 on both > machines. PAT] IME the upgrade decision is forced when a Windows98 machine catches a virus or spyware that can't be removed, or could be only if the owner had the W/98 distro CD. The hardware is fine. The system needs a fresh install and patches and it will be amazing who much better the machine will work. This can happen to perfectly usable mid-range hardware. Depending on the type of advice the user is getting, it could mean just buying a w/98 CD, somewhere and doing a fresh installation (a new big disk and a memory chip as upgrade should cost less than $100) or opening up the wallet to Dell and buying much more machine than the user really needs. I've seen donated P-III 700 machines. Users lose the CDs and registration information. For recent (XP) machines I predict the same thing will happen but XP is much more robust so it will take disk crash or killer virus to force a new purchase. a d y k e s @ p a n i x . c o m Don't blame me. I voted for Gore. ------------------------------ From: Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> Subject: Re: Los Angeles Times: Low-Tech Methods Used in Data Theft Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 17:20:36 -0600 Organization: Wizard Information It was a dark and stormy night when hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: > If it were up to me: > 1) Their own credit report would be free to consumers. In the US, this part is already true, sort of, partially. If you are turned down for credit, the place that turned you down must tell you the company that issued the report, and the credit bureau must give you a free copy. You are entitled to a free report annually from each of the "big 3" agencies (TransUnion, Experian, Equifax) by going to http://www.annualcreditreport.com/. You can get them all at the same time, but you don't have to (usually it would be a better idea to space them out throughout the year). This isn't entirely in place yet, it's being rolled out geographically, it works for people in the West and Midwest now, the South will be added in June, the East in September. The reports do indicate when companies got reports on you. It's a lot more frequent than most people would think. But it's (maybe a long time) after the fact that you find out. It's still very easy for unscrupulous individuals to get access to these reports. And this law doesn't cover sleaze like ChoicePoint. Of course, that's just a start. They still claim they aren't responsible for damages to you that might be caused by their sale of incorrect or untrue information. Judging by ChoicePoint's case, there doesn't seem to be any penalty (except bad publicity, if it becomes public) for negligent handling of your data. And going by reports, it is still very difficult for the consumer to get corrections made. ------------------------------ From: Clark W. Griswold, Jr. <spamtrap100@comcast.net> Subject: Re: Los Angeles Times: Low-Tech Methods Used in Data Theft Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 17:45:28 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: > 1) Their own credit report would be free to consumers. It is. www.annualcreditreport.com From all three major agencies. > 2) When any time seriously adverse information is posted > to a person's file, the credit company would be required > to notify the person and allow time for a response. The > consumer should be able to challenge such adverse information > and the burden of proof to be on the reporter, without any risk > or penalty or cost to the individual person. Consumers have been able to challenge adverse entries in their reports for years. Reporting companies are required to investigate and remove said item if it can't be substantiated. Furthermore, the consumer is required to be told when a credit report was used to as a basis of an adverse decision and is entitled to request a copy of that report, even if they have their free annual report allowance used already. > 3) Any time a business requests credit info the consumer is to be > notified. Its already recorded and shows up the free annual report. ------------------------------ From: Dean <cjmebox-telecomdigest@yahoo.com> Subject: Re: Former WorldCom CEO Guilty on All Counts Date: 16 Mar 2005 14:32:32 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: > Lisa Minter wrote: >> A federal jury in Manhattan returned guilty verdicts on all nine >> counts, including securities fraud, conspiracy and lying to >> regulators; a decision that could send Ebbers, 63, to prison for the >> rest of his life. Sentencing was set for June 13. > Does anybody out there think he -- or others convicted in stock fraud > -- got a raw deal? You're kidding right? This _is_ a rhetorical question isn't it? -Dean [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think, technically, his prison sentence could be for 85 years, if the court decided to give him (what shall I say?) full value for his dollar. Obviously he would not live long enough to fulfill his obligation. I think in actual practice the court will probably give him 5-10 years, and considering his health -- not that great -- that may be all he 'needs'. I know that in this column yesterday, or day before, I said something about him getting the essence of a life sentence, but as I think about it now, I think almost all prison sentences are far, far too long. I think an 'ideal' -- if that is a good term -- prison sentence would be one or two years, max. After all, if a person does not know what prison is about the day he enters one, I doubt he will know any more about it ten or fifteen years later. And if people are _serious_ about rehabilitation efforts, then the prisoner has to be discharged while there is still some time to engage him in rehabilitation. The speed with which our society and technical world is changing, a person getting out of prison after ten or twenty years is never going to be able to catch up. And if a person commits a crime which is *that* atrocious as to deserve a fifty or seventy year prison sentence, my suggestion would be to offer the person the option of a death penalty instead; his choice. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Re: The Lost Lessons of the 1920s and 1930s Reply-To: jhaynes@alumni.uark.edu Organization: University of Arkansas Alumni From: haynes@alumni.uark.edu (Jim Haynes) Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 00:11:47 GMT Yes, and people like to ignore the fact that the regulated industries we had got regulated because of the misdeeds of the operators before they were regulated. jhhaynes at earthlink dot net ------------------------------ Date: 17 Mar 2005 04:11:54 -0000 From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> Subject: Re: Iridium II: Is Satellite Radio Doomed? Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > When the original Iridium was being drawn up on the planning boards, > the accountants went over the numbers very meticulously. ... > But the telecom industry changed between the drawing board and launch > pad. Inconvenient bulky mobile-telephone receivers were replaced by > dinky little cellphones. Cellphone companies built out their coverage > area to include almost all potential customers in the 1st world. And > cellphone and long distance rates plummeted due to competition. Part of their mistake was to underestimate how fast cellular would develop, which suprised just about everyone, but an equally big part was to disregard what pricing was due to technology and what to politics. Actually, long distance rates plummeted more due to regulatory changes and fiber optics than to competition. For the past century long distance had been deliberately overpriced to subsidize local service and (in places with PTTs) other bits of government bureaucracy. The mistake there was not to realize that with a stroke of a pen those subsidies could be and were removed, which is the main reason that a call from the US to the UK or Hong Kong now costs 2 cpm rather than a dollar. > Things change. A lot of satellite radio's target households have > broadband and can get "internet radio" now. True, but unlike Iridium vs. cellular, satellite vs. internet radio is not an apples to apples comparison. With telephony, the question is how you get a 3 KHz low-latency full duplex channel (not exactly, but close enough) from one point to another. Satellite really broadcasts, but internet radio fakes it with a separate connection to each recipient. (There is real Internet multicasting but it's a pain to set up and is only used in the geek community to broadcast IETF meetings and the like.) With broad, the question is how you get the same one-way signal to lots of recipients. This means that it's a question of scale. With the current low numbers of listeners, Internet has the edge as you note due to its parasitic carriage. > The car was supposed to be the last refuge of satellite radio that > internet radio couldn't touch. But 3G, WiFi, and WiMax are showing > that it can be done. Two-way radio spectrum is far from free. 3G definitely works, WiFi is OK for short distances, WiMax is grossly oversold for other than fixed point to point service. They're swell for telephone and individual data service but they're way too expensive for broadcast. Back around the turn of the century, there was what you might call telephone radio, with concerts and the like sent over phone wires to large numbers of listeners. (It was really popular in Hungary for some reason.) As radio developed, radio blew it away because there was no incremental cost per listener, and the phone wires could be used more profitably for telephony. If you use any Internet technology for radio, you're in the same situation, using point-to-point bandwidth for simulated broadcast. If the total number of listeners to your station is small, in the thousands, point-to-point looks good because of the low cost of entry. But if satellite radio does what its backers hope, and has millions of listeners per station, which is not implausible considering how many listen to Howard Stern on normal broadcast, satellite wins big. I think the real outcome will depend on questions like whether the satellite radio stations are able to bribe car makers to install receivers as standard equipment in cars so users need only call up and subscribe, no installation or visible startup cost involved. It'd be like cell phones are now, using the equipment as a loss leader made up from subscription revenue. It looks to me like the incremental cost of a Sirius or XM receiver and antenna would be about $100 which is well within the range that cell plans subsidize. R's, John ------------------------------ From: R Collinge <rcollinge@yahoo.com> Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 22:12:27 -0600 Subject: Re: Rep. Fred Upton apparently sold out to incumbent telcos Hi Jack, Are you reading Rep Upton's comments correctly? I had interpreted his quote as something like, "It is scary that we were so close to disaster, which could easily have happened if not for a few brave commissioners and judges." I read his thought as being that we need federal regulation to keep the hungry states permanently at bay. Also, I certainly agree with your point about international competition holding the power of regulators in check. FWIW, I commented to the FCC on the Vonage petition back in November '03, and think I mentioned it then, too. Bob ----- Original Message ----- From: Jack Decker To: MI-Telecom Mailing List ; VoIP News Mailing List Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2005 8:09 PM Subject: [VoIP News] Rep. Fred Upton apparently sold out to incumbent telcos [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Jack Decker *did say* in a later message the same day (both original message and retraction were printed here in the last issue) that there was a misunderstanding in the way he interpreted the message. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Fred Atkinson <fatkinson@mishmash.com> Subject: Re: Attacked by a Dog Which was Playing Reply-To: fatkinson@mishmash.com Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 20:32:05 GMT Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net Pat, When I was a teenager, my family had an enormous German Shepherd. Her name was Heidi, she was approximately 125 pounds, all lean, strong as a bull, and very protective of the family. She grew to be so big that we couldn't get a harness big enough to fit her from the local pet store. As my father was a director for the department of corrections, we were able to ask the D.O.C. guard dog people who their supplier was so we could special order a harness that would fit her. Heidi was huge. Her father was a national tracking champion. We had a couple of minor incidents with her, but we were patient and taught her better. When she was still a pup, I was scratching her behind her ears while she was eating her dinner. She turned and bit at my arm (fortunately I drew back fast enough that she didn't bite me). I swatted her pretty good for that and took her dinner away. After that, I could take the bowl away from her and she'd just beg nicely to get it back. Any of our family members could take the bowl away from her (or take the food t of her mouth, for that matter) and she'd not become aggressive with any of us. When she was full grown, I came in late one night. She apparently didn't realize it was me and came running at me at the speed of a rocket. She reared on her hind legs and suddenly realized it was me. She tried to stop, but 125 pounds of all lean dog coming at that speed with her front paws five feet in the air wasn't going to be able to stop in a few short feet. Her nose hit me on the nose of my wire rim glasses. The cut across my nose was in a perfect line parallel to the nose bridge of my frames (she didn't bite me, the glasses cut into my nose). I had to go to the hospital and have three stitches put in. When I got home, she followed me everywhere trying to make up with me. I let her think she was still in the 'dog house' with me for quite a while after that. Hopefully, it would make her more careful in the future. When she bounced off me, she turned and took off because she knew she was in trouble. She thought she'd lose me under the kitchen table, but she thought wrong. I was hopping mad at her. I caught her and gently swatted her nose to let her know she had really fouled up. Years later, my sister brought my two then tiny little nieces over to my parents' house when I was visiting there. Melissa (my oldest niece) had a strange idea about 'patting' dogs. It was more like hitting them. I saw Melissa 'pat' Heidi out of the corner of my eye and saw Heidi coming up to her feet. I rushed towards the corner intending to push Melissa out of the way and let Heidi bite me instead. But I knew I wasn't going to be able to get there quick enough. But the dog never growled, snapped, or even showed her teeth. She just got up, walked away, and as she walked away she let out a gentle 'woof' of protest. She knew Melissa was family and it was not kosher for her to harm Melissa in any way. In fact, the behavior she always exhibited around those two nieces of mine was always one of protectiveness. We subsequently gave Melissa 'patting' lessons. Show the dog some patience and treat her with some love. A big dog like that is going to be clumsy. But they are good protection. When Heidi was still a pup, we were all asleep one night. She was in the front room barking. My parents thought she was just exhibiting normal behavior of a young pup and didn't even get out of bed to check. The next day, our across the street neighbor reported that burglars had come through the neighborhood the night before. The only houses that weren't hit were ours, that neighbors, and the neighbors on either side of our house. Heidi was on the job, that was clear. The noise she made caused the burglars to bypass us altogether. She had become a very loving animal when it came to our family. She was by far one of the best pets we ever had in spite of her size and potential. Good luck with the dog. Fred [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thanks for your good words. Very oddly (at least to me) Buffy very seldom barks. Now it is quite rare that we have any burglars or other malfeasants in this area, however, Buffy was always letting me know when the the garbage collection truck came through the alley every Monday and Thursday morning. But now today, she only jumped around a little -- because I was sitting on my back porch when they came through. But she has never barked even once at the Meals on Wheels guy when he brings in my dinner, or at the housekeeper nor my friends. She seems to understand that is okay, but she sure was giving hell to the garbage collectors and the postman each day. PAT] ------------------------------ From: SELLCOM Tech support <support@sellcom.com> Subject: Re: Attacked by a Dog Which was Playing Organization: www.sellcom.com Reply-To: support@sellcom.com Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 05:56:22 GMT ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick Townson) posted on that vast internet thingie: > Buffy was all excited and in trying to get out the door with me in > it she knocked me down. I fell, banged up my own face pretty well, > and chipped a tooth which was about gone anyway. Remember, she _is_ > a very big dog, weighing close to a hundred pounds Well, I have read and found that it is a good idea to train a dog to "stay" until you have gone out (or in) and then tell them to come. You are the leader of the pack. A puppy is a puppy and your puppy did not intend to harm you and apparently was trying to please/obey you. I am sorry to hear of your hurt and wish you a speedy recovery. It sounds like you have a loyal canine friend for many years. You may wish to solicit a favor or two from any local dog trainer (those people AMAZE me though I have had dogs for many years). Regards, Steve http://www.sellcom.com Discount multihandset cordless phones by Panasonic 5.8Ghz 2line; TMC ET4300 4line Epic phone, OnHoldPlus, Brickmail voicemail Brick wall "non MOV" surge protection. Firewood splitters www.splitlogs.com If you sit at a desk www.ergochair.biz. New www.electrictrains.biz [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: And thanks for your encouraging words also. I am going to speak to Dr. Epp (veternarian) or the lady who grooms pets (Buffy was taken to get a bath a couple days after she first got here) and see if either of them can recommend a good dog trainer. Maybe the animal shelter will know of someone. PAT] ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. ************************ DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO YOUR CREDIT CARD! REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST AND EASY411.COM SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest ! ************************ Visit http://www.mstm.okstate.edu and take the next step in your career with a Master of Science in Telecommunications Management (MSTM) degree from Oklahoma State University (OSU). This 35 credit-hour interdisciplinary program is designed to give you the skills necessary to manage telecommunications networks, including data, video, and voice networks. The MSTM degree draws on the expertise of the OSU's College of Business Administration; the College of Arts and Sciences; and the College of Engineering, Architecture and Technology. The program has state-of-the-art lab facilities on the Stillwater and Tulsa campus offering hands-on learning to enhance the program curriculum. Classes are available in Stillwater, Tulsa, or through distance learning. Please contact Jay Boyington for additional information at 405-744-9000, mstm-osu@okstate.edu, or visit the MSTM web site at http://www.mstm.okstate.edu ************************ --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V24 #119 ****************************** | |