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 Tue, 17 May 2005 02:18:00 EDT Volume 24 : Issue 217 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Inflection Point (Monty Solomon) Re: Traveller Seeks Phone Advice (John Levine) Re: Traveller Seeks Phone Advice (Mark Crispin) Re: Very Early Modems (Wesrock@aol.com) Re: FAQ: How Real ID Will Affect You (Dean M.) Re: Will 911 Difficulties Derail VoIP? (AES) Re: Will 911 Difficulties Derail VoIP? (Charles B. Wilber) Re: Original Definition of 'Class 5' (Kenneth P. Stox) Re: Verizon FiOS (Neal McLain) 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 16 May 2005 23:41:43 -0400 From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com> Subject: Inflection Point This Week Changed the World of High Tech Forever, Though Most of Us Still Don't Know It By Robert X. Cringely It's an expression made popular in Silicon Valley years ago by Andy Grove of Intel: "inflection point." It's that abrupt elbow in a graph of growth or decline when the new technology or paradigm truly kicks in, and suddenly there is no going back. From that moment, the new stuff takes off and the old stuff goes into rapid decline, whether it is a new standard of modem, a new video game, a new microprocessor family, or just a new idea. I think we've just hit such an inflection point and -- though most of us still don't realize it -- the personal computer, video game, and electronic entertainment businesses will never be the same. There are three pieces to this puzzle. http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20050512.html ------------------------------ Date: 16 May 2005 22:42:36 -0000 From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> Subject: Re: Traveller Seeks Phone Advice Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > phone (that is, with GSM 900/1800/1900 or GSM 850/900/1800/1900) then > you can use your Australian cell phone in the USA and Europe. All you > need to do is buy a prepaid SIM card in from a cell phone provider in > the country that you are visiting. For the USA, the big two GSM > providers are T-Mobile and GSM. It appears that neither Cingular nor T-Mobile will sell you a prepaid SIM in the US without a phone. If you poke around on their web sites, all the prepaid plans include a phone. I realize there's no technical reason that you couldn't just pop in a new SIM like you can in Europe, but if they won't, they won't. My guess would be that there are so few unlocked GSM phones in the US and even fewer people who understand what they are that it's not worth the hassle of supporting them. A regular subscription phone is no good, since the subscriptions are all for at least a year with a large penalty if you cancel early. > So, your best bet is to go to a company-owned cell phone shops, > explain that you're a foreign tourist (have your passport handy) and > ask if they will sell you a phone. Pay with a credit card; that > serves as excellent identification. Agreed. With a credit card and a passport it shouldn't be a problem. > Assuming that you're buying a phone in the USA, I would recommend > against the GSM carriers. GSM is primarily an urban service in the > USA, and coverage can be spotty or non-existant outside of the large > cities. That used to be true, but Cingular is rapidly switching their whole network to GSM, to the extent that they're selling GSM-only phones now. If you have a GSM phone, particularly if it's both GSM 850/1900, it should work all over the place. > Another reason for going with Verizon is you buy a phone in the USA is > that a US GSM 1900 phone is of no use outside of the USA and Canada. Hey, my US GSM phone worked great in Argentina. The rates weren't great, but that's a separate issue. I looked at the phones that Cingular and T-Mobile sell, and was surprised how many of them, not just the ones sold as world phones, handle 900 or 1800 as well as 850 and 1900. But if you can unlock your Australian phone, you don't care. > I would recommend against rental. Renting is almost always much more > expensive then buying a throwaway prepay phone, and the pre-minute > rate isn't much less than roaming. Agreed. You can buy a used phone for what it costs to rent one for a week. R's, John ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 May 2005 15:52:11 (PDT) From: Mark Crispin <MRC@CAC.Washington.EDU> Subject: Re: Traveller Seeks Phone Advice Organization: Networks & Distributed Computing On Mon, 16 May 2005, John Levine wrote: > It appears that neither Cingular nor T-Mobile will sell you a prepaid > SIM in the US without a phone. Local Cingular and T-Mobile stores here told me that they'd sell just the SIM card. IIRC, it was $25 or $35. >> Assuming that you're buying a phone in the USA, I would recommend >> against the GSM carriers. GSM is primarily an urban service in the >> USA, and coverage can be spotty or non-existant outside of the large >> cities. > That used to be true, but Cingular is rapidly switching their whole > network to GSM, to the extent that they're selling GSM-only phones > now. If you have a GSM phone, particularly if it's both GSM 850/1900, > it should work all over the place. It's still the case in the west coast that that analog, TDMA, and CDMA coverage is quite a bit more thorough than GSM. The GSM network here is getting better, but it's not there yet. In Alaska, a TDMA+analog phone is much more useful than a GSM or CDMA phone. In Canada, most of the analog-only holdouts now have CDMA. GSM still has a way to go. >> Another reason for going with Verizon is you buy a phone in the USA is >> that a US GSM 1900 phone is of no use outside of the USA and Canada. > Hey, my US GSM phone worked great in Argentina. The rates weren't > great, but that's a separate issue. Is your phone GSM 1900 (single band), or is it a tri-band (900/1800/1900) or quad-band (850/900/1800/1900) phone? The cheap phones tend to be GSM 1900 only in North American, and GSM 900/1800 only elsewhere. -- Mark -- http://staff.washington.edu/mrc Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate. Si vis pacem, para bellum. ------------------------------ From: Wesrock@aol.com Date: Mon, 16 May 2005 20:30:07 EDT Subject: Re: Very Early Modems In a message dated 16 May 2005 13:14:42 -0700, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com writes: > In the IBM history series by Pugh et al, they said IBM converted > punched cards to paper tape for transmission in the 1940s. My guess > is that that particular transmission used telegraph TTY lines (not > voice) of either AT&T or Western Union. Recall that AT&T maintained > telegraph long distance lines as part of carrier long distance > circuits. Because of the low bandwidth, a telegraph channel could be > carried on the low end of a carrier channel. Accordingly, no > modulation was required and thus no modem needeed. Telegraph circuits were widely used, both Morse and teletypewriter, well into the 1950s and 1960s by news services, stock brokers, railroads, pipeline companies and no doubt many other users. The use of telegraphy pre-dated carrier systems and while many of the circuits were later converted to carrier, many of them undoubtedly remained copper. There were also the TWX services (Bell) and Telex (Western Union) which were similarly carried on telegraph circuits. Incidentally, in later years Western Union was a big user of Bell telegraph circuits, especially within a city but also many intercity routes where they were either not able to finance their own circuits to accomodate their growth or did not feel the rate of return would be adequate. Wes Leatherock wesrock@aol.com ------------------------------ From: Dean M. <cjmebox-telecomdigest@yahoo.com> Subject: Re: FAQ: How Real ID Will Affect You Organization: SBC http://yahoo.sbc.com Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 00:45:49 GMT We're playing with words here, but more like Garbage In - Garbage-Out I'd say. Too much information is available as input to decision aiding systems of still evolving (dubious?) design. These systems are then used to make potentially life changing decisions. With almost no quality control on this information and no control of the information by its subject (unless I'm missing something significant), it is a recipe for disaster. In this context, I can't see the upside for Real ID, but neither do I identify it as the main culprit (military personel have unique identifiers, and I am not aware of any proof that they suffer from proportionately more information quality problems than do the rest of us). I think we're putting the cart before the horse with this new law. It seems to me we should have first strengthened our information quality/information use/information liability and privacy laws, and then debated the merits of yet another identifier (we already have state ID, state DLs, passports, Social Security numbers, etc). Dean John R. Levine <johnl@iecc.com> wrote in message news:telecom24.216.6@telecom-digest.org: >> What I'm not willing to deal with is the same fallout because somebody >> else (with the same name) had one of the above issues happen. >> In this respect, a universal ID is a good thing, names simply aren't >> unique enough. > Gosh, I love people's naive belief in technology. You know the > acronym GIGO, which stands for Garbage In, Gospel Out? That's what > Real ID is. > Mixups will still happen, because the people maintaining the files and > databases will be the exact same sloppy error-prone people who > maintain them today. The cost of getting a fake Real-ID license will > continue to be the price of bribing the most corrupt person in some > state's DMV. The difference will be that it'll be far harder to get > mistakes fixed, because now everyone will know that licenses are > perfect, so if the computer says that you are a crook, it must be > right and you're just lying. > R's, > John ------------------------------ From: AES <siegman@stanford.edu> Subject: Re: Will 911 Difficulties Derail VoIP? Date: Mon, 16 May 2005 18:44:28 -0700 Organization: Stanford University In article <telecom24.216.13@telecom-digest.org>, Dean M. <cjmebox-telecomdigest@yahoo.com> wrote: > I see now that your proposal is: since our communications are being > decoupled from the copper wire anyway (or at the very least the low > band part of it), we should not remove (on this point, see another > posting about Verizon's FiOS offering and copper) or allow it to > decay, but use it as dedicated conduit for "utility" services like > 911, alarms etc. Anything which is first location dependent and then > customer dependent as opposed to the other way around. That's a fair enough summary. > It's quite interesting so let's disregard any marginal issues. Perhaps > someone with a better understanding of the maintenance costs for the > copper loop can hazard a guess if these offerings could possibly make > enough money so as to sustain themselves (i.e. pay for the service > including loop maintenance and extension to new housing) without tax > subsidies. It seems to me that this is the central issue if one was to > decide such a policy shift. Also a fair statement -- and the reason I tried to think of multiple services (like home security systems, services for the elderly, remote meter reading) for which people or companies will (and currently do) pay repeated monthly charges. Note that minimal basic telephone service can currently be obtained for something in the range of $10/month, give or take (although I don't know how much subsidy is in that number). Suppose the telco didn't have to provide the telephone service, handle the switching of calls, do the billing, all that stuff -- just provide and maintain a bare wire. Wouldn't take much in the way of services to support that monthly cost. > If we want to solve the location problem, why not do it in the > broadband world? Because it just seems to be intrinsically rather hard and complicated to do it on the broadband packet-based system -- whereas the hardwired approach seems (to me anyway) in many ways simpler, easier, more reliable, and more effective. ------------------------------ Date: 16 May 2005 21:53:45 EDT From: Charles.B.Wilber@Dartmouth.EDU (Charles B. Wilber) Subject: Re: Will 911 Difficulties Derail VOIP? TELECOM Digest Editor noted: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I would think if it ever got that > critical (where 'everyone' went with VOIP instead of landline) the > VOIP administrators would develop the equivilent of the 'Erlang > tables' in an effort to develop the amount of capacity needed to keep > up with it. .... This tool already exists. It is very useful for PBX administrators who are considering converting systems from TDM to VoIP. Charlie Wilber Dartmouth College ------------------------------ From: Kenneth P. Stox <ken@stox.org> Organization: Ministry of Silly Walks Subject: Re: Original Definition of 'Class 5' Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 02:27:30 GMT soren.telfer@gmail.com wrote: > Can someone point me to a technical document that 'defines' class 5 > switch functionality? Does one exist? I somewhat understand the > historical development, but I'm interested in some text, preferable > from Bell. > Thanks in advance. Briley, B., Introduction to Telephone Switching, Bell Telephone Laboratories, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, 1983. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 May 2005 22:34:42 -0500 From: Neal McLain <nmclain@annsgarden.com> Subject: Re: Verizon FiOS William Cousert <williamcousert@gmail.com> wrote: > I have a few questions about Verizon's new FiOS service. > It was recently installed in my neighborhood and I'm > thinking about switching over from Comcast. A resident of Keller, Texas (screename "ELENgin"), who currently has FiOS, posted a report about it on Broadband Reports on 08-25-04, precipitating a thread that now runs 25 pages. Many of the posts in this thread address questions similar to yours. ELENgin seems to have been quite happy to answer all sorts of questions, so perhaps s/he would be able to respond to yours. http://tinyurl.com/4y9ca As to your question 5: > 5. Will they offer cable tv services? I'd like to dump > Comcast completely. Will they have video on demand? Verizon will definitely offer video services, and they're currently negotiating with program suppliers. But they probably won't call it "cable TV" since they're doing everything they can to convince the feds that their video service won't actually be cable TV; it will just be "competitive to cable TV." Their big problem is legal: telephone companies are regulated under Title II of the Communications Act; Cable TV companies are regulated under Title VI. Under that Act, Cable TV companies must obtain a franchise from the "local franchising authority." Typically, the LFA is a municipal or county government, although in some cases, it's a separate legal entity operating under an interlocal agreement among two or more local governments. Or it might be a state government (case in point: Connecticut's now-defunct statewide franchise to SNET). Verizon does not want to go through the hassle of getting a local franchise from every LFA in its territory (and having spent a lot of time in my cable-TV career dealing with LFAs, I certainly understand with their position). So they want Congress to "adopt a national policy that preempts other levels of government." http://tinyurl.com/4ldyt How much success they'll have remains to be seen. The entrenched entities (LFAs; National League of Cities; National Association of Counties; National Association of Telecommunications Officers and Advisors) will fight it tooth-and-nail. And, as I noted in a previous post on this subject, you can rest assured that the cable industry will oppose it too unless it gets similar relief. http://tinyurl.com/dvk62 Neal McLain ------------------------------ 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 #217 ****************************** | |