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
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 Wed, 18 May 2005 22:30:00 EDT Volume 24 : Issue 221
Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson
FCC's 911 Move a Trojan Horse? (Jack Decker)
Earthquake Forecasting (Lisa Minter)
Time Warner Cable Settles NY Promotion Dispute (Lisa Minter)
Sprint Has a Surprise For "Wireless Web Access" (billemery)
Re: Vonage Improvement: No More Dial 1+ (Dean M.)
Re: Vonage Improvement: No More Dial 1+ (Tony P.)
Re: Foreign Exchange (FX) Lines Still in Use? (Isaiah Beard)
Re: Foreign Exchange (FX) Lines Still in Use? (Tony P.)
Re: AT&T Licensed the Transistor For Free (AES)
Re: AT&T Licensed the Transistor For Free (Tony P.)
Re: AT&T - Cingular - Alltel; They Broke MY Contract! (Steve Sobol)
Re: FAQ: How Real ID Will Affect You (Tony P.)
Re: Very Early Modems (Tony P)
Re: Vonage Changes 911 to Opt-Out (AES)
Re: Vonage Changes 911 to Opt-Out (Robert Bonomi)
Re: Traveling to Brazil; Need Cell Phone(Joseph)
Re: AT&T - Cingular Wireless - Alltel; They Broke My Contract (Joseph)
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: Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@workbench.net>
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 21:11:52 -0400
Subject: FCC's 911 Move a Trojan Horse? Critics Charge They're Engineering
http://www.broadbandreports.com/shownews/63675
FCC's 911 Move a Trojan Horse?
Critics Charge They're Engineering Death of Indie VoIP
Written by Karl Bode
Tomorrow the FCC will release an order that forces all independent
VoIP providers to offer 911 service within 120 days. On the surface
the move seems like a simple way of ensuring public safety, but
critics believe it's really an incumbent engineered attempt to crush
upstart VoIP competitors.
There's been a scattered number of deaths blamed on VoIP -- whether or
not the VoIP provider was actually culpable
http://www.broadbandreports.com/shownews/63372 hasn't mattered to
some news outlets. Vonage has also been sued for "failing to inform
users they need to activate their 911 service" before it will work;
apparently this welcome screen
http://www.broadbandreports.com/r0/download/800075~433b0c31ec1520970b77229393b7d713/vonage.png every customer sees was simply too mystical.
Such concerns, valid or not, have resulted in a growing cry for action
on the federal level. So the FCC issues a ruling that requires upstart
VoIP providers to provide 911 service.
An honest move to ensure public safety, right?
Not according to the TechKnow Times http://www.techknowtimes.com/ :
"They (indie VoIP providers) were in the market space first, they
have far better offerings, and much better pricing as well. So how
to kill them? Simple. Force them to have to buy a service where
the traditional telephone companies can set the price. And what is
one thing that the traditional phone companies still pretty much
have a monopoly on? The provision of 911 service."
Jeff Pulver, co-founder of Vonage and the man behind Free-World
dial-up, hasn't been optimistic either. An entry
http://pulverblog.pulver.com/archives/002189.html to his blog
questioning the FCC move was apparently met with harsh criticism. From
a follow up post http://pulverblog.pulver.com/archives/002209.html :
"I have had much internal debate over how to approach what we
believe the FCC is doing to the industry this week, and, frankly,
I felt compelled to speak up, aware of the potential political
consequences. I have deep concerns that the FCC is going to
drastically overreach (like swatting a fly with a nuclear bomb)
and bring down the VoIP industry."
Pulver worries that "2005 may go down in history as the time we saw
both the rise and fall of the unaffiliated VoIP service provider."
Evident by discussion in our VoIP forum
http://www.broadbandreports.com/forum/remark,13433727 , others are
also worried that the move is an opening salvo in the slaughter of
indie providers by a well lobbied FCC.
Article + reader comments at:
http://www.broadbandreports.com/shownews/63675
How to Distribute VoIP Throughout a Home:
http://michigantelephone.mi.org/distribute.html
If you live in Michigan, subscribe to the MI-Telecom group:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MI-Telecom/
------------------------------
From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: Earthquake Forecasting
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 18:20:43 -0500
LONDON (Reuters) - For Californians, getting the latest earthquake
forecast will now be as easy as checking the weather.
They simply have to look on the Internet.
Scientists have developed a computer model, available on
http://pasadena.wr.usgs.gov/step/, that gives the probability of
damaging tremors occurring in California in the next 24 hours.
"It is a daily forecast map of earthquakes, updated hourly," said
Matthew Gerstenberger, a seismologist at the US Geological Survey in
Pasadena, California.
The map doesn't predict big earthquakes but calculates whether the
region will experience tremors severe enough to break windows or crack
plaster.
"The probabilities are generally low," said Gerstenberger, who
discussed his work in the science journal Nature.
Gerstenberger and his colleagues believe their forecasting model will
be useful for city managers, people who make decisions about emergency
planning, operators of large facilities, as well as members of the
public.
The model uses knowledge of the behavior of fault lines in California
and factors in effects from recent earthquakes in the area.
"It is dominated by aftershock information, earthquake clustering
information," he said.
"It is not an earthquake prediction tool. We are not saying yes, there
will be an earthquake or no, there won't be an earthquake. It deals
with lower probability events."
The map gives details about California but the researchers said it
could be used for forecasting in other earthquake-prone areas of the
world.
"There is no reason it needs to be limited to California. It is
purely a statistical model driven by earthquake data -- where, when
and how big they are," said Gerstenberger.
Copyright 2005 Reuters Limited.
NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the
daily media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra/more-news.html . Hundreds of new
articles daily.
------------------------------
Date: 18 May 2005 16:33:19 -0700
From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: Time Warner Cable Settles NY Promotion Dispute
Time Warner Cable Settles NY Promotion Dispute
http://story.news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20050518/wr_nm/media_timewarnercable_dc
------------------------------
From: billemery <emery_bill@hotmail.com>
Subject: Sprint Has a Surprise For "Wireless Web Access"
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 15:06:05 -0500
Used my trusty Nokia as a modem the other day to see if it worked and
called my ISP's dialup access number for folks on the road or whatever
and found that Sprint had charged me .40 a minute for "wireless web
access". What a rip !!! Gonna change to t-mobile or someone (anyone)
else. Don't like surprises.
------------------------------
From: Dean M. <cjmebox-telecomdigest@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Vonage Improvement: No More Dial 1+
Organization: SBC http://yahoo.sbc.com
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 20:28:23 GMT
I've heard it called "hash". Is that the UK term? Don't tell me
they/you say "octothorpe"!
Dean
Jim Hatfield <jim.hatfield@insignia.com> wrote in message
news:telecom24.220.12@telecom-digest.org:
> On Tue, 17 May 2005 23:10:31 -0400, TELECOM Digest Editor noted in
> response to Scott Kramer <witheld@giganews.com>:
>> eight digits pressed, so why not just press ten? Thet # pound or
>> 'carriage return' as it is officially known is better used where it
> I thought it was officially known as an octothorpe? It certainly
> isn't called a pound in the UK!
> Jim Hatfield
[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It may be about time to reprint an old
item from our archives (!All You Wanted to Know About the #') or look
for it at http://telecom-digest.org in the history section. PAT]
------------------------------
From: Tony P. <kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net>
Subject: Re: Vonage Improvement: No More Dial 1+
Organization: ATCC
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 17:40:15 -0400
In article <telecom24.218.3@telecom-digest.org>, john@katy.com says:
> Recently ordered a new Vonage line. The new line does not require a "1"
> prefix.
> I was spending $50 per new line for a device that inserted the 1. This
> is Great news!
> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Since there is no price differential
> on Vonage in most cases (I still have a 500 minute limited account
> but most users do not) the '1' is pointless and a waste of time.
> _Everything_ is ten digits; even locally, and the price is the same
> no matter what. However, some people do not know that Vonage can also
> be _seven digits_ with area code (where the box was installed, or
> 'home area') assumed. Like telco, if nothing is dialed after seven
> digits, then it sits there for a few seconds to time out, and deals
> with what it got. PAT]
The problem is that they're transmitting caller ID with a 1, so when you
go to re-dial a number from CLID guess what happens.
They are having problems, not doubt about it. Today I come home, pick
up the phone and get stutter tone. Ok, check voice mail. No
connection. Hmm, try dialing my number from my cell and I get "Your
call cannot be completed as dialed..."
What the hell! It appears to be working now but during this time I
could not even access my web account. It looks like a Vonage server
took a hit.
------------------------------
From: Isaiah Beard <sacredpoet@sacredpoet.com>
Subject: Re: Foreign Exchange (FX) Lines Still in Use?
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 16:55:01 -0400
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com
hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> In another thread Pat mentioned FX lines. As mentioned, these were
> used to save on long distance changes -- customers would make a local
> call to a distant business and the business could call its customers
> for the cost of a local call. This service was not cheap.
> At a resort I visited that had FX lines to a city 75 miles away, the
> switchboard had special heavy cord pairs. Extensions authorized for
> FX had a second jack underneath in which the heavy cord was inserted.
> I heard FX lines used higher voltage thus the heavy cords. I don't
> know what kind of special wiring, if any, was in the telephone sets.
> I would guess WATS and long distance packages has made most FX lines
> obsolete. There was toll free before 800 numbers but it was manual
> and a local number added a comfort factor.
There is something else too that is going the way of the dodo: tie
lines. These were useful for large universities with multiple campuses,
as well as businesses with more than one hub operation in distant cities.
A tie line is usually part of a PBX system and works like this: instead
of getting an outside line, you dial a special code that connects you to
the PBX at the distant office. There could be multiple codes, each one
connecting you to a different distant location, depending on how big
your organization is. You can then call any extension in that distant
PBX, OR get an outside line in that distant PBX and make a local call in
that area without incurring toll charges.
Of course, tie lines, too, are pricey, but in their day they were
economical if your organization had a lot of voice traffic going back
and forth from each office, and saved some cash making LD calls in
certain areas, too.
Nowadays, cheaper LD and Voice over IP is making tie lines quite
obsolete. I currently work in a large organization that has three
major complexes spread out across the state, that are connected to tie
lines. All three sites have CENTREX systems, and the tie lines are
accessed through it. Recently, one of the three sites migrated to a
completely VoIP system, which effectively "broke" the tie line (the
other two sites can no longer use the tie line to call site 3,
incurring toll charges while site 3 is saving TONS of money ... all of
its calles are net-routed now). Ultimately, the only option appears
to be that the other two sites have to upgrade as well, but
technological inertia here for things as mundane as phones moves
glacially slow.
E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.
------------------------------
From: Tony P. <kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net>
Subject: Re: Foreign Exchange (FX) Lines Still in Use?
Organization: ATCC
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 18:13:29 -0400
In article <telecom24.220.8@telecom-digest.org>, bonomi@host122.r-
bonomi.com says:
> In article <telecom24.218.5@telecom-digest.org>,
> <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
>> In another thread Pat mentioned FX lines. As mentioned, these were
>> used to save on long distance changes -- customers would make a local
>> call to a distant business and the business could call its customers
>> for the cost of a local call. This service was not cheap.
>> At a resort I visited that had FX lines to a city 75 miles away, the
>> switchboard had special heavy cord pairs. Extensions authorized for
>> FX had a second jack underneath in which the heavy cord was inserted.
>> I heard FX lines used higher voltage thus the heavy cords. I don't
>> know what kind of special wiring, if any, was in the telephone sets.
>> I would guess WATS and long distance packages has made most FX lines
>> obsolete.
> The proverbial "yes and no".
> I seriously looked at FX for my residence a couple of times within the
> last 10 years or so.
nWhen I was living in the Marieville section of North Providence, RI I
got tagged with a Pawtucket (722 to 729) rate center phone number
while just a block away, there were Providence (353 and 354) rate
center numbers.
The install of the FX was about $85 and the monthly service < $40 but
it was worth it as I had many friends in the Warwick/EG area and my
tolls were getting insane.
When I moved two block over I had a Providence rate center number
again. So as a "screw you" to then New England Telephone, I had call
forwarding set up on the line.
You see, folks in the Pawtucket rate center could call my Providence
rate center number.
I could call the Warwick and EG rate centers without toll. You see
where I'm going here.
Friend of mine had a major BBS set up in East Greenwich but northern
RI users paid tolls to access. What we found out about call forwarding
was that the call forwarded and then released the line for other
calls. In addition, it would forward even while I was using it.
He split the cost of the line with me for that little service.
[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: A memory on this topic ... in the
Chicago area, Harlem Avenue and Irving Park Road is the dividing line
between part of Chicago proper and various western suburbs. When area
312 was split many years ago with part of it going into a new code
708, there were many customers along Harlem Avenue (on the west side
of the street; the suburban side) who had inadvertently earlier gotten
assigned a 'Chicago' prefix instead of a 'suburban' prefix. (All the
prefixes around that area work out of the Chicago-Newcastle central
office regardless of geographic location; once '708' as an area code
got started, telco just did programming in the central office.) But
the end result was the a few people on the Chicago (eastern) side of
Harlem wound up with a 708 number and some on the suburban (western)
side of Harlem wound up with a 312 number. It has been several years
now, of course, but I seem to remember a restaurant on the Chicago
side with its natural 312 business number, but the parking lot in
front of it had one payphone with a 708 number. At that time (of the
708 split from 312) a lot of business people around Harlem/Irving were
very unhappy about split; even more so when it was discovered a bit
later that 'here and there' their neighbor across the street had an
incorrectly assigned phone number from long before in the past. PAT]
------------------------------
From: AES <siegman@stanford.edu>
Subject: Re: AT&T Licensed the Transistor For Free
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 14:20:48 -0700
Organization: Stanford University
In article <telecom24.220.9@telecom-digest.org>,
The Kaminsky Family <kaminsky@kaminsky.org> wrote:
> hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>> I presume other Bell Labs patents were also available free;
>> indeed, I never knew of AT&T making money from licensing
>> its many inventions. It appears patents were more for
>> freedom of use than profit. IBM adopted a similar policy
>> in the 1950s. Both did so from anti-trust settlements.
> Don't I wish that were true! A company I once worked for got
> sued by AT&T for patent infringement, and spent a considerable
> effort in proving that we were not infringing. They came back
> with something to the effect that, "You don't get it. Here are
> fifty more patents you are infringing on. We have thousands more
> once you prove that you're not infringing on these. Just give up
> and pay us!"
> I don't know the whole story -- I was not working there at the
> time -- but as I understand it, the settlement was a yearly fee
> in a rather significant amount (for a small company).
> Mark
Folks at misc.int-property may find this post interesting.
U.S. Constitution, Article. I. Section. 8. (1): " . . . promote the
Progress of Science and useful Arts" -- how all those legal complexities
in the patent system and all those all-too-easily obtained trivial
patents are _really_ employed in practice?
------------------------------
From: Tony P. <kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net>
Subject: Re: AT&T Licensed the Transistor For Free
Organization: ATCC
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 18:01:04 -0400
In article <telecom24.218.2@telecom-digest.org>, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
says:
> From time to time critics of the old Bell System gripe that the
> company was "guaranted profits" by the regulators and as such, owed
> something back to the community.
> Aside from the fact that regulation actually limited profits, AT&T was
> indeed required to give things back. One of which was the rights to
> its invention of the transistor, which were available free of charge.
> (Per Ziff-Davis history).
> I had always wondered why AT&T never seemed to make any money from the
> invention of the transistor.
> I presume other Bell Labs patents were also available free; indeed, I
> never knew of AT&T making money from licensing its many inventions.
> It appears patents were more for freedom of use than profit. IBM
> adopted a similar policy in the 1950s. Both did so from anti-trust
> settlements.
Hmmm ... among other things they pretty much gave away:
LASER/MASER
Fiber Optics
And a host of other inventions, many of which I'm using at the moment
as I reply to this.
------------------------------
From: Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net>
Subject: Re: AT&T - Cingular - Alltel; They Broke MY Contract!
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 14:37:57 -0700
Organization: Glorb Internet Services, http://www.glorb.com
I said,
>>> Yes, the cell phone contracts generally allow companies to assign
>>> contracts to third parties. Read your original contract.
The OP replied,
>> I expected this type of answer. And I'm sure _you_ read through your
>> entire contract letter-by-letter, yes?
Well, in fact I did :) Sprint PCS actually prints the Terms of
Service/Privacy Policy/some other relevant stuff in their user
guides. (Unlike other carriers, Sprint phone manuals are printed up
either by Sprint or specially for Sprint.)
Robert Bonomi said,
> If you do not do it, you have only yourself to blame when something in
> it bites you 'unexpectedly'.
to which the other Steve said,
>> I know AT&T had the right to transfer the contract when purchased by
>> Cingular. What I don't like is the regulatory issue that then forced
>> Cingular to divest to some "third party" (in this case, Alltel). What
>> I am expecting is for them to at least continue the options I've had
>> with AT&T.
a) Someone *complaining* about the DoJ forcing competition? We know
the FCC won't do it, it's a good thing that at least Justice tries not
to allow the companies to grow so big that their growth stifles
competition. Give me a break.
b) Exactly what options do you not have with Alltel that you had with
AT&T?
JustThe.net - Apple Valley, CA - http://JustThe.net/ - 888.480.4NET (4638)
Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / sjsobol@JustThe.net / PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
"The wisdom of a fool won't set you free"
--New Order, "Bizarre Love Triangle"
------------------------------
From: Tony P. <kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net>
Subject: Re: FAQ: How Real ID Will Affect You
Organization: ATCC
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 17:53:11 -0400
In article <telecom24.218.8@telecom-digest.org>, jmeissen@aracnet.com
says:
> In article <telecom24.216.7@telecom-digest.org>,
> <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
>> DevilsPGD wrote:
>>> Sure -- I can't speak for anyone else, but I'm willing to deal with the
>>> resulting fallout if I get in a fight in a bar or with my landlord or
>>> whatever.
>> I don't know your personal circumstances, but I can't help but wonder
>> if you don't realize the long term import of the situation.
> I highly recommend reading the opinions of Bruce Schneier, of
> Counterpane Internet Security:
> http://www.schneier.com/crypto-gram-0505.html
> He has some interesting comments in his most recent newsletter, and in
> earlier essays and his blog.
> john-
Yep, papiren please.
I am opposed to this. Put it this way -- there is already a nationwide
network in place to verify drivers licenses. Any police car with an
MDT in it is more than likely connected to it. That is all that is
necessary.
This is nothing but a money grab.
------------------------------
From: Tony P. <kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net>
Subject: Re: Very Early Modems
Organization: ATCC
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 17:58:53 -0400
In article <telecom24.218.6@telecom-digest.org>, bradDOThouser@intel.com
says:
> On 16 May 2005 13:14:42 -0700, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>> 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 needed.
>> It was also said IBM limited development in this area to avoid
>> annoying AT&T who was IBM's best customer.
>> However, in the 1950s, IBM developed card-to-card directly without
>> paper tape and "over AT&T lines". Modems were developed to take good
>> advtg of the available bandwidth (about 1200 baud). Undoubtedly the
>> equipment and implementation was developed in close cooperation with
>> AT&T.
>> I was wondering if the modems in that application were supplied by IBM
>> (who appears to have developed the technology) or by AT&T. My
>> understanding that AT&T's "Dataset" modem-telephones didn't come out
>> until the 1960s.
>> Comments by anyone familiar with pre-1960 data communications would be
>> greatly appreciated.
> Here is a picture of a 1958 AT&T modem (not sure if this is the first
> commercial modem, the Bell 103. If so it was 300 baud):
> http://www.att.com/history/milestone_1958.html
So the carrier was on tape. How interesting.
I guess at that point it was hard to stabilize a tube based
oscillator.
------------------------------
From: AES <siegman@stanford.edu>
Subject: Re: Vonage Changes 911 to Opt-Out
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 14:34:47 -0700
Organization: Stanford University
In article <telecom24.220.11@telecom-digest.org>, Dean
M. <cjmebox-telecomdigest@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Maybe for now we should only mandate that anyone who dials 911 from
> a VoIP phone [which does not provide 911 service] should be given
> an announement to the effect "use your cell phone to make this call!".
Not a bad idea ...
------------------------------
From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi)
Subject: Re: Vonage Changes 911 to Opt-Out
Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 00:33:15 -0000
Organization: Widgets, Inc.
In article <telecom24.220.11@telecom-digest.org>, Dean M.
<cjmebox-telecomdigest@yahoo.com> wrote:
> You are essentially relegating every IP communications device to a 911
> caller first and then any other type of communications (and only after
> the customer jumps through a number of hoops remembering to drop
> cookie crums so she can find her way back should she need to change
> something).
How do you figure that? In my proposal, *ONLY* the VoIP functionality is
ffected by the need to 'drop cookie crumbs".
> I agree with you that this solution would probably be a
> quicker one to implement, but I don't think it would ever be
> considered satisfactory. Any 911 solution needs to be more transparent
> to the user than what you describe. Therefore, it probably has to be a
> technology solution (naturally any technology will be implementing
> policy!).
This solution is *exactly* what PBX admins have to do when they move
hard-wired phones behind their PBX. It is in real-world use today.
It works.
If you want to be your own phone service provider, there are
responsibilities that go along with that task.
Doing VoIP *does* mean that you are the 'last mile' phone service
provider -- The VoIP provider is providing the 'port' on the switch,
at their premises. It is *your* responsibility to provide the
connection to that point.
> Your points about GPS and its relatives are well taken. Sadly, even
> though I consider your suggested solution inadequate, I have nothing
> better to suggest at this time ... Frankly I think it's too soon to
> suggest anything in this field, except that users of VoIP should be
> *warned* that their service doesn't include 911. I would hazard the
> guess that most anyone who at some point in time needs to dial 911
> from a VoIP phone, also has a cell available to do that job. Maybe for
> now we should only mandate that anyone who dials 911 from a VoIP phone
> should be given an announement to the effect "use your cell phone to
> make this call!"
> Dean
> Robert Bonomi <bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com> wrote in message
> news:telecom24.218.11@telecom-digest.org:
>> In article <telecom24.215.13@telecom-digest.org>, Robert Bonomi
>> <bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com> wrote:
>> [[.. munch ..]]
>>> The "easy" solution is a two-part one.
>>> Part 1: The VoIP 'head end' tracks the 'most recently used' IP
>>> address for each customer. _EVERY_TIME_ the customer IP
>>> address changes, the phone goes *out*of*service* with a
>>> notice that the customer must update their "calling
>>> location".
>>> Possibly with an added hook that if the phone has been 'off
>>> line' for some non-trivial period, that when it goes back
>>> 'on line', the customer is queried (in an automated
>>> fashion) to confirm that they are still at "thus and such
>>> location"; where "thus and such" is the previously
>>> specified location for the phone.
>>> Part 2: The VoIP 'head end' maps the various 'calling locations'
>>> to the appropriate PSAP, upon need.
>>> Add an option for the customer to intentionally _not_ specify his
>>> location, but which also totally disables 911 calling. This protects
>>> his 'privacy' at the expense of his safety, but it is the customer's
>>> decision.
>>> The last part of the puzzle is ensuring that the customer is aware
>>> that the "location information" provided is used for "emergency calls"
>>> and that deliberately providing FALSE information can (and probably
>>> _will_) lead to criminal prosecution if emergency services are
>>> directed to an incorrect location as a result of said false
>>> information. There is already existing enforcement mechanism for this
>>> -- "filing a false police report", etc.
>> [[.. munch ..]]
------------------------------
From: Joseph <JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Travelling From USA to Brazil: Need Cell Phone
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 17:45:39 -0700
Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com
On Wed, 18 May 2005 03:11:38 -0500, Frugal Sam <frugalsam@hotmail.com>
wrote:
> Hello,
> I have a Nokia CDMA phone that I currently use with Verizon in USA.
> I will be visiting Brazil in the next couple of weeks, and then
> Thailand in September and would like to have the use of a cell phone
> while I am in those countries.
> My understanding is that I need to get hold of an 'unlocked' quad band
> cell phone and then, when I am in those countries, buy a SIM card from
> a local provider.
If you intend to keep your Verizon service a "quad band" phone will be
more than overkill. Brazil uses GSM at 900 Mhz and at 1800 Mhz. If
you intend to continue to use your Verizon service back in the US the
prudent thing would be to buy a dual band 900/1800 phone such as is
marketed in Europe and in Asia. If on the other hand you were to
change to another provider such as cingular or T-Mobile a triband or
quad band phone would be useful to you as it would be useable in both
North American (USA/Canada and some South American countries) and in
Europe and Asia as well. If you have no intention of changing US
carriers a triband or quad band phone is really an unneeded expense
and will be a a waste of your money.
A triband phone with 900/1800/1900 would likely work for you as well.
A quad band phone is not necessary unless you are going to switch
carriers in the US.
> Is this correct?
> If it is, how can I get hold of an unlocked quad band cell phone?
eBay or sometimes you can find them on craigslist. You can pay full
retail from places such as expansys.com.
For information about prepaid in Brazil go to:
http://www.prepaidgsm.net/en/brasile.html
For Thailand:
http://www.orange.co.th/english.index.jsp (just talk)
------------------------------
From: Joseph <JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: AT&T - Cingular - Alltel; They Broke MY Contract!
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 17:49:53 -0700
Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com
On Wed, 18 May 2005 13:42:13 -0000, bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com
(Robert Bonomi) wrote:
> You're not locked into long-term contracts. You *could* have bought
> service with _no_minimum_term_. Yes, all the major carriers do offer
> such contracts. If you did that, it would have been considerably more
> expensive, no "free phone", no free activation, or any other
> 'freebies'. You pay for it all, one way or another.
You may *think* that this is true of all the major carriers, but the
reality is that for mobile service cingular does not require a
contract if you bring your own equipment and do not opt into any
special promotions. The other major mobile carriers, T-Mobile, Sprint
PCS, Nextel, etc. do not "give you a break" and will require a minimum
contract.
------------------------------
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 #221
******************************
| |
