TELECOM Digest     Sun, 14 Aug 2005 17:50:00 EDT    Volume 24 : Issue 367

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Podcasting Is Still Not Quite Ready For the Masses (Monty Solomon)
    Podcasting Frequently Asked Questions (Monty Solomon)
    The Paradox of Podcasting (Monty Solomon)
    Podcasting: Can This New Medium Make Money? (Monty Solomon)
    Review: Podcasting: The Do-It-yourself Guide (Monty Solomon)
    Start-Up Slashes Cost of International Wireless (Monty Solomon)
    Segregated Saudis Flirt Via Bluetooth (Monty Solomon)
    Classic Six-Button Keysets - Cost During 1970s? (Lisa Hancock)
    True Long Distance Carriers? (Lisa Hancock)
    Using Converged Services Platform [CSP] With Windows (Ali)
    Re: Appeals Court Ruling Revives Case of Intercepted E-Mail (Mike Sullivan)
    Re: Appeals Court Ruling Revives Case of Intercepted E-Mail (John Levine)
    Re: Appeals Court Ruling Revives Case of Intercepted E-Mail (Robert Bonomi)
    Re: Stock Market Ticker Tape Machines? (Jim Haynes)
    Re: Telephoning Russian Villages (B.M. Wright)
    Re: How Long Can a Telephone Extension Cord Be?  (Michael Quinn)
    Usenet (was Re: Don't Forget Peter Jennings'... Flaw) (Dennis G. Rears)
    School Gun Expulsions End (alan@bloomfieldpress.com)

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: Sun, 14 Aug 2005 14:18:39 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Podcasting Is Still Not Quite Ready For the Masses



[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: In this issue of the Digest, our
regular correspondent Monty Solomon has colllected a number of
articles from the media of interest on 'Podcasting', the relatively
new technique for audio presentations on the net. I hope you will
find this collection of articles interesting.  PAT]

By WALTER S. MOSSBERG
July 6, 2005

The process of receiving, and creating, blogs has gone mainstream and 
become quite simple. Anyone can compose and post a blog -- a 
personal, diary-like Web site filled with text and photos -- in a 
matter of minutes using free online services like Google's Blogger or 
Microsoft's MSN Spaces. Last month, I explained how to do it in my 
guide to blogging (see 
http://ptech.wsj.com/archive/solution-20050615.html ).

But text blogs are yesterday's news. The hottest new trend in 
personal online content creation is something called a podcast, 
essentially a short personal radio show or audio blog. They can be 
downloaded and played back on a computer or a portable music player 
like Apple's iPod, whence the genre draws its name.

Podcasts range from slick productions offered by big media companies 
and amateur broadcasters; to clever and entertaining offerings from 
smart, undiscovered talent; to crude diatribes and snooze-inducing 
lectures by people the mainstream media proved wise not to hire. Some 
are just talk, some include music. Some sound like they were recorded 
on a 1971-vintage RadioShack cassette recorder, others -- even from 
amateurs -- are studio-quality.

These audio blogs, once the province mainly of techies, took a big 
step toward the mainstream last week when Apple began offering 
thousands of them, free, through its market-leading iTunes music 
store and iTunes music software. Anyone can submit a podcast for 
distribution through iTunes, and any iTunes user can download it. The 
company doesn't charge a penny for listing or downloading podcasts.

So, this week, my assistant Katie Boehret and I set out to see how 
easy it is to get and create podcasts. The good news is that, with 
its iTunes move, Apple has made receiving podcasts as simple as 
downloading music. The bad news is that neither Apple nor anyone else 
has made it nearly as simple to create a podcast and get it online as 
it is to create and post a text and photo blog. Until that happens, 
podcasting won't be truly mainstream.

http://ptech.wsj.com/archive/solution-20050706.html

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2005 14:23:21 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Podcasting Frequently Asked Questions


http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=301880

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2005 14:24:35 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: The Paradox of Podcasting


By Robert MacMillan  washingtonpost.com Staff Writer

Podcasting has done what no new technology that I'm aware of has ever
accomplished: It's gone mainstream and underground at the same time.

I don't know any other word to use besides "mainstream" when I hear
from the White House that President Bush's radio addresses will be
offered via podcast. And I have no other word at my fingertips than
"underground" when I read a recent Los Angeles Times opinion piece
that suggests that podcasting is the biggest tech craze that most of
us have never heard of.

Here's what White House spokesman David Almacy told me: Selected Bush
speeches, along with the radio addresses, are available now at the
iTunes Web site. A team of about a dozen Web staffers are converting
these and selected speeches into MP3 files and making them available
too.

Not only that, the White House has created RSS feeds for the radio
addresses in English and Spanish. That means that anyone who wants to
can sign up to receive the information through their RSS readers along
with news and other Web site updates that offer this service.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/11/AR2005081100695.html

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2005 14:23:30 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Podcasting: Can This New Medium Make Money?


Conservative commentator Rush Limbaugh and his nemesis, Al Franken,
are podcasting. As are ESPN, former MTV video jockey Adam Curry and
thousands of others. Podcasting, a way to broadcast audio over the
Internet, has become the latest web movement to get everyone's
attention.

Including Apple Computer CEO Steve Jobs, who recently called it "the
next generation of radio." On June 28, Apple announced that it had
integrated podcasts into the latest version of iTunes software so that
users can manage and receive these new kinds of broadcasts. It's a
logical move. After all, the podcast moniker stuck partially because
of the popularity of the iPod, although most of these broadcasts are
produced in a format that can be played on music players using the
MPEG-1 Audio Layer-3, or MP3, audio compression format. Podcasting can
also apply to video broadcasts, but audio dominates for now.

The actual content on podcasts is a mix of amateur broadcasters --
waxing poetic about everything from global warming to venture capital
to ice hockey -- and media giants that are repurposing existing shows
like "Nightline." Podcasting is different from traditional media
broadcasting because it allows listeners to "time shift," or listen to
programs at their leisure, unlike radio, which operates on a
schedule. Podcasting is also different from traditional media in that
the means of production and distribution are readily available to
anyone. The technology required to produce podcast content is
relatively simple and, unlike the scarce radio broadcast spectrum, the
distribution channel -- the Internet -- is available to all.

The market for podcasts is growing quickly. A survey by the Pew
Internet & American Life Project found that more than six million
people out of the 22 million who own iPods or MP3 players have
listened to a podcast. Such activity begs the question: Is podcasting
here to stay? Experts at Wharton and analysts who follow the market
answer with a resounding yes. As to whether a business model emerges
for these broadcasts, observers suggest that advertising and
subscription revenues may eventually come into play. Apple, for
example, could begin serving as a guide to podcasts and sell a few
more iPods in the process. "A lot of the attention has been overdone,
but podcasting is not going away," says Wharton marketing professor
Peter Fader. "It will continue to grow and resources will be thrown at
it. Some will do podcasting well and be rewarded for it."

http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/index.cfm?fa=viewArticle&id=1239

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2005 14:40:59 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Review: Podcasting: The Do-It-yourself Guide


Todd Cochrane's Podcasting: The Do-It-yourself Guide is the first book
published on listening to and creating podcasts. It's an easy read,
covers a lot of ground, and has enough information that podcasters at
all levels of experience should be able to learn from it.

Cochrane's Geek News Central is a popular tech blog. His podcast is an
extension of his site, and with this book he shares what he's learned
from his experiences creating a regular podcast.

In addition to this review, we've arranged with the publisher to make
a sample chapter available, Producing a Podcast with the Gear You Own
Today. You can preview the book online, or download the sample chapter
as a PDF for printing.

The book is broken down into five sections:

      * Listening to the Podcast Revolution
      * Joining the Revolution: Your Own Podcast
      * Recording Your Podcast and Performing Postproduction Tasks
      * Hosting and Preparing to Publish Your Podcast
      * It's Show Time

http://www.podcastingnews.com/archives/2005/07/review_podcasti_1.html

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0764597787/

http://search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbninquiry.asp?isbn=0764597787



[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: And there you have it; everything
anyone could ever possibly wish to know about Podcasting and its
techniques. My thanks to Monty Solomon for compiling all this from 
the recent press.   PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2005 01:45:52 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Start-Up Slashes Cost of International wireless


Cambridge firm uses Skype technology to make cellphone calls
By Peter J. Howe, Globe Staff  |  August 1, 2005

CAMBRIDGE -- In just one year, computer users around the world have
downloaded 140 million copies of the Skype program that lets them make
free phone calls over the Internet to other Skype users.

Now a Kendall Square start-up is pushing Skype into a new frontier:
cellphones. Through a $10-a-year software rental that goes on sale
today, iSkoot promises to let people make international calls to other
Skype users for nothing more than the price of local air time for the
link from their cellphones to their broadband-connected home
computers.

Just as Internet phone technology has slashed the price of making
conventional landline long-distance calls and enabled unlimited
calling for as little as $20 a month, the iSkoot technology could put
pressure on still-exorbitant wireless international calling charges.

Cingular Wireless and Verizon Wireless, the two biggest US carriers,
charge $1.49 a minute for calls to Europe and India, and rates as high
as $3 for less common destinations like Madagascar. Subscribers
willing to pay a $4 monthly fee can get lower rates, such as 19 or 20
cents a minute to most of Europe and 30 or 35 cents to India. But
Verizon warns it can require a $500 security deposit for international
long-distance subscribers.

Market data suggest a big market for international cellphone calls.
According to a survey by Telegeography, a market analysis and research
firm in San Diego, 20 percent of all international calls originated on
cellphones in 2003, the most recent year surveyed. In the United
States and Canada, the figure was 5 percent.

The iSkoot founder, Jacob Guedalia, said his vision was to 'enable
the individual to become his own long-distance carrier' by routing
calls over a home or office computer connection, instead of AT&T or
Sprint. Thanks to moves by Skype to make its software code available
to other technology developers to build new services and products that
run over Skype, Guedalia said, "We can take the voice-over-Internet
revolution, which until now has really been confined to the personal
computer, and bring it to the mobile world."

Executives at top wireless carriers, who could lose millions of
dollars in international calling revenue, are taking a wait-and-see
attitude. Although carriers like Verizon and Cingular maintain wide
latitude to terminate customers they deem to be misusing their service
by doing things like making excessive free night and weekend calls,
functionally iSkoot resembles using a calling card or company
conference bridge for an international cellphone call, which normally
carriers don't block. 

http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2005/08/01/start_up_slashes_cost_of_international_wireless/

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2005 14:07:53 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Segregated Saudis Flirt Via Bluetooth


By DONNA ABU-NASR
The Associated Press

RIYADH, Saudi Arabia -- The restaurant, like all Riyadh eateries, has
taken precautions to prevent its male and female diners from seeing or
contacting each other.

Circular white walls surround each table in the family section, open
only to women alone or women accompanied by close male relatives.
Other male diners are on lower floors.

Yet despite the barriers, the men and women flirt and exchange phone
numbers, photos and kisses.

They elude the mores imposed by the kingdom's puritanical Wahhabi
version of Islam _ formulated in the 18th century _ by using a 21st
century device in their mobile phones: the wireless Bluetooth
technology that permits users to connect without going through the
phone company.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/11/AR2005081100987.html

------------------------------

From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Subject: Classic Six-Button Keysets - Cost During 1970s?
Date: 13 Aug 2005 18:30:30 -0700


Back in the 1970s, a standard fixture in almost every business (and
even in some wealthy homes) was a key telephone.  This has six buttons
along the time so that the phone could handle more than one outside
line, intercom lines, and HOLD function.  I was wondering what basic
key systems cost in the 1970-1975 time frame.

 From what I saw, the pricing was a la carte--every little feature was
a charge.  One large organization did not bother with line lamps to
save money.  The "wink-hold" feature, where the line lamp blinked
slowly when the line was on-hold, was optional.  I never saw a system
without a HOLD button, but apparently even that was optional.  (I
believe later systems, such as ComKey had package prices).

Anyway, would anyone know what typical pricing was in the 1970-1975
time frame, for the following:

- "Hunting" feature so busy calls would go to the next line.

- Two lines, two keysets, line lamps that would blink on ring, but not
wink-hold.

- Wink-hold feature.

- Basic manual intercom (push-button to sound buzzer).  Sometimes there
was a SIG button on the phone, sometimes there was a tiny panel with
pushbuttons mounted next to the phone.

- Dial intercom, one common channel, one digit automatically sounded
desired buzzer.

- Other features of the six button keyset?

- If a residence had a key system was the cost cheaper than a business?

Around the 1960s the Bell System came out with a fancier system known
as the "Call Director".  Did this have any advanced features or did it
just offer more line buttons?  I know the basic Call Director shell
was used as a PBX operator's console, but that was a different phone
and included an additional lamp for supervision.

Six button keysets are rare to see today, having been replaced by more
modern systems.  Even the Bell System, before divesture, had developed
several new lines, such as ComKey and phones with more buttons
(identified by a larger square button with the light within it.  Both
wall and desk sets had a long row of buttons along the top of the
phone.  These were out early enough that they were made in rotary dial
as well as touch tone.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have seen a few very elaborate and
very complex (regards wiring) six-buton sets. One of the strangest I
ever saw had six buttons (five lines plus hold) but the 'lines' were
very special purpose: from left to right, the hold button (red
plastic) was followed by 'intercom' for an open-loop arrangement (just
battery to provide talking voltage on to a similar set in a place
called 'radio station booth' and also 'box office' and 'stage left'
[anyone using one of the instruments at 'radio booth' or 'box office'
or 'stage left' could talk to or be heard by persons at the the other
instruments by going off hook]) the fourth button (or third 'line')
was 'extension 263' from the building PBX. There was a jack on the
backside to plug in a headphone for handsfree conversation either on
the 'extension 263' or the 'intercom'; either of which could be put
on hold to answer the other line; the switchhook on the left plunger
was plastic and could be raised up to serve a way to swap between the
phone receiver or the headset; and last but not least, a 'beehive
lamp' so the phone did not actually ring (which might disturb
something in process in the auditorium) but just flashed in cadence
with the silent bell 'ringing'. Apparently the principal user of that
instrument used it to stay in touch with the box office, the other 
side of the stage or perhaps the radio station booth, to be informed
when the radio link was on the air or not. This was in around 1960,
and instead of the 'square' buttons on the bottom, they were the older
style 'round' buttons. They told me they had to pay Illinois Bell 
seventy five cents per month for the intercom loop, which I presume
was to maintain the power supply and the wiring of same. They paid a
dollar per month for the rental of the operator-style headset and
about the same amount for the beehive lamp. PAT] 

------------------------------

From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Subject: True Long Distance Carriers?
Date: 13 Aug 2005 18:35:51 -0700


Would anyone know who the 'true' long distance carriers are in the
U.S.?

That is, what carriers actually own their own physical network that can
carry calls to various parts of the entire United Sates (as opposed to
renting space from someone else)?

Also, today the Baby Bells each hold a large geograhic area and offer
long distance.  Do they carry calls within their own areas?  (They've
always had the capability to do that).

Do whatever large once-'independent' telephone companies (ie United
Telecom?) have any long distance networks?  (GTE was the largest
independent, but that was merged into Verizon.)

Thanks.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: In the 1960-70's, AT&T was mostly it,
and the _largest customers_ of AT&T were MCI and Sprint. As MCI began
putting together some facilities of their own, then AT&T and Sprint 
started buying from them, etc. They have always been each other's
largest customers, even until more recent years as they developed
their own networks. United Tel used to buy capacity almost exclusively
 from AT&T but now they buy it as much as possible from their parent
company Sprint. The term 'independent' means nothing any longer (in the
context of telephony) as you know, and I _think_ that all carriers try
to handle their own calls within their 'territories' but even the
terms 'intralata' and 'interlata' these days are very complex and
vague.  PAT]

------------------------------

From: Ali <abdulrazaq@gmail.com>
Subject: Using Converged Services Platform [CSP] with Windows
Date: 13 Aug 2005 17:11:59 -0700


Hi EveryOne!

Hope every one is fine; I need to know if any one here is familiar
with Hardware Switch [ http://www.excelswitching.com/ ] for
implementing H.323 , SIP or SS7  [ http://www.pt.com/ ].

For general solution like call center, voice conference, call
diverting-forwarding-recording etc. I'll appreciate any useful tips and
hints for this from design to implementation phase. Are there any www, 
usenet groups or other articles?


Looking forward to hear. 

ali

------------------------------

From: Michael D. Sullivan <userid@camsul.example.invalid>
Subject: Re: Appeals Court Ruling Revives Case of Intercepted E-Mail
Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2005 01:00:41 GMT


Barry Margolin wrote:

> It seems to me that they're using the wrong law.  Doesn't the
> Electronic Communications Privacy Act have provisions prohibiting
> email providers from looking at customers' mail, except as needed to
> provide the service (e.g. server administrators sometimes have to look
> at mail to diagnose problems)?  Why are they using the a wiretapping
> statute, when he didn't actually intercept anything on the wire?

The ECPA is part of the federal wiretapping law; it amended the
wiretap laws that were enacted as part of the 1968 Omnibus Crime and
Safe Streets Act to address electronic communications.


Michael D. Sullivan
Bethesda, MD (USA)
(Replace "example.invalid" with "com" in my address.)

------------------------------

Date: 14 Aug 2005 01:21:29 -0000
From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
Subject: Re: Appeals Court Ruling Revives Case of Intercepted E-Mail
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


> It seems to me that they're using the wrong law.  Doesn't the
> Electronic Communications Privacy Act have provisions prohibiting
> email providers from looking at customers' mail, except as needed to
> provide the service (e.g. server administrators sometimes have to look
> at mail to diagnose problems)?  Why are they using the a wiretapping
> statute, when he didn't actually intercept anything on the wire?

The ECPA is part of the wiretap law.  If you're interested in this,
why not read the decision, which is not all that long, rather than
guessing about what the parties were trying to do.

R's,

John

------------------------------

From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi)
Subject: Re: Appeals Court Ruling Revives Case of Intercepted E-Mail
Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2005 13:04:27 -0000
Organization: Widgets, Inc.


In article <telecom24.366.12@telecom-digest.org>,
Barry Margolin  <barmar@alum.mit.edu> wrote:

> In article <telecom24.365.3@telecom-digest.org>, Monty Solomon
> <monty@roscom.com> wrote:

>> Bradford Councilman is former vice president of Interloc Inc., a rare
>> book dealer in Greenfield that offered a free e-mail service to
>> customers. In 1998, Councilman allegedly began intercepting any
>> e-mails sent to his customers by the Internet retailer Amazon.com.
>> Councilman and his colleagues allegedly read the messages to see what
>> Amazon was offering his customers, so that he could make attractive
>> counter-offers.

>> A grand jury indicted Councilman in 2001 for violating the federal
>> wiretapping law. Councilman urged dismissal of the indictment, saying
>> that the wiretap law did not apply because the e-mail was intercepted
>> while it was stored in the memory of a computer, not when it was
>> traveling across a network.

>> A federal district court agreed and threw out the indictment. The US
>> Justice Department, which had brought the case against Councilman,
>> appealed the ruling. But a three-judge panel of the US Court of
>> Appeals in Boston also rejected the charges. Last year, the Justice
>> Department persuaded all seven appeals court judges to hear the case.

> It seems to me that they're using the wrong law.  Doesn't the
> Electronic Communications Privacy Act have provisions prohibiting
> email providers from looking at customers' mail, except as needed to
> provide the service (e.g. server administrators sometimes have to look
> at mail to diagnose problems)?  Why are they using the a wiretapping
> statute, when he didn't actually intercept anything on the wire?

Maybe because the "unlawful access to stored communications" statute
(sec. 2701) has a hole in it that you could drive a battleship
through.  *SIDEWAYS*.

It specifies that if you access the _facility_ in/on which the
messages are stored, "without authorization", or "in access of
authorization", and access/modify/delete messages, you have committed
a crime.  There is also a blanket exemption for any acts "authorized"
by the owner of _the_ _facility_.

Sec 2511 is pretty clear that _it's_ prohibitions apply to messages
'in transit', especially when you look at how 'intercepting' a message
is defined.



[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I am curious, but how can an email
message be 'in transit'?  Its either 'here' or it is 'there' or are
they referring to the 30 or 45 seconds after the sender hits his 
'enter' key (while the message travels on the wires from here to there
via somewhere else) before it lands in my box, at which point I would
think the 'in transit' stage has ended. Or does 'in transit' include
the time it spends sitting on my ISPs server until I call the ISP and
further retrieve it?  I like to think of email as I would think of
a traditional box at the post office. I am not standing there at the
post office box 24/7 with the door open waiting to immediatly grab
what is stuffed in from the clerk's side. Doesn't 'in transit' refer
to the time one carrier is handling my letter from the point where it
was picked up until it is placed in my physical possession?   PAT]

------------------------------

Subject: Re: Stock Market Ticker Tape Machines?
Reply-To: jhaynes@alumni.uark.edu
Organization: University of Arkansas Alumni
From: haynes@alumni.uark.edu (Jim Haynes)
Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2005 01:43:42 GMT


> In article <telecom24.364.8@telecom-digest.org>,
> <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:

>> I was wondering what kind of machine, if any, replaced the classic
>> glass-dome model and continued to produce a tape showing trades.

(Guess I missed the original message, or I would have replied.)

The glass-bell-jar ticker was replaced ca. 1930 by a machine made by
Teletype.  It used a six-level start-stop code and printed using a
type wheel.  I would have to look this up, but think the speed was 600
letters per minute, which works out to 100 wpm.  The glass bell jar
tickers continued to be used by Western Union to report baseball
scores as late as circa 1950.  Sports score reporting was a service of
W.U.; the customers for the service were mostly bookies and other
gamblers.

W.U. made some tape printers for telegrams using the basic mechanism
of the 1930 ticker; this was called the 401-A printer.  Teletype made
a low-cost page printer in the late 1930s using much of the same
technology; this was the Model 26.  The ticker had no model number.

Those tickers where replaced circa 1965 by a new Teletype ticker
operating at 900 chars/min and often called the "900" ticker for that
reason.  It used technology under development for the Model 37 page
printer; but within the Bell System it was called the Model 28 ticker
even though it had little in common with the Model 28 equipment line.
I guess they wanted to reserve Model 37 for the new page printer.  The
900 ticker used the same 6-level code as the earlier ticker.

This ticker could be considered the last successful Teletype product
of the almost-all-mechanical genre.  The Model 37 and Model 38 page
printers achieved few sales and never got completely debugged.
Everything after that used a lot of electronics instead of complicated
mechanisms.

jhhaynes at earthlink dot net

------------------------------

From: B.M. Wright <bmwright@xmission.com>
Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2005 03:45:28 UTC
Organization:  XMission Internet http://www.xmission.com
Subject:  Re: Telephoning Russian Villages


cherniymonakh@hotmail.com wrote:

> Hello, perhaps you can help:

> My family are now at a cottage in a village outside Moscow, where they
> are staying for weeks due to the hot weather.  The telephone number
> there contains less than the usual number of digits (6 instead of
> seven).  For some reasons calls cannot get there from North America,
> although they can call here.  The problem seems to be with the US, as
> I don't even get a Russian dial tone, but a North American one
> followed by an English-language message saying that there is no such
> number and to try again.

> Is there any trick to dialing such numbers and getting through?  There
> is freakish discrepency between the cost of calling from there (a
> couple of dollars per minute) versus from here (cents per minute with
> calling card), so I would prefer to be the one doing the calling.

Read here: http://www.wtng.info/wtng-7-ru.html and maybe you will find
some answers.  Numbers aren't always a fixed length from city to city
in certain countries, some people include numbers which need to be
omitted when dialing international, and some places have numbering
plan changes (which, that URL discusses).  In London many places still
have a number from an old numbering plan printed on their business
sign/literature (i.e. 0171 became 0207) and if you didn't know about
this change you could spend all day mis-dialing.  Somtimes mobile
phone numbers include more/less digits also.

Example of how an international number may be printed and how
you might dial it differently  depending on the originating area:

	+44 (0)20 7555 5555
	Dialed as:
	011 44 20 7555 5555 (from the US)
	020 7555 5555 (from the UK)
	00 44 20 7555 5555 (from Germany)

So, as you can see, the 0 is only used when dialing locally from
within the UK and international dialing prefix in the US is 011 vs. 00
in most European (and many other) countries.

------------------------------

Subject: Re: How Long Can a Telephone Extension Cord Be? 
Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2005 06:11:20 -0400
From: Michael Quinn <quinnm@bah.com>


Several years ago when or Verizon phone line failed (amazing, but it
does happen), the tech ran a cable from the nearby riser across our
lawn through the backyard into our house, must have been a hundred
feet or more, while they waited to retrench the new cable.  Now that
there's fiber in the neighborhood, I guess they'll retrench a new
fiber cable if we order FIOS.

Regards,

Mike
Northern VA

> Recently, at a Radio Shack store at the telephone accessories section,
> I noticed that telephone extension cords were available in lengths up
> to 25 feet (but I didn't notice any that were longer).  Is that
> because 25 feet is the longest you can go before there's a significant
> loss of signal strength

------------------------------

From: Dennis G. Rears <drears@runningpagespam.org.lga.highwinds-media.com>
Subject: USENET (Was Re: Don't Forget Peter Jennings'... Flaw)
Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2005 23:43:51 -0400
Organization: Optimum Online


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This Digest does not exist to serve as
> a mouthpiece for CDT or for that matter, _any of Usenet_. Usenet is
> so nineteen-sixtyish it is not funny. It might have been a cute and
> quaint thing back in the 1980's or even the 1990's, but this is 2005
> for god's sake. Only a ... well ... Usenetter would pay any attention
> to the load of crap coming out of that network most of the time.

I am mostly a lurker to USENET now.  My favourite group
(rec.travel.air) was taken over by politics a long time ago.  I was
involved in USENET a long time ago.  I was a newsgroup moderator and
news admin. I have since gone in a different way.  I salute Pat in
maintaining the Telecom Digest and the link to USENET.  He has a lot
more patience than I ever had.

Dennis


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, Dennis, that is why they used to
call me the 'Moderator who doesn't give a shit'  or even an iota of a 
shit for that matter. A long time ago, when there were a grand total
of 80-100 newsgroups in total, I used to at least glance through them
all every day. I am talking now about 1980-85 or so. Believe me you,
in those days there was but _one_ voice-telecom related newsgroup, and
that was me doing business as comp.dcom.telecom, period, that was it. 
Just like AT&T 'got some competition' from 'outsiders' in their business,
I got competition also. First there was 'alt.dcom.telecom' which started
when some readers got angry at me (as I recall it was the 'caller-ID'
debacle that started the hassles or maybe the 'hacker' scandals around
1989-90 which gave birth to both your computer privacy alt.group and
the Computer Underground newsgroup of Jim Thomas). But I didn't give a
shit ... then there was the fuss in 1993 when comp.dcom.telecom.tech
got started. Then came the web in 1994-95 and god only knows how many
telecom newsgroups from various directions. When it got to the point I
had to put in six to eight hours each day merely to get all the
messages out (if I wanted any coherence in the messages, and some 
standardization to the punctuation, and an archives I could be proud
of, etc) I had to give up my full time employment and work on this
Digest, which became my full time 'employer'. I still did not give a
shit ... like the NPR or CBP models, I experimented with begging to
have pennies pitched at me by the audience, only to have a producer
and radio host from NPR -- for god's sakes! -- ask me (and the readers
here) if I had 'cleared' my proposal of asking for money with the
Usenet hierarchy. I didn't give a shit ... just kept on doing my
thing.

But when it got to be time to pay the rent and buy cat food for Tarzan
and Oliver and hopefully some bologna, peanut butter and bread for
myself, while some of the audience was quite generous and helpful (my
patrons as I call them), most of the audience (and I am  sure NPR and
CPB have discovered this also) were not quite willing to be as generous,
so I had to switch to a paid advertising basis, like any good .com
site. So it is no longer true that I don't give a shit; now I worship
at the Divine Google Scorecard Church, when services are held each
month about the 25th or so for the proceeding month. The Google
Scorecard; that is where things are at these days on the net. With 
Google Scorecard (Ad Sense) assisted by the Social Security Disability
Choir, I _finally_ am able to pay my bills in a more or less timely
way each month, feed Missy, Callie and Sassy, and actually (gasp!) go
out to our local public house for a beer now and then; and my patrons
supplant that income just a little. I must say however that all those
commercials on television and the net claiming to make tons of money
for a 'couple hours per day at your computer' are just a bunch of
_lies_.

So yes, Dennis, I have lots of patience, lots of calluses and other 
thick skin, and I have actually gotten a wee bit wiser in the past
quarter century or so.   Thanks for writing to me.    PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2005 14:39:06 -0400
From: alan@bloomfieldpress.com
Subject: School Gun Expulsions End


BLOOMFIELD PRESS

KIDS BACK TO SCHOOL

School Expulsions For Guns Quietly Dropped
Rare procedure omits federal ban

New research has uncovered an "inventive" federal procedure used to
require local schools to adopt a national student-expulsion plan. Once
set, the enabling law was "omitted," leaving little trace of this
federal gun policy operating on the nation's local schools.

In President Clinton's highly publicized Educational Goals 2000, the
federal government banned itself from giving money to any school that
didn't expel students for having a gun at school (20 USC §
3351). Narrow exceptions were allowed for officials and authorized
use, and case-by-case review. Local school systems, to continue
receiving the funds they depend upon, had to provide assurance they
would expel students who possessed firearms.

This forced schools nationwide to quickly implement gun-possession
expulsion rules, nearly opposite of the gun-safety training atmosphere
that gun-rights advocates recommend. Until the 1960s, many schools had
firing ranges on campus, and guns could be brought to school for many
reasons, such as varsity competition, ROTC training, hunting on the
way home after class, and even show-and-tell.

Seven months later, with expulsion policies cobbled into place, the
law was quietly "omitted" from a general amendment of the Elementary
and Secondary Education Act of 1965, of which it was a part. That
removed the ban Congress had placed on its ability to spend.

In other words, government can again fund any school, maintaining the
influence that implies, even if the school has no expulsion
rules. Left in place though are the expulsion requirements schools
everywhere had already implemented. Detecting and deciphering this
omission in federal law was arguably the most challenging research for
the tenth anniversary edition of "Gun Laws of America," just released.

"Expulsion is an obviously inadequate response to a child who has a
gun at school with evil intent," says Alan Korwin, the book's
author. "That's why we have deadly serious laws against crime. On the
other hand, this approach to gun safety, and the blind fear this law
encouraged toward the wholesome American tradition of firearms
possession, may be irreparable. It's time to actively invest in
training and safety programs, instead of bans and ignorance, isn't
it?"

###

[Backgrounder:  Bloomfield Press is the largest publisher and distributor of gun law books in the country, founded in 1988. Our website, gunlaws.com, features a free national directory to gun laws and relevant contacts in all states and federally, along with our unique line of related books and DVDs. "Gun Laws of America" for news media review is available on request, call 1-800-707-4020.  The author is available for interview, call us to schedule. Call for cogent positions on gun issues, informed analysis on proposed laws, talk radio that lights up the switchboard, fact sheets and position papers.  As we always say, "It doesn't make sense to own a gun and not know the rules."]


Contact:
Alan Korwin
BLOOMFIELD PRESS
"We publish the gun laws."
4718 E. Cactus #440
Phoenix, AZ 85032
602-996-4020 Phone
602-494-0679 FAX
1-800-707-4020 Orders
http://www.gunlaws.com
alan@gunlaws.com
Call, write, fax or click for a free catalog.


Encourage politicians to pass more laws ... with expiration dates.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Our friend, Alan Korwin has written to 
us again, as you can see. I do not know if this means I will now get
a huge raft of ugly mail as I did from his screed on Peter Jennings 
or not ... but I sincerely wish people would debate the _issues_
rather than pick on the messenger all the time.   PAT]

------------------------------


TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly to telecomm-
unications 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)

RSS Syndication of TELECOM Digest: http://telecom-digest.org/rss.html
  For syndication examples see http://www.feedrollpro.com/syndicate.php?id=308
    and also http://feeds.feedburner.com/TelecomDigest

*************************************************************************
*   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

              ************************

   In addition, gifts from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert
   have 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 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 #367
******************************