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
Add this Digest to your personal
or 
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
Add this Digest to your personal
or
TELECOM Digest Fri, 26 Aug 2005 16:04:00 EDT Volume 24 : Issue 386
Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson
Book Review: "Corporate Computer and Network Security", Panko (R Slade)
Internet Telephone Providers Ask For Further Delay Re 911 (Reuters News)
Telecom Update #494 - Canada (Angus Telemanagement)
Picking Up the Pieces (Eric Friedebach)
VoIP Market Draws a Crowd (USTelecom dailyLead)
Merlin Legend - Blocking Outbound Caller ID (contessa)
Re: Problem Acessing Some Sites! (panoptes@iquest.net)
Re: The Luncheon Meat Associated With Junk Email? (John Hines)
Re: The Luncheon Meat Associated With Junk Email? (John McHarry)
Re: The Luncheon Meat Associated With Junk Email? (Robert Bonomi)
Re: Long Distance Carrier Verification (jstrauss01@att.net)
Re: Internet Phone Companies May Cut Off Customers (Paul Coxwell)
Re: Broadband Competition Must Surely be Working (hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com)
Spam Targeted at TD Subscribers? (Michael Quinn)
Is it Sp*m if They Offer to Set You Up as a Sp*mmer? (Hudson Leighton)
Last Laugh! Turning the Tables on Nigeria's E-Mail Conmen (M Quinn)
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: Rob Slade <rslade@sprint.ca>
Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2005 13:26:16 -0800
Subject: Book Review: "Corporate Computer and Network Security", R. Panko
Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca
BKCPCNSC.RVW 20050614
"Corporate Computer and Network Security", Raymond R. Panko, 2004,
0-13-038471-2
%A Raymond R. Panko pankosecurity.com
%C One Lake St., Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458
%D 2004
%G 0-13-038471-2
%I Prentice Hall
%O 800-576-3800 +1-201-236-7139 fax: +1-201-236-7131
%O http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0130384712/robsladesinterne
http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0130384712/robsladesinte-21
%O http://www.amazon.ca/exec/obidos/ASIN/0130384712/robsladesin03-20
%O Audience a- Tech 2 Writing 1 (see revfaq.htm for explanation)
%P 522 p.
%T "Corporate Computer and Network Security"
In the preface (for teachers), Panko states that this is a text for a
security course. The book is said to be based on the CISSP (Certified
Information Systems Security Professional) "exam," although there is a
definite lack of material dealing with architecture, physical
security, and security management.
Chapter one is a list of possible attacks and security problems.
There are "Test Your Understanding" questions sprinkled throughout,
but they are mostly on the level of fact-based reading checks. (One
of the later examples asks "What is shoulder surfing?" immediately
under a paragraph on shoulder surfing.) There is also a chapter "1a"
with a collection of very terse "case studies" (one is only a sentence
in length). Access control and a tiny mention of physical security is
in chapter two. (As well as a very strange mention of wireless LANs:
the author considers WLAN access to be a factor of site security.)
There are odd and sometimes careless mistakes: "rters" is said to be
four characters. The emphasis seems to be on minutiae rather than
concepts. A lot of material is repeated: two separate paragraphs deal
with piggybacking, only five paragraphs apart. The facts are
generally correct, but the discussions are often misleading if not
wrong: a confusing deliberation of what is probably false acceptance
incorrectly refers to the situation as false rejection. Chapter three
reviews the TCP/IP protocol suite. (Again, the conceptual material is
weak: Panko asserts that the real world uses an amalgam of the OSI
[Open Systems Interconnection] and TCP/IP models, whereas the TCP/IP
protocol suite is generally described with reference to the OSI model.
Anyone who has actually used the OSI protocols knows why the rest of
the world uses TCP/IP.) Network attacks are discussed in chapter
four. (Oddly, in the midst of a list of net probing activities comes
a mention of looking up corporate information on the Security and
Exchange Commission's EDGAR database.) There is also a rather limited
section on malware. Chapter five looks at firewalls. Some generic
advice on hardening hosts or desktop computers is given in chapter
six.
Chapters seven and eight contain miscellaneous references to
cryptographic ideas or practices. Most of the discussion of
application security, in chapter nine, is limited to Web and e-
commerce problems. Chapter ten is a rather mixed bag of incident
response, automated intrusion detection, and business continuity
planning. Security should be managed, says chapter eleven, but it
doesn't give an awful lot of help on how it can be done. Most of
chapter twelve looks at computer related laws.
The book seems to be a very loosely structured compilation of points
related to security. The lack of overall organization means that
material is often disjointed and repetitive. As with anything, in the
hands of a good teacher this could be used for a computer security
course text. In the hands of one who followed the text closely, the
course would be a bit ragged.
copyright Robert M. Slade, 2005 BKCPCNSC.RVW 20050614
====================== (quote inserted randomly by Pegasus Mailer)
rslade@vcn.bc.ca slade@victoria.tc.ca rslade@sun.soci.niu.edu
There's nothing so useless as doing efficiently that which should
not be done at all. - Peter F. Drucker
http://victoria.tc.ca/techrev or http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade
------------------------------
From: Reuters News Wire <reuters@telecom-digest.org>
Subject: ISP Telephone Providers Ask For Further Delay in FCC Cut Off
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2005 10:19:08 -0500
A coalition of Internet telephone service companies asked the
U.S. Federal Communications Commission on Thursday to modify a rule
that could force them to cut off service to some customers by next
week.
The FCC in May ordered Internet phone service providers to ensure
emergency 911 calls go directly to emergency dispatchers and provide
the location of callers by November 29, four months after the order
became effective.
The agency also required companies to get acknowledgments from all
subscribers that they understood the type of 911 service available,
and that providers should disconnect anyone who fails to reply by
August 29.
The decision came after the FCC heard tear-filled testimony from
parents who only were able to reach administrative offices when they
dialed 911 with Voice Over Internet Protocol (VOIP) services. Since
many VOIP services can be used anywhere a person has a high-speed
Internet connection, knowing a caller's location can be difficult.
The VON Coalition, which includes AT&T Corp. and MCI Inc., both
providers of VOIP services, said in a letter to the FCC that
disconnecting customers could cause more harm than good, as many who
have not responded already have 911 service.
Cutting customers off "would inevitably impede commerce and cause
consumer inconvenience and could even leave VOIP customers stranded in
an emergency," the coalition said.
"We are not aware of any other circumstances where the Commission has
required service providers to terminate service to their customers,
possibly leaving them without any communications services," it said.
An FCC spokesman was not immediately available for comment.
Several other companies and organizations have also asked the FCC to
reconsider its cutoff order, and one smaller provider has challenged
the rules in court. Florida state officials have warned the FCC that
disconnecting VOIP customers could endanger people during hurricane
season.
UBS analyst John Hodulik estimates there were about 2.5 million
U.S. VOIP customers at the end of the second quarter, meaning that
even if 90 percent responded by the deadline, 250,000 could lose
service.
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.
To discuss this item with others, go to our chatroom at:
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra/chatpage.html
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2005 11:14:23 -0700
Subject: Telecom Update #494, August 26, 2005
From: Angus TeleManagement Group <jriddell@angustel.ca>
************************************************************
TELECOM UPDATE
************************************************************
published weekly by Angus TeleManagement Group
http://www.angustel.ca
Number 494: August 26, 2005
Publication of Telecom Update is made possible by generous
financial support from:
** ALLSTREAM: www.allstream.com
** AVAYA: www.avaya.ca/en/
** BELL CANADA: www.bell.ca
** CISCO SYSTEMS CANADA: www.cisco.com/ca/
** ERICSSON: www.ericsson.ca
** MITEL NETWORKS: www.mitel.com/
** ROGERS TELECOM: www.rogers.com/solutions
** UTC CANADA: www.canada.utc.org/
************************************************************
IN THIS ISSUE:
** Canadian VoIP Carriers Comply With 9-1-1 Rules
** Telus Intros Hosted IP Call Centre
** CRTC Refuses to Change Allstream City Contracts
** Agenda Set for Local Forbearance Hearing
** Auto Union Protests GM-Telus Deal
** Telus Launches Mobile TV
** Rogers Wins CA*net Expansion Contract
** Internet Growth Slows
** Telus Makes Mike Multimedia
** Regulation of Small Incumbents Under Review
** Google Offers Instant Messaging, Voice
** Aliant Boosts Internet Download Speed
** Cogeco Expands Phone Service
** CRTC Orders Telus to Tariff Fibre Deal
** Telus Provides WLAN for Winnipeg Airport
** Call Centre Managers to Meet in September
============================================================
CANADIAN VOIP CARRIERS COMPLY WITH 9-1-1 RULES: All VoIP providers in
Canada have told the CRTC that they are in compliance with the VoIP
9-1-1 requirements set out in Telecom Decision 2005-21. (See Telecom
Update #476) This includes routing 9-1-1 calls to the correct
emergency centre, and obtaining new customers' express consent to
limitations on 9-1-1 service. Unlike the U.S. rules, Canada's don't
require carriers to obtain express consent from existing customers.
** An industry consensus report on standard notification of
9-1-1 limitations awaits approval by the Commission.
www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Decisions/2005/dt2005-21.htm
www.crtc.gc.ca/cisc/COMMITTE/E-docs/ESRE039D.doc
TELUS INTROS HOSTED IP CALL CENTRE: Telus says it already has $12
million in contracts for CallCentreAnywhere, a newly announced hosted
IP-based call centre product that the telco says can be up and running
for a customer within 12 days.
CRTC REFUSES TO CHANGE ALLSTREAM CITY CONTRACTS: The CRTC has denied
MTS Allstream's 2001 request to amend the municipal access agreements
signed with Toronto and Calgary by its predecessor, MetroNet. The CRTC
says the terms Allstream objects to as "onerous and unconscionable"
were actually proposed by MetroNet and confirmed by Allstream when it
and MetroNet merged.
www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Decisions/2005/dt2005-46.htm
www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Decisions/2005/dt2005-47.htm
AGENDA SET FOR LOCAL FORBEARANCE HEARING: The CRTC has outlined the
process to be followed at the September 26-29 hearing on deregulating
local phone service, including the order in which parties will
speak. The process is similar to that followed at the VoIP hearing
last year.
www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Letters/2005/lt050817.htm
www.crtc.gc.ca/PartVII/eng/2005/8640/c12_200505076.htm
AUTO UNION PROTESTS GM-TELUS DEAL: The Canadian Auto Workers union
says that General Motors' IP telephony contract with Telus is
"completely unacceptable" so long as a strike continues at Telus. In
an August 19 letter to GM, CAW president Buzz Hargrove says that the
deal violates a GM-CAW "Supplier Relation letter" and that CAW "fully
expects that GM will cancel this contract" unless the strike is
settled immediately. (See Telecom Update #493)
TELUS LAUNCHES MOBILE TV: Telus Mobility has launched Mobile TV,
providing seven television channels for $15/month, on Telus's 1X data
network. It's initially available only on the Motorola V710 flip
phone, which sells for $349.99, or for $199.99 on a three-year
contract.
** Rogers and Bell launched similar services last week. (See Telecom
Update #493)
ROGERS WINS CA*net EXPANSION CONTRACT: Rogers Telecom (formerly Sprint
Canada) has won a multi-million contract with CANARIE to expand CA*net
4 connections beyond universities and colleges, to federal and
provincial research labs, schools, hospitals and private sector
research facilities.
INTERNET GROWTH SLOWS: A new TeleGeography survey says that that
global cross-border Internet traffic grew by "just" 49% in 2005, down
from 103% in 2004. The combined average traffic on all cross-border
backbone routes is now just under 1 Terabit per second.
www.telegeography.com/press/releases/2005-08-23.php
TELUS MAKES MIKE MULTIMEDIA: Telus Mobility's push-to-talk Mike
service now offers the multimedia-enabled Motorola 1860 phone, which
allows users to send photos, contacts, and virtual business cards to
other Mike users.
REGULATION OF SMALL INCUMBENTS UNDER REVIEW: In Public Notice 2005-10,
the CRTC invites comments on the regulatory framework for small
incumbent phone companies from 2006 forward. A joint report by all 39
small ILECs has proposed extending the existing price cap rules, with
modifications, for another four years. (See Telecom Update #492).
www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Notices/2005/pt2005-10.htm
GOOGLE OFFERS INSTANT MESSAGING, VOICE: The new Google Talk service
allows users of Google's email service to exchange instant messages or
computer-to-computer voice calls.
ALIANT BOOSTS INTERNET DOWNLOAD SPEED: Aliant has increased the
download speed of its High-Speed Ultra Internet service from 3 Mbps to
5 Mbps. The upload speed remains 640 Kbps.
COGECO EXPANDS PHONE SERVICE: Cogeco's cable telephone service is now
available to its Internet customers in a Drummondville. The service
made its Quebec debut in Trois-Rivieres in July. (See Telecom Update
#488)
CRTC ORDERS TELUS TO TARIFF FIBRE DEAL: The CRTC says that Telus
cannot provide and maintain fibre to four remote B.C. communities
under an inter-carrier agreement with EnTel, a company that provides
high-speed Internet to remote, rural and First Nations
communities. Instead, Telus must file a special facilities tariff for
the services.
www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Orders/2005/o2005-309.htm
TELUS PROVIDES WLAN FOR WINNIPEG AIRPORT: Winnipeg Airports Authority
has launched a wireless LAN service at Winnipeg International Airport;
travelers can access the service, built and managed by Telus Mobility,
for $8 a day.
CALL CENTRE MANAGERS TO MEET IN SEPTEMBER: The 2005 ICCM Conference &
Exposition -- the world's largest event focusing on contact centre
management -- will be held September 25-28 at the Bellagio Hotel in
Las Vegas. ICCM's educational program is developed by Canada's Angus
Dortmans Associates, and the conference will be chaired by Henry
Dortmans. For more information or to register, go to
http://vegas.iccm.com.
============================================================
HOW TO SUBMIT ITEMS FOR TELECOM UPDATE
E-mail ianangus@angustel.ca and jriddell@angustel.ca
===========================================================
HOW TO SUBSCRIBE (OR UNSUBSCRIBE)
TELECOM UPDATE is provided in electronic form only. There are two
formats available:
1. The fully-formatted edition is posted on the
World Wide Web late Friday afternoon each week
at www.angustel.ca
2. The e-mail edition is distributed free of charge.
To subscribe, send an e-mail message to:
join-telecom_update@nova.sparklist.com
To stop receiving the e-mail edition, send
an e-mail message to:
leave-telecom_update@nova.sparklist.com
Sending e-mail to these addresses will automatically add
or remove the sender's e-mail address from the list. Leave
subject line and message area blank.
We do not give Telecom Update subscribers' e-mail
addresses to any third party. For more information,
see www.angustel.ca/update/privacy.html.
===========================================================
COPYRIGHT AND CONDITIONS OF USE: All contents copyright 2005 Angus
TeleManagement Group Inc. All rights reserved. For further
information, including permission to reprint or reproduce, please
e-mail jriddell@angustel.ca.
The information and data included has been obtained from sources which
we believe to be reliable, but Angus TeleManagement makes no
warranties or representations whatsoever regarding accuracy,
completeness, or adequacy. Opinions expressed are based on
interpretation of available information, and are subject to change. If
expert advice on the subject matter is required, the services of a
competent professional should be obtained.
------------------------------
From: Eric Friedebach <friedebach@yahoo.com>
Subject: Picking Up The Pieces
Date: 26 Aug 2005 11:52:06 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com
by S. Dinakar, Forbes.com, 09.05.05
Singapore Telecom's regional ambitions are looking smarter now. The
turnaround is starkly evident at Optus in Australia. Lee Hsien Yang's
vision mirrors that of his father, Lee Kuan Yew, who, as Singapore's
first prime minister, transformed it from a tropical slum in the 1960s
into a regional economic powerhouse. Lee, his youngest son, wants to
turn Singapore Telecommunications, the island nation's biggest
company, into a regional telecom powerhouse.
The son's voyage into emerging markets is expensive and risky --
buying stakes in Asian telcos in 1999-2002 cost nearly $10 billion,
driving SingTel into debt. The stock suffered, sliding to 92 cents
(U.S.) per share, less than half of what foreign investors paid when
SingTel listed on the Singapore bourse in 1993.
But Lee stands vindicated today in his efforts to convert a sleepy
state monopoly into a nimble Pan-Asian telecom carrier. The stock now
trades at $1.60. His forays into foreign lands are beginning to pay
off.
http://www.forbes.com/business/global/2005/0905/100.html
To read without registration, try http://www.bugmenot.com/
Eric Friedebach
/And now it's time for: Jaromir Weather/
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2005 12:44:43 EDT
From: USTelecom dailyLead <ustelecom@dailylead.com>
Subject: VoIP Market Draws a Crowd
USTelecom dailyLead
August 26, 2005
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=24159&l=2017006
TODAY'S HEADLINES
NEWS OF THE DAY
* VoIP market draws a crowd
BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH
* Parks: IPTV's takeoff year is 2008
* Nextel Partners' shareholders approve vote on Sprint Nextel buyout
* This ain't your daddy's ESPN
USTELECOM SPOTLIGHT
* USTelecom Webinar -- Municipal Broadband: The Shape of the Debate
EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES
* Column: S&P says WiMAX is gathering momentum
VOIP DOWNLOAD
* Google Talk VoIP could get big, analysts say
* Report: VoIP gear Q2 revenues soar
* Analysis: Broader wiretap rules could hurt Skype
REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE
* VoIP companies ask FCC to extend service cutoff deadline
* MPAA files 286 lawsuits against file-swappers
Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others.
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=24159&l=2017006
------------------------------
From: contessa <cshine@usecu.org>
Subject: Merlin Legend - Blocking Outbound Caller ID
Date: 25 Aug 2005 13:21:31 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Is there a feature within the Merlin Legend or Magix system that can
prevent the caller ID (DID line) from displaying when calling out,
specifically upon demand? Our users want to be able to turn off the
caller ID from time to time on specific calls.
------------------------------
From: panoptes@iquest.net
Subject: Re: Problem Acessing Some Sites!
Date: 25 Aug 2005 15:21:20 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com
> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You know, Robert, for a man who is
> usually so full of long, usually lengthy answers on things, I am a
> little surprised at this response to a fellow who posed a legitimate
> question. PAT]
Would you have preferred "Insufficient data for meaningful answer"?
As far as problem descriptions go, this was right up there with "Six
or seven months ago, I was driving in Platte County, and something lit
up on the dashboard when I hit the gas. What does this mean? Is
there a problem with my car?"
[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Your answer would have been a little
more agreeable, IMO. _Not everyone_ who uses this forum is as
brilliant (or perceived to be, at least) as everyone else. With any
number of newer, or at least less regular readers, it is often times
necessary to ask the person to rephrase the question in a more precise
way in order to attempt to give an answer. PAT]
------------------------------
From: John Hines <jbhines@newsguy.com>
Subject: Re: The Luncheon Meat Associated With Junk Email?
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2005 15:43:48 -0500
Organization: www.jhines.org
Reply-To: john@jhines.org
hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> Regards the use of the term 'spam' for unwanted email, my impression
> has always been that Hormel treats it like a joke.
No, they have a policy these days, in summary, the word 'spam' has
been added to the English vocabulary, while 'Spam' is still a
registered trademark, and is to be used only in reference to their
(Hormel AFAIK) product.
[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: All well and good, but how does one
pronounce an upper case /S/ differently than a lower case /s/ in order
to avoid violating any trademarks? Perhaps in verbalizing it we
could refer to 'upper Spam' and 'lower spam' but somehow I think
that would be even more confusing; it would make it come out
sounding like a country in Asia or something. PAT]
------------------------------
From: John McHarry <jmcharry@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: The Luncheon Meat Associated With Junk Email?
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2005 01:58:55 GMT
Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net
On Thu, 25 Aug 2005 09:28:40 -0700, hancock4 wrote:
> The meat product has been around for years. It was given to troops
> during WW II. Complaints then arose about it, but they were NOT about
> the quality or taste of the product, which was fine. The problem was
> that the troops in the field were given that as meal three times a
> day, seven days a week and they got sick of the monotony.
My father wouldn't touch the stuff afterward. In Hawaii I understand
it has become a part of the local culture. Go figure.
> Getting back to words and communication, it is interesting how the word
> "pig" is so contradictory. As I understand it, the pig is actually a
> nice animal and some people have them as pets.
There is also the old saying, "I haven't seen so much excitement
around here since the day the hogs et my baby brother." From what I
understand, it has happened, but my father again, who practiced
medicine in a rural community for over 50 years cannot recall an
actual incident. My former father in law was very strict about keeping
his young daughters away from them. They will eat pretty much anything
thrown to them, including rats, and I have read of them scavenging the
dead on Civil War battlefields, so I tend to believe it has happened.
People keep young ones as pets, but a full grown hog is huge. The ones
you see being trucked to piggy heaven are prepubescent. Even the pot
bellied pigs that were popular a few years ago tended to get too big
for many owners.
> (*balogna, salami, hot dogs, sausage, liverwurst, etc. Scrapple is a
> popular Philadelphia food made from scraps.)
Don't forget head cheese, or souse. Gelatin replaces the fat in most lunch
meats, so I think it is a bit healthier. Also, the name keeps the price
low.
> (**The combat cooks used mobile gasoline stoves, but the stoves required
> unleaded gas otherwise the burners would clog up from the lead. The
> army stocked leaded gas for vehicles, carrying a separate fuel was
> another burden. As an aside, apparently gasoline fired stoves and
> heaters were popular at one time, but no longer. Anyone know why?
> Gasoline too flammable? Why didn't they use safer kerosene back then?)
I got interested in gasoline fired appliances many years ago when I
had a larger collection of Coleman equipment. Since I was a grad
student, and it was probably the slow summer period, I went over to
the law library and looked up the original patents from the early
1920s. There is a whole series granted to the eponymous Coleman and to
his engineer, whose name escapes me. Basically what they figured out
was the generator, used to gasify white gasoline. This led to the
familiar Coleman lanterns and stoves, but also to whole house systems
with table lamps and kitchen ranges, presumably for unelectrified
homes. There are UL standards for how to pipe the stuff around.
There are kerosene stoves on yachts that work on the same principal,
but they are more complex. Kerosene is harder to gasify, so the
generator has to be preheated with a fire in a small can of
alcohol. There are also alcohol stoves that work much the same way,
but are started by drizzling a bit of alcohol into a pan beneath the
burner and lighting it there. Gasoline is a no no on yachts because
of its tendency to collect in the bilge and launch the crew beyond the
Styx. I don't know if the kerosene stove had been developed by WW2. It
might, since the Coleman patents were mostly still in effect, have
come later. At any rate, it would still have been a second fuel, since
I don't think you can use #2 diesel, and white gas was not one of the
top danger elements at the time.
There are also kerosene mantel lamps, of which I have one, that date
from around the same period as the Coleman lamps, maybe earlier. Mine
isn't presently in working order, but I have had it so in the past. It
puts out about as much light as a 40-50 watt light bulb, but enough
heat to light a cigarette off the outflow of the chimney. Those lamps,
made by Alladin, work entirely differently. They have a circular wick,
with air fed up the center, that indirectly heats the Wiesbach
mantel. If you turn the wick up slightly too high, the mantel will
carbon up. For some reason, a few grains of salt dropped down the
chimney will clear it much quicker. There are one or two places that
sell these things on the Internet, but I got my parts at an Amish lamp
shop in Chester, IL.
LPG seems to be the dominant fuel these days, but it isn't necessarily
better. It has less heat value than white gas or kerosene, and its
fumes are as dangerous as gasoline. It is more convenient, and I guess
we can spare a few launched yachties.
------------------------------
From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi)
Subject: Re: The Luncheon Meat Associated With Junk Email?
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2005 14:08:07 -0000
Organization: Widgets, Inc.
In article <telecom24.385.7@telecom-digest.org>,
<hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
> There's a name given to junk email that is the same as a pork luncheon
> meat product produced by Hormel. I don't think the Hormel company is
> too pleased about their product associated with something negative and
> undesirable, but the usage has become widespread.
Hormel has made it clear that they *do*not*object* to the use of 'spam'
to refer to junk e-mail. They do maintain a proprietary interest in
'SPAM' and people who use the all-caps form to refer to junk email have
gotten 'cease and desist' requests.
OTOH, the Monty Python skit -- from which the e-mail usage derives --
did use the word as referent to the "spiced ham" product, and Hormel
did not have any problems with _that_.
> I was wondering if this word association has helped or hindered sales
> of the food product.
It has given Hormel *millions* (literally!) of dollars of free publicity
for the product.
And introduced it to a whole new generation -- too young to be familiar
with Monty Python's diner.
Sales have actually increased slightly, but not enough to support any
claim of cause-and-effect.
> The meat product has been around for years. It was given to troops
> during WW II. Complaints then arose about it, but they were NOT about
> the quality or taste of the product, which was fine. The problem was
> that the troops in the field were given that as meal three times a
> day, seven days a week and they got sick of the monotony. ....
Not necessarily 3x daily, every day, but often enough to *seem* like
it ;)
It was -- fortunately, or unfortunately, depending on your viewpoint
-- about the only meat product that could/would survive _all_ the
conditions encountered in shipping food rations to the front lines.
The length of time it took to get food to the front, and the lack of
means to keep things cold, meant that other products spoiled and/or
went rancid.
> Getting back to words and communication, it is interesting how the word
> "pig" is so contradictory. As I understand it, the pig is actually a
> nice animal and some people have them as pets.
That is *WIDELY* variable -- depending on the species. The one
frequently kept as a pet is a South-East Asian breed -- the Vietnamese
Pot-Bellied Pig. A *distant* cousin of the animals used in the U.S
and Europe for feed animals.
Many U.S./European varieties are 'temperamental', to put it
charitably, and a wise person exercises considerable care around them,
particularly when feeding.
In large part, I suspect, with the 'nice' pigs, it is a matter of
'socialization' with humans, starting from a very young age.
Wild pigs are notoriously aggressive/dangerous -- especially when
'cornered' (as with any other wild animal). Do a literature search
for references to a "wild boar', and being gored by same, With their
tendencies to root in garbage, carrion, etc, the tusks/teeth were a
serious source of infection when injuries were inflicted.
> But we have so many negative "pig" usages -- a nasty term for cops,
> sloppy eating, greediness, an overly aggressive man, rude behavior
> etc.
With the exception of the law-enforcement-officer reference, all of
the connotations mentioned _are_ directly based on representative
behaviors of the typical American/European farm animal.
> Yet pig meats -- processed luncheon meats*, pork, ham, bacon,
> scrapple*,etc., are very popular foods.
> (**The combat cooks used mobile gasoline stoves, but the stoves
> required unleaded gas otherwise the burners would clog up from the
> lead. The army stocked leaded gas for vehicles, carrying a separate
> fuel was another burden. As an aside, apparently gasoline fired
> stoves and heaters were popular at one time, but no longer. Anyone
> know why? Gasoline too flammable? Why didn't they use safer
> kerosene back then?)
Popular because:
Gasoline burns hotter.
Gasoline has (somewhat) more energy per gallon.
Gasoline was easily available, *everywhere*.
Discontinued because:
Gasoline *very* volatile -- vaporizes at relatively low temperatures.
*Explosive* concentration of vapors was too easily reached.
[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Regards 'PIG' and police officers or
other municipal employees, do not forget how the City of Chicago and
Illinois Bell were each greatly embarassed by having 312-744 (312-PIG)
assigned to municipal offices -- including the police department --
in the middle 1960's by a witty phreak who happened to both work for
Illinois Bell (until he got canned in a housecleaning the telco did
a year or so later) and the Chicago Seed newspaper (until it went out
of business once the Vietnam war ended.) PAT]
------------------------------
From: jstrauss01@att.net
Subject: Re: Long Distance Carrier Verification
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2005 05:09:15 +0000
(In reply to old thread: Michael Muderick: "Long Distance Carrier
Verification")
Michael Muderick <michael.muderick@verizon.net> wrote:
> Has anyone tried 700-555-4141 lately to verify long distance carrier?
Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote:
> Apple Valley, CA, March 12th: 700-555-4141 works just fine with VZ as
> the ILEC and Sprint as the IXC. Has worked everywhere else I've tried
> it, too. I've never seen -1212 advertised as the IXC number.
Seems to depend on the l.d. carrier. I dialed 700-555-4141 and
received a, "Your call cannot be completed as dialed ..." message. I
tried 700-555-1212, not expecting it to work, and got, "Thank you for
using Covista."
One would think there would be a standard. Oh, well.
-Jeremy Strauss
[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: On my local (620-331) line from
Prairie Stream Communications, dialing it without a '1' first got
me a request to 'dial 1 first, then the area code and number." Doing
it with '1' first got me a message saying 'Thank you for choosing
Quest Communications ... then a pause ... and "your call cannot be
completed as dialed, one-six-one". PAT]
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2005 16:48:53 +0100
From: Paul Coxwell <paulcoxwell@tiscali.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Internet Phone Companies May Cut Off Customers
> Providers of Internet-based phone services may be forced next week to
> cut off tens of thousands of customers who haven't formally
> acknowledged that they understand the problems they may encounter
> dialing 911 in an emergency.
> The Federal Communications Commission had set the Monday deadline as
> an interim safeguard while providers of Internet calling, also known
> as "VoIP" for Voice over Internet Protocol, rush to comply with an FCC
> order requiring full emergency 911 capabilities by late November.
> Vonage Holdings Corp., the biggest VoIP carrier with more than 800,000
> subscribers, told The Associated Press Wednesday that 96 percent of
> its customer base have responded to the company's notices about 911
> risks. But that still means as many as 31,000 accounts would need to
> be shut off as early as Tuesday.
I can't help but ponder upon the irony that a ruling intended to make
people aware of how the service may not work as they believe could
result in the service being withdrawn altogether, so they won't be
able to place ANY call.
To hear the fuss, it kind of makes me wonder how anybody ever managed
before 911.
I know when I was down in Georgia around 1992/93 there were still
quite a few of the more rural counties which had no 911 service at
all, so it's not as though we're talking about ancient history either.
- Paul
[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Also see the news report in this issue
from Reuters which stated that several VOIP carriers, including
AT&T, have filed an emergency request for a further extension of time
from FCC.
Like yourself, I do not know how people managed to get by from the
start of dial or automated telephony until (in most communities) the
advent of 911 back around the early/middle 1980's ... Does anyone
remember when the standard that AT&T set up for the operating
companies called for police emergency to be (prefix)-1313 or
(prefix)-2121 and fire emergencies to be (prefix)-2131. In large
cities such as Chicago, where there were many exchanges and calls
were routed automatically through internal telco switches they often
times used POLice-1313 and FIRe-1313. In cases where there were
two separate and distinct communities (each with own PD or FD) but
sharing one phone exchange, where one community was '2121' and '2131'
the other community would be '2181' and '2191' for police and
fire respectively. Where 911 I guess was an improvement was that when
someone reported their house was on fire, they would often times
be in a panic and tell the dispatcher, "help, house on fire at
3200 Halsted Street" and slam the phone down and run off (to get
away from the fire), but neglect to say if firemen were wanted at
3200 _North_ Halsted or 3200 _South_ Halsted, a difference in driving
of about seven miles, so of course Fire had to dispatch _two_ companies,
one to each location, and at least one company came back empty-handed.
That is, unless both of them came back from a dry run; it was not
uncommon in those days for idiots to deliberatly call in a false
alarm. In the 1960's, when it seems with Vietnam everyone was anti-
everything, Chicago Fire Department in one year alone (1965 I think)
responded to over six thousand deliberate false alarms. 911 pinned it
down a little closer than the old system of a huge map on the wall and
beehive lamps from telco which lighted up in the _general vicinity_ on
the map where police/fire was needed. PAT]
------------------------------
From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Subject: Re: Broadband Competition Must Surely be Working
Date: 26 Aug 2005 10:20:35 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Garrett Wollman wrote:
> Because the market for residential communications services cannot
> support what economists call "effective competition". The barriers to
> entry in "local loop" services are so high that allowing bundling
> stifles competition on the services built on top.
I don't agree about the barriers. As I mentioned, our local cable
company, while still a small independent outfit, managed to go through
and wire us with coax and then come back and use fibre optic.
Granted, their work methods were far cheaper than other utilities, but
they managed to build a network. Today they offer competition for
both telephone and broadband computer connections. Somehow the cable
TV industry managed to break through those "barriers" and build itself
up from little cooperatives to major corporations.
> What should have been done back in 1984, and wasn't, is the unbundling
> of outside plant from telephone service (with both by preference
> provided by separate companies). By the late 1990s, most states
> understood this, and implemented a similar model for energy
> deregulation: you buy your energy from a competitive supplier, who
> then must contract with a regulated distribution company to deliver it
> to you.
Two years ago we had a massive blackout thanks to this "new model".
The electric power "deregulation" did nothing for consumers and was a
bad idea. The power companies have _reduced_ distribution service
quality to save money. For years, power companies traded with each
other to get the best cost of power, so for a consumer buying it
doesn't save any money. Power supply was one of the fraud's Enron was
involved in. Today the national grid is carrying far more power than
it was designed to and the risks of another NYC-Midwest blackout is
very high. Little has been done to resolve those problems.
Garrett Wollman also wrote:
> The barriers to entry in "local loop" services are so high ...
If that is true -- local loop is so hard to build -- why wasn't the
Bell System assigned the task of providing CATV service? After all, it
already had the natural monopoly local loop plant already in place.
The answer is that the barrier isn't so high and cable companies were
able to surmount it.
jmeissen@aracnet.com wrote:
>> So, if a telecom provider wants to bundle services, why shouldn't it?
> We've seen the effects of that many times. And each time it involved a
> monopoly (or near-monopoly) the results were bad enough to get the
> government involved. For instance, in the old days you HAD to use IBM
> software and peripherals with your IBM mainframe. It was called
> "bundling", and the government eventually stepped in and forced them
> to unbundle their products and services.
Actually, IBM chose to unbundle on its own, the government was not
involved at that time.
Remember that customers who wished to buy the full IBM product were
still able to do so -- customers could go a la carte or take the
traditional offering. When telecom deregulated -- supposedly to give
consumers "more" choice -- we consumers actually had LESS choice. If
my local Bell company wanted to sell me long distance, they were
forbidden to do so (until very recently). I note that now I get my
long distance from them and dealing with one provider is so much
better than multiple, plus they give me a good deal.
Saying a company should be a carrier only is like saying IBM can only
sell hardware and we must buy our software from someone else, even if
we like IBM's software. By the way, the vast majority of IBM
mainframe users continued to use IBM's operating systems (OS, DOS,
CICS, and VM and their successors) to this very day.
Allowing independent manufacturers to hook up their peripherals to IBM
mainframes had its problems as well, which people forget. If IBM
enhanced its mainframes, the peripheral makers had to follow suit, but
sometimes such improvements would be enough to kill them off. If a
peripheral had trouble, there would be finger-pointing between
vendors.
> Most of the "examples" you cited aren't valid analogies. In almost
> every case the "bundles" are value-added services or features that
> might make using one service slightly mor attractive than using a
> competing one. The Verizon "bundling" is much more like the sporting
> event, where you're FORCED to use and pay for the parking facilities
> associated with the event.
The line between "value added" and forced bundling is blurry. In any
event, carriers should be allowed to offer their own bundled package
and not isolated into a narrow niche.
John Levine wrote:
> My, how soon we forget. The Bell breakup was about long distance
> competition, and LD has indeed been quite competitive, at least until
> all of the LD carriers merge into one in a couple of years. But the
> breakup made no difference at all to local competition. Your local
> Bell company was and is just as much of a monopoly after the breakup
> as before.
I can get phone service from my cable company or from a cellular
company. I don't see Bell being a monopoly anymore.
You also forget that equipment ownership and other services were also
deregulated at that time.
> Because the telecom provider is a monopoly, or now maybe a duopoly.
> The only companies with wires into everyone's house are the phone
> company and the cable company, and that is as true now as it was 20
> years ago. The first mover advantage is insurmountable, and although
> it would be legal for someone to raise $100 billion and overbuild a
> new phone infrastructure alongside the one we have, it'll never
> happen.
I don't agree at all. See my other post about cable construction; they
were able to do it.
BTW, the electric companies have wires into my house, and the water
company has a pipe into my house. I understand power lines can carry
phone signals although for the moment it's not practical. But who
knows -- maybe they'll invent something to allow effective
transmission. Maybe signals could be carried along copper water pipes
as well in the future.
> The point of splitting the telco into switchco and loopco is that the
> loop part is a natural monopoly and the switchco isn't. So split them
> up, require the loopco to provide service to everyone on an equal
> basis, and then completely deregulate the switchco. That would work,
> and we'd end up with a much more vibrant market.
Who gets to decide what is a "natural monopoly"? Is the phone loop
really a natural monopoly? At one time it was, but I'm not sure any
more. On the other hand, breaking up the telco switches to support
multiple vendors was very costly and I'm not sure it was worth it. MY
phone rates went up to pay for a new telco building to house
switchgear for external companies so that someone ELSE would benefit.
That sure doesn't seem like a free marketplace to me. And as I
mentioned elsewhere, I wasn't allowed until recently to make a free
choice.
>> Otherwise we're back to the Bell System and we must wait for the
>> government to tell us what we may and may not have.
> Uh, no. Please, put down the kool-aid and think about what's really
> going on.
Sorry, but outsiders are attempting to dictate to me -- as a consumer
-- what business arrangements I want to make. You people claim it
will be "better" for me if you do so.
------------------------------
Subject: Spam Targeted at TD Subscribers?
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2005 07:24:27 -0400
From: Micheal Quinn <quinnm@bah.com>
Has anyone else on the Telecom Digest heard from this idiot? The
subject line is so specific that I assume he may have harvested my
address from here. I do use my legit address when I occasionally
post.
I only regret that he doesn't have a toll free number, but maybe he'll
accept a collect call.
Sorry for the disturb and thanks a lot for your patient, as Jun Wang
would say.
Regards,
Mike
-----Original Message-----
From: Jun Wang [mailto:wwwjjjj8866@yahoo.com.cn]=20
Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2005 8:07 PM
To: Quinn Michael
Subject: Various low price Telecom products
Importance: High [TD Editor Notes: But of course!]
Dear Sir,
We know your company via internet offering and purchasing list. Sorry
for the disturb without your permission.
It's my favor to introduce our plant as one professional
telecommunication products manufacture here in Shanghai.
We supply many kinds of Telecom products as follows:
1...Fiber optic jumper: SM 9/125um, MM 50/125um, 62.5/125um; simplex,
duplex; Cable type-PVC, LSZH; Jacket-OFNR, OFNP; Polishing-PC, UPC, APC;
connector-SC, ST, FC, LC, MTRJ, MU ...
2...Net work patch panel: CAT5E, CAT6; AMP, SYSTIMAX, OEM; 24 ports, 48
ports;...
3...LAN cable: UTP, FTP, SFTP; CAT5, CAT5E, CAT6; 305M/Carton or
500M/Roll...
4...LAN patch cable: UTP, FTP, SFTP; CAT5, CAT5E, CAT6; 8P4C, 8[8C;
0.5M, 1M, 1.5M, 2M, 3M, 5M, 10M...
5...USB cable:USB1.1, USB2.0; A/M-A/M, A/M-A/F, A/M-B/M, B/M-B/M...
6...Phone cable: 6P2C, 6P4C line cable, 4P4C Coiled; 0.5M, 1M, 1.5M, 2M,
3M, 5M, 10M...=20
7...Telecom components: Keystone jack, face plat, crimping tools,
connection strips...
Welcome OEM and Custom order!
Anything we can do for you just contact with us directly by:
prestonsh@126.com.
Jun Wang
TEL:+86 21 67820784
FAX:+86 21 67820791
------------------------------------------
If no use for you, please send one "No thanks" mail to: cable88@163.com,
your won't receive this mail in the future again.
[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, perhaps the several hundred
thousand readers who see this should write mailto://cable88@162.com
and tell Mr. Wang 'no use for me, thanks' as he asks. And no, Michael,
harvesting names from this Digest has been a long time favored
activity of the luncheon meat eaters. No news here, no suprise. All
the luncheon meat eaters get from this end now and then is a blast
of 'no thanks' notes from polite readers, rude, crude and lewd relies
from less courteous readers, and a hideous bill on their 800 number
if they bothered to include one in their email. PAT]
------------------------------
From: Hudson Leighton <hudsonl@skypoint.com>
Subject: Is it Sp*m if They Are Offering to Set You Up as a Sp*mmer?
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2005 09:43:02 -0500
Received the following email today, names and address removed to protect
the guilty.
******
BulletProof server:
Fresh IPs
1024MB RAM
P4 CPU
72GB SCSI
Dedicated 100M fiber
Unlimited Data Transfer
Any software
Based in China
US$599.00 for per month
May use the server for:
Bulk Hosting
Direct Mailing
We also supply Target list according to your
order and sending out your message for you.
*****
[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I've been thinking I should write a
note to those people and ask them how many netters take them up on
their offer to 'rent their server' for direct mail purposes. If
they can get $599 per customer/month it would pay me to discontinue
this Digest and turn my computer totally into a 'bullet proof' direct
spam -- err, I mean, mail server. Even just one customer per month
would pay off better for me than this Digest does at $599 each. PAT]
------------------------------
Subject: Last Laugh! Turning the Tables on Nigeria's E-Mail Conmen
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2005 07:47:26 -0400
From: Michael Quinn <quinnm@bah.com>
This BBC News article about getting back at the senders of "get rich
quick" scam messages may amuse some Telecom Digest readers. The
pictures alone are hilarious.
Regards,
Mike
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/3887493.stm
[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thanks for passing this along. The
pictures are funny. 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
************************
---------------------------------------------------------------
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 #386
******************************
| |