TELECOM Digest     Tue, 20 Dec 2005 00:18:00 EST    Volume 24 : Issue 570

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Icahn Says Deal With AOL/Google is Stupid and Outrageous (Erich Auchard)
    TXU amd Current Team Up on Internet Over Power Lines (Reuters News Wire)
    Web Site Emails the Future (Nahal Toosi)
    Re: Congress: Merry Christmas! We're Turning Off Analog Outs (C. Griswold)
    Re: Congress: Merry Christmas! We're Turning Off Analog Outs (panoptes)
    Re: Physically Protecting The Local Loop Metwork? (Scott Dorsey)
    Re: Physically Protecting The Local Loop Metwork? (Gordon Burditt)
    Re: Spam (was FTC Do Not Call List) (Seth Breidbart)
    Re: Letter From Russia (Seth Breidbart)
    Re: Congress: Merry Christmas! We're Turning Off Analog Outs (R.T. Wurth)
    Re: Wikipedia Becomes Internet Force, But Faces Crisis (Seth Breidbart)
    Re: Verizon/Yahoo ISP Service From Hell (Steve Sobol)
    Mexican Officials Say Bush Fence Blocking Plan is Stupid (William Weissert)

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: Eric Auchard <reuters2telecom-digest.org>
Subject: Icahn Says deal With AOL/Google is Stupid and Outrageous
Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2005 21:23:06 -0600


Icahn seeks to derail Google as partner of AOL

By Eric Auchard

Dissident shareholder Carl Icahn on Monday labeled as "disastrous" a
new deal set to be unveiled this week between Time Warner Inc.'s
America Online unit and Web search leader Google Inc., as the
billionaire investor argued that AOL could do better. "Not only
stupid, but disasterous and outrageous," he claimed.

Icahn said in a letter to Time Warner's board of directors that the
company appeared to be on the verge of a "disastrous decision"
following reports it is in talks to sell a 5 percent stake of its AOL
Internet unit to Google Inc..

Icahn, whose group has a 3.1 percent stake in Time Warner, said he
feared a Google pact may preclude a merger or other deals with the
likes of eBay Inc., Yahoo Inc.  IAC/InterActiveCorp, or Microsoft
Corp.

"Like all shareholders, I am not opposed to Time Warner entering into
an AOL transaction that creates long-term value," Icahn
wrote. "However, I am deeply concerned that the Time Warner board may
be on the verge of making a disastrous decision concerning an
agreement with Google," he said.

In the past several months, Icahn has blasted Time Warner's every move
as falling short of realizing the company's full value. He has hired
investment bank Lazard Ltd to wage a campaign to replace a majority of
Time Warner's directors.

A Time Warner spokesman declined to comment. "There's nothing new
here, and given that, we're not going to comment," spokeswoman Kathy
McKiernan said.

A Google spokesman was not immediately available to comment.

Shares of Google, which traded to record intra-day high level of
$446.21, up 3.7 percent on the day, turned tail and fell back on news
of Icahn's opposition to the potential new search and advertising deal
between AOL and Google.

Google shares fell $5.55, or 1.3 percent, to close at $424.60 on
Monday on Nasdaq. Meanwhile, Time Warner shares finished off 5 cents
at $17.95 on the New York Stock Exchange.

Icahn, who has said he is waging an "all-out proxy battle" to force
Time Warner to step up asset sales and streamline, cited a recent
report by Goldman Sachs that argued that Google may not be the best
long-term partner for America Online.

Wall Street analysts debated whether the $1 billion, which sources
said Google was prepared to pay AOL for a 5 percent stake, was a
meaningful calculation of the implied overall value of AOL -- $20
billion -- if it were spun-off.

Some analysts groused that the investment could simply be an expedient
way for Google to keep AOL as a key customer and thwart rival
Microsoft from gaining a foothold in advertising. Citigroup analyst
Mark Mahaney calculated that AOL's business declined to just 1.9
percent of Google's net revenue recently.

Another financial analyst, who declined to be named, said Google may
view the $1 billion stake as a small down payment to avert the loss of
AOL as its biggest single customer and thereby defend its lofty $125
billion market capitalization.

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. And, discuss this and other topics in our forum at
http://telecom-digest.org/forum (or) http://telecom-digest.org/chat/index.html

For more news headlines, please go to:
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra/newstoday.html

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

From: Reuters News Wire <reuters@telecom-digest.org> 
Subject: TXU and Current Team up on Internet Over Power Lines
Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2005 21:25:28 -0600


TXU Corp., Texas's largest utility, said on Monday it was teaming up
with Current Communications Group to offer high-speed Internet access
over power lines to about 2 million homes and businesses in the state.

The companies also said they plan to use Current's broadband over
power line (BPL) technology to allow TXU to more actively monitor and
manage its electrical grid.

TXU agreed to pay Current about $150 million over 10 years to use the
"smart grid" capabilities of Current's BPL network. the companies said
in a statement. TXU said the payments will not affect its previously
disclosed financial forecasts.

Privately-held BPL provider Current, whose investors include Google
Inc. and U.S. utility Cinergy Corp., will provide broadband and
wireless Internet services to TXU's customers under the agreement.

TXU will also become an equity holder in Current as part of the
agreement.

The companies plan to start deploying the broadband network in 2006.

Broadband service over power lines has been highly touted by equipment
makers and federal regulators as a possible competitor to cable and
telephone services that handle almost all of the roughly 40 million
U.S.  residential broadband connections.

But until recently U.S. utilities interested in the service have faced
various financial and technical problems. The signals used to carry
data over electrical lines can cause interference with radio
equipment, and can travel only a short distance before weakening,
requiring repeaters in many areas.

Some analysts have also said that most utilities don't have the skills
to challenge companies that already have years of experience in the
fiercely competitive Internet service business.

Nevertheless several top U.S. power companies, including Cinergy and
CenterPoint Energy Inc., have recently made investments in BPL. Aside
from the draw of additional revenue from providing Internet services,
the companies have been attracted by the possibility of cost savings
from enhancement of their electrical grids.

TXU said that it hopes to increase network reliability and power
quality and efficiently implement automated meter reading through its
partnership with Current. It said the technology should also help it
prevent, detect and restore customer outages more effectively.

TXU's electric transmission unit, TXU Electric Delivery, provides
power to over 2.9 million electric delivery points.

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. And, discuss this and other topics in our forum at
http://telecom-digest.org/forum (or) http://telecom-digest.org/chat/index.html

For more news headlines and stories, please to TELECOM Digest News
Radio:  http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra/TDNewsradio.html

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

From: Nahal Toosi <ap@telecom-digest.org> 
Subject: Web Site Lets Users Send Email to the Future
Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2005 21:27:44 -0600


By NAHAL TOOSI, Associated Press Writer

In the year 2009, on the 25th of April, a man named Greg is supposed
to get an e-mail. The e-mail will remind Greg that he is his best
friend and worst enemy, that he once dated a woman named Michelle, and
that he planned to major in computer science.

"More importantly," the e-mail says, "are you wearing women's
clothing?"

The e-mail was sent by none other than Greg himself -- through a Web
site called FutureMe.org.

The site is one of a handful that let people send e-mails to
themselves and others years in the future. They are technology's
answer to time capsules, trading on people's sense of curiosity,
accountability and nostalgia.

"Messages into the future is something that people have always sought
to do," said Paul Saffo, director of the Institute for the Future. "In
a way, it's a statement of optimism."

Matt Sly, 29, came up with the concept for FutureMe.org about four
years ago. He was inspired one day after recalling how during his
education he had been given assignments to write letters to himself.

Sly, who partnered with 31-year-old Jay Patrikios of San Francisco on
the project, said the site has made maybe $58 through donations. He is
adamant that FutureMe.org is not a reminder service and that users
should think long-term.

The site lets people send messages 30 years from now, though Sly's
numbers show most users schedule their e-mails to be sent within three
years.

"We want people to think about their future and what their goals and
dreams and hopes and fears are," he said. "We're trying to facilitate
some serious existential pondering."

He said a large number of the messages sent do one of two basic
things: tell the future person what the past person was doing at the
time, and ask the future person if he or she had met the aspirations
of the past person.

"The tone of the past person is not always friendly," said Sly, now a
Yale University graduate student. "It's often like 'Get off your lazy
butt.'"

Recently, Forbes.com jumped on the idea, offering an "e-mail time
capsule" promotion. More than 140,000 letters were collected over
about six weeks.  Nearly 20 percent of the messages sent are supposed
to land in the sender's inbox in 20 years; others requested shorter
time frames. Forbes.com is partnering with Yahoo! and Codefix
Consulting on the project.

"A lot of people have kind of been freaked out by it," said David
Ewalt, a Forbes.com writer who worked on the project. "It really makes
you stop and think about your life in a way that you usually don't."

Another type of future message service can be found at sites such as
myLastEmail.com or LastWishes.com, which promise to send messages to
loved ones (or less-than-loved ones) after you die.

Paul Hudson, co-founder of the International Time Capsule Society,
said e-mail time capsules were new to him.

"Part of the value of time capsules are that they are thought
processes in the present," said Hudson, a historian who teaches at
Georgia Perimeter College. "You define yourself when you do a time
capsule. It might be a good exercise in introspection."

But sometimes the past is best left behind, said Saffo, who personally
finds the whole thing "sad and really weird."

"The lesson about all these things, it's the lesson from time
capsules, is you have to be careful lest you set yourself up for
enormous embarrassment in two decades," Saffo said. "Do you really
want to be reminded that you thought ABBA was cool?"

Service providers try to make the delivery process fail-safe through
partnerships or back up software, and they urge people to hang on to
their e-mail address, but there's no ironclad guarantee that the
message will ever arrive.

Technology changes. Companies go out of business. Spam filters might
get in the way.

Still, that hasn't deterred a sizable number of people from signing
up.

On FutureMe.org, where more than 112,000 messages have been written,
many writers are confident enough to make their e-mails -- though not
necessarily their names -- public.

"I hope that I've learned to take responsibility for my actions -- to
not be passive aggressive and to not avoid things that are scary for
me," one wrote. "I hope I've changed a little."

"Are you missing an eye? If so, I apologize." wrote another.

And, of course, the cautious optimist: "Hell, I hope you're still
alive."

___

On the Net:

 . http://www.FutureMe.org

Copyright 2005 The Associated Press.

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. And, discuss this and other topics in our forum at
http://telecom-digest.org/forum (or) http://telecom-digest.org/chat/index.html

For more news headlines and audio from Associated Press go to:
http://telecom-digest.org/tg-extra/AP.html

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

From: Clark W. Griswold, Jr. <spamtrap100@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Congress: "Merry Chrismas! We're Turning Off Your Analog Outs"
Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2005 17:10:57 -0700
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com


hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:

> Just out of curiosity, do radio stations have to pay a royalty to
> record companies when they play music?  

No & Yes -- There are three major "performance rights" agencies in the
US. ASCAP, BMI and SESAC. These organizations collect royalties form
radio stations and distribute them to the composer, lyricist and
performer, but not to the record company.

For reasons that escape me right now, but probably having to do with
radio being a giant advertising medium for the record companies, no
royalty is paid to the record company.

> What are the rules, if any, for someone recording a song off the
> radio or a tape off of TV?

Depends on who's point of view is being presented. As long as its for
personal use, most legal authorities would hold no foul. Hand the copy
to a friend?  Technically wrong, but you aren't likely to be
tagged. Sell the copies on eBay?  You'll get tagged quickly.

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

From: panoptes@iquest.net
Subject: Re: Congress: "Merry Chrismas! We're Turning Off Your Analog Outs"
Date: 19 Dec 2005 17:44:21 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com


hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:

> Just out of curiosity, do radio stations have to pay a royalty to
> record companies when they play music?

Of course.

http://www.ascap.com/licensing/radio/

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

From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey)
Subject: Re: Physically Protecting The Local Loop Metwork?
Date: 19 Dec 2005 10:11:31 -0500
Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000)


<hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:

> Today customers own all their equipment that is supposed to be
> certified.  But what happens if the customer alters the equipment or
> it is defective?  What happens if a high voltage is sent out
> accidently over a telephone line (ie house current, either 110 or 220,
> or ringing current meant for an extension telephone of a PBX)?

What happens is that my line starts getting noisy.  It's true that
crosstalk between lines is much lower than it was back in the days of
paper insulation and less careful twisting of pairs.  But high levels
on one pair will leak into adjacent pairs.  Getting someone from Qwest
to understand that this is an issue, however, is difficult.

> Further, is there any kind of high powered signal that could be sent
> over a phone line that would result in crosstalk or service disruption
> to the neighbors or other kinds of RF interference?

Sure.  Any of the above.  Put a high pitched tone at a high level on
the phone, and it'll turn up all over the place.  Use a crappy
answering machine that unbalances your pair and plays an outgoing
message at +20, and your neighbors will hear it.  Qwest doesn't care,
though. 

 --scott -- "C'est un Nagra.  C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

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

From: gordonb.wvukh@burditt.org (Gordon Burditt)
Subject: Re: Physically Protecting The Local Loop Metwork?
Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2005 00:27:10 -0000
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com


> I think I remember once seeing a little circuit board that did nothing
> except guarantee Part 68 compliance.  (It even had its own Ringer
> Equivalence Number, a whole 0.0B.)  It was designed for people who
> wanted to attach their own homebrew projects to the phone line but not
> worry about causing problems.  I don't remember where I saw it, sorry,
> but you could probably find something like it wherever you buy other
> bare electronic circuit thingies.

A long time ago, when they first started allowing other people to
connect modems to a phone line, but NOT directly, there was the DAA
("Data Access Arrangement", I think).  I worked with these in the late
1970's.  You rented it from the phone company.  It had a defined
interface so you could pass voice through it, take the phone off the
hook, pulse dial, detect ringing, etc.  For tone dialing you'd just
take the phone off hook and send tones.  For pulse dialing you'd do
the equivalent of rapidly jiggling switch-hook.  Most of it was
providing isolation between the phone line and your side so if
lightning hit your gadget, it wouldn't get through to the phone line
(much).  It was also supposed to protect the other way.  Typically
there was transformer isolation for the voice signal and maybe relay
or optical isolation for the ringing signal and switch-hook.

Eventually they built these into modems, but I can still see a use for
these as interfaces to one-off projects that aren't worth going
through FCC certification for.

Gordon L. Burditt

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

From: sethb@panix.com (Seth Breidbart)
Subject: Re: Spam (was FTC Do Not Call List)
Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2005 01:12:50 UTC
Organization: Society for the Promulgation of Cruelty to the Clueless


In article <telecom24.563.14@telecom-digest.org>,
Jim Haynes <jhaynes@alumni.uark.edu> wrote:

> One scheme that seemed to me to have some promise was to detect spam
> in the SMTP receiving program and deliberately delay its responses
> to the sending program.  So that the transaction of sending a message
> is stretched out far longer than normal.

That's called tarpitting.  It would work against spammers who use
their own resources to send.  Those who use armies of zombies wouldn't
care.

Seth

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

From: sethb@panix.com (Seth Breidbart)
Subject: Re: Letter From Russia
Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2005 01:50:25 UTC
Organization: Society for the Promulgation of Cruelty to the Clueless


In article <telecom24.566.15@telecom-digest.org>, TELECOM Digest
Editor noted in response to a message from Valentin
<valent@mailrus.ru>:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I thought about this message for quite
> a while, and although it would probably qualify as spam (by virtue of
> how many copies were distributed, I personally do not think it is a
> scam.

It's spam.

Spam is theft.

Therefore, it's a scam.

If he's so hard up, where did he get the resources to spam with?

Wasn't there just a thread on why spam continues, because so many
idiots send money to spammers?  Some are suckers for bigger bodyparts,
others for free money, others for helping the needy.  All of those are
reasons that spam continues.

Seth


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I suppose he probably got the resources
to send the spam from the local public library, where he said he 
looked up other information.  Many libraries are nto set up on their
public terminals to block spam from going out. As far as 'why spam 
continues to be a success' the only reason (of the several you named)
which I would consider at least a wee bit acceptable would be helping
the needy. And do you consider the occassional 'call for papers'
printed here and at other sites to be 'spam'?  Or the monthly notices
or minutes of meetings from the EFF, ICANN and similar?  Those are
unsolicited also, yet they keep coming out to the entire net.   PAT]

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

Subject: Re: Congress: "Merry Chrismas! We're Turning Off Your Analog Outs"
From: R. T. Wurth <rwurth@att.net>
Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2005 02:01:17 GMT
Organization: AT&T Worldnet


hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote in news:telecom24.569.15@telecom-digest.org:

[...]

> Just out of curiosity, do radio stations have to pay a royalty to
> record companies when they play music?  What are the rules, if any,
> for someone recording a song off the radio or a tape off of TV?

(IANAL, this is just my opinion, do not rely on this as legal 
advice.  Furthermore, this reflects my understanding of the 
situation in the USA only.  If you need legal advice, hire a 
lawyer.)  

Yes, and no.  Radio stations pay a royalty to the composers and
(lyric) authors (or, more correctly, to the publishing company to
which they sold the rights) indirectly through license contracts with
ASCAP and BMI (and sometimes a 3rd agency, SECAC, which represents a
miniscule portion of the authors and composers).  ASCAP and BMI
license their entire libraries (and not just to radio stations, but
also to stores that play music, bars, restaurants, and night clubs)
for a single negotiated fee, take samples of music usage, and
distribute their collections (less collection fees and profits) to the
rights holders in proportion to the works' standings in the sample
results.

On the other hand, the actual performers (or the holders of their
royalty rights) receive nothing from the radio stations.  They are
held to be fully compensated by the exposure they receive and the
increased record and live performance ticket sales resulting
therefrom.  (Except, of course performer- author-composers, who still
receive their author/composer royalties, but nothing extra as
performers.)

Record companies don't figure into the equation, unless you consider
the illegal practice of payola, wherein they allegedly pay stations or
DJs to play certain songs, but we all know that's illegal, so no one
would actually to that (wink, wink; nod, nod).  In fact, most folks in
the radio biz would be "shocked! shocked!" (like the police chief in
_Casablanca_), to hear that anything like that goes on.

As to the 2nd question, IANAL, but my understanding is that under the
Sony Betamax decision, a person has at least the right to record off
the air for the purpose of time shifting, that is, a single viewing in
their own home for the enjoyment of themself and their family.  I
think (with less certainty) one may also have the right to keep the
recording around for more than one viewing.  I certainly believe one
does not have the right to sell (for cash or barter) the recording or
charge admission to a viewing.  I suspect trading or lending like for
like with other enthusiasts to fill gaps in one's viewing is a gray
area.  

-- Rich Wurth / rwurth@att.net / Rumson, NJ USA


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Regards the first part of your
statement on paying royalties what about classical music stations,
where a great deal of the music itself is in the public domain, owing
to the age of the compositions, etc?  PAT]

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

From: sethb@panix.com (Seth Breidbart)
Subject: Re: Wikipedia Becomes Internet Force, But Faces Crisis
Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2005 01:55:02 UTC
Organization: Society for the Promulgation of Cruelty to the Clueless


In article <telecom24.568.6@telecom-digest.org>, Robert Bonomi
<bonomi@host122.r-bonomni.com> wrote:

> In article <telecom24.566.10@telecom-digest.org>, Thor Lancelot Simon
> <tls@rek.tjls.com> wrote:

>> In article <telecom24.565.7@telecom-digest.org>, Dave Garland
>> <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> wrote:

>>> The exercise revealed numerous errors in both encyclopaedias, but
>>> among 42 entries tested, the difference in accuracy was not
>>> particularly great: the average science entry in Wikipedia contained
>>> around four inaccuracies; Britannica, about three ...

>> I'm astonished that a 25% difference is considered "not particularly
>> great".

> I'm astonished that something that can be explained by "jitter" of
> "plus/minus one count" in 'ordinal' numeric data, would be considered
> anything _other_ than "not particularly great".  Well, unless they do
> not really understand statistical analysis, that is.

3 vs 4 is jitter.  126 vs. 168 is a bigger difference, though it's the
same 25%.  (Unless you believe that there are a lot of off-by-one
errors, _all_ in the same direction.)

Seth

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

From: Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net>
Subject: Re: Verizon/Yahoo ISP Service from Hell
Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2005 19:37:46 -0800
Organization: Glorb Internet Services, http://www.glorb.com


harold@hallikainen.com wrote:

> Why do communications companies "partner" with content companies? 

To compete with AOL, which for years provided content *and*
access. They still do content, of course, but they don't do broadband
access. They still do do dialup.

Steve Sobol, Professional Geek   888-480-4638   PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
Company website: http://JustThe.net/
Personal blog, resume, portfolio: http://SteveSobol.com/
E: sjsobol@JustThe.net Snail: 22674 Motnocab Road, Apple Valley, CA 92307

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

From: Will Weissert <ap@telecom-digest.org>
Subject: Mexican Officials Say Bush Fence Blocking Plan is Stupid
Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2005 21:21:00 -0600


By WILL WEISSERT, Associated Press Writer

Mexico's foreign secretary Monday leveled his country's sharpest
criticism yet at U.S. proposal for a fence along parts of its southern
border, condemning it as "stupid" and "underhanded."

In a radio interview, Luis Ernesto Derbez said U.S. legislators who
approved the bill were turning a blind eye to the contributions
millions of migrants from Mexico and elsewhere make to America's
economy and culture.

"It's a law that looks underhanded to everybody ... stupid," Derbez
said.

On Friday, the U.S. House of Representatives voted 239-182 in favor of
an immigration enforcement bill, which includes a proposal to build
700 miles of border fencing along parts of California, Arizona, New
Mexico and Texas.

Under the measure, soldiers and police would help stop people sneaking
across, and employers would have to check the legal status of their
workers.

Derbez said he was confident the bill would not make it past the U.S.
Senate, which he said was not as easily swayed as the House.

Reacting Sunday to the bill's approval, Mexican President Vicente Fox
said "this wall is shameful," and called the plan hypocritical for a
country made up of immigrants.

Fox has for years called for an immigration agreement with Washington
granting some form of legal status to Mexicans who sneak into
U.S. territory in search of work.

President Bush proposed a new guest worker program with three-year
work visas, but lawmakers refused to include the initiative in the
immigration bill passed Friday.

Authorities estimate there are about 11 million undocumented migrants
in the United States, about half of them Mexican. There have also been
suggestions to build a similar fence across the several thousand miles
of Canadian border.

Copyright 2005 The Associated Press. 

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. And, discuss this and other topics in our forum at
http://telecom-digest.org/forum (or) http://telecom-digest.org/chat/index.html

For more news from Associated Press audio and headline stories, go to:
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra/AP.html



[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This reminds me of the feeble efforts
by folks in the village of Evanston, IL (the immediate north suburb of
Chicago) to try and discourage criminals and others from Chicago
driving drunkenly, like bats out of hell coming from Chicago into the
north suburb (where crime _was_ virtually zilch for many years.) The
only part of Evanston in those day (late 1980's) and even today is the
strip of (common street) 1400 to 2400 West Howard Street in
Chicago. For many years, that three or four block area where city of
Chicago dips north of Howard Street along Bosworth Street and Paulina
Street past Juneway Terrace and Jonquil Terrace has been the 'wild
west'.  They don't call it 'Jonquil Jungle' for no reason.  Village of
Evanston usually is a straight east/west line north of Howard Street
but in that little section behind the elevated tracks the boundary
line gets irregular for a few blocks and runs east and in the alley
behind Calvary Cemetery (Evanston) over to the lakefront. What the
Village of Evanston did was turn _every one_ of the streets which 
intersect with Howard Street _one way_ southbound into Chicago. Although
they left Sheridan Road alone the next two through streets (Clark
Street in Chicago becomes 'Chicago Avenue' when it hits Evanston and
Western Avenue in Chicago turns into some other street when it reaches
Evanston. The only way to get into Evanston from Chicago along there
in that crime-ridden area was a little two lane thing behind the 
elevated tracks where Paulina Street connects into Juneway Terrace.
"Those snots!" proclaimed Mayor Daley the Second; "they don't want us
in their village!"  Either cross into Evanston on Sheridan Road (a
nice neighborhood) or drive down Howard Street a number of blocks 
through the black area until they get to the white area of town again.
Then Evanston decided to build a concrete barrier -- a little island
 -- on _their_ side of Howard Street a few blocks further west, and
the Chicago alderman in that neighborhood (Bernie Stone) went to 
battle with Evanston officials about that. 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 #570
******************************