Previous Issue (Only one)
Classified Ads
TD Extra News

Add this Digest to your personal   or  

 

Message Digest Volume 28 : Issue 34 : "text" Format Messages in this Issue: Re: nano cell site Re: Windows area code rules Re: Local Police Want Right to Jam Wireless Signals Re: Local Police Want Right to Jam Wireless Signals Re: Local Police Want Right to Jam Wireless Signals 867-5309' number for sale on eBay 'Foul play' suspected in Tucson Super Bowl porn feed ====== 27 years of TELECOM Digest -- Founded August 21, 1981 ====== 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, and other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2009 11:22:00 -0500 From: Will Roberts <oldbear@arctos.com> To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu Subject: Re: nano cell site Message-ID: <0MKpCa-1LU1bv39Zu-0007HM@mrelay.perfora.net> In Telecom Digest, Robert Neville <dont@bother.com> wrote: >Date: Sun, 01 Feb 2009 08:16:08 -0700 >From: Robert Neville <dont@bother.com> >To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu >Subject: Re: nano cell site >Message-ID: <lqebo4h6vaakbajds70i7buceq2ohg5pkr@4ax.com> > >kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote: > >>No, the device talks to your phone and it also talks to a local >>cell tower. It acts effectively as a repeater. > >There are two types of devices. One is a true repeater, where you install an >antenna on a roof or tower to pick up the cell signal, then rebroadcast it on >another antenna inside the building. These work for any cell company and any >number of users. > >The devices being discussed are femtocells. These are restricted to a specific >company, plug into a broadband connection and act as mini cell towers. The >communicate back to the cell network over your broadband connection, not through the cell company air network. > >AIUI, the femtocells allow you to restrict the number of users by specific >phone. At least one model restricts originating calls to within 15' of the >femtocell. Whether you can leave them open to all phones, I don't know. They >also have a GPS receiver embedded that prevents them from being used outside the US. I don't know the specific details about how the "femtocell" base station which connects via a broadband internet connection works, but Robert Neville has done a good job at explaining the difference between this device and the cellular "boosters" (repeaters) which use a high gain antenna to provide a connection to the existing wireless cellular network. I tried one of these repeater devices made by Zboost (http://www.wi-ex.com/) because my home is poorly served by AT&T's wireless signal. (There are three AT&T towers nearby, but because of a strange quirk of geography and fate, my location is shielded from each by relatively a small rock out-cropping, dense forest, and the shadow of a hillside. For that reason, I am now using Verizon -- without the Zboost -- because it has one tower which is just high enough to provide a signal over the intervening hillside.) Quoting from the Zboost manual: >Before installing zBoost in your home, make sure that you can place calls >on the outside of your home or in the attic or at roof level where you >will install the signal antenna. The zBoost Series can only bring cell >phone signals into your home if cell phone signals are reaching the >outside of your home, your attic or at roof level. > >Using your cell phone, place a call from an outdoor location to confirm >that enough signal is present to complete the call. If a weak signal is >available at ground level, check the signal strength in an attic or roof >level location where the signal antenna could be installed for best >performance. > >If you can reliably make and receive calls outside your home, then zBoost >can bring the signal into your home. > >The Zboost YX500/510 Series is designed to cover multiple signals >simultaneously and will allow multiple users to operate at the same time. >For example, if there were 8 people in the same room then the system >would help each of them. (The full manual for this device is may be found online in PDF format at http://www.wpsantennas.com/pdf/amplifier/zBoost_Manual.pdf ) Worth noting is that the Zboost does some clever stuff in choosing which frequencies to use so that it minimizes the likelihood that it will feedback its own signal. That means that if it is communicating with the local cell tower one channel, it will use a different channel to communicate with your handset. This gets even more interesting, because the Zboost will also try to confirm that the channel is available and not it use by your next door neighbor communicating directly with the cell tower -- something which would cause an obvious conflict. It would seem that any "femtocell" device would need to do similar signal processing to assure that it was not stepping on a channel in use by another nearby femtocell device (say, your upstairs neighbor in an apartment building) or on a signal from the phone company's own cell towers in the area. In other words, the problem of integrating femtocells into an existing cellular network is not trivial and is more complicated than just connecting a cordless phone base station to a VoIP interface device. I'd also be curious to know if one can set up a femtocell device to recognize only one's own handset(s) or if the femtocell is promiscuous and available for use by anyone within its range. Specific situations might determine how one would want one's femtocell configured: to keep one's neighbors from using one's limited backhaul bandwidth or to allow friends to be able to make and receive calls using their own handsets when visiting. Just some thoughts. Regards, Will ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2009 17:07:58 +0000 (UTC) From: richgr@panix.com (Rich Greenberg) To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu Subject: Re: Windows area code rules Message-ID: <gm799e$m2f$1@reader1.panix.com> In article <ehhbo45557952nqa7t2kvnfeh196qmrd1p@4ax.com>, Robert Neville <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >If I understand what you are asking, I think you need to reverse things. That >is, you create a general rule that states for all calls to other area codes, you >must dial a "1" before the area. This is your default rule listed as "My >Location". Yes, thats what I want, and I would have thought it would be an automatic default, but some dialing errors in winfax made me think it doesn't. >Then you edit "My Location" to create the exceptions. In the tab called "Area >Code Rules", you list all the codes you do not want to dial "1" in front of. >Presumably those would be for overlay codes, or nearby codes that are not long >distance. You can even drill down farther, and specify specific prefixes in >those codes that you do not dial "1" for. That part I see, but I don't think its what I want. I have to do some more experimenting. Thanks for your help. -- Rich Greenberg N Ft Myers, FL, USA richgr atsign panix.com + 1 239 543 1353 Eastern time. N6LRT I speak for myself & my dogs only. VM'er since CP-67 Canines:Val, Red, Shasta & Casey (RIP), Red & Zero, Siberians Owner:Chinook-L Retired at the beach Asst Owner:Sibernet-L ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2009 12:45:37 -0600 From: Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu Subject: Re: Local Police Want Right to Jam Wireless Signals Message-ID: <MfqdnVC_fZdRoxrUnZ2dnUVZ_gydnZ2d@posted.visi> hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: > Sadly, there are situations where such blocking is necessary to > protect public safety, such as to prevent cellphone detonation of > bombs, a common tactic. Also prisons need control over contraband > phones and communications. Such jamming ("blocking" would be shielding the building so that radio waves could not enter or exit, which might be a useful thing to do to prisons) is always a tradeoff between usefulness and damage done (e.g., preventing an emergency call by someone else in the area). If the police are to use this tool, we need legislation such that its usage is formally logged as to time and place, and making the police liable for any damages caused to unintended victims. If police can use this tool with impunity and without regard to collateral damage, they will do it widely. (After all, almost anyone they are chasing might have a cellphone that needs jamming.) Dave ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2009 21:22:55 GMT From: "Tony Toews \[MVP\]" <ttoews@telusplanet.net> To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu Subject: Re: Local Police Want Right to Jam Wireless Signals Message-ID: <8soeo4d34u2q6gltq4fhd8rf4ic5thbpe3@4ax.com> hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: >Sadly, there are situations where such blocking is necessary to >protect public safety, such as to prevent cellphone detonation of >bombs, a common tactic. And of course there are a mutlitude of other frequencies which you can use to set off a bomb. For example a tone sent over a FRS/GMRS radio.. Put a directional antenna on the recieving device and have the transmitter in the directional antennas path. There's next to no way of jamming that. Tony -- Tony Toews, Microsoft Access MVP Please respond only in the newsgroups so that others can read the entire thread of messages. Microsoft Access Links, Hints, Tips & Accounting Systems at http://www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm Tony's Microsoft Access Blog - http://msmvps.com/blogs/access/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2009 21:20:44 -0500 From: T <kd1s.nospam@cox.nospam.net> To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu Subject: Re: Local Police Want Right to Jam Wireless Signals Message-ID: <MPG.23f17409867110a29898cc@reader.motzarella.org> In article <8soeo4d34u2q6gltq4fhd8rf4ic5thbpe3@4ax.com>, ttoews@telusplanet.net says... > > hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: > > >Sadly, there are situations where such blocking is necessary to > >protect public safety, such as to prevent cellphone detonation of > >bombs, a common tactic. > > And of course there are a mutlitude of other frequencies which you can use to set off > a bomb. For example a tone sent over a FRS/GMRS radio.. Put a directional antenna > on the recieving device and have the transmitter in the directional antennas path. > There's next to no way of jamming that. > > Tony Not to mention the CB band, Amateur radio bands, et al. Hell, you could even use a 49MHz baby monitor for the purposes at hand. And not for anything but aren't the miraculous trunked radio systems up in the 800MHz band? And isn't some cell service right around that same band? Should be interesting as this flies afoul of FCC regulation. ***** Moderator's Note ***** I assume that the Secret Service has considered all the possibilities, but it's true that there are a lot of things other than cell phones which pose a risk. Bomb makers are not usually expert technicians. Hollywood stereotypes to the contrary, the typical bomber is, above all, a creature of habit: he knows one design and sticks to it. If a bomber learned a design that uses a cell phone, he'll stay with it. There's another factor, which is that cell phones are not, in and of themselves, suspicious. It may be convenient to use a cell phone as part of a triggering mechanism, but that's not what makes cell phones per se attractive to bombers. A bomber's biggest concern is how to blend into the crowd after planting a bomb: a cell phone in a bomber's pocket is just a cell phone until he dials the fatal number, but any other kind of transmitter would single him out. If I had to guess at which frequencies the Secret Service would be most likely to jam, other than the cellular channels, it would be the ones used for remote control of model aircraft and other toys. Not only are the transmitters and receiver easy to obtain, small, and designed to work on low power - they're also designed to operate remote actuators, e.g., the electromechanical linkages between an r/c receiver and a model aircraft's control surfaces. That capability is, of course, tailor made for use in triggering a bomb. Bill Horne Temporary Moderator ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2009 18:08:51 -0500 From: Diamond Dave <dmine45.NOSPAM@yahoo.com> To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu Subject: 867-5309' number for sale on eBay Message-ID: <d7veo492mmd0au7t61go2rqie95v6d5u4q@4ax.com> >From CNN's website posted 2/2/2009 http://www.cnn.com/2009/SHOWBIZ/Music/02/02/ebay.jennys.number/index.html By Alan Duke CNN (CNN) -- Jenny's phone number is for sale, but not for a song. Bids for a New Jersey version of the number, stuck in the minds of millions since Tommy Tutone's "867-5309/Jenny" hit the Top 10 in 1982, had reached $5,100 on eBay as of Monday morning. The song is about a guy who finds Jenny's name and number scribbled on a bathroom wall. "This is really, in my opinion, one of the last cultural remnants of the '80s pop culture era ... other than the mullet," said Spencer Potter, a 28-year-old DJ who is selling the number he got for free five years ago. While Potter is overlooking the fact that "867-5309" is an active phone number in dozens of other area codes, it does get called a lot by curious people. Potter said he has gotten about 40 calls a day since he got the area code 201 version for his Weehawken, New Jersey, DJ business. "The minute we plugged the phone jack into the wall, it began ringing," Potter said. Mostly, Potter said, the callers are "a lot of '80s fanatics" and he lets the calls ring through to his voice mail. When he did answer a call three years ago, Potter found his own Jenny on the line. "She had been using my number to give out to guys that she didn't like at bars," he said. "It was a bum phone number." The young lady from Hoboken, New Jersey, told Potter she was just curious about who might be getting the calls. Potter ended up asking her out. "I figured if she was having to give out a bum number that often then she was probably pretty cute," he said. "We ended up meeting for drinks. We dated for awhile and it was actually a great friendship." Potter recently moved from Weehawken and decided to try to make money off the infamous digits with an eBay auction. Potter's DJ business goes with the number, a necessary provision to get around phone company rules against selling telephone numbers, he said. Phone companies technically own the numbers, not the customers. Potter said Vonage, the company that assigned the number, gave him permission to transfer it as part of the sale of his business. EBay halted a 2004 auction by the purported holder of the 212 area code version of the number, The New York Times reported. A Philadelphia-area resident who holds the toll-free versions -- both 800 and 888 -- said he values his numbers in the millions. Jeffrey Steinberg said his best offer so far, rejected several years ago, was for $1 million from a national weight-loss company. He acquired the numbers in the early 1990s for a pizza delivery campaign and has licensed them for other advertisers in the years since. Potter said when his auction ends next Monday, February 9, he hopes to make at least $40,000. He said he would use the money to take a Caribbean vacation -- away from his ringing phone. ------------------------- CNN's Laurie Segall and CNN Radio's April Williams contributed to this report. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2009 20:27:14 -0500 From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com> To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu Subject: 'Foul play' suspected in Tucson Super Bowl porn feed Message-ID: <p06240807c5ad4cddd6f8@[10.0.1.6]> UPDATED: 'Foul play' suspected in Tucson Super Bowl porn feed By Brian J. Pedersen ARIZONA DAILY STAR The pornographic content that interrupted thousands of local Comcast subscribers' Super Bowl broadcast was the result of an "isolated malicious act," a company spokeswoman said Monday. But company officials have yet to determine how that act was committed, spokeswoman Kelle Maslyn said, though any sort of equipment malfunction has been ruled out. "We did an extensive preliminary check on our technical systems, and everything appeared to be working properly when the incident occurred," Maslyn said. Meanwhile, the U.S. Attorney's office in Phoenix said it is looking into the interruption, which lasted about 30 seconds, and featured full male nudity. "We take this matter seriously," spokesman Wyn Hornbuckle said. "We're working with appropriate agencies to review the incident." One of those agencies, the Federal Communications Commission, was not aware of any formal complaints made regarding the porn clip, FCC media relations director David Fiske said Monday afternoon. It is still unclear how many viewers saw the clip, from a porn movie being shown on Shorteez, an adult cable channel offered by Comcast on a pay-per-view basis. Only Comcast subscribers who received a standard definition signal could see the clip, while those who watched the game on high-definition televisions were not affected, Maslyn said. Comcast is Southern Arizona's second-largest cable subscriber, with more than 80,000 customers in unincorporated Pima County, Marana and Oro Valley. ... http://www.azstarnet.com/sn/hourlyupdate/278448.php ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly to telecom- munications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition 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. The Telecom Digest is currently being moderated by Bill Horne while Pat Townson recovers from a stroke. Contact information: Bill Horne Telecom Digest 43 Deerfield Road Sharon MA 02067-2301 781-784-7287 bill at horne dot net Subscribe: telecom-request@telecom-digest.org?body=subscribe telecom Unsubscribe: mailto:telecom-request@telecom-digest.org?body=unsubscribe telecom 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://feeds.feedburner.com/telecomDigest Copyright (C) 2008 TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. ************************ --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 The Telecom digest (7 messages) ******************************