TD Extra News
Add this Digest to your personal or
The Telecom Digest for August 22, 2010 Volume 29 : Issue 227 : "text" Format Messages in this Issue:
====== 28 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: Fri, 20 Aug 2010 21:26:48 -0700 From: Thad Floryan <email@example.com> To: firstname.lastname@example.org. Subject: Re: In battle of smartphones, Google has the right answer Message-ID: <4C6F5588.email@example.com> On 8/19/2010 8:57 PM, Monty Solomon wrote: > TECH LAB > In battle of smartphones, Google has the right answer > Company's decision to distribute Android operating system widely > gives it an edge > > By Hiawatha Bray, Globe Staff | August 19, 2010 > > The war for smartphone domination is pretty much over, and the > reasons are sitting on my desk. > > There's the Vibrant from Samsung Group, a sleek, four-ounce beauty > with a dazzling color screen. Next to it sits the hulking, half-pound > Streak from PC maker Dell Inc., the biggest cellphone I've seen since > NBC canceled "Miami Vice.'' > > Each, in its own way, is delightful. And both are built around > Android, the smartphone operating system from Google Inc. that's > outselling Apple Inc.'s in the US smartphone market. > > Apple and its excellent iPhone will do fine, but Google will seize > most of the market because it has adopted Microsoft Corp.'s old PC > playbook. By selling Windows software to any computer maker, > Microsoft flooded the world with Windows machines. > > Today, there are just three iPhone models, all from Apple, and > available in the United States through just one cell carrier: AT&T. > There are more than 20 Android models, made by a host of companies, > and available from every cell carrier. Of course Android wins. > > The Android approach encourages phone designers to create innovative > devices to target particular niche markets. So we're getting products > like the Vibrant and the Streak, devices that have almost nothing in > common except the software they run. > [...] Yep, Android's where it's at. I don't even see anyone using iPhones here in Silicon Valley -- it's all Android. Earlier this week I attended the first annual Plug Computer Developer Camp hosted by Marvell (http://www.marvell.com/) in Santa Clara CA. Ugh, talk about information overload. :-) There were a ton of sessions focused on interfacing between Plug computers and Android; nothing for iPhone. A computer I received for attending the Camp is a Globalscale (http://www.globalscaletechnologies.com/ Guruplug Server which is about the same size as my SheevaPlugs and it features both WiFi and Bluetooth. What is neat about its WiFi is that it can be quickly changed from an AP (Access Point) to a Client. Note also the Server-Plus has two gigabit Ethernet ports vs. the Server's one. An amazing thing about these Plug computers is low power operation; I measured mine (using a Kill-A-Watt) to vary from 4 to 5 watts. From the factory the SheevaPlugs come with Ubuntu and the GuruPlugs with Debian installed. These are all based on 1.2GHz to 2GHz ARM computers which are used in many cellphones. I don't (yet) have pictures of my GuruPlug Server but you can see one of my SheevaPlugs here (pictures from 2009): http://thadlabs.com/PIX/SheevaPlug_first.jpg http://thadlabs.com/PIX/SheevaPlug_labelled.jpg http://thadlabs.com/PIX/SheevaPlug_underside.jpg http://thadlabs.com/PIX/Sheevaplug_Webmin.jpg http://thadlabs.com/PIX/SheevaPlug_ext_HD.jpg More info about Plugs at the above URL for Globalscale and here: http://plugcomputer.org/, and http://computingplugs.com/index.php/Main_Page Another manufacturer of Plug computers is Ionics (who uses the Marvell Sheeva 2 GHz 88F6282 RISC ARMs): http://www.ionicsplug.com, and http://www.ionics-ems.com ***** Moderator's Note ***** Ah, but WHY does Google have the right answer? Is Android going to change the way consumers use cell phones? I doubt it. Will it change the functionality? No. So, where's the advantage? Compared to the cost of the phone, or the revenue cell carriers receive, the license fees for existing phone software are probably not enough of a factor to make Android a game-changer. My 2¢. Bill Horne Moderator
Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2010 13:41:24 -0400 From: danny burstein <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: email@example.com. Subject: Why we love Ct. librarians, and admire Nicholas Merrill Message-ID: <Pine.NEB.firstname.lastname@example.org> Nicholas Merrill owned an ISP in NYC, was served with an FBI "National Security Letter" - along with an associated gag order. He fought it. Connecticut librarians received them, too, and with the gag orders as well. They fought back. Reporter Amy Goodman is co-host of a widely admired radio (and now tv) program, Democracy Now. Loosely affiliated with WBAI/Pacifica Radio in NYC and fed to affiliates around the world. She interviewed Mr. Merrill a week ago. Given that tens of thousands of NSLs have been served each year, many of which have been handed over to telecom and similar groups, the interview illustrates a disturbing practice. "We begin today's show with a guest here in New York who has been under an FBI gag order for the past six years. In early 2004, an FBI agent visited Nicholas Merrill and handed him a national security letter that ordered him to hand over detailed private records about some of his customers. At the time, Merrill was running an internet service provider in New York called Calyx. " Rest of transcript: http://www.democracynow.org/2010/8/11/gagged_for_6_years_nick_merrill _____________________________________________________ Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key email@example.com [to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]
Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2010 20:32:47 +0000 (UTC) From: "Adam H. Kerman" <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: email@example.com. Subject: Re: Why we love Ct. librarians, and admire Nicholas Merrill Message-ID: <firstname.lastname@example.org> danny burstein <email@example.com> wrote: >Nicholas Merrill owned an ISP in NYC, was served with an FBI >"National Security Letter" - along with an associated gag order. >He fought it. >Connecticut librarians received them, too, and with the >gag orders as well. They fought back. I thank them for standing up for liberty.
Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2010 17:00:39 +0000 (UTC) From: "Adam H. Kerman" <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: email@example.com. Subject: Re: Overlay acceptance Message-ID: <firstname.lastname@example.org> David Lesher <email@example.com> wrote: >"Adam H. Kerman" <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes: >>David Lesher <email@example.com> wrote: Please retain the attribution lines. >>>But now, does anyone even raise their voice? My pet theory is >>>coincident with splits/overlays was the saturation of users >>>with cell phones. Most cell phone calls are dialed with 10D; >>>and the users seem to cope. That coping seems to translate >>>back to wireline, even if the 2500 pad lacks a SPEND key to >>>push. >>I don't agree. >>While nearly no cell phone user cares about where the cell >>phone number is rated to (which could mean distance-based >>charges on an incoming caller's local calling plan), generally >>they care about area code, especially in situations in which >>7 digit home NPA dialing exists. >In MD, 10D has nothing to do with toll. All toll calls must be 11D. >(Local calls can be dialed with 10 or 11D.) I wasn't discussing dialing plans that included toll alerts. (My area has never had toll-alerting dialing plans.) I'm stating that a typical cell phone subscriber would request telephone number assignment from a particular area code without concern for rating point, a concept he won't even be aware of applying to inbound calls to cell phones. Depending on local calling plans available, a call to a cell phone in the home area code could very well include distance-rated charges because the rating point assigned to the cell phone could be a great distance from the caller's exchange, even though it's a home area code call. Local calls in my area, at various times, depending on the calling plan, some calls were time-and-distance rated as toll calls, on the state-wide long distance calling schedule, even though on other calling plans they could have been time-and-distance rated as measured service, a cheaper rating plan that never applied to (what would eventually be called) in-state interLATA calls. On still other plans, the same local call could be included in the pre-paid area. In the mid '80's, we went to another plan for local calls that changed everyone's rates in that calls within 8 miles (later 15 miles) were flat rate untimed and calls beyond were time-and-distance rated on something that had been similar to the measured rates for local calls, and only in-state inerLATA calls were rated on the state-wide toll schedule. When we got "competition" for "local toll", generally, calls within 15 miles were untimed or prepaid (there was a choice), and calls beyond were rated on the schedule of the carrier one selected. All Chicago area codes include points that are more than 15 miles in between so there's great potential for calls to home area code cell phones to have distance charges under all the scenarios I described. But a cell phone subscriber won't likely be aware of it and won't request a cell phone number assigned to a rating point that could avoid distance charges for some of his inbound callers, like family members. Well, not until he saw his next residential phone bill.
Date: 21 Aug 2010 19:55:07 -0000 From: John Levine <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: email@example.com. Subject: Re: Overlay acceptance Message-ID: <firstname.lastname@example.org> > I'm stating that a typical cell phone subscriber would request >telephone number assignment from a particular area code without >concern for rating point, a concept he won't even be aware of >applying to inbound calls to cell phones. Depends where you are. Where I live, people are quite aware of the difference between an Ithaca and a Binghamton number. They're both 607 numbers, but different LATAs so for most landlines it's an expensive toll call from one to the other. FWIW, we do not have and have never had toll alerting, either. In New Jersey, people know Trenton vs. Atlantic City numbers for the same reason, again no toll alerting but inter-LATA toll. R's, John
Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2010 12:41:04 -0700 (PDT) From: Lisa or Jeff <email@example.com> To: firstname.lastname@example.org. Subject: Re: film "Executive Suite" Message-ID: <email@example.com> On Aug 20, 8:09 pm, Wes Leatherock <Wesr...@aol.com> wrote: > Of course, at all of them you can use your "Pikepass" (called > different things in eash state) which bills you automatically with no > need for a toll taker. One notable toll gate has the "Pikepass" > dedicated lane marked "Ramp Speed 75." Is this pass compatible with the "EZPASS" which is used in the east coast*? I've read where parking can be paid for by cellphone. Any toll facilities thinking of allowing for that? *For some reason, the customer service center for EZPASS users is located in Richardson, TX.
Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2010 22:59:38 +0000 (UTC) From: Paul <firstname.lastname@example.org.INVALID> To: email@example.com. Subject: Re: film "Executive Suite" Message-ID: <Xns9DDBC139893EFSenex@184.108.40.206> Lisa or Jeff <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote in news:email@example.com : > On Aug 20, 8:09 pm, Wes Leatherock <Wesr...@aol.com> wrote: > >> Of course, at all of them you can use your "Pikepass" (called >> different things in eash state) which bills you automatically >> with no need for a toll taker. One notable toll gate has the >> "Pikepass" dedicated lane marked "Ramp Speed 75." > > Is this pass compatible with the "EZPASS" which is used in the > east coast*? > > I've read where parking can be paid for by cellphone. Any toll > facilities thinking of allowing for that? > > > *For some reason, the customer service center for EZPASS users is > located in Richardson, TX. At least for NH and NJ, E-ZPass customer service seems to be in NJ. -- Paul
Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2010 23:00:54 +0000 (UTC) From: John Levine <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: email@example.com. Subject: Re: film "Executive Suite" Message-ID: <firstname.lastname@example.org> >> Of course, at all of them you can use your "Pikepass" (called >> different things in eash state) which bills you automatically with no >> need for a toll taker. One notable toll gate has the "Pikepass" >> dedicated lane marked "Ramp Speed 75." > >Is this pass compatible with the "EZPASS" which is used in the east >coast*? It appears to be the same ETC technology, but it doesn't interoperate with EZPass and Fastlane. Their web site says they're working on it. >I've read where parking can be paid for by cellphone. Any toll >facilities thinking of allowing for that? Not that I've heard, but you can pay for airport parking at LGA, JFK, EWR, ALB, SYR, and ACY with your E-Zpass, as well as some parking lots in Atlantic City and parking for the NY State Fair in Syracuse next week. See you there. R's, John
Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2010 18:37:08 -0400 From: Fred Goldstein <fgoldstein.SeeSigSpambait@wn2.wn.net> To: email@example.com. Subject: Re: Simplifying the Lives of Web Users Message-ID: <20100821223727.732184F42@mailout.easydns.com> On Fri, 20 Aug 2010 00:22:21 -0400, Monty Solomon contributed, ...By DAVID POGUE (NYTimes) >August 18, 2010 > >... >Behind the scenes, the actual address is a string of numbers (called >an I.P. address, for Internet protocol) that looks something like >this: 220.127.116.11. (That happens to be Google's address.) > >Nobody can remember those addresses, though they are no longer than a >phone number, so the Web's thoughtful designers came up with a >secondary system: plain-English addresses like www.whatever.com. When >you type that into your browser, a computer at your Internet provider >performs a quick lookup. "Aha," it says to itself in its little >digital way, "you just typed www.google.com. What you really want, of >course, is 18.104.22.168. Please hold; I'll connect you." > >That, in a nutshell, is how D.N.S. works. (It stands for domain name >system, in case that helps.) Pogue got it wrong. It is the DNS, but it's not how the web works. He's probably thinking about what he could have learned from a textbook in the 19900s, when TCP/IP was still sort of fresh, and seemed to work the way it did in the early 1980s when it first went public. But it doesn't work like that any more. TCP/IP is obsolete, sensescent, and held together by a remarkable collection of bailing wire and spit. DNS is just one of the old wads of chewing gum. When I look up www.google.com here, I get 22.214.171.124, not the number he gets. This is to be expected. DNS and the web go together like SPAM (that's the Hormel stuff, not the lower-case email stuff) on a bagel. TCP/IP was designed when the ARPANET had a few hundred host computers, mainly timesharing systems, and each was connected to one of the government-owned IMPs (as its routers were called then). Since the early pre-TCP/IP (it used NCP for its first decade or so) ARPANET wanted to get going and prove packet switching before it thought about addressing, it simply copied the telephone network of the 1960s. The first part of the NCP address identified the IMP; the second part identified the port on the IMP. When TCP was developed around 1975 (IP was split off of it in 1978, in Version 4, hence it began as "IP version 4"), they simply copied NCP's semantics. Which were already wrong. An IP address thus does not identify a computer. It identifies a connection to a network from a computer. Two connections? Two addresses. Each router thus has multiple addresses, one on each port. Heck, even the phone network is well beyond this nowadays... And because it's identifying the underlying link, not the node, an IP address is not an "internet" address (layer 3); it is simply a synonym for a layer 2 (link) address! There is no true layer 3 address in TCP/IP. But now let's move on. Addresses pretend to identify host computers. But the web rarely has a one-on-one relationship between host and IP address. Take a small web site like mine, http://www.ionary.com/ . It's hosted at an ISP's server, and the IP address is shared among many web sites. You really think anyone's getting a dedicated computer and IP address out of a hosting plan that costs under $20/month? Of course not. HTML, however, is smarter than IP; it's one of the best-designed application protocols. It sends the actual URL to the server. So the server is responding to the URL, not to the IP address. The server may have a default service associated with its own address, but everybody else is only reachable via the URL. And that's the way it should be. Applications, like the web, should only be addressed at the application layer. Underlying plumbing, like IP, should be hidden. So that's the case where a lot of small web sites (URLs) share an IP address. What about Google? That's the opposite case: One web site needs many, many servers. This isn't what DNS was built for. What we have here, instead, is a case of *anycast*: Many devices all share the same identity, and any one of them can field the question. In the telephone world, this is akin to "multiple appearance directory number - single call appearance" (MADN-SCA), or a call distributor. Contrast this with multicast, which is MADN-multiple call appearance (one number rings multiple phones). Anycast is far more common, but gets less attention. How is anycast done with TCP/IP? On a small basis -- a few servers in one location -- it's typically done with a distributor like a "Big Iron" box. This is a specialized router that receives the HTTP request and forwards it to one of a group of servers. But what happens when one distibutor can't handle it? That's when you have to start hacking DNS, as Google does. In such a case, DNS does not return a single address to a request. It distributes the requests among multiple IP addresses. So the one cached in the DNS server my ISP is using might not be the one cached in the DNS server yours is using. And it may change. It can also be done more cleverly, looking at the IP address that's making the request, and returning the IP address of the distributor that's closest (in Internet terms, like hops, or being on the same ISP) to the requester. This is how content delivery networks (CDNs), like Akamai, work, too. They return the IP address of the nearest Akamai server. So it's really all about work-arounds. If you use a third-party DNS server like OpenDNS, as Pogue suggests, you get the IP address in the OpenDNS cache, or from the server that they are directed to (DNS is a hierarchy of referring servers). This may be the one closest to them, not you, and thus not even the ideal choice. For more information on why we think TCP/IP is obsolete and you shouldn't waste your time on IPv6, check out the Pouzin Society web site http://www.pouzinsociety.org/ or in particular this article on my site: http://www.ionary.com/PSOC-MovingBeyondTCP.pdf . -- Fred Goldstein k1io fgoldstein "at" ionary.com ionary Consulting http://www.ionary.com/ +1 617 795 2701
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 Bill Horne. 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 moderated by Bill Horne. Contact information: Bill Horne Telecom Digest 43 Deerfield Road Sharon MA 02067-2301 781-784-7287 bill at horne dot net Subscribe: firstname.lastname@example.org?body=subscribe telecom Unsubscribe: email@example.com?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 Copyright (C) 2009 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 (9 messages)