28 Years of the Digest ... founded August 21, 1981

Classified Ads
TD Extra News

Add this Digest to your personal   or  

 


The Telecom Digest for October 06, 2010
Volume 29 : Issue 268 : "text" Format

Messages in this Issue:

ESS Switch Uptime(Gray, Charles)
Re: ESS Switch Uptime(Sam Spade)
'Robo-call' law in limbo after lawsuit fails(Joseph Singer)
Re: 'Robo-call' law in limbo after lawsuit fails(danny burstein)
Re: Rahm Emanuel leaving white house(Adam H. Kerman)
Re: A Simple Swipe on a Phone, and You're Paid(John Levine)
Re: Help needed differentiating email, texting and SMS(tlvp)


====== 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: Mon, 4 Oct 2010 09:59:15 -0500 From: "Gray, Charles" <charles.gray@okstate.edu> To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: ESS Switch Uptime Message-ID: <18AC66D00A844644BF202001BCE0FE2640557EC94A@STWEXE3.ad.okstate.edu> The reliability target on the WeCo 5ESS was/is 99.999% (the famous "five nines"). Actually, it comes out to 99.99943% "up time". That calculates to two hours (not seconds) of down time in 40 years. Regards. Charles G. Gray Senior Lecturer, Telecommunications Oklahoma State University - Tulsa (918) 594-8433
Date: Tue, 05 Oct 2010 11:14:01 -0700 From: Sam Spade <sam@coldmail.com> To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: ESS Switch Uptime Message-ID: <odednbbnfMV09zbRnZ2dnUVZ_uWdnZ2d@giganews.com> Gray, Charles wrote: > The reliability target on the WeCo 5ESS was/is 99.999% (the famous "five > nines"). Actually, it comes out to 99.99943% "up time". That calculates to > two hours (not seconds) of down time in 40 years. > > Regards. > > Charles G. Gray > Senior Lecturer, Telecommunications > Oklahoma State University - Tulsa > (918) 594-8433 > It also requires a definition of "down time" and "up time." I recall a line module failure on an early No 1ESS that took three days to diagnose, then repair. 1,000 customers assigned to that module (frame) were out of service for those three days. But, the other 20,000-plus subscribers assigned to that switch were unaffected.
Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2010 05:13:48 -0700 (PDT) From: Joseph Singer <joeofseattle@yahoo.com> To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: 'Robo-call' law in limbo after lawsuit fails Message-ID: <94096.50087.qm@web52706.mail.re2.yahoo.com> This is a story about a man, a message, a federal lawsuit and some very unintended consequences. James Cubbage is an Olympia businessman who came home one day last year to this prerecorded message on his answering machine: "Hi, it's Julie calling from Talbots with a reminder that you have only a few days left to take advantage of your exclusive 20 percent savings pass and free shipping... http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2013067060_donotcall04m.html?syndication=rss or: http://goo.gl/qe7P
Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2010 16:07:43 +0000 (UTC) From: danny burstein <dannyb@panix.com> To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: 'Robo-call' law in limbo after lawsuit fails Message-ID: <i8figf$dot$1@reader1.panix.com> In <94096.50087.qm@web52706.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Joseph Singer <joeofseattle@yahoo.com> writes: >This is a story about a man, a message, a federal lawsuit and some >very unintended consequences. >James Cubbage is an Olympia businessman who came home one day last >year to this prerecorded message on his answering machine: "Hi, it's >Julie calling from Talbots with a reminder that you have only a few >days left to take advantage of your exclusive 20 percent savings pass >and free shipping... >http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2013067060_donotcall04m.html?syndication=rss >or: http://goo.gl/qe7P I don't see the (bigger) problem here. For better or worse, the man's wife was a customer of the store, and they took advantage of that "pre existing relationship" loophole. So the law, in general, hasn't been vacated. (That's not to say the law is anywhere near perfect. It's pretty lame, and rarely enforced. I just receiver Yet Another Robot Call from "Rachel of Account Services", a business that's gazillions of complaints to the FTC and related regulatory groups, and ain't nothing happening). -- _____________________________________________________ Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key dannyb@panix.com [to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]
Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2010 07:59:23 +0000 (UTC) From: "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: Rahm Emanuel leaving white house Message-ID: <i8elsr$kt0$1@news.albasani.net> Robert Bonomi <bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com> wrote: >Joseph Singer <joeofseattle@yahoo.com> wrote: >>I was under the impression that all 312 numbers were no longer >>available and you'd have to get another area code which was overlaid >>on the 312 area. >"Not Exactly" applies. >Yes, 312 was "running short" of unassigned numbers, so an overlay area- >code was allocated, and activated earlier this year. >However, cell carriers (_and_ wireline carriers, for that matter) get >"blocks" of numbers assigned to them, which they then dole out one-by-one >to customers. >If a cell carrier has a reserve of '312' numbers there's no problem in >getting a phone with at 312-area number from them. Another point is that cell phone rating points might have any area code, ignoring area code geography that would be used by a telephone company land line number. It's even possible to get 312 numbers at suburban rating points as the cell phone companies never turned their original pools back for re-assignment after the 312/708 split. Those of us who went through it recall that our cell phone providers insisted on forcing 708 numbers on us even though the 312 numbers were never returned to the pool. >Secondly, there is a constant 'churn' of phone numbers -- people leave >the area and discontinue service, just for one example. when this happens, >that number is available for 're-assignment' to somebody else. Of course, and numbers tend to be reassigned quickly. >I recently (last month) signed up for "Google Voice" and had the choice >of a whole bunch of 312 area numbers. In that respect, I've got at >least as much 'clout' as Mr. Emmanuel does. <grin> Google Voice numbers are from Bandwidth.com CLEC, a company that supplies phone numbers to any VoIP provider. As far as I know, none of the VoIP providers have their own number pools. Whoa. Getting line numbers assigned automatically by a neutral third party upon request. Too bad no one thought of this years ago before Chicago area got 11 area codes, up from the original two. Bet we could have survived without splits.
Date: 5 Oct 2010 20:05:27 -0000 From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: A Simple Swipe on a Phone, and You're Paid Message-ID: <20101005200527.44769.qmail@joyce.lan> >In Australia Mastercard are introducing the "Swipe and go" system where >you just wave your card at a terminal for transactions under under a >certain amount - no signing, not PIN to enter, just grab your receipt and >go (TV ads are running now promoting it). That's called Paypass. My Mastercard debit card here in the US has it, but I've never used it. If my credit card had it, I would use it. R's, John
Date: Tue, 05 Oct 2010 19:25:27 -0400 From: tlvp <tPlOvUpBErLeLsEs@hotmail.com> To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: Help needed differentiating email, texting and SMS Message-ID: <op.vj4l0pgsitl47o@acer250.gateway.2wire.net> On Mon, 04 Oct 2010 18:48:37 -0400, Thad Floryan <thad@thadlabs.com> wrote: > ... I know for a fact my phone receives email sent to the > "cellphone#@txt.att.net" address, but what is this method termed? > Is it SMS or simply email? ... As ever, "that depends" -- does it come through with all characters that were beyond the first 150 or so truncated away? If so, that was SMS. Does it come through in its entirety (except perhaps missing some graphics components)? If so, that was probably either MMS or real email. My own handsets segregate inbound messages into separate IN-boxes, one for SMS items, one for MMS items. (They don't "do" email.) (MMS = "MultimediaMessageService", SMS = "ShortMessageService".) In T-Mobile's service, I have yet to come up with any reliable criterion for determining whether an email addressed to my "cellphone#@tmomail.net" gets delivered to me as an SMS or an MMS at the handset -- I've received emails either way, at different times, with neither rhyme nor reason (nor even T-Mo CS) able to provide any clue as to why :-) . I can imagine that a suitably set up Blackberry will receive an email simply as an email. HTH; and cheers, -- tlvp -- Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP
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: telecom-request@telecom-digest.org?body=subscribe telecom Unsubscribe: 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 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 (7 messages)

Return to Archives ** Older Issues